Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/555,927

DISPLAY DEVICE AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING THE DISPLAY DEVICE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 18, 2023
Examiner
GREEN, TRACIE Y
Art Unit
2875
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Semiconductor Energy Laboratory 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 01/26/2024 and 02/05/2024 have 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 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kanda et al. (US 20190363278 A1) (Kanda, hereafter) (Kanda, hereafter). Regarding claim 1, Kanda discloses a display device (Figures 1-11) (Figures 1-3) comprising a first pixel (106) and a second pixel(106)(Examiner note: the pixels and their attributes share common numbers ) adjacent to the first pixel (106) (π31), wherein the first pixel(106) comprises a first pixel electrode (152), a first EL layer (154)over the first pixel electrode (152), and a common electrode over(156), opposing electrode) the first EL layer (154), wherein the second pixel comprises a second pixel electrode(152), a second EL layer (154) over the second pixel electrode (152), and the common electrode over the second EL layer, wherein each of a side surface of the first pixel electrode(152) and a side surface of the second pixel electrode(152) has a tapered shape, wherein a taper angle of the tapered shape is smaller than 90° (π48). Kanda fails to explicitly disclose wherein the display device comprises a region where a distance between the first pixel electrode and the second pixel electrode is less than or equal to 1 μm. In the field of high definition television this is not an uncommon and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would modify the display device of Kanda based on the of one of ordinary skill and that of Kanda wherein the display device comprises a region where a distance between the first pixel electrode and the second pixel electrode is less than or equal to 1 μm, and since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Regarding claim 9, Kandra discloses wherein the first pixel (106) further comprises a common layer (no number) between the first EL layer(154) and the common electrode (156,opposing electrod4), and wherein the second pixel(106) further comprises the common layer(no number) between the second EL layer (154) and the common electrode (106) (π52) (Examiner note: this is not shown in drawings it examiner has just noted what the prior art reference would refer to)). Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kanda et al. (US 20190363278 A1, IDS) (Kanda, hereafter) (Kanda, hereafter) in view of Nakatani et al. ( US 20100252857 A1, IDS) Regarding claims 2 and 3. Kanda discloses the display device set forth above(see rejection claim1). Kanda further discloses a first insulating layer (184); and a second insulating layer (190) over the first insulating layer (184), wherein the first insulating (186)layer comprises an inorganic material (π40), wherein the second insulating layer comprises an organic material (π42) , Kanda fails to explicitly disclose wherein the second insulating layer faces a side surface of the first EL layer and a side surface of the second EL layer with the first insulating layer therebetween (Claim 2), wherein the first insulating layer covers the side surface of the first pixel electrode, the side surface of the first EL layer, the side surface of the second pixel electrode, and the side surface of the second EL layer (claim 3). Nakatani discloses (Figures 1-4 and π12-π92) An organic EL device including: a substrate; an anode arranged on the substrate; a hole injection layer consisting of transition metal oxides arranged on the anode; an organic light emitting layer arranged on the hole injection layer; the anode arranged on the organic light emitting layer; an inorganic film arranged on the substrate; and a bank arranged on the inorganic film; wherein:] the bank and the inorganic film define the region of the organic light emitting layer; no difference in level is present in the boundary between the bank and the inorganic film; the bottom face of the inorganic film extends in the region defined by the bank and the inorganic film farther than the top face of the inorganic film One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would have further modified the display device of Kanada as disclosed by Nakatani wherein the second insulating layer faces a side surface of the first EL layer and a side surface of the second EL layer with the first insulating layer therebetween , wherein the first insulating layer covers the side surface of the first pixel electrode, the side surface of the first EL layer, the side surface of the second pixel electrode, and the side surface of the second EL layer the motivation being to provide a device low driving voltage and high light emitting efficiency, by preventing the hole injection layer from dissolution and by protecting the surface of the hole injection layer from the contamination of the residues of from layers. Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kanda et al. (US 20190363278 A1, IDS) (Kanda, hereafter) (Kanda, hereafter) in view of Park et al. (US 20200321427 A1) (Park, hereafter). Regarding claim 4, Kanda discloses wherein each of the first pixel electrode (152) and the second pixel (152) electrode comprises a first conductive layer (152a), a second conductive layer(152b) over the first conductive layer (152a), a third conductive layer (152c) over the second conductive layer (152b), wherein the second conductive layer(152b) has a reflective property (π46), Kanda discloses that wherein each of the third conductive layer has a high light transmitting property (π47). Kanda fails to explicitly disclose wherein a fourth conductive layer over the third conductive layer, wherein each of the first conductive layer and the third conductive layer is configured to protect the second conductive layer, wherein the fourth conductive layer has a higher work function than the third conductive layer, and the fourth conductive layer has a light-transmitting property. Park discloses the material of the conductors are disposed in some instances to prevent oxidation or corrosion. Light leakage can be controlled through the placement if conductors as wells as amount of resistance to handle power consumption of a device(π208-π212). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would have further modified the display device of Kanada as disclosed by based Park to derive wherein a fourth conductive layer over the third conductive layer, wherein each of the first conductive layer and the third conductive layer is configured to protect the second conductive layer, wherein the fourth conductive layer has a higher work function than the third conductive layer, and the fourth conductive layer has a light-transmitting property the motivation to arrange Kanda in such a manor is to provide a device low power consumption, high luminance, and high reaction speed. Regarding claim 5 and 8, Kanda fails to explicitly disclose wherein the first conductive layer comprises titanium (claim 5) ; wherein the third conductive layer comprises titanium oxide (claim 7); wherein the fourth conductive layer comprises an oxide comprising any one or more selected from indium, tin, zinc, gallium, titanium, aluminum, and silicon (claim 8). Park teaches at least one among the first conductive layer including the lower pattern 115, the second conductive layer (151, 152, 153, 172b, 155, 154b, and 154c), and the third conductive layer (171a, 171b, 171c, 172a, 172b, 172d, 170, 173, 175, 174, 176, 177, and 178) may include at least one of metals such as copper (Cu), aluminum (Al), magnesium (Mg), silver (Ag), gold (Au), platinum (Pt), palladium (Pd), nickel (Ni), neodymium (Nd), iridium (Ir), molybdenum (Mo), tungsten (W), titanium (Ti), chromium (Cr), tantalum (Ta), and alloys thereof. Each of the first conductive layer, the second conductive layer, and the third conductive layer may include a single layer or multiple layers. In an exemplary embodiment, the third conductive layer may have a multilayer structure including an underlying layer including titanium and an overlying layer including copper, for example. (π200). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would have further modified the display device of Kanada as disclosed by based Park wherein the first conductive layer comprises titanium ; wherein the fourth conductive layer comprises an oxide comprising any one or more selected from indium, tin, zinc, gallium, titanium, aluminum, and silicon the motivation being is to provide a device low power consumption, high luminance, and high reaction. Regarding claim 6, Kanda discloses, wherein the second conductive layer comprises aluminum (π46)Regarding claims 10-16, The limitations for these claims are similar enough to claims 1-9 that that the same rejections would apply mutatis mutandis. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found in the 892 and below: US 8519619 B2-multilayer pixel electrode (4-layers) 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 /TRACIE Y GREEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 18, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 14, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 10, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 10, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

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