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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. As to claim 27, it reads, “wherein the first portion of the image is the entire image and the second portion of the image is the entire image”. The image has two portions (or divisions, or sections), and these two portions cannot be both the entire image and be portions at the same time. Correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 6, 8, and 20-22, and 24, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizukura et al. (US 2009/0154798) in view of Ando et al. (US 2014/0292834).
As to claim 6, Mizukura discloses a display device [0083], comprising: a display panel [0005, 0083]; and a controller coupled to the display panel [0147], the controller to: receive an original color gamut matrix (Fig. 27A, (412) and a target color gamut (Fig. 27A, (422) [0148], the target color gamut a color gamut of multiple color gamuts [0148];determine a color conversion based on the original color gamut matrix and the target color gamut (Fig. 27A, (421) [0148]; generate a converted color gamut matrix based on the color conversion (Fig. 27A, (423)[0148, 0149], the converted color gamut matrix based on the color gamut of the multiple color gamuts [0148, 0149]. further, wherein the controller is to: receive a second original color gamut matrix [0148, 0149] and a second target color gamut [0148, 0149], the second target color gamut a different color gamut of the multiple color gamuts than the first target color gamut; determine a second color conversion based on the second original color gamut matrix and the second target color gamut [0148]; generate a second converted color gamut matrix based on the second color conversion[0148]; (clearly, first, second, or many different original color gamut matrix and target color gamuts can be processed by this color gamut conversion method). However, Mizukura does not specifically discloses causing a light source of the display panel to display a pixel of an image using the converted color gamut matrix and causing a second light source of the display panel to display a second pixel of an image using the second converted color gamut matrix.
Ando discloses causing a light source of the display panel to display a pixel of an image using the converted color gamut matrix [0070, 0207, 0208], and causing a second light source of the display panel to display a second pixel of an image using the converted second color gamut matrix [0070, 0208]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to display a pixel of an image, and a second pixel of an image, as taught by Ando, in the device of Mizukura, so that image display device that achieves both a reduction of individual variability in color perception and an expansion of a display color gamut can be provided [0019].
As to claim 8, further, Mizukura does not specifically disclose the pixel of the image is for display utilizing the light source that is indicated by a first coordinate, and wherein the controller is to: receive a second coordinate for the pixel of the image; and cause a second light source of the display panel that is indicated by the second coordinate to display the pixel of the image using the converted color gamut matrix.
Ando discloses the pixel of the image is for display utilizing the light source that is indicated by a first coordinate [0331], and wherein the controller is to: receive a second coordinate for the pixel of the image [0331]; and cause a second light source of the display panel that is indicated by the second coordinate to display the pixel of the image using the converted color gamut matrix [0111, 0207, 0208]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to display the pixel of the image using converted color gamut matrix, as taught by Ando, in the device of Mizukura, to provide an image display device that achieves both a reduction of individual variability in color perception and an expansion of a display color gamut [0012].
As to claim 20, Mizukura, further, discloses the display panel is capable of displaying the multiple color gamuts [0117, 0118, 0148, 0149].
As to claim 21, further, Mizukura, does not specifically disclose the display panel is capable of displaying the multiple color gamuts simultaneously.
Ando discloses, further, the first color gamut matrix is displayable on for the display device
simultaneously with the second color gamut matrix. (Fig. 3) ("The wide color gamut light source
group 721 is constituted by a red light source 723, a green light source 724, and a blue light
source 725. In addition, the low chroma light source group 722 is constituted only by a white
light source 726 in the first embodiment. The respective light source groups are simultaneously
lighted based on the backlight drive signal 61."). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art at the time of filing to have the two gamut matrixes displayed simultaneously, as
taught by Ando, in Mizukura, so that perceived colors can be made equivalent even when there
is individual variability among color matching functions".
As to claim 22, further, Mizukura, does not specifically disclose a first color gamut of the multiple color gamuts is a wide-spectrum color gamut in comparison to a second color gamut of the multiple color gamuts.
Ando discloses, further, using a first color gamut matrix is a wide-spectrum color gamut (Fig. 3, (721) and 10D, [0111, 0113, 0131] in comparison to a second color gamut indicated by the second color gamut matrix (Fig. 3, (722), and 10F, [0111, 0113, 0131]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have the first color gamut matrix wider than the second color gamut matrix, as taught by Ando, in Mizukura, in order to provide an image display device that achieves both a reduction of individual variability in color
perception and an expansion of a display color gamut.[0012].
