Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/327,788

DISPLAY DEVICE

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jun 01, 2023
Examiner
GREEN, TRACIE Y
Art Unit
2875
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
1097 granted / 1385 resolved
+11.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+9.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
1417
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
60.3%
+20.3% vs TC avg
§102
20.3%
-19.7% vs TC avg
§112
11.6%
-28.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1385 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/02/2026 has been considered by the examiner. Response to Amendment Receipt is acknowledged of applicant’s amendment filed 01/15/2026. Claims 11-20 withdrawn to a non-elected invention, Claims 1-10 are pending and an action on the merits is as follows. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection in light of amendments made to claims 1 and 6. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al.( WO2020050467A1, machine translation) (Lee, hereafter). Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses a display device (Figures 1-12 and corresponding text) (Figures 1-6, 7a-7b,8) comprising: partition walls (PW1,PW2) overlapping an emission area (EMA) and spaced from each other; electrodes (ELT1, ELT2) on the partition walls (PW1,PW2) and spaced from each other; a first bank (BNK) on the electrodes and in a non-emission area (π127); light-emitting elements (LD) between the electrodes (ELT1, ELT2) in the emission area (EMA), wherein the electrodes(ELT1 ELT2)define a hole ((CH1), π121) overlapping the first bank(BNK) and wherein the first bank(BNK) does not overlap the light-emitting elements in a plan view. Lee fails to explicitly disclose a second bank, Lee however discloses that the BNK is higher (H2) than the partition wall (H1, height of partition wall. In an embodiment, the bank BNK may have various shapes. In an embodiment, the bank BNK may have a trapezoidal cross-section which is reduced in width upward, as illustrated in FIG. 7A. For example, the bank BNK may have, in an area bordering on the emission area EMA of each sub-pixel SPX, an inclined surface which is reduced in width upward. In an embodiment, the bank BNK may have, in an area bordering on the emission area EMA of each sub-pixel SPX, a curved surface which is reduced in width upward, as illustrated in FIG. 7B. In otherward, in an embodiment, the bank BNK may have a shape which is reduced in width upward, and the shape thereof may be changed in various ways.(π163-π186). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the office before the effective filing date to modify the display device as Lee discloses to provide a second bank on top of the first bank the motivation being to create a dam-like structure to prevent overflow in manufacturing or crosstalk among subpixels that degrades emission. Regarding claim 2, Lee discloses (Figure 7A-7B, 8 ) an insulating layer(INS1) between the electrodes (ELT1 ELT2) and the first bank (BNK). Regarding claim 3, Lee discloses (Figure 7A-7B, 8 ) wherein the light emitting elements (LD) are on the insulating layer (INS1). Regarding claim 4, Lee discloses (Figure 7A-7B, 8 ) wherein the insulating layer (INS1) includes defines a hole overlapping the hole of the electrodes (ELT1, ELT2). Regarding claim 5, Lee fails to explicitly disclose wherein the first bank is in contact with the partition walls through the hole of the electrodes and the hole of the insulating layer. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the display device of Lee wherein the insulating layer (INS1) includes defines a hole overlapping the hole of the electrodes, since it been held hat rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Regarding claim 6, Lee discloses (Figures 7A-8) display device comprising: partition walls (PW1,PW2)overlapping an emission area (EMA) and spaced from each other; electrodes (ELT1, ELT2) above the partition walls (PW1,pw2), spaced from each other, and defining a hole (no number); wherein a first bank (BNK) above the electrodes, in a non-emission area ;light-emitting elements (LD) between the electrodes (ELT1, ELT2) in the emission area (EMA); wherein the first bank (BNK) does not overlap the light-emitting elements (LD)in a plan view. Lee fails to explicitly disclose, and wherein the first bank is-in contact with one of the partition walls through the hole of the electrodes; and a second bank above the first bank, Lee however discloses that the BNK is higher (H2) than the partition wall (H1, height of partition wall. In an embodiment, the bank BNK may have various shapes. In an embodiment, the bank BNK may have a trapezoidal cross-section which is reduced in width upward, as illustrated in FIG. 7A. For example, the bank BNK may have, in an area bordering on the emission area EMA of each sub-pixel SPX, an inclined surface which is reduced in width upward. In an embodiment, the bank BNK may have, in an area bordering on the emission area EMA of each sub-pixel SPX, a curved surface which is reduced in width upward, as illustrated in FIG. 7B. In otherward, in an embodiment, the bank BNK may have a shape which is reduced in width upward, and the shape thereof may be changed in various ways.