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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 19 September 2023. These drawings are acceptable.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 19 September 2023 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 7-9, 11, 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schellingerhout et al. (US 2009/0267870 A1).
With respect to claim 1: Schellingerhout teaches “a display device (6) comprising: a display unit (Figs. 5, 7-9) having a display region in which a plurality of pixel columns (50) is arranged, wherein each of a plurality of the pixel columns has a plurality of pixels (40) arranged in a ring shape (see Figs. 5, 7-9), in the display unit, a plurality of the pixel columns is concentrically arranged along a plane direction of the display region (see Figs. 5, 7-9), the plurality of the pixel columns being arranged around, as a center, a reference position in the display region (origin of 53; see Figs. 7, 9), and in a case where a pixel column (50(i) or 50(i-1), 70 or 72; see Figs. 7, 9) among the pixel columns arranged at a predetermined position (see Figs. 5, 7-9) in a plurality of the pixel columns is defined as a reference pixel column, and each of the pixels forming the reference pixel column is defined as a reference pixel, each of the pixels (pixels in 50(i+1), 74) forming each of the pixel columns arranged on an outer side of the reference pixel column has a similar shape obtained by enlarging a shape of the reference pixel (see Figs. 5, 7-8)”.
With respect to claim 2: Schellingerhout teaches “a display device (6) comprising: a display unit having a display region in which a plurality of pixel columns (50) is arranged (see Figs. 5, 7-9), wherein each of a plurality of the pixel columns has a plurality of pixels (40) arranged in a ring shape (see Figs. 5, 7-9), in the display unit, a plurality of the pixel columns is concentrically arranged along a plane direction of the display region (see Figs. 5, 7-9), the plurality of the pixel columns being arranged around, as a center, a reference position in the display region (origin of 53), in a case where the display region is sectioned into a plurality of sectioned regions (i-1, i, i+1 (Fig. 7); 70, 72, 74 (Fig. 9); present but unlabeled in Figs. 5, 8) with a boundary between the pixel columns adjacent to each other (see Figs. 5, 7-9), the pixels arranged in a same sectioned region among the sectioned regions have areas equal to each other (paragraph 47), have lengths made equal to each other along a direction orthogonal to an alignment direction of the pixels (lengths in section i-1 are all equal to r(1)-r(0), lengths in section i are all equal to r(2)-(r(1)+r(0)), and lengths in section i+1 are all equal to r(3)-(r(2)+r(1)+r(0)); see Fig. 8), and have pitches made equal to each other (see Figs. 5, 7-9), and among the sectioned regions adjacent to each other, a pitch of the pixels arranged in each of the sectioned regions arranged on an inner side is smaller than a pitch of the pixels arranged in each of the sectioned regions arranged on an outer side (see Figs. 5, 7-8)”.
With respect to claim 3: Schellingerhout teaches “the display device according to claim 1 (see above), wherein among the pixel columns adjacent to each other arranged on an outer side of the reference pixel column, a similarity ratio of a size of each of the pixels forming each of the pixel columns on an outer side to a size of each of the pixels forming each of the pixel columns on an inner side coincides with a similarity ratio of a size of each of the pixels forming each of the pixel columns adjacent to the reference pixel column on an outer side of the reference pixel column to a size of the reference pixel (see Fig. 5)”.
With respect to claim 7: Schellingerhout teaches “the display device according to claim 1 (see above), wherein the reference pixel column (50(i-1)) is a pixel column among the pixel columns arranged at a position closest to the reference position (see Fig. 7)”.
With respect to claim 8: Schellingerhout teaches “the display device according to claim 1 (see above), wherein inner pixels (50(i-1)) defined as the pixels arranged on an inner side of the reference pixel column (50(i)) have areas equal to each other (paragraph 47), the inner pixels having lengths made equal to each other along a direction orthogonal to an alignment direction of the pixels in each of the pixel columns (see Figs. 5, 8), and pitches of the inner pixels are equal to each other (see Figs. 5, 7-8)”.
