Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/618,024

ELECTRICAL CONNECTION STRUCTURE AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE COMPRISING THE SAME

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Mar 27, 2024
Examiner
FAN, SU JYA
Art Unit
2818
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Innolux Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
700 granted / 929 resolved
+7.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
53 currently pending
Career history
982
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.4%
-36.6% vs TC avg
§103
47.5%
+7.5% vs TC avg
§102
24.9%
-15.1% vs TC avg
§112
19.7%
-20.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 929 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 . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. Response to Amendment The following office action is in response to the amendment and remarks filed on 6/7/25. Applicant’s amendment to claims 1 and 4 is acknowledged. Claims 1-6 are pending and subject to examination at this time. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection. 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. (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) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yang, US Publication No. 2017/0047313 A1. Yang anticipates: 4. An electronic device, comprising (see fig. 12): an array substrate (22+24+32+40); a circuit substrate (110) disposed adjacent to the array substrate; and an electrical connection structure (116+21+26+28), comprising: a plurality of conductive particles (117/116 is ACF); and a connection pad (21+26+28+50+54+72) comprising a first part (50+54), a second part (21) and a third part (72), wherein the first part (50+54) is formed on a first surface of the array substrate and electrically connected to a circuit (46-66) of the array substrate, the second part (21) is connected to the first part (50+54) and passes through the array substrate, and the third part (72) is formed on a second surface opposite to the first surface of the array substrate, connected to the second part (21) and electrically connected to a circuit (LEDs of 110; and/or “thin film transistor circuit layers” at para. [0129] – [0130]) of the circuit substrate (110) through the conductive particles (117/116). See Yang at para. [0001] – [0143], figs. 1-19. 5. The electronic device as claimed in claim 4, further comprising an adhesive layer (116 is ACF), wherein the adhesive layer (116) and the conductive particles (117) form an anisotropic conductive film (ACF) for bonding the array substrate to the circuit substrate, para. [0123]. Regarding claim 1: Yang teaches the limitations as applied to claim 4 above. 2. The electrical connection structure as claimed in claim 1, wherein the connection pad comprises copper, nickel, silver or gold, para. [0045], [0063], [0083] Regarding claim 3: Yang teaches the limitations as applied to claim 5 above. 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) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iino, JP 2004327215 A (see attached English machine translation). Iino teaches: 4. An electronic device, comprising (see fig. 3): an array substrate (305+306); a circuit substrate (200) disposed adjacent to the array substrate; and an electrical connection structure (400+340+330+portion 303 directly below 330), comprising: a plurality of conductive particles (400 is ACF); and a connection pad (340+330+portion 303 directly below 330) comprising a first part, a second part (330) and a third part, wherein the first part (340) is formed on a first surface of the array substrate (300) and electrically connected to a circuit (e.g. LEDs) of the array substrate, the second part (330) is connected to the first part and passes through the array substrate (300), and the third part (e.g. portion 303 directly below 330) is formed on a second surface opposite to the first surface of the array substrate, connected to the second part (330) and electrically connected to a circuit (e.g. TFTs) of the circuit substrate (200) through the conductive particles (400). See Iino at English machine translation para. [0001] – [0064], figs. 1-17. Regarding claim 4: The limitation “a connection pad comprising… a third part” can be arrived at by separately forming the integral electrode (303) as two distinct portions, as annotated in fig. 3 below. A first portion directly below 330 to be the claimed “third part” and a second portion as an anode of the LED. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to separately form the integral electrode (303) as two distinct portions, since constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04, Legal Precedent as Source of Supporting Rationale, V. Making Portable, Integral, Separable, Adjustable or Continuous. PNG media_image1.png 550 688 media_image1.png Greyscale 5. The electronic device as claimed in claim 4, further comprising an adhesive layer, wherein the adhesive layer and the conductive particles form an anisotropic conductive film (ACF) for bonding the array substrate to the circuit substrate, para. [0027]. Regarding claim 1: Iino teaches the limitations as applied to claim 4 above. 2. The electrical connection structure as claimed in claim 1, wherein the connection pad comprises copper, nickel, silver or gold, para. [0052]. Regarding claim 3: Iino teaches the limitations as applied to claim 5 above. Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iino, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Chang et al., US Publication No. 2019/0181189 A1. Regarding claim 6: Iino teaches all the limitations of claim1 above, but does not expressly teach: further comprising a light absorption layer covering the first part of the connection pad. In an analogous art, Chang teaches (see fig. 10A) further comprising a light absorption layer (200) covering the LED display area. See Chang at para. [0243] – [0258]. One of ordinary skill in the art modifying Iino with Chang to form a light absorption layer would form the light absorption layer covering “the first part of the connection pad”, as recited in the claim, because Chang’s light absorption layer covers all the LED pixels. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Iino with the teachings of Chang to “achieve a high brightness without loss of light and improve a color reproduction range” See Chang at para. [0255]. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michele Fan whose telephone number is 571-270-7401. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F from 7:30 am to 4 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, Jeff Natalini, can be reached on (571) 272-2266. 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. /Michele Fan/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818 11 August 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 27, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 10, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jun 07, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 12, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Apr 14, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593739
POWER MODULE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12593700
Low Parasitic Inductance Power Module Having Staggered, Interleaving Conductive Busbars
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588571
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12588373
DISPLAY DEVICE, AND METHOD FOR FABRICATING DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12588374
DISPLAY PANEL AND DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (+8.0%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 929 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month