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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Amendments and Arguments
Amendments and arguments filed on 03/02/2026 have been fully considered and are not found to place the application in a condition for allowance. In view of the amendments and arguments an updated search has been performed according to which the arguments are not found persuasive and the amended limitations are found to be taught in view of the discovered prior art. Specifically, identifying a height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules and performing the scaling and dividing as claimed, is found to be taught by Leppanen (newly found art), according to which the limitations of the claims are found to be obvious. The following Action provides further details.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2, 7, 17-19 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al., CN 111857633, hereinafter “Chen” (Note the attached translation), in view of Sasaki, US 2015/0077365 A1, hereinafter “Sasaki”, further in view of Kang, US 2014/0368409 A1, hereinafter “Kang”, and further in view of Leppanen et al., US 2015/0268917 A1, hereinafter “Leppanen”.
Regarding claim 1, Chen teaches a computer-implemented method of controlling one of a plurality of display modules in a modular display system (fig. 2, see modular display configuration comprising display units D01-D04, ¶ 40), the method being implemented by one of the plurality of display modules (see ¶ 40, position information is processed by each wireless transmission module 101 implemented in each display module, integrally in connection with a splice controller 20; also see ¶ 53), and the method comprising: sharing a module ID of a display module, of the plurality of display modules, to one or more adjacent display modules, of the plurality of display modules (¶ 40: “the left short-distance wireless communication module 102 and the upper short-distance wireless communication module 104 are respectively used for transmitting the wireless signal carrying the unique identification code (such as ID information) of the display unit 10; the right short distance wireless communication module 103 for receiving the other display unit 10 of the left side short distance wireless communication module 102 carries with other display unit 10 unique identification code of the wireless signal. the lower short-distance wireless communication module 105 is used for receiving the wireless signal carried with the unique identification code of other display units 10 transmitted by the upper short-distance wireless communication module 104 of other display units 10; The unique identification code of each display unit 10 is, for example, ID information, for example, D01, D02, D03.”), wherein the display module is connected to each adjacent display module with a short-range data connection (¶ 40, “short-distance wireless communication”), wherein each short-range data connection is associated with a connector ID and the module ID is sent through the short-range data connection to each adjacent display module (¶ 75-76, “the left short-range wireless communication module 102 and the upper short-range wireless communication module 104 are preset with respective unique identification codes (for example, D01-Tx-L, D01-Tx-U), and the right short-range wireless communication module 102 and the lower short-range wireless communication module 104 are preset with respective unique identification codes (for example, D01-Rx-R, D01-Rx-D).” Fig. 6, see the communication between short range communication modules. Also see ¶ 40 regarding sending the module ID to adjacent display modules); wirelessly receiving a module ID of each other display module, of the plurality of display modules, in the modular display system (¶ 40), each transmitted with one or more module IDs of adjacent display modules and connector IDs of respective short-range data connections between the display modules (¶ 40 and 75-76; for example “The wireless transmission module 101 of the display unit 10 then transmits the unique identification code of the display unit 10 and the unique identification codes of the respective short-range wireless communication modules to the splice controller 20”); determining an arrangement of the plurality of display modules (¶ 52: “after the wireless transmission module 203 of the splicing controller 20 receives the unique identification code from each display unit 10 and the orientation information of the adjacent display unit 10, the processor 201 of the splicing controller 20 identifies and positions each display unit 10”); scaling and dividing an image to be displayed on the modular display system into a plurality of image portions (¶ 52: “then performs image data segmentation according to the identification and positioning results”. Note that such a segmentation process requires scaling and dividing of the image signal. Also see ¶ 47); wirelessly transmitting a respective image portion to each of the other display modules, of the plurality of display modules (¶ 53); and causing the respective image portions to be displayed by the plurality of display modules (¶ 53: “after each display unit 10 receives the data information from the splicing controller 20 through its respective wireless transmission module 101, it decodes and acquires its respective digital information according to its corresponding unique identification code, and then each display unit 10 converts the acquired digital information through its respective display screen and displays the allocated picture on the display screen, so as to implement wireless splicing display”).
Chen does not specifically teach configuring a Wi-Fi access point in one of the plurality of display modules and providing an IP address to each connected display module.
