Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/928,410

DISPLAY DEVICE

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Oct 28, 2024
Examiner
WILSON, DOUGLAS M
Art Unit
2622
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
320 granted / 427 resolved
+12.9% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
452
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.9%
-38.1% vs TC avg
§103
56.5%
+16.5% vs TC avg
§102
22.5%
-17.5% vs TC avg
§112
14.4%
-25.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 427 resolved cases

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 . Claims 1-20 are pending. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Claim Objections Claims 11 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities: The limitation “among the transistors” and “each of the transistors” should read “among the plurality of transistors” and “each of the plurality of transistors” to provide proper antecedent basis with “a plurality of transistors”. Appropriate correction is required. 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. 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. Claims 1-4, 7, 11-12, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang (US 2025/0232722) in view of Feng (US 2024/0306442). All reference is to Jiang unless otherwise indicated. Regarding Claim 1 (Currently Amended), Jiang teaches a display device comprising: a scan line [construed as control signal lines (fig. 4 @81-85)] extending in a first direction [fig. 4 @Horizontal], wherein the scan line [fig. 4 @81-83] includes a write [¶0080, “a data writing transistor T4”] scan line [fig. 4 @81], a compensation [¶0080, “a compensation transistor T2”] scan line [fig. 4 @82] and a bias [¶0099, “node N3 are reset to a high voltage by the third reset transistor T8, which is equivalent to adding a negative bias voltage”] scan line [fig. 4 @84]; a data [fig. 2 @Data] line [fig. 14 @91] extending in a second direction [fig. 14 @vertical] crossing the first direction [fig. 4 @Horizontal]; and a pixel connected to the scan line and the data line [¶0037, “FIG. 2 shows an equivalent circuit diagram of a pixel driving circuit of a display substrate”], wherein a bias voltage [¶0099, ““the node N3 are reset to a high voltage by the third reset transistor T8, which is equivalent to adding a negative bias voltage to the gate-source electrode of the driving transistor T3”] is applied to the pixel in response to a bias scan signal applied thereto through the bias scan line [fig. 4 @84] Jiang does not teach the bias scan line includes a plurality of sub-bias scan lines spaced apart from each other in the first direction; and a connecting line connected to the sub-bias scan lines Feng teaches a bias scan line [fig. 5 @42] includes a plurality of sub-bias scan lines [fig. 9b @portion of 42 left of K2 and portion of 42 right of K2] spaced apart from each other in the first direction [fig. 9b @X]; and a connecting line [fig. 11b @92] connected to the sub-bias scan lines [fig. 9b @portion of 42 left of K2 and portion of 42 right of K2] Before the application was filed it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the concept of providing display scan signal lines comprising unequal widths and through holes, as taught by Feng, into the display device taught by Jiang, in order to reduce parasitic capacitances between the second scan signal line 42, and the first power supply line, the data signal line, and the compensation signal line (Feng: ¶0158). Regarding Claim 2 (Original), Jiang in view of Feng teaches the display device of Claim 1, wherein the connecting line [Feng: fig. 11b @92] is disposed in a layer different [Feng: fig. 9b is 2nd conductive layer and 11b is 3rd conductive layer] from a layer in which the sub-bias scan lines [feng: fig. 9b @portion of 42 left of K2 and portion of 42 right of K2] are disposed. Regarding Claim 3 (Original), Jiang in view of Feng teaches the display device of Claim 2, wherein the connecting line [Feng: fig. 11b @92 ] is disposed above [Feng: fig. 9b is 2nd conductive layer and 11b is 3rd conductive layer] the sub-bias scan lines [Feng: fig. 9b @portion of 42 left of K2 and portion of 42 right of K2]. Regarding Claim 4 (Original), Jiang in view of Feng teaches the display device of Claim 1, wherein the pixel [fig. 1 @PX] includes: a first pixel circuit [fig. fig. 1 @SP1], a second pixel circuit [fig. 1 @SP2], and a third pixel circuit [fig. 1 @SP3], which are arranged in the first direction [fig. 1 @Horizontal]; and light emitting elements [fig. 4 @OLED, ¶0072] connected to the first, second, and third pixel circuits [fig. 5 @P1-P3], respectively [¶0005, “a plurality of pixel driving circuits provided on the base substrate, the plurality of pixel driving circuits are arranged in the first direction and the second direction, the plurality of pixel driving circuits are configured to drive the light emitting elements of the plurality of sub-pixels respectively”, ¶0037, “FIG. 2 shows an equivalent circuit