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 .
Status
The filing on 06/18/2026 amended claims 1, 7, and 11. Claims 1-15 are pending and rejected on new grounds of rejections necessitated by the amendments of claims 1 and 11.
Objection/s to the Application, Drawings and Claims
The filing on 06/18/2026 appropriately amended the title; hence the objection/s to the title made in the last office action are withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - AIA 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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 of this title, 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 1-5, 7, and 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (US 20050168705 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Li teaches an electronic apparatus (Fig. 1-29) comprising: a projection unit (Fig. 3); a sensor assembly (10; [0045], [0053], [0079], [0080]); and a processor (22) configured to: acquire state information (by projection screen detection module 14) including at least one of horizontal inclination information, vertical inclination information, or horizontal distortion information based on sensing data acquired through the sensor assembly (10; [0047]-[0073], [0078], [0079]), identify a projection direction at which an image is to be output based on the state information, the projection direction comprising a position of the electronic apparatus with respect to a projection surface among a horizontal projection surface or a vertical projection surface ([0084]-[0089]), based on the position of the electronic apparatus with respect to the projection surface, selectively perform a keystone function and a leveling function (by keystone detection and correction module 18; [0038], [0047], [0073], [0074], [0076], [0078], [0083]), and control the projection unit (Fig. 3) to output a projection image onto the projection surface.
Li does not explicitly teach the processor is further configured to: in a state in which the projection surface corresponds to the vertical projection surface, perform only the keystone function, among the keystone function and the leveling function, and not perform the leveling function, in a state in which the projection surface corresponds to the horizontal projection surface, based on the electronic apparatus being positioned to be inclined in an up-down direction with respect to the horizontal projection surface, perform only the keystone function, among the keystone function and the leveling function, and not perform the leveling function, and in the state in which the projection surface corresponds to the horizontal projection surface, based on the electronic apparatus being positioned to be inclined in a left- right direction with respect to the horizontal projection surface, perform only the leveling function, among the keystone function and the leveling function, and not perform the keystone function.
Lacking criticality to the functioning of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to choose when to perform the keystone correction or the leveling function depending on the orientation of the projection surface, (i.e., having the processor is further configured to: in a state in which the projection surface corresponds to the vertical projection surface, perform only the keystone function, among the keystone function and the leveling function, and not perform the leveling function, in a state in which the projection surface corresponds to the horizontal projection surface, based on the electronic apparatus being positioned to be inclined in an up-down direction with respect to the horizontal projection surface, perform only the keystone function, among the keystone function and the leveling function, and not perform the leveling function, and in the state in which the projection surface corresponds to the horizontal projection surface, based on the electronic apparatus being positioned to be inclined in a left-right direction with respect to the horizontal projection surface, perform only the leveling function, among the keystone function and the leveling function, and not perform the keystone function). Essentially, it is a matter of design choice. Furthermore, it also is a matter of common sense to correct for keystone when keystone distortion exists and to not correct for leveling when leveling problem does not exist or correct for leveling when leveling problem exists and to not correct for keystone when keystone distortion does not exist.
Regarding claim 2, Li further teaches the processor (22) further configured to: acquire information based on the projection surface ([0050], [0052], [0053], [0055], [0056], [0057], [0060], [0069], [0071], [0079]), identify a size of a projection area in which the projection image is output and a size of the projection image based on the information based on the projection surface ([0050], [0056], [0060]), and control the projection unit (Fig. 3) to output the projection image in the projection area based on the size of the projection image ([0050]), and wherein the information based on the projection surface comprises: at least one of pattern information of the projection surface, color information of the projection surface, or distance information between the projection surface and the electronic apparatus ([0050], [0052], [0053], [0055], [0056], [0057], [0060], [0069], [0071], [0079]).
Regarding claim 3, Li further teaches the processor (22) is further configured to: based on identifying a predetermined object (edges, lines in a pattern), control the projection unit (Fig. 3) to output the projection image depending on a location of the predetermined object ([0049], [0050]-[0058], [0068]-[0072]).
