Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/861,791

SUPPORT APPARATUS AND DISPLAY DEVICE HAVING SAME

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Oct 30, 2024
Examiner
MORRIS, TAYLOR L
Art Unit
3631
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Lg Electronics INC.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
60%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
67%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 60% of resolved cases
60%
Career Allow Rate
407 granted / 683 resolved
+7.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+7.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
722
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
45.5%
+5.5% vs TC avg
§102
24.2%
-15.8% vs TC avg
§112
27.0%
-13.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 683 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §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 . Status of the Application Claims 25-44 are pending and have been examined in this application. This communication is the first action on the merits. As of the date of this application, the Information Disclosure Statement(s) (IDS) filed on 10/30/2024 and 09/25/2025 has/have been taken into account. Claim Objections Claim 29-31 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 29 and 30 each recite “the bottom surface of the slip rubber”. This should read “a bottom surface of the slip rubber” (emphasis added). Claim 31 recites “the bottom surface of the support rubber”. This should read “a bottom surface of the support rubber” (emphasis added). Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 25-44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 25 recites “a stand body supporting the display panel”. It is unclear if the display panel is being positively claimed in this limitation, as claim 44 is clearly claiming the panel. For purposes of examination, the panel has been interpreted as not being positively claimed in claim 25. Claim 26 recites the limitation "the securing portion" in line(s) 7-8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 27 recites “further comprising one of slip rubbers respectively mounted on bottom surfaces of four corners of the stand base, and support rubbers respectively mounted on front and rear ends of the bottom surface of the stand base” (emphasis added). The emphasized portions of this limitation make it unclear if both the slip and support rubbers are being claimed or only one of the rubbers. For purposes of examination, it has been interpreted that both are being claimed. Claim 30 contains the trademark/trade name Teflon. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite. Claims 33 and 35 each recite “a shape that a plurality of dots are arranged in a circumferential direction along the edge of the swivel cover”. It is unclear what shape is being recited in this limitation. Claim(s) 27-29, 31-32, 34, and 36-44 is/are rejected as being dependent on, and failing to cure the deficiencies of, rejected claims 25-27, 30, 33, and 35. 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. Claims 25-26, 32, and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hwang et al. (US 2005/0258334). In regards to Claim 25, Hwang discloses a support device supporting a display panel, comprising: a stand body (Hwang: Fig. 3, 7; 25, 61, 73, 75) supporting the display panel; a swivel ring (Hwang: Fig. 7; 83) rotatably placed on a bottom surface of the stand body; a swivel cover (Hwang: Fig. 7; 81) fixed to the bottom surface of the stand body on an inner side of the swivel ring and supporting an inner edge of the swivel ring; a stand base (Hwang: Fig. 7; 23) fixed to the bottom surface of the stand body and supporting an outer edge of the swivel ring; and a fixing pad (Hwang: Fig. 7; 85) mounted on a bottom surface of the swivel ring and in close contact with an installation surface on which the display panel is placed. In regards to Claim 26, Hwang discloses the support device according to claim 25, wherein the stand body includes: a mounting portion (Hwang: Fig. 7; 25) placed on the installation surface, and having a bottom surface to which the swivel ring (Hwang: Fig. 7; 83) and the stand base (Hwang: Fig. 7; 23) are coupled; and a support portion (Hwang: Fig. 3; 61, 73, 75) extending upwardly and having a front surface on which a panel bracket to support the display panel is mounted, and wherein the support portion is configured to be inclined and extend upward at a rear end of the mounting portion by an angle less than 90 degrees from the mounting portion to the securing portion (Hwang: Fig. 3; portion 73b is inclined). In regards to Claim 32, Hwang discloses the support device according to claim 26, wherein the swivel ring (Hwang: Fig. 7; 83) is formed in a circular band shape with a predetermined width, wherein the swivel cover (Hwang: Fig. 7; 81) is formed in a circular plate shape corresponding to the inner diameter of the swivel ring, and wherein a bottom surface (Hwang: Fig. 7; 83b) of an inner edge of the swivel ring and an upper surface of an edge of the swivel cover overlap in the radial direction by a predetermined width In regards to Claim 44, Hwang discloses a display device, comprising: a display panel (Hwang: Fig. 2; 11); and a support device according to claim 26, which supports the display panel (see claim 26 rejection). 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. Claims 25-26, 32-35, 37, and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato (US 7,440,038) in view of Seo (KR 10-2005-0065965). In regards to Claim 25, Kato discloses a support device supporting a display panel, comprising: a stand body (Kato: Fig. 4; 72, 76) supporting the display panel; a swivel ring (Kato: Fig. 4; 60) rotatably placed on a bottom surface of the stand body; a swivel cover (Kato: Fig. 4; 74) fixed to the bottom surface of the stand body on an inner side of the swivel ring and supporting an inner edge of the swivel ring; a stand base (Kato: Fig. 4; 40) fixed to the bottom surface of the stand body and supporting an outer edge of the swivel ring. Kato fails to disclose a fixing pad mounted on a bottom surface of the swivel ring and in close contact with an installation surface on which the display panel is placed. However, Seo teaches a fixing pad (Seo: Fig. 3-4; 24) mounted on a bottom surface of a swivel ring (Seo: Fig. 3-4; 123) and in close contact with an installation surface on which a display panel is placed Kato and Seo are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor or a similar problem solving area e.g. rotatable supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ring in Kato with the grooves and pads from Seo, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a means of preventing