DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 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.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/22/24 has been considered by the examiner.
Specification
3. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: on line 3 of paragraph [0003], "a" should be changed to --an--. On line 2 of paragraph [0004], the second occurrence of "in order" should be deleted. On line 5 of paragraph [0019], the word "are" should be changed to --is--. On line 3 of paragraph [0020], the word "refers" should be changed to --refer--. On line 3 of paragraph [0026], a period should be inserted at the end of the line. On the second line of paragraph [0030], the word "receives" should be changed to --receive--. On line 7 of paragraph [0038], "same or similar as" should be changed to --same as or similar--. On line 3 of paragraph [0039], the word "at" should be changed to --in--, and also in this paragraph, on line 5, the word "comprises" should be changed to --comprise--. On line 4 of paragraph [0040], "LEDs" should be changed to --LED--. On line 7 of paragraph [0041], a comma should be inserted at the end of the line after the word "and". On line 3 of paragraph [0045], the word "generates" should be changed to --generate--. On line 3 of paragraph [0047], the word "modifies" should be changed to --modify--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
4. The drawings are objected to because in figure 2 of the originally filed drawings, "CALIBRATION DATA 116" should be changed to --CALIBRATION DATA 118-- (note what is indicated in paragraph [0034] of the originally filed specification), and in figure 3 of the originally filed drawings, "DRIVERS OF THE LIGHT" should be changed to
--LEDs--, i.e., in order to consistent with what is recited on the last three lines of independent claim 1 and what is recited on the last three lines of independent claim 9. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
5. Claims 10-12, 14 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
On line 2 of claim 10, the word "further" should be deleted, the reason being that the step of modifying recited on the last three lines of claim 9 is not recited as comprising anything, and therefore to recite, in claim 10, that it "further" comprises anything is improper. Note the same problem on the second line of claim 11, on the second line of claim 12, on lines 2 and 5 of claim 14, and on the second line of claim 15, i.e., the word "further" should similarly be deleted (applicant should note that the word "further" set forth on the second line of claim 18 is, by contrast, proper because in claim 17 the claimed controller is recited as comprising at least one driver).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zuena et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0196963, in view of either Park et al, U.S. Patent No. 11,626,057, or Ong et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0239804.
As to claim 1, Zuena et al discloses a controller for dynamically adjusting a color temperature of a light, the controller comprising:
at least one driver (although Zuena et al does not disclose the claimed at least one driver, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the light emitting elements, e.g., LEDs, within display 125 or display 140 shown in figure 1 will inherently or obviously be driven by a plurality of drivers, i.e., it was old and well-known in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's invention that the light emitting elements, e.g., LEDs, within displays are typically driven by gate and source drivers, two examples of this well-known concept being disclosed by Park et al and Ong et al, note the gate and source drivers 335 and 345 shown in figure 3 of the former and note the display drivers shown in figure 2 of the latter) configured to modify an operation of at least one light emitting diode (LED) of the light (the at least one driver in Zuena et al--obvious, as noted above--will inherently or obviously be configured to modify the operation of the light emitting elements, e.g., LEDs, within Zuena et al's display 125 or display 140);
at least one communication interface (inherently or obviously in the figure 1 controller of Zuena et al, there will be at least one communication interface used for inputting a plurality of red, green, and blue pixel values to Zuena et al's processor, note paragraphs [0043] and [0078] of this reference where the claimed at least one processor is disclosed); and
at least one processor (note paragraphs [0043] and [0078] of Zuena et al where the claimed at least one processor is disclosed by this reference) configured to:
receive, via the at least one communication interface, a plurality of red, green and blue (RGB) pixel values for output at the light (inherently in Zuena et al's figure 1, the above-noted inherent or obvious communication interface will receive a plurality of RGB pixel values for output by the light within Zuena et al's display 125 or display 140);
identify a target color temperature for the light (note figure 2A of Zuena et al which shows a plurality of target color temperatures for Zuena et al's light, i.e., these target color temperatures range from a low of 5500K up to a high of 9500K);
generate one or more matrix transforms based on the target color temperature (see paragraph [0011] of Zuena et al and also step 320 shown in figure 3 of this reference where the generation of matrix transforms is disclosed, and note that such matrix transforms will inherently, during the operation of Zuena et al's controller, be based on the above-noted target color temperature);
process the plurality of RGB pixel values using the one or more matrix transforms to generate a plurality of linear light values (note the last two lines of paragraph [0011] in Zuena et al where the claimed processing of the plurality of RGB pixel values is disclosed, i.e., Zuena et al indicates that the matrix transforms are applied to the input image data—applicant should note that such input image data inherently has RGB pixel values to which the matrix transforms of Zuena et al are applied, note that such application of the matrix transforms to the RGB pixel values of the input image data will inherently generate a plurality of linear light values); and
modify, utilizing the at least one driver (the claimed at least one driver, as noted above, would have been obvious within the controller of Zuena et al), the operation of the at least one LED based on a plurality of linear light values to implement the target color temperature for the light (inherently in the controller of Zuena et al, the above-noted at least one driver will be utilized, during the operation of Zuena et al's controller, in order to modify the operation of the light emitting elements, e.g., LEDs, based on the above-noted plurality of linear light values which result from the above-noted processing of the plurality of RGB pixel values using Zuena et al's matrix transforms).
As to claim 2, note paragraph [0003] of Zuena et al which indicates that the light emitting elements, e.g., LEDs, within display 125 or within display 140 are calibrated, note that such calibration will inherently or obviously be performed via calibration data stored in a memory, and Zuena et al's controller will inherently or obviously send driver control signals to the above-noted at least one driver as part of Zuena et al's color temperature adjustment process.
As to claim 3, note that during the operation of Zuena et al's controller, the above-noted one or more matrix transforms are inherently configured to perform color space transformations of the RGB pixel values.
As to claim 4, official notice is taken by the examiner that color space transformations typically comprise transformations between an RGB color space, an XYZ color space, a long, medium, short (LMS) color space, and/or a color space defined by Bianco Schettini positivity constraint matrix transformation, and any person having ordinary skill in the art would have easily recognized that the above-noted color space transformations of the RGB pixel values disclosed by Zuena et al could obviously comprise any one of RGB color space transformations, XYZ color space transformation, etc. The same is true for the limitations recited in claims 5-8, i.e., official notice is also taken by the examiner that matrix transforms typically comprise achromatic adaptation matrix having terms based on a ratio of the target color temperature and a color temperature of the RGB pixel values (as per claim 5), a processor within a display controller typically receives, via a communication interface, a DMX profile that specifies a desired color temperature, and one or more DMX messages that include RGB pixel values (as per claim 6), a controller typically comprises a user interface used for providing color temperature data to the processor thereof (as per claim 7), and a Bianco Schettini positivity constraint matrix is a well-known type of matrix transform (as per claim 8).
As to claims 9-20, because the limitations of these method claims are essentially the same as the limitations recited in claims 1-8, they are all rejected using the same analysis as set forth above with regard to claims 1-8.
Prior Art Not Relied Upon
7. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Note also paragraph [0140] of Hille et al, cited on the attached PTO-892 form, which discloses an image processing system which uses matrix transformations for implementing a target color temperature of a light.
Conclusion
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH B WELLS whose telephone number is (571)272-1757. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am-5pm.
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, LINCOLN DONOVAN can be reached at (571)272-1988. 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.
/KENNETH B WELLS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2842 October 20, 2025