Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/254,958

DISPLAY ELEMENT, DISPLAY DEVICE, AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jun 30, 2025
Examiner
EDWARDS, MARK
Art Unit
2624
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Sony Group Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 12m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
531 granted / 702 resolved
+13.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 12m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
729
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.5%
-38.5% vs TC avg
§103
53.3%
+13.3% vs TC avg
§102
27.1%
-12.9% vs TC avg
§112
17.1%
-22.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 702 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 . DETAILED ACTION Preliminary Amendment Applicant's amendment, filed September 03, 2025 are respectfully acknowledged and have been fully considered. Claim 1 is cancelled. Claims 2-15 are newly added. Claims 2-15 are pending. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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 2-4, 7, 9-11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hokazono et al. (U.S. Patent Application 20140132175 A1, hereinafter “Hokazono”). Regarding Claim 2 (New), Hokazono teaches a display device (par 0070 Fig 4 display device) comprising: a light emitting element (par 0071 Figs 3,6D ELP); a first capacitor (par 0071 Figs 1,3,6D capacitor C1); a second capacitor (par 0090 Figs 1,3,6D a parasitic capacitance exists between facing diffusion areas 34 and 25 of the driving transistor TRDrv and of the sampling transistor TRSig); a sampling transistor configured to supply a data signal voltage corresponding to a data signal to the first capacitor according to a control signal supplied from a control signal line (par 0090 Figs 1,3,6D sampling transistor TRSig supplies a data signal voltage from signal line DTL to capacitor C1 according to the scan signal on scan line SCL); and a driving transistor configured to supply a driving current from a power potential to the light emitting element according to a voltage stored in the first capacitor (paras 0106,0107 Figs 1,3,6D driving transistor TRDrv supplies current from a power potential Vcc to the ELP corresponding according to the voltage stored in the first capacitor C1), wherein a first electrode of the first capacitor is disposed in a first layer and is electrically connected to a gate of the driving transistor (par 0092 Figs 1,3,6D first electrode 42 of the first capacitor C1 corresponds to the driving gate electrode 21 and is disposed in a first layer on dielectric layer (insulating layer) 43 and is electrically connected to gate electrode 21 of the driving transistor TRDrv), a second electrode of the first capacitor is disposed in a second layer different from the first layer and is electrically connected to a first source/drain of the driving transistor (par 0092 Figs 1,3,6D second electrode 41 of the first capacitor C1 is disposed in a second layer, above insulating layer 61), a first electrode of the second capacitor is disposed in a third layer different from the first layer and the second layer, and is electrically connected to the first source/drain of the driving transistor (par 0090 Figs 1,3,6D a parasitic capacitance exists between facing diffusion areas 34 of the driving transistor TRDrv and 25 of the sampling transistor TRSig, the parasitic capacitance, such that a first electrode of the parasitic capacitance is disposed in a third layer [through isolation region layer 14] different from the first layer and the second layer, and is electrically connected to the first source/drain 23 of the driving transistor TRDrv), a first source/drain of the sampling transistor is disposed closer to the first source/drain of the driving transistor than to a second source/drain of the driving transistor (par 0119 Fig 1,3,6D first source/drain 34 of the sampling transistor TRSig is disposed closer to the first source/drain 23 of the driving transistor TRDrv than to a second source/drain 24 of the driving transistor TRDrv), the first source/drain of the sampling transistor being electrically connected to the gate of the driving transistor (par 0119 Fig 1,3,6D first source/drain 34 of the sampling transistor TRSig being electrically connected to the gate 21 of the driving transistor TRDrv), the first source/drain of the driving transistor being electrically connected to the power potential (par 0127,0234 Fig 1,3,6D first source/drain 23 of the driving transistor TRDrv electrically connected to the power potential Vcc, e.g. par 0121 Fig 6D when TREL on), and the second source/drain of the driving transistor being electrically connected to an anode of the light emitting element (par 0107 Figs 1,3,6D second source/drain 24 of the driving transistor