slipping between the swivel ring and the installation surface (Seo: Pg. 3, Par. 5). In regards to Claim 26, Kato, as modified, teaches the support device according to claim 25, wherein the stand body includes: a mounting portion (Kato: Fig. 4; 72) placed on the installation surface, and having a bottom surface to which the swivel ring (Kato: Fig. 4; 60) and the stand base (Kato: Fig. 4; 40) are coupled; and a support portion (Kato: Fig. 4; 76) extending upwardly and having a front surface on which a panel bracket (Kato: Fig. 2; 12) to support the display panel is mounted, and wherein the support portion is configured to be inclined and extend upward at a rear end of the mounting portion by an angle less than 90 degrees from the mounting portion to the securing portion (Kato: Fig. 3). In regards to Claim 32, Kato, as modified, teaches the support device according to claim 26, wherein the swivel ring (Kato: Fig. 4; 60) is formed in a circular band shape with a predetermined width, wherein the swivel cover (Kato: Fig. 4; 74) is formed in a circular plate shape corresponding to the inner diameter of the swivel ring, and wherein a bottom surface of an inner edge of the swivel ring and an upper surface of an edge of the swivel cover overlap in the radial direction by a predetermined width (Kato: Fig. 10). In regards to Claim 33, Kato, as modified, teaches the support device according to claim 32, wherein, on an upper surface of the edge of the swivel cover overlapping the swivel ring, at least one contact projection (Kato: Fig. 11; 74a, 74b) that contacts the lower surface of the inner edge of the swivel ring is protruded, and wherein the at least one contact projection is formed in a shape of a continuous circular band that surrounds the edge of the swivel cover, or a shape that a plurality of dots are arranged in a circumferential direction along the edge of the swivel cover. In regards to Claim 34, Kato, as modified, teaches the support device according to claim 32, wherein a through hole (Kato: Fig. 4; 40a) through which the swivel ring penetrates is formed in the stand base (Kato: Fig. 4; 40), and wherein an upper surface of an inner edge of the stand base and a bottom surface of an outer edge of the swivel ring overlap in the radial direction by a predetermined width (Kato: Col. 11, Ln. 13-24). In regards to Claim 35, Kato, as modified, teaches the support device according to claim 34, wherein a guide projection (Kato: Fig. 4; 31) is protruded on the upper surface of the inner edge of the stand base overlapping the swivel ring, wherein a guide groove (Kato: Annotated Fig. 10; G) is formed on a bottom surface of the outer edge of the swivel ring that overlaps the stand base, to receive the guide projection, and wherein the guide protrusion is formed in a shape of a continuous circular band surrounding an edge of the through hole, or a shape that a plurality of dots are arranged in a circumferential direction along the edge of the through hole (Kato: Fig. 4; 40a). In regards to Claim 37, Kato, as modified, teaches the support device according to claim 26, further comprising: one or more catching protrusions (Kato: Fig. 9; tab of 61) protruding radially from an outer edge of the swivel ring; and a plurality of limiting protrusions (Kato: Fig. 4; 31) protruding from an upper surface of the stand base to limit the rotational amount of the one or more catching protrusions, wherein the catching protrusion is arranged between two circumferentially adjacent limiting projections. In regards to Claim 44, Kato, as modified, teaches a display device, comprising: a display panel (Kato: Fig. 2; 10 - internal panel); and a support device according to claim 26, which supports the display panel (see claim 26 rejection). Claim 36 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato (US 7,440,038) in view of Seo (KR 10-2005-0065965) as applied to claim 26 above, and further in view of Takao (US 2012/0106093). In regards to Claim 36, Kato, as modified, teaches the support device according to claim 26, wherein a plurality of contact protrusions (Kato: Fig. 8; 62, 64) having different diameters protrudes from an upper surface of the swivel ring and extend in a circumferential direction to come in contact with a bottom surface of the mounting portion (Kato: Fig. 4; 72), and wherein a fixing pad mounting groove (Seo: Fig. 3-4; groove that receives 24) to receive the fixing pad (Seo: Fig. 3-4; 24) is formed on the lower surface of the swivel ring. Kato fails to disclose a lubricating groove provided with a lubricant is formed in a space between adjacent contact protrusions. However, Takao teaches a lubricating groove (Takao: Fig. 10; 9c) provided with a lubricant is formed in a space between adjacent contact protrusions (Takao: [0038]). Kato and Takao are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor or a similar problem solving area e.g. rotatable supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ring in Kato with the groove and lubricant from Takao, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a means of facilitating and maintaining lubrication between the moving parts of the assembly (Takao: [0038]), thereby helping to minimize wear on the moving components. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 27-31 and 38-43 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Annotated Figures PNG media_image1.png 403 574 media_image1.png Greyscale I: Kato; Fig. 10 Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 for cited references. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Taylor Morris whose telephone number is (571)272-6367. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 10AM-6PM PST / 1PM-9PM EST. 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, Jonathan Liu can be reached at (571) 272-8227. 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. /Taylor Morris/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 30, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Mar 24, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595035
OUTBOARD MOTOR SUPPORT DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595061
MODULAR POWER BOX MOUNTING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12576801
PIVOTING ARRANGEMENT AND CABLE-GUIDE ARRANGEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12565321
FRONT ENGINE ATTACHMENT SYSTEM INTENDED FOR AN AIRCRAFT ENGINE AND HAVING A COMPACT STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12553284
REMOVABLE SUPPORT PLATFORM FOR LADDER
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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
60%
Grant Probability
67%
With Interview (+7.1%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 683 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