Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/523,124

DISPLAY DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Nov 29, 2023
Priority
Dec 16, 2022 — RE 10-2022-0176532
Examiner
SPRENGER, JAIME LYNN
Art Unit
2893
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
LG Display Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
100%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 100% — above average
100%
Career Allowance Rate
1 granted / 1 resolved
+32.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
17 currently pending
Career history
21
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
86.0%
+46.0% vs TC avg
§102
10.5%
-29.5% vs TC avg
§112
1.8%
-38.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Should applicant desire to obtain the benefit of foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) prior to declaration of an interference, a certified English translation of the foreign application must be submitted in reply to this action. 37 CFR 41.154(b) and 41.202(e). Failure to provide a certified translation may result in no benefit being accorded for the non-English application. 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. Election/Restrictions Claims 8-16 and 18-21 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 in the reply filed on 04-02-2026. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 6 and 7 are 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. The term “upper high voltage power wiring” and “lower high voltage power wiring” in claims 6 and 7 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear what is included in the scope of these terms and examiner is interpreting them as upper and lower portions of the high voltage power wiring for the purposes of examination. An explanation and/or examples from the specification would be greatly appreciated to help examiner search the invention to the greatest capability. 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chanyoungas Park et al. (US 11637151 B2) Hereinafter referred to as “Park” Regarding Claim 17 park teaches A display device(Fig 11 element 10), comprising: a substrate(100); a display area comprising a plurality of pixels(P); a hole area(through holes R1 and/or R2); a non-display area disposed between the display area and the hole area(NDA1 Fig 11); a conductive layer disposed on the substrate(PLa and PLb); and a power wiring (Driving voltage lines PLa and PLb) connected to the plurality of pixels (P) and configured to provide power, wherein: at least a portion of the power wiring is disposed in the conductive layer;(PLa and PLb and disposed in PLa and PLb) and the power wiring comprises a hole-surrounding power wiring surrounding the non-display area (PLa and PLb of PLa and PLb, Col. 23 lines 22-24) 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) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chanyoungas Park et al. (US 11637151 B2) Hereinafter referred to as “Park” further in view of Yujin Jeon et al. (US 11665937 B2) Hereinafter referred to as “Jeon”. Regarding Claim 1 Park teaches A display device (Fig 11 element10), comprising: a substrate(100); a display area comprising a plurality of pixels(P); a sensor hole area (through holes R1 and/or R2); a sensor non-display area(NDA1) disposed between the display area and the sensor hole area (Fig 11); a first conductive layer (SLa and SLb) disposed on the substrate and comprising a scan wiring (SLa and SLb) connected to the plurality of pixels (P Col. 11 lines 59-67) and extending along a first direction (X-axis); a second conductive layer (the layer of PLa and PLb); and a high voltage power wiring(PLa and PLb) connected to the plurality of pixels, wherein: the high voltage power wiring comprises a hole-surrounding high voltage power wiring (PLa and PLb of PLa and PLb) surrounding the sensor non-display area on a plane (Col. 23 lines 22-24); and at least a portion of the hole-surrounding high voltage power wiring is disposed in the second conductive layer.(PLa and PLb are of the layer of PLa and PLb) Though Park does teach PLa and PLb intersecting SLa and SLb in figure 11 park is not relied on to teach that PLa and PLb are disposed on SLa and SLb in the limitation: a second conductive layer disposed on the first conductive layer; Jeon explicitly teaches a second conductive layer (PL and HL) disposed on the first conductive layer (SL);(Col. 11 lines 8-11, 25-27, 31-32 ) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Park such that the second conductive layer disposed on the first conductive layer, as described in Jeon because the modification allows for the Reduction of electrostatic discharge damage since HL is above SL we are able to have 113 to insulate most of SL from HL since HL is connected to a metal layer. (Jeon Col. 18-19 lines 66-3, Col 19 lines 20-28) Regarding Claim 2 Park in view of Jeon teaches The display device of claim 1, Park further teaches wherein the high voltage power wiring further(PLa and PLb) comprises a first high voltage power wiring(PLa) extending along a second direction (y-axis) intersecting the first direction(x-axis).(Fig11) Regarding Claim 3 Park in view of Jeon teaches The display device of claim 2, Park further teaches wherein the hole-surrounding high voltage power wiring(Fig 11. PLa and PLb) has a larger width than the first high voltage power wiring.(PLa) (the width of PLa and PLb will always be wider than its subset PLa) Regarding Claim 4 Park in view of Jeon teaches The display device of claim 1, Park further teaches wherein the high voltage power wiring(PLa and PLb) does not overlap the sensor non-display area. (Col. 23 lines 22-24) Regarding Claim 5 Park in view of Jeon teaches The display device of claim 1, Park further teaches wherein the scan wiring (SLa and SLb) extends along the first direction (x-axis) and by passes the sensor hole area on a plane within the sensor non-display area. (Fig. 11) Regarding Claim 6 Park in view of Jeon teaches The display device of claim 1, Park further teaches wherein the high voltage power wiring(PLa and PLb) further comprises an upper high voltage power wiring (upper portion of PLa and PLb) disposed at an upper side of the hole-surrounding high voltage power wiring(disposed at the upper side of PLa and PLb) on a plane and connected to the hole-surrounding high voltage power wiring(connected to PLa and PLb), and a lower high voltage power wiring(lower portion of PLa and PLb) disposed at a lower side of the hole-surrounding high voltage power wiring(disposed at the lower side of PLa and PLb) on a plane and connected to the hole-surrounding high voltage power wiring. (connected to PLa and PLb) Regarding Claim 7 Park in view of Jeon teaches The display device of claim 6, Park further teaches wherein the upper high voltage power wiring(upper portion of PLa and PLb) and the lower high voltage power wiring(lower portion of PLa and PLb) extend along a second direction (y-axis) intersecting the first direction(x-axis). (Fig 11) Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. LEE; Jinuk (US 20240206260 A1), Jaehee Park (US12219846B2), Yeseul HAN (US12004393B2) (power wiring above scan lines), SONG; Hwayoung (US 20200058728 A1). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAIME LYNN SPRENGER whose telephone number is (571)272-8444. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 7:30a.m. - 5:00p.m. ET.. 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, Sue Purvis can be reached at 571-272-1236. 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. /JAIME LYNN SPRENGER/Examiner, Art Unit 2893 /SUE A PURVIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 29, 2023
Application Filed
May 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12677542
DISPLAY PANEL AND ELECTRONIC APPARATUS INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 7m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 1 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
100%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+0.0%)
2y 7m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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