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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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.
Drawings
The amended drawing sheets provided for replacement Figs. 1 and 2 which are stated to be amended to include reference designators 112, 210, 220, and 230 have not be received. Objection to the drawings sustained.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 6/30/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-19 under 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Battiato (Battiato, Sebastiano & Messina, Giuseppe & Castorina, Alfio. (2008). Chapter 1 Exposure Correction for Imaging Devices: an Overview. 10.1201/9781420054538.ch12.)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-6,8-18,20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ji(US-20190355296-A1) in view of Atkins(US-20130120234-A1), Haraguchi(JP-2020187306-A) and Battiato (Battiato, Sebastiano & Messina, Giuseppe & Castorina, Alfio. (2008). Chapter 1 Exposure Correction for Imaging Devices: an Overview. 10.1201/9781420054538.ch12.)
Regarding claim 1, the combination of Ji, Atkins, Battiato and Haraguchi disclose A method of providing full array local dimming to a display comprising: performing an image processing algorithm with a at least one processor having instructions for: determining a new pixel value for each pixel of a plurality of pixels of the image; mapping the new pixel value to a prior pixel value for each pixel of the plurality of pixels( Ji para [0045]“acquiring respective initial backlight values of the plurality of backlight blocks of an s-th frame of image, and performing a peak driving process on the respective initial backlight values of the plurality of backlight blocks of the s-th frame of image based on the peak driving threshold of the (s−1)-th frame of image, so as to obtain respective adjusted backlight values of the plurality of backlight blocks of the s-th frame of image.” This reference describes determining new blacklight (pixel values) values and mapping new backlight values (adjusted for the current frame) to prior backlight values (from the previous frame), aligning with this claim element.); and compiling the repeated results into a data set (Ji para. [0045] “acquiring respective initial backlight values of the plurality of backlight blocks of an s-th frame of image, and performing a peak driving process on the respective initial backlight values of the plurality of backlight blocks of the s-th frame of image based on the peak driving threshold of the (s−1)-th frame of image.” The adjusted backlight values represent the compiled dataset resulting from processing multiple backlight blocks);
However, Ji alone does not disclose scaling the image of the zone bilinearly; repeating the determining mapping and scaling until an approximation value is reached; dividing an image for the display having into a plurality of zones which each have at least one LED associate therewith; and making an illumination decision from the data set via the processor, wherein the illumination decision is for the at least one LED associated with one zone of the plurality of zones based on an evaluation algorithm in which only luminosity data is utilized and color and chroma data are discarded from the data set to reduce memory and processing requirements
The combination of Ji and Atkins disclose scaling the image of the zone bilinearly; repeating the determining mapping and scaling until an approximation value is reached
Atkins does disclose scaling the image of the zone bilinearly (Atkins para. [0434] “The resulting (inverse) light field is finallu upsampled using a bilinear method to the full LCD resolution. The final light field simulation should contain smooth contours that closely match the observed light field of the backlight;” para.[0415] “ A mean bilinear downsample is applied to smooth the backlight image. The filtered image is at twice the resolution of the cluster image, so a 2×2 region is used for this process:” This reference teaches bilinear sampling in two places. An upsampling of the inverse light-field and a downsampling when deriving per-cluster backlight values.);
Ji discloses repeating the determining mapping and scaling until an approximation value is reached (Ji para. [0051] “According to respective backlight values of a plurality of backlight blocks of the backlight unit of a previous frame of image (an (s−1)-th frame of image), it is determined whether a peak driving process is performed on each of the plurality of backlight blocks of the backlight unit of a current frame of image” This describes an iterative process of determining and adjusting backlight values based on thresholds, aligning with the claim element. The process being iterative inherently means that there is repetition going on in the determination. Used in combination with the bilinear scaling taught in Atkins this satisfies the claim element.); It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Atkins into the teachings of Ji in order to a achieve gentler brightness changes across zone boundaries.
