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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yang et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2022/0076629).
Regarding Claim 1, Yang et al. teach a method of compensating image sticking in a display device (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 49), the method comprising:
storing image-sticking compensation data (Figure 14, Element 302. Paragraph 87) representing a compensation value according to a degradation amount (Paragraph 87) of a pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56);
performing an image-sticking compensation operation (Figure 14, Element 302, Sub-Element Compensation. Paragraph 87) on test data (Element test image data. Paragraph 73) based on the image-sticking compensation data (Figure 14, Element 302. Paragraph 87);
displaying a test image (Figure 14, Element 300. Paragraph 87 and Figure 10, Element 202. Paragraph 73) based on the test data (Element test image data. Paragraph 73);
receiving a miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) input representing a miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) in the test image (Figure 14, Element 300. Paragraph 87 and Figure 10, Element 202. Paragraph 73);
receiving a relative brightness input (Figures 7A - 9B, Element Lv. Paragraph 63) representing whether the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) is brighter or darker (Seen in Figures 7A – 9B) than a remaining region (Figures 7A - 9B, Element 130. Paragraph 65) of the test image (Figure 14, Element 300. Paragraph 87 and Figure 10, Element 202. Paragraph 73) that is other than the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65); and
determining an additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) for the pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56) in the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) based on the degradation amount (Paragraph 87) of the pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56) in the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65), based on the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) input, and based on the relative brightness input (Figures 7A - 9B, Element Lv. Paragraph 63).
Regarding Claim 2, Yang et al. teach the method of claim 1 (See Above), further comprising determining that the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) is an overcompensation region (Figure 15, Element Over-compensation. Paragraph 90) based on the relative brightness input (Figures 7A - 9B, Element Lv. Paragraph 63) indicating that the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) is brighter (Seen in Figures 7A – 9B) than the remaining region (Figures 7A - 9B, Element 130. Paragraph 65).
Regarding Claim 3, Yang et al. teach the method of claim 2 (See Above), wherein the additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) for the pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56) in the overcompensation region (Figure 15, Element Over-compensation. Paragraph 90) is a negative value (Seen in Figures 7A – 9B).
Regarding Claim 4, Yang et al. teach the method of claim 2 (See Above), wherein an absolute value of the additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) for the pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56) in the overcompensation region (Figure 15, Element Over-compensation. Paragraph 90) increases (Seen in Figure 15)as the degradation amount (Paragraph 87) of the pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56) increases.
Regarding Claim 5, Yang et al. teach the method of claim 2 (See Above), wherein determining the additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) for the pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56) in the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) comprises:
determining a first additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) for a first pixel (Figures 7A - 9B, Element 132. Paragraph 65) having a first degradation amount (Paragraph 87) in the overcompensation region (Figure 15, Element Over-compensation. Paragraph 90); and
determining a second additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) for a second pixel (Figures 7A - 9B, Element 134. Paragraph 65) having a second degradation amount (Paragraph 87) that is greater than the first degradation amount (Paragraph 87) in the overcompensation region (Figure 15, Element Over-compensation. Paragraph 90),
wherein the first and second additional compensation values (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) are negative values (Seen in Figures 7A – 9B), and
wherein an absolute value of the second additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) is greater than an absolute value of the first additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87).
Regarding Claim 6, Yang et al. teach the method of claim 1 (See Above), further comprising determining that the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) is an undercompensation region (Figure 15, Element Under-compensation. Paragraph 90) based on the relative brightness input (Figures 7A - 9B, Element Lv. Paragraph 63) indicating that the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) is darker than (Seen in Figures 7A – 9B) the remaining region (Figures 7A - 9B, Element 130. Paragraph 65).
Regarding Claim 7, Yang et al. teach the method of claim 6 (See Above), wherein the additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) for the pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56) in the undercompensation region (Figure 15, Element Under-compensation. Paragraph 90) is a positive value (Seen in Figures 7A – 9B).
Regarding Claim 8, Yang et al. teach the method of claim 6 (See Above), wherein an absolute value of the additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) for the pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56) in the undercompensation region (Figure 15, Element Under-compensation. Paragraph 90) increases as the degradation amount (Paragraph 87) of the pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56) increases.