(π163-π186). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the office before the effective filing date to modify the display device as Lee discloses wherein the first bank is-in contact with one of the partition walls through the hole of the electrodes, since it been held hat rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. And where in there to provide a second bank on top of the first bank the motivation being to create a dam-like structure to prevent overflow in manufacturing or crosstalk among subpixels that degrades luminous efficiency. Regarding claim 7 and 8 , Lee discloses (figures 7a-8, Figure 10) wherein the bank(BNK) defines an opening overlapping the emission area (See Figure 10: SPA1); color conversion layer (CCL)in the opening of the (BNK). Lee fails to explicitly disclose a second bank, Lee however discloses that the (BNK) is higher (H2) than the partition wall (H1, height of partition wall. In an embodiment, the bank (BNK) may have various shapes. In an embodiment, the bank BNK may have a trapezoidal cross-section which is reduced in width upward, as illustrated in FIG. 7A. For example, the bank BNK may have, in an area bordering on the emission area EMA of each sub-pixel SPX, an inclined surface which is reduced in width upward. In an embodiment, the bank BNK may have, in an area bordering on the emission area EMA of each sub-pixel SPX, a curved surface which is reduced in width upward, as illustrated in FIG. 7B. In otherward, in an embodiment, the bank BNK may have a shape which is reduced in width upward, and the shape thereof may be changed in various ways.(π163-π186). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the office before the effective filing date to modify the display device as Lee discloses to provide a second bank on top of the first bank the motivation being to create a dam-like structure to prevent overflow in manufacturing or crosstalk among subpixels that degrades emission. Regarding claim 9, Lee discloses (Figure 10:SPA1) a color filter layer (CF1) on the color conversion layer CCL1). Regarding claim 10, Lee fails to explicitly disclose wherein the first bank is in contact with the partition walls through the hole of the electrodes and the hole of the insulating layer; wherein the first bank comprises a first area extending along a second direction crossing the first direction, and wherein the hole of the electrodes is at a crossing of the first area and the second area of the first bank. do not appear to contain any additional features which define more than slight constructional changes which come within the scope of the customary (design) practice followed by persons skilled in the art, especially as the advantages thus achieved can be readily contemplated in advance. Alternatively, these limitations are not deemed patentable since the applicant's disclosure fails to show such limitations to solve any problems or to yield any unobvious advantage that is not within the scope of the teachings applied. Therefore, such limitations would be a matter of design alternative. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify the display device of LI as disclosed with the teachings of Li to derive wherein the first bank comprises a first area extending along a first direction and a second area extending along a second direction crossing the first direction, and wherein the hole of the electrodes is at a crossing of the first area and the second area of the first bank, to further enhance compactness of devices while understanding that matters of design choice require routine skill. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found in the 892 and below: US 20220068901 A1- General State of the Art-display device including a subminiature light emitting element US 20210217739 A1-US Application for rejection of claims 1-10 US 20150044805 A1- organic electronic device manufacturing method Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRACIE Y GREEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3104. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thursday, 10am-8pm. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, James R Greece can be reached at (571)272-3711. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. TRACIE Y. GREEN Primary Examiner Art Unit 2875 /TRACIE Y GREEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 01, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 11, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 15, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 17, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596258
DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593585
PIXEL ARRAY, DISPLAY PANEL AND METAL MASK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591164
HIGH EFFICIENCY TUNABLE BEAM STEERING DEVICE BASED ON PANCHARATNAM PHASE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12581786
DISPLAY DEVICE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD OF THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575394
THREE-DIMENSIONAL INTEGRATED CIRCUIT WITH TOP CHIP INCLUDING LOCAL INTERCONNECT FOR BODY-SOURCE COUPLING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+9.4%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1385 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month