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
Response to Amendment
This office action is in response to applicant’s amendment and RCE filed, 05 January 2026, of application filed, with the above serial number, on 18 March 2015, in which claims 1-4, 6-10, 12-16, and 21-23 have been amended. Claims 1-4, 6-10, 12-18, and 20-26 are pending in the application.
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 1-4, 6-10, 12-18, and 20-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang et al (hereinafter “Kang”, 2013/0120330) in view of Dougall et al (hereinafter “Dougall”, 2012/0054664).
As per Claim 1, Kang discloses a method comprising:
generating data representing an image of a content item as presented via a first device (at least Fig. 2-3, paragraph 67; camera photographs images displayed by mobile device 100), and configuration setting(s) of the first device (at least paragraph 73, 68; brightness level of images / receives the information regarding brightness level from device 100; par. 33, 36: compares the photographed image with reference data);
transmitting, to a second device, the data representing the image of the content item and the current configuration setting (at least Fig. 2-3, paragraph 67-68; camera 380 transfer image to 300 and luminance value of display mobile device);
receiving, from the second device, and based on a comparison of stored user preference data with the generated data representing the image of the content item and the current configuration setting of the first device, updated configuration setting for the first device (at least paragraph 152, 8, 32, 58, 62-64; adjust a level of brightness, … according to the user preferences; the visibility optimizing system automatically provides screens with optimal visibility according to respective states of mobile devices or user preferences; transmitting reference data / original image for controller to perform comparison of photographed images with reference data and creating brightness adjustment information (updated configuration setting) based on comparison); and
updating the configuration setting(s) of the first device with the updated configuration settings (at least paragraph 73-74, 38; calculated brightness adjustment information is provided to display mobile device 100).
While Kang discloses obtaining current configuration setting(s) as brightness level of images and receiving the information regarding brightness level from device 100 (at least paragraph 73, 68), Kang fails to explicitly disclose a plurality of current configuration settings of the first device and respective updating the plurality of current configuration settings. However, the use and advantages for using such a system was well known to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as evidenced by the teachings of Dougall. Dougall discloses, in an analogous art, parameters including different types of display devices and their configuration settings being determined from a device to configure the device for optimal display of images/video wherein device parameters are sent 110 to server so that the settings for the STB can be optimized depending on the display being LCD, plasma, LED, DLP and depending on other environmental settings including ambient light and network bandwidth etc (as shown in Fig. 2 and at least paragraphs 29, 31-32; See also par. 23, 49-51, 60).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the use of Dougall’s optimal display device parameters being determined, with Kang as Dougall shows that this would enable more customized settings to be sent to the first device and display in accordance with the specific capabilities of the display device type in order to optimize settings for the user’s display according to both the content type and their display and environment (including ambient light sent from the device to the server for the server to automatically adjust: par. 36). Further, Kang discloses a mobile device 300 taking a picture of another mobile device’s display 100 to determine how that display is perceived and adjust a setting, eg. brightness of the display in response (Fig. 1), modifying Kang with Dougall would allow multiple settings of a display to be optimized according to user preferences and known display properties according to manufacturer recommendations and would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
As per Claim 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the data representing the image of the content item and the plurality of current configuration settings of the first device comprises information representing a video, audio, a data set, an application, or a combination thereof, relating to the content item (at least paragraph 34, 40; camera capturing output image by device 100).
As per Claim 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the data representing the image of the content item and the plurality of current configuration settings of the first device comprises information relating to an optical property (at least paragraph 31; brightness).
As per Claim 4. The method of claim 1, wherein updating the plurality of current configuration settings of the first device with the plurality of updated configuration settings comprises implementing the plurality of updated configuration settings automatically, manually, or a combination thereof (at least paragraph 41: ‘The display mobile device 100 receives the brightness adjustment information based on the visibility table or based on the visibility table and electric power consumption, and automatically controls the brightness level according to the received information’).
As per Claim 6. The method of claim 1, wherein updating the current configuration settings of the first device with the updated configuration settings comprises adjusting one or more of a brightness, a color, a contrast, a tint, a resolution, or a transmission parameter associated with the first device (at least paragraph 41: ‘The display mobile device 100 receives the brightness adjustment information based on the visibility table or based on the visibility table and electric power consumption, and automatically controls the brightness level according to the received information’).
