Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/481,876

Light-Emitting Display Device

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 05, 2023
Examiner
GREEN, TRACIE Y
Art Unit
2875
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
LG Display Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
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 . 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. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/15/2024 AND 10/05/2023 has been considered by the examiner. 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 § 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) 1-4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu et al. (US 20230422542 A1) (Hu, hereafter) in view of Furuie (US 20200227487 A1). Regarding claim 1, Hun discloses A light-emitting display device comprising: an auxiliary wire (172) on a substrate(110); a first insulating layer(180) having a first hole on the auxiliary wire (172) (π32); a first metal layer (221, π35 ) having a second hole overlapping the first hole on the first insulating layer (180); a second insulating layer (190) having a third hole(224) overlapping the second hole on the first metal layer (210); a second metal layer (220) having a fourth hole (225, undercut) overlapping the third hole( 224) on the second insulating layer (190)(π35-π37); Hun fails to disclose an organic insulating film pattern filling the first hole to the fourth hole and contacting the auxiliary wire. Furuie discloses (Figure 7) In the display region 101, the display device 10A includes a substrate 100, a transistor 110, a capacitor 120, a capacitor 121, a light emitting element 130, an insulating layer 141, an insulating layer 149, a planarization layer 150, a rib 157A, a sealing layer 161, a filler material 170, a color filter layer 180, a light shielding layer 190, a coat layer 185 and a substrate 200. The display device 10A includes a partition wall member 165 in addition to a substrate 100, a transistor 111, a capacitor 121, an insulating layer 141, an insulating layer 149, a planarization layer 150, a rib 157A, a sealing layer 161, a filler material 170, a light shielding layer 190 and the substrate 200 in the periphery region 104A. the filler material being disposed in the display and the peripheral region and being organic (π87). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify the lighting-emitting display device of Hun as disclosed by Furuie to wherein to have an organic insulating film pattern filling the first hole to the fourth hole and contacting the auxiliary wire the motivation to improve moisture blocking performance and effectively deal with ambient light. Regarding claim 2-4, Hun as modified by Furuie disclose the invention set forth above (see rejection claim 1). Hun as modified by Furuie fail to explicitly wherein a first side surface of the first insulating layer surrounding the first hole, a second side surface of the first metal layer surrounding the second hole, a third side surface of the second insulating layer surrounding the third hole, and a fourth side surface of the second metal layer surrounding the fourth hole have different tapers adjacent to each other in a vertical direction (claim 2); wherein the first and third side surfaces have reverse tapers (Claim 3);, wherein the second side surface protrudes from the first side surface and the third side surface, and the fourth side surface protrudes from the third side surface (Claim 4). However it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify the light emitting display device of Hun wherein a first side surface of the first insulating layer surrounding the first hole, a second side surface of the first metal layer surrounding the second hole, a third side surface of the second insulating layer surrounding the third hole, and a fourth side surface of the second metal layer surrounding the fourth hole have different tapers adjacent to each other in a vertical direction ; wherein the first and third side surfaces have reverse tapers; wherein the second side surface protrudes from the first side surface and the third side surface, and the fourth side surface protrudes from the third side surface since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237(CCPA 1955) and Such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component and it has been held that a change in size is generally recognized in as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955)) and that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device (In re Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984)). See MPEP 2144.04 (IV-A). Regarding claim 14 Hu discloses, (Figure 7) wherein the second metal layer (220) is on a same layer as a pad protection electrode(173) protecting a pad portion (π31). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 5 and 6 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. Claims 7-13 and 15 are objected to due to their dependence upon claim 6 Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found in the 892 provided this disclosure below: US 20240088340 A1-General state of the art display device in which device reliability of a pad part is improved US 20230275101 A1-General State of the Art- periphery circuit region of the display panel US 20210028272 A1-Generall State of the Art- preventing defects of a pad unit arranged in a peripheral area 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 05, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 06, 2026
Non-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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+9.4%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
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