Sasaki, however, teaches configuring a Wi-Fi access point in one of the plurality of display modules and providing an IP address to each connected display module (¶ 66-70, see configuring an ad-hoc network wherein a wireless access point is established and unique IP addresses are provided to modular display units and are used as identifier IDs).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Chen in view of Sasaki. The references teach modular displays and while Chen teaches that each display module is provided with a preset identifier, Sasaki teaches that such an identifier may be assigned based on the IP address of a connected device. As such, one would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to set the IP address as the identifier while expecting the same result of having a unique identifier for each display module and providing the appropriate image data to the identified display module accordingly.
Chen and Sasaki do not specifically teach that scaling and dividing the image to be displayed on the modular display system into a plurality of image portions comprises: identifying a height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules, scaling to an aspect ratio based on the height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules, the image to be displayed on the modular display system, and dividing the image to be displayed on the modular display system into the plurality of image portions.
Kang, however, teaches scaling to an aspect ratio based on a height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules (see fig. 8B and 9 wherein the height and width of the arrangement is the basis for a 16:9 aspect ratio), the image to be displayed on the modular display system, and dividing the image to be displayed on the modular display system into the plurality of image portions (fig. 5, ¶ 90; and fig. 9 and ¶ 125-131; note that the aspect ratio is a product of width and height of the devices).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Chen and Sasaki as applied above, further in view of Kang. The references teach displaying an image across multiple display devices and Kang further teaches details regarding the manipulation of such an image. As such, one would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to properly display the image across the devices.
Chen, Sasaki and Kang do not specifically teach identifying a height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules.
Leppanen, however, clearly teaches identifying a height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules (see fig. 13, ¶ 67-68).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Chen, Sasaki, Kang and Leppanen. The references teach a plurality of display devices for displaying an image, and Leppanen further teaches determining the aspect ratio of the image displayed across a plurality of display devices according to determined width and heights of the display modules (see fig. 8A-8C, ¶ 56). Accordingly, one would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to properly divide and scale the image across a plurality of display devices according to different alignments between the display devices, thus providing a more robust multi-display device.
Regarding claim 2, Chen does not specifically teach connecting to the Wi-Fi access point, receiving the IP address and setting the received IP address as the module ID.
Sasaki, however, teaches connecting to a Wi-Fi access point, receiving an IP address and setting the received IP address as the module ID (¶ 66-70, a wireless access point is established and unique IP addresses are provided to modular display units and are used as identifier IDs).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Chen in view of Sasaki. The references teach modular displays and while Chen teaches that each display module is provided with a preset identifier, Sasaki teaches that such an identifier may be assigned based on the IP address of a connected device. As such, one would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to set the IP address as the identifier while expecting the same result of having a unique identifier for each display module and providing the appropriate image data to the identified display module accordingly.
Regarding claim 7, Chen teaches configuring a webserver to generate and output a graphical user interface, GUI, which includes the determined arrangement of the plurality of display modules (¶ 51: “When the four display units of this embodiment are tiled into a grid as shown in fig. 1, the display 202 of the tiling controller 20 displays the pattern shown in fig. 1”. The tile controller 20 is such a webserver), and to receive the image to be displayed on the modular display system (¶ 52: “then performs image data segmentation according to the identification and positioning results, pre-encodes (precoding) the segmented image data for each display unit 10, and then sends the processed data information to the wireless transmission module 101 of each display unit 10 through the wireless transmission module 203 of the splicing controller 20”. Note that such image data is necessarily initially received by the controller 20).
Regarding claim 17, Chen and Sasaki do not teach that scaling and dividing the image to be displayed on the modular display system based on the aspect ratio of the height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules comprises one or more of: stretching the image across the height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules, cropping the image across the height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules, adding side bars to the image based on the height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules, or adding top bars to the image based on the height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules.
Kang teaches stretching the image across the height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules (see fig. 3 wherein the image is stretched across the arrangement; ¶ 53-56).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Chen and Sasaki as applied above, further in view of Kang. The references teach displaying an image across multiple display devices and Kang further teaches details regarding the manipulation of such an image. As such, one would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to properly display the image across the devices.
Regarding claim 18, Chen and Sasaki do not teach that scaling and dividing the image to be displayed on the modular display system based on the aspect ratio of the height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules comprises one or more of: stretching the image across the height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules.
Kang teaches stretching the image across the height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules (see fig. 3 wherein the image is stretched across the arrangement; ¶ 53-56).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Chen and Sasaki as applied above, further in view of Kang. The references teach displaying an image across multiple display devices and Kang further teaches details regarding the manipulation of such an image. As such, one would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to properly display the image across the devices.
