Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 04, 2026
Application No. 18/710,492

INTERFACE DISPLAY METHOD AND APPARATUS

Final Rejection §112
Filed
May 15, 2024
Priority
Nov 30, 2021 — CN 202111453343.X +1 more
Examiner
KHOO, STACY
Art Unit
2624
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
6m
Est. Remaining
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allowance Rate
488 granted / 600 resolved
+19.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+14.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
619
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.6%
-38.4% vs TC avg
§103
49.8%
+9.8% vs TC avg
§102
19.9%
-20.1% vs TC avg
§112
23.9%
-16.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 600 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 Claims 27, 43 and 45 are objected to because of the following informalities: As to claim 27, the phrase “the second window” in line 14 of the claim should be changed to “a second window”, since “a second window” is not previously recited in the claim. Appropriate correction is required. As to claim 43, the phrase “the second window” in line 16 of the claim should be changed to “a second window”, since “a second window” is not previously recited in the claim. Appropriate correction is required. As to claim 45, the second comma ( , ) at the end of line 5 of the claim should be deleted. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 27, 29-40, 43, and 45-49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. As to claim 27, the specification as originally filed does not disclose “a second plurality of display windows is displayed on the second window prior to receiving the slide operation, and the first plurality of display windows and the second plurality of display windows have a preset quantity of display windows.” Paragraph [0007] of applicant’s specification discloses if the second display includes a plurality of display windows, in response to a slide operation on the plurality of display windows, selecting, on the second display based on the slide operation, a preset quantity of windows from the plurality of display windows for display.” Furthermore, paragraph [0008] of applicant’s specification discloses “the plurality of display windows on the second display”. The specification as first filed does not disclose “a second plurality of display windows is displayed on the second window prior to receiving the slide operation, and the first plurality of display windows and the second plurality of display windows have a preset quantity of display windows.” Claims 29-40 are rejected based on dependence on claim 27. As to claim 43, the specification as originally filed does not disclose “a second plurality of display windows is displayed on the second window prior to receiving the slide operation, and the first plurality of display windows and the second plurality of display windows have a preset quantity of display windows.” Paragraph [0007] of applicant’s specification discloses if the second display includes a plurality of display windows, in response to a slide operation on the plurality of display windows, selecting, on the second display based on the slide operation, a preset quantity of windows from the plurality of display windows for display.” Furthermore, paragraph [0008] of applicant’s specification discloses “the plurality of display windows on the second display”. The specification as first filed does not disclose “a second plurality of display windows is displayed on the second window prior to receiving the slide operation, and the first plurality of display windows and the second plurality of display windows have a preset quantity of display windows.” Claims 45-49 are rejected based on dependence on claim 43. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 41 is allowed. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 27, 29-40, 43, and 45-49 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection. 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 STACY KHOO whose telephone number is (571)270-3698. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00 am-5:00 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Matthew Eason can be reached at 571-270-7230. 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. /STACY KHOO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2624
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 15, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Mar 26, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 04, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12614512
DISPLAY SUBSTRATE AND DISPLAY APPARATUS
2y 8m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12614511
Driving Circuit and Display Device Using the Same
1y 5m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12602139
DISPLAY PANEL AND DISPLAY DEVICE
1y 10m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12592194
DISPLAY DEVICE
1y 4m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586532
DISPLAY APPARATUS
2y 6m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
81%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+14.7%)
2y 5m (~6m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 600 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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