Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/084,499

DISPLAY PANEL AND ELECTRONIC APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Mar 19, 2025
Examiner
AZONGHA, SARDIS F
Art Unit
2627
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 11m
To Grant
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
501 granted / 616 resolved
+19.3% vs TC avg
Minimal -2% lift
Without
With
+-1.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 11m
Avg Prosecution
15 currently pending
Career history
631
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.4%
-38.6% vs TC avg
§103
62.4%
+22.4% vs TC avg
§102
23.8%
-16.2% vs TC avg
§112
7.6%
-32.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 616 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION This action is responsive to 03/19/2025. Claims 1-20 are pending. Drawings The drawings are objected to because the display driver is variously referred to as “display driver 4” in the specification, but in figs. 6 and 10-16, the display driver is labeled “2”. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. 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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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, 5-8, 16, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (US Pub. 2023/0282793), hereinafter Lee. Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses a display panel (display device DD-see fig. 2A) comprising: a substrate (substrate 100-see fig. 2A); a display layer above the substrate (display element layer ED-see fig. 3 and [0061]); a display driver above the substrate (driving circuits DIC on substrate 100-see fig. 2A and [0055]), and apart from the display layer (see fig. 3-DIC is apart from the display element layer ED); and an encapsulation member above the display layer, configured to shield the display layer and the substrate (upper substrate 200-see fig. 2A, 3 and [0065]), and defining an opening recessed toward the display layer to expose the display driver (the upper substrate is provided with a notch (NC) defined by recessing the upper substrate 200 from an external side surface of the upper substrate 200 extending in a second direction DR2 to a first direction DR1 toward the active area AA (see fig. 2A, [0006], and [0066]), and the driving circuit DIC is disposed on the substrate and exposed by the notch-see[0075] and fig. 2A). Regarding claim 16, Lee discloses an electronic apparatus (display device DD-see fig. 2A) comprising: a housing (a display device necessarily has a housing); and a display panel inside the housing (panel EP-see fig. 2B and [0047]), and comprising: a substrate (substrate 100-see fig. 2A); a display layer above the substrate (display element layer ED-see fig. 3 and [0061]); an encapsulation member above the display layer, shielding the display layer and the substrate (upper substrate 200-see fig. 2A, 3 and [0065]), and defining an opening recessed toward the display layer ((the upper substrate is provided with a notch (NC) defined by recessing the upper substrate 200 from an external side surface of the upper substrate 200 extending in a second direction DR2 to a first direction DR1 toward the active area AA (see fig. 2A, [0006], and [0066])); and a display driver above the substrate, apart from the display layer, and exposed by the opening (driving circuit DIC is disposed on the substrate and exposed by the notch-see[0075] and fig. 2A). Regarding claim 5, Lee discloses further comprising a display controller connected to the substrate, and configured to transfer a signal to the display driver (see [0083]-main circuit board MCB may include a driving controller to drive the DIC). Regarding claims 6 and 19, Lee discloses wherein the encapsulation member comprises: an encapsulation substrate facing the substrate (upper substrate 200-see fig. 2A), and defining the opening (i.e., notch NC-see fig. 2A); and a sealing member between the encapsulation substrate and the substrate (coupling member 300-see fig. 3 and [0070]). Regarding claims 7 and 20, Lee discloses wherein the encapsulation member covers the display layer (see fig. 3-upper substrate 200 covers display element layer ED) and defines the opening (i.e., notch NC-see fig. 2A). Regarding claim 8, Lee discloses wherein at least a portion of a planar shape of the opening is an oblique line (notch NC (N1, N2, N3)-see figs. 2A-2B). 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. Claim(s) 2-4 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Lu et al. (US Pub. 2021/0231995), hereinafter Lu. Regarding claims 2 and 17, Lee does not appear to expressly disclose wherein the substrate comprises a substrate protrusion protruding away from the display layer to correspond to a portion on which the display driver is located. Lu is relied upon to teach wherein the substrate comprises a substrate protrusion protruding away from the display layer to correspond to a portion on which the display driver is located (see, for example, fig. 1 with description in [0041]-substrate 101 has a protrusion 107 protruding away from display region 103). