Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 24, 2026
Application No. 18/784,615

Display Device

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 25, 2024
Priority
Oct 13, 2023 — RE 10-2023-0136745
Examiner
LI, MO
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
LG Display Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 0% of cases
0%
Career Allowance Rate
0 granted / 0 resolved
-60.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
Avg Prosecution
11 currently pending
Career history
1
Total Applications
across all art units
This examiner has no resolved cases yet (career too new); statute-level performance unavailable. The Grant Probability card shows Tech Center averages instead.

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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/25/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, ‘a first-first connection electrode of the plurality of first-first connection electrodes and the first repair line are spaced apart from each other, a first-second connection electrode of the plurality of first-second connection electrodes and the second repair line are spaced apart from each other, and a first-third connection electrode of the plurality of first-third connection electrodes and the third repair line are spaced apart from each other’ in claim 12 (pg. 5, lines 15-20) must be shown or the features canceled from the claim. No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 1-8, 10 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cok (US2018/0323180A1, Cok hereinafter) in view of Lee et al. (US2022/0328582A1, Lee hereinafter). Regarding claim 1, Cok teaches a display device (Fig. 1), comprising: a substrate (10) having a plurality of pixel areas (Fig. 13B, 96-99); a plurality of pixels (20) in the plurality of pixel areas (Fig. 1), each of the plurality of pixels including a first sub-pixel (see annotated Fig. 1: 1st sub-pixel), a second sub-pixel (see annotated Fig. 1: 2nd sub-pixel), a third sub-pixel (see annotated Fig. 1: 3rd sub-pixel), and a reserve sub-pixel (redundant pixels 20’. Fig. 12A); a first plurality of light-emitting elements (red pixel elements 24R/24R’) in the first sub-pixel and the reserve sub-pixel; (Fig. 8 and 12A: 24R in 1st sub-pixel, 24R’ in 20’) a second plurality of light-emitting elements (green pixel elements 24G/24G’) in the second sub-pixel and the reserve sub-pixel; (Fig. 8 and 12A: 24G in 2nd sub-pixel, 24G’ in 20’) and a third plurality of light-emitting elements (blue pixel elements 24B/24B’) in the third sub-pixel and the reserve sub-pixel. (Fig. 8 and 12A: 24B in 3rd sub-pixel, 24B’ in 20’) However, Cok does not teach a first light-emitting element of the first plurality of light-emitting elements, a second light-emitting element of the second plurality of light-emitting elements, and a third light-emitting element of the third plurality of light-emitting elements are on different layers in the reserve sub-pixel. Lee in the same field of endeavor in LED display device teaches the detail structures of reserve sub-pixel with light emitting elements in a display device (Fig. 4), wherein a first light-emitting element of the first plurality of light-emitting elements (light emitting units EU-1), a second light-emitting element of the second plurality of light-emitting elements (light emitting units EU-2), and a third light-emitting element of the third plurality of light-emitting elements (light emitting units EU-3) are on different layers in the reserve sub-pixel (Fig.4, EU-1, EU-2 and EU-3 are on different layers). Since Cok and Lee are in the same field of LED, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill of art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cok by vertically stacking the light emitting elements in the reserve pixel. Instead of placing the light emitting elements side by side, vertically stacking them would reduce the reserve sub-pixel area and increase the light emitting area, as suggested by Lee (P[0032]). PNG media_image1.png 519 742 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 2, Cok in view of Lee teaches the display device of claim 1, wherein the plurality of pixel areas are spaced apart from one another (Cok, Fig.13B), and a transmissive area is between the plurality of pixel areas (Cok, Fig. 13B, pixel areas 96-99 are spaced apart by transmissive area) Regarding claim 3, Cok in view of Lee teaches the display device of claim 1, wherein the first plurality of light-emitting elements emit red light (Cok[0087]: red pixel element 24R/24R’), the second plurality of light-emitting elements emit green light (Cok[0087]: green pixel element 24G/24G’), and the third plurality of light-emitting elements emit blue light (Cok[0087]: blue pixel element 24B/24B’). Regarding claim 4, Cok in view of Lee teaches the display device of claim 1, wherein the first light-emitting element, the second light-emitting element, and the third light-emitting element at least partially overlap one another in the reserve sub-pixel (Lee, Fig. 4, Common Electrode CE is part of Emitting Unit EU, CE1 and CE2 and CE3 overlap each other). Regarding claim 5, Cok in view of Lee teaches the display device of claim 1, wherein a light-emitting element of the first plurality of light-emitting elements of the first sub-pixel is on a same layer as another light-emitting element of the first plurality of light-emitting elements