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 .
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furihata et al. (US PGPub 2022/0223081) in view of Huang et al. (US PGPub 2020/0126499).
Regarding claim 1, Furihata discloses a method for adjusting display brightness (fig. 22 and [0119], method 2200), comprising:
acquiring a plurality of first display brightness values input corresponding to a plurality of bonding points of a display panel ([0119] a first predetermined gamma curve);
converting the plurality of first display brightness values into a plurality of second display brightness values ([0119], “At step 2201, a first modified gamma curve is determined by scaling a first predetermined gamma curve defined for a first region of a display panel with a common scale factor”); and
adjusting the display brightness of the display panel by using the plurality of second display brightness values ([0119], “At step 2205, the first pixel circuit is updated with the first output voltage level”).
While Furihata teaches determining a modified gamma curve by using scaling, it has been known to use a preset mapping relationship as a way to accomplish such determining task. In a similar field of endeavor of methods of driving display devices, Huang discloses converting the plurality of first display brightness values into a plurality of second display brightness values according to a preset mapping relationship, the plurality of second display brightness values being matched with a gamma adjustment curve ([0193], “For realizing that the display device to switch different gamma curves in different scenarios, the display device provided by the present application further includes a gamma curve adjustment module, and the gamma curve adjustment module is configured for adjusting a gamma curve required by the driving chip to provide a gray scale of video signal according to a brightness change of a display device environment” and [0012]-[0013], “deriving driving voltage compensation parameters corresponding to the respective driving voltage ranges according to a mapping relationship between the driving voltages of the test points in the respective driving voltage ranges and the actual driving voltages, and the driving voltage compensation rules of the driving voltage ranges; and compensating the driving voltage of the pixel according to the driving voltage compensation parameters corresponding to the driving voltage ranges.”);
wherein for any bonding point, the second display brightness value is greater than the first display brightness value (Huang: [0143], “the gray scale voltage of 225 is divided into a low gray scale range (1 to 30 gray scales, corresponding to the first gray scale range), a medium gray scale range (30 to 237 gray scales, corresponding to the second gray scale range) and a high gray scale range (237 to 255 gray scales, corresponding to the third gray scale range)”).
In view of the teachings of Furihata and Huang, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the mapping relationship of Huang in the method of Furihata as a known way of accomplishing the brightness conversion, and for the purpose solving the problem of how to compensate the pixels to alleviate the uneven display of the display panel (Huang: [0004]).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Furihata and Huang further discloses wherein for any bonding point, the second display brightness value is even times of the first display brightness value (Furihata: [0051], “To achieve a desired display brightness level for a second DBV, a first modified gamma curve is determined by scaling the first predetermined gamma curve with a common scale factor and a second modified gamma curve is determined by scaling the second predetermined gamma curve with the common scale factor, where the common scale factor is a numerical value indicating the ratio by which both the first and second predetermined gamma curves are scaled. The common scale factor for scaling the second predetermined gamma curve is the same as the common scale factor for scaling the first predetermined gamma curve. In one or more embodiments, the common scale factor is based on the second DBV”).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Furihata and Huang further discloses wherein any second display brightness value between the bonding points adjacent to each other is calculated by interpolation (Furihata: [0048], “For a DBV for which no LUT is defined, the gamma curve for the DBV may be defined through interpolation of two LUTs associated with the nearest two DBVs for which LUTs are defined”).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Furihata and Huang further discloses an apparatus for adjusting display brightness (Furihata: figs 1 and 9, display driver 20), comprising: sub-circuits to perform the method of claim 1 and therefore interpreted and rejected based on similar reasoning.
Claim 8 is an apparatus claim drawn to the method of claim 4 and is therefore interpreted and rejected based on similar reasoning.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Furihata and Ahn further discloses a display apparatus (Furihata: fig. 1, display device 100), comprising the apparatus for adjusting display brightness according to claim 7.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Furihata and Ahn further discloses further comprising:
a display brightness control circuit configured to input the first display brightness values to the display panel (Furihata: [0046], “The gamma curves defined for the first region 11 and the second region 12 may be adjusted in response to a display brightness value (DBV). In one or more embodiments, the DBV is a control parameter that controls the display brightness level of the display device 100. The display brightness level may be the brightness of the entire image displayed on the display panel 10. The display driver 20 is configured to update the pixels 13 and 14 of the display panel 10 based on the DBV to achieve a desired brightness level”).
Claims 14-15 are within the scope of claims 11-12 respectively and are therefore interpreted and rejected based on similar reasoning.
Claims 17-18 are within the scope of claims 11-12 respectively and are therefore interpreted and rejected based on similar reasoning.
Claim 20 is within the scope of claim 11 and is therefore interpreted and rejected based on similar reasoning.
Claims 5, 6, 9, 10, 13, 16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furihata and Huang in view of Ahn et al. (US PGPub 2017/0110044).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Furihata and Huang discloses to converting a brightness, it has been known to perform a conversion based on the amount of bits available. In a similar field of endeavor of display devices, Ahn discloses further comprising: before acquiring the plurality of first display brightness values input corresponding to the plurality of bonding points of the display panel,
determining a total number of the plurality of bonding points according to a total number of bits corresponding to the second display brightness value (Ahn: [0069], “Referring to FIG. 7, the input gamma adjustment unit 210 may output the gamma adjustment image signal RGB′ having a bit width of 12 bits by receiving an image signal RGB, having a bit width of 8 bits. For example, when a grayscale level of an image signal RGB having a bit width of 8 bits is 30, the input gamma adjustment unit 210 may output a gamma adjustment image signal RGB′ having a bit width of 12 bits and a grayscale level of 36”).