Regarding claims 19 and 22, Chen and Sasaki do not teach that scaling and dividing the image to be displayed on the modular display system based on the aspect ratio of the height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules comprises one or more of: cropping the image across the height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules.
Kang teaches cropping the image across the height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules (fig. 5, see the cropped images 50-1 to 50-3 which are the cropped form of the image across the height and width of the arrangement per fig. 3; also see ¶ 53-56 and 91-93).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Chen and Sasaki as applied above, further in view of Kang. The references teach displaying an image across multiple display devices and Kang further teaches details regarding the manipulation of such an image. As such, one would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to properly display the image across the devices.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen, Sasaki, Kang and Leppanen, as applied above, and further in view of Nam et al., US 2015/0138038 A1, hereinafter “Nam”.
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Chen, Sasaki, Kang and Leppanen do not specifically teach that the respective image portions are respective first image portions of a first frame in a video stream, and the method further comprises: receiving and storing respective second image portions of a second frame in the video stream; and causing the respective second image portions to be displayed by the plurality of display modules after a predefined frame duration has elapsed.
Nam teaches that the respective image portions are respective first image portions of a first frame in a video stream, and the method further comprises: receiving and storing respective second image portions of a second frame in the video stream; and causing the respective second image portions to be displayed by the plurality of display modules after a predefined frame duration has elapsed (¶ 41).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Chen, Sasaki, Kang and Leppanen, as applied above, further in view of Nam. The references teach modular display panels and while Chen teaches that the display modules display video signals, Nam further teaches that such display modules may exhibit images that fall out of synchronization. Accordingly, one would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to incorporate the technique of Nam and ensure proper synchronization between the display modules as taught by Nam in ¶ 40-41.
Claims 20-21 and 23. are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen, Sasaki, Kang and Leppanen, as applied above, and further in view of Tamatam et al., US 2020/0051202 A1, hereinafter “Tamatam”.
Regarding claims 20-21 and 23, Chen, Sasaki, Kang and Leppanen do not specifically teach that scaling and dividing the image to be displayed on the modular display system based on the aspect ratio of the height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules further comprises: adding side bars to the image based on the height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules, or adding top bars to the image based on the height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules.
Tamatam, however, clearly teaches adding side bars to the image based on the height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules (fig. 3, ¶ 41 adding “pillar boxing” or side bars), or adding top bars to the image based on the height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules (fig. 2, ¶ 41 adding “letter boxing” or top/bottom bars).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Chen, Sasaki, Kang and Leppanen, as applied above, further in view of Tamatam. The references teach displaying images on different display devices and Tamatam further teaches details regarding the addition of pillar or letter boxing. One would have been motivated to make such a combination because Tamatam clearly teaches that whenever the aspect ratio of the video frame is different than the display aspect ratio, such bars are added (see ¶ 41) in order to “retain the original aspect ratio” of the image (see ¶ 42), thereby avoiding a distorted image output.
Claims 9-11 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen, in view of Slade, US 2023/0004338 A1, hereinafter “Slade”, further in view of Sasaki, further in view of Kang, and further in view of Lepannen.
Regarding claim 9, Chen teaches a display module for a modular display system (fig. 2, see modular display configuration comprising display units D01-D04, ¶ 40); wherein each short-range data connection is associated with a connector ID (¶ 75-76); a wireless communication unit (fig. 1, elements 102-105, ¶ 40); and one or more processors (fig. 1, element 101, ¶ 40-41) configured to: share a module ID of the display module, of a plurality of display modules, to one or more adjacent display modules, of the plurality of display modules, wherein the display module is connected to each adjacent display module via the corresponding short-range data connections, and wherein the module ID is sent through the short-range data connection to each adjacent display module (¶ 40); wirelessly receive the module ID of each other display module in the modular display system (¶ 40), each transmitted with one or more module IDs of adjacent display modules and connector IDs of respective short-range data connections between the display modules (¶ 40 and 75-76; for example “The wireless transmission module 101 of the display unit 10 then transmits the unique identification code of the display unit 10 and the unique identification codes of the respective short-range wireless communication modules to the splice controller 20”); determining an arrangement of the plurality of display modules (¶ 52: “after the wireless transmission module 203 of the splicing controller 20 receives the unique identification code from each display unit 10 and the orientation information of the adjacent display unit 10, the processor 201 of the splicing controller 20 identifies and positions each display unit 10”); scale and divide an image to be displayed on the modular display system into a plurality of image portions (¶ 52: “then performs image data segmentation according to the identification and positioning results”. Note that such a segmentation process requires scaling and dividing of the image signal. Also see ¶ 47); wirelessly transmit a respective image portion to each of the other display modules, of the plurality of display modules (¶ 53); and cause the respective image portions to be displayed on the display module (¶ 53: “after each display unit 10 receives the data information from the splicing controller 20 through its respective wireless transmission module 101, it decodes and acquires its respective digital information according to its corresponding unique identification code, and then each display unit 10 converts the acquired digital information through its respective display screen and displays the allocated picture on the display screen, so as to implement wireless splicing display”).