Regarding Claim 9, Yang et al. teach the method of claim 6 (See Above), wherein determining the additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) for the pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56) in the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) comprises:
determining a first additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) for a first pixel (Figures 7A - 9B, Element 132. Paragraph 65) having a first degradation amount (Paragraph 87) in the undercompensation region (Figure 15, Element Under-compensation. Paragraph 90); and
determining a second additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) for a second pixel (Figures 7A - 9B, Element 134. Paragraph 65) having a second degradation amount (Paragraph 87) that is greater than the first degradation amount (Paragraph 87) in the undercompensation region (Figure 15, Element Under-compensation. Paragraph 90),
wherein the first and second additional compensation values (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) are positive values (Seen in Figures 7A – 9B), and
wherein an absolute value of the second additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) is greater than an absolute value of the first additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87).
Regarding Claim 10, Yang et al. teach the method of claim 1 (See Above), wherein the test data (Element test image data. Paragraph 73) represent a same gray level for an entire region (Paragraph 106) of a display panel (Figure 1, Element 18. Paragraph 49).
Regarding Claim 11, Yang et al. teach the method of claim 1, further comprising:
re-performing (Figures 8A – 8B. Paragraphs 66 – 67) the image-sticking compensation operation (Figure 14, Element 302, Sub-Element Compensation. Paragraph 87) on the test data (Element test image data. Paragraph 73) based on the image-sticking compensation data (Figure 14, Element 302. Paragraph 87) and based on the additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87);
displaying a corrected test image (Figure 14, Element 300. Paragraph 87 and Figure 10, Element 202. Paragraph 73) based on the test data (Element test image data. Paragraph 73) on which the image-sticking compensation operation (Figure 14, Element 302, Sub-Element Compensation. Paragraph 87) is re-performed (Figures 8A – 8B. Paragraphs 66 – 67); and
receiving a visibility evaluation input for the corrected test image (Figure 14, Element 300. Paragraph 87 and Figure 10, Element 202. Paragraph 73).
Regarding Claim 12, Yang et al. teach the method of claim 11 (See Above), further comprising storing (Paragraph 76) the additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) for the pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56) in the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) based on the visibility evaluation input indicating that the corrected test image (Figure 14, Element 300. Paragraph 87 and Figure 10, Element 202. Paragraph 73) has good visibility.
Regarding Claim 13, Yang et al. teach the method of claim 11, further comprising re-determining (Figures 9A – 9B. Paragraph 68 – 71) the additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) for the pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56) in the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) by again receiving the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) input and the relative brightness input (Figures 7A - 9B, Element Lv. Paragraph 63) based on the visibility evaluation input indicating that the corrected test image (Figure 14, Element 300. Paragraph 87 and Figure 10, Element 202. Paragraph 73) has poor visibility.
Regarding Claim 14, Yang et al. teach a method of compensating image sticking in a display device (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 49), the method comprising:
storing image-sticking compensation data (Figure 14, Element 302. Paragraph 87) representing a compensation value according to a degradation amount (Paragraph 87) of a pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56);
performing an image-sticking compensation operation (Figure 14, Element 302, Sub-Element Compensation. Paragraph 87) on test data (Element test image data. Paragraph 73) based on the image-sticking compensation data (Figure 14, Element 302. Paragraph 87);
displaying a test image (Figure 14, Element 300. Paragraph 87 and Figure 10, Element 202. Paragraph 73) based on the test data (Element test image data. Paragraph 73);
receiving a miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) input representing a miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) in the test image (Figure 14, Element 300. Paragraph 87 and Figure 10, Element 202. Paragraph 73);
receiving a relative brightness input (Figures 7A - 9B, Element Lv. Paragraph 63) representing whether the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) is brighter or darker than a remaining region (Figures 7A - 9B, Element 130. Paragraph 65) in the test image (Figure 14, Element 300. Paragraph 87 and Figure 10, Element 202. Paragraph 73) that is other than the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65);
receiving a brightness level input representing a brightness level or a darkness level of the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65); and
determining an additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) for the pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56) in the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) based on the degradation amount (Paragraph 87) of the pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56) in the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65), based on the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) input, based on the relative brightness input (Figures 7A - 9B, Element Lv. Paragraph 63), and based on the brightness level input.
Regarding Claim 15, Yang et al. teach the method of claim 14 (See Above), wherein an absolute value of the additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) for the pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56) in the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) increases (Seen in Figure 15) as the brightness level input increases (Seen in Figures 7A – 9B).
