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 Amendment and Arguments
Amendments and arguments filed on 04/06/2026 have been fully considered and are not found to place the application in a condition for allowance. While the office agrees that Kuang and Oh do not specifically teach the configuration of the “enable fourth scan signal” as claimed, the Office does not find such limitations to place the application in a condition for allowance.
Specifically, Chung is found to teach such limitations and the claims are found unpatentable in view of Kuang, Oh and Chung. No arguments regarding the teachings of Chung has been provided. Accordingly, the arguments are found moot. The following action provides further details.
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.
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.
Claims 1-9 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuang et al., US 2023/0419904 A1, hereinafter “Kuang”, in view of Oh et al., US 2020/0082768 A1, hereinafter “Oh”, and further in view of Chung et al., US 2022/0101785 A1, hereinafter “Chung”.
Regarding claim 1, Kuang teaches a display device (fig. 1, ¶ 34) comprising: pixels (fig. 1, element 12, ¶ 34) connected to scan lines (fig. 1, Lsp, ¶ 51), data lines (fig. 1, Data), and emission control lines (fig. 1 and 2, LE , ¶ 51); a data driver configured to supply a data signal to the data lines during a first cycle of a frame (fig. 3, see first cycle T1, ¶ 39 and 79, the data signal Vd is provided by such a data driver); a scan driver configured to supply to the scan lines an enable first scan signal during the first cycle (fig. 3, see SP enable signal during period b, note that a signal such as SP is necessarily driven by a scan driver, see ¶ 42); and an emission driver configured to supply a disable emission control signal and an enable emission control signal to the emission control lines during the first cycle (fig. 3, see the enable (low) and disable (high) emission signals E provided during T1) and the at least one other cycle (fig. 3, see the other cycles T2 during T), wherein the emission driver supplies the disable emission control signal having a first width (fig. 3, high period of E during T1) and overlapping the enable first scan signal during the first cycle (fig. 3, see low period of SP overlapping high period of E), and with a second width different from the first width during at least one other cycle adjacent to the first cycle (fig. 3, d2 periods of E during proceeding T2 cycles).
Kuang does not teach that the emission driver is responsive to measuring a frequency component power while varying a width of the disable emission control signal to at least two different widths in response to a P-th cycle (where P is a natural number of 2 or more) within the at least one other cycle, and sets the second width of the disable emission control signal to a width that results in a lower frequency component power for the P-th cycle based on the measured frequency component powers for the at least two different widths.
Oh, however, teaches that the emission driver is responsive to measuring a frequency component power (¶ 218-219 see calculating the frequency component powers; note that the amplitude of the frequency component corresponds to the power of the frequency component) while varying a width of the disable emission control signal to at least two different widths in response to a P-th cycle (where P is a natural number of 2 or more) within the at least one other cycle (fig. 17, W1-W5, ¶ 223-225), and sets the second width of the disable emission control signal to a width that results in a lower frequency component power for the P-th cycle based on the measured frequency component powers for the at least two different widths (figs. 17-19, ¶ 226-248).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Kuang in view of Oh. The references teach driving a display device and different refresh rates and Oh further teaches a technique that results in a lower frequency component. Oh clearly teaches that such a technique may reduce flicker in such a display device thus motivating one of ordinary skill to make such a combination in order to improve the quality of the display device.
Kuang and Oh do not specifically teach supplying an enable fourth scan signal during the first cycle and at least one other cycle of the frame, wherein the disable emission signal overlaps the enable fourth scan signal during the first cycle and the at least one other cycle.
Chung, however, teaches supplying an enable fourth scan signal (signal SC2) during the first cycle (figs. 3A-J, see SC2) and at least one other cycle of the frame (figs. 4A-B, see SC2), wherein the disable emission signal overlaps the enable fourth scan signal during the first cycle and the at least one other cycle (disable emission signal (EM high) overlaps SC2 enable signals (SC2 low)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Kuang and Oh, as applied above, further in view of Chung. The references teach driving of pixel units and Chung further teaches providing and controlling a “fourth scan signal” as claimed. Specifically, Chung teaches controlling the operation of a transistor similar to M6 of Kuang during the writing cycle and holding cycles using a signal line different than the first signal line which controls the data writing. Accordingly, one would have been motivated to combine the teachings in order to independently control the operations of the anode-initializing transistor (M6 of Kuang and T6 of Oh and Chung), “thereby preventing a luminance deviation between the refresh frame and the hold frame” (see ¶ 144 of Chung).
Regarding claim 2, Kuang teaches that the first cycle is a period in which a voltage of the data signal is stored in the pixels (T1 is a data writing period, ¶ 38), and the at least one other cycle is a period in which the pixels emit light and do not emit light while maintaining the voltage of the data signal (fig. 3, T2 cycles, ¶ 45).