Chen does not specifically teach a display module comprising a housing with 3 or more side walls, an upper face and a base, and a controller module; a light-emitting diode, LED, panel comprising a plurality of LEDs, the LED panel arranged on the upper face of the housing; a short-range data connection on each side wall.
Slade, however, teaches a display module (fig 1A, element 101) comprising a housing with 3 or more side walls, an upper face and a base (¶ 56), and a controller module (see master processor, fig. 2, ¶ 57); a light-emitting diode, LED, panel comprising a plurality of LEDs, the LED panel arranged on the upper face of the housing (¶ 68); a short-range data connection on each side wall (¶ 56).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Chen in view of Slade. The references teach modular display devices capable of communicating between adjacent display modules. While Chen clearly teaches in ¶ 40 that the short-range data connectors are provided at each edge of the display module, Slade further teaches such connectors are provided at the side walls of the device being an OLED display. Note that Chen teaches in ¶ 51 that the short-range transmitters are preferably placed within 20mm of each other. As such, one would have been motivated to place the short range data connections at the side-walls in order to reduce the distance between the display modules and ensure a secure connection between the modules.
Chen and Slade do not specifically teach a Wi-Fi access point configured to provide an IP address to each connected display module.
Sasaki, however, teaches configuring a Wi-Fi access point in one of the plurality of display modules and providing an IP address to each connected display module (¶ 66-70, see configuring an ad-hoc network wherein a wireless access point is established and unique IP addresses are provided to modular display units and are used as identifier IDs).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Chen and Slade, as applied above, further in view of Sasaki. The references teach modular displays and while Chen teaches that each display module is provided with a preset identifier, Sasaki teaches that such an identifier may be assigned based on the IP address of a connected device. As such, one would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to set the IP address as the identifier while expecting the same result of having a unique identifier for each display module and providing the appropriate image data to the identified display module accordingly.
Chen, Slade and Sasaki do not specifically teach that in scaling and dividing the image to be displayed on the modular display system into the plurality of image portions, one or more processors of the controller module are configured to: identify a height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules, scale to an aspect ratio based on the height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules, the image to be displayed on the modular display system, and divide the image to be displayed on the modular display system into the plurality of image portions.
Kang, however, teaches scaling to an aspect ratio based on a height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules (see fig. 8B and 9 wherein the height and width of the arrangement is the basis for a 16:9 aspect ratio), the image to be displayed on the modular display system, and dividing the image to be displayed on the modular display system into the plurality of image portions (fig. 5, ¶ 90; and fig. 9 and ¶ 125-131; note that the aspect ratio is a product of width and height of the devices).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Chen, Slade and Sasaki as applied above, further in view of Kang. The references teach displaying an image across multiple display devices and Kang further teaches details regarding the manipulation of such an image. As such, one would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to properly display the image across the devices.
Chen, Slade, Sasaki and Kang do not specifically teach identifying a height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules.
Leppanen, however, clearly teaches identifying a height and width of the arrangement of the plurality of display modules (see fig. 13, ¶ 67-68).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Chen, Slade, Sasaki, Kang and Leppanen. The references teach a plurality of display devices for displaying an image, and Leppanen further teaches determining the aspect ratio of the image displayed across a plurality of display devices according to determined width and heights of the display modules (see fig. 8A-8C, ¶ 56). Accordingly, one would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to properly divide and scale the image across a plurality of display devices according to different alignments between the display devices, thus providing a more robust multi-display device.
Regarding claim 10, Chen teaches that the number of side walls is a tessellation number (fig. 2, see 4 sides and 4 displays).
