Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/305,047

LIGHT-EMITTING SUBSTRATE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME, BACKLIGHT MODULE AND DISPLAY APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Aug 20, 2025
Examiner
SUFLETA II, GERALD J
Art Unit
2875
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
BOE TECHNOLOGY GROUP CO., LTD.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
474 granted / 652 resolved
+4.7% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+21.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
677
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
44.8%
+4.8% vs TC avg
§102
31.2%
-8.8% vs TC avg
§112
21.4%
-18.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 652 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Claim Objections Claim 7 is objected to because: “in a central of the second opening” is grammatically awkward; for example, it should be “in a central portion of the second opening.” Claim 10 is objected to because: “a central of the first opening coincides with a central of the light-emitting device” is grammatically awkward; it has been read as “a center point of the first opening coincides with a center point of the light-emitting device” 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 1-2, 5-8, 10-12, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu US 20220137458 (“Liu”) in view of Joo et al. US 20080013015 (“Joo”). Re 1: Liu teaches a substrate 10 (Fig. 1); a plurality of light-emitting devices 20; a reflective layer disposed on a side of both the plurality of light-emitting devices and the plurality of driving chips away from the substrate; and a bonding structure disposed on the side of the substrate and electrically connected to the plurality of driving chips; wherein the reflective layer 30 has a plurality of openings (Fig. 1: each LED 20 is in an opening), and the plurality of openings include a plurality of first openings (Fig. 1); a light-emitting device 20 of the plurality of light-emitting devices is located in a first opening of the plurality of first openings (Fig. 1: any one of LEDs 20 read on this limitation); a driving chip (“drive circuit layer”) is electrically connected to at least one light-emitting device of the plurality of light-emitting devices (¶49: teaching a drive circuit layer which necessarily includes at least one chip); an orthographic projection of at least one driving chip on the substrate is located within an orthographic projection of the reflective layer on the substrate (Fig. 1; ¶49: driving circuit which includes at least one chip is co-extensive with 10 which is itself co-extensive with 200); and the bonding structure is configured to transmit a working signal to the driving chip to drive the at least one light-emitting device electrically connected to the driving chip to emit light (¶45: “a plurality of light sources 20 disposed on the drive substrate 10 and electrically connected to a circuit in the drive substrate 10…”). Liu does not explicitly teach and a plurality of driving chips that are disposed on a side of the substrate; an orthographic projection of at least one driving chip of the plurality of driving chips. (emphasis added to highlight portion not explicitly taught). Joo teaches (Fig. 1; ¶25): and a plurality of driving chips 27 that are disposed on a side of the substrate; an orthographic projection of at least one driving chip of the plurality of driving chips. Joo explicitly teaches a plurality of driving chips, which allows for multiple driving signals to be sent to the light emitting unit thereby allowing for more precise control over the illumination patterns. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to combine Liu with Joo's teachings in order to allow for more precise over the illumination patterns by giving each driving chip a subset of LEDs to control. Re 2: wherein orthographic projections of the plurality of driving chips on the substrate are all located within the orthographic projection of the reflective layer on the substrate (note: necessarily a consequence of combination made above since they’d all be co-extensive with 10). Liu and Joo disclose (all citations below refer to Liu): Re 5: wherein the reflective layer is discontinuous at at least one side surface of a driving chip of the at least one driving chip (Fig. 1: the openings represent discontinuities in the reflective layer and they are formed at the boundary of 10). Re 6: wherein the plurality of openings further include a plurality of second openings (Fig. 1), a driving chip of another at least one driving chip of the plurality of driving chips is located in a second opening of the plurality of second openings (Fig. 1). Re 7: wherein the driving chip of the another at least one driving chip is located in a central of the second opening (Fig. 1). Re 8: wherein the driving chip of the plurality of driving chips is electrically connected to multiple light-emitting devices of the plurality of light-emitting devices (¶45: they would all be electrically interconnected thus the driving chip would be part of the overall electrical circuit connected to all LEDs). Re 10: wherein an area of the first opening is greater than or equal to an area of the light-emitting device located in the first opening, and a central of the first opening coincides with a central of the light-emitting device (Fig. 1: the LED is in the center of the first opening and is smaller than the opening). Re 11: wherein the reflective layer 30 includes a plurality of first portions and a plurality of second portions (Fig. 1: starting from the left, it starts with the first portion then alternates to the second portion), the plurality of first portions and the plurality of second portions are arranged alternatively (Fig. 