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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Korea on 11/05/2021. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the Korean application. The Examiner will attempt to initiate retrieval of the foreign priority document.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 01/21/2026. These drawings are not acceptable.
The replacement sheets include misspellings. See Fig. 5, for example.
“)” sometimes appears in the absence of “(”. See Fig. 4. See also Fig. 5.
Different parts are similarly labeled. See “First Reference Gamma Curve” and “First Reference Gamma Curve” in Fig. 5, for example.
Reference character 10 does not include a lead line pointing to any part meant by reference character 10.
The meaning (if any) of a large rectangle surrounding Fig. 5 is unclear.
The relationship (if any) between Driving Voltage Domain Deviation Data and First Compensation Video Data is inconsistent between Figs. 4 and 5. See Fig. 4, wherein First Compensation Video Data appears to exist without Driving Voltage Domain Deviation Data as an input. Compare Fig. 5, wherein Modified Gamma Curve appears as an intermediate input between Driving Voltage Domain Deviation Data and First Compensation Video Data.
Drawing sheet numbers, if present, must be placed in the middle top of each sheet, but not in the margin. See 37 CFR 1.84(t).
Drawing sheets “should have scan target points (i.e., cross-hairs) printed on two catercorner margin corners.” See 37 CFR 1.84(g).
“Identifying indicia should be provided, and if provided, should include the title of the invention, inventor’s name, and application number, or docket number (if any) if an application number has not been assigned to the application. If this information is provided, it must be placed on the front of each sheet within the top margin.” See 37 CFR 1.84(c).
The drawings filed 01/23/2025 are objected to because:
Numbers, letters, and reference characters do not measure at least 1/8 inch in height as required by 37 CFR 1.84(p).
Solid black shading is not permitted by 37 CFR 1.84(m), which recites “Solid black shading areas are not permitted, except when used to represent bar graphs or color.” See OLED in Fig. 1, for example.
Different parts are similarly labeled. See Fig. 4, for example, wherein two different parts are labeled as ΔLU, and two different parts are labeled as ΔBeta. See also Figs. 2-3 and 5, for example, wherein one “Original Gamma Curve” refers to a first reference gamma curve shown in Figs. 2 and 5, while an identically-labeled “Original Gamma Curve” refers to a second reference gamma curve shown in Figs. 3 and 5.
Views are not “arranged on the sheet(s) without wasting space” as required by 37 CFR 1.84(h).
Views are numbered in association with brackets, in letters and numbers which are shorter than required, contrary to 37 CFR 1.84(u)(2) which recites “Numbers and letters identifying the views … must not be used in association with brackets… The view numbers must be larger than the numbers used for reference characters.”
Identifying indicia are present, but do not include the title of the invention nor the inventor’s name.
Dimensions of margins are unclear, there being no scan target points on catercorner margin corners. For this reason, it is unclear whether “[Drawings]” appears within the margin or within the sight.
Some reference characters are not legible. See partial character at the end of a lead line for a 2nd storage unit in Fig. 4, for example.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 3.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims.
Therefore, the feature(s) “display driver integrated circuit … comprising: a memory” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
The feature(s) “a compensation data generator” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
The feature(s) “memory configured to store … at least one reference gamma curve” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
The feature(s) “compensation data based on the compensation-related data stored in the memory” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
The feature(s) “obtaining” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
The feature(s) “obtained” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
The feature(s) “adding” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
The feature(s) “convert” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
The feature(s) “compensation data based on a second reference gamma curve” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
The feature(s) “linear gamma manner” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
No new matter should be entered.
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.
Specification
The amendment to the SPEC has been received and entered.
Inconsistencies between the claims and the drawings may obfuscate errors elsewhere in the disclosure. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits (e.g., “efficiently compensated”) or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art (e.g., “reduced circuit”).
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
The Examiner acknowledges, but has not entered, the replacement ABST. The replacement ABST refers to purported merits (e.g., “efficiently compensated”), compares the invention with the prior art (e.g., “reduced circuit”), does not indicate what (if anything) is new in the art, and does not include a technical disclosure of the improvement (if any).
The abstract of the disclosure remains objected to because it remains unclear whether the abstract refers to a method or to an apparatus for performing the method. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Independent claim 1 recites “display driver integrated circuit … comprising: a memory”. This is inconsistent with the appearance of display driver IC 10 in Fig. 4, to the extent understood.
Independent claim 1 recites “compensation data … compensation data … compensation data”. It is unclear whether these limitations refer to the same compensation data or to different compensation data. The Examiner suggests that distinct names would be useful for assisting the reader to distinguish distinct data.
Independent claim 1 recites “the thin film transistor”. Which one? A typical display includes millions of pixels, each with its own pixel circuit comprising at least one drive transistor.
Independent claim 1 recites “obtaining … obtained”. It is unclear what structure obtains.
Independent claim 1 recites “compensated by adding compensation data obtained in a gamma curve domain between the luminance and a driving voltage.” Adding compensation data to what?
Claim 2 recites “first compensation circuit unit”. It is unclear whether this limitation refers to the “compensation data generator” of claim 1 or to some other unit. Furthermore, it is unclear whether or not “compensation data generator” constitutes sufficient structure to perform the first compensation circuit unit’s function “to generate first compensation video data based on the compensation-related data stored in the memory”. For this reason, the Examiner cannot reasonably determine whether or not to apply 35 USC § 112(f).
Claim 2 recites “the set first reference gamma curve”. It is unclear whether this limitation refers to “at least one reference gamma curve” of claim 1 or to some other reference gamma curve. The Examiner suggests that distinct names would be useful for assisting the reader to distinguish distinct curves.
Claim 2 recites “compensation data”. It is unclear whether this limitation refers to any or all of the “compensation data” of claim 1 or to some additional compensation data. The Examiner suggests that distinct names would be useful for assisting the reader to distinguish distinct data.
Other rejected claims are indefinite by virtue of dependency from at least one indefinite claim.
Regarding claims 1-5: In the absence of a reasonably definite interpretation of a claim, it is improper to rely on speculative assumptions regarding the meaning of a claim and then base a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 on these assumptions (In re Steele, 305 F.2d 859,134 USPQ 292 (CCPA 1962)). See MPEP 2143.03.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/21/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Replacement drawings have not been entered. The drawings filed 01/23/2025 remain objectionable. The replacement abstract has not been entered. The originally filed abstract remains objectionable. The specification amendment has been entered. All claims remain indefinite for the reasons stated above.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Julie Anne Watko whose telephone number is (571)272-7597. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Tuesday 9AM-5PM, Wednesday 10:30AM-5PM, Thursday-Friday 9AM-5PM, and occasional Saturdays.
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, Ke Xiao can be reached at 571-272-7776. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
JULIE ANNE WATKO
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2627
/Julie Anne Watko/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2627
03/10/2026