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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/30/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The applicant has amended their application as follows:
Amended: 1 and 10
Cancelled: None
Added: None
Therefore, claims 1-20 are currently pending in the instant application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 10 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 Objections
Claims 1 and 10 objected to because of the following informalities: “the plurality of gate lines are sequentially drive by the second gate driving circuit” in line 26 (last line). Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 7-12 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2013/0201176 A1) in view of Choi et al. (US 2014/0138643 A1, hereinafter “Choi”) and Kim et al. (US 2019/0073074 A1, hereinafter “Kim”).
As to claim 1, Lee (Fig. 3) discloses a multi-display device (111, 112) comprising:
a single display panel (Para. 0057) including a light-transmissive display area (112) disposed in a first area of the single display panel and a light-opaque display area (111) disposed in a second area different from the first area (Para. 0057), the light-transmissive display area being configured to allow external light to be transmitted (Para. 0016) wherein the light-transmissive display area and the light-opaque display area are integrally formed on a common substrate (Para. 0057, it has to be on the common substrate as they are part of a same display panel) of the single display panel (Para. 0057);
a data driving circuit (Fig. 1 element 120) configured to drive a plurality of data lines (Para. 0059, a display device inherently has a data lines) disposed across the single display panel (Para. 0059) in a first direction (data lines are necessarily disposed in vertical direction);
a gate driving circuit (120) configured to drive a plurality of gate lines (Para. 0059; display device inherently has gate lines) disposed across the single display panel (Para. 0059) in a second direction different from the first direction (gate lines are necessarily disposed in horizontal direction);
a plurality of first pixels defined by the plurality of data lines and the plurality of gate lines disposed in a matrix form in the light-opaque display area (Para. 0060, pixels are inherently defined by data lines and gate lines); and
a plurality of second pixels configured to present an image and a plurality of transmissive areas (Fig. 6A-6B; Para. 0060); and
a single controller (Fig. 1 element 130) configured to supply image data to the data driving circuit to drive the plurality of first pixels in the light-opaque display area and the plurality of second pixels in the light-transmissive display area during a same frame (Fig. 13B, 13C, 16; Para. 0049, 0079, 0081).
Lee does not expressly disclose wherein each of the plurality of transmissive areas is disposed on one side of at least one of the plurality of second pixels in the light-transmissive display area, and the plurality of transmissive areas are configured to allow external light to be transmitted,
wherein the plurality of second pixels in the light-transmissive display area and the plurality of first pixels in the light opaque display area are driven by a same data driving circuit, but are respectively driven by first and second gate driving circuits, and
wherein after first gate lines connected to the plurality of second pixels in the light- transmissive display area among the plurality of gate lines are sequentially driven by the first gate driving circuit, second gate lines connected to the plurality of first pixels in the light opaque display area among the plurality of gate lines are sequentially drive by the second gate driving circuit.
However, Choi teaches wherein each of the plurality of transmissive areas (440) is disposed on one side of at least one of the plurality of second pixels (P1, P2) in the light-transmissive display area (440), and the plurality of transmissive areas are configured to allow external light to be transmitted (Para. 0067).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to simple substitute a transparent display system of Choi for the transparent display system of Lee. The result of such a substitution would have yielded predictable results of providing a transparent display. Furthermore, Choi clearly discloses the data lines in a vertical direction and gate lines in a horizontal direction (Fig. 14 elements D, S; Para. 0159).
And, Kim (Fig. 3) teaches wherein the plurality of second pixels in the light-transmissive display area (Area 1) and the plurality of first pixels in the light opaque display area (Area 2) are driven by a same data driving circuit (Fig. 1 element 130; Para. 0048), but are respectively driven by first and second gate driving circuits (Fig. 3 elements 121, 122; Para. 0080), and
wherein after first gate lines connected to the plurality of second pixels in the light- transmissive display area among the plurality of gate lines are sequentially driven by the first gate driving circuit (Fig. 4 element Gate#1-Gate#n; Para. 0090), second gate lines connected to the plurality of first pixels in the light opaque display area among the plurality of gate lines are sequentially drive by the second gate driving circuit (Gate#n+1 – Gate#2n; Para. 0092).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Kim to include multiple scan drivers in the device disclosed by Lee/Choi. The motivation would have been to drive the different portions of display panel through different scan drivers for various reasons (Kim; Para. 0017-0018).
