Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 18, 2026
Application No. 19/020,624

DISPLAY DEVICE AND METHOD FOR OPERATING THE SAME

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jan 14, 2025
Priority
Jan 11, 2024 — RE 10-2024-0004949 +1 more
Examiner
MATTHEWS, ANDRE L
Art Unit
2621
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 10m
Est. Remaining
78%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allowance Rate
320 granted / 518 resolved
At TC average
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
552
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.8%
-38.2% vs TC avg
§103
71.3%
+31.3% vs TC avg
§102
12.2%
-27.8% vs TC avg
§112
13.2%
-26.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 518 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-3, 5-13, 15-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claims 1, 9, and 16 recite the limitations of “predicting first individual power consumption amount and second individual power consumption amount…..in each of a first operation mode or a second operation mode”, “predicting a third individual power consumption amount and a fourth individual consumption amount…..in each of the first operation mode or the second operation mode”, “predicting a fifth individual power consumption amount and a sixth individual power consumption amount… in each of the first operation mode or the second operation mode”, “predicting a seventh individual power consumption amount and an eighth individual power consumption amount….in each of the first operation mode or the second operation mode”. The limitations as written require that two individual power consumption amounts are predicting in each operation mode, however the specification does not provide clear support for predicting two individual power consumption amounts in each operation mode. 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 ANDRE L MATTHEWS whose telephone number is (571)270-5806. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-6:00. 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, Amr Awad can be reached at 571-272-7764. 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. /ANDRE L MATTHEWS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2621
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 14, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
May 19, 2026
Response Filed
Jul 31, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12699497
VIRTUAL USER INPUT CONTROLS IN A MIXED REALITY ENVIRONMENT
1y 8m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12693824
DISPLAY METHOD, CHIP, AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12688804
TEST SYSTEM, METHOD OF TESTING DISPLAY CELL USING THE SAME, AND DISPLAY DEVICE
3y 7m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12682863
LIQUID CRYSTAL DISPLAY DEVICE AND METHOD OF DRIVING THE SAME
2y 3m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12670884
METHOD, APPARATUS, DEVICE, AND MEDIUM FOR COMPENSATING BRIGHTNESS
2y 4m to grant Granted Jun 30, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
62%
Grant Probability
78%
With Interview (+16.1%)
3y 5m (~1y 10m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 518 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