DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bae (US 10,431,183).
Referring to claims 1 and 8, Bae discloses a display device (fig. 1, display 100), comprising:
a communication unit (fig. 1, reception unit 130, external device interface unit 135, wireless communication unit 173) to communicate with an external device (fig. 5, mobile terminal 500; fig. 8A, device 10);
a display unit (fig. 1, display unit 180);
a control unit (fig. 1, control unit 170) to:
receive video data (fig. 8A, image 810 from WFD source 10; 22:13-18, video) from the external device through the communication unit, and
output mirrored video data (fig. 8A, image 810 on WFD sink 20) through the display unit based on whether the video data is rotated (fig. 8A, portrait source 810; fig. 8C, or landscape source 870) and screen mode of the display device (fig. 8A, full screen landscape display 20 mode, or fig. 8B, portion of display 20 mode).
As to claims 2 and 10, Bae discloses the display device of claim 1, wherein the control unit is to:
when the video data received from the external device is height video data (fig. 8C, landscape image 870) rotated by a specific angle (fig. 8C, such as 0-degree), and the screen mode of the display device is landscape screen mode (fig. 8C, landscape within display unit 551),
rotate the height video data rotated by the specific angle in an opposite direction (fig. 8C, image rotate 0-degree 890) by the specific angle,
output a width screen (fig. 8C, output display 20) containing height video data rotated in the opposite direction by the specific angle.
As to claims 3 and 11, Bae discloses the display device of claim 2, wherein the width screen includes a first area (fig. 8C, area 870 within display 20) where height video data rotated in the opposite direction by the specific angle is output and a second area (fig. 8C, area 891/893) where black video data is output.
As to claims 4 and 12, Bae discloses the display device of claim 1, wherein the control unit is to:
when the video data received from the external device is height video data (fig. 8A, image 810 of device 10) rotated by a specific angle (fig. 8A, 0-degree), and the screen mode of the display device is portrait screen mode (fig. 8A, portrait within display unit 551),
map the video data received from the external device to correspond to the screen size of the display device to output a height screen (fig. 8A, output image 810 on display 180).
As to claims 5 and 13, Bae discloses the display device of claim 1, wherein the control unit is to:
when the video data received from the external device is landscape video data (fig. 8C, image 810 on device 10) and the screen mode of the display device is landscape screen mode (fig. 8C, image 870 on display 20),
map the width video data received from the external device to correspond to the screen size of the display device to output a width screen (fig. 8C, image 890 within display 20).
As to claims 6 and 14, Bae discloses the display device of claim 1, wherein the control unit is to:
when the video data received from the external device is width video data (fig. 8A, image 810) and the screen mode of the display device is portrait screen mode (fig. 8A, display 810 in portrait orientation within display 20),
rotate the width video data received from the external device by a specific angle (fig. 8A, 0-degree) in a direction opposite (fig. 8A, left or right rotate of image 810) to the rotation direction of the display device, and
output a height screen (fig. 8A, output image 810 on display 20) including the rotated width video data.
As to claims 7 and 15, Bae discloses the display device of claim 6, wherein the height screen includes a third area (fig. 8C, area 810 within display 20) where the rotated width video data is output and a fourth area (fig. 8A, area 831/833) where black video data is output.
As to claim 9, Bae discloses the method of claim 8, wherein the video data is height video data rotated by a specific angle (fig. 8A, 0-degree) when the external device is in portrait mode, and the video data is unrotated landscape video data (fig. 8A, image 810) when the external device is in landscape mode (fig. 8C, display 20 in landscape).
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), because the claim limitations use a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are: “communication unit” and “control unit” in claim 1.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to examiner Cheng-Yuan Tseng whose telephone number is (571)272-9772, and fax number is (571)273-9772. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 09:00 to 17:30 Eastern Time. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Alicia Harrington can be reached on (571)272-2330. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571)273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at (866)217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call (800)786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571)272-1000.
/CHENG YUAN TSENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2615