1), and a thickness of a second portion of the plurality of second portions is less than a thickness of a first portion of the plurality of second portions (¶57; Fig. 1: compare d1 versus d2). Re 12: wherein a difference between the thickness of the first portion and the thickness of the second portion is less than or equal to 20 pm; and/or the difference between the thickness of the first portion and the thickness of the second portion is less than or equal to 20% of a thickness of the reflective layer (Fig. 1: the last thickness is not specified, thus the difference between d1 and d2 satisfy this). Re 14: wherein an included angle between at least one sidewall of the first opening and the substrate is an acute angle (Fig. 1). Re 15: wherein at least one sidewall of the first opening is in a shape of a curved surface (Fig. 1). Re 16: wherein at least one edge of an orthographic projection, on the substrate, of the reflective layer includes a plurality of curved segments, and at least one curved segment of the plurality of curved segments protrudes towards a direction where an edge of the substrate is located (Fig. 1: both edges of the reflective portions are curved toward an edge of the substrate). Re 17: wherein an included angle between at least one side surface, proximate to an edge of the substrate, of the reflective layer and the substrate is an acute angle (Fig. 1). Re 18: wherein the bonding structure is located on a side of the light-emitting substrate proximate to an edge of the light- emitting substrate, and the bonding structure is not covered by the reflective layer (Fig. 1; ¶45). Re 19: the light-emitting substrate according to the light-emitting substrate according to an optical film located on a light exit side of the light-emitting substrate (Figs. 1 and 7: see 200 which comprises a bunch of optical films; ¶98). Re 20: the backlight module according to claim 19; a color filter substrate (¶98: “color film substrate”) located on a light exit side of the backlight module (Fig. 7: see 200 which comprises liquid crystal); and an array substrate located between the backlight module and the color filter substrate (¶98: “The display panel 200 comprises an array substrate, liquid crystals, and a color film substrate. The array substrate is disposed opposite to the color film substrate, and the liquid crystals are sandwiched between the array substrate and the color film substrate.”). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 3-4, 9, and 13 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 an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance. In combination with the other limitations nothing in the prior art of record teaches, suggests, or discloses: Re 3: “wherein a thickness of a portion, in contact with a top surface of the at least one driving chip, of the reflective layer is less than or equal to a thickness of a portion, in contact with the substrate, of the reflective layer.” Liu and Joo are completely silent as to the thickness of the driving chip portion and it is not apparent from the references there is any teaching to suggest so modifying it. Re 4: “wherein at least one side surface of a driving chip of the at least one driving chip and the reflective layer are provided with a gap therebetween.” Liu and Joo are completely silent as to the side surface of the driving chip portion and it is not apparent from the references there is any teaching to suggest so modifying it. Re 9: “the four light-emitting devices are arranged in two columns of light-emitting devices, and the driving chip is located in a same column as any column of light-emitting devices of the two columns of light-emitting devices or located between the two columns of light- emitting devices; or the four light-emitting devices are arranged in a staggered manner, and the driving chip is located between the four light-emitting devices.” Liu and Joo fail to teach the placement and alignment of the driving chip and there is no motivation to do so. Re 13: “wherein a distance between the light-emitting device located in the first opening and a sidewall of the first opening is in a range from 0.05 mm to 0.3 mm.” Liu and Joo are completely silent as to the dimensions of the opening as well as the distance between the sidewall and the LED. 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.” Conclusion Relevant prior art considered: US 10451921 teaching an illumination device includes a light source module including a plurality of light sources, and a reflector opposed to the light source module. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GERALD J SUFLETA II whose telephone number is (571)272-4279. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-6PM EDT/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, 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. GERALD J. SUFLETA II Primary Examiner Art Unit 2875 /GERALD J SUFLETA II/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 20, 2025
Application Filed
Mar 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596276
Optical Film, Backlight and Display System
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12576988
AIRCRAFT LIGHT, AIRCRAFT COMPRISING AN AIRCRAFT LIGHT, AND METHOD OF ASSEMBLING AN AIRCRAFT LIGHT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576777
LIGHTING APPARATUS FOR WHEELS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12578077
Signaler segment with an inner side for homogeneous overall illumination
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12566347
LAMP PANEL ASSEMBLY AND DISPLAY 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
73%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+21.6%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 652 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