Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/984,530

DISPLAY DEVICE AND CONTROLLING METHOD THEREOF

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Dec 17, 2024
Examiner
DANIELSEN, NATHAN ANDREW
Art Unit
2622
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co, LTD.
OA Round
2 (Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
81%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
687 granted / 940 resolved
+11.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
964
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.5%
-38.5% vs TC avg
§103
53.8%
+13.8% vs TC avg
§102
22.5%
-17.5% vs TC avg
§112
11.9%
-28.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 940 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 . 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 1-5 and 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (US 2020/0111403; hereinafter Kim), in view of Han et al (US 2025/0201196; hereinafter Han), and further in view of Oh (US 2008/0218449). • Regarding claims 1 and 10, Kim discloses a display device, and corresponding method, (figures 13 and 14) comprising: a display panel (figure 13) comprising: a pixel array comprising pixels arranged in a plurality of row lines, the pixels comprising a plurality of inorganic light-emitting elements (figure 3 and ¶s 70 and 71); and sub-pixel circuits corresponding to the plurality of inorganic light-emitting elements of the pixel array (figures 9 and 12B and ¶ 111); and a driver (element 820 in figure 13 and ¶ 239) configured to: set an image data voltage corresponding to an image frame in sub-pixels of the plurality of row lines in the sub-pixel circuits (Sig<m> in figure 9 and ¶s 153 and 239); drive the sub-pixel circuits so that an inorganic light-emitting element, of the inorganic light-emitting elements, emits light based on the set image data voltage (¶s 151, 153, and 239). However, Kim fails to disclose the additional details of the display device. In the same field of endeavor, Han discloses where: a driver (element 20 in figure 2) configured to: set a reset voltage in the sub-pixels of the plurality of row lines in an anode terminal of the inorganic light-emitting elements (V0 in figure 2 and ¶ 61); and drive the sub-pixel circuits so that an inorganic light-emitting element, of the inorganic light-emitting elements, emits light based on the reset voltage (¶ 66), wherein the reset voltage is a voltage for compensating for at least one of an electrical characteristic deviation of the inorganic light-emitting element or a ground voltage deviation applied to a cathode terminal of the inorganic light-emitting elements (¶s 64 and 67). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the invention of Kim according to the teachings of Han, for the purposes of reducing a fluctuation amplitude of a voltage difference between the anode and the cathode input to a light-emitting device, reducing changes of the brightness and chroma of a display screen, and improving display quality of a display panel (¶ 68). However, Han also fails to disclose the additional details of the display device. In the same field of endeavor, Oh discloses where the driver si configured to: obtain a reset voltage (steps ST100 and ST110 in figure 6 and ¶s 35-40); store the reset voltage in the display device (step ST120 in figure 6 and ¶s 35 and 41); apply the stored reset voltage in the sub-pixels (¶s 38-40); and drive the sub-pixel circuits so that an inorganic light-emitting element, of the inorganic light-emitting elements, emits light based on the reset voltage (¶s 38-40). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the invention of Kim, as modified by Han, according to the teachings of Oh, for the purpose of reducing a defective proportion of produced displays by correcting the brightness thereof, if the brightness deviates from a normal brightness range (¶s 12 and 42). • Regarding claims 2-5, 8, 9, and 11-14, Kim, in view of Han and Oh, discloses everything claimed, as applied to claims 1 and 10. Additionally, Kim discloses where: Claims 3 & 12: the driver comprises: a first data driver configured to provide the image data voltage (element 820 in figure 13 and ¶ 239). Claims 5 & 14: the driver is further configured to set the image data voltage in the sub-pixels of the plurality of row lines in the sub-pixel circuits by applying a scan signal in the sub-pixels of the plurality of row lines (element 830 in figure 13 and ¶s 240 and 241). Claim 8: the inorganic light-emitting element is configured to emit light according to driving current provided from the sub-pixel circuits (¶ 110), and each of the sub-pixel circuits comprises at least one of a Pulse Amplitude Modulation (PAM) circuit for controlling a magnitude of the driving current based on the image data voltage (element 310 in figure 9 and ¶ 110) or a Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) circuit for controlling a pulse width of the driving current based on the image data voltage (element 320 in figure 9 and ¶ 110). Claim 9: the PAM circuit comprises