As to claim 24, Mizukura, further, does not specifically disclose the light source is a light-emitting diode (LED), an organic LED (OLED), a microLED, a quantum dot (QD)-LED (QD-LED), a QD-OLED, or a QD-microLED.
Ando discloses the light source being a light-emitting diode (LED). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have LED light sources, as taught by Ando, in Mizukura, since LEDs are well known in the art as some of the best known light sources used, with many known benefits, such as energy efficiency, long lifespan, cost savings, durability, instant illumination, etc.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizukura et al. (US 2009/0154798) in view of Ando et al. (US 2014/0292834), as applied to claims 6 and 22 above,
and further in view of Zhang et al. (US Pat. 8,654,141).
As to claim 23, Mizukura, as anticipated by Ando, further, does not specifically disclose the first and the second color gamuts are governed by a first and a second color gamut standard, respectively, and wherein the first or the second color gamut standard is National Television Standards Committee (NTSC) 45%, NTSC 72%, standard Red Green Blue (sRGB), ADOBE® Red Green Blue (ADOBE® RGB), ADOBE® Wide Gamut Red Green Blue (ADOBE® Wide Gamut RGB), Digital Cinema Initiatives - Protocol 3 (DCI-P3), International Telecommunication Union (ITU) BT.2020, ITC BT.709, Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers-C (SMPTE-C), or European Broadcasting Union (EBU).
Zhang discloses the first and the second color gamuts are governed by a first and a second color gamut standard, respectively, and wherein the first or the second color gamut standard is National Television Standards Committee (NTSC) 45%, NTSC 72%, standard Red Green Blue (sRGB), ADOBE® Red Green Blue (ADOBE® RGB), ADOBE® Wide Gamut Red Green Blue (ADOBE® Wide Gamut RGB), Digital Cinema Initiatives - Protocol 3 (DCI-P3), International Telecommunication Union (ITU) BT.2020, ITC BT.709, Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers-C (SMPTE-C), or European Broadcasting Union (EBU). (see paragraph [0004]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have the first and second color gamut standards, as taught by Zhang, in the device of Mizukura and Ando, because a wide variety of color gamuts standards are well known in the art to be used in display devices to provide a variety of colors to match reality as close as possible.
Claim(s) 10, 12, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura et al. (EP 2551841) in view of Ando et al. (US 2014/0292834).
As to claim 10, further, Nakamura discloses a display device (Fig. 1, (2)), comprising: a display panel (Fig. 1, (7)) having first (Figs. 4-6, (SUB1) and second areas( Figs. 4-6, (SUB2/SUB3), the first area having a first light source and the second area having a second light source (page 8, last paragraph to page 9, second paragraph); and a controller (Fig. 1, subscreen control section (1)) coupled to the display panel (Fig. 1, (7)); the controller to: cause the display panel to display a first image in the first area using the first light source (page 8, last paragraph to page 9, second paragraph); cause the display panel to display the first image in the second area using the second light source (page 8, last paragraph to page 9, second paragraph); and cause the display panel to display a second image in the first area using the first light source (page 8, last paragraph to page 9, second paragraph).
However, Nakamura does not specifically disclose displaying the first image in the first area using the first light source and a first color gamut matrix and displaying the second image in a second area using a second light source and a second color gamut matrix
Ando discloses displaying the first image in the first area using the first light source and a first color gamut matrix (Fig. 3, (721)[0074], and displaying the second image in a second area using a second light source and a second color gamut matrix (Fig. 3, (722)[0074]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have the first and second gamut matrix, as taught by Ando, in the device of Nakamura, so that an expansion of a display color gamut can be provided [0019].
As to claim 12, Nakamura, as anticipated by Ando, does not specifically disclose to cause the display panel to display the first image in a first window of an application and cause the display panel to display the second image in a second window of the application. Examiner take Official Notice as to causing the display panel to display the first image in a first window of an application and cause the display panel to display the second image in a second window of the application. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have the first and second windows of the application, in the device of Nakamura, and Ando, since it is well known in the art of windows and graphical user interface to have two, or multiple windows, of the same application in order to conveniently control different elements of the same application in a convenient order.
