Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/461,142

Display Apparatus Having a Light-Emitting Device

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Sep 05, 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
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 Species I, claims 1-17 in the reply filed on December 24, 2025 is acknowledged. Claims 18-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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) 1-3, 5-6, 9, 11 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shim et al. (US 2016/0087018 A1). Regarding claim 1, Shim discloses a display apparatus, comprising: a substrate (100) with a pixel area; a light-emitting device (110/130/140) formed in the pixel area for emitting light; an encapsulation unit (600) on the light-emitting device; a black matrix (210) on the encapsulation unit, the black matrix formed with an opening (212), the opening in the black matrix overlapping with the light-emitting device in a first direction (Fig. 8); an insulating layer (500, ¶[0060]) on the encapsulation unit, an upper surface of the insulating layer (500) formed with a groove that is a recessed portion toward the substrate, the groove overlapping with the opening in the black matrix in the first direction (Fig. 8); and an optical lens (304) disposed above the groove in the insulating layer. Regarding claim 2, Shim discloses a display apparatus wherein a refractive index of the optical lens (304, ¶[0055]) is greater than a refractive index of the insulating layer (500, ¶[0060]). Regarding claim 3, Shim discloses a display apparatus wherein the black matrix (210) is formed on the insulating layer, and the groove is formed within the opening (Fig. 8). Regarding claim 5, Shim discloses a display apparatus wherein at least a part of the optical lens (304) has a convex shape or a semicircular shape (Fig. 8). Regarding claim 6, Shim discloses a display apparatus wherein the recessed portion is filled with at least a portion of the optical lens (Fig. 8). Regarding claim 9, Shim discloses a display apparatus wherein the light-emitting device includes a first electrode (110), a light-emitting layer (130), and a second electrode (140), and wherein a size of an emission area of the light-emitting device where the first electrode, the light-emitting layer, and the second electrode overlap is larger than an area of the opening (212) of the black matrix (Fig. 8). Regarding claim 11, Shim discloses a display apparatus wherein a surface of the recessed portion of the groove is curved (Fig. 8). Regarding claim 17, Shimi discloses a display apparatus wherein the optical lens is disposed on at least a portion of the black matrix (Fig. 8). Claim(s) 1-3, 5-7, 9, 11 and 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Choi al. (US 2014/0339509 A1). Regarding claim 1, Choi discloses a display apparatus, comprising: a substrate (100) with a pixel area; a light-emitting device (200) formed in the pixel area for emitting light; an encapsulation unit (300) on the light-emitting device; a black matrix (520) on the encapsulation unit, the black matrix formed with an opening, the opening in the black matrix overlapping with the light-emitting device in a first direction (Fig. 4); an insulating layer (410) on the encapsulation unit, an upper surface of the insulating layer (410) formed with a groove that is a recessed portion toward the substrate, the groove overlapping with the opening in the black matrix in the first direction (Fig. 4); and an optical lens (420) disposed above the groove in the insulating layer. Regarding claim 2, Choi discloses a display apparatus wherein a refractive index of the optical lens (420, ¶[0065]) is greater than a refractive index of the insulating layer (410, ¶[0065]). Regarding claim 3, Choi discloses a display apparatus wherein the black matrix (520) is formed on the insulating layer, and the groove is formed within the opening (Fig. 4). Regarding claim 5, Choi discloses a display apparatus wherein at least a part of the optical lens (420) has a convex shape or a semicircular shape (Fig. 4). Regarding claim 6, Choi discloses a display apparatus wherein the recessed portion is filled with at least a portion of the optical lens (Fig. 4). Regarding claim 7, Choi discloses a display apparatus wherein the recessed portion is formed with at least a first surface inclined in a second direction and a second surface inclined in a third direction different from the second direction (Fig. 5). Regarding claim 9, Choi discloses a display apparatus wherein the light-emitting device includes a first electrode (221), a light-emitting layer (222), and a second electrode (223), and wherein a size of an emission area of the light-emitting device where the first electrode, the light-emitting layer, and the second electrode overlap is larger than an area of the opening of the black matrix (Fig. 4). Regarding claim 11, Choi discloses a display apparatus wherein a surface of the recessed portion of the groove is curved (Fig. 4). Regarding claim 15, Choi discloses a display apparatus further comprising a lens passivation layer (510) covering the optical lens, wherein a refractive index of the lens passivation layer is equal to or greater than a refractive index of the optical lens (¶[0065]). Regarding claim 16, Choi discloses a display apparatus wherein a first width of the recessed portion of the groove from a first distance from the substrate is wider than a second width of the recessed portion of the groove from a second distance smaller than a first distance from the substrate (Fig. 4). Regarding claim 17, Choi discloses a display apparatus wherein the optical lens is disposed on at least a portion of the black matrix (Fig. 4). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4 and 12-14 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) 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 the insulating layer is disposed on the black matrix, and the display apparatus further comprising: a second black matrix on the insulating layer, the second black matrix formed with a second opening, the second opening of the black matrix overlapping with the light-emitting device and the opening in the first direction, and wherein the groove is formed within the second opening. Regarding claim(s) 12, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 12, and specifically comprising the limitation of wherein a bottom surface of the recessed portion is substantially flat, and a side surface of the recessed portion is perpendicular to the bottom surface of the recessed portion. Regarding claim(s) 13, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 13, and specifically comprising the limitation of the recessed portion is formed with at least a first surface inclined in a second direction and a second surface inclined in a third direction different from the second direction, and a third surface perpendicular to the upper surface of the insulating layer. Regarding claim(s) 14, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 14, and specifically comprising the limitation of the recessed portion is filled with an optical insulating layer, and the optical lens is disposed on the optical insulating layer, and wherein a refractive index of the optical insulating layer is between a refractive index of the optical lens and a refractive index of the insulating layer. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Shiozaki (US 2012/0261698 A1) discloses a display device comprising a light absorbing layer, and forming a foundation layer such that the foundation layer covers a region where the lens portion is to be formed, wherein the foundation layer is in contact with the light absorbing layer and the lens portion once the lens portion is formed. Li et al. (US 2023/0060696 A1) discloses a display panel, including: a base substrate, a first electrode layer, a luminescent material layer, a second electrode layer, an elastic lens layer and at least one light wavelength conversion layer arranged in sequence. 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

Sep 05, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (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