Kuang and Oh do not specifically teach that the emission driver supplied the disable emission control signal concurrent with the enable fourth scan signal in the first cycle and in the at least one other cycle.
Chung, however, teaches that the emission driver supplied the disable emission control signal concurrent with the enable fourth scan signal in the first cycle and in the at least one other cycle (see such concurrent driving in fig. 3B and 4A with respect to EM high (disable signal) and SC2 low (enable signal)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Kuang and Oh, as applied above, further in view of Chung. The references teach driving of pixel units and Chung further teaches providing and controlling a “fourth scan signal” as claimed. Specifically, Chung teaches controlling the operation of a transistor similar to M6 of Kuang during the writing cycle and holding cycles using a signal line different than the first signal line which controls the data writing. Accordingly, one would have been motivated to combine the teachings in order to independently control the operations of the anode-initializing transistor (M6 of Kuang and T6 of Oh and Chung), “thereby preventing a luminance deviation between the refresh frame and the hold frame” (see ¶ 144 of Chung).
Regarding claim 3, Kuang teaches that the at least one other cycle is adjacent to the first cycle, wherein the at least one other cycle is a second cycle, a third cycle, or a fourth cycle (see fig. 3, T2 cycles).
Regarding claim 4, Kuang teaches that the pixels do not emit light when the disable emission control signal is supplied to the emission control lines (fig. 3, d1/d2 periods, note that d1 is not labeled on fig. 3 and it is the high level of E during T1), and the pixels emit light when the enable emission control signal is supplied to the emission control lines (C1/C2 periods; ¶ 39).
Regarding claim 5, Kuang teaches a display device (fig. 1, ¶ 34) comprising: pixels (fig. 1, element 12, ¶ 34) connected to scan lines (fig. 1, Lsp, ¶ 51), data lines (fig. 1, Data), and emission control lines (fig. 1 and 2, LE , ¶ 51); a data driver configured to supply a data signal to the data lines (fig. 3, see first cycle T1, ¶ 39 and 79, the data signal Vd is provided by such a data driver); a scan driver configured to supply to the scan lines an enable first scan signal during one frame period (fig. 3, see SP enable signal during period b, note that a signal such as SP is necessarily driven by a scan driver, see ¶ 42); and an emission driver configured to supply a plurality of disable emission control signals and a plurality of enable emission control signals to the emission control lines during the one frame period (fig. 3, see the enable (low) and disable (high) emission signals E provided during T), wherein at least one of the plurality of disable emission control signals has a first width (fig. 3, high period of E during T1) and overlaps the enable first scan signal (fig. 3, see low period of SP overlapping high period of E), and at least one other of the plurality of disable emission control signals has a second width different from the first width (fig. 3, d2 periods of E during proceeding T2 cycles).
Kuang does not teach that the emission driver is responsive to measuring a frequency component while varying a width of the disable emission control signal to at least two different widths in response to a P-th cycle (where P is a natural number of 2 or more) within the at least one other cycle, and sets the width of the disable emission control signal to a width that results in a lower frequency component for the P-th cycle based on the measured frequency components for the at least two different widths.
Oh, however, teaches that the emission driver is responsive to measuring a frequency component (¶ 218 see calculating the frequency components) while varying a width of the disable emission control signal to at least two different widths in response to a P-th cycle (where P is a natural number of 2 or more) within the at least one other cycle (fig. 17, W1-W5, ¶ 223-225), and sets the width of the disable emission control signal to a width that results in a lower frequency component for the P-th cycle based on the measured frequency components for the at least two different widths (figs. 17-19, ¶ 226-248).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Kuang in view of Oh. The references teach driving a display device and different refresh rates and Oh further teaches a technique that results in a lower frequency component. Oh clearly teaches that such a technique may reduce flicker in such a display device thus motivating one of ordinary skill to make such a combination in order to improve the quality of the display device.
Kuang and Oh do not specifically teach supplying an enable fourth scan signal during the first cycle and at least one other cycle of the frame, wherein the disable emission signal overlaps the enable fourth scan signal during the first cycle and the at least one other cycle.
Chung, however, teaches supplying an enable fourth scan signal (signal SC2) during the one frame period (figs. 3A-J, see SC2) and at least one other cycle of the frame (figs. 4A-B, see SC2), wherein the disable emission signal overlaps only the enable fourth scan signal during the at least one other cycle (disable emission signal (EM high) only overlaps SC2 enable signals (SC2 low)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Kuang and Oh, as applied above, further in view of Chung. The references teach driving of pixel units and Chung further teaches providing and controlling a “fourth scan signal” as claimed. Specifically, Chung teaches controlling the operation of a transistor similar to M6 of Kuang during the writing cycle and holding cycles using a signal line different than the first signal line which controls the data writing. Accordingly, one would have been motivated to combine the teachings in order to independently control the operations of the anode-initializing transistor (M6 of Kuang and T6 of Oh and Chung), “thereby preventing a luminance deviation between the refresh frame and the hold frame” (see ¶ 144 of Chung).