As to claim 14, Nakamura, further, does not specifically disclose the second area is a first portion of the first area, a second portion of the first area is a remaining portion of the first area using a second color gamut matrix.
Ando discloses the second area (Figs, 11-12, (M1) and Fig. 13, (thR1) is a first portion of the first area (Figs, 11-12, (M2) and Fig. 13, (thR2), a second portion of the first area is a remaining portion of the first area (Figs, 11-12, (M2) and Fig. 13, (thR2), using a second color gamut matrix [0134, 0331]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have the first and second portions, as taught by Ando, in the device of Nakamura, to provide an image display device that achieves both a reduction of individual variability in color perception and an expansion of a display color gamut [0012].
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura et al. (EP 2551841) in view of Ando et al. (US 2014/0292834) as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of He et al. (CN 114115619).
As to claim 11, Nakamura, as anticipated by Ando, does not specifically disclose the controller is to cause the display panel to display the first image in a window of a first application and cause the display panel to display the second image in a window of a second application.
He discloses to cause the display the first image in a window of a first application (Fig. 6b, (610) and (Fig. 7, (S101) and its first and second paragraph description) and cause the display panel to display the second image in a window of a second application(Fig. 6b, (611) and its first and second paragraph description). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have the first and second windows, as taught by He, in the device of Nakamura and Ando, since it helps satisfying the requirement of the user for the display content in the application interface for amplifying or reducing, providing a friendly operation environment to the user, improving the user visual experience.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura et al. (EP 2551841) in view of Ando et al. (US 2014/0292834) as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Ramanath et al. (US 2009/0141039).
As to claim 13, further, Nakamura, as anticipated by Ando, does not specifically disclose the second area is an area of the display panel having a fixed location and a fixed color gamut that is equivalent to a color gamut indicated by the first color gamut matrix.
Ramanath, further, discloses a display having a fixed color gamuts [0002]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have fixed color gamut, as taught by Ramanath, in the device of Nakamura and Ando, since it is well known in the art of display systems to have a fixed color gamut depending on the illumination system used in the display system [0002].
Claim(s) 25, 27, and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura et al. (EP 2551841) in view of Ando et al. (US 2014/0292834).
As to claim 25 and 27, Nakamura discloses a display device (Fig. 1, (2)) comprising a display panel (Fig. 1, (7)); and a controller (Fig. 1, (10)) coupled to the display panel (Fig. 1, (7)), the controller to: cause the display panel to display at least a first portion of an image in a first area of the display panel (page 8, last paragraph to page 9, second paragraph); and when the first portion of the image in the first area is displayed, cause the display panel to display at least a second portion of the image in a second area of the display panel (page 8, last paragraph to page 9, second paragraph).
However, Nakamura does not specifically disclose displaying the first image with a first color gamut and displaying the second image with a second color gamut.
Ando discloses displaying the first image in the first area using the first color gamut (Fig. 3, (721)[0074], and displaying the second image in a second area using a second color gamut (Fig. 3, (722)[0074]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have the first and second gamut, as taught by Ando, in the device of Nakamura, so that an expansion of a display color gamut can be provided [0019].
As to claim 29, Nakamura, further, discloses the first subset of multiple light sources is a first set
of pixels for an area of the display device (Fig. 5 and 6, SUB 1) and the second subset of the
multiple light sources is a second set of pixels for the area(Figs. 5 and 6, SUB 3), the first set of
pixels non-overlapping with the second set of pixels (see Figs. 5 and 6).
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura et al. (EP 2551841) in view of Ando et al. (US 2014/0292834), as in claim 25, above, and further in view of Mizukura et al. (US 2009/0154798).
As to claim 26, Nakamura, as anticipated by Ando, does not specifically disclose receive an original color gamut matrix and a target color gamut that is the second color gamut; determine a color conversion based on the original color gamut matrix and the target color gamut matrix; generate a converted color gamut matrix based on the color conversion; and cause the display panel to display the first portion of the image using the converted color gamut matrix.