With respect to claim 11: Schellingerhout teaches “The display device according to claim 2 (see above), wherein a number of the sectioned regions is three or more (see Figs. 5, 7-9)”.
With respect to claim 14: Schellingerhout teaches “The display device according to claim 1 (see above), wherein a plurality of the pixel columns is arranged concentrically (see Fig. 5)”.
With respect to claim 15: Schellingerhout teaches “An electronic device (see paragraph 37) comprising: the display device according to claim 1 (see above)”.
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 4-6, 10, 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schellingerhout as applied to claims 1, 2 above, and further in view of Bok et al. (US 2021/0191552 A1).
With respect to claim 4: Schellingerhout teaches “The display device according to claim 1 (see above)”.
Schellingerhout does not specifically teach “wherein each of the pixels has sub-pixels of a plurality of color types, and for every color type of the sub-pixels, each of the sub- pixels arranged on an outer side of the reference pixel column has shape of a similar shape obtained by enlarging a shape of each of the sub-pixels forming the reference pixel”.
However, Bok teaches “wherein each of the pixels has sub-pixels of a plurality of color types (Pr, Pg, Pb), and for every color type of the sub-pixels, each of the sub- pixels arranged on an outer side of the reference pixel column has shape of a similar shape obtained by enlarging a shape of each of the sub-pixels forming the reference pixel (see Fig. 14d)”.
It would have been obvious at the time the application was effectively filed for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display device of Schellingerhout with the plurality of colored subpixels as taught by Bok in order to permit the display of images having multiple colors (Bok paragraph 293).
With respect to claim 5: Schellingerhout in view of Bok teaches “The display device according to claim 4 (see above)”.
Schellingerhout does not specifically teach “wherein for every color type of the sub-pixels, among the pixel columns adjacent to each other arranged on an outer side of the reference pixel column, a similarity ratio of a size of each of the sub-pixels forming each of the pixel columns on an outer side to a size of each of the sub-pixels forming each of the pixel columns on an inner side coincides with a reference similarity ratio that is defined as a similarity ratio of a size of each of the sub-pixels forming each of the pixel columns adjacent to the reference pixel column on an outer side of the reference pixel column to a size of each of the sub-pixels forming the reference pixel column, and the reference similarity ratio coincides between the sub- pixels of different color types”.
However, Bok teaches “wherein for every color type of the sub-pixels, among the pixel columns adjacent to each other arranged on an outer side of the reference pixel column, a similarity ratio of a size of each of the sub-pixels forming each of the pixel columns on an outer side to a size of each of the sub-pixels forming each of the pixel columns on an inner side coincides with a reference similarity ratio that is defined as a similarity ratio of a size of each of the sub-pixels forming each of the pixel columns adjacent to the reference pixel column on an outer side of the reference pixel column to a size of each of the sub-pixels forming the reference pixel column, and the reference similarity ratio coincides between the sub- pixels of different color types (see Fig. 14d)”.
It would have been obvious at the time the application was effectively filed for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display device of Schellingerhout with the plurality of colored subpixels as taught by Bok in order to permit the display of images having multiple colors (Bok paragraph 293).
With respect to claim 6: Schellingerhout teaches “The display device according to claim 1 (see above)”.
Schellingerhout does not specifically teach “wherein each of the pixels has sub-pixels of a plurality of color types, and for every color type of the sub-pixels, among the pixel columns adjacent to each other arranged on an outer side of the reference pixel column, each of the sub-pixels forming one of the pixel columns is arranged at a position avoiding a position to be aligned, in an inner and outer direction, with a position of each of the sub-pixels forming another one of the pixel columns”.
