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 .
Claims 1 and 11 are amended. Claims 3, 5, 13, and 15 are cancelled. Claims 21-24 are newly added. Claims 1-2, 4, 6-12, 14, and 16-24 are currently under review.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-2, 4, 6-12, 14, and 16-24 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
With respect to Claim 21, the claim limitations require compensating for optical crosstalk however the specification does not mention crosstalk nor compensation, the specification merely mentions calculating luminance of a particular zone which is equal to a sum of contributions from neighboring zones. For the purposes of examination, the Office will interpret the claim limitations “wherein the local dimming control information is computed using a panel light spread function indicated in the display device capability information to compensate for optical crosstalk among neighboring backlight zones” as “wherein the local dimming control information is computed using a panel light spread function indicated in the display device capability information to include a sum of contributions from neighboring zones”
With respect to Claim 22, the claim limitations require chained secondary data packet payload that encodes per-zone luminance using run-length encoding for consecutive zones having the same luminance however the specification does not mention run-length encoding.
With respect to Claim 23, the claim limitations require the processor circuitry to apply local dimming control information to an identified frame however the specification only mentions in paragraph 38 that regional backlight control is supported based on an info frame and does not mention “an identified frame”, therefore does not mention “applies the local dimming control information to the identified frame”. Therefore for the purposes of examination the Office will interpret the claim limitations “wherein the receiver circuitry is configured to receive, with the local dimming control information, a frame identifier synchronized to an associated video frame, and the processor circuitry applies the local dimming control information to the identified frame” as “wherein the receiver circuitry is configured to receive, with the local dimming control information, backlight zone control support by set flags at the host”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-2, 4, 6, 8-9, 11-12, 14, 16, 18-19, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murthi et al. (Pub. No.: US 2023/0274718 A1) hereinafter referred to as Murthi in view of De Paepe et al. (Pub. No.: US 2007/0120763 A1) hereinafter referred to as De Paepe.
With respect to Claim 1, Murthi teaches a method (fig. 3; ¶56) for local dimming of a display backlight (¶21, “as part of the display subsystem 208 is a backlight 210, possibly as multiple separately-controllable localized zones of backlight”), implemented in a display device (fig. 1, item 100; ¶15, “This display system 100 could be structured as a unitary display device such as a TV or monitor, having the controller 102 and panel 104 in a common housing arranged for mounting on a wall or other convenient placement”; fig. 2; ¶19), the method comprising: transmitting (fig. 2, item 230: transmitter and item 262: configuration data; ¶24) display device capability information to a host device (fig. 1, item 104; fig. 2, item 204; ¶19-20, the host device is a controller), the capability information comprising per-zone luminance for each backlight zone (¶47; ¶55; ¶57); receiving information from the host device, wherein the information from the host device is generated based on the per-zone luminance and includes local dimming control information (¶53-54; ¶57); and adjusting a luminance of at least one region of the display backlight, based on the information received from the host device (¶57).
Murthi does not teach capability information comprising per-zone luminance is per-zone peak luminance for each backlight zone such that the information from the host device is generated based on the per-zone peak luminance.
De Paepe teaches a method for illumination implemented in a display device (¶24; ¶26), transmitting display device capability information to a host device (¶24, “preferred calibration characteristics for individual zones of the active display area may be coded in a signal communicated to the display by the user of the display or by any device or software application. ... Alternatively, according to embodiments of the present invention, this information for individual zones of the active display area may be selected out of a list of calibration parameters stored in non-volatile memory”), such that display capability information corresponds to preferred calibration characteristics for individual zones of a display area (¶24) and comprising per-zone peak luminance for each backlight zone (¶84, “In other words: since one knows in advance which zones of the multi-display 21 will be used to display which specific video signals (each having their own requirements on for example calibration, peak luminance, colour point, colour profile . . . ) one can improve, e.g. optimize, the physical characteristics of the display system or panel 54 to reflect the requirements of the individual video signals as good as possible.”),
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of Murthi, such that capability information comprising per-zone luminance is per-zone peak luminance for each backlight zone resulting in the information from the host device is generated based on the per-zone peak luminance, as taught by De Paepe so as to optimize the physical characteristics of the display panel (¶84).
