Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/339,583

LIGHT EMITTING ELEMENT, DISPLAY DEVICE INCLUDING THE SAME, AND METHOD OF FABRICATING THE DISPLAY DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Jun 22, 2023
Examiner
MICHAUD, NICHOLAS BRIAN
Art Unit
2818
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
38 granted / 51 resolved
+6.5% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+29.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
72
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
56.7%
+16.7% vs TC avg
§102
17.1%
-22.9% vs TC avg
§112
25.3%
-14.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 51 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-15, in the reply filed on 03/04/2026 is acknowledged. Status of the Application Claims 1-20 remain pending in this application. Claims 16-20 are withdrawn. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Specification The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Regarding claim 6, it recites the limitation “in a range of about 120 degrees or more” in lines 1 and 2 of the claim, which does not adequately define the metes and bounds of the claim, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. One of ordinary skill in the art would only conclude that certain exemplary embodiments qualify, but without a definite criterion by which to ascertain whether any non-disclosed embodiments so qualifies. For example, it is unclear if the claim is intended to limit the angle to a specific range, such as +/-10%, or some other range. This renders the scope of the claim indefinite. For the purpose of compact prosecution, the Examiner has interpreted “in a range of about 120 degrees or more” to mean “120 degrees or more”. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dimitropoulos et al (US 20200105969 A1, hereafter Dimitropoulos). Regarding claim 1, Dimitropoulos discloses: A light emitting element (Dimitropoulos 2000, fig 1B, 10A, 20, ¶0106) comprising: a first end surface (Dimitropoulos, top surface of 2010) and a second end surface (Dimitropoulos, bottom surface of 2025) opposite to each other (Dimitropoulos fig 20); a first semiconductor layer (Dimitropoulos 2010, ¶0106) disposed at the first end surface (Dimitropoulos fig 20); an active layer (Dimitropoulos 2015, ¶0106) disposed on the first semiconductor layer (Dimitropoulos fig 20); a second semiconductor layer (Dimitropoulos 2020, ¶0106) disposed on the active layer (Dimitropoulos fig 20); and an electrode layer (Dimitropoulos 2025, ¶0106, under a broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of “electrode”) disposed on the second semiconductor layer and disposed at the second end surface (Dimitropoulos fig 20, ¶0106), wherein the first semiconductor layer (Dimitropoulos 2010) includes: a first part (Dimitropoulos first part, annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20, provided below, patterned part of 2010, fig 20, ¶0042, 0048, 0053, 0075, 0117), a second part (Dimitropoulos second part, annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20, sloped part of 2010, fig 20, ¶0042, 0048, 0053, 0075, 0117) disposed on the first part and adjacent to the active layer (annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20), and a third part (Dimitropoulos first part, annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20, provided below, patterned part of 2010, fig 20, ¶0042, 0048, 0053, 0075, 0117) disposed between the first part and the second part (annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20), a width of the first part and a width of the second part are different from each other (annotated Dimitropoulos fig 1B, 20, ¶0048, second part is greater than W and first part is less than W), and the third part has different widths at different length positions (annotated Dimitropoulos fig 1B, 20, ¶0048, having sloped sidewalls). PNG media_image1.png 582 627 media_image1.png Greyscale Annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20 Regarding claim 2, Dimitropoulos discloses: The light emitting element of claim 1, wherein each of the first part (Dimitropoulos first part, annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20 above) and the second part (Dimitropoulos second part, annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20) of the first semiconductor layer (Dimitropoulos 2010) has a cylindrical pillar shape (annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20, ¶0050, 0053, under a BRI of “cylindrical pillar”), and the width of the second part is greater than the width of the first part (annotated Dimitropoulos fig 1B, 20, ¶0048, second part is greater than W and first part is less than W). Regarding claim 3, Dimitropoulos discloses: The light emitting element