However, the combination of Ji and Atkins still does not disclose dividing an image for the display having into a plurality of zones which each have at least one LED associate therewith; and making an illumination decision from the data set via the processor, wherein the illumination decision is for the at least one LED associated with one zone of the plurality of zones based on an evaluation algorithm in which only luminosity data is utilized and color and chroma data are discarded from the data set to reduce memory and processing requirements
Haraguchi does disclose dividing an image for the display having into a plurality of zones which each have at least one LED associate therewith (Haraguchi page 11, lines 9-10 “In this embodiment, one sub-area LSB is associated with one LED 31. Further, one sub-area LSB is composed of 48 sub-block SBs”, Haraguchi page 10, lines 20-22, “Therefore, the display area 511 is divided into, for example, 2304 subblocks SB (= 36 rows × 64 columns). FIG. 3 shows a state in which the display area 511 is divided into 48 (= 6 rows × 8 columns) sub-area LSBs for ease of understanding.” Haraguchi page 11, lines 23-24 “. In this embodiment, the plurality of LEDs 31 and the plurality of subarea LSBs are associated with each other in a one-to-one relationship.” These passages from Haraguchi detail a system where the display area is divided into multiple zones (sub-areas referred to as LSBs), and making sure each of these zones is associated with an LED in a one-to-one relationship. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Haraguchi into the teachings of Ji in order to a have a method capable of ensuring more efficient image processing.);
However, the combination of Ji and Haraguchi still does not fully disclose and making an illumination decision from the data set via the processor, wherein the illumination decision is for the at least one LED associated with one zone of the plurality of zones based on an evaluation algorithm in which only luminosity data is utilized and color and chroma data are discarded from the data set to reduce memory and processing requirements. The combination of Ji and Battiato do disclose and making an illumination decision from the data set via the processor, wherein the illumination decision is for the at least one LED associated with one zone of the plurality of zones based on an evaluation algorithm in which only luminosity data is utilized and color and chroma data are discarded from the data set to reduce memory and processing requirements(Battiato on page 2, section 1.1 discloses “The exposure value (1.1) becomes smaller as the exposure duration increases, and it becomes larger as the f-number grows. Most Auto-exposure algorithms work this way: 1. Take a picture with a pre-determined exposure value (EVpre); 2. Convert the RGB values to brightness, B…; Further page 8 -9 disclose “The algorithm is defined as follows: 1. Luminance extraction. If the algorithm is applied on Bayer data, in place of the three full colour Exposure Correction for Imaging Devices: an Overview 9 planes, a sub-sampled (quarter size) approximated input data (Figure 1.3) is used.” Battiato discloses an “evaluation algorithm” for exposure/illumination control where the processor converts RGB into a single brightness (luminosity) representation and derives the exposure/illumination decision from that brightness statistic. This means the decision is made using luminance rather than color components. It also teaches operating using sub-sampled input data after luminance extraction, aligning with the claim element that discards chroma information to reduce memory and processing requirements.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Battiato into the teachings of Ji in order to have a system that can more effectively make an illumination decision and do so while reducing memory requirements.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Ji, Atkins, Battiato and Haraguchi disclose all the elements of claim 1 as discloses above. Ji also discloses further comprising: making the illumination decision for each of the plurality of zones (Ji para. [0039] “The MCU 131 receives a backlight local control signal (Local Dimming SPI (Serial Peripheral Interface) signal) from the FPGA 12, a SOC (System on Chip, not as shown in FIG. 1B), or the TCON 11, and the backlight local control signal is used in an “AND” operation (controlling whether the “AND” operation is performed according to an enable signal (BL_EN)) with a brightness modulation signal (DIM_PWM) from the TCON 11 to obtain a brightness control signal of each of the plurality of backlight blocks. Then, the MCU 131 outputs the brightness control signal to the LED integrated circuit driving chip 132 to implement current control of the LEDs of each of the plurality of backlight blocks, thereby controlling the luminance of each of the plurality of backlight blocks.” This reference explicitly describes making illumination decisions for each backlight block(zone) based on the received backlight local control signals and modulation signals. This aligns with the claim element of making an illumination decision for each zone.)
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Ji, Atkins, Battiato, and Haraguchi disclose all the elements of claim 2 as discussed above. Ji also discloses wherein the dividing the image into the plurality of zones further comprises dividing the image such that each zone of the plurality of zones has one LED associated therewith (para [0036] “Each of the plurality of backlight regions includes one or more LED units and can be controlled independently of other backlight regions. For example, the LEDs in each of the plurality of backlight block are linked, for example, connected in series, that is, currents passing through the LEDs in a same backlight block are consistent.” The passage describes dividing the backlight into regions, each associated with one or more LED units. This aligns with the claim element’s requirement for associating each zone with at least one LED.)
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Ji, Atkins, Battiato and Haraguchi disclose all the elements of claim 1 as discussed above. Ji also discloses further comprising: utilizing only luminesence data of the pixels in the one of the plurality of zones to make the illumination decision (para. [0068] “For example, the backlight value of each backlight block is related to the grayscales of all pixels corresponding to the each backlight block. For example, the backlight value B.sub.s−1(i, j) of the backlight block after the first local dimming process is performed on the (s−1)-th frame of image can be obtained by averaging the grayscales of all pixels of the (i, j)-th backlight block and then adjusting the obtained average value according to a number of bytes occupied by the backlight value and a number of bytes occupied by the grayscale (the two may be the same or different).” This passage describes deriving the backlight value (used to make illumination decisions) based on the grayscale(luminescence) data of the pixels within each zone. This directly aligns with the requirement of using luminescence data of pixels in a zone to decide its illumination.)
