Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/078,609

DISPLAY DEVICE AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Mar 13, 2025
Examiner
ADAMS, CARL
Art Unit
2627
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allow Rate
556 granted / 780 resolved
+9.3% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+17.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
26 currently pending
Career history
806
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§103
58.3%
+18.3% vs TC avg
§102
30.9%
-9.1% vs TC avg
§112
7.9%
-32.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 780 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 § 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. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Specifically, claim 2 recites the limitation "the boundary area". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. 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. Claims 1 – 6, 11, 12 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US Pub. No. 2019/0179451 A1) in view of Xu et al. (US Pub. No. 2018/0300007 A1). As to claims 1 and 20, Kim shows an electronic device (touch sensor panel 1, Fig. 1 and para. 29) comprising: an input sensing layer (200/100, Fig. 1 and para. 30), the input sensing layer comprises: a plurality of sensing electrodes (20/10, Figs. 1 and 3a – 3h and para. 29); and a plurality of dummy electrodes 21/11 on a layer different from the plurality of sensing electrodes and overlapping the plurality of sensing electrodes (Fig. 1 and 3a – 3h and para. 34), wherein the plurality of sensing electrodes comprises: a first sensing electrode (drive electrode 10, for example, Figs. 1 and 3a – 3h and para. 30); and a second sensing electrode (receiving electrode 20, for example, Figs. 1 and 3a – 3h and para. 30) adjacent to the first sensing electrode (Figs. 1 and 3a – 3h and paras. 31), electrically separated from the first sensing electrode (Figs. 1 and 3a – 3h and paras. 30), and having a smaller extent than that of the first sensing electrode (Fig. 1), wherein the plurality of dummy electrodes comprises: a first dummy electrode 21 overlapping the first sensing electrode (Figs. 3a – 3h and para. 40); and a second dummy electrode 11 overlapping the second sensing electrode (Figs. 3a – 3h and para. 40), and wherein the first and second dummy electrodes are connected at a boundary area between the first and second sensing electrodes (i.e. capacitance path indicated by arrows, Figs. 3b – 3d and paras. 40 – 45). Kim does not show a display device comprising a display panel. Xu shows a sensing device including a display device comprising a display panel (Fig. 1 and para. 29). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Kim with those of Xu because designing the system in this way allows the device to exhibit that touch control modes will not be affected by ambient light, sunlight and other light (para. 43). As to claim 2, Kim shows that the first sensing electrode comprises a first mesh line defining a first opening (Fig. 2a and para. 35), wherein the second sensing electrode comprises a second mesh line defining a second opening (Fig. 2a and para. 35), and wherein the first mesh line and the second mesh line are spaced apart from each other in a boundary area (Fig. 2a and para. 35). As to claim 3, Kim shows that the first dummy electrode comprises a first dummy mesh line extending along the first mesh line (Fig. 2a and para. 35), wherein the second dummy electrode comprises a second dummy mesh line extending along the second mesh line (Fig. 2a and para. 35), and wherein the first dummy mesh line is connected to the second dummy mesh line in the boundary area (Fig. 2a and para. 35). As to claim 4, Kim shows that a line width of each of the first and second mesh lines is greater than a line width of each of the first and second dummy mesh lines (Fig. 2a). As to claim 5, Kim shows that the input sensing layer further comprises: an intermediate insulating layer 300 covering the plurality of dummy electrodes and on which the plurality of sensing electrodes are arranged (Fig. 3b and para. 32). Kim does not show a base insulating layer on which the plurality of dummy electrodes are arranged. Xu shows a base insulating layer 61 on which a plurality of dummy electrodes 25 are arranged (Fig. 9 and paras. 70 and 73). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Kim with those of Xu because designing the system in this way allows the device to prevent short circuits (para. 73). As to claim 6, Kim shows that the plurality of sensing electrodes are arranged in a first direction and a second direction crossing the first direction (Fig. 2a), and wherein the plurality of sensing electrodes are electrically separated from each other (Figs. 3b – 3c). As to claim 11, Kim does not show a sensor controller configured to drive the input sensing layer, wherein the input sensing layer comprises a plurality of trace lines electrically connecting the plurality of sensing electrodes to the sensor controller. Xu shows a controller (i.e. integrated circuit) configured to drive an input sensing layer (para. 48), wherein the input sensing layer comprises a plurality of trace lines electrically connecting a plurality of sensing electrodes to the sensor controller (para. 48). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Kim with those of Xu because designing the system in this way allows the device to achieve a better touch control effect and support multi-touch control (para. 48). As to claim 12, Kim shows that each of the trace lines is connected to a corresponding one of the plurality of sensing electrodes (Fig. 2a) and overlaps at least one non-corresponding sensing electrode of the plurality of sensing electrodes that does not correspond thereto (Fig. 2a). Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Xu as combined above in view of Fan et al. (US Pub. No. 2022/0317806 A1). As to claim 10, Kim as modified above does not show that the dummy electrodes are electrically floated. Fan shows that dummy electrodes are electrically floated (para. 123). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Kim as modified above with those of Fan because designing the system in this way allows the device to improve touch sensitivity (para. 123). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 7 – 9 and 13 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. Specifically, claim 7 recites that “… the input sensing layer has an active area in which a hole area is defined and an inactive area around the active area, wherein the plurality of sensing electrodes are in the active area, and wherein the first and second sensing electrodes are adjacent to the hole area.” The prior art does not show this configuration; therefore this claim contains allowable subject matter. Claim 8 recites that “… the input sensing layer has an active area having a curved edge at a portion of the input sensing layer and an inactive area around the active area, and wherein the first and second sensing electrodes are adjacent to the curved edge.” The prior art does not show this configuration; therefore this claim contains allowable subject matter. Claim 9 recites that “… the plurality of sensing electrodes further comprises: a third sensing electrode adjacent to the first sensing electrode and having an extent that is equal to or greater than that of the first sensing electrode, wherein the first and third sensing electrodes are spaced apart from each other by a first distance in a boundary area between the first and third sensing electrodes, and wherein the first and second sensing electrodes are spaced apart from each other by a second distance that is smaller than the first distance in the boundary area between the first and second sensing electrodes.” The prior art does not show this configuration; therefore this claim contains allowable subject matter. Claim 13 recites “… the trace lines and the plurality of dummy electrodes are on the same layer, and wherein the plurality of dummy electrodes do not overlap the trace lines.” The prior art does not show this configuration; therefore this claim contains allowable subject matter. CONCLUSION Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARL ADAMS whose telephone number is (571)270-7448. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9AM - 5PM 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, Ke Xiao can be reached at 571-272-2976. 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. /CARL ADAMS/Examiner, Art Unit 2627
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 13, 2025
Application Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601813
VIRTUAL TOUCH INTERACTION FOR ANY DISPLAY DEVICES USING RADAR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12591131
LIGHT SOURCE DEVICE, CONTROL METHOD, AND COMPUTER-READABLE RECORDING MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591330
Electronic Devices With Display and Touch Sensor Structures
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582388
SYSTEM AND APPARATUS FOR REMOTE INTERACTION WITH AN OBJECT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582382
SYSTEM AND APPARATUS FOR REMOTE INTERACTION WITH AN OBJECT
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
71%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+17.1%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 780 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