As per Claim 7, Kang discloses a method comprising:
receiving data representing an image of a content item as presented via a device and current configuration setting(s) of the device (at least Fig. 2-3, paragraph 67; camera photographs images displayed by mobile device 100; paragraph 73, 68; brightness level of images / receives the information regarding brightness level from device 100; par. 33, 36: compares the photographed image with reference data);
determining, based on a comparison of stored user preference data with the received data representing the image of the content item and the configuration setting(s) of the device (at least paragraph 33-36; determining luminance level or brightness level or power consumption; paragraph 8, 32, 58, 62-64; the visibility optimizing system automatically provides screens with optimal visibility according to respective states of mobile devices or user preferences) updated configuration setting(s) for the device (at least paragraph 58, 62-64; transmitting reference data / original image for controller to perform comparison of photographed images with reference data and creating brightness adjustment information (updated configuration settings) based on comparison); and
transmitting, to the device, the updated configuration setting(s) for the device (at least paragraph 73-74, 38; calculated brightness adjustment information is provided to display mobile device 100).
While Kang discloses obtaining configuration setting(s) as brightness level of images and receiving the information regarding brightness level from device 100 (at least paragraph 73, 68), Kang fails to explicitly disclose a plurality of current configuration settings of the first device and respective updating of a plurality of updated configuration settings. However, the use and advantages for using such a system was well known to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as evidenced by the teachings of Dougall. Dougall discloses, in an analogous art, parameters including different types of display devices and their configuration settings being determined from a device to configure the device for optimal display of images/video wherein device parameters are sent 110 to server so that the settings for the STB can be optimized depending on the display being LCD, plasma, LED, DLP and depending on other environmental settings including ambient light and network bandwidth etc (as shown in Fig. 2 and at least paragraphs 29, 31-32; See also par. 23, 49-51, 60).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the use of Dougall’s optimal display device parameters being determined, with Kang as Dougall shows that this would enable more customized settings to be sent to the first device and display in accordance with the specific capabilities of the display device type in order to optimize settings for the user’s display according to both the content type and their display and environment (including ambient light sent from the device to the server for the server to automatically adjust: par. 36). Further, Kang discloses a mobile device 300 taking a picture of another mobile device’s display 100 to determine how that display is perceived and adjust a setting, eg. brightness of the display in response (Fig. 1), modifying Kang with Dougall would allow multiple settings of a display to be optimized according to user preferences and known display properties according to manufacturer recommendations and would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
As per Claim 10. The method of claim 7, further comprising determining at least one parameter associated with the device, wherein the at least one parameter comprises one or more parameters associated with one or more of a video, audio, an image, a data set, an application, and or the plurality of configuration settings for the device (at least paragraph 34, 40; camera capturing output image by device 100).
As per Claim 12. The method of claim 7, wherein the plurality of updated configuration settings are implemented on the device for presenting the content item (at least Fig. 9; loop to perform steps again; paragraph 58, 62-64; transmitting and storing reference data / original image for controller to perform comparison of photographed images with reference data and creating brightness adjustment information (updated configuration settings) based on comparison).
As per Claim 14, Kang discloses a method comprising:
receiving data representing an image of a content item presented via a device (at least Fig. 2-3, paragraph 67; camera photographs images displayed by mobile device 100), and current configuration setting(s) of the device (at least paragraph 73, 68; brightness level of images / receives the information regarding brightness level from device 100; par. 33, 36: compares the photographed image with reference data));
analyzing stored user preference data against the received data representing the image of the content item and the current configuration setting(s) of the device (at least paragraph 58, 62-64, 33; transmitting reference data / original image for controller to perform comparison of photographed images with reference data and creating brightness adjustment information (updated configuration setting) based on comparison);
generating, based on the analysis of the stored user preference data against the received data representing the image of the content item and the current configuration setting(s) of the device, a modified content item (at least paragraph 125-127; receiving first brightness level, adjusting display on 100 accordingly and then a second brightness level is used); and
transmitting, to the device, the modified content item (at least paragraph 125-127; receiving/transmitting first brightness level, adjusting display on 100 accordingly and then a second brightness level is used).