Muzukura discloses receive an original color gamut matrix (Fig. 27A, (412)) and a target color gamut (Fig. 27A, (422)) that is the second color gamut [0418]; determine a color conversion based on the original color gamut matrix and the target color gamut matrix (Fig. 27A, (421)[0148, 0149]; generate a converted color gamut matrix based on the color conversion (Fig. 27A, (423)[0148, 0149]; and cause the display panel to display the first portion of the image using the converted color gamut matrix [0148, 0149]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have the color conversion, as taught by Mizukura, in the device of Nakamura and Ando, since in the event that the original color gamut is unknown, and it is difficult to determine that the input picture content data is image data shot by a shooting device, the color conversion processing unit can readily perform color gamut conversion [0143].
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura et al. (EP 2551841) in view of Ando et al. (US 2014/0292834), as applied to claim 25 above,
and further in view of Zhang et al. (US Pat. 8,654,141).
As to claim 28, Nakamura, as anticipated by Ando, further, does not specifically disclose the first and the second color gamuts are governed by a first and a second color gamut standard, respectively, and wherein the first or the second color gamut standard is National Television Standards Committee (NTSC) 45%, NTSC 72%, standard Red Green Blue (sRGB), ADOBE® Red Green Blue (ADOBE® RGB), ADOBE® Wide Gamut Red Green Blue (ADOBE® Wide Gamut RGB), Digital Cinema Initiatives - Protocol 3 (DCI-P3), International Telecommunication Union (ITU) BT.2020, ITC BT.709, Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers-C (SMPTE-C), or European Broadcasting Union (EBU).
Zhang discloses the first and the second color gamuts are governed by a first and a second color gamut standard, respectively, and wherein the first or the second color gamut standard is National Television Standards Committee (NTSC) 45%, NTSC 72%, standard Red Green Blue (sRGB), ADOBE® Red Green Blue (ADOBE® RGB), ADOBE® Wide Gamut Red Green Blue (ADOBE® Wide Gamut RGB), Digital Cinema Initiatives - Protocol 3 (DCI-P3), International Telecommunication Union (ITU) BT.2020, ITC BT.709, Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers-C (SMPTE-C), or European Broadcasting Union (EBU). (see paragraph [0004]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have the first and second color gamut standards, as taught by Zhang, in the device of Nakamura and Ando, because a wide variety of color gamuts standards are well known in the art to be used in display devices to provide a variety of colors to match reality as close as possible.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 and 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claims 9 and 15 are allowable since certain key features of the claimed invention are not taught or fairly suggested by the prior art. In claim 9, “receive a first priority and a first coordinate indicated by the first original color gamut matrix, the first coordinate associated with the pixel of the image; receive a second original color gamut matrix of the multiple original color gamut matrices, a second target color gamut that is different than the first target color gamut, a second priority, and a second coordinate indicated by the second coordinate indicated by the color gamut matrix, the second coordinate associated with the pixel of the image; determine that the second priority is higher than the first priority; determine the color conversion based on the second original color gamut matrix and the second target color gamut “. In claim 15, “the display panel has a third area having the first light source; and wherein the controller is to: determine a third image for display in the third area has a higher priority than a priority of the first image for display in the first area; and cause the display panel to display the third image in the third area using the first light source and a third color gamut matrix”. The closest prior art of record, referring to claim 9, Mizukura et al. (US 2009/0154798) (see above rejection), and referring to claim 15, Nakamura et al. (EP 2551841) (see above rejection). However, singularly or in combination, fails to anticipate or render the above underlined limitations obvious, together with all the other limitations of the claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/23/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
First, referring to claim 6, Applicant argues that Mizukura, at best, describes a single color gamut conversion using original color gamut information and target color gamut information.
Examiner disagrees because Mizukura discloses multiple color gamut conversions according to different color gamuts [0117, 0118, 0148, 0149].
Second, referring to claim 10, Applicant argues that Ando fails to teach displaying a first image using a first color gamut matrix and a second image using a second color gamut matrix.
Examiner disagrees because Ando discloses displaying a first image using a first color gamut matrix (Fig. 3, (721)[0074] and a second image using a second color gamut matrix (Fig. 3, (722)[0074], and [0111, 0207, 0208].
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 RICARDO OSORIO whose telephone number is (571)272-7676. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 AM-5:30 PM.
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, LunYi Lao can be reached at 571-272-7671. 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.
/RICARDO OSORIO/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2619