Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 19/008,331

IMAGE OUTPUT DEVICE AND CONTROL METHOD FOR SAME

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jan 02, 2025
Examiner
KHALID, OMER
Art Unit
2422
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., LTD.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
66%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 66% — above average
66%
Career Allow Rate
324 granted / 488 resolved
+8.4% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+23.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
513
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.4%
-34.6% vs TC avg
§103
50.8%
+10.8% vs TC avg
§102
23.7%
-16.3% vs TC avg
§112
13.5%
-26.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 488 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 1/2/2025 was filed on the mailing date of the claims on 1/2/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. 1. Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 20170044399A Song et al. (hereinafter Song [English Translation Provided] in view of U.S. 2021/0006689, Yamamoto et al. (hereinafter Yamamoto). 2. Regarding Claim 1, Song discloses An image output device (Page 2 para 7, “image projection apparatus 100 may be realized by a projector”) comprising: a projector (100 projector); a communication interface including a circuit (Fig. 3a: a communication module 120-1); memory storing instructions (Fig. 3A: a memory 130); and at least one processor (Fig. 3A: processor 110), wherein the instructions (Page 13 para 8, “program instructions that can be executed through various computer means and recorded in a computer-readable medium.”), when executed by the at least one processor (Fig. 3A: processor 110), cause the image output device (100 projector) to: identify whether another image output device (Fig. 5; Page 3para 5-8 “image projection apparatus 100-2” Page 7 para 8 “the processor 110 may detect proximity of the other image projection apparatus 100-2 by using the sensor module 140.”) outputs the input image by adjusting its luminance, by communicating with the other image output device that receives a same image as the input image and outputs the same image onto a projection surface (Page 10 para 4 “The processor 100 determines the total projection area and determines the first projection area by the first image projection apparatus 100-1 and the second projection area by the second image projection apparatus 100-2, It is possible to determine the overlapping overlap area. Since the light is superimposed on the overlapping region, the processor 110 adjusts the transparency of the image projected on the concave region so that the brightness of the entire projected region is constant.”), adjust the luminance of at least one area included in the input image based on the brightness information (Page 10 para 4, “the processor 110 adjusts the transparency of the image projected on the concave region so that the brightness of the entire projected region is constant.” Adjusting luminance (via transparency/intensity control) of overlapping image areas) according to a result of the identifying (page 5 para 4, “The sensor module 140 may detect whether the other image projecting device 100 'is adjacent to the other and the distance to the other image projecting device 100'.”), and control the projector to output the adjusted input image onto the projection surface (Page 2 para 2, “projecting an input image signal on a screen” Page 4 para 1, “plurality of image projection apparatuses 100-1 and 100-2 can share not only a plurality of sub images but also sync information for adjusting a sync.”. However, Song does not explicitly disclose acquire brightness information of an input image received via the communication interface Yamamoto teaches acquire brightness information of an input image received via the communication interface (Fig. 9; [0064], “the video reproduction apparatus receives, from the video display apparatus, the maximum luminance information (MAXTVLL) of the display apparatus” [0079]-[0080], “Metadata processor 122 processes the dynamic metadata extracted by dynamic metadata extractor 120 and the static metadata extracted by static metadata extractor 117 by using the menu graphics state information output from menu controller 116B and the luminance information (MAXTVLL) of video display apparatus 102B, and changes the dynamic metadata according to the state of menu graphics. Also, metadata processor 122 acquires MAXTVLL from, for example, video display apparatus 102B as EDID.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the image output device of Song to further acquire and utilize brightness information of an input image as taught by Yamamoto for the purposes of controlling luminance adjustment when multiple image output devices project the same image. Hence improve luminance coordination accuracy and visual quality when multiple projectors output the same image. 3. Regarding Claim 2, Song in view of Yamamoto discloses The image output device as claimed in claim 1, Song discloses wherein the instructions (Page 13 para 8, “program instructions that can be executed through various computer means and recorded in a computer-readable medium.”), when executed by the at least one processor (Fig. 3A: processor 110), cause the image output device to acquire the adjusted input image (Page para, “And adjusts the transparency of an area of the first projection area of the image projection device that overlaps with the second projection area of the other image projection device to be different from each other”), Song does not explicitly disclose where the luminance of a relatively bright area is increased and the luminance of a relatively dark area is decreased, among the at least one area included in the input image, based on the brightness information and a tone map curve for expanding a dynamic range. Yamamoto discloses where the luminance