of claim 2, wherein the width of the third part (Dimitropoulos third part, annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20) of the first semiconductor layer (Dimitropoulos 2010) increases as becoming closer to the second part (Dimitropoulos second part, annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20) from the first part (Dimitropoulos first part, annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20)(annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20, ¶0048). Regarding claim 4, Dimitropoulos discloses: The light emitting element of claim 3, wherein the third part (Dimitropoulos third part, annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20) of the first semiconductor layer (Dimitropoulos 2010) has a truncated cone shape (annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20, ¶0048). Regarding claim 5, Dimitropoulos discloses: The light emitting element of claim 3, wherein a side surface of the third part (Dimitropoulos third part, annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20) has a slope at an angle with respect to the first end surface (Dimitropoulos, top surface of 2010) of the light emitting element (Dimitropoulos 2000)(annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20). Regarding claim 6, Dimitropoulos discloses: The light emitting element of claim 5, wherein the angle is in a range of about 120 degrees or more (as best understood to mean “120 degrees or more”)(Dimitropoulos ¶0044, 0048, “sloped sidewalls … 160 degrees”). Regarding claim 7, Dimitropoulos discloses: The light emitting element of claim 2, wherein each of the active layer (Dimitropoulos 2015), the second semiconductor layer (Dimitropoulos 2020), and the electrode layer (Dimitropoulos 2025) has a cylindrical pillar shape (Dimitropoulos fig 1B, 13, 20, ¶0050, 0053, under a BRI of “cylindrical pillar”). Regarding claim 8, Dimitropoulos discloses: The light emitting element of claim 7, wherein a width of the active layer (Dimitropoulos 2015), a width of the second semiconductor layer (Dimitropoulos 2020), a width of the electrode layer (Dimitropoulos 2025), and the width of the second part (Dimitropoulos second part, annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20) of the first semiconductor layer (Dimitropoulos 2010) are substantially same as each other (annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20, fig 1B, ¶0048, at least the exterior diameters of each layer has width 2s+W). Regarding claim 9, Dimitropoulos discloses: The light emitting element of claim 1, further comprising: a reflective layer (Dimitropoulos 2030, ¶0056, 0070, 0117, “n-contacts … provide … optical reflection”) surrounding a side surface of the first semiconductor layer (Dimitropoulos 2010), a side surface of the active layer (Dimitropoulos 2015), a side surface of the second semiconductor layer (Dimitropoulos 2020), and a side surface of the electrode layer (Dimitropoulos 2025)(Dimitropoulos fig 20, ¶0070, “entirely surround each LED to provide for optical isolation and/or optical reflection”). Regarding claim 10, Dimitropoulos discloses: The light emitting element of claim 9, wherein the reflective layer (Dimitropoulos 2030) includes a reflective metal material (Dimitropoulos ¶0056, “silver… aluminum or aluminum alloy”). Regarding claim 11, Dimitropoulos discloses: The light emitting element of claim 1, further comprising: an insulative film (Dimitropoulos 2040/2055/2060, 1140, ¶0108, 0117) surrounding a side surface of the first semiconductor layer (Dimitropoulos 2010), a side surface of the active layer (Dimitropoulos 2015), a side surface of the second semiconductor layer (Dimitropoulos 2020), and a side surface of the electrode layer (Dimitropoulos 2025)(Dimitropoulos fig 11A, 20, ¶0108, 0177, “between the epitaxial layers and n-contact 2030, … a dielectric insulator 2040”). Regarding claim 12, Dimitropoulos discloses: The light emitting element of claim 11, wherein the insulative film (Dimitropoulos 2040/2055/2060) exposes the first end surface (Dimitropoulos, top surface of 2010) of the light emitting element (Dimitropoulos 2000) as a lower surface of the first semiconductor layer (Dimitropoulos 2010), and exposes the second end surface (Dimitropoulos, bottom surface of 2025) of the light emitting element as an upper surface of the electrode layer (Dimitropoulos 2025)(Dimitropoulos 20, first and second end surfaces not covered vertically by 2040, therefore meeting a BRI of the insulative film exposes the ends). Regarding claim 13, Dimitropoulos discloses: A display device (Dimitropoulos 585, 1900, 2000, ¶0041, 0080, 0103, fig 19A, 20) comprising: a pixel (Dimitropoulos 585, 1900, 2000, fig 1B, 10A, 20, ¶0066, 0089, 0106) including: a first electrode (Dimitropoulos 2030, ¶0056, 0075, 0078, 0177), a second electrode (Dimitropoulos 585, ¶0073, 0094), and a light emitting element (Dimitropoulos 2000, fig 1B, 10A, 20, ¶0106) including: a first end surface (Dimitropoulos, top surface of 2010) electrically connected to the first electrode (Dimitropoulos, ¶0056, 0075, 0078, 0177), and a second end surface (Dimitropoulos, bottom surface of 2025) electrically connected to the second electrode (Dimitropoulos, ¶0073, 0075, 0094), wherein the light emitting element includes: a first semiconductor layer (Dimitropoulos 2010, ¶0106) disposed at the first end surface (Dimitropoulos fig 20); an active layer (Dimitropoulos 2015, ¶0106) disposed on the first semiconductor layer (Dimitropoulos fig 20); a second semiconductor layer (Dimitropoulos 2020, ¶0106) disposed on the active layer (Dimitropoulos fig 20); and an electrode layer (Dimitropoulos 2025, ¶0106, under a BRI of “electrode”) disposed on the second semiconductor layer and disposed at the second end surface (Dimitropoulos fig 20, ¶0106), the first semiconductor layer (Dimitropoulos 2010) includes: a first part (Dimitropoulos first part, annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20, provided above, patterned part of 2010, fig 20, ¶0042, 0048, 0053, 0075, 0117), a second part (Dimitropoulos second part, annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20, sloped part of 2010, fig 20, ¶0042, 0048, 0053, 0075, 0117) disposed on the first part and adjacent to the active layer (annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20), and a third part (Dimitropoulos first part, annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20, patterned part of 2010, fig 20, ¶0042, 0048, 0053, 0075, 0117) disposed between the first part and the second part (annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20), a width of the first part and a width of the second part are different from each other (annotated Dimitropoulos fig 1B, 20, ¶0048, second part is greater than W and first part is less than W), and the third part has different widths at different length positions (annotated Dimitropoulos fig 1B, 20, ¶0048, having sloped sidewalls). Regarding claim 14, Dimitropoulos discloses: The light emitting element of claim 13, wherein each of the first part (Dimitropoulos first part, annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20 above) and the second part (Dimitropoulos second part, annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20) of the first semiconductor layer (Dimitropoulos 2010) has a cylindrical pillar shape (annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20, ¶0050, 0053, under a BRI of “cylindrical pillar”), and the width of the second part is greater than the width of the first part (annotated Dimitropoulos fig 1B, 20, ¶0048, second part is greater than W and first part is less than W). Regarding claim 15, Dimitropoulos discloses: The light emitting element of claim 14, wherein the width of the third part (Dimitropoulos third part, annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20) of the first semiconductor layer (Dimitropoulos 2010) increases as becoming closer to the second part (Dimitropoulos second part, annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20) from the first part (Dimitropoulos first part, annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20)(annotated Dimitropoulos fig 20, ¶0048). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Danesh et al (US 20190088820 A1) is cited as an example of an analogous device. Choi et al (US 20160013365 A1) is cited as an example of an analogous device. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS B. MICHAUD whose telephone number is (703)756-1796. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 0800-1700 Eastern Time. 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, EVA MONTALVO can be reached at (571) 272-3829. 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. /NICHOLAS B. MICHAUD/ EXAMINER Art Unit 2818 /Mounir S Amer/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 22, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593577
DISPLAY DEVICE FOR REDUCING RECOGNITION OF AN AREA ADJACENT A COMPONENT AREA
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12581866
MEMORY DEVICE AND METHOD FOR FABRICATING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12568654
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12550480
MICRO-LED STRUCTURE AND MICRO-LED CHIP INCLUDING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12514044
DISPLAY DEVICE HAVING A REDUCED BEZEL
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+29.4%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 51 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