Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 19/274,097

METHOD FOR MANAGING PIXEL OF DISPLAY, AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE SUPPORTING SAME

Non-Final OA §Other
Filed
Jul 18, 2025
Examiner
SHANKAR, VIJAY
Art Unit
2624
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., LTD.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
91%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 91% — above average
91%
Career Allow Rate
1001 granted / 1101 resolved
+28.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+6.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
1122
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.0%
-35.0% vs TC avg
§103
12.3%
-27.7% vs TC avg
§102
44.8%
+4.8% vs TC avg
§112
10.6%
-29.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1101 resolved cases

Office Action

§Other
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 . Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 18/158,100, filed on 01/23/2023. Election/Restrictions Applicant's election with traverse of Claims 6-15 in the reply filed on 1/16/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Claims 6 and 7 and Claim 1 are similar, however, Independent Claim 7 and Claim 1 are not similar and both claims 1 and 7 have different search. This is not found persuasive because Claim 7 does not claim “the first type pixel being controlled to display a light within a reduced gradation value range, wherein the first type pixel is controlled to display a light within the reduced gradation value range in the second mode such that contrast ratio of the first type pixel operated in the second mode is lower than contrast ratio of the first type pixel operated in the first mode.” as claimed in Claim 1. Claim 7 does not claim “the second mode such that contrast ratio of the first type pixel operated in the second mode is lower than contrast ratio of the first type pixel operated in the first mode.” as claimed in Claim 1. Also, Claim 6 has different search for these claimed matters such as “a shield layer including shield member portions and light transmission portions, and pixel definition member surrounding the second type pixel; wherein the first type pixel comprises a plurality of first type sub pixels, no shield member portion is overlapped an area between the plurality of first type sub pixels, and light from the second type pixel is emitted with the second viewing angle limited by a portion of the shield member portions, such that the second viewing angle being narrower than the first viewing angle, and wherein an additional shield member is disposed between the shield layer and the pixel definition member surrounding the second type pixel. Non-elected Claims 1-5 should be cancelled. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6-15 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: None of the prior art, made of record, either singularly or in combination, teaches or fairly suggests the features presented in the limitations of Claim 6, such as “ An electronic device comprising: a display comprising a first type pixel observable at a first viewing angle, a second type pixel observable at a second viewing angle being narrower than the first viewing angle, a shield layer including shield member portions and light transmission portions, and pixel definition member surrounding the second type pixel; wherein the first type pixel comprises a plurality of first type sub pixels, no shield member portion is overlapped an area between the plurality of first type sub pixels, and light from the second type pixel is emitted with the second viewing angle limited by a portion of the shield member portions, such that the second viewing angle being narrower than the first viewing angle, and wherein an additional shield member is disposed between the shield layer and the pixel definition member surrounding the second type pixel.”, recited by Claim 6. None of the prior art, made of record, either singularly or in combination, teaches or fairly suggests the features presented in the limitations of Claim 7, such as “in a first mode, display a screen with the first viewing angle by emitting of the first type pixel and emitting of the second type pixel, and in a second mode, display a screen with the second viewing angle narrower than the first viewing angle by emitting of the second type pixel and, by controlling turning off the first type pixel or by controlling the first type pixel to emit within an adjusted gradation value range, wherein the display comprises a shield layer including shield member portions and opening portions, and wherein the first type pixel comprises first type sub pixels, no shield member portion of the shield layer overlapped an area between the first type sub pixels such that the first type pixel observable at a first viewing angle, and wherein the second type pixel comprises second type sub pixels, a shield member portion of the shield layer overlapped an area between the second type sub pixels such that the second type pixel observable at a second viewing angle being narrower than the first viewing angle.”, recited by Claim 7. Examiner notes the current invention as disclosed in the independent claims is allowed in its entirety. Each and every limitation working together in concert realizes the current claimed invention’s novelty. No single limitation alone accomplishes the allowability of the inventive independent claim(s). Rather, each and every limitation of the claim(s) and their disclosed relationships are integral. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VIJAY SHANKAR whose telephone number is (571)272-7682. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 am- 6 pm. 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 at 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 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. VIJAY SHANKAR Primary Examiner Art Unit 2624 /VIJAY SHANKAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2624
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 18, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §Other
Apr 01, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597220
INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592040
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR METAVERSE PERFORMANCE AUTHORING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586509
DISPLAY APPARATUS, DISPLAY DRIVING DEVICE AND DRIVING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585354
Mechanical Force Redistribution Sensor Array Embedded in a Single Support Layer
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578679
DIFFRACTIVE OPTICAL NETWORK FOR RECONSTRUCTION OF HOLOGRAMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
91%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+6.7%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1101 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