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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 [Remarks: pg. 10, last para. – pg. 13, last para.] have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 20140132162), in view of Song et al. (US 20160055798).
As to claim 1, Kim teaches a display device (display device 10) [abstract & fig. 1 & para. 42] comprising:
a first scan driver (scan driver 200) [fig. 1 & para. 47] configured to transmit first scan signals (scan signals s[1]-s[n] supply gate-on voltage @ time t1 for s[i-1] scan line & @ time t2 for s[1] scan line) [fig. 3 & para. 47, 56, & 73-74] at a turn-on level during first scan periods [fig. 3 & fig. 3 & para. 47, 56, & 73-74] and to maintain the first scan signals at a turn-off level throughout second scan periods (time t4 corresponding to reset, scan signals s[1]-s[n] off) [fig. 3 & para. 80];
a light emitting driver (light emission driver 500) [fig. 1 & para. 42 & 53] configured to transmit light emitting signals (light emitting signals em[1]-em[n] during time t1 & t2, gate-off voltage) [figs. 2-3 & 74] at a turn-off level to overlap the first scan signals at the turn-on level during the first scan periods and to transmit the light emitting signals at the turn-off level during the second scan periods (light emitting signals em[1]-em[n] during time t4, gate-off voltage) [figs. 2-3 & 80]; and
pixels (pixel 510) [figs. 1-2 & para. 54-55] configured to receive data voltages (data voltage vdat applied by data signal data[j] in response to corresponding scan signal) [figs. 1-3 & para. 48, 50, 53, 56, & 77] in response to the first scan signals at the turn-on level and to be in a non-emitting state in response to the light emitting signals at the turn-off level [figs. 1-3 & para. 60-62 & 65],
wherein,
the light emitting driver includes a plurality of light emitting stages (light emitting driving blocks 510-1, 510-2, 510-3, 510-4…) [fig. 4 & para. 84-85],
during the first scan periods, the light emitting stages sequentially generate light emitting signals of the turn-off level in units of one light emitting stage (times t12 & t13) [fig. 6 & para. 74, 120-122, & 117], and
during the second scan periods, the light emitting stages sequentially generate light emitting signals of the turn-off level in units of m light emitting stages, where m is an integer greater than 1 (time t14 corresponding to reset period t4, em[1] & em[2]) [fig. 6 & para. 80, 124-125, & 117].
Kim does not explicitly teach such that first light emitting signals of the turn-off level of a first unit of m light emitting stages are output simultaneously, and second light emitting signals of the turn-off level of a second unit of m light emitting stages are output simultaneously and delayed relative to the first light emitting signals.
Song teaches the concept of a display device [abstract], wherein a first light emitting signals of a turn-off level of a first unit of m light emitting stages are output simultaneously (ebk-1) [figs. 10-11 & para. 77-78 & 63], and second light emitting signals of the turn-off level of a second unit of m light emitting stages are output simultaneously and delayed relative to the first light emitting signals (ebk-2, occurs after the completion of ebk-1) [figs. 10-11 & para. 77-78 & 63].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the light emitting signals of the light emitting driver of the display device of Kim, such that first light emitting signals of the turn-off level of a first unit of m light emitting stages are output simultaneously, and second light emitting signals of the turn-off level of a second unit of m light emitting stages are output simultaneously and delayed relative to the first light emitting signals, as taught by Song, to improve image quality by providing a suitable emission mode corresponding to an image to be displayed, as taught by Song [para. 82].
As to claim 2, Kim as modified by Song teaches the display device of claim 1 (see above).
Kim as modified by Song does not explicitly teach wherein the integer m is a multiple of 2.
However, there are clearly only two options regarding providing light emitting signals to a plurality of light emitting stages of a light emitting driver.
The light emitting signals are provided to an even plurality of light emitting stages.
The light emitting signals are provided to an odd plurality of light emitting stages.
This group of approaches address the need to provide light emitting signals to the plurality of light emitting stages with a reasonable level of success.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to try to modify the display device of Kim as modified by Song, such that the light emitting signals are provided to an even plurality of light emitting stages, since there are finite number of identified and predictable potential solutions to the recognized need (as discussed above) and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention could have pursued the known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success.
Thus, Kim as modified by Song teaches wherein the integer m is a multiple of 2 (integer greater than 2, as modified even plurality of stages of integer would correspond to multiples of 2) [Song: para. 78 & 63].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-10 are 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.
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 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 DAVID TUNG whose telephone number is (571)270-3385. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday; 10:00AM - 6:00PM.
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.
/DAVID TUNG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2622
Prosecution Insights