DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-13 are pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive as pertaining to independent claim 1. Applicant argues that the prior art combination of Rolston (US 2011/0117959 A1) in view of Rivard et al (US 2019/0149706 A1) as a whole, fails to teach the claim limitations as currently constructed, specifically, “a first period in which pixel data is written to the pixels and the display panel is light-transmitting, the imaging device capturing an image of the subject transmitted through the display panel and a second period in which the light source emits the light after the first period and the display panel displays an image.” Examiner respectfully disagrees. The prior art of Rolston teaches a mobile device with a image capturing device 806 disposed through the main display 801 for capturing images, enhancing the captured images, and displaying them on the main display 801. Rolston further teaches a light source which may emit light to a side surface of the main display 801. Rivard discloses a method in which during a period an image is captured and then a flash emits a light and a final image is generated as shown in method 100 in fig. 1. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to combine Rolston and Rivard, as a whole, to teach the limitations as currently constructed in claim 1. Based on this reasoning/rationale, the rejection of claim 1 based on the prior art will remain. It is highly suggested to amend claim 1 further highlight the inventive concept. Claim 10 is rejected as well as pertaining to the prior art of rejection as depending from claim 1 and being rejected in the previous action.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 7, filed 05/27/2026, with respect to claims 2-9 and 11-13 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection/objection of claims 2-9 and 11-13 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rolston (US 2011/0117959 A1) in view of Rivard et al (US 2019/0149706 A1).
As per claim 1, Rolston discloses an imaging system (fig. 38A, mobile device 800) comprising:
a display device that includes a display panel (fig. 38A, mobile device 800, main display 802) on which a light source configured to emit light to a side surface of the display panel (fig. 38A, mobile device 800, top and bottom portions 810 and 812, para 0209); and
an imaging device that is provided with the display panel interposed between the imaging device and a subject (figs. 38A and 38C, mobile device 800, image capturing device 806, para 0209 and 0211).
and the display panel is light-transmitting, the imaging device capturing an image of the subject transmitted through the display panel (para 0100, 0123, 0215).
Rolston fails to teach a display having a plurality of pixels are arranged in a first direction and a second direction intersecting the first direction and a first period in which pixel data is written to the pixels, and a second period in which the light source emits the light after the first period, and the imaging device is configured to generate imaged data of the subject using exposure data acquired during the first period. However, Rivard discloses a digital photographic system 300 comprising a display unit 312 and strobe unit 336, having a two-dimensional array of pixels and a method for image capturing wherein a first ambient frame is captured during a first time, a flash frame being captured at a second time, lastly a final image is captured based on the ambient frame and the flash frame (Rivard, figs. 1 and 3, method 100, digital photographic system 300, display unit 312, strobe unit 336, steps 110 and 112, para 0035, 0060).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Rolston in view of Rivard, as a whole, by incorporating the display and imaging method as taught by Rivard into the mobile device as taught by Rolston, because doing so would provide a more efficient way of adjusting the exposure, thus enhancing image capturing.
As per claim 10, the combined teachings of Rolston in view of Rivard, as a whole, further discloses the imaging system according to claim 1, wherein the display panel is a liquid crystal panel in which polymer-dispersed liquid crystals are enclosed (Rolston, fig. 38A, mobile device 800, LCD display 801, para 0209).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-9 and 11-13 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 2, “An imaging system comprising:
a display device that includes a display panel on which a plurality of pixels are arranged in a first direction and a second direction intersecting the first direction and a light source configured to emit light to a side surface of the display panel; and
an imaging device that is provided with the display panel interposed between the imaging device and a subject and is configured to capture an image of the subject transmitted through the display panel,
wherein the display device is configured to have:
a first period in which pixel data is written to the pixels; and
a second period in which the light source emits the light after the first period,
the imaging device is configured to generate imaged data of the subject using exposure data acquired during the first period,
a one-frame period in which the image for one frame is displayed on the display panel includes:
a first sub-frame period in which display of a first color is performed;
a second sub-frame period in which display of a second color different from the first color is performed; and
a third sub-frame period in which display of a third color different from the first color and the second color is performed, the light source includes:
a first light source configured to emit light in the second period of the first sub- frame period;
a second light source configured to emit light in the second period of the second sub-frame period; and
a third light source configured to emit light in the second period of the third sub- frame period, and
the imaging device is configured to generate the imaged data by combining first exposure data acquired in the first period of the first sub-frame period, second exposure data acquired in the first period of the second sub-frame period, and third exposure data acquired in the first period of the third sub-frame period.”
