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 § 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 8, 10 and 12-19 and 21-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2008/0309652 Ostlund; in view of US 2006/0146056 to Wyatt; further in view of US 11,170,692 to Orio et al.
As per claim 8, Ostlund teaches a method comprising:
executing an application program (paragraph 43) that causes one or more frames to be displayed (Fig. 3, paragraph 58, “device 100 may include application software that produces image data 310. In still another implementation, device 100 may receive image data 310 from a source external to device 100 (e.g., a network or another device) via antenna assembly 250”¸ external software generating image data 310 will be construed as the claimed application program) on a display screen using content generated by the application program (paragraph 58, “device 100 may generate image data 310. For example, device 100 may include an image-capturing component, such as camera 170. In yet another implementation, device 100 may include application software that produces image data 310. In still another implementation, device 100 may receive image data 310 from a source external to device 100 (e.g., a network or another device) via antenna assembly 250”);
identifying a first refresh rate for updating the display screen (paragraph 45, “display 130 may have a variable refresh rate between 50-100 Hertz (Hz). Adaptive refresh rate controller 320 may calculate a refresh rate of 90 Hz, since 90 is an integer multiple of 30 (i.e., 3.times.30)”, in other words, the first refresh rate is identified as 90 Hz, since it’s a frequency consistent with that of the application program that still falls within the permissible range of the display).
Ostlund does not necessarily teach determining a permissible range of refresh rates for the display screen based on the identified first refresh rate, wherein the permissible range of refresh rates comprises the identified first refresh rate and is supported by the display screen, causing the display screen to update the one or more frames at a second refresh rate that is selected from within the determined permissible range.
Wyatt suggests determining a permissible range of refresh rates for the display screen based on the identified first refresh rate, wherein the permissible range of refresh rates comprises the identified first refresh rate and is supported by the display screen, causing the display screen to update the one or more frames at a second refresh rate that is selected from within the determined permissible range (Figs. 7-8, paragraph 60, the displayed frequency is adjusted up and down different frequencies within a range based on displayed content); paragraph 43, “the refresh signal produced by the timing generator 219 may cause the panel 236 to be refreshed at a reference refresh rate (e.g. 60 Hz) during typical (e.g. non-power saving) operation. During power saving operation, the timing generator 219 may lower refresh rates for panel display 110 (e.g. to 50 Hz, 40 Hz, 30 Hz, etc.)”, in other words, a reference rate, analogous to the first refresh rate is part of the refresh rates within the dynamic range).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to modify the device of Ostlund, by determining a permissible range of refresh rates for the display screen based on the identified first refresh rate, wherein the permissible range of refresh rates comprises the identified first refresh rate and is supported by the display screen, causing the display screen to update the one or more frames at a second refresh rate that is selected from within the determined permissible range, such as taught by Wyatt, for the purpose of reducing power consumption.
Ostlund and Wyatt do not necessarily teach identifying the first refresh rate as specified by the application program, wherein the content comprises different scenes of a video game.
Orio et al. teach identifying the first refresh rate as specified by the application program (Fig. 1, f_FRM, column 4, lines 60-67, “The frame rate command f.sub.FRM4* may specify a desired frame rate of the display device”), wherein the content comprises different scenes of a video game (column 1, lines 10-20, “An increased frame rate improves the image quality, while a decreased frame rate reduces power consumption. In view of this, the frame rate may be controlled depending on the contents of display images (e.g., videos, still images, etc.) For example, the frame rate may be set to 60 Hz in a normal operation, and increased up to 90 Hz or more during gaming”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to modify the device of Ostlund and Wyatt, by identifying the first refresh rate as specified by the application program, wherein the content comprises different scenes of a video game, such as taught by Orio et al., for the purpose of balancing good image quality and improved power consumption.
As per claim 10, Ostlund, Wyatt and Orio et al. teach the method of claim 8, wherein the application program is a video game (Ostlung, paragraph 35, “For example, display 130 may display … video, … and/or information regarding … games”; Wyatt, paragraph 59) that targets rendering video frames at the first refresh rate on the display screen (Ostlung, paragraph 45).
As per claim 12, Ostlund, Wyatt and Orio et al. teach the method of claim 8, further comprising: updating to the first refresh rate during execution of the application programming (Ostlund, paragraph 45, “calculate a frames-per-second (fps) based on the periodicity of the synchronization signal within image data 310. In still another example, adaptive refresh rate controller 320 may determine that image data 310 includes a video format of 30 fps”, in other words, the refresh rate is calculated based on variable image data and synchronization signals) and dynamically updating the permissible range of refresh rates based on the determined updates to the first refresh rate (Wyatt, Fig. 8, paragraph 43, the refresh rate may be lowered from a target rate so as to reduce power consumption based on motion between frames).
As per claim 13, Ostlund, Wyatt and Orio et al. teach the method of claim 12, wherein determining updates to the first refresh rate during the execution of the application programming comprises determining updates to the first refresh rate during one or more scenes during the execution of the application programming (Wyatt, Fig. 8, paragraph 43, the refresh rate may be lowered from a target rate so as to reduce power consumption based on motion between frames).
