Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/961,183

QUANTUM DOT CONTAINERS FOR MICRO-LED DISPLAYS

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Nov 26, 2024
Examiner
SOWARD, IDA M
Art Unit
2898
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Tectus Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
93%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 93% — above average
93%
Career Allow Rate
1226 granted / 1316 resolved
+25.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +5% lift
Without
With
+5.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
48 currently pending
Career history
1364
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
33.6%
-6.4% vs TC avg
§102
35.2%
-4.8% vs TC avg
§112
30.2%
-9.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1316 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . This Office Action is in response to the application filed November 26, 2024. 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 2-17 recite the limitation "the display chip" in line 1 of all claim (interpreted as the color micro-LED display chip); Claims 1, 4, 6-7, 9-10 and 13-17 recite the limitation "the QD container" in line 4 of claim 2, line 1 of claim 4, line 2 of claim 6, line 2 of claim 7, lines 1 and 2 of claim 9, line 1 of claim 10, lines 1-2 of claim 13, line 1 of claim 14, lines 1-2 of claim 15, claim 1 of claim 16, and line 1 of claim 17 (interpreted as the plurality of QD containers); Claims 1 and 18 recite the limitation "the two faces" in line 5 of claim 1, and line 3, page 2 of claim 18 (interpreted as the entrance face and the opposing exit face); Claims 1 and 18 recite the limitation "the faces" in line 6 of claim 1, and line 4, page 3 of claim 18 (interpreted as the entrance face and the opposing exit face); Claims 1-2 and 18 recite the limitation "the other face" in line 6 of claim 1, line 2 of claim 2, and lines 4-5 of claim 18 (interpreted as the entrance face or the opposing exit face); Claims 3 and 11-12 recite the limitation "the exit face" in lines 1-2 of claim 1, line 2 of claim 11, and lines 2-3 of claim 12 (interpreted as the opposing exit face); Claims 6-7 recite the limitation "said face" in line 3 of claim 6, and line 2 of claim 7 (interpreted as the entrance face or the opposing exit face); Claims 1, 13 and 15-17 recite the limitation "the LEDs" in lines 3-4 of claim 1, in line 2 of claim 13, lines 1-2 of claim 15, line 1 of claim 16, and line 1 of claim 17 (interpreted as the plurality of LEDs); Claim 19-20 recites the limitation "the display" in line 1 of both claims (interpreted as the color micro-LED display); and Claims 18 and 20 recite the limitation "the light emitters" in line 3, page 2 of claim 18 and line 2 of claim 20 (interpreted as the plurality of light emitters). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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) 1-4 and 13-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fu (US 2023/0155076 A1). In regard to claim 1, Fu teaches a color micro-LED display chip 100 comprising: a plurality of light-emitting diodes (LEDs) 40; and a plurality of quantum dot (QD) containers 10 positioned to receive light emitted from the LEDs 40, the QD containers 10 shaped to have an entrance face, an opposing exit face and a waist located between the two faces, the waist having (See Figures 3-4) an area that is less than an area of one of the faces (at 30) and less than or equal to an area of the other face (at 20) (Figures 3-5, pages 2-5, paragraphs [0053]-[0077]). In regard to claim 2, Fu teaches the area of the waist being less than the area of one face (at 30) and equal to the area of the other face (at 20) (Figures 3-5, pages 2-5, paragraphs [0053]-[0077]). In regard to claim 3, Fu teaches the area of the waist being less than the area of the exit face (at 30) and equal to the area of the entrance face (at 20) (Figures 3-5, pages 2-5, paragraphs [0053]-[0077]). In regard to claim 4, Fu teaches the QD containers 10 having a constant cross-sectional area between the waist and the face (at 20) with the equal area (Figures 3-5, pages 2-5, paragraphs [0053]-[0077]). In regard to claim 13, Fu teaches quantum dots 121/122 contained in the QD containers 10, the quantum dots 121/122 converting light from the LEDs 40 to a different color (Figures 3-5, pages 2-5, paragraphs [0053]-[0077]). In regard to claim 14, Fu teaches the QD containers 10 only partly filled with quantum dots 121/122 (Figures 3-5, pages 2-5, paragraphs [0053]-[0077]). In regard to claim 15, Fu teaches the entrance faces of the QD containers 10 abutting the LEDs 40 emitting light into the QD containers 10 (Figures 3-5, pages 2-5, paragraphs [0053]-[0077]). In regard to claim 16, Fu teaches the LEDs 40 and the QD containers 10 supported by a single substrate 70 (Figures 3-5, pages 2-5, paragraphs [0053]-[0077]). In regard to claim 17, Fu teaches the LEDs 40 and the QD containers 10 being two stacked layers (Figures 3-5, pages 2-5, paragraphs [0053]-[0077]). Allowable Subject Matter As best understood, claims 5-12 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. As best understood, claims 18-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following patents are cited to further show the state of the art with respect to display devices: Chung et al. (US 2022/0020943 A1) Geng et al. (US 2023/0117381 A1) Kang et al. (US 2025/0255142 A1) Lin et al. (US 2021/0109617 A1) Park et al. (US 2022/0149251 A1) Yuan (US 2010/0065102 A1). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IDA M SOWARD whose telephone number is (571)272-1845. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday, 7am to 5:30pm. 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, Leonard Chang can be reached at 571-270-3691. 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. IMS January 26, 2026 /IDA M SOWARD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2898
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 26, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Apr 02, 2026
Interview Requested
Apr 13, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 13, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604638
DISPLAY SUBSTRATE, DISPLAY MOTHER BOARD AND DISPLAY APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598979
Dual Contact and Power Rail for High Performance Standard Cells
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598917
ADVANCED MRAM DEVICE STRUCTURE HAVING HYPERBOLOID SHAPE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598894
DISPLAY DEVICE INCLUDING PASSIVATION LAYER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588384
DISPLAY BASE PLATE INCLUDING MAIN AND AUXILIARY SPACERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
93%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+5.4%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1316 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