TRDrv electrically connected to an anode 51 of the light emitting element ELP), at least a portion of a wiring path is adjacent to at least a portion of the power potential, the wiring path being electrically connecting the first source/drain of the sampling transistor and the gate of the driving transistor (par 0119 Fig 1,3,6D at least a portion of a wiring path 42 is vertically adjacent to at least a portion of the power potential Vcc path CSL1, the wiring path 42 being electrically connecting first source/drain 34 of the sampling transistor TRSig and the gate 21 of the driving transistor TRDrv), and at least a portion of the power potential overlaps the gate of the driving transistor in a plan view (par 0119 Fig 1 at least a portion of the power potential Vcc path CSL1 overlaps the gate 21 of the driving transistor TRDrv in a plan view). Regarding Claim 3 (New), Hokazono teaches the display device according to claim 2, wherein the wiring path is electrically connected to the first electrode of the first capacitor (par 0092 Figs 1,3,6D the wiring path 41 is electrically connected to first electrode 42 of the first capacitor C1). Regarding Claim 4 (New), Hokazono teaches the display device according to claim 2, wherein a channel length direction of the sampling transistor and a channel length direction of the driving transistor are a same direction (Fig 1 teaches both channel lengths are a same first direction). Regarding Claim 7 (New), Hokazono teaches the display device according to claim 2, wherein a second electrode of the second capacitor is disposed in the third layer (par 0090 Figs 1,3,6D a parasitic capacitance exists between facing diffusion areas 34 of the driving transistor TRDrv and 25 of the sampling transistor TRSig, such that a second electrode of the parasitic capacitance is disposed in the third layer). Regarding Claim 9 (New), Hokazono teaches an electronic device comprising the display device according to claim 2 (par 0158 electronic device comprising a game machine including the display device). Regarding Claim 10 (New), Hokazono teaches the electronic device according to claim 9, wherein the wiring path is electrically connected to the first electrode of the first capacitor (par 0092 Figs 1,3,6D the wiring path 41 is electrically connected to first electrode 42 of the first capacitor C1). Regarding Claim 11 (New), Hokazono teaches the electronic device according to claim 9, wherein a channel length direction of the sampling transistor and a channel length direction of the driving transistor are a same direction (Fig 1 teaches both channel lengths are a same first direction). Regarding Claim 14 (New), Hokazono teaches the electronic device according to claim 9, wherein a second electrode of the second capacitor is disposed in the third layer (par 0090 Figs 1,3,6D a parasitic capacitance exists between facing diffusion areas 34 of the driving transistor TRDrv and 25 of the sampling transistor TRSig, such that a second electrode of the parasitic capacitance is disposed in the third layer). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 5 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hokazono et al. (U.S. Patent Application 20140132175 A1, hereinafter “Hokazono”) in view of Heo (U.S. Patent Application 20120205647 A1). Regarding Claim 5, Hokazono teaches the display device according to claim 2. However, Hokazono appears not to expressly teach wherein the first capacitor is a MIM (Metal-Insulator-Metal) capacitor. Heo teaches wherein the first capacitor is a MIM (Metal-Insulator-Metal) capacitor (par 0052 Fig 3A source/drain electrode 20 of the capacitor region Cst forms a metal-insulator-metal (MIM) capacitor together with the gate electrode 16 thereunder). Hokazono and Heo are analogous art as they each pertain to OLED display driving circuits. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the first capacitor of Hokazono with the inclusion of the metal electrodes of Heo. The motivation would have been in order to provide an OLED display in a simplified process [fewer mask steps] while minimizing parasitic capacitance (Heo paras 0017,0076, Fig. 7). Regarding Claim 12 (New), Hokazono teaches the electronic device according to claim 9. However, Hokazono appears not to expressly teach wherein the first capacitor is a MIM (Metal-Insulator-Metal) capacitor. Heo teaches wherein the first capacitor is a MIM (Metal-Insulator-Metal) capacitor (par 0052 Fig 3A source/drain electrode 20 of the capacitor region Cst forms a metal-insulator-metal (MIM) capacitor together with the gate electrode 16 thereunder). Hokazono and Heo are analogous art as they each pertain to OLED display driving circuits. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the first capacitor of Hokazono with the inclusion of the metal electrodes of Heo. The motivation would have been in order to provide an OLED display in a simplified process [fewer mask steps] while minimizing parasitic capacitance (Heo paras 0017,0076, Fig. 7). Claims 6 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hokazono et al. (U.S. Patent Application 20140132175 A1, hereinafter “Hokazono”) in view of Park et al. (U.S. Patent Application 20140367664 A1, hereinafter “Park”). Regarding Claim 6, Hokazono teaches the display device according to claim 3. However, Hokazono appears not to expressly teach wherein the gate electrode of the driving transistor is disposed in the first layer. Park teaches wherein the gate electrode of the driving transistor is disposed in the first layer (Park par 0148 Figs 5,7 first electrode 158 of the first storage capacitor Cst/80 corresponds to the driving gate electrode 154b and is disposed in a first driving gate electrode layer on gate insulating layer 140 and is electrically connected to gate electrode 154b of the driving transistor Qd). Hokazono and Park are analogous art as they each pertain to OLED display driving circuits. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Park with the inclusion of the gate electrode of the driving transistor is disposed in the first layer of Park. The motivation would have been in order to provide that an area of the storage capacitor Cst may be reduced. Accordingly, it is possible to prevent reduction in aperture ratio of the display device due to the formation of the storage capacitor Cst (Park par 0148). Regarding Claim 13 (New), Hokazono teaches the electronic device according to claim 9. However, Hokazono appears not to expressly teach wherein the gate of the driving transistor is disposed in the first layer. Park teaches wherein the gate of the driving transistor is disposed in the first layer (Park par 0148 Figs 5,7 first electrode 158 of the first storage capacitor Cst/80 corresponds to the driving gate electrode 154b and is disposed in a first driving gate electrode layer on gate insulating layer 140 and is electrically connected to gate electrode 154b of the driving transistor Qd). Hokazono and Park are analogous art as they each pertain to OLED display driving circuits. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Park with the inclusion of the gate of the driving transistor is disposed in the first layer of Park. The motivation would have been in order to provide that an area of the storage capacitor Cst may be reduced. Accordingly, it is possible to prevent reduction in aperture ratio of the display device due to the formation of the storage capacitor Cst (Park par 0148). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 8 and 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten to include 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: Claim 8: While closest prior art Hokazono (20140132175 A1) teaches portions of the limitations of Claim 8, the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest the particular limitations of Claim 8, namely "wherein a second electrode of the second capacitor is electrically connected to the power potential" in combination with all other limitations of the claim and of claims on which the claim depends. Claim 15: While closest prior art Hokazono (20140132175 A1) teaches portions of the limitations of Claim 15, the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest the particular limitations of Claim 15, namely "wherein a second electrode of the second capacitor is electrically connected to the power potential" in combination with all other limitations of the claim and of claims on which the claim depends. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK EDWARDS whose telephone number is (571)270-7731. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9a-5p 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, Matthew Eason can be reached on 571-270-7230. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /MARK EDWARDS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2624
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 30, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602111
PROJECTION SYSTEM FOR SMART RING VISUAL OUTPUT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596513
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR REMOTELY MONITORING ELECTRONIC DISPLAYS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591317
INPUT INTERFACE CONTROLLING METHOD AND SYSTEM THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586533
GATE DRIVER AND DISPLAY DEVICE INCLUDING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585359
DISPLAY APPARATUS AND METHOD OF CONTROLLING THE SAME
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
76%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+13.5%)
1y 12m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 702 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