Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/146,909

DISPLAY METHOD FOR DISPLAYING FIRST IMAGE INCLUDING FIRST PORTION AND SECOND PORTION, PROJECTOR, AND STORAGE MEDIUM STORING PROGRAM

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Dec 27, 2022
Examiner
LE, BAO-LUAN Q
Art Unit
2882
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Seiko Epson Corporation
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
52%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
70%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 52% of resolved cases
52%
Career Allow Rate
503 granted / 963 resolved
-15.8% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+17.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
62 currently pending
Career history
1025
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
52.1%
+12.1% vs TC avg
§102
30.4%
-9.6% vs TC avg
§112
13.0%
-27.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 963 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Status The filing on 12/12/2025 amended claims 1, 8 and 9. Claims 1-9 are rejected on new grounds of rejections necessitated by the amendments of claims 1-9. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/12/2025 has been entered. 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 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. Claim(s) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawaguchi (US 20120182416 A1). Regarding claim 1, Kawaguchi teaches a display method (Fig. 1-26) comprising: displaying a first image (test pattern; [0078]) including a first portion and a second portion different from the first portion on a screen by a projector (100; S14); the first image (resolution chart, e.g., resolution chart, see below) containing a background (blank/white) and a character on the background (blank/white), the first portion including at least a part of the character, the second portion including only a part of the background (blank/white) without including any part of the character; storing information representing a first shape which is a shape of the first portion when the screen is seen from a first direction (S24, S34, S44, S54); and when the shape of the first portion as seen from the first direction changes to a shape different from the first shape, displaying, by the projector (100), a second image obtained by performing correction on the first image (test pattern) to make the shape of the first portion as seen from the first direction closer to the first shape (S31, S32), and not performing the correction on the second portion on the screen (Fig. 6). PNG media_image1.png 562 749 media_image1.png Greyscale Resolution Chart Kawaguchi does not teach “correcting on the screen the first portion that includes at least a part of the character and not correcting on the screen the second portion that includes only a part of the background without including any part of the character.” Choosing a test pattern such that applying the correction to the test pattern results in the first portion of test pattern that includes at least a part of the character being corrected and the second portion of test pattern that includes only a part of the background without including any part of the character not being corrected is a matter of design choice that does not have any effect on the functionality of the reference invention; hence it is prima facie obvious. Regarding claim 2, Kawaguchi further teaches the storing includes: acquiring a first captured image by capturing the first portion from the first direction (S34); and generating the information representing the first shape based on the first captured image (S35, S31; Fig. 6). Regarding claim 3, Kawaguchi further teaches the displaying the second image (SS33) includes: acquiring a second captured image (S34) by capturing the first portion from the first direction after acquiring the first captured image; and determining a correction amount (S31) for the correction by comparing the first shape with the shape of the first portion based on the second captured image (Fig. 6). Regarding claim 4, Kawaguchi further teaches the determining the correction amount includes: dividing an area containing the first portion of the first image (test pattern) into two or more rectangular areas (Fig. 9-13); and determining the correction amounts for respective correction points in the respective rectangular areas by the comparing (S31; [0104]). Regarding claim 5, Kawaguchi further teaches comprising receiving input to designate the first portion (distorted region; [0104]). Regarding claim 6, Kawaguchi further teaches determining the first portion by extracting a contour contained in the first image (resolution chart) (test pattern; [0104]-[0108]; Fig. 9-11). Regarding claim 7, Kawaguchi further teaches the first portion and the second portion are in a same layer in the first image (resolution chart) (test pattern; Fig. 9-11). Regarding claim 8, Kawaguchi teaches a projector (100) comprising: an optical device (50); and a control device (20) controlling the optical device (50), wherein the control device (20) executes displaying a first image (test pattern) including a first portion and a second portion different from the first portion on a screen using the optical device (50; S14), the first image (resolution chart, e.g., resolution chart) containing a background (blank/white) and a character on the background (blank/white), the first portion including at least a part of the character, the second portion including only a part of the background (blank/white) without including any part of the character; storing information representing a first shape which is a shape of the first portion when the screen is seen from a first direction (S24, S34, S44, S54), and when the shape of the first portion as seen from the first direction changes to a shape different from the first shape, displaying, using the optical device (50), a second image obtained by performing correction on the first image (test pattern) to make the shape of the first portion as seen from the first direction closer to the first shape (S31, S32), and not performing the correction on the second portion on the screen (Fig. 6). Kawaguchi does not teach “correcting on the screen the first portion that includes at least a part of the character and not correcting on the screen the second portion that includes only a part of the background without including any part of the character.” Choosing a test pattern such that applying the correction to the test pattern results in the first portion of test pattern that includes at least a part of the character being corrected and the second portion of test pattern that includes only a part of the background without including any part of the character not being corrected is a matter of design choice that does not have any effect on the functionality of the reference invention; hence it is prima facie obvious. Regarding claim 9, Kawaguchi teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium ([0072], [0075], [0077]) storing a program for causing a processing device to execute: displaying a first image (test pattern; [0078]) containing a first portion and a second portion different from the first portion on a screen by a projector (100; S14), the first image (resolution chart, e.g., resolution chart) containing a background (blank/white) and a character on the background (blank/white), the first portion including at least a part of the character, the second portion including only a part of the background (blank/white) without including any part of the character; storing information representing a first shape which is a shape of the first portion when the screen is seen from a first direction (S24, S34, S44, S54); and when the shape of the first portion as seen from the first direction changes to a shape different from the first shape, displaying, by the projector (100), a second image obtained by performing correction on the first image (test pattern) to make the shape of the first portion as seen from the first direction closer to the first shape (S31, S32), and not performing the correction on the second portion on the screen (Fig. 6). Kawaguchi does not teach “correcting on the screen the first portion that includes at least a part of the character and not correcting on the screen the second portion that includes only a part of the background without including any part of the character.” Choosing a test pattern such that applying the correction to the test pattern results in the first portion of test pattern that includes at least a part of the character being corrected and the second portion of test pattern that includes only a part of the background without including any part of the character not being corrected is a matter of design choice that does not have any effect on the functionality of the reference invention; hence it is prima facie obvious. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) s 1, 8, and 9 have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new ground/s of rejection/s necessitated by the amendment/s of claims 1, 8, and 9. Conclusion The prior art references cited in PTO-892 are made of record and considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAO-LUAN Q LE whose telephone number is (571)270-5362. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday; 9:00AM-5:00PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Minh-Toan Ton can be reached on (571) 272 230303. 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. Any response to this action should be mailed to: Commissioner for Patents P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 Or faxed to: (571) 273-8300, (for formal communications intended for entry) Or: (571) 273-7490, (for informal or draft communications, please label “PROPOSED” or “DRAFT”) Hand-delivered responses should be brought to: Customer Service Window Randolph Building 401 Dulany Street Alexandria, VA 22314 /BAO-LUAN Q LE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 27, 2022
Application Filed
May 02, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 01, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 23, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 12, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 15, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603977
PROJECTION IMAGE CORRECTION METHOD AND PROJECTION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601963
EXTERNAL ELECTRIC ADJUSTING MODULE AND LENS DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12591146
PROJECTOR AND PROJECTION METHOD FOR FORMING IMAGES ON AERIAL PROJECTION REGION AND REAL PROJECTION SURFACE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12574482
MULTI-HALF-TONE IMAGING AND DUAL MODULATION PROJECTION/DUAL MODULATION LASER PROJECTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12560749
COMMUNAL OPTICAL FILTER AND OTHER OPTICAL FILTERS ON SUBSTRATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
52%
Grant Probability
70%
With Interview (+17.3%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 963 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