The closest prior art of record relied upon is Rolston (US 2011/0117959 A1) which discloses a mobile device having an image capturing device through a main display and a light source which emits a light through the display device and captures an image which is displayed on a display device. Rivard et al (US 2019/0149706 A1) further discloses an imaging device method for capturing an image and displaying the image while adjusting the flash for emitting a light source. However, none of the prior art cited alone or in combination provides the motivation to teach the following claimed limitations, with emphasis that it is each claim, taken as a whole, including the interrelationships and interconnections between various claimed elements make them allowable over the prior art of record, a one-frame period in which the image for one frame is displayed on the display panel includes a first sub-frame period in which display of a first color is performed a second sub-frame period in which display of a second color different from the first color is performed and a third sub-frame period in which display of a third color different from the first color and the second color is performed, the light source includes a first light source configured to emit light in the second period of the first sub-frame period, a second light source configured to emit light in the second period of the second sub-frame period and a third light source configured to emit light in the second period of the third sub-frame period, and the imaging device is configured to generate the imaged data by combining first exposure data acquired in the first period of the first sub-frame period, second exposure data acquired in the first period of the second sub-frame period, and third exposure data acquired in the first period of the third sub-frame period. Independent claim 3 recites the same/similar language as claimed in independent claim 2, and is allowable for the same reasons stated above. Claims 5, 7 and 11 depend from independent claim 2, and claims 4, 6, 8, and 12 depend from independent claim 3.
Regarding claim 9, “An imaging system comprising:
a display device that includes a display panel on which a plurality of pixels are arranged in a first direction and a second direction intersecting the first direction and a light source configured to emit light to a side surface of the display panel; and
an imaging device that is provided with the display panel interposed between the imaging device and a subject and is configured to capture an image of the subject transmitted through the display panel,
wherein the display device is configured to have:
a first period in which pixel data is written to the pixels; and
a second period in which the light source emits the light after the first period, the imaging device is configured to generate imaged data of the subject using exposure data acquired during the first period,
the display device includes:
a scan circuit configured to simultaneously supply a drive signal to the pixels arranged in the first direction and sequentially supply the drive signal to the pixels arranged in the second direction; and
a signal output circuit configured to supply the pixel data of the image to be displayed on the display panel to the pixels supplied with the drive signal,
all the pixels on the display panel are configured to be reset immediately before the first period, and
an area not supplied with the pixel data of the image to be displayed on the display panel in the first period overlaps an imaging area of the imaging device when the exposure data is acquired.”
The closest prior art of record relied upon is Rolston (US 2011/0117959 A1) which discloses a mobile device having an image capturing device through a main display and a light source which emits a light through the display device and captures an image which is displayed on a display device. Rivard et al (US 2019/0149706 A1) further discloses an imaging device method for capturing an image and displaying the image while adjusting the flash for emitting a light source. However, none of the prior art cited alone or in combination provides the motivation to teach the following claimed limitations, with emphasis that it is each claim, taken as a whole, including the interrelationships and interconnections between various claimed elements make them allowable over the prior art of record, the display device includes a scan circuit configured to simultaneously supply a drive signal to the pixels arranged in the first direction and sequentially supply the drive signal to the pixels arranged in the second direction and a signal output circuit configured to supply the pixel data of the image to be displayed on the display panel to the pixels supplied with the drive signal, all the pixels on the display panel are configured to be reset immediately before the first period, and an area not supplied with the pixel data of the image to be displayed on the display panel in the first period overlaps an imaging area of the imaging device when the exposure data is acquired. Claim 13 depends from independent claim 9, and is allowable for the same reasons stated above.
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 JOHN H MOREHEAD III whose telephone number is (571)270-3845. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 0930-1800 EST.
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, Twyler Haskins can be reached at (571) 272-7406. 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.
/JOHN H MOREHEAD III/Examiner, Art Unit 2639
/TWYLER L HASKINS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2639
Prosecution Insights