a first drive transistor (element 311 in figure 9 and ¶s 112-115) and the PWM circuit comprises a second drive transistor (element 321 in figure 9 and ¶s 112-115), and a first threshold voltage of the first drive transistor is compensated when the image data voltage is set in the sub-pixel circuits (¶s 120-125), and a second threshold voltage of the second drive transistor is compensated when the image data voltage is set in the sub-pixel circuits (¶s 120-125). However, Kim fails to disclose the additional details of the display device. In the same field of endeavor, Han discloses where: Claims 2 & 11: the reset voltage is applied to the anode terminal of the inorganic light-emitting element through a line separate from a line through which the image data voltage is applied (note where V0 and Da in figure 1 are separate lines, as further suggested by the structure of figure 2). Claims 3 & 12: the driver comprises: a second data driver configured to provide the reset voltage (element 20 in figure 2 and ¶ 61). Claims 4 & 13: each of the sub-pixel circuits comprises a reset transistor configured to apply the reset voltage provided by the second data driver to the anode terminal of the inorganic light-emitting elements while turned on (element T7 in figure 1 and ¶ 63). Claims 5 & 14: the driver is further configured to set the image data voltage in the sub-pixels of the plurality of row lines in the sub-pixel circuits by applying a scan signal in the sub-pixels of the plurality of row lines (Sn and element T2 in figure 1 and ¶ 63); and the reset transistor is turned on based on the scan signal (Sn and element T7 in figure 1 and ¶ 63). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the invention of Kim according to the teachings of Han, for the purposes of reducing a fluctuation amplitude of a voltage difference between the anode and the cathode input to a light-emitting device, reducing changes of the brightness and chroma of a display screen, and improving display quality of a display panel (¶ 68). Claims 6, 7, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim, in view of Han and Oh, and further in view of Park et al (US 2017/0124954; hereinafter Park). • Regarding claims 6, 7, and 15, Kim, in view of Han and Oh, discloses everything claimed, as applied to claims 1 and 10. However, Kim, in view of Han and Oh, fails to disclose the additional details of the display device. In the same field of endeavor, Park discloses where: Claims 6 & 15: the driver is further configured to: set the image data voltage in the sub-pixels of the plurality of row lines in the sub-pixel circuits by applying a first scan signal in the sub-pixels of the plurality of row lines (SCAN in figures 15 and 16 and ¶s 71 and 142); and turn on the reset transistor in the sub-pixels of the plurality of row lines by applying a second scan signal separate from the first scan signal in the sub-pixels of the plurality of row lines (GI in figures 15 and 16 and ¶ 143). Claim 7: the reset voltage set in the anode terminal of the inorganic light-emitting element is maintained by parasitic capacitance formed between the anode terminal and the cathode terminal of each inorganic light-emitting element until each inorganic light-emitting element emits light (¶s 96 and 97). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the invention of Kim, as modified by Han and Oh, according to the teachings of Park, for the purpose of more accurately compensating the threshold voltage of a driving transistor (¶ 113). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 10 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. Closing Remarks/Comments 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 NATHAN DANIELSEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4248. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM Eastern Time. 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. /NATHAN DANIELSEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2622
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 17, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 01, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 13, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 29, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 20, 2026
Final Rejection — §103
Mar 30, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 01, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598901
TOUCH SENSOR AND DISPLAY DEVICE INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597381
Display Device and Driving Method Thereof
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597382
DISPLAY DEVICE HAVING LIGHT SENSING FUNCTION AND PIXEL CIRCUIT DRIVING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12585335
GESTURE INPUT WITH MULTIPLE VIEWS, DISPLAYS AND PHYSICS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586518
PIXEL AND DISPLAY DEVICE
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
81%
With Interview (+8.1%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 940 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