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Ji, Atkins, Battiato, and Haraguchi disclose all the elements of claim 1 as discussed above. The combination of Ji, Atkins, Battiato and Haraguchi also disclose further comprising: determining the illumination decision is YES when at least one pixel within the one of the plurality of zones having a luminance is present (Haraguchi page 2 lines 21-23 “The target luminance determining unit determines the target luminance based on the input pixel values of the plurality of pixels constituting the divided region which is a region where the display region is divided and is associated with each of the plurality of light emitting elements. You may decide” This passage describes determining the target luminance for a region based on the luminance of the input pixel values within that region. While it does not explicitly state “YES” as the decision, this implies that the luminance within a zone triggers the determination of the emission brightness for the associated LED, aligning with the concept of making an illumination decision where there is luminance. The threshold of determining what gets luminance is up to the user.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Haraguchi into the teachings of Ji, Battiato and Atkins in order to have a more sensitive luminance detection system.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Ji, Atkins, Battiato and Haraguchi disclose all the elements of claim 5 as discussed above. Haraguchi also discloses further comprising illuminating the at least one LED associated with the one zone of the plurality of zones when the illumination decision is YES (page 29. Lines 13- 18, “The duty value conversion unit 113b converts the input emission luminance value into a duty value, and outputs a control signal Sdy including the converted duty value and the information of the LED 31 to be emitted light associated with the emission luminance in the LED drive circuit 35. Output to. The LED drive circuit 35 drives the LED 31 to be light-emitting with an intensity based on the duty value included in the control signal Sdy. As a result, the LED 31 to be emitted emits light with the emission brightness.” This citation explicitly discloses that the emission brightness of each LED is determined, and the LED is illuminated using a control signal (duty value) when the illumination decision is made.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Haraguchi into the combination of teachings of Ji, Battiato and Atkins in order to have very fine control over which portions of the zones are illuminated.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Ji, Atkins, Battiato and Haraguchi disclose all the elements of claim 1 as discussed above. Ji also discloses wherein dividing the image into a plurality of zones and making the illumination decision further comprises utilizing a first processor (para. [0038] “The MCU 131 receives a backlight local control signal (Local Dimming SPI (Serial Peripheral Interface) signal) from the FPGA 12, a SOC (System on Chip, not as shown in FIG. 1B), or the TCON 11, and the backlight local control signal is used in an “AND” operation (controlling whether the “AND” operation is performed according to an enable signal (BL_EN)) with a brightness modulation signal (DIM_PWM) from the TCON 11 to obtain a brightness control signal of each of the plurality of backlight blocks. Then, the MCU 131 outputs the brightness control signal to the LED integrated circuit driving chip 132 to implement current control of the LEDs of each of the plurality of backlight blocks, thereby controlling the luminance of each of the plurality of backlight blocks.” This passage details these functions in the claim limitations being performed by the MCU(inherently having a processor, thus being a first processor)) and performing an image analysis algorithm via a second processor (para. [0142] “Another embodiment of the present disclosure also provides an image display processing device configured to execute the above image display processing method of the embodiment of the present disclosure.” This passage explicitly mentions the use of a second processor (image processing device) to execute the image analysis method.)
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Ji, Atkins Battiato and Haraguchi disclose all the elements of claim 8 as discussed above. The combination also discloses, further comprising: sending the data set from the second processor to the first processor prior to the illumination decision (Ji Fig.2 shows a flowchart detailing the steps in the claim element. Step S120 details “…so as to obtain respective adjusted backlight values of the plurality of backlight blocks of the s-th frame of image”, the next step, S130, details “displaying the s-th frame of image by using the respective adjusted backlight values”, meaning the image is being illuminated. First the adjusted backlight values are obtained (obtaining the data set), then the image is being illuminated, meaning an illumination decision was made at some point. As discussed earlier in claim 8’s rejection, the “image display processing device” executes the image analysis method, this being one processor, and is able to send that data over to the MCU, as discussed above in claim 8’s rejection.)
