Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 17, 2026
Application No. 18/889,790

ELECTRONIC DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Sep 19, 2024
Priority
Oct 08, 2019 — CN 201910949842.4 +4 more
Examiner
QURESHI, MARIAM
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Innolux Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2m
Est. Remaining
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allowance Rate
500 granted / 663 resolved
+15.4% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+22.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
695
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
58.8%
+18.8% vs TC avg
§102
26.4%
-13.6% vs TC avg
§112
13.0%
-27.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 663 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 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. Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hoshino et al (US Publication No.: US 2005/0179828 A1, “Hoshino”). Regarding Claim 1, Hoshino discloses an electronic device (Figure 1) comprising: A first layer (Figure 1, first layer 6); A second layer disposed opposite to the first layer (Figure 2, second layer 5); A circuit layer formed on the first layer (Paragraph 0056); and A display medium layer disposed between the first layer and the second layer (Figure 1, liquid crystal layer 3), wherein The first layer has a first light transmission chromaticity coordinates (x1, y1) on the CIE 1931 xy chromaticity coordinates, the second layer has a second light transmission chromaticity coordinates (x2, y2) on the CIE 1931 xy chromaticity coordinates (Figure 1; Paragraphs 0049-0054 disclose that each layer have light transmission chromaticity coordinates that are affected by film thickness), and Wherein x1≥x2 or y1≥y2 (Paragraphs 0051-0056 discloses a film thickness of second layer 5 to be 180 nm, and a film thickness of first layer 6 to be 220 nm, and Figure 7 discloses light transmission chromaticity coordinates of second layer 5 with a thickness of 180nm to be approximately (.23, .25) and light transmission chromaticity coordinate of first layer 6 with a thickness of 220 nm to be approximately (.28, .39) resulting in x1 and y1 to be greater than x2 and y2, where Paragraph 0056 discloses that the given thicknesses may be switched). Regarding Claim 2, Hoshino discloses the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the first layer has a first thickness, the second layer has a second thickness, and the first thickness is greater than the second thickness (Paragraphs 0051-0056 discloses a film thickness of second layer 5 to be 180 nm, and a film thickness of first layer 6 to be 220 nm). Regarding Claim 3, Hoshino discloses the electronic device of claim 2, wherein the first thickness is 10% to 100% greater than the second thickness (Paragraphs 0051-0056 discloses a film thickness of second layer 5 to be 180 nm, and a film thickness of first layer 6 to be 220 nm, which is 22% greater). Regarding Claim 7, Hoshino discloses the electronic device of claim 1, wherein x1-x2≧0.002 or y1-y2≧0.002 (Paragraphs 0051-0056 discloses a film thickness of second layer 5 to be 180 nm, and a film thickness of first layer 6 to be 220 nm, and Figure 7 discloses light transmission chromaticity coordinates of second layer 5 with a thickness of 180nm to be approximately (.23, .25) and light transmission chromaticity coordinate of first layer 6 with a thickness of 220 nm to be approximately (.28, .39) resulting in a coordinate difference of (.05, .14). Regarding Claim 8, Hoshino discloses the electronic device of claim 1, wherein x1-x2≧0.002 and y1-y2≧0.002 (Paragraphs 0051-0056 discloses a film thickness of second layer 5 to be 180 nm, and a film thickness of first layer 6 to be 220 nm, and Figure 7 discloses light transmission chromaticity coordinates of second layer 5 with a thickness of 180nm to be approximately (.23, .25) and light transmission chromaticity coordinate of first layer 6 with a thickness of 220 nm to be approximately (.28, .39) resulting in a coordinate difference of (.05, .14). Regarding Claim 9, Hoshino discloses the electronic device of claim 1, wherein x1-x2≧0.005 or y1-y2≧0.005 (Paragraphs 0051-0056 discloses a film thickness of second layer 5 to be 180 nm, and a film thickness of first layer 6 to be 220 nm, and Figure 7 discloses light transmission chromaticity coordinates of second layer 5 with a thickness of 180nm to be approximately (.23, .25) and light transmission chromaticity coordinate of first layer 6 with a thickness of 220 nm to be approximately (.28, .39) resulting in a coordinate difference of (.05, .14). Regarding Claim 10, Hoshino discloses the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the circuit layer comprises a thin-film transistor circuit and an insulating layer surrounding the thin-film transistor circuit (Paragraph 0056). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4-6 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIAM QURESHI whose telephone number is (571)272-4434. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM EST M-F. 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. /MARIAM QURESHI/Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 19, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12704709
OPTICAL MODULE
3y 0m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12704705
MICROSCOPE OBJECTIVE AND MICROSCOPE OBSERVATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12699253
IMAGING OPTICAL LENS ASSEMBLY, IMAGING APPARATUS AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
4y 1m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12699269
OPTICAL MODULE AND HEAD MOUNT DISPLAY
2y 8m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12693490
LENS MODULE AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 7m to grant Granted Jul 28, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+22.2%)
2y 1m (~2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 663 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