While Kang discloses obtaining a setting(s) such as brightness level of images and receiving the information regarding brightness level from device 100 (at least paragraph 73, 68), Kang fails to explicitly disclose a plurality of current configuration settings of the first device and respective analyzing of the plurality of current configuration settings. However, the use and advantages for using such a system was well known to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as evidenced by the teachings of Dougall. Dougall discloses, in an analogous art, parameters including different types of display devices and their configuration settings being determined from a device to configure the device for optimal display of images/video wherein device parameters are sent 110 to server so that the settings for the STB can be optimized depending on the display being LCD, plasma, LED, DLP and depending on other environmental settings including ambient light and network bandwidth etc (as shown in Fig. 2 and at least paragraphs 29, 31-32; See also par. 23, 49-51, 60).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the use of Dougall’s optimal display device parameters being determined, with Kang as Dougall shows that this would enable more customized settings to be sent to the first device and display in accordance with the specific capabilities of the display device type in order to optimize settings for the user’s display according to both the content type and their display and environment (including ambient light sent from the device to the server for the server to automatically adjust: par. 36). Further, Kang discloses a mobile device 300 taking a picture of another mobile device’s display 100 to determine how that display is perceived and adjust a setting, eg. brightness of the display in response (Fig. 1), modifying Kang with Dougall would allow multiple settings of a display to be optimized according to user preferences and known display properties according to manufacturer recommendations and would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
As per Claim 18. The method of claim 14, wherein the modified content item comprises one or more of a modified video, a modified audio, a modified image, a modified data set, or a modified application associated with the content item (at least paragraph 34, 40, 125-127; camera capturing adjusted image by device 100).
As per Claim 21. The method of claim 1, wherein reference data is determined prior to generating the data representing the image of the content item and the current configuration settings of the first device (at least paragraph 33-36; the reference data may be preset image; compares the photographed image with reference data, and estimates visibility.).
As per Claim 24. The method of claim 1, wherein the stored user preference data is associated with one or more of a color setting, a brightness setting, a contrast setting, a tint setting, a resolution, a dimension, or a refresh rate (at least paragraph 8, 98, 32; systems, methods, and the mobile devices can also adjust a level of brightness…according to the user preferences; Dougall par. 24: such parameters can include display parameters such as color parameters, gamma (rendition of dark area), aspect ratio, screen size, screen resolution).
Claims 8, 9, 13, 15-17, 20, and 22-23, 25-26 do not, in substance, add or define any additional limitations over claims 1-4, 6-7, 10, 12, 14, 18, 21, and 24 and therefore are rejected for similar reasons, supra.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05 January 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
To begin, the amendment to the claims amends the prior limitation of ‘current configuration settings’ (which are plural configuration settings) to ‘plurality of current configuration settings’ and similarly ‘updated configuration settings’ (which also are plural configuration settings) to ‘plurality of updated configuration settings’. Thus, the amendment does not further narrow the claims and the amended claims are identical to or patentably indistinct from the 6/24/25 claims.
As background, Kang primarily (with Tomay) has been relied on for teaching a similarly worded (arguably more narrow) limitation for years including being affirmed by the PTAB, see p. 3-6 of PTAB Decision filed 9/2/21. The Examiner maintained and the PTAB agreed, that Kang and (previously 103a art) Tomay disclose “generating a data sample of a content item as presented via a first device, wherein the data sample is generated by an internal component of the first device, and wherein the data sample comprises current configuration settings of the first device” (Kang teachings in bold). Tomay was relied on for teaching that the data sample is generated internally and a plurality of configuration settings. Tomay was replaced with Dougall based on amendments and in particular remove of claim language of internal generation of the content item.
Applicant argues in A. that Kang and Dougall do not disclose “receiving, from the second device, and based on a comparison of stored user preference data with the generated data representing the image of the content item and the plurality of current configuration settings of the first device, a plurality of updated configuration settings for the first device”.