of a relatively bright area is increased and the luminance of a relatively dark area is decreased (Figs. 3A and 3B, Applying a tone mapping curve, [0103], dynamic tone mapping), among the at least one area included in the input image ([0052], “dynamic metadata is included in the video information”), based on the brightness information and a tone map curve for expanding a dynamic range ([0103], “the video display apparatus (TV set) may change the tone mapping curve of the video display apparatus so as to not affect MaxLLGM, and maintain the dynamic metadata mode (dynamic tone mapping)”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the image output device of Song to further acquire and utilize brightness information of an input image as taught by Yamamoto for the purposes of controlling luminance adjustment when multiple image output devices project the same image. Hence improve luminance coordination accuracy and visual quality when multiple projectors output the same image. 4. Regarding Claim 4, Song in view of Yamamoto discloses The image output device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor (Fig. 3A: processor 110), cause the image output device to transmit (Fig. 3a: communication module 120-1 of image projection apparatus 100), to the other image output device (Page para, “the processor 110-1 may control the communication module 120-1 to transmit the remaining one of the plurality of sub images to the other image projection apparatus 100-2”, based on the other image output device being identified as outputting the input image by adjusting its luminance (Page 10 para 4 “The processor 100 determines the total projection area and determines the first projection area by the first image projection apparatus 100-1 and the second projection area by the second image projection apparatus 100-2, It is possible to determine the overlapping overlap area. Since the light is superimposed on the overlapping region, the processor 110 adjusts the transparency of the image projected on the concave region so that the brightness of the entire projected region is constant.”). Song does not explicitly disclose at least one of a tone map curve used by the image output device or a depth map or an object map, corresponding to the input image Yamamoto discloses at least one of a tone map curve used by the image output device (Figs. 3A and 3B, Applying a tone mapping curve, [0103], dynamic tone mapping) or a depth map (claimed in the alternative) or an object map (claimed in the alternative), corresponding to the input image ([0052], “dynamic metadata is included in the video information”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the image output device of Song to further acquire and utilize brightness information of an input image as taught by Yamamoto for the purposes of controlling luminance adjustment when multiple image output devices project the same image. Hence improve luminance coordination accuracy and visual quality when multiple projectors output the same image. 5. Regarding Claim 5, Song in view of Yamamoto discloses The image output device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor (Fig. 3A: processor 110), cause the image output device (100-1 or 100-2) to control the projector to output the adjusted input image (Page para, “input image signal”) to a corresponding position on the projection surface based on received position information if position information on the projection surface onto which the other image output device outputs the input image is received (Page 4 para 2, “The sensor module 140-2 can sense position information including the rotation angle of the other image projection apparatus 100-2. For example, the information of the other image projection apparatus 100-2 used in the processor 110-1 may be the position information of the other image projection apparatus.” Page 3 para 5, “the communication module 120-1 can transmit and receive image data”). 6. Regarding Claim 6, Song in view of Yamamoto discloses The image output device as claimed in claim 1, Song discloses further comprising a sensor (sensor module 140), wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor (Fig. 3A: processor 110), cause the image output device (100-1 or 100-2) to: acquire, through the sensor, position information on the projection surface onto which the other image output device outputs the input image, and control the projector to output the adjusted input image to a corresponding position on the projection surface based on the acquired position information (Page 4 para 2, “The sensor module 140-2 can sense position information including the rotation angle of the other image projection apparatus 100-2. For example, the information of the other image projection apparatus 100-2 used in the processor 110-1 may be the position information of the other image projection apparatus.” Page 5 para 3, “The sensor module 140 can sense whether the image projection apparatus 100 is close to the placement surface. For example, the sensor module 140 may determine whether the sensor module140 is in proximity to the placement surface using an illuminance sensor 148 attached to one side of the image projection apparatus 100. In addition, the sensor module 140 can detect the infrared ray-marked identification mark using the infrared ray sensor 145.”). 7. Regarding Claim 9, Song in view of Yamamoto discloses The image output (100-1 or 100-2) device as claimed in claim 1, Song discloses wherein a projection screen output by the image output device and a projection screen output by the other image output device are overlaid at the same position on the projection surface (Figs. 9, 11a-14b, (Page 10 para 4 “The processor 100 determines the total projection area and determines the first projection area by the first image projection apparatus 100-1 and the second projection area by the second image projection apparatus 100-2, It is possible to determine the overlapping overlap area. Since the light is superimposed on the overlapping region, the processor 110 adjusts the transparency of the image projected on the concave region so that the brightness of the entire projected region is constant.”). 