Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/556,396

DISPLAY SUBSTRATE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING DISPLAY SUBSTRATE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 20, 2023
Examiner
QUARTERMAN, KEVIN J
Art Unit
2875
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
BOE TECHNOLOGY GROUP CO., LTD.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
706 granted / 857 resolved
+14.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
887
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
36.0%
-4.0% vs TC avg
§102
47.2%
+7.2% vs TC avg
§112
11.2%
-28.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 857 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 . Claim Objections Claim 26 is objected to because of the following informalities: There are two claims numbered “26” in the claim set. Appropriate correction is required. For purposes of examination, the second occurrence of claim 26 will be treated as claim 27. 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 1, 14-15, and 26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai (US 2020/0211477) in view of Wang (US 2020/0381651). Regarding independent claim 1, Lai teaches a display substrate comprising a base substrate (Fig. 17, Element 100; ¶ [0174]) and a plurality of sub-pixels (Fig. 17, Elements RGB) disposed on the base substrate, wherein the sub-pixel comprises a driving transistor (Fig. 17, Element T1; ¶ [0174]) located on the base substrate, wherein the driving transistor has a gate (Fig. 17, Element G; ¶ [0174]), a source (Fig. 17, Element S; ¶ [0174]), and a drain (Fig. 17, Element D; ¶ [0174]); and a light-emitting element (Fig. 17, Element 200; ¶ [0174]) located on a side of the driving transistor away from the base substrate, wherein the light-emitting element has a first electrode (Fig. 17, Element 201; ¶ [0174]), a second electrode (Fig. 17, Element 203; ¶ [0174]), and a light-emitting layer (Fig. 17, Element 202; ¶ [0174]) located between the first electrode and the second electrode, and the first electrode is electrically connected to the source or the drain of the driving transistor (¶ [0174]); wherein the first electrode comprises a first conductive layer (Fig. 27, Element 106; ¶ [0302]) electrically connected to the source or the drain of the driving transistor (¶ [0174]); a second conductive layer (Fig. 27, Element 201; ¶ [0302]) located on a side of the first conductive layer away from the base substrate; and a transparent material layer (Fig. 27, Element 103; ¶ [0335]) located on a side of the second conductive layer away from the base substrate; wherein the transparent material layer comprises a first transparent material sub-layer and a second transparent material sub- layer (Fig. 27) Lai teaches the limitations of independent claim 1 discussed earlier but fails to exemplify the first material sub-layer located between the second transparent material sub-layer and the second conductive layer, the second transparent conductive sub-layer covers the first transparent material sub-layer, and an edge of the first transparent material sub-layer aligned with an edge of the second conductive layer. Wang teaches a display substrate comprising a first electrode (Fig. 6, Element 1; ¶ [0037]) including a first conductive layer (Fig. 6, Element 11; ¶ [0037]); a second conductive layer (Fig. 6, Element 12; ¶ [0037]); and a transparent material layer located on a side of the second conductive layer away from the base substrate; wherein the transparent material layer comprises a first transparent material sub-layer (Fig. 6, Element 13; ¶ [0037]) and a second transparent material sub-layer (Fig. 6, Element 14; ¶ [0037]), the first material sub-layer located between the second transparent material sub-layer and the second conductive layer, the second transparent conductive sub-layer covers the first transparent material sub-layer, and an edge of the first transparent material sub-layer is aligned with an edge of the second conductive layer (Fig. 6). Wang discloses the first electrode structure described above being provided for ensuring high light output efficiency and obtaining high transmittance of an external light source (¶ [0041]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the display substrate of Lai with the first electrode taught by Wang for ensuring high light output efficiency. Regarding claim 14, the combination of Lai and Wang teaches the limitations of independent claim 1 discussed earlier but fails to exemplify a surface roughness of the second transparent material sub-layer being less than a surface roughness of the first transparent material sub-layer. Lai discloses a surface roughness of the first electrode layer being less than 3.0 nm (¶ [0021]). Lai also discloses the structure having a relatively low surface roughness, which improves light emitting efficiency (¶ [0348]). Therefore, it would have been obvious choice of design to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the display substrate taught by the combination of Lai and Wang with a surface roughness of the second transparent material sub-layer being less than a surface roughness of the first transparent material sub-layer, since where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentations (MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A)). Regarding claim 15, the combination of Lai and Wang teaches the limitations of independent claim 1 discussed earlier but fails to exemplify a thickness of the second transparent material sub-layer being greater than a thickness of the first transparent material sub-layer. Wang discloses that by adjusting the thickness of the first transparent conductive layer, the pixel defining layer is prevented from covering the metal reflective layer to cause insulation. Therefore, it would have been obvious choice of design to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the display substrate taught by the combination of Lai and Wang with a thickness of the second transparent material sub-layer being greater than a thickness of the first transparent material sub-layer, since where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentations (MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A)). Regarding claim 26, Lai teaches a metal layer located between the first conductive layer and the second conductive layer, wherein a material of the metal layer is Al (¶ [0336]), and a material of the transparent material layer is ITO (¶ [0328]). Regarding claim 27, the combination of Lai and Wang teaches a method of manufacturing the display substrate according to claim 1, as discussed earlier. Lai teaches forming the driving transistor of each sub-pixel on the base substrate, so as to obtain a substrate structure (Fig. 17); and forming, on the substrate structure, the first electrode, the light-emitting layer, and the second electrode of the light-emitting element of each sub-pixel in sequence (Fig. 17), wherein forming the first electrode of the light-emitting element comprises forming, by a first deposition and etching, the first conductive layer, the second conductive layer, and the first transparent material sub-layer of the transparent material layer of the light-emitting element on the substrate structure (¶ [0321]); forming, by a second deposition and etching, the second transparent material sub-layer of the transparent material layer on the first transparent material sub-layer (¶ [0338]). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-13, 16, and 22-23 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 2, the prior art of record neither shows or suggests a display substrate comprising, in addition to other limitations of the claim, one of the first conductive layer and the second conductive layer being a composite material layer, the composite material layer comprises a first conductive sub-layer and a second conductive sub-layer, the second conductive sub-layer is located on a side of the first conductive sub-layer away from the base substrate, and a material of the first conductive sub-layer is different from a material of the second conductive sub-layer. Due to their dependencies upon claim 2, claims 3-13, 16, and 22-23 are also allowable. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Shin (US 2021/0202641) teaches a transparent display device with first and second capacitor electrodes. Sakamoto (US 2017/0279084) teaches a display device with transparent insulating layer with refractive index higher than that of a first transparent electrode. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kevin Quarterman whose telephone number is (571)272-2461. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10am-6pm. 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 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. /Kevin Quarterman/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875 21 March 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 20, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598863
DISPLAY PANEL AND DISPLAY APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12575299
DISPLAY MODULE AND DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12557517
DISPLAY DEVICE AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12550584
DISPLAY DEVICE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD OF THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12550580
DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
82%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+11.7%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 857 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