Regarding claim 6, Kuang teaches that at least one of the plurality of disable emission control signals has a third width different from the first width and the second width (fig. 3, ¶ 65 wherein the width of d2 gradually increases for each T2).
Regarding claim 7, Kuang teaches that the emission driver sets a first disable emission control signal within the frame period to the first width (see high period of E during T1, for examle).
Regarding claim 8, Kuang teaches that the emission driver sets at least one of a second disable emission control signal, a third disable emission control signal, and a fourth disable emission control signal within the frame period to the second width (see d2 periods of T2 cycles, ¶ 45).
Regarding claim 9, Kuang teaches that the pixels do not emit light when the disable emission control signal is supplied to the emission control lines, and the pixels emit light when the enable emission control signal is supplied to the emission control lines (fig. 3, ¶ 45).
Regarding claim 17, Kuang teaches an electronic device (fig. 1, ¶ 34 and ¶ 99) comprising: a processor (devices disclosed in ¶ 99 include necessarily include a processor); pixels (fig. 1, element 12, ¶ 34) connected to scan lines (fig. 1, Lsp, ¶ 51), data lines (fig. 1, Data), and emission control lines (fig. 1 and 2, LE , ¶ 51); a data driver connected to the processor and configured to supply a data signal to the data lines during a first period of a frame (fig. 3, see first cycle T1, ¶ 39 and 79, the data signal Vd is provided by such a data driver); a scan driver configured to supply to the scan lines an enable first scan signal during only the first period (fig. 3, see SP enable signal only during period b, note that a signal such as SP is necessarily driven by a scan driver, see ¶ 42); an emission driver configured to supply a disable signal and an enable signal to the emission control lines during the first period and the at least one additional period (fig. 3, see the enable (low) and disable (high) emission signals E provided during T1 and at least one of T2 cycles), wherein the emission driver supplies the disable signal having a first duration (fig. 3, high period of E during T1) and overlapping the enable first scan signal during the first period (fig. 3, see low period of SP overlapping high period of E), and supplies the disable signal having a second duration during the at least one additional period (fig. 3, ¶ 65 wherein the width of d2 gradually increases for each T2).
Kuang does not teach that the emission driver is responsive to measuring a frequency component power while varying a duration of the disable signal to at least two different durations in response to a P-th cycle (where P is a natural number of 2 or more) within the at least one additional period, and sets the second duration of the disable signal to a duration that results in a lower frequency component power for the P-th cycle based on the measured frequency component powers for the at least two different durations.
Oh, however, teaches that the emission driver is responsive to measuring a frequency component power (¶ 218-219 see calculating the frequency component powers; note that the amplitude of the frequency component corresponds to the power of the frequency component) while varying a duration of the disable signal to at least two different durations in response to a P-th cycle (where P is a natural number of 2 or more) within the at least one additional period (fig. 17, W1-W5, ¶ 223-225), and sets the second duration of the disable signal to a duration that results in a lower frequency component power for the P-th cycle based on the measured frequency component powers for the at least two different durations (figs. 17-19, ¶ 226-248).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Kuang in view of Oh. The references teach driving a display device and different refresh rates and Oh further teaches a technique that results in a lower frequency component. Oh clearly teaches that such a technique may reduce flicker in such a display device thus motivating one of ordinary skill to make such a combination in order to improve the quality of the display device.
Kuang and Oh do not specifically teach supplying an enable fourth scan signal during the first cycle and at least one other cycle of the frame, wherein the disable emission signal overlaps the enable fourth scan signal during the first cycle and the at least one other cycle.
Chung, however, teaches supplying an enable fourth scan signal (signal SC2) during the first cycle (figs. 3A-J, see SC2) and at least one other cycle of the frame (figs. 4A-B, see SC2), wherein the disable emission signal overlaps the enable fourth scan signal during the first cycle and the at least one other cycle (disable emission signal (EM high) overlaps SC2 enable signals (SC2 low)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Kuang and Oh, as applied above, further in view of Chung. The references teach driving of pixel units and Chung further teaches providing and controlling a “fourth scan signal” as claimed. Specifically, Chung teaches controlling the operation of a transistor similar to M6 of Kuang during the writing cycle and holding cycles using a signal line different than the first signal line which controls the data writing. Accordingly, one would have been motivated to combine the teachings in order to independently control the operations of the anode-initializing transistor (M6 of Kuang and T6 of Oh and Chung), “thereby preventing a luminance deviation between the refresh frame and the hold frame” (see ¶ 144 of Chung).