Regarding Claim 16, Yang et al. teach an electronic device comprising:
an input device (Figure 1, Element 20. Paragraph 52); and
a display device (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 49) comprising:
a display panel (Figure 1, Element 18. Paragraph 49); and
a panel driver (Figure 5, Elements 84, 86A, and 86B. Paragraph 56) configured to drive the display panel (Figure 1, Element 18. Paragraph 49), configured to store image-sticking compensation data (Figure 14, Element 302. Paragraph 87) representing a compensation value according to a degradation amount (Paragraph 87) of a pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56) of the display panel (Figure 1, Element 18. Paragraph 49), configured to perform an image-sticking compensation operation (Figure 14, Element 302, Sub-Element Compensation. Paragraph 87) on test data (Element test image data. Paragraph 73) based on the image-sticking compensation data (Figure 14, Element 302. Paragraph 87), and configured to drive the display panel (Figure 1, Element 18. Paragraph 49) to display a test image (Figure 14, Element 300. Paragraph 87 and Figure 10, Element 202. Paragraph 73) based on the test data (Element test image data. Paragraph 73),
wherein the input device (Figure 1, Element 20. Paragraph 52) is configured to receive a miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) input representing a miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) in the test image (Figure 14, Element 300. Paragraph 87 and Figure 10, Element 202. Paragraph 73), and is configured to receive a relative brightness input (Figures 7A - 9B, Element Lv. Paragraph 63) representing whether the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) is brighter or darker than a remaining region (Figures 7A - 9B, Element 130. Paragraph 65) in the test image (Figure 14, Element 300. Paragraph 87 and Figure 10, Element 202. Paragraph 73) that is other than the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65), and
wherein the panel driver (Figure 5, Elements 84, 86A, and 86B. Paragraph 56) is configured to determine an additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) for the pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56) in the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) based on the degradation amount (Paragraph 87) of the pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56) in the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65), based on the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) input, and based on the relative brightness input (Figures 7A - 9B, Element Lv. Paragraph 63).
Regarding Claim 17, Yang et al. teach the electronic device of claim 16 (See Above), wherein the panel driver (Figure 5, Elements 84, 86A, and 86B. Paragraph 56) is configured to determine that the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) is an overcompensation region (Figure 15, Element Over-compensation. Paragraph 90) based on the relative brightness input (Figures 7A - 9B, Element Lv. Paragraph 63) indicating that the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) is brighter than the remaining region (Figures 7A - 9B, Element 130. Paragraph 65), or
wherein the panel driver (Figure 5, Elements 84, 86A, and 86B. Paragraph 56) is configured to determine that the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) is an undercompensation region (Figure 15, Element Under-compensation. Paragraph 90) based on the relative brightness input (Figures 7A - 9B, Element Lv. Paragraph 63) indicating that the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) is darker than the remaining region (Figures 7A - 9B, Element 130. Paragraph 65).
Regarding Claim 18, Yang et al. teach the electronic device of claim 17 (See Above), wherein the additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) for the pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56) in the overcompensation region (Figure 15, Element Over-compensation. Paragraph 90) is a negative value (Seen in Figures 7A – 9B), or
wherein the additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) for the pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56) in the undercompensation region (Figure 15, Element Under-compensation. Paragraph 90) is a positive value (Seen in Figures 7A – 9B).
Regarding Claim 19, Yang et al. teach the electronic device of claim 16 (See Above), wherein an absolute value of the additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) for the pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56) in the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) increases as the degradation amount (Paragraph 87) of the pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56) increases.
Regarding Claim 20, Yang et al. teach the electronic device of claim 16 (See Above), wherein the panel driver (Figure 5, Elements 84, 86A, and 86B. Paragraph 56) is configured to receive a brightness level input representing a brightness level or a darkness level of the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65), and
wherein an absolute value of the additional compensation value (Figure 14, Element 304. Paragraph 87) for the pixel (Figure 5, Element 82. Paragraph 56) in the miscompensation region (Figures 7A - 9B, Elements 132 and 134. Paragraph 65) increases as the brightness level input increases (Seen in Figures 7A – 9B).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Marks et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2010/0149340) discloses a second compensation dependent on the shape of an image.
Kim et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2014/0146071) discloses a logo detection unit that is capable of sensing an edge corresponding to a boundary of the logo and correcting the brightness of the edge.
Lee et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2022/0398961) discloses a display device that contains an image sticking compensation, similar to the instant invention.
Chun et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2022/0122544) discloses an image region with a logo that contemplates a correction value for pixels in the region.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW B SCHNIREL whose telephone number is (571)270-7690. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10 - 6 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, William 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.
/A.B.S/Examiner, Art Unit 2625
/WILLIAM BODDIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2625