With respect to Claim 2, claim 1 is incorporated, Murthi teaches wherein the information received from the host device indicates at least one of global backlight luminance information or backlight zone output luminance information (¶57, “the controller 204 could determine one or more backlight-dimming capabilities of the panel such as whether the panel 202 supports zone-based dimming in the form of full array local dimming (FALD) or rather just global dimming”).
With respect to Claim 4, claim 1 is incorporated, Murthi teaches wherein the display device capability information indicates at least one of: backlight zone control support (¶57-58).
With respect to Claim 6, claim 1 is incorporated, Murthi teaches a serial interface (fig. 1, item 106; fig. 2, item 206; ¶15; ¶19) wherein the information received from the host device is received from the host device via at least one of an embedded DisplayPort (eDP) interface (¶4).
With respect to Claim 8, claim 1 is incorporated, Murthi teaches further comprising converting the information received from the host device into a backlight drive strength value to control backlight luminance (¶17; ¶35; ¶57).
With respect to Claim 9, claim 1 is incorporated, Murthi teaches wherein the information received from the host device indicates a backlight drive strength to control backlight luminance (¶17; ¶35; ¶57).
With respect to Claim 11, Murthi teaches a device (fig. 1, item 100; ¶15, “This display system 100 could be structured as a unitary display device such as a TV or monitor, having the controller 102 and panel 104 in a common housing arranged for mounting on a wall or other convenient placement”; fig. 2; ¶19) configured for local dimming of a display backlight (¶21, “as part of the display subsystem 208 is a backlight 210, possibly as multiple separately-controllable localized zones of backlight”; ¶57), transmitter circuitry (fig. 2, item 230; ¶24) configured to transmit display device capability information to a host (fig. 1, item 104; fig. 2, item 204; ¶19-20, the host device is a controller), the capability information comprising per-zone peak luminance for each backlight zone (¶47; ¶55; ¶57); receiver circuitry (fig. 2, item 230; ¶24) configured to receive information from the host device, wherein the information from the host device is generated based on the per-zone luminance and includes local dimming control information (¶53-54; ¶57); and processor circuitry (fig. 2, item 214; ¶35) configured to adjust a luminance of at least one region of the display backlight, based on the information received from the host device (¶57).
Murthi does not teach capability information comprising per-zone luminance is per-zone peak luminance for each backlight zone such that the information from the host device is generated based on the per-zone peak luminance.
De Paepe teaches a device configured for illumination (¶24; ¶26), comprising: transmitter circuitry (fig. 2, video cables are connected to the displays 13 and 21 which have transmitter circuitry) configured to transmit capability information to a host device (fig. 2, item 14: host; ¶24, “preferred calibration characteristics for individual zones of the active display area may be coded in a signal communicated to the display by the user of the display or by any device or software application. ... Alternatively, according to embodiments of the present invention, this information for individual zones of the active display area may be selected out of a list of calibration parameters stored in non-volatile memory”), such that display capability information corresponds to preferred calibration characteristics for individual zones of a display area (¶24) and comprising per-zone peak luminance for each backlight zone (¶84, “In other words: since one knows in advance which zones of the multi-display 21 will be used to display which specific video signals (each having their own requirements on for example calibration, peak luminance, colour point, colour profile . . . ) one can improve, e.g. optimize, the physical characteristics of the display system or panel 54 to reflect the requirements of the individual video signals as good as possible.”),
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Murthi, such that capability information comprising per-zone luminance is per-zone peak luminance for each backlight zone resulting in the information from the host device is generated based on the per-zone peak luminance, as taught by De Paepe so as to optimize the physical characteristics of the display panel (¶84).
With respect to Claim 12, claim 11 is incorporated, Murthi teaches wherein the information received from the host device indicates at least one of global backlight luminance information or backlight zone output luminance information (¶57, “the controller 204 could determine one or more backlight-dimming capabilities of the panel such as whether the panel 202 supports zone-based dimming in the form of full array local dimming (FALD) or rather just global dimming”).
With respect to Claim 14, claim 11 is incorporated, Murthi teaches wherein the display device capability information indicates at least one of: backlight zone control support (¶57-58).