Regarding claim 4, Li further teaches the predetermined object comprises a line object (lines in a pattern), and wherein the processor (22) is further configured to: based on identifying the line object (Fig. 23; [0050]-[0058]), control the projection unit (Fig. 3) such that the line object and an outer rim portion of the projection image are in parallel (keystone correction; Fig. 23; [0074]).
Regarding claim 5, Li further teaches the predetermined object comprises an edge object ([0050], [0055], [0069]-[0072]), and wherein the processor (22) is further configured to: control the projection unit (Fig. 3) to output the projection image onto a first projection surface among a plurality of projection surfaces divided by the edge object (centering; Fig. 26; [0050], [0073], [0085], [0089]).
Regarding claim 7, Li further teaches wherein the processor (22) is further configured to: based on identifying a predetermined event, provide a user interface (UI) for providing at least one function of a rotation function of the projection image, a size change function of the projection image, or a location change function of the projection image ([0085]-[0086]).
Regarding claim 11, Li teaches a method of controlling an electronic apparatus (Fig. 1-29), the method comprising: acquiring state information including at least one of horizontal inclination information, vertical inclination information, or horizontal distortion information ([0047]-[0073], [0079]); identifying a projection direction at which an image is to be output based on the state information, the projection direction comprising a position of the electronic apparatus with respect to a projection surface among a horizontal projection surface or a vertical projection surface ([0084]-[0089]); based on the position of the electronic apparatus with respect to the projection surface, selectively performing a keystone function and a leveling function (by keystone detection and correction module 18; [0038], [0047], [0073], [0074], [0076], [0078], [0083]); and outputting a projection image onto the projection surface (Fig. 3).
Li does not explicitly teach the selectively performing the keystone function and the leveling function comprises: in a state in which the projection surface corresponds to the vertical projection surface, performing only the keystone function, among the keystone function and the leveling function, and not performing the leveling function; in a state in which the projection surface corresponds to the horizontal projection surface, based on the electronic apparatus being positioned to be inclined in an up-down direction with respect to the horizontal projection surface, performing only the keystone function, among the keystone function and the leveling function, and not performing the leveling function; and in the state in which the projection surface corresponds to the horizontal projection surface, based on the electronic apparatus being positioned to be inclined in a left- right direction with respect to the horizontal projection surface, performing only the leveling function, among the keystone function and the leveling function, and not performing the keystone function.
Lacking criticality to the functioning of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to choose when to perform the keystone correction or the leveling function depending on the orientation of the projection surface, (i.e., having the processor is further configured to: in a state in which the projection surface corresponds to the vertical projection surface, perform only the keystone function, among the keystone function and the leveling function, and not perform the leveling function, in a state in which the projection surface corresponds to the horizontal projection surface, based on the electronic apparatus being positioned to be inclined in an up-down direction with respect to the horizontal projection surface, perform only the keystone function, among the keystone function and the leveling function, and not perform the leveling function, and in the state in which the projection surface corresponds to the horizontal projection surface, based on the electronic apparatus being positioned to be inclined in a left-right direction with respect to the horizontal projection surface, perform only the leveling function, among the keystone function and the leveling function, and not perform the keystone function). Essentially it is a matter of design choice. Furthermore, it also is a matter of common sense to correct for keystone when keystone distortion exists and to not correct for leveling when leveling problem does not exist or correct for leveling when leveling problem exists and to not correct for keystone when keystone distortion does not exist.
Regarding claim 12, Li further teaches acquiring information based on the projection surface ([0050], [0052], [0053], [0055], [0056], [0057], [0060], [0069], [0071], [0079]); identifying a size of a projection area in which the projection image is output and a size of the projection image based on the information based on the projection surface ([0050], [0056], [0060]); and outputting the projection image in the projection area based on the size of the projection image ([0050]), wherein the information based on the projection surface comprises: at least one of pattern information of the projection surface, color information of the projection surface, or distance information between the projection surface and the electronic apparatus ([0050], [0052], [0053], [0055], [0056], [0057], [0060], [0069], [0071], [0079]).