As to claim 10, Lee (Fig. 3) discloses a display panel (111, 112) comprising:
a light-opaque display area (111) disposed in a first area (Para. 0057), including plurality of first pixels or pixel groups each including first subpixels, and configured to emit light (Para. 0059, 0060);
a light-transmissive display area (112) disposed in a second area different from the first area, including plurality of second pixels or pixel groups each including second subpixels, and configured to present an image (Fig. 12A; Para. 0060), wherein the light-transmissive display area and the light-opaque display area are integrally formed on a common substrate (Para. 0057, it has to be on the common substrate as they are part of a same display panel) of the display panel (Para. 0057);
a plurality of data lines (Para. 0059, a display device inherently has a data lines) extending along at least one of the plurality of first pixels or pixel groups and at least one of the plurality of transmissive areas (Para. 0057, single panel would necessarily share the data lines);
a plurality of gate lines (Para. 0059; display device inherently has gate lines) extending along one or more first pixels or second pixel or pixel groups in a second direction different from the first direction (Para. 0057, gate lines are necessarily disposed in horizontal direction);
wherein at least one of the first pixels and at least one of the second pixels are connected to a corresponding same data line among the plurality of data lines (Para. 0057, single panel would necessarily share data lines and gate lines).
Lee does not expressly disclose wherein a plurality of transmissive areas each disposed on one side of at least one of the plurality of second pixels or pixel groups and configured to allow external light to be transmitted,
wherein the plurality of second pixels in the light-transmissive display area and the plurality of first pixels in the light opaque display area are driven by a same data driving circuit, but are respectively driven by first and second gate driving circuits, and
wherein after first gate lines connected to the plurality of second pixels in the light- transmissive display area among the plurality of gate lines are sequentially driven by the first gate driving circuit, second gate lines connected to the plurality of first pixels in the light opaque display area among the plurality of gate lines are sequentially drive by the second gate driving circuit.
However, Choi teaches wherein a plurality of transmissive areas (440) each disposed on one side of at least one of the plurality of second pixels (P1, P2) or pixel groups and configured to allow external light to be transmitted (Para. 0067).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to simple substitute a transparent display system of Choi for the transparent display system of Lee. The result of such a substitution would have yielded predictable results of providing a transparent display. Furthermore, Choi clearly discloses the data lines in a vertical direction and gate lines in a horizontal direction (Fig. 14 elements D, S; Para. 0159).
And, Kim (Fig. 3) teaches wherein the plurality of second pixels in the light-transmissive display area (Area 1) and the plurality of first pixels in the light opaque display area (Area 2) are driven by a same data driving circuit (Fig. 1 element 130; Para. 0048), but are respectively driven by first and second gate driving circuits (Fig. 3 elements 121, 122; Para. 0080), and
wherein after first gate lines connected to the plurality of second pixels in the light- transmissive display area among the plurality of gate lines are sequentially driven by the first gate driving circuit (Fig. 4 element Gate#1-Gate#n; Para. 0090), second gate lines connected to the plurality of first pixels in the light opaque display area among the plurality of gate lines are sequentially drive by the second gate driving circuit (Gate#n+1 – Gate#2n; Para. 0092).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Kim to include multiple scan drivers in the device disclosed by Lee/Choi. The motivation would have been to drive the different portions of display panel through different scan drivers for various reasons (Kim; Para. 0017-0018).
As to claim 2, Lee (Fig. 7) discloses the multi-display device of claim 1, wherein the light-transmissive display area (112) is disposed at an upper portion of the single display panel, and the light-opaque display area (111) is disposed at a lower portion of the single display panel (Para. 0050).
The above rejection also stands for similar method of claim 11.
As to claim 3, Lee in view of Choi discloses the multi-display device of claim 1. Choi (Fig. 4) further teaches wherein in the light-transmissive display area, at least one of the plurality of second pixels (430) and at least one of the plurality of transmissive areas (440) are alternately disposed along one direction and disposed adjacent to each other (Para. 0073).
The above rejection also stands for similar method of claim 12.
As to claim 7, Lee (Fig. 16) discloses the multi-display device of claim 1, wherein the single controller receives the image data corresponding to images to be displayed in an entire display area of the multi-display device and processes the received image data (Para. 0081).
As to claim 8, Lee (Fig. 1) discloses the multi-display device claim 7, the single controller (130) receives arrangement information on respective areas of the multi-display device in which distinct images are presented (Para. 0046), and processes the image data based on the arrangement information (Fig. 12A-B, 13A-D, 14; Para. 0077-0079).