With respect to Claim 16, claim 1 is incorporated, Murthi teaches a serial interface (fig. 1, item 106; fig. 2, item 206; ¶15; ¶19) wherein the information received from the host device is received from the host device via at least one of an embedded DisplayPort (eDP) interface (¶4).
With respect to Claim 18, claim 1 is incorporated, Murthi teaches wherein the processor circuitry is further configured to convert the information received from the host device into a backlight drive strength value to control backlight luminance (¶17; ¶35; ¶57).
With respect to Claim 19, claim 1 is incorporated, Murthi teaches wherein the information received from the host device indicates a backlight drive strength to control backlight luminance (¶17; ¶35; ¶57).
With respect to Claim 23, claim 11 is incorporated, Murthi and De Paepe do not mention wherein the receiver circuitry is configured to receive, with the local dimming control information, a frame identifier synchronized to an associated video frame, and the processor circuitry applies the local dimming control information to the identified frame/backlight zone control support by set flags at the host (¶41; ¶55).
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murthi and De Paepe as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Morein (Pub. No.: US 2019/0371253 A1).
With respect to Claim 7, claim 1 is incorporated, Murthi and De Paepe combined do not mention wherein the information received from the host device is received synchronously with video frames.
Morein teaches a method (fig. 10; ¶98) for local dimming of a display backlight (fig. 3, item 326: display backlight; ¶75; ¶102), implemented in a display device (fig. 3, item 320: display device), the method comprising: receiving information from a host device (fig. 3, item 322 receives information from a host device = item 310; ¶69); and adjusting a luminance of the display backlight (¶60); wherein the information received from the host is received synchronously with video frames (¶73).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the combined method of Murthi and De Paepe, wherein the information received from the host device Is received synchronously with video frames, as taught by Morein, so as to render each image on the display using the correct backlight intensity for that particular image (¶97).
With respect to Claim 17, claim 11 is incorporated, Murthi and De Paepe combined do not mention wherein the information received from the host device is received synchronously with video frames.
Morein teaches a device (fig. 3, item 320: display device) configured for local dimming of a display backlight (fig. 3, item 326: display backlight; ¶75; ¶102), comprising: receiver circuitry (fig. 3, item 322: functions as receiver circuitry) configured to receive information from a host device (fig. 3, item 310: host device; ¶69); and processor circuitry (fig. 3, item 316) configured to adjust a luminance of the display backlight, based on information received from the host device (¶60); wherein the information received from the host device is received synchronously with video frames (¶73).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the combined device of Murthi and De Paepe, wherein the information received from the host device Is received synchronously with video frames, as taught by Morein, so as to render each image on the display using the correct backlight intensity for that particular image (¶97).
Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murthi and De Paepe as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Kim (Pub. No.: US 2008/0151965 A1).
With respect to Claim 10, claim 1 is incorporated, Murthi and De Paepe combined do not mention wherein the display device information comprises a table mapping backlight drive strength to backlight luminance.
Kim teaches a control method (fig. 3; ¶48) of a display backlight (fig. 2, item 30; ¶30), implemented in a display device (fig. 2, item 2; ¶44), the method comprising: receiving information (fig. 3, item S30; ¶49) from a host device (fig. 2, item 100: host; ¶45-46); and adjusting a luminance of the display backlight (fig. 3, item S40; ¶49); further comprising transmitting display device information to the host device (fig. 3, item S20; ¶49); wherein the display device information comprises a table mapping backlight drive strength to backlight luminance (fig. 3, item S30; ¶45, “the external host apparatus 100 includes a personal computer, etc., that may include a controller, and transmits a color coordinate value corresponding to a brightness of the light emitted by a backlight unit 30 to a controller 70 through a display data channel (DDC) line”; ¶46, “The external host apparatus 100 may store a lookup table in a storing unit, in which the color temperature is corresponded to the color coordinate values by the controller”).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the combined method of Murthi and De Paepe, wherein the display device information comprises a table mapping backlight drive strength to backlight luminance, as taught by Kim so as to precisely make adjustments irrespective of deviation by a product (¶53).
With respect to Claim 20, claim 11 is incorporated, Murthi and De Paepe combined do not mention wherein the display device information comprises a table mapping backlight drive strength to backlight luminance.