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Lu with the invention of Lee such that the display substrate has a protruding portion that protrudes away from the display layer and corresponds to a portion on which the display driver is located, as taught by Lu, in order to prevent poor electrical properties, prevent increase of width of bezel, and maintain screen-body ratio of the display device (see [0020]). Regarding claims 3 and 18, Lee in view of Lu teaches a substrate protrusion as in claim 2 above, and Lee further discloses further comprising a display controller connected to the substrate, configured to transfer a signal to the display driver, and defining a recess recessed away from the substrate (see figs. 2A-2B and [0083]-main circuit board MCB is connected to the driving circuit DIC at a location corresponding to the notch NC, and the MCB may include a driving controller to drive the DIC). Regarding claim 4, Lee discloses further comprising a display controller connected to the substrate, configured to transfer a signal to the display driver (see [0083]). Lee does not appear to expressly disclose and comprising a portion overlapping the substrate protrusion in a plan view. Lu is further relied upon to teach and comprising a portion overlapping the substrate protrusion in a plan view (see fig. 1B). Claims 9-10 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Lee in view of Kim et al. (US Pub. 2018/0075817), hereinafter Kim. Regarding claim 9, Lee discloses a display panel (display device DD-see fig. 2A) comprising: a substrate (substrate 100-see fig. 2A) comprising a display area (AA-see fig. 2) and a peripheral area (NAA-see fig. 2); a display driver in the peripheral area (driving circuits DIC on a peripheral area NAA of substrate 100-see fig. 3 and [0055]); and a display controller connected to the substrate, and configured to transfer a signal to the display driver (see [0083]), wherein the display controller is in contact with the substrate and connected to the substrate in at least two portions (as shown in fig. 2, the display controller contacts the substrate in three portions (N1, N2, and N3). Lee does not appear to expressly disclose wherein the display controller is in direct contact with the substrate. Kim is relied upon to teach wherein the display controller is in direct contact with the substrate (see, for example, fig. 8, which teaches a display module 800 having a display driver integrated circuit (DDI) 830 implemented as a single semiconductor chip IC chip including a timing controller 831, a data driver circuit 832, and a switching circuit 834, wherein the DDI is directed mounted in a chip on glass (COG) form on a lower substrate 840). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Kim with the invention of Lee such that the display controller is in direct contact with the display substrate, as taught by Kim, which constitutes combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Regarding claim 10, Lee discloses wherein the display controller comprises: a display circuit board (MCB-see fig. 2 and [0083]); and a connector protruding from the display circuit board toward the substrate, and integrally formed with the display circuit board (FCB-see fig. 2 and [0083]). Regarding claim 15, Kim is further relied upon to teach wherein at least a portion of the display controller overlaps the substrate (see fig. 8). Claims 11 and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Lee in view of Kim, and further in view of Lu. Regarding claim 11, Lee in view of Kim does not appear to expressly teach further comprising a connection member apart from the connector, and connecting the display circuit board to the substrate. Lu is further relied upon to teach further comprising a connection member apart from the connector, and connecting the display circuit board to the substrate (see, for example, fig. 4B, 4101-4103 equates to connector and connecting member of circuit board). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Lu with the inventions of Lee and Kim to include one or more connectors for connecting a display circuit board with the display driver, as taught by Lu, which constitutes combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Regarding claim 12, Lee in view of Kim does not appear to expressly teach wherein the substrate comprises a substrate protrusion protruding toward the display controller. Lu is further relied upon to teach wherein the substrate comprises a substrate protrusion protruding toward the display controller (see, for example, fig. 1 with description in [0041]-substrate 101 has a protrusion 107 protruding away from display region 103). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Lu with the inventions of Lee and Kim such that the display substrate has a protruding portion that protrudes away from the display layer and corresponds to a portion on which the display driver is located, as taught by Lu, in order to prevent poor electrical properties, prevent increase of width of bezel, and maintain screen-body ratio of the display device (see [0020]). Regarding claim 13, Lu is further relied upon to teach wherein the display driver is above the substrate such that at least a portion thereof overlaps the substrate protrusion (see fig. 1A-driving chip 105 overlaps protrusion 107). Regarding claim 14, Lee in view of Lu teaches a substrate protrusion as in claim 12 above, and Lee further discloses wherein the display controller defines a recess recessed in a direction away from the substrate, and having a shape corresponding to the substrate protrusion (see figs. 2A-2B and [0083]-circuit board MCB has a display controller connected to the DIC via FCB in the notched portions). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARDIS F AZONGHA whose telephone number is (571)270-7706. The examiner can normally be reached 10AM-7:00PM. 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)272-7776. 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. /SARDIS F AZONGHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2627
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 19, 2025
Application Filed
Mar 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598830
SOLID-STATE IMAGING ELEMENT AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597630
BATTERIES WITH NON-RECTANGULAR SHAPES FOR AUGMENTED REALITY DEVICES, AND SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12578579
EYEWEAR WITH INTEGRATED PERIPHERAL DISPLAY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575273
Display Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12567371
DISPLAY DRIVING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
81%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (-1.9%)
1y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 616 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