of the reserve sub-pixel , a light-emitting element of the second plurality of light-emitting elements of the second sub-pixel is on a same layer as another light-emitting element of the second plurality of light-emitting elements of the reserve sub-pixel, and a light-emitting element of the third plurality of light-emitting elements of the third sub-pixel is on a same layer as another light-emitting element of the third plurality of light-emitting elements of the reserve sub-pixel. (Cok, Fig. 12A, the sub-pixel 20 and the reserved pixel 20’ are identical. With the teaching of Lee, the sub-pixel 20 and the reserve sub-pixel 20’ would have the same vertical structure as Lee Fig. 4. Therefore, the light emitting element EU-1 in 20 would be on the same layer as light emitting element EU-1 in 20’. Similarly, EU-2/EU-3 in 20 would be on the same layer as EU-2/EU-3 on 20’.) Regarding claim 6, Cok in view of Lee teaches the display device of claim 1, further comprising a plurality of repair lines (Cok: pixel wires 26) connected to the reserve sub-pixel (Cok, Fig. 8 and 12A), wherein the plurality of repair lines comprises: a first repair line (1st repair line in annotated Cok Fig. 11B) having one end connected to a first electrode (1st electrode in annotated Cok Fig. 11B) of a light-emitting element of the first plurality of light-emitting elements of the reserve sub-pixel (Cok, light emitting elements in 20’ have the detailed structure as Fig. 11B); a second repair line having one end connected to a first electrode of a light-emitting element of the second plurality of light-emitting elements of the reserve sub-pixel (Cok, Fig. 8, 11B and 12A); and a third repair line having one end connected to a first electrode of a light-emitting element of the third plurality of light-emitting elements of the reserve sub-pixel line (Cok, Fig. 8, 11B and 12A), and wherein the first repair, the second repair line, and the third repair line are on different layers (after vertically stacking three light emitting elements, as teaching by Lee, the repair lines would be on different layers). Regarding claim 7, Cok in view of Lee teaches the display device of claim 6, wherein the first repair line, the second repair line, and the third repair line at least partially overlap one another. (Cok Fig. 8 and 12A, after vertically stacking the light emitting element per teaching by Lee, the repair lines would overlap one another) PNG media_image2.png 203 731 media_image2.png Greyscale Regarding claim 8, Cok in view of Lee teaches the display device of claim 6, further comprising: a plurality of driving transistors in the first sub-pixel (Lee, Fig. 4, transistor TR-a), the second sub-pixel (Lee, Fig. 4, transistor TR-b), and the third sub-pixel (Lee, Fig. 4, transistor TR-c); a first plurality of reflective electrodes (Lee, RE1 section of AE1/AE2/AE3) in the first sub-pixel (Lee, Fig. 4, AE1 in PXA-R), the second sub-pixel (Lee, Fig. 4, AE2 in PXA-G), and the third sub-pixel (Lee, Fig. 4, AE3 in PXA-B), wherein the first plurality of reflective electrodes are on the plurality of driving transistors (Lee, Fig. 4), and each of the first plurality of reflective electrodes is configured to electrically connect a driving transistor of the plurality of driving transistors and the first electrode of corresponding one of the light-emitting element of the first plurality of light-emitting elements (Lee, see annotated Fig. 4, RE1 section of AE1 electrically connect TR-a and 1st electrode section of AE1 in EU1), the light-emitting element of the second plurality of light-emitting elements (Lee, similar to PXA-R, RE1 section of AE2 electrically connect TR-b and EU2), and the light-emitting element of the third plurality of light-emitting elements (Lee, Fig. 4, RE1 section of AE3 electrically connect TR-c and EU3); and a second plurality of reflective electrodes (Lee, RE2 section of CE1/CE2/CE3 in annotated Fig. 4) in the first sub-pixel (Lee, RE2 section of CE1 in PXA-R), the second sub-pixel (Lee, RE2 section of CE2 in PXA-G), and the third sub-pixel (Lee, RE2 section of CE3 in PXA-B), wherein the second plurality of reflective electrodes are on the plurality of driving transistors (Lee, Fig. 4), and the second plurality of reflective electrodes are electrically connected to a second electrode of the light-emitting element of the first plurality of light emitting elements (Lee, see annotated Fig. 4, RE2 section of CE1 electrically connect to the 2nd electrode section of CE1 in EU1), a second electrode of the light-emitting element of the second plurality of light-emitting elements (Lee, similar to PXA-R, RE2 section of CE2 electrically connect to EU2), and a second electrode of the light-emitting element of the third plurality of light-emitting elements (Lee, similar to PXA-R, RE2 section of CE3 electrically connect to EU3). PNG media_image3.png 703 910 media_image3.png Greyscale Regarding claim 10, Cok in view of Lee teach the display device of claim 8, further comprising: a first planarization layer (Lee, insulating layer 60) between the driving transistor and a first reflective electrode of the first plurality of reflective electrodes (Lee, Fig. 4, 60 is between TR-a and RE1 section of AE1), and the first planarization layer is further between the driving transistor and a second reflective electrode of the second plurality of reflective electrodes (Lee, Fig. 4, 60 is between TR-a and RE2 section