However, Bok teaches “wherein each of the pixels has sub-pixels of a plurality of color types (Pr, Pg, Pb), and for every color type of the sub-pixels, among the pixel columns adjacent to each other arranged on an outer side of the reference pixel column, each of the sub-pixels forming one of the pixel columns is arranged at a position avoiding a position to be aligned, in an inner and outer direction, with a position of each of the sub-pixels forming another one of the pixel columns (see Fig. 14d)”.
It would have been obvious at the time the application was effectively filed for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display device of Schellingerhout with the plurality of colored subpixels as taught by Bok in order to permit the display of images having multiple colors (Bok paragraph 293).
With respect to claim 10: Schellingerhout teaches “The display device according to claim 1 (see above)”.
Schelleringhout does not specifically teach “wherein each of the pixels has sub-pixels of a plurality of color types, and for every color type of the sub-pixels, among the pixel columns arranged adjacent to each other on an inner side of the reference pixel column, each of the sub-pixels forming one of the pixel columns is arranged at a position avoiding a position to be aligned, in an inner and outer direction, with a position of each of the sub-pixels forming another one of the pixel columns”.
However, Bok teaches “wherein each of the pixels has sub-pixels of a plurality of color types (Pr, Pg, Pb), and for every color type of the sub-pixels, among the pixel columns arranged adjacent to each other on an inner side of the reference pixel column, each of the sub-pixels forming one of the pixel columns is arranged at a position avoiding a position to be aligned, in an inner and outer direction, with a position of each of the sub-pixels forming another one of the pixel columns (see Fig. 14d)”.
It would have been obvious at the time the application was effectively filed for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display device of Schellingerhout with the plurality of colored subpixels as taught by Bok in order to permit the display of images having multiple colors (Bok paragraph 293).
With respect to claim 12: Schellingerhout teaches “The display device according to claim 2 (see above)”.
Schellingerhout does not specifically teach “wherein each of the pixels has sub-pixels of a plurality of color types, and for every color type of the sub-pixels, the sub-pixels forming the pixels arranged in a same sectioned region among the sectioned regions have areas equal to each other and have lengths made equal to each other along a direction orthogonal to an alignment direction of the pixels in each of the pixel columns”.
However, Bok teaches “wherein each of the pixels has sub-pixels of a plurality of color types (Pr, Pg, Pb), and for every color type of the sub-pixels, the sub-pixels forming the pixels arranged in a same sectioned region among the sectioned regions have areas equal to each other and have lengths made equal to each other along a direction orthogonal to an alignment direction of the pixels in each of the pixel columns (see Fig. 14d)”.
It would have been obvious at the time the application was effectively filed for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display device of Schellingerhout with the plurality of colored subpixels as taught by Bok in order to permit the display of images having multiple colors (Bok paragraph 293).
With respect to claim 13: Schellingerhout teaches “The display device according to claim 1 (see above)”.
Schellingerhout does not specifically teach “wherein each of the pixels has a plurality of sub-pixels, and for one of the pixels, a plurality of the sub-pixels is arranged in each direction among an alignment direction of the pixels forming each of the pixel columns and a direction orthogonal to the alignment direction”.
However, Bok teaches “wherein each of the pixels has a plurality of sub-pixels (Pr, Pg, Pb), and for one of the pixels, a plurality of the sub-pixels is arranged in each direction among an alignment direction of the pixels forming each of the pixel columns and a direction orthogonal to the alignment direction (see Fig. 14d)”.
It would have been obvious at the time the application was effectively filed for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display device of Schellingerhout with the plurality of colored subpixels as taught by Bok in order to permit the display of images having multiple colors (Bok paragraph 293).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lin et al. (US 20180012566 A1), which teaches a circular display device.
Tseng et al. (US 10303211 B2), which teaches a conical display device.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANIEL J. LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-5721. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5 EST M-F.
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, ABDULMAJEED AZIZ can be reached at (571)270-5046. 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.
/NATHANIEL J LEE/ Examiner, Art Unit 2875
/ABDULMAJEED AZIZ/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2875