Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/451,027

DISPLAY DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Aug 16, 2023
Examiner
SANTIAGO, MARICELI
Art Unit
2896
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
LG Display Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
816 granted / 1013 resolved
+12.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
1038
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
42.1%
+2.1% vs TC avg
§102
40.1%
+0.1% vs TC avg
§112
13.1%
-26.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1013 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-18 in the reply filed on January 12, 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 18-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse. 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. Claim(s) 1, 5, 9 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim (US 2017/0345880 A1). Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a display device, comprising: a first substrate (100), which includes an active area (AA) including a plurality of sub pixels and a non-active area (NA) adjacent to the active area; an inorganic layer (340) disposed on the first substrate; a planarization layer (400) disposed on the inorganic layer; a bank (600) disposed on the planarization layer; an adhesive layer (700) disposed on the inorganic layer, the planarization layer, and the bank (Fig. 1); and a second substrate (200) disposed on the adhesive layer (700), wherein the bank (600) includes a first bank (601) disposed in an area overlapping the first substrate (100) and a second bank (602) that encloses a side surface of the first bank. Regarding claim 5, Kim discloses a display device wherein an end of the second bank (602) is located on a same plane as an end of the adhesive layer (700, Fig. 1) or located inside with respect to the end of the adhesive layer (Fig. 3). Regarding claim 9, Kim discloses a display device wherein the first bank and the second bank are integrally formed (Fig. 1). Regarding claim 16, Kim discloses a display device wherein the first bank (601) includes a first part connected to the second bank and a second part, the second part spaced apart from the first part and closer to the active area than the first part (Fig. 1). Claim(s) 1, 5, 10 and 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fujimura et al. (US 2006/0033429 A1). Regarding claim 1, Fujimura discloses a display device, comprising: a first substrate (2), which includes an active area (3) including a plurality of sub pixels and a non-active area (4) adjacent to the active area; an inorganic layer (21) disposed on the first substrate; a planarization layer (12) disposed on the inorganic layer; a bank (33) disposed on the planarization layer; an adhesive layer (15) disposed on the inorganic layer, the planarization layer, and the bank (Fig. 2A); and a second substrate (17) disposed on the adhesive layer (15), wherein the bank (33) includes a first bank (33) disposed in an area (3) overlapping the first substrate (2) and a second bank (33) that encloses a side surface of the first bank (Fig. 2A). Regarding claim 5, Fujimura discloses a display device wherein an end of the second bank (33) is located on a same plane as an end of the adhesive layer (15, Fig. 2A) or located inside with respect to the end of the adhesive layer (Fig. 4B). Regarding claim 10, Fujimura discloses a display device wherein the first bank (33) and the second bank (33) are spaced apart from each other (Fig. 2B). Regarding claim 13, Fujimura discloses a display device wherein one end of the second bank (33) is disposed on the planarization layer (12), the first bank and the second bank are separated from each other (Fig. 2A) and the adhesive layer (15) is between the first bank and the second bank, and the first substrate (2) and the second bank (33) are spaced apart from each other (Fig. 2A). Regarding claim 14, Fujimura discloses a display device wherein the planarization layer (12, layer located in display area 3) covers an end of the inorganic layer (21) and is spaced apart from the second bank (33, located in peripheral area 4). Regarding claim 15, Fujimura discloses a display device wherein the second bank (33) and the planarization layer (12, layer located in display area 3) are separated from each other and the adhesive layer (15) is between the second bank and the planarization layer (Fig. 2A). 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. Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2017/0345880 A1) in view of Park et al. (US 2015/0349293 A1). Regarding claim 18, Kim discloses a display device wherein the planarization layer includes an organic material and the bank includes a polyimide (¶[0076]), but fails to exemplify the planarization layer includes an acrylic material. Park discloses a display device, comprising: a first substrate (120), which includes an active area (display area) including a plurality of sub pixels and a non-active area (non-display area) adjacent to the active area; an inorganic layer (121, ¶[0078]) disposed on the first substrate; a planarization layer (123) disposed on the inorganic layer; a bank (162) disposed on the planarization layer; an adhesive layer (151) disposed on the inorganic layer, the planarization layer, and the bank (Fig. 1); and a second substrate (170) disposed on the adhesive layer, wherein the planarization layer includes an acrylic material (¶[0062]) and the bank includes a polyimide (¶[0062]). It is considered within the capabilities of one skilled in the art the selection of a material based on its known suitability for an intended application as an obvious matter of design engineering. Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skills in the art at the time of effective filling of the claimed invention to have the planarization layer includes an acrylic material, since the selection of known materials for a known purpose is within the skill of the art. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-4, 6-8, 11-12 and 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, 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 a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim(s) 2, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 2, and specifically comprising the limitation of the second bank encloses the inorganic layer, the planarization layer, and a side surface of the first substrate. Regarding claim(s) 3, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 3, and specifically comprising the limitation of the second bank is disposed on a same level as the first substrate and laterally outside of the first substrate. Regarding claim(s) 4, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 4, and specifically comprising the limitation of a flexible film disposed at a side of the non-active area on the first substrate, wherein the second bank is disposed in the non-active area at a side portion excluding the side at which the first flexible film is disposed. Regarding claim(s) 6, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 6, and specifically comprising the limitation of the first bank and the second bank have different densities. Regarding claim(s) 7, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 7, and specifically comprising the limitation of the second bank includes a cracked portion. Regarding claim(s) 8, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 8, and specifically comprising the limitation of the second bank is in a state in which crumbled powders are gathered. Regarding claim(s) 11, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 11, and specifically comprising the limitation of the second bank is spaced apart from the first substrate and the inorganic layer and the adhesive layer is between the second bank and one or more of the first substrate or the inorganic layer. Regarding claim(s) 12, claims(s) 12 is/are allowable for the reasons given in claim(s) 11 because of its/their dependency status from claim(s) 11. Regarding claim(s) 17, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 17, and specifically comprising the limitation of the first part is spaced apart from the inorganic layer, the adhesive layer is between the first part and the inorganic layer, and an end of the inorganic layer protrudes beyond an end of the planarization layer. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Saida et al. (US 2021/0020733 A1) discloses a display device comprising a first bank including a first bank lower portion in the same layer as a flattening film and a first bank upper portion in the same layer as an edge cover, a second bank includes a second bank lower portion in the same layer as the flattening film and a second bank upper portion in the same layer as the edge cover. Kim et al. (US 2020/0144536 A1) discloses a display device comprising a pixel definition layer PDL including an edge portion PDL-E overlapped with the non-display region NDA and a center portion PDL-C overlapped with the display region DA. Sonoda et al. (US 2020/0043997 A1) discloses an organic EL display device including pixels each including an organic EL layer formed, the pixels disposed in a matrix shape in a display region, a frame-shaped bank surrounding a periphery of the display region and including dot-shaped banks forming a plurality of columns and disposed in a staggered manner. The rejections above rely on the references for all the teachings expressed in the text of the references and/or one of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably understood or implied from the texts of the references. To emphasize certain aspects of the prior art, only specific portions of the texts have been pointed out. Each reference as a whole should be reviewed in responding to the rejection, since other sections of the same reference and/or various combinations of the cited references may be relied on in future rejections in view of amendments. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mariceli Santiago whose telephone number is (571) 272-2464. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM. 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, Jessica Han, can be reached on (571) 272-2078. 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. /Mariceli Santiago/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2879
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 16, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604644
DISPLAY PANEL AND DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12588394
DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12588358
DISPLAY DEVICE AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581800
DISPLAY PANEL AND MOBILE TERMINAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12581805
DISPLAY DEVICE AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
81%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+10.6%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1013 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