Regarding claims 18-20, Kuang teaches that a width or duration of the disable emission control signal for a (P+1)-th cycle is varied when the second width or duration of a disable emission control signal for the P-th cycle is set (fig. 3, see B11 and B21 periods, ¶ 50).
Claims 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chung, in view of Oh.
Regarding claim 10, Chung teaches a method of setting an emission control signal of a display device (fig. 1, element 100, ¶ 28), wherein one frame (fig. 7, RR2) includes a first cycle (R0) in which a data signal is supplied to pixels (fig. 3F, ¶ 78) and a plurality of remaining cycles in which the pixels alternately emit and do not emit light while maintaining the data signal (fig. 4A-C, ¶ 88-92), the method comprising: measuring a frequency component while varying a width of a disable emission control signal overlapping an enable fourth scan signal (disable emission signal (EM high) overlaps SC2 enable signals (SC2 low)) to at least two different widths in response to a P-th cycle (where P is a natural number of 2 or more) within the remaining cycles (fig. 7, counter 221 measures a frequency component while the width of EM is varied, see ¶ 104-105 and ¶ 141); and setting the width of the disable emission control signal to a width that results in a lower frequency component for the P-th cycle (¶ 141-142).
Chung does not teach measuring a frequency component power, and setting the width of the disable emission control signal to a width that results in a lower frequency component power for the P-th cycle based on the measured frequency component powers for the at least two different widths, wherein the frequency component power is a frequency domain characteristic responsive to the width of the disable emission control signal.
Oh, however, teaches setting the width of the disable emission control signal to a width that results in a lower frequency component power for the P-th cycle based on the measured frequency components for the at least two different widths (figs. 17-19, ¶ 226-248; also see ¶ 218-219 wherein the amplitude of the frequency component corresponds to the power of the frequency component), wherein the frequency component is a frequency domain characteristic of the disable emission control signal (see fig. 19, <spectrum> graph, ¶ 244-248).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Chung in view of Oh. The references teach driving a display device and different refresh rates and Oh further teaches a technique that results in a lower frequency component. Oh clearly teaches that such a technique may reduce flicker in such a display device thus motivating one of ordinary skill to make such a combination in order to improve the quality of the display device.
Regarding claim 11, Chung teaches that the frequency component corresponding to the P-th cycle is measured when measuring the frequency component (see fig. 7 wherein the counter 221 performs such measuring).
Chung does not specifically teach the frequency component power.
Oh, however, teaches such a frequency component power (¶ 218-219, amplitude of the frequency component corresponds to the power of the frequency component).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Chung in view of Oh. The references teach driving a display device and different refresh rates and Oh further teaches a technique that results in a lower frequency component. Oh clearly teaches that such a technique may reduce flicker in such a display device thus motivating one of ordinary skill to make such a combination in order to improve the quality of the display device.
Regarding claim 12, Chung teaches that the disable emission control signal has a voltage that turns off the pixels when it is applied to the pixels (figs. 3-4, high level of EM turns off the pixels).
Regarding claim 13, Chung teaches that a width of an emission control signal within the first cycle is predetermined (fig. 7, W1, ¶ 135).
Regarding claim 14, Chung teaches that a width of an emission control signal for the P-th cycle is set when a width of an emission control signal for a (P+1)-th cycle is predetermined (fig. 7, see W2 for P and P+1 cycles, ¶ 135).
Regarding claim 15, Chung teaches that the width of the emission control signal for the (P+1)-th cycle is equal to the width of the emission control signal for the first cycle (fig. 7, notice the second R0 period during the RR2 cycle wherein the W2 width is utilized which is equal to that of the P+1 cycle).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chung and Oh, as applied above, further in view of Kuang.
Regarding claim 16, Chung does not teach that a width of an emission control signal for a (P+1)-th cycle is varied when a width of an emission control signal for the P-th cycle is set.
Kuang, however, teaches that a width of an emission control signal for a (P+1)-th cycle is varied when a width of an emission control signal for the P-th cycle is set (fig. 3, see B11 and B21 periods, ¶ 50). Note that Oh teaches similar limitations (fig. 17, W1-W5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Chung, Oh and Kuang. The references teach driving display devices having different refresh frequencies. Kuang further teaches varying the length of the emission period during data holding periods. One would have been motivated to make such a combination because Kuang teaches that such a configuration “can reduce the brightness of the light-emitting element 11 in the data writing phase T1, thereby compensating for the brightness reduction of the light-emitting element 11 in the data holding phase T2, caused by the change in the potential of the first node N1 due to the leakage current” (see ¶ 50).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEPEHR AZARI whose telephone number is (571)270-7903. The examiner can normally be reached weekdays from 11AM-7PM.
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, Amr Awad can be reached at (571) 272-7764. 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.
/SEPEHR AZARI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2621
Prosecution Insights