ETAILED 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 claims 1 and 13 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
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 1-3, 7, 8, 12-14, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 12,316,146 to Chiluvuri et al.; in view of US 2022/0334604 to Kim et al.; in view of US 2013/0342177 to Slattery.
As per claim 1, Chiluvuri et al. teach an electronic device comprising:
a constant voltage supply unit (Fig. 4, charging circuit 402) which receives a first voltage (Fig. 4, VDD_Low) from a power supply device (Fig. 4, means for generating VDD_Low) and generates a second voltage (Fig. 4, VDD_Out) based on the first voltage;
a driving circuit (Fig. 4, device 104) which receives the second voltage from the constant voltage supply unit and operates based on the second voltage; and
a voltage adjusting unit (Fig. 4, 124/128) which generates a control signal (Fig. 4, ENABLE) to change the first voltage based on a power source current corresponding to the second voltage (column 11, lines 14-20, “The charging circuits 402 may selectively be used to cause current associated with a first voltage source 404(1) or a second voltage source 404(2) to be provided to an electrical device 104 engaged with the charger device 102, based on measured values determined using a load sensing circuit 124”).
Chiluvuri et al. do not explicitly teach wherein the first voltage is further changed based on the second voltage.
Kim et al. teach wherein the first voltage is further changed based on the second voltage (Fig. 4B and 4C, paragraph 40, the voltages used so as to supply a necessary level of current are based on voltage measurement at the load node).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to modify the device of Chiluvuri et al., so that the first voltage is further changed based on the second voltage, such as taught by Kim et al., for the purpose of reducing power consumption.
Chiluvuri and Kim et al. do not teach wherein a voltage level of the first voltage is further changed based on the second voltage.
Slattery suggests wherein a voltage level of the first voltage (Fig. 1, paragraph 21, “the control logic 106 controls the output 108 to drive the remote load 114 with a predetermined current (IOUT) and receives measurements from the measuring circuit 112 (e.g., voltage measurements). Based on the measurements from the measuring circuit 112 and the known predetermined current output (IOUT), the control logic 106 determines the remote load RLOAD 114 and dynamically adjusts the voltage supplied by the internal power supply 110 (via the control signal VF) to produce the desired output compliance voltage VOUT”, the load voltage VOUT is analogous to the load voltages 404(1) and 404(2) in Fig. 4 of Chiluvuri) is further changed based on the second voltage (Fig. 1, the load voltage measured by the measuring circuit 112 is analogous to the load voltage VDD_Out in Fig, 4 of Chiluvuri).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to modify the device of Chiluvuri and Kim et al., so that a voltage level of the first voltage is further changed based on the second voltage, such as taught by Slattery, for the purpose of further stabilizing dynamic load voltages.
As per claim 2, Chiluvuri, Kim and Slattery et al. teach the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the constant voltage supply unit includes a low drop-out circuit (Chiluviri, Fig. 5, 502), and wherein the voltage adjusting unit senses the power source current flowing through the low drop-out circuit (Fig. 5, the LDO is connected in series with the load so that the sense current is at least indirectly that of the LDO).
As per claim 3, Chiluvuri, Kim and Slattery et al. teach the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the voltage adjusting unit senses the second voltage and generates the control signal based on the power source current and the second voltage (Chiluvuri, column 11, lines 14-20, “The charging circuits 402 may selectively be used to cause current associated with a first voltage source 404(1) or a second voltage source 404(2) to be provided to an electrical device 104 engaged with the charger device 102, based on measured values determined using a load sensing circuit 124”; Kim, Fig. 4B and 4C, paragraph 40, the voltages used so as to supply a necessary level of current are based on voltage measurement at the load node).
As per claim 7, Chiluvuri, Kim and Slattery et al. teach the electronic device of claim 3, wherein the constant voltage supply unit includes: a first low drop-out circuit which receives the first voltage; and a second low drop-out circuit which receives a third voltage, wherein the voltage adjusting unit senses the power source current flowing through the second low drop-out circuit (Chiluvuri, Figs. 4 and 5, an LDO receives a power supply voltage, it is implicitly disclosed that supply voltages other than VDD_IN may be also connected to an LDO, said LDO is in series with the load so that the measured current by the load sensing circuit is at least indirectly that of the LDO, see also Fig. 1 of Kim).
As per claim 8, Chiluvuri, Kim and Slattery Kim et al. teach the electronic device of claim 2, wherein the low drop-out circuit receives a third voltage (Chiluvuri, Figs. 4 and 5 suggest connecting VDD_Low to an LDO, see also Fig. 1 of Kim).
As per claim 12, Chiluvuri, Kim and Slattery Kim et al. teach the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the driving circuit performs an operation of displaying an image, and wherein the voltage adjusting unit generates the control signal every frame cycle of the driving circuit (Oh et al, Fig. 6, adjustments are continuously performed during operation).