Regarding claim 11, Chen teaches a memory configured to store the received image portion (¶ 53: “each display unit 10 obtains the digital information through the respective display screen conversion, displaying the distributed picture on the display screen, so as to realize wireless splicing display”. In other words, each display module 10 necessarily includes a memory for storing and displaying the portion of the image assigned to the display module 10).
Regarding claim 15, Chen and Slade do not teach that one or more of the processors are further configured to receive an IP address and set the received IP address as the module ID.
Sasaki teaches that one or more of the processors are further configured to connect to a Wi-Fi access point, receive an IP address and set the received IP address as the module ID (¶ 66-70, a wireless access point is established and unique IP addresses are provided to modular display units and are used as identifier IDs).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Chen and Slade, as applied above, further in view of Sasaki. The references teach modular displays and while Chen teaches that each display module is provided with a preset identifier, Sasaki teaches that such an identifier may be assigned based on the IP address of a connected device. As such, one would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to set the IP address as the identifier while expecting the same result of having a unique identifier for each display module and providing the appropriate image data to the identified display module accordingly.
Claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen, Slade, Sasaki, Kang and Leppanen, as applied above, and further in view of Martinez et al., US 2003/0189529 A1, hereinafter “Martinez”.
Regarding claim 12, Chen, Slade, Sasaki, Kang and Leppanen do not teach that each side wall includes a mechanical butterfly connector.
Martinez teaches that each side wall includes a mechanical butterfly connector (figs. 3-4, couplers 300 are considered mechanical “butterfly” connectors, see ¶ 30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Chen, Slade, Sasaki, Kang and Leppanen, as applied above, further in view of Martinez. The references teach modular display systems and Martinez further teaches that such couplers may provide a few advantages (see ¶ 28). For example, one would have been motivated to make such a combination and include such connectors in order to provide “a secure physical connection” between the different display modules.
Regarding claim 13, Chen, Slade, Sasaki, Kang and Leppanen do not specifically teach that the short-range data connection comprises a wired connector.
Martinez teaches that the short-range data connection comprises a wired connector (¶ 28, the connectors provide “a conduit” to transfer data between display modules).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Chen, Slade, Sasaki, Kang and Leppanen, as applied above, further in view of Martinez. The references teach modular display systems and Martinez further teaches that such couplers may provide a few advantages (see ¶ 28). For example, one would have been motivated to make such a combination and include such connectors in order to provide a wired conduit to transfer the data as required by the teachings of Chen between the display modules while providing “a secure physical connection”.
Regarding claim 14, Chen, Slade, Sasaki, Kang and Leppanen do not teach that each wired connector is further configured to transmit power between adjacent display modules.
Martinez teaches that each wired connector is further configured to transmit power between adjacent display modules (¶ 28, the connectors “provide an electrical connection to power the display modules”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Chen, Slade, Sasaki, Kang and Leppanen, as applied above, further in view of Martinez. The references teach modular display systems and Martinez further teaches that such couplers may provide a few advantages (see ¶ 28). For example, one would have been motivated to make such a combination and include such connectors in order to provide a wired conduit to transfer the data and power as required by the teachings of Chen between the display modules while providing “a secure physical connection”.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen, Slade, Sasaki, Kang and Leppanen, as applied above, and further in view of Nam.
Regarding claim 16, Chen, Slade, Sasaki, Kang and Leppanen do not teach that the respective image portion is a respective first image portion of a first frame in a video stream, and wherein one or more of the processors are further configured to: receive and store a respective second image portion of a second frame in the video stream; and causing the respective second image portion to be displayed by the module after a predefined frame duration has elapsed.
Nam teaches that the respective image portion is a respective first image portion of a first frame in a video stream, and wherein one or more of the processors are further configured to: receive and store a respective second image portion of a second frame in the video stream; and causing the respective second image portion to be displayed by the module after a predefined frame duration has elapsed (¶ 40-41).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Chen, Slade, Sasaki, Kang and Leppanen, as applied above, further in view of Nam. The references teach modular display panels and while Chen teaches that the display modules display video signals, Nam further teaches that such display modules may exhibit images that fall out of synchronization. Accordingly, one would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to incorporate the technique of Nam and ensure proper synchronization between the display modules as taught by Nam in ¶ 40-41.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEPEHR AZARI whose telephone number is (571)270-7903. The examiner can normally be reached weekdays from 11AM-7PM.
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, Amr Awad can be reached at (571) 272-7764. 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.
/SEPEHR AZARI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2621
Prosecution Insights