Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/759,085

PROCESSING APPARATUS, DISPLAY DEVICE AND PROCESSING METHOD

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jun 28, 2024
Examiner
ABDIN, SHAHEDA A
Art Unit
2627
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Lenovo (Beijing) Limited
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
561 granted / 712 resolved
+16.8% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+19.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
733
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.0%
-38.0% vs TC avg
§103
72.2%
+32.2% vs TC avg
§102
11.1%
-28.9% vs TC avg
§112
6.0%
-34.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 712 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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 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. 1. Claim(s) 1-5, 7-8, 15, 17-18, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woo (US 20160109934 A1) in view of Tran (US 20160109934). Regarding claims 1 and 14: Woo (US 20160109934 A1) discloses a processing apparatus (in Fig. 2-3, 14), comprising: a first interface (interface 111, processor 1, see Fig. 3) configured to obtain first input data (Ddata1), the first input data coming from a collection device (e.g. camera, 4091, see Fig. 14, (also see [0178], [0020-0021], [0072, 0084], [0156-0160]), a second interface (interface for processor 2, see Fig. 3) configured to obtain second input data (DData2 the second input data coming from a source (HDMI) different from that of the first input data ([0020-0021], [0072] [0085-0089], see Fig. 14); the first input data (DDTA1) coming from a collection device (i.e. MIPI, [0020-0021], [0156-0160], Fig. 14); Noe that Woo discloses a processing module processing module configured to convert, using hardware circuitry (i.e. MIPI, [0020-0021], [0156-0160], Fig. 14) without executing an operating system or an application ; output one or more of the first display signal (signal from 300a) and the second display signal (signal from 400a) (in 0113 discloses the AP 300a generate first display data DDATA1 based on the sensing information INFO, and see Fig. 4. In [0107] discloses AP 300a may determine an operating mode conversion signal, the MCU 400a may generate second display data DDATA2 based on the sensing information INFO, and directly provide the second display data DDATA2 to the display driver circuit 100. However, Woo does not specifically discloses a processing module configured to convert the input data into display signal and wherein the display parameters of the first input data are determined based on a preset table stored in the collection device. Tran (US 20160109934) a processing module configured to convert (converted by luminance matrix method) the input data into display signal (see,[0031] [0075], input data is a video fitted signal converted as display image signal. The input data corresponding to display parameters, which represent display resolution and display brighness (see [0043], [0046]) and wherein the display parameters (display brightness, contrast and sharpness or resolution) of the input data are determined based on a preset table stored in the collection device (e.g. 102) ([0010], [0025], [0043]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Woo with the teaching of Tran, thereby adjusting the image quality of the display signal. Regarding claims 2 and 15: Woo discloses wherein when outputting one or more of the first display signal (signal from processor 1) and the second display signal (signal from processor 2), the processing module is further configured to: output one or more of the first display signal and the second display signal to a display device (200), such that the display device displays first display information of the first display signal and/or second display information of the second display signal (see Fig. 14, [0156-0159]). Regarding claim 3: Woo discloses wherein the first display signal and the second display signal are a same type of signals (i.e.display driving signal) ([0072], [0086]). Regarding claim 4: Woo discloses wherein: the processing module (1200) is connected to one or more display devices (see Fig. 14), and is configured to output one or more of the first display signal and the second display signal to the one or more display devices ((see Fig. 14 [0156-0159]). Regarding claims 5 and 17: Woo discloses wherein when outputting one or more of the first display signal and the second display signal, the processing module (1200) is further configured to: output the first display signal to a first display device to display the first display information of the first display signal (see Fig. 14 [0156-0159]). or output the second display signal to a second display device to display the second display information of the second display signal, the second display device being independent of the first display device; or output the first display signal to the first display device to display the first display information of the first display signal, and outputting the second display signal to the second display device to display the second display information of the second display signal ((see Fig. 14 [0156-0159]). Regarding claim 18: Woo discloses wherein the first display signal and the second display signal are a same type of signals (i.e. display pixel driving signal) ([0072], [0086]). Regarding claim 7: Woo discloses wherein: the first interface is a mobile industry processing interface (MIPI) of the collective device ([0020-0021], [0156-0160]). Regarding claim 8: Woo discloses wherein: the second interface is an interface connected to a graphics card, a high-definition multimedia interface (HDMI) device, or a display port (DP) device ([0020-0021], [0156-0160]). Regarding claim 19: Woo in view of Tran discloses wherein when outputting one or more of the first display signal and the second display signal, the processing module is further configured to: output