As per claim 13, Chiluvuri et al. teach an electronic system comprising:
a power supply device which generates a first voltage (Fig. 4, VDD_Low) based on a control signal (Fig. 4, ENABLE)
a constant voltage supply unit (Fig. 4, charging circuit 402) which generates a second voltage (Fig. 4, VDD_Out) based on the first voltage;
a driving circuit (Fig. 4, device 104) which operates based on the second voltage generated by the constant voltage supply unit;
a processor (Fig. 4, 124/128) which generates the control signal based on a power source current corresponding to the second voltage (column 11, lines 14-20, “The charging circuits 402 may selectively be used to cause current associated with a first voltage source 404(1) or a second voltage source 404(2) to be provided to an electrical device 104 engaged with the charger device 102, based on measured values determined using a load sensing circuit 124”).
Chiluvuri et al. do not explicitly teach wherein the first voltage is further changed based on the second voltage.
Kim et al. teach wherein the first voltage is further changed based on the second voltage (Fig. 4B and 4C, paragraph 40, the voltages used so as to supply a necessary level of current are based on voltage measurement at the load node).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to modify the device of Chiluvuri et al., so that the first voltage is further changed based on the second voltage, such as taught by Kim et al., for the purpose of reducing power consumption.
Chiluvuri and Kim et al. do not teach wherein a voltage level of the first voltage is based on the control signal.
Slattery suggests wherein a voltage level of the first voltage (Fig. 1, paragraph 21, “the control logic 106 controls the output 108 to drive the remote load 114 with a predetermined current (IOUT) and receives measurements from the measuring circuit 112 (e.g., voltage measurements). Based on the measurements from the measuring circuit 112 and the known predetermined current output (IOUT), the control logic 106 determines the remote load RLOAD 114 and dynamically adjusts the voltage supplied by the internal power supply 110 (via the control signal VF) to produce the desired output compliance voltage VOUT”, the load voltage VOUT is analogous to the load voltages 404(1) and 404(2) in Fig. 4 of Chiluvuri) is based on the control signal (Fig. 1, the load voltage measured by the measuring circuit 112 is analogous to the load voltage VDD_Out in Fig, 4 of Chiluvuri. Furthermore, notice that in Chivuliri, the current active voltage (404(1) vs 40(2))) driving the load voltage VDD_Out is based at least indirectly on said control signal (Enable). In other words, Slattery suggests modifying the current active voltage influencing the load, and said current output voltage is determined, at least indirectly, based on the control signal of Chiluvuri).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to modify the device of Chiluvuri and Kim et al., so that a voltage level of the first voltage is further changed based on the control signal, such as taught by Slattery, for the purpose of further stabilizing dynamic load voltages.
As per claim 14, Chiluvuri, Kim and Slattery Kim et al. teach the electronic system of claim 13, wherein the constant voltage supply unit includes a low drop-out circuit (Chiluviri, Fig. 5, 502), and wherein the processor senses the power source current flowing through the low drop-out circuit (Fig. 5, the LDO is connected in series with the load so that the sense current is at least indirectly that of the LDO) and the second voltage (Kim, Fig. 4B and 4C, paragraph 40, the voltages used so as to supply a necessary level of current are based on voltage measurement at the load node).
As per claim 18, it comprises similar limitations to those in claim 7 and it is therefore rejected for similar reasons.
As per claim 19, it comprises similar limitations to those in claim 8 and it is therefore rejected for similar reasons.
Claims 4-6 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 12,316,146 to Chiluvuri et al.; in view of US 2022/0334604 to Kim et al.; in view of US 2013/0342177 to Slattery; further in view of US 2025/0006103 to Oh et al.
As per claim 4, Chiluvuri, Kim and Slattery et al. teach the electronic device of claim 3.
Chiluvuri, Kim and Slattery et al. do not explicitly teach wherein when the second voltage is greater than a predetermined reference voltage value and the power source current is less than or equal to a predetermined reference current value, the voltage adjusting unit generates the control signal to control the power supply device in a way such that the first voltage is lowered.
Oh et al. teach wherein when the second voltage is greater than a predetermined reference voltage value and the power source current is less than or equal to a predetermined reference current value, the voltage adjusting unit generates the control signal to control the power supply device in a way such that the first voltage is lowered (Figs. 5 and 6, paragraphs 96 and 101, a load state is determined based on the current level and subsequently a voltage level is proportionally changed, so that if a voltage is too high after a current is lowered, then the voltage is lowered as well).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to modify the device of Chiluvuri, Kim and Slattery et al. so that when the second voltage is greater than a predetermined reference voltage value and the power source current is less than or equal to a predetermined reference current value, the voltage adjusting unit generates the control signal to control the power supply device in a way such that the first voltage is lowered, such as taught by Oh et al., for the purpose of extending the life of the device.
As per claim 5, Chiluvuri, Kim and Slattery et al. teach the electronic device of claim 3.
Chiluvuri, Kim and Slattery et al. do not explicitly teach wherein when the second voltage is less than or equal to a predetermined reference voltage value and the power source current is less than or equal to a predetermined reference current value, the voltage adjusting unit generates the control signal to control the power supply device in a way such that the first voltage is maintained.
