Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 19/204,094

DISPLAY APPARATUS AND LIGHT SOURCE DEVICE THEREOF

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
May 09, 2025
Examiner
DZIERZYNSKI, EVAN P
Art Unit
2875
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co.,Ltd,
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 0m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
890 granted / 1153 resolved
+9.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
1169
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
60.3%
+20.3% vs TC avg
§102
27.5%
-12.5% vs TC avg
§112
8.6%
-31.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1153 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Terminal Disclaimer The Terminal Disclaimer filed 11/25/2025 has been acknowledged and entered. Upon further searching and consideration of the scope of the claims, Yamamoto JP 2017-157278 was found to read on claims 1, 9, 16 and 17 of the claimed invention. The examiner regrets any confusion regarding stating by phone that the filing of the Terminal Disclaimer the application would suffice to place the application condition for allowance. 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. Claims 1, 3, 9, 10, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamamoto JP 2017-157278 (see English translation for references to page numbers). 1. Yamamoto discloses a light source device (see Figures 1-5) comprising: a diffuser plate (130 Fig 2); and a light source module comprising: a substrate 120; a plurality of light emitting diodes (LEDs light emitting element 108 of light source 103) on the substrate (see Fig 2); and a plurality of optical domes (124 Fig 3; 142 Fig 5), each of the plurality of optical domes configured to cover a respective one of the plurality of LEDs (see at least Fig 3 which shows dome 124 covering LED); wherein the plurality of LEDs are arranged along a first direction and a second direction perpendicular to the first direction (arranged in an array of rows and columns, see at least Fig 1), wherein, when a distance between centers of adjacent LEDs of the plurality of LEDs is defined as a pitch (light source pitch P, see first half of page 7, Yamamoto teaches a pitch is a distance between adjacent LEDs), and a distance between the diffuser plate and the substrate is defined as an optical distance (distance H, see first half of page 7), a ratio of the pitch to the optical distance satisfies the following expression: 2.5 ≤ pitch/optical distance ≤ 4.5 (P/H can be 3.3, which is within this range, see first half of page 7). 3. Yamamoto discloses the light source device (see Figures 1-5) of claim 1 further comprising: a plurality of reflective layers 122, each of the plurality of reflective layers provided on a respective front surface of each of the plurality of LEDs (second half of page 5); and wherein each of the plurality of reflective layers comprises a Distributed Bragg Reflector (see second half of page 5). 9. Yamamoto discloses the light source device (see Figures 1-5) of claim 1, wherein the plurality of optical domes are formed of silicone or epoxy resin (middle of page 8, Yamamoto). 10. Yamamoto discloses the light source device (see Figures 1-5) of claim 1, wherein the plurality of LEDs are configured to emit blue light (first half of page 8). 16. Yamamoto discloses the light source device (see Figures 1-5) of claim 1, wherein the light source module is provided behind the diffuser plate (see Fig 2; substrate 120 and LEDs 103 are behind diffuser 130 Fig 2). 17. Yamamoto discloses the light source device (see Figures 1-5) of claim 1, wherein the light source module is configured to emit light towards the diffuser plate (light is emitted upward from 103 to 130, see Fig 2). 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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto in view of Sonobe US 2021/0200026. 5. Yamamoto discloses the light source device (see Figures 1-5) claim 1, but is silent to specifically teaching the optical distance is greater than or equal to 1.5 mm but less than or equal to 4.5 mm. Sonobe teaches a distance between a diffuser plate 21 and the substrate 11 is an optical distance (see optical distance between 21 and 11), the optical distance is greater than or equal to 1.5 mm but less than or equal to 4.5 mm (height from lower surface of bottom of 13c to 13a, where the diffusion plate 21 is located is preferably 2-4mm, paragraph 0054). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling of the claimed invention to look to the teachings of Sonobe and utilize having the optical distance is greater than or equal to 1.5 mm but less than or equal to 4.5 mm in the device of Yamamoto to achieve an alternate, desired spacing arrangement and low profile for the lighting device. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2, 4, 6-8, 11-15 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter; the prior art fails to teach: 2. The light source device of claim 1, wherein a first pitch of the adjacent LEDs in the first direction and a second pitch of the adjacent LEDs in the second direction satisfy the following expression: (second pitch) ≤ (first pitch) ≤ 1.1*(second pitch). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. KIM US 20180114884 discloses a light emitting diode package includes a light emitting diode chip, a reflector disposed on an upper surface of the light emitting diode chip and configured to reflect some light emitted from the light emitting diode chip, and a molding part disposed to cover an upper surface and a side surface of the light emitting diode chip and disposed to cover an upper surface and a side surface of the reflector. MATSUKI US 20110013116 discloses a lighting device includes a light emitting element that emits a first colored light; a phosphor layer disposed on the light emitting element; and a lens part that is disposed so as to cover the light emitting element and the phosphor layer. KASANO US 20120147292 A1 discloses a backlight unit, a liquid crystal display apparatus, and a light-emitting diode light source on a substrate. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Evan P Dzierzynski whose telephone number is (571)272-2336. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-4:30pm PST. 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, Abdulmajeed Aziz can be reached at 571-270-5046. 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. /EVAN P DZIERZYNSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 09, 2025
Application Filed
Nov 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Mar 27, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595898
LED connection element
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589849
TETHERED-WING TRACTION SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MOVING CARRIAGES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583318
COMPONENT FOR VEHICLE INTERIOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12584599
LIGHTING FIXTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12560306
ADJUSTABLE-BEAM LUMINAIRES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
77%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+6.3%)
2y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1153 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