Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/524,404

Display Apparatus

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Nov 30, 2023
Examiner
NGUYEN, KHIEM D
Art Unit
2892
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
LG Display Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
1872 granted / 2187 resolved
+17.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
73 currently pending
Career history
2260
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
44.5%
+4.5% vs TC avg
§102
30.7%
-9.3% vs TC avg
§112
15.2%
-24.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 2187 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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The IDS filed on 11/30/2023, 06/26/2024, and 11/13/2025 have been considered. 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. The following title is suggested: Display apparatus comprising a deposition blocking layer disposed on a planarization layer in a transmissive area. 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) 1, 6, 9, 11, 14, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Jin et al. (U.S. Pub. 2024/0032344). In re claim 1, Jin discloses a display apparatus 10 (see paragraphs [0042], [0046] and fig. 3), comprising: a substrate 110 (see paragraph [0046] and fig. 3) including a display area, the display area including a first area and a second area surrounding the first area, and the first area includes an emission area AA and a transmissive area TA (see paragraphs [0042], [0046] and fig. 3); a planarization layer 140 disposed on the substrate 110 in the display area (see paragraph [0046] and fig. 3); a plurality of light emitting elements that are disposed on the planarization layer 140, the plurality of light emitting elements including an anode 150 (see paragraph [0048] and fig. 3), a light emitting layer (171,172,173), and a cathode 190 (see paragraph [0049] and fig. 3); a bank (pixel definition layer 160) disposed to cover a portion of an end portion of the anode 150 in the emission area AA (see paragraph [0049] and fig. 3); and a deposition blocking layer 180 disposed on the planarization layer 140 in the transmissive area TA, wherein the deposition blocking layer 180 is spaced apart from the bank 160 (see paragraph [0050] and fig. 3). PNG media_image1.png 532 831 media_image1.png Greyscale In re claim 6, as applied to claim 1 above, Jin discloses wherein the display apparatus further comprising at least one structure disposed on the planarization layer 140 in the transmissive area TA and disposed between the bank 160 and the deposition blocking layer 180 (see paragraphs [0049], [0050] and fig. 3, notes that the claims are given the broadest reasonable interpretation (In re Hyatt, 211 F. 3d 1367, 1372, 54 USPQ2d 1664, 1667 (Fed. Cir. 2000)), thus, a portion of layers 171 and 173 can be interpreted as the at least one structure). In re claim 9, as applied to claim 1 above, Jin discloses wherein an upper surface of the planarization layer 140 is horizontal in the emission area AA and the transmissive area TA (see paragraph [0046] and fig. 3). In re claim 11, as applied to claim 1 above, Jin discloses wherein the deposition blocking layer 180 and the cathode 190 do not overlap each other (see paragraphs [0049], [0050] and fig. 3). In re claim 14, as applied to claim 1 above, Jin discloses wherein the deposition blocking layer 180 is not disposed along a side surface of the bank 160 (see paragraphs [0049], [0050] and fig. 3). In re claim 15, as applied to claim 1 above, Jin discloses wherein the cathode 190 is not disposed in the transmissive area TA (see paragraph [0049] and fig. 3). 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) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin et al. (U.S. Pub. 2024/0032344) in view of Chung et al. (U.S. Pub. 2020/0258947). In re claim 12, as applied to claim 1 above, Jin is silent to wherein the display apparatus further comprising an optical electronic device disposed below the substrate in the first area. However, Chung discloses in a same field of endeavor, a display apparatus 1 including, inter-alia, an optical electronic device 300 disposed below the substrate 100 in the first area SA (see paragraph [0040] and fig. 2). Therefore, it is respectfully submitted that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to be motivated to incorporate the technique as taught by Chung into the display apparatus of Jin in order to enable an optical electronic device disposed below the substrate in the first area in Jin to be formed in order to configured for transmitting a signal through the substrate and the transmission portion (see paragraph [0005] of Chung). Furthermore, it would have been obvious because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398 (2007). “If a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond that person’s skill.” Id. Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin et al. (U.S. Pub. 2024/0032344). In re claim 13, as applied to claim 1 above, Jin is silent to wherein the deposition blocking layer has an area of less than 95% of the area of the transmissive area. However, it is respectfully submitted that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to optimize the shape of the deposition blocking layer to have an area of less than 95% of the area of the transmissive area since it is respectfully submitted that, the configuration regarding about the shape of the deposition blocking layer was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration was significant (In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966)). Furthermore, a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955), Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), and MPEP 2144.04. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-5, 7, 8, and 10 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. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Bok et al. (U.S. Pub. 2020/0393936) discloses a display apparatus, comprising: a substrate SUB including a display area, the display area including a first area and a second area surrounding the first area (see paragraphs [0269], [0290] and fig. 14) and the first area includes an emission area and a transmissive area; a planarization layer 160 disposed on the substrate SUB in the display area (see paragraph [0368] and fig. 14); a plurality of light emitting elements 170 that are disposed on the planarization layer 160, the plurality of light emitting elements 170 including an anode 171, a light emitting layer 172, and a cathode 173 (see paragraph [0380] and fig. 14). Kim et al. (U.S. Pub. 2018/0033847) discloses a display apparatus, comprising: a substrate 111 (see paragraph [0047] and fig. 6) including a display area DA, the display area including a first area and a second area surrounding the first area, and the first area includes an emission area and a transmissive area (see paragraphs [0048], [0049] and fig. 6); a planarization layer 280 disposed on the substrate 111 in the display area DA (see paragraph [0100] and fig. 6); a plurality of light emitting elements 290 that are disposed on the planarization layer 280 (see paragraph [0101] and fig. 6), the plurality of light emitting elements including an anode 291, a light emitting layer 292, and a cathode 293 (see paragraph [0101] and fig. 6). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHIEM D NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1865. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 AM - 6:00 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, N. Drew Richards can be reached at (571) 272-1736. 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. /KHIEM D NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2892
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 30, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603626
MULTI-PHASE-BASED DOHERTY POWER AMPLIFIER METHOD AND APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599329
Sense Amplifer For a Physiological Sensor and/or Other Sensors
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599000
NON-VOLATILE MEMORY DEVICE INCLUDING FIRST AND SECOND MONITORING CHANNEL STRUCTURES AND NON-VOLATILE MEMORY SYSTEM COMPRISING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12599018
PACKAGE STRUCTURE WITH ENHANCEMENT STRUCTURE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592674
SELF-BIAS SIGNAL GENERATING CIRCUIT USING DIFFERENTIAL SIGNAL AND RECEIVER INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
86%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+12.5%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 2187 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