Applicant argues that Kang teaches controlling a single ‘brightness’ configuration setting and fails to teach ‘a plurality of configuration settings’ are transferred.
Par. 45 of the specification support for such “preferences’ and configuration settings relate to “the one or more configuration settings can comprise a color, a brightness, a contrast, a tint, a resolution, a dimension, a refresh rate, a volume, a sound effect, and the like” and “user preferences can comprise contrast, brightness, color level, tint, color temperature, sharpness, resolution, aspect ratio, audio format, audio frequency response, dynamic range, audio processing, etc.”.
Thus, as has been discussed in the plurality of previous responses, Kang teaches such preference and configuration setting including a brightness, but fails to explicitly disclose a plurality of settings and preferences, ie. more than just the brightness, hence the reliance on Dougall for the prior limitation and the current limitation as amended.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Therefore, Kang is not addressed further.
Dougall discloses parameters, including different types of display devices and their configuration settings being determined from a device to configure the device for optimal display of images/video. In par. 4 Dougall discloses “a remote content server can receive display device parameters from a receiver on a home network of a user and the server can, in turn, transmit multimedia content to the receiver that is optimized for the particular display device of the user. Alternatively, the remote server can transmit a description of parameter settings that are optimized for the display device. Other exemplary embodiments include broadcasting different content versions and/or different sets of parameter settings that can be selected and used by the user's receiver.” And par. 27 “In system 100, a receiver 104 connected to a user's home local area network and/or entertainment system display device 106 can automatically identify the local parameters of the display device and can send an indication of the local parameters to a remote content provider server 101”. And par. 31 “Alternatively, the device parameters received from receiver 104 can optionally send a listing of the device parameters.” Finally, par. 64 outlines “generate a plurality of different sets of display device parameter settings that are optimized for a corresponding plurality client display device parameters for the multimedia content, as discussed above.”
Applicant argues the device settings may be based on the make and model of the display. While the make and model may be an option, Dougall discloses in par. 29, 31-32 such settings / parameters may be ‘parameter settings’ as well as ‘parameters can include display settings such as color settings, brightness, contrast and other display parameters’. And in par. 31 for example, that alternatively they could be device parameters received from the receiver/display, thus not just the make and model ideal parameters as Applicant argues. Dougall discloses using the make and model of the device in order to ‘minimize the bandwidth resources used by the receiver to transmit the parameter indications’ and thus such being option to minimize having to transmit all the parameters, however Dougall discloses alternatively transmitting all the parameters. The parameters can also be based on the content itself. And in particular when combining with Kang, in par. 36 of Dougall, such settings can include ambient light sent from the device to the server for the server to automatically adjust, thus ambient light around the device display along with brightness can be sent to the server for the server to alter at least the brightness for the best viewing of the user. Thus, Dougall is teaching optimizing the display, based on a collection of variables, including display settings, the display make / model, and/or in real time, on-the-fly based on the content being viewed.
Dougall similarly optimizes the display as the user prefers in an automated manner (par. 4) as the user prefers this over manually and that the display is optimized according to make and model number identifying the device (par. 30-31). The specification describes that such user preferences can be retrieved from a device identifier (par. 59).
Applicant argues in B. that motivation to combine Kang with Dougall is not supported.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
Applicant argues in C. that dependent claims are dependent on independent claims which are nonobvious.
However, the independent claims are rejected as being obvious and thus the dependent claims are further rejected as indicated in the rejection above.
Conclusion
All claims are identical to or patentably indistinct from, or have unity of invention with claims in the application prior to the entry of the submission under 37 CFR 1.114 (that is, restriction (including a lack of unity of invention) would not be proper) and all claims could have been finally rejected on the grounds and art of record in the next Office action if they had been entered in the application prior to entry under 37 CFR 1.114. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL even though it is a first action after the filing of a request for continued examination and the submission under 37 CFR 1.114. See MPEP § 706.07(b). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY TODD whose telephone number is (303)297-4763. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5 MST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor Nicholas Taylor can be reached on 571-272-3889. 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.
/GREGORY TODD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443