As per claim 14, Ostlund, Wyatt and Orio et al. teach the method of claim 8, wherein causing the display screen to update the one or more frames at a second refresh rate that is selected from within the determined permissible range comprises selecting the second refresh rate that is within the determined permissible range to match the identified first refresh rate (Wyatt, Fig. 8, the refresh rate is dynamically adjusted to and from the first refresh rate based on operating conditions).
As per claim 15, Ostlund, Wyatt and Orio et al. teach the method of claim 8, wherein causing the display screen to update the one or more frames at a second refresh rate that is selected from within the determined permissible range comprises selecting the second refresh rate that is within the determined permissible range and differs from the identified first refresh rate (Wyatt, Fig. 8, the refresh rate is dynamically adjusted to and from the first refresh rate based on operating conditions) by a threshold amount (Wyatt, paragraph 43, suggests a difference in frequencies of 10 Hz, “the timing generator 219 may lower refresh rates for panel display 110 (e.g. to 50 Hz, 40 Hz, 30 Hz, etc.)”).
As per claim 16, Ostlund, Wyatt and Orio et al. teach the method of claim 8, wherein causing the display screen to update the one or more frames at a second refresh rate that is within the determined permissible range comprises causing the display screen to execute refreshes of the one or more frames at time intervals that correspond to the second refresh rate (Wyatt, Fig. 8, frames are refreshed at different rates based on operating conditions).
As per claim 17, Ostlund, Wyatt and Orio et al. teach the method of claim 16, wherein executing refreshes of the one or more frames at time intervals that correspond to the second refresh rate comprises executing a sequence of N consecutive refreshes of the display screen, wherein N-1 of the consecutive refreshes are performed without the second refresh rate and the N-th refresh in the sequence is executed at a time interval associated with the second refresh rate (Wyatt, Fig. 8, N-1 refreshed may be performed at 40 Hz, for example, and an Nth refresh at 60 Hz).
As per claim 18, it comprises similar limitations to those in claim 8 and it is therefore rejected for similar reasons.
As per claim 19, it comprises similar limitations to those in claim 10 and it is therefore rejected for similar reasons.
As per claim 21, it comprises similar limitations to those in claim 12 and it is therefore rejected for similar reasons.
As per claim 22, it comprises similar limitations to those in claim 13 and it is therefore rejected for similar reasons.
As per claim 23, it comprises similar limitations to those in claim 14 and it is therefore rejected for similar reasons.
As per claim 24, it comprises similar limitations to those in claim 15 and it is therefore rejected for similar reasons.
As per claim 25, it comprises similar limitations to those in claim 16 and it is therefore rejected for similar reasons.
As per claim 26, it comprises similar limitations to those in claim 17 and it is therefore rejected for similar reasons.
As per claim 27, it comprises similar limitations to those in claim 8 and it is therefore rejected for similar reasons.
As per claim 28, Ostlund, Wyatt and Orio et al. teach the non-transitory computer-readable of claim 27, wherein identifying a first refresh specified by the application program for updating the display screen comprises identifying the first refresh rate specified by the application program for updating the display screen at a time corresponding to a change in the first refresh rate for different scenes of the video game (Orio, column 11, lines 20-35, a different gamma curve will be construed as a different scene, each one of said scenes is associated with a corresponding frame rate, the first refresh rate has an associated gamma curve/scene).
Claims 11 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2008/0309652 Ostlund; in view of US 2006/0146056 to Wyatt; further in view of US 11,170,692 to Orio et al.; further in view of US 11,776,502 to Waggoner.
As per claim 11, Ostlund, Wyatt and Orio teach the method of claim 8, wherein determining the permissible range of refresh rates for the display screen based on the identified first refresh rate specified by the application program comprises:
obtaining, from the display screen, a range of refresh rates that the display screen supports (Ostlund, paragraph 45, “display 130 may have a variable refresh rate between 50-100 Hertz (Hz). Adaptive refresh rate controller 320 may calculate a refresh rate of 90 Hz, since 90 is an integer multiple of 30 (i.e., 3.times.30), in other words the first refresh rate is choses so as to fit within the range of refresh rates supported by the display)”; and
determining, using the range of refresh rates, the permissible range of refresh rates that comprises the identified first refresh rate, wherein the permissible range includes the identified first refresh rate (Wyatt, Figs. 7-8, the refresh rate is dynamically adjusted between a target frequency range and lower frequency ranges so as to reduce power consumption).
Ostlund, Wyatt and Orio do not explicitly teach wherein a size of the permissible range of refresh rates is less than a size of the range of refresh rates.
Waggoner teaches wherein a size of the permissible range of refresh rates is less than a size of the range of refresh rates (column 6, lines 12-20, “a display interface in variable refresh rate mode is capable of selecting a range of refresh rates of the display (e.g., without a reset), e.g., between the minimum refresh rate and maximum refresh rate or any proper subset thereof”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to modify the device of Ostlund, Wyatt and Orio, so that a size of the permissible range of refresh rates is less than a size of the range of refresh rates, such as taught by Waggoner, for the purpose of reducing power consumption.
As per claim 20, it comprises similar limitations to those in claim 11 and it is therefore rejected for similar reasons
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSE R SOTO LOPEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5689. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, from 8 am - 5 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, Patrick Edouard can be reached at (571) 272-7603. 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.
/JOSE R SOTO LOPEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2622
Prosecution Insights