Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/624,135

DISPLAY DEVICE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME USING SELECTIVE ETCHING

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Apr 02, 2024
Examiner
WILSON, PAISLEY L
Art Unit
2871
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
58%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 58% of resolved cases
58%
Career Allow Rate
389 granted / 671 resolved
-10.0% vs TC avg
Strong +35% interview lift
Without
With
+35.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
694
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
54.2%
+14.2% vs TC avg
§102
23.2%
-16.8% vs TC avg
§112
20.1%
-19.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 671 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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant’s submission filed on January 2, 2026 has been entered. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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. 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. Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lu et al. (US 2019/0056626). Regarding claim 1, Lu discloses a method of manufacturing a display device (Figs. 1-7), comprising: disposing a first insulating layer (15) comprising a contact hole (17) on a substrate (10), the contact hole extending entirely through the first insulating layer (Figs. 5-7); disposing a conductive material (16) on the first insulating layer (15) and inside the contact hole (17) to completely fill the contact hole (Figs. 5-7); disposing a second insulating layer (19) on the conductive material (16) and inside the contact hole (17) (Fig. 5); forming a masking pattern (18) by exposing and developing the second insulating layer (19) (Figs. 5-6); etching the conductive material (16) to form a conductive pattern (Fig. 6; paras. [0056-0057]); etching back the masking pattern (18) such that the masking pattern remains in the contact hole (17), wherein the conductive pattern (16) is interposed between the masking pattern (18) and the first insulating layer (15) while the masking pattern does not contact the first insulating layer after etching back the masking pattern (Figs. 6-7); and disposing a third insulating layer (paras. [0078-0080, 0092]; “alignment film”) on the conductive pattern (16) and the masking pattern (18). Regarding claim 2, Lu discloses wherein after the etching back, the conductive pattern (16) is at least partially exposed (Fig. 7). Regarding claim 3, Lu discloses wherein the first insulating layer (15) includes a first region (e.g., region surrounding connecting portion 17) that overlaps the conductive pattern (16) and a second region (e.g., rightmost region in Figs. 5-7) that does not overlap the conductive pattern (16), and a thickness of the first region of the first insulating layer (15) is greater than a thickness of the second region of the first insulating layer (Figs. 5-7). Regarding claim 4, Lu discloses wherein the forming of the masking pattern (18) by exposing and developing the second insulating layer (19) is performed using a half-tone mask (20-22) (Figs. 5-6). Regarding claim 5, Lu discloses wherein the masking pattern (18) includes a first masking pattern part (18) having a first thickness and a second masking pattern part (19) having a second thickness smaller than the first thickness (Fig. 6). Regarding claim 6, Lu discloses wherein the second masking pattern part (19) is removed by the etching back (Figs. 6-7). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. 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 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu et al. (US 2019/0056626), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of LG Display Co Ltd (KR 2016-0002596), of record. Regarding claim 7, Lu discloses the limitations of claim 1 above, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the first insulating layer, the second insulating layer, and the third insulating layer include a siloxane polymer. However, LG Display Co Ltd discloses a method of manufacturing a display device (Figs. 1-2), wherein an insulating layer includes a siloxane polymer (paras. [0046, 0050, 0053-0057]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate wherein the first insulating layer, the second insulating layer, and the third insulating layer include a siloxane polymer, as in LG Display Co Ltd, into the method of Lu, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. See MPEP 2144.07. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments (see Remarks, filed December 2, 2025), with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) over Sim et al. (US 2017/0141169), and in accordance with the amendments, have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been overcome and is withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Lu as discussed above. Therefore, the new ground of rejection over Lu is considered appropriate in accordance with the amendments to the claim. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAISLEY L WILSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5023. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00am-5:00pm 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, MICHAEL CALEY can be reached at 571-272-2286. 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. /PAISLEY L WILSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 02, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 11, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Aug 27, 2025
Interview Requested
Sep 03, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Sep 03, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 12, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 07, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Nov 25, 2025
Interview Requested
Dec 02, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 02, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 21, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 25, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598960
DISPLAY PANEL, PREPARATION METHOD FOR DISPLAY PANEL, AND DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12599001
DISPLAY DEVICE INCLUDING DISPLAY PANEL AND INFORMATION CODE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12585052
Dispersive Optical Elements, Devices, Systems and Methods Using the Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12566349
PIXEL UNIT, DISPLAY SUBSTRATE, DISPLAY PANEL, AND DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12560753
LIGHTING UNIT HAVING A CENTERING DEVICE FOR A LIGHT GUIDE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
58%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+35.3%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 671 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