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Ji, Atkins, Battiato and Haraguchi disclose all the elements of claim 8 as discussed above. The combination also discloses further comprising sending the data set from the second processor to the first processor prior to dividing the image into the plurality of zones (Haraguchi page 47, lines 4-8 “For example, in the methods disclosed herein, steps, actions or functions may be performed in parallel or in a different order, as long as the results are not inconsistent. The steps, actions and functions described are provided by way of example only, and some of the steps, actions and functions can be omitted and combined with each other to the extent that they do not deviate from the gist of the invention. It may be one, or other steps, actions or functions may be added.” This citation suggests that the reference does not impose a strict sequential order for the steps. This means that sending the data set may be done prior to dividing the image into a plurality of zones. The first and second processor performing these actions consistent with the rejection discussed for claim 8).) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Haraguchi into the combination of teachings of Ji, Battiato and Atkins in order to allow for more versatility in its process without compromising the quality of the output.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Ji, Atkins, Battiato and Haraguchi disclose all the elements of claim 8 as discussed above. Ji also discloses wherein the second processor is one of a plurality of system on a chips (para. [0039] “The MCU 131 receives a backlight local control signal (Local Dimming SPI (Serial Peripheral Interface) signal) from the FPGA 12, a SOC (System on Chip, not as shown in FIG. 1B), or the TCON 11, and the backlight local control signal is used in an “AND” operation (controlling whether the “AND” operation is performed according to an enable signal (BL_EN)) with a brightness modulation signal (DIM_PWM) from the TCON 11 to obtain a brightness control signal of each of the plurality of backlight blocks.” Here, this passage discloses the potential use of a SOC being able to send a backlight control signal, which contain the compiled backlight dataset, as well as an MCU which can be replaced with an SOC. para. [0146] “For example, the processor 11 may be a central processing unit (CPU) or other forms of processing units having a data processing ability and/or instruction execution ability. For example, the processor 210 may be a general processor or a dedicated processor, and can control other components in the image processing device 200 to achieve the expected functions.” This passage describes the image processing device, containing similar components to an SOC. Thus, an SOC is capable of performing the same instructions as the image processing device, being the second processor, in conjunction with the MCU being an SOC implies a plurality of system of chips.)
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Ji, Atkins, Battiato and Haraguchi disclose all the elements of claim 1 as discussed above. Haraguchi also discloses, wherein the second processor is connected to at least one memory; and wherein the memory includes a look up table of expansion curve values(page 30, lines 21-24, “The gain adjustment coefficient calculation unit 115c is connected to the coordinate detection unit 111a, the gain calculation unit 115a, and the memory 15 of the preprocess unit 111. The gain adjustment coefficient calculation unit 115c is configured to read, for example, the look-up table LUT2 (not shown) stored in the memory 15.” This reference discloses that the “gain adjustment coefficient calculation unit”, which in this example can be the second processor, is connected to a memory and can read a look up table.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Haraguchi into the combinations of teachings of Ji, Battiato and Atkins in order to reduce errors when scaling the image.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Ji, Atkins, Battiato and Haraguchi disclose all the elements of claim 1 as discussed above. Haraguchi also discloses, wherein the determining, mapping, and scaling are repeated for three iterations (page 16. Lines 19-22 “The emission brightness determination unit 113c repeats the adjustment process for adjusting the emission brightness of the plurality of LEDs 31 constituting the sub-area LSB a predetermined number of times (three times in this embodiment) using the difference between the target brightness distribution and the estimated brightness distribution.” This references explicitly discloses repeating an adjustment process for emission brightness three times.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Haraguchi into the combination of teachings of Ji, Battiato and Atkins in order to achieve the proper downscale factor.
Claim 14, which recites similar claim limitations to claim 1, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 15, which recites similar claim limitations to claim 2, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 16, which recites similar claim limitations to claim 3, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 17, which recites similar claim limitations to claim 4 and 5, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 18, which recites similar claim limitations to claim 6, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 7,19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ji as modified by Atkins, Battiato and Haraguchi as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Park (US-20110234654-A1).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Ji, Atkins, Battiato and Haraguchi disclose all the elements of claim 1 as discussed above. However, the combination does not disclose, further comprising converting the compiled data set into a YUV image format.
Park does disclose further comprising converting the compiled data set into a YUV image format (para. [0097], “The image decoder 161 receives and decodes a video signal that is divided into a brightness component (Y) and a color signal component (C). For example, the image decoder 161 may separate U and V from the color signal (C) and output the received video signal as Y, U and V.” This passage describes taking data from the image decoder and converting it into a YUV format.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Park into the teachings of the combination of Ji, Atkins, Battiato and Haraguchi in order to a have YUV formatted data to improve performance, and compression efficiency.
Claim 19, which recites similar claim language to claim 7, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRIS ALEJANDRO PUNTIER whose telephone number is (703)756-1893. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:00.
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, Daniel Hajnik can be reached at 571-272-7642. 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.
/CHRIS ALEJANDRO PUNTIER/ Examiner, Art Unit 2616
/DANIEL F HAJNIK/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2616