8. Claim 10 is a method claim, rejected with respect to the same limitation rejected in device Claim 1. 9. Claim 11 is a method claim, rejected with respect to the same limitation rejected in device Claim 2. 10. Claim 13 is a method claim, rejected with respect to the same limitation rejected in device Claim 4. 11. Claim 14 is a method claim, rejected with respect to the same limitation rejected in device Claim 5. 12. Claim 15 is a method claim, rejected with respect to the same limitation rejected in device Claim 6. 13. Claim 16 is a non-transitory CRM claim, rejected with respect to the same limitation rejected in device Claim 1. 14. Claim 17 is a non-transitory CRM claim, rejected with respect to the same limitation rejected in device Claim 2. 15. Claim 19 is a non-transitory CRM claim, rejected with respect to the same limitation rejected in device Claim 4. 16. Claim 20 is a non-transitory CRM claim, rejected with respect to the same limitation rejected in device Claim 5. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 3, 7, 8, 12 and 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding Claim 3, Song in view of Yamamoto discloses The image output device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the instructions (Page 13 para 8, “program instructions that can be executed through various computer means and recorded in a computer-readable medium.”), when executed by the at least one processor (Fig. 3A: processor 110), cause the image output device (100-1 or 100-2) to: acquire one of a depth map (Page 7 para 8 “a depth camera”, an object map (claimed in the alternative), or a saliency map (claimed in the alternative), corresponding to the input image (page 2 para 2, “projecting an input image signal”), Song in view of Yamamoto does not explicitly disclose based on the brightness information of the input image, identify distance information of a plurality of objects included in the input image based on one of the depth map or the object map, increase the luminance of an area corresponding to a first object disposed at a relatively short distance among the plurality of objects, and decrease the luminance of an area corresponding to a second object disposed at a relatively long distance among the plurality of objects. Regarding Claim 7, Song in view of Yamamoto discloses The image output device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor (Fig. 3A: processor 110), cause the image output (100-1 or 100-2) device to: Song in view of Yamamoto does not explicitly disclose set one of the other image output device and the image output device as a master and set the other as a slave, transmit a first control signal to the other image output device for the other image output device to output the input image by adjusting its luminance, and control the projector to output the input image without adjusting the luminance of the input image based on the other image output device being set as the slave, and transmit a second control signal to the other image output device for the other image output device to output the input image without adjusting its luminance, and control the projector to output the adjusted input image after adjusting the luminance of the input image based on the other image output device being set as the master. Regarding Claim 8, Song in view of Yamamoto discloses The image output device (100-1 or 100-2) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor (Fig. 3A: processor 110), cause the image output device (100-1 or 100-2) to: Song in view of Yamamoto does not explicitly disclose identify at least one object corresponding to a user selection among a plurality of objects included in the input image, and acquire the adjusted input image by increasing the luminance of an area corresponding to the identified at least one object and decreasing the luminance of a remaining area. Claim 12 is a method claim, objected with respect to the same limitation objected in device Claim 3. Claim 18 is a non-transitory CRM claim, objected with respect to the same limitation objected in device Claim 3. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMER KHALID whose telephone number is (571)270-5997. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 9am-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, John Miller can be reached at (571) 272-7353. 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. /OMER KHALID/Examiner, Art Unit 2422
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 02, 2025
Application Filed
Dec 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 24, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 24, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 27, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598399
IMAGE SYNCHRONIZATION FOR MULTIPLE IMAGE SENSORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12576814
Method for Determining a Cleaning Information, Method for Training of a Neural Network Algorithm, Control Unit, Camera Sensor System, Vehicle, Computer Program and Storage Medium
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12563165
INSTALLATION INFORMATION ACQUISITION METHOD, CORRECTION METHOD, PROGRAM, AND INSTALLATION INFORMATION ACQUISITION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12549690
VIDEO TRANSMISSION SYSTEM, VIDEO TRANSMISSION APPARATUS, VIDEO TRANSMISSION METHOD, AND RECORDING MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12548344
VIDEO PROCESSING DEVICE AND VIDEO PROCESSING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
66%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+23.2%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 488 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month