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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 6/12/26 has been entered and made of record. Claims 1, 6-7, 9, 14-15, 17, and 20 are amended. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 9 and 17 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant asserts that Hill does not disclose, for example, "generating a modified content item comprising a set of frames based on the content item, the set of frames comprising: a first frame comprising a first modified version of the content item with an adjusted brightness based on the ambient brightness, the first modified version comprising, for a first pixel of the set of pixels, a first red subpixel value selected from the first set of red subpixel values and a first blue subpixel value selected from the second set of blue subpixel values and, for a second pixel of the set of pixels, a second green subpixel value selected from the third set of green subpixel values for a second pixel of the set of pixels, a second frame comprising a second modified version of the content item comprising, for the first pixel, a first green subpixel value selected from the third set of green subpixel values and, for the second pixel, a second red subpixel value selected from the first set of red subpixel values and a second blue subpixel value selected from the second set of blue subpixel values," as claimed (p. 8-9 of Remarks).
Examiner notices that the added limitations in claim 1 recites the first modified version comprising, for a first pixel of the set of pixels… for a second pixel of the set of pixels… Since the added limitation is directed to one pixel with displaying a subset of the subpixels, each pixel may be displayed with different combination of subpixels, such as, the cited first pixel with selected first red subpixel and first blue subpixel, while the cited second pixel with selected second green subpixel. Here, the claim language merely define a first pixel and a second pixel with a fist frame, it is unclear how to define the remaining pixels in the first frame. Is there repeatable pixel pattern to cover all the pixels in the first frame? The similar uncertainty exist in the cited second frame.
Further, the new claim 1 recites a first frame with the defined two pixels, a second frame with the defined two pixels, a third frame comprising a solid color. Examiner notices that there is no written description in the specification to support these claim language. Applicant may try to combine the features from different embodiments, which would make the whole claim unreasonable or unnecessary.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Independent claims 1, 9 and 17 recite the limitation “a first frame comprising a first modified version of the content item… for a first pixel of the set of pixels… for a second pixel of the set of pixels… a second frame comprising a second modified version of the content item comprising, for the first pixel… for the second pixel… a third frame comprising a solid color…” Since the first frame and the second frame display only a portion of subpixels, there is no necessary to display a third frame comprising a solid color for all pixels. Further, there is no written description in the specification to support these claim limitations. Claims 2-8, 10-16 and 18-20 are dependent claims and are rejected under the similar rationale.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Independent claims 1, 9 and 17 recite the limitation “a first frame comprising a first modified version of the content item with an adjusted brightness based on the ambient brightness, the first modified version comprising, for a first pixel of the set of pixels, a first red subpixel value selected from the first set of red subpixel values and a first blue subpixel value selected from the second set of blue subpixel values and, for a second pixel of the set of pixels, a second green subpixel value selected from the third set of green subpixel values for a second pixel of the set of pixels”. Here, claim language only defines a first and second pixel within the first frame. It is unclear how to define the remaining pixels within the first frame. Similarly, the second frame only defines the first and second pixel within the second frame. There is no further limitation to define the remaining pixels within the first/second frame. Claims 2-8, 10-16 and 18-20 are dependent claims and are rejected under the similar rationale.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WEIMING HE whose telephone number is (571)270-1221. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, Tammy Goddard can be reached on 571-272-7773. 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.
/Weiming He/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2611
Prosecution Insights