Regarding claim 13, Li further teaches, based on identifying a predetermined object, outputting the projection image depending on a location of the predetermined object ([0049], [0050]-[0058], [0068]-[0072]).
Regarding claim 14, Li further teaches wherein the predetermined object comprises a line object (lines in a patternn), and wherein the outputting the projection image comprises: based on identifying the line object (Fig. 23; [0050]-[0058]), outputting the projection image such that the line object and an outer rim of the projection image are in parallel (keystone correction; Fig. 23; [0074]).
Regarding claim 15, Li further teaches wherein the predetermined object comprises an edge object ([0050], [0055], [0069]-[0072]), and wherein the outputting the projection image comprises: outputting the projection image onto a first projection surface among a plurality of projection surfaces divided by the edge object (centering; Fig. 26; [0050], [0073], [0085], [0089]).
Claims 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Furui (US 20130235082 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Li further teaches a camera (10; [0045]); but Li does not explicitly teach the processor (22) further configured to: based on acquiring vibration information greater than or equal to a threshold value based on the sensing data of the sensor assembly (10), acquire a captured image through the camera, and identify the predetermined object based on the captured image.
Furui teaches the processor (160) configured to: based on acquiring vibration information greater than or equal to a threshold value based on the sensing data of the sensor assembly (129), acquire a captured image through the camera (190; [0051], [0077], [0078], [0082]), and identify the predetermined object (by line detection part 122; S155) based on the captured image (by camera 190; Fig. 10).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to combine Li with Furui; because it ensures continuous operation of the projector thereby improve viewers’ experience.
Regarding claim 8, Li does not teach the processor (22) is further configured to: after performing at least one of the keystone function or the leveling function based on the state information, and based on acquiring movement information greater than or equal to a threshold value based on the sensing data of the sensor assembly (10), perform at least one of the keystone function or the leveling function.
Furui teaches the processor (160) is further configured to: after performing at least one of the keystone function (S180) or the leveling function based on the state information (S185), and based on acquiring movement information (S20; S185) greater than or equal to a threshold value based on the sensing data of the sensor assembly (129), perform at least one of the keystone function (S180) or the leveling function (Fig. 10; [0077], [0078], [0082]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to combine Li with Furui; because it ensures continuous operation of the projector thereby improve viewers’ experience.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Shigeta (US 20210110790 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Li further teaches manually location the projection screen ([0058], [0085], [0086]) but does not teach does not teach a communication interface configured to communicate with an external apparatus, wherein the processor is further configured to: acquire location information of the external apparatus, and identify a projection area in which the projection image is output based on the location information of the external apparatus.
Shigeta teaches a communication interface (122) configured to communicate with an external apparatus (input device, [0055], [0072], [0074], [0076]), wherein the processor (100; [0080]) is further configured to: acquire location information of the external apparatus ([0072], [0074], [0076]), and identify a projection area in which the projection image is output based on the location information of the external apparatus ([0074], [0080], [0081]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to combine Li with Shigeta; because it allows greater automation of the process of designating the screen thereby improving user experience.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Li and Shigeta consequently results in the processor (100 of Shigeta) is further configured to: based on a change of the location information of the external apparatus, change the projection area in which the projection image is output (Fig. 1, 2, 10, [0053], [0055], [0073] of Shigeta).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1 and 11 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection necessitated by the amendment/s of claims 1 and 11.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAO-LUAN Q LE whose telephone number is (571)270-5362. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday; 9:00AM-5:00PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Minh-Toan Ton can be reached on (571) 272 230303. 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. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
Or faxed to:
(571) 273-8300, (for formal communications intended for entry)
Or:
(571) 273-7490, (for informal or draft communications, please label “PROPOSED” or “DRAFT”)
Hand-delivered responses should be brought to:
Customer Service Window
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
/BAO-LUAN Q LE/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Prosecution Insights