Oh et al. teach wherein when the second voltage is less than or equal to a predetermined reference voltage value and the power source current is less than or equal to a predetermined reference current value, the voltage adjusting unit generates the control signal to control the power supply device in a way such that the first voltage is maintained (Figs. 5 and 6, paragraphs 96 and 101, see also Fig. 3, step S240, during light mode the voltage is maintained at a lower level).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to modify the device of Chiluvuri, Kim and Slattery et al. so that when the second voltage is less than or equal to a predetermined reference voltage value and the power source current is less than or equal to a predetermined reference current value, the voltage adjusting unit generates the control signal to control the power supply device in a way such that the first voltage is maintained, such as taught by Oh et al., for the purpose of extending the life of the device.
As per claim 6, Chiluvuri, Kim and Slattery et al. teach the electronic device of claim 3.
Chiluvuri, Kim and Slattery et al. do not explicitly teach wherein when the second voltage is less than or equal to a predetermined reference voltage value and the power source current is greater than a predetermined reference current value, the voltage adjusting unit generates the control signal to control the power supply device in a way such that the first voltage is raised.
Oh et al. teach wherein when the second voltage is less than or equal to a predetermined reference voltage value and the power source current is greater than a predetermined reference current value, the voltage adjusting unit generates the control signal to control the power supply device in a way such that the first voltage is raised (Figs. 5 and 6, paragraphs 96 and 101, a load state is determined based on the current level and subsequently a voltage level is proportionally changed, so that if a voltage is too low after a current is raised, then the voltage is raised as well).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to modify the device of Chiluvuri, Kim and Slattery et al. so that when the second voltage is less than or equal to a predetermined reference voltage value and the power source current is greater than a predetermined reference current value, the voltage adjusting unit generates the control signal to control the power supply device in a way such that the first voltage is raised, such as taught by Oh et al., for the purpose of extending the life of the device.
As per claim 15, it comprises similar limitations to those in claim 4 and it is therefore rejected for similar reasons.
As per claim 16, it comprises similar limitations to those in claim 5 and it is therefore rejected for similar reasons.
As per claim 17, it comprises similar limitations to those in claim 6 and it is therefore rejected for similar reasons.
Claims 9-11 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 12,316,146 to Chiluvuri et al.; in view of US 2022/0334604 to Kim et al.; in view of US 2013/0342177 to Slattery; further in view of US 2025/0006103 to Oh et al.; in view of US 11,127,345 to Seo et al.
As per claim 9, Chiluvuri, Kim and Slattery et al. teach the electronic device of claim 1,
Chiluvuri, Kim and Slattery et al. do not explicitly teach wherein the driving circuit receives data.
Oh et al. teach wherein the driving circuit receives data (paragraph 62).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to modify the device of Chiluvuri, Kim and Slattery et al. so that the driving circuit receives data, such as taught by Oh et a., for the purpose of protecting display devices.
Chiluvuri, Kim, Slattery and Oh et al. do not explicitly teach wherein the voltage adjusting unit calculates the power source current based on the data.
Seo et al teach wherein the voltage adjusting unit calculates the power source current based on the data (column 2, lines 60-65, “calculating a target current using a frame load calculated for an image frame of input image data”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to modify the device of Chiluvuri, Kim. Slattery and Oh et al., so that the voltage adjusting unit calculates the power source current based on the data, such as taught by Seo et al., for the purpose of improving display quality.
As per claim 10, Chiluvuri, Kim, Slattery Oh and Seo et al teach the electronic device of claim 9, wherein the driving circuit performs an operation of displaying an image, and the data is image data (Chiluvuri, Fig. 4).
As per claim 11, Chiluvuri, Kim, Slattery Oh and Seo et al the electronic device of claim 9, wherein the voltage adjusting unit senses the second voltage and generates the control signal based on the power source current and the second voltage (Chiluvuri, column 11, lines 14-20, “The charging circuits 402 may selectively be used to cause current associated with a first voltage source 404(1) or a second voltage source 404(2) to be provided to an electrical device 104 engaged with the charger device 102, based on measured values determined using a load sensing circuit 124”; Kim, Fig. 4B and 4C, paragraph 40, the voltages used so as to supply a necessary level of current are based on voltage measurement at the load node).
As per claim 20, Chiluvuri, Kim and Slattery et al. teach the electronic system of claim 13,
Chiluvuri, Kim and Slattery et al. do not explicitly teach wherein the electronic device is a display device.
Oh et al. teach wherein the electronic device is a display device (paragraph 62).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to modify the device of Chiluvuri, Kim and Slattery et al. so that the electronic device is a display device, such as taught by Oh et a., for the purpose of protecting display devices.
Chiluvuri, Kim, Slattery and Oh et al. do not explicitly teach wherein the processor calculates the power source current based on image data transmitted to the display device.
Seo et al teach calculates the power source current based on image data transmitted to the display device (column 2, lines 60-65, “calculating a target current using a frame load calculated for an image frame of input image data”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to modify the device of Chiluvuri, Kim, Slattery and Oh et al., so that calculates the power source current based on image data transmitted to the display device, such as taught by Seo et al., for the purpose of improving display quality.
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 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