diagram of a pixel driving circuit”]. Regarding Claim 7 (Original), Jiang in view of Feng teaches the display device of Claim 1, wherein the data line is provided in plural [Feng: fig. 5 @70], the pixel is provided in plural [Feng: fig. 5 @P1-P4], the connecting line is provided in plural [Feng: fig. 5 illustrates single connector 92 that fig 2 teaches repeats a plurality of times], and the sub-bias scan lines include three or more sub-bias scan lines [Feng: fig. 5 illustrates two sub scan lines 42 that fig 2 teaches repeats a plurality of times], and wherein a plurality of pixels [Feng: fig. 5 @P1-P4], a plurality of connecting lines [Feng: fig. 5 @92], and the three or more sub-bias scan lines [Feng: fig. 5 @42 left of 92] are arranged in the first direction [Feng: fig. 5 @X]. Regarding Claim 11 (Original), Jiang in view of Feng teaches the display device of Claim 1, wherein the pixel includes: a plurality of transistors [Feng: fig. 4 @T1-T3] connected to the data line [Feng: fig. 4 @D], the write scan line [Feng: fig. 4 @S1], and the bias scan line [fig. 2 @PReset]; and a light emitting element [fig. 2 @130] connected to a corresponding transistor [fig. 2 @T4 via T3 and T6] among the transistors, wherein each of the transistors [fig. 2 @T4 and T8] includes: a semiconductor layer [fig. 6 @T4 and T8] including a source area, a channel area, and a drain area [fig. 50 illustrates claimed structure for T2 which is construed as representative of T4 and T8]; and a gate electrode [fig. 50 @822] disposed over the semiconductor layer [fig. 50 @22], and wherein the sub-bias scan lines [Feng: fig. 9b @42] are disposed in a same layer [Feng: fig. 9b illustrates the second conductive layer] as the gate electrode. Regarding Claim 12 (Original), Jiang in view of Feng teaches the display device of Claim 11, wherein the connecting line [Feng: fig. 11b @92] is disposed above [Feng: fig. 11b is 3rd conductive layer, fig. 9b is 2nd conductive layer] the gate electrode [Feng: fig. 9b @41-1]. Regarding Claim 18 (Currently Amended), Jiang teaches a display device comprising: a scan line [construed as control signal lines (fig. 4 @81-85)] extending in a first direction [fig. 4 @Horizontal], wherein the scan line [fig. 4 @81-83] includes a write [¶0080, “a data writing transistor T4”] scan line [fig. 4 @81], a compensation [¶0080, “a compensation transistor T2”] scan line [fig. 4 @82] and a bias [¶0099, “node N3 are reset to a high voltage by the third reset transistor T8, which is equivalent to adding a negative bias voltage”] scan line [fig. 4 @84]; a plurality of data lines [fig. 14 @91, ¶0080, “a data line 91 (corresponding to a data signal Data in FIG. 2)”], extending in a second direction [fig. 14 @vertical] crossing the first direction [fig. 4 @Horizontal]; and a plurality of pixels [¶0005, “a plurality of sub-pixels provided on the base substrate … the plurality of sub-pixels are arranged in a first direction”] arranged in the first direction and connected to the scan line and the data lines [¶0037, “FIG. 2 shows an equivalent circuit diagram of a pixel driving circuit of a display substrate”], wherein a bias voltage [¶0099, ““the node N3 are reset to a high voltage by the third reset transistor T8, which is equivalent to adding a negative bias voltage to the gate-source electrode of the driving transistor T3”], is applied to the pixel in response to a bias scan signal applied thereto through the bias scan line [fig. 4 @84] Jiang does not teach the bias scan line includes a plurality of sub-bias scan lines spaced apart from each other in the first direction; and a connecting line connected to the sub-bias scan lines Feng teaches a bias scan line [fig. 5 @42] includes: a plurality of sub-bias scan lines [fig. 9b @portion of 42 left of K2 and portion of 42 right of K2] spaced apart from each other [construed as first sub-bias scan line is separated from the next first sub-bias scan line] for at least one pixel [fig. 5 illustrates first sub-bias scan line (fig. 5 left of K2) spaced by P3 and P4 (two pixels) from the next first sub-bias scan line]; and a plurality [fig. 5 @P1-P5 repeats as illustrated in fig. 2] of connecting lines [fig. 11b @92] connected to the sub-bias scan lines Before the application was filed it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the concept of providing display scan signal lines comprising unequal widths and through holes, as taught by Feng, into the display device taught by Jiang, in order to reduce parasitic capacitances between the second scan signal line 42, and the first power supply line, the data signal line, and the compensation signal line (Feng: ¶0158). Regarding Claim 19 (Original), Jiang in view of Feng teaches the display device of Claim 18, wherein the connecting lines [Feng: fig. 11b @92] are disposed above [Feng: fig. 9b is 2nd conductive layer and 11b is 3rd conductive layer] the sub-bias scan lines [Feng: fig. 9b @portion of 42 left of K2 and portion of 42 right of K2] and connected to the sub-bias scan lines [Feng: abstract]. Regarding Claim 20 (Currently Amended), Jiang teaches an electronic device comprising: a scan line [construed as control signal lines (fig. 4 @81-85)] extending in a first direction [fig. 4 @Horizontal], wherein the scan line [fig. 4 @81-83] includes a write [¶0080, “a data writing transistor T4”] scan line [fig. 4 @81], a compensation [¶0080, “a compensation transistor T2”] scan line [fig. 4 @82] and a bias [¶0099, “node N3 are reset to a high voltage by the third reset transistor T8, which is equivalent to adding a negative bias voltage”] scan line [fig. 4 @84]; a data [fig. 2 @Data] line [fig. 14 @91] extending in a second direction [fig. 14 @vertical] crossing the first direction [fig. 4 @Horizontal]; and a pixel connected to the scan line and the data line [¶0037, “FIG. 2 shows an equivalent circuit diagram of a pixel driving circuit of a display substrate”], wherein a bias voltage [¶0099, ““the node N3 are reset to a high voltage by the third reset transistor T8, which is equivalent to adding a negative bias voltage to the gate-source electrode of the driving transistor T3”] is applied to the pixel in response to a bias scan signal applied thereto through the bias scan line [fig. 4 @84]; and the pixel includes: a plurality of transistors [fig. 2 @T8 and T3] connected to the bias scan line [fig. 2 @Preset] Jiang does not teach two sub-bias scan lines spaced apart from each other in the first direction; and a connecting line connected to the two sub-bias scan lines, wherein the pixel includes: a plurality of transistors connected to the data line, the write scan line; and a light emitting element connected to a corresponding transistor among the transistors, and wherein the two sub-bias scan lines are disposed in a same layer as gate electrodes of the transistors, and the connecting line is disposed above the gate electrodes Feng teaches two sub-bias scan lines [fig. 9b @portion of 42 left of K2 and portion of 42 right of K2] spaced apart from each other in the first direction [fig. 9b @Horizontal]; and a connecting line [fig. 11b @92] connected to the two sub-bias scan lines [fig. 9b @portion of 42 left of K2 and portion of 42 right of K2], wherein a pixel includes: a plurality of transistors [fig. 4 @T1 and T2] connected to the data line [fig. 4 @D], the write scan line [fig. 4 @S1]; and a light emitting element [fig. 4 @OLED] connected to a corresponding transistor [fig. 4 @T2] among the transistors, and wherein the two sub-bias scan lines [fig. 18 @portion of 42 left of K2 and 42 right of K2] are disposed in a same layer [fig. 18 illustrates each of transistor gates formed in the second conductive layer illustrated in fig. 18] as gate electrodes of the transistors [¶0155, T1 gate is fig. 18 @41-1, T2 gate is fig. 18 @41, fig. 18 illustrates second conductive layer], and the connecting line [fig. 11b @92] is disposed above the gate electrodes [fig. 11b illustrates third conductive layer which is above the second conductive layer] Before the application was filed it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the concept of providing display scan signal lines comprising unequal widths and through holes and on the same conductive layer as their respective transistor gate electrode, as taught by Feng, into the display device taught by Jiang, in order to reduce parasitic capacitances between the second scan signal line 42, and the first power supply line, the data signal line, and the compensation signal line and simplify connecting the scan lines with their corresponding gate electrodes (Feng: ¶0158). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 5-6, 8-10, and 13-17 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 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 Douglas Wilson whose telephone number is (571)272-5640. The Examiner can normally be reached 1000-1700 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, Patrick Edouard can be reached at 571-272-7603. 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. /Douglas Wilson/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2622
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 28, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 02, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 03, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 13, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596431
VIRTUAL REALITY CONTENT DISPLAY SYSTEM AND VIRTUAL REALITY CONTENT DISPLAY METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596279
ACTIVE MATRIX SUBSTRATE AND A LIQUID CRYSTAL DISPLAY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583317
INPUT DEVICE FOR A VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585480
USE OF GAZE TECHNOLOGY FOR HIGHLIGHTING AND SELECTING DIFFERENT ITEMS ON A VEHICLE DISPLAY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12579947
DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+16.1%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 427 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