In view of the teachings of Furihata, Huang and Ahn, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art determining the number of bits of Ahn, within the system of Furihata and Huang, for the purpose of improving the display image quality (Ahn: [0073]).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Furihata and Huang discloses to converting a brightness, it has been known to perform a conversion based on the amount of bits available. In a similar field of endeavor of display devices, Ahn discloses further comprising: after acquiring the plurality of first display brightness values input corresponding to the plurality of bonding points of the display panel,
establishing the preset mapping relationship between the first display brightness values and the second display brightness values according to a total number of bits corresponding to the first display brightness value and a total number of bits corresponding to the second display brightness value (Ahn: [0070], “The image signal processing circuit 221 converts the gamma adjustment image signal RGB′ into an intermediate data signal RGBW in response to a scaling signal SV. For example, the scaling signal SV, which has a bit width of 8 bits, is a scaling range of 256 levels. When the gamma adjustment image signal RGB′ is scaled down by 50%, the scaling signal SV is set to 128”).
In view of the teachings of Furihata, Huang and Ahn, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art determining the number of bits of Ahn, within the system of Furihata and Huang, for the purpose of improving the display image quality (Ahn: [0073]).
Claims 9-10 are apparatus claims drawn to the method of claims 5-6 and are therefore interpreted and rejected based on similar reasoning.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Furihata and Huang discloses to converting a brightness, it has been known to perform a conversion based on the amount of bits available. In a similar field of endeavor of display devices, Ahn discloses wherein the display brightness control circuit performs a division operation by a bit-shift operation (Ahn: [0069], “the input gamma adjustment unit 210 may output the gamma adjustment image signal RGB′ having a bit width of 12 bits by receiving an image signal RGB, having a bit width of 8 bits. For example, when a grayscale level of an image signal RGB having a bit width of 8 bits is 30, the input gamma adjustment unit 210 may output a gamma adjustment image signal RGB′ having a bit width of 12 bits and a grayscale level of 36”).
In view of the teachings of Furihata, Huang and Ahn, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art determining the number of bits of Ahn, within the system of Furihata and Huang, for the purpose of improving the display image quality (Ahn: [0073]).
Claim 16 is within the scope of claim 13 respectively and is therefore interpreted and rejected based on similar reasoning.
Claim 19 is within the scope of claim 13 respectively and is therefore interpreted and rejected based on similar reasoning.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/04/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claims 1 and 7, Applicants argue “In summary, Applicants believe that even if Furihata and Huang are combined, a person skilled in the art would not conceive to "for any bonding point, the second display brightness value is greater than the first display brightness value" (page 7, paragraph 2), however Examiner respectfully disagrees. Examiner maintains Huang discloses at step S102 and [0093], “determining test points in the respective driving voltage ranges” where the test points read on the bonding points. Further at [0099], Huang teaches “a compensation rule corresponding to the first driving voltage range is a quadratic function, and a compensation rule corresponding to the second driving voltage range is a linear function, and a compensation rule corresponding to the third driving voltage range is a quadratic function” where the first point is updated to the second point based on the compensation rule. As long as the function is a positive function the output would be greater than the input.
Regarding claim 3, Applicants argue “current claim 3 of the present invention clearly specifies that the second display brightness is determined based on the times of the first display brightness. Therefore, the solution of claim 3 is contrary to the paragraph [0051] of Furihata” (page 8, paragraph 1), however Examiner respectfully disagrees. Furihata discloses at [0037], “A first modified gamma curve used for a first gamma transformation for the first region is determined by scaling the first predetermined gamma curve with a common scale factor, while a second modified gamma curve used for a second gamma transformation for the second region is determined by scaling the second predetermined gamma curve with the common scale factor. The common scale factor for scaling the second predetermined gamma curve is the same as the common scale factor for scaling the first predetermined gamma curve. The use of the common scale factor may effectively mitigate an undesired change in the display characteristics”. The use of the common scale for the first and the second predetermined gamma curves teaches the second display brightness value is a scale factor including even times of the first display brightness value where the first value is before the scaling and the second value is after the scaling. In [0051] of Furihata, the statement “In one or more embodiments, the common scale factor is based on the second DBV” was preceded in [0051] by “To achieve a desired display brightness level for a second DBV, a first modified gamma curve is determined by scaling the first predetermined gamma curve with a common scale factor and a second modified gamma curve is determined by scaling the second predetermined gamma curve with the common scale factor, where the common scale factor is a numerical value indicating the ratio by which both the first and second predetermined gamma curves are scaled...” so said statement simply stated the mathematical relationship between the second DBV, the common scale factor, and the first and second predetermined gamma curves, rather than an origin or causal-effect admission, and furthermore, said statement is made in the context of “one or more embodiments” so applicant’s argument that said statement in [0051] of Furihata renders the rejection unreasonable is not deemed persuasive.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 EMILY J FRANK whose telephone number is (571)270-7255. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8AM-6PM.
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, Benjamin C Lee can be reached at (571)272-2963. 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.
/EJF/
/BENJAMIN C LEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2629
Prosecution Insights