Lee does not disclose wherein to display distinct images based on a difference in resolution between the light-transmissive display area and the light-opaque display area.
However, Choi (Fig. 8) teaches wherein to display distinct images based on a difference in resolution between the light-transmissive display area and the light-opaque display area (Para. 0119-0120, 0198, since each pixel is larger in transparent display region, the resolution would be lower).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Choi to display main and secondary images based on the resolution of the display area in the device disclosed by Lee. The motivation would have been to display a secondary image in the display region with a lower resolution (Lee; Fig. 18).
As to claim 9, Lee in view of Choi (Fig. 10) discloses the multi-display device of claim 8. Lee does not disclose wherein the arrangement information on the respective areas of the multi-display device comprises at least one of a total number, or respective numbers, of light-transmissive display areas and light-opaque display areas included in the multi-display device, and respective disposed locations of the light-transmissive display areas and the light-opaque display areas (Para. 0204).
However, Choi teaches wherein the arrangement information on the respective areas of the multi-display device comprises at least one of a total number, or respective numbers, of light-transmissive display areas and light-opaque display areas included in the multi-display device, and respective disposed locations of the light-transmissive display areas and the light-opaque display areas (Fig. 10; Para. 0204, 0212).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Choi to determine the number and locations of the different types of display regions in the device disclosed by Lee. The motivation would have been to display the images corresponding to the type of the display regions (Choi; Para. 0212).
As to claim 19, Lee discloses the multi-display device of claim 1, wherein the plurality of data lines and the plurality of gate lines extend continuously across the light-opaque display area and the light- transmissive display area (Para. 0059).
Claim(s) 4 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee, Choi and Kim as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of Lee (US 2015/0379952 A1, hereinafter “Lee’952”).
As to claim 4, Lee in view Choi and Kim does not disclose the multi-display device of claim 1, wherein the gate driving circuit is configured to sequentially drive one or more gate lines among the plurality of gate lines connected to one or more of the plurality of second pixels disposed in the light-transmissive display area and other one or more gate lines among the plurality of gate lines connected to one or more of the plurality of first pixels disposed in the light-opaque display area, by sequentially supplying a gate signal with a turn-on level voltage to the one or more gate lines and the other one or more gate lines.
However, Lee’952 (Figs. 4, 5) teaches wherein the gate driving circuit is configured to sequentially drive one or more gate lines (HL1-HLj) among the plurality of gate lines connected to one or more of the plurality of second pixels disposed in the light-transmissive display area (A1; GL1-GLj; Para. 0039) and other one or more gate lines among the plurality of gate lines (HLn-HL(n-j+1) connected to one or more of the plurality of first pixels disposed in the light-opaque display area (A3; GLn-GL(n-j+1; Para. 0039), by sequentially supplying a gate signal with a turn-on level voltage to the one or more gate lines and the other one or more gate lines (Gl1-GLn; Para. 0039).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Lee’952 to perform double-bank driving and line-sequential driving in the device disclosed by Lee/Choi/Kim. The motivation would have been to increase data scan time (Lee; Para. 0044).
The above rejection also stands for similar method of claim 13.
Claim(s) 5-6 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee, Choi, Kim and Lee’952 as applied to claims 4 and 13 above, and further in view of Lee et al. (US 2020/0152134 A1, hereinafter “Lee’134”).
As to claim 5, Lee in view of Choi, Kim and Lee’952 does not disclose the multi-display device of claim 4, wherein when specific gate lines are selected and driven, the data driving circuit is configured to supply data signals corresponding to the image data to at least one data line of the plurality of data lines across the light-transmissive display area and the light-opaque display area, and
wherein the at least one data line connected to at least one subpixel included in at least one of the plurality of second pixels and at least one subpixel included in at least one of the plurality of first pixels delivers the data signals to the at least one subpixel included in the at least one second pixel and the at least one subpixel included in the at least one first pixel, and is not electrically connected to at least one of the plurality of transmissive areas disposed in a same column or row as the at least one first pixel or the at least one second pixel.
