Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/395,804

DISPLAY DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 26, 2023
Examiner
AHMED, SHAHED
Art Unit
2813
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
LG Display Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
91%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 91% — above average
91%
Career Allow Rate
866 granted / 955 resolved
+22.7% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
1000
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.8%
-38.2% vs TC avg
§103
50.9%
+10.9% vs TC avg
§102
22.0%
-18.0% vs TC avg
§112
19.8%
-20.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 955 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . DETAILED ACTION This action is responsive to application No. 18395804 filed on 12/26/2023. Information Disclosure Statement Acknowledgment is made of Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) form PTO-1449. These IDS has been considered. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file. Allowable subject matter Claims 16-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim (independent claim 1), but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The closest prior art known to the Examiner is listed on the PTO 892 forms of record. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Lee et al. (KR 20200082764 A). With respect to dependent claims 16-19, the cited prior art does not anticipate or make obvious, inter alia, the step of: “further comprising a spread control layer disposed on the primary protective film”. 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 1-10, 12-15, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (KR 20200082764 A). Regarding independent claim 1, Lee et al. teach a display device comprising: a substrate (Fig. 5, element 101) including a display area (Fig. 5, element AA) and a non-display area (Fig. 5, element NA); a planarization layer (Fig. 5, element 118) disposed over the substrate; a bank (Fig. 5, element 128) disposed over the planarization layer; a dam (Fig. 5, elements D) disposed over the substrate in the non-display area; a hydrogen adsorption layer (Fig. 5, element 150) configured to cover an upper portion and a side surface of the dam; and an encapsulation layer (Fig. 5, element 140) disposed over the planarization layer and an upper portion of the bank and having an organic film (Fig. 5, element 144) positioned inside the dam (specification discloses “the flow of the organic encapsulation film material is controlled and the organic encapsulation film 144 remains inside the dam pattern D”). Regarding claim 2, Lee et al. teach wherein the dam comprises: a first dam positioned inward (Fig. 5, element D closer to element AA); and a second dam (Fig. 5, element D further away from element AA) positioned outward, and wherein at least one of the first and second dams is configured as a single-layer or multilayer structure (Fig. 5). Regarding claim 3, Lee et al. teach wherein the dam has a frame shape that surrounds the display area (Fig. 5 discloses element D structurally analogous to the instant application). Regarding claim 4, Lee et al. teach wherein the encapsulation layer comprises: a primary protective film (Fig. 5, element 142) disposed over the planarization layer and the upper portion of the bank; and a secondary protective film (Fig. 5, element 146) disposed on the organic film, wherein the organic film disposed on the primary protective film. Regarding claim 5, Lee et al. teach wherein the hydrogen adsorption layer includes one of titanium (Ti) (specification discloses titanium), scandium (Sc), vanadium (V), lead (Pd), niobium (Nb), zirconium (Zr), yttrium (Y), tantalum (Ta), cerium (Ce), lanthanum (La), samarium (Sm), and uranium (U). Regarding claim 6, Lee et al. teach wherein the hydrogen adsorption layer has a frame shape that surrounds the display area (Fig. 5 discloses element 150 structurally analogous to the instant application). Regarding claim 7, Lee et al. teach wherein the primary protective film comprises: a first primary protective film made of silicon nitride (SiNx); and a second primary protective film disposed on the first primary protective film and made of silicon oxide (SiOx) (specification discloses “the first and second inorganic encapsulation films 142 and 146 may be made of the same material, and each may have multiple layers”, additionally the specification discloses silicon oxide and silicon nitride material). Regarding claim 8, Lee et al. teach wherein the hydrogen adsorption layer is disposed from an inner side surface of the second dam to an inner side surface of the first dam (Fig. 5). Regarding claim 9, Lee et al. teach wherein the hydrogen adsorption layer is disposed from an outer side surface of the second dam to an inner side surface of the first dam (Fig. 5). Regarding claim 10, Lee et al. teach wherein the hydrogen adsorption layer is disposed from an outer side surface of the second dam to a side surface of the planarization layer (Fig. 5). Regarding claim 12, Lee et al. teach wherein the second primary protective film and the organic film are spaced apart from an inner side surface of the first dam (Fig. 5). Regarding claim 13, Lee et al. teach wherein the first primary protective film extends to the non-display area to cover the dam and the hydrogen adsorption layer (Fig. 5). Regarding claim 14, Lee et al. teach wherein the first primary protective film has lower surface roughness than the second primary protective film (Lee teach the same material as the instant application, accordingly the properties would be the same). Regarding claim 15, Lee et al. teach wherein the organic film is disposed on the second primary protective film and does not contact the first primary protective film (Fig. 5, since the primary protective is film is multilayer, the organic film would only contact the upper/second primary protective film). Regarding claim 20, Lee et al. teach wherein a gate-in-panel (GIP) part is positioned in the non-display area, and the GIP part comprises an oxide thin-film transistor (Fig. 4, transistor associated with element 205a, specification discloses transistors can be formed of oxide semiconductor). 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 of this title, 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. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (KR 20200082764 A). Regarding claim 11, Lee et al. teach wherein the first primary protective film further extends to the non-display area than the second primary protective film (Fig. 5, the extension of the insulating films would be an obvious design choice that a person skilled in the art could set as appropriate taking into consideration design dimension parameters and the like. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAHED AHMED whose telephone number is (571)272-3477. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5. 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, Steven Gauthier can be reached on 571-270-0373. 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. /SHAHED AHMED/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2813
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 26, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604673
JOSEPHSON JUNCTION DEVICE AND METHOD OF MAKING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604589
DISPLAY DEVICE AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604498
MEMORY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604502
NANOCHANNEL GALLIUM NITRIDE-BASED DEVICE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598762
METHODS OF MANUFACTURING A SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE WITH LOCAL ISOLATION AND A SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE WITH LOCAL ISOLATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
91%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+0.0%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 955 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