of CE1); a first bonding layer (Lee, PDL1) on the first reflective electrode and the second reflective electrode (Lee, Fig. 4, PDL1 is on RE1 section of AE1 and RE2 section of CE1), the first light-emitting element attached to an upper surface of the first bonding layer (Lee, Fig. 4, EU-1 is on the upper surface of PDL1); a second planarization layer (Lee, TFL1) on the first light-emitting element and the first bonding layer (Lee, Fig. 4, TFL1 is on EU-1 and PDL1); a second bonding layer (Lee, PDL2) on the second planarization layer (Lee, Fig. 4, PDL2 is on TFL1), the second light-emitting element attached to an upper surface of the second bonding layer (Lee, Fig. 4, EU-2 attached to upper surface of PDL2); a third planarization layer (Lee, TFL2) on the second light-emitting element and the second bonding layer (Lee, Fig. 4, TFL2 is on EU-2 and PDL2); a third bonding layer (Lee, Fig. 4, PDL3) on the third planarization layer (Lee, Fig. 4, PDL3 is on TFL2), the third light-emitting element attached to an upper surface of the third bonding layer (Lee, Fig. 4, EU-3 is on upper surface of PDL3); and a fourth planarization layer (Lee, TFL3) on the third light-emitting element and the third bonding layer (Lee, Fig. 4, TFL3 is on EU-3 and PDL3). Regarding claim 16, Cok in view of Lee teaches the display device of claim 10, wherein the first electrode (Lee, 1st electrode section of AE1/2/3 in annotated Fig. 4) and the second electrode (Lee, 2nd electrode section of CE1/2/3 in annotated Fig. 4) of the light-emitting element of the third plurality of light-emitting elements include a first transparent conductive material (Lee[0094]: AE may include a transparent indium tin oxide; Lee[0104]: CE may include a transparent indium tin oxide), and the first electrode and the second electrode of the light-emitting element of the second plurality of light-emitting elements include a second transparent conductive material (Lee[0094]: AE may include a transparent indium zinc oxide; Lee[0104]: CE may include a transparent indium zinc oxide). Regarding claim 17, Cok in view of Lee teaches the display device of claim 16, wherein the first electrode and the second electrode of the light-emitting element of the first plurality of light-emitting elements at least partially include an opaque conductive material (Lee[0094]: AE may include Ag, Mg, Cu; Lee[0105]: CE may include Ag, Mg, Cu). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 9, 11-15 and 18-20 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. Regarding claim 9, Lee teaches the low-potential power line and the driving transistor. However, Lee does not teach a data line, and the low-potential power line is between the data line and the driving transistor. Regarding claim 11-15, Cok teaches the repair lines and Lee teaches the layer structures, however, Cok in view of Lee does not teach that the repair lines are between the planarization layers and the bonding layers. Regarding claim 18-20, Cok in view of Lee does not teach the repair lines overlaps the first reflective electrode. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. An (US 2019/0189049 A1) teaches the second reflective electrode and a light emitting element structure similar to the invention. Lee et al. (US 2016/0189593 A1) teaches a display device comprising regular pixels and a reserved sub-pixel. The regular pixels and the reserve sub-pixels are connected by repair lines. Chang (US 2020/0219858 A1) teaches a display device comprising vertically stacked LEDs. Ju et al. (US 2022/0406248 A1) teaches a display device comprising RGB repaired sub-pixels beside the regular pixels. Jang et al. (US 2020/0212262 A1) teaches a display device comprising vertically stacked LEDs. Kim et al. (US 2019/0165207 A1) teaches a display device comprising vertically stacked LEDs and two connection holes. Jain et al. (US 2023/0222960 A1) teaches a display device comprising a repair site. Cok et al. (US 2017/0025075 A1) teaches a display device comprising a redundant repair pixel. Lee et al. (US 2023/0028194 A1) teaches a display device comprising two reflective electrodes that are electrically connected to the light-emitting device. Lee et al. (US 2017/0104035 A1) teaches a display device comprising vertically stacked light-emitting elements. Kim et al. (US 2020/0083312 A1) teaches a display device comprising regular RGBW sub-pixels and corresponding repaired pixels. Lee et al. (US 2022/0285433 A1) teaches a display device comprising vertically stacked light emitting elements, and the elements are electrically connected. Cha et al. (US 2017/0288093 A1) teaches a display device comprising vertically stacked light emitting elements, and the elements are connected through the contact holes. Hsu (US 2017/0213496 A1) teaches a display device comprising a reserved subpixel for repair. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MO LI whose telephone number is (571)272-0395. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 8am-5pm. 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, Eva Montalvo can be reached at (571) 270-3829. 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. /Mo Li/Examiner, Art Unit 2818 /EVA Y MONTALVO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 25, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
Grant Probability
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 0 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