Kim teaches a device (fig. 2, item 2; ¶44) configured to adjust the amount of light emitted by a display backlight (¶10), comprising: receiver circuitry (fig. 2, item 70; ¶37) configured to receive information from a host device (fig. 2, item 100: host device; ¶45); and processor circuitry (fig. 2, item 70 also functions as processor circuitry) configured to adjust a luminance of the display backlight (¶37), based on information received from the host device (¶45); further comprising transmitter circuitry (fig. 2, item 40; ¶31) configured to transmit display device information to the host device (fig. 2, output from item 140 is transmitted to item 100: host device); wherein the display device information comprises a table mapping backlight drive strength to backlight luminance (¶45, “the external host apparatus 100 includes a personal computer, etc., that may include a controller, and transmits a color coordinate value corresponding to a brightness of the light emitted by a backlight unit 30 to a controller 70 through a display data channel (DDC) line”; ¶46, “The external host apparatus 100 may store a lookup table in a storing unit, in which the color temperature is corresponded to the color coordinate values by the controller”).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the combined device of Murthi and De Paepe, wherein the display device information comprises a table mapping backlight drive strength to backlight luminance, as taught by Kim so as to precisely make adjustments irrespective of deviation by a product (¶53).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murthi and De Paepe as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lin et al. (Pub. No.: US 2025/0246159 A1) hereinafter referred to as Lin.
With respect to Claim 21, claim 11 is incorporated, Murthi and De Paepe do not mention wherein the local dimming control information is computed using a panel light spread function indicated in the display device capability information to compensate for optical crosstalk among neighboring backlight zones.
Lin teaches a device (fig. 1; ¶17) configured for local dimming of a display backlight (¶20), comprising: determining backlight information (¶38); wherein local dimming control information is computed using a panel light spread function indicated in the backlight information to include a sum of contributions from neighboring zones (¶38).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the combined device of Murthi and De Paepe, such that the backlight information corresponds to display device capability information, resulting in wherein the local dimming control information is computed using a panel light spread function indicated in the display device capability information to compensate for optical crosstalk among neighboring backlight zones as taught by Lin so as to reduce screen flicker when an object moves between multiple backlight blocks (¶1).
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murthi and De Paepe as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Xu et al. (Pub. No.: US 2021/0304703).
With respect to Claim 24, claim 11 is incorporated, Murthi and De Paepe do not mention wherein the processor circuitry is configured to enforce a maximum average backlight luminance constraint indicated in the display device capability information by limiting per-zone luminance based on the constraint.
He teaches a device (fig. 1, item 10; fig. 7 ¶14; ¶33) comprising: a backlight (¶84, “Indeed, while the disclosure has referred to scaling the luminance of image data to prevent self-emissive pixels of an electronic display from drawing too much power, this may also be applied to electronic displays with a one- or two-dimensional backlight. In that case, the luminance of backlighting may be accumulated as the backlight changes from row to row or image frame to image frame. The amount of light emitted by the backlight may be scaled as appropriate to keep the electronic display from exceeding the power consumption provided by a power supply”); and processor circuitry (fig. 1, item 18); wherein the processor circuitry is configured to enforce a maximum average backlight luminance constraint indicated in the display device capability information by limiting per-zone luminance based on the constraint (¶51; ¶52, “row by row”, therefore a row is a zone; ¶53-54; ¶57, “This continues until the image data for additional pixels is scaled to 0 at a maximum average pixel luminance 118, beyond which point the electronic display 12 may not emit any more light or the electronic display 12 will exceed a power threshold and draw too much power from the power supply 26. This corresponds to the row 104 and below, where the display pixels display black (i.e., do not emit light).”).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the combined device of Murthi and De Paepe, wherein the processor circuitry is configured to enforce a maximum average backlight luminance constraint indicated in the display device capability information by limiting per-zone luminance based on the constraint, as taught by Xu so as to allow the device to operate at a relatively high brightness level without exceeding a power limit (abstract).
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 DONNA V Bocar whose telephone number is (571)272-0955. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am to 5pm EST.
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 A 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.
/DONNA V Bocar/Examiner, Art Unit 2621