However, Lee’134 (Fig. 10) teaches wherein when specific gate lines (GL1-GLk+2) are selected and driven, the data driving circuit is configured to supply data signals corresponding to the image data to at least one data line of the plurality of data lines (DL2) across the light-transmissive display area (A2) and the light-opaque display area (A1; Para. 0059), and
wherein the at least one data line (DL2) connected to at least one subpixel included in at least one of the plurality of second pixels (SP; formed by GL1 and DL2) and at least one subpixel included in at least one of the plurality of first pixels (SP formed by GLK+1 and DL2) delivers the data signals to the at least one subpixel included in the at least one second pixel (A2, first left pixel formed by GL1 and DL2) and the at least one subpixel included in the at least one first pixel (A1, first left pixel formed by GLK+1 and DL2), and is not electrically connected to at least one of the plurality of transmissive areas disposed in a same column or row as the at least one first pixel or the at least one second pixel (pixels connected to DL3 column).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of lee’134 to connect data lines to both display regions in the device disclosed by Lee/Choi/Kim/Lee’952. The motivation would have been to ensure brightness uniformity (Lee’134; Para. 0027).
The above rejection also stands for similar method of claim 14.
As to claim 6, Lee in view of Choi, Lee’952 and Lee’134 discloses the multi-display device of claim 5. Choi further teaches wherein data sequences of the data signals comprise image data supplied to the at least one subpixel included in the at least one first pixel and the at least one subpixel included in the at least one second pixel, and do not comprise image data for the at least one transmissive area (Choi; Fig. 0073).
The above rejection also stands for similar method of claim 15.
As to claim 16, Lee (Fig. 16) discloses the display panel of claim 15, wherein the image data corresponding to images to be displayed in an entire display area of the display panel are received and processed by the controller (Para. 0081).
Claim(s) 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee, Choi, Kim, Lee’952 and Lee’134 as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Moon et al. (US 10,529,269 B2, hereinafter “Moon”).
As to claim 17, Lee (Fig. 1) discloses the display panel of claim 14, the image data are processed by the controller (130) based on the arrangement information (Fig. 12A-B, 13A-D, 14; Para. 0077-0079).
Lee does not disclose wherein to display distinct images based on a difference in resolution between the light-transmissive display area and the light-opaque display area, arrangement information on respective areas of the display panel in which distinct images are presented is received by the controller.
However, Moon (Fig. 1) teaches wherein to display distinct images based on a difference in resolution between the light-transmissive display area (I) and the light-opaque display area (II), arrangement information on respective areas of the display panel in which distinct images are presented is received by the controller (Col. 4 lines 31-50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Moon to display images based on resolution of the display regions in the device disclosed by Lee/Choi. The motivation would have been to display less important information in the transparent display (Moon; Col. 4 lines 37-41).
As to claim 18, Lee in view of Choi, Kim, Lee’952 and Lee’134 discloses the display panel of claim 17. Lee does not disclose wherein the arrangement information on the respective areas of the display panel comprises at least one of a total number, or respective numbers, of light-transmissive display areas and light-opaque display areas included in the multi- display device, and respective disposed locations of the light-transmissive display areas and the light-opaque display areas.
However, Choi teaches wherein the arrangement information on the respective areas of the display panel comprises at least one of a total number, or respective numbers, of light-transmissive display areas and light-opaque display areas included in the multi- display device, and respective disposed locations of the light-transmissive display areas and the light-opaque display areas (Fig. 10; Para. 0204, 0212).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Choi to determine the number and locations of the different types of display regions in the device disclosed by Lee. The motivation would have been to display the images corresponding to the type of the display regions (Choi; Para. 0212).
Claim(s) 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee, Choi and Kim as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Moon.
As to claim 20, Lee in view of Choi does not disclose the multi-display device of claim 1, wherein the single controller is further configured to display distinct images based on a difference in resolution between the light- transmissive display area and the light-opaque display area according to predefined arrangement information.
However, Moon (Fig. 1) teaches herein the single controller is further configured to display distinct images based on a difference in resolution between the light-transmissive display area (I) and the light-opaque display area (II) according to predefined arrangement information. (Col. 4 lines 31-50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Moon to display images based on resolution of the display regions in the device disclosed by Lee/Choi/Kim. The motivation would have been to display less important information in the transparent display (Moon; Col. 4 lines 37-41).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant‘s disclosure.
Kwon (US 2017/0117342 A1) discloses a plurality of display regions (Fig. 1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BIPIN GYAWALI whose telephone number is (571)272-1597. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:30 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, Will Boddie can be reached at 571-272-0666. 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.
BIPIN GYAWALI
Examiner
Art Unit 2625
/BIPIN GYAWALI/Examiner, Art Unit 2625
Prosecution Insights