the first display signal and the second display signal to a display device (see Woo, [0015-0016]) and Tran [0031, 0075]), such that the display device displays first display information of the first display signal and second display information of the second display signal (see Woo, [0015-0016]) and Tran [0031, 0075]). Same motivation as applied to claim 1. Regarding claim 20: Woo in view of Tran discloses wherein when outputting one or more of the first display signal and the second display signal (see Woo Fig. 6, and Tran Fig.2) the processing module is further configured to: output the first display signal to a first display device to display first display information of the first display signal, and see Woo, [0015-0016]) and Tran [0031, 0075]; output the second display signal to a second display device to display second display information of the second display signal, the second display device being independent of the first display device (see Woo, [0015-0016]) and Tran [0031, 0075]) .Same motivation as applied to claim 1. 2. Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woo (US 20160109934 A1) in view of Tran and further in view of Kim (US 20160078833 A1). Regarding claim 16: Woo discloses wherein displaying by the display device the first display information of the first display signal (display signal from DDATA1) and/or the second display information of the second display signal comprises: displaying all or a portion of the first display information (display driving information from DDATA 1) in a first display area of the display device (1201) (see Woo, ([0020-0021], [0072] [0085-0089], see Fig. 14); Note that Woo does not specifically disclose displaying all or a portion of the second display information in a second display area of the display device; wherein the first display area and the second display area together form an entire display area or a portion of the entire display area of the display device, and a first pixel array corresponding to the first display area interferes with a second pixel array corresponding to the second display area. Kim (US 20160078833 A1) discloses displaying all or a portion of the second display information in a second display area of the display device (i.e. Panel II, see, Fig. 1 and [0023-0024]); wherein the first display area and the second display area (Panel I, see Fig. 1) together form an entire display area or a portion of the entire display area of the display device (see [0023-0024]), and a first pixel array (PX) corresponding to the first display area interferes (affect) with a second pixel array corresponding to the second display area ([see 0030-0033], [0052-005]) (i.e. note that pixel arrays are corresponding to the first and second display, the first command CMD1 may control the displaying operation for half of a display panel, and the second command CMD2 may control the displaying operation for the remaining half of the display panel, thereby the first pixel arrays interferes with the second pixel arrays) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Woo with the teaching of Tran and Kim, thereby he performance of the electronic display could be increased. Responds to Applicant’s argument 3. Applicant’s argument filed on 11/17/2025 has been considered but are not persuasive. More specifically the Applicant argues that Woo in view of Tran fails to teach or suggest the limitations “a processing module processing module configured to convert, using hardware circuitry without executing an operating system or an application”. However, Woo discloses a processing module processing module configured to convert, using hardware circuitry (i.e. MIPI, [0020-0021], [0156-0160], Fig. 14) without executing an operating system or an application ; output one or more of the first display signal (signal from 300a) and the second display signal (signal from 400a) (in 0113 discloses the AP 300a generate first display data DDATA1 based on the sensing information INFO, and see Fig. 4. In [0107] discloses AP 300a may determine an operating mode conversion signal, the MCU 400a may generate second display data DDATA2 based on the sensing information INFO, and directly provide the second display data DDATA2 to the display driver circuit 100. Allowable subject matter 4. Claims 9-13 are allowed and claims 20 is 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. Pertinent art 5. The pertinent art of record US 20020026642 A1 discloses display device. Inquiry 6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to Shaheda Abdin whose telephone number is (571) 270-1673. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, LunYi Lao could 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 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 PAIR system, see http://pari-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. /SHAHEDA A ABDIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2621
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 28, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jun 25, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 13, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Nov 17, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 15, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 13, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603056
DATA DRIVING INTEGRATED CIRCUIT, DISPLAY APPARATUS, AND PIXEL COMPENSATION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598879
ORGANIC LIGHT EMITTING DIODE DISPLAY DEVICE AND METHOD OF DRIVING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12581801
DISPLAY SUBSTRATE AND DISPLAY APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12579959
DISPLAY DEVICE AND CONTROL METHOD THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12573345
GATE DRIVING PANEL CIRCUIT, DISPLAY PANEL AND DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+19.0%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 712 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month