Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/016,163

MULTI-DISPLAY CONTROLLER

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jan 10, 2025
Examiner
YANG, NAN-YING
Art Unit
2629
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Nxp B V
OA Round
2 (Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
629 granted / 815 resolved
+15.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+8.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
831
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.5%
-38.5% vs TC avg
§103
74.1%
+34.1% vs TC avg
§102
10.3%
-29.7% vs TC avg
§112
7.7%
-32.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 815 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 . Response to Amendment This Office Action is made in response to applicant’s amendment submitted on 01/22/2026. Claims 16 and 23 have been amended. Claims 1-15, 28 and 35 have been cancelled. Claim 36 has been newly added. Claims 16-27, 29-34 and 36 are currently pending in the application. Response to Argument Applicant’s argument filed on 01/22/2026 has been fully considered but it is not persuasive. Applicant submits “Shen however is referring only one display (e.g. "determines user is not looking at the display") worn by a user. Shen's user is not wearing "two displays" nor is "vary an attribute of one display in a set of two displays" as both recited in amended Claim 16. Thus neither Lee nor Shen either individually or in view of each other teach or suggest amended Claim 16.” (Remarks, page 6, the fifth paragraph) Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s premises and conclusions. Claim 16 has been amended as “wherein the rendering engine is configured to delay adjusting the attribute of the at least one display until the attention of the user is either on or not on the at least one display for a predetermined time period”. Therefore, delaying adjusting the attribute of the at least one display is claimed; and Shen teaches delaying adjusting the attribute of one display (paragraph 44, if the wearable device determines based on the position of the user eye that the user is looking at the display, the wearable device may return the brightness of the display from the dimmed display brightness to a previous display brightness level or a default display brightness level. In one example, the wearable device may return the brightness to a previous display brightness level or the default display brightness level if the wearable device determines that the user is looking at the display for a predetermined period of time). Primary reference Lee discloses to vary an attribute of one display in a set of two or more displays based on the attention of the user (figures 3A-D, active zone is at enhanced level (high brightness, magnified) based on the user’s line of sight, abstract, a controller determining an active zone and a non-active zone of the one or more displays based on the user's line of sight. The one or more displays are configured to operate the active zone at an enhanced level, paragraph 76, the active zone, i.e. display 1, is adjusted or maintained at higher brightness and higher contrast). Therefore, Lee can be modified by Shen to delay adjusting the attribute of the one display until the attention of the user is either on or not on the one display for a predetermined time period. As above, if Applicant believes that the current invention is different from Examiner’s interpretation of the prior art, the claim language should be amended to reflect the difference and more clearly define Applicant’s invention. However, based on the currently pending claim language, Examiner maintains the rejections of the independent claims 16 and 35. Applicant further submits “Not only is Lin referring to just one screen 140 while Claim 36 cites "two displays", but Lin also does not "gradually adjust the attribute" "based on the attention of the user" "focus detector configured to detect an attention of a user", as recited in Claim 36. In Lin the user's attention may or may not be on the "screen [140] of an electronic device" "when the electronic device is switched from a first operating system to a second operating system", as recited in Lin's Abstract. Instead, Lin will perform "gradually adjusting screen brightness" regardless of any user's attention. Thus neither Lee nor Lin either individually or in view of each other teach or suggest amended Claim 36.” (Remarks, page 7, the fifth – the eighth paragraphs) Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s premises and conclusions. Primary reference Lee discloses one or more rendering engines configured to vary an attribute of one display in a set of two or more displays based on the attention of the user (figures 3A-D, active zone is at enhanced level (high brightness, magnified) based on the user’s line of sight, abstract, a controller determining an active zone and a non-active zone of the one or more displays based on the user's line of sight. The one or more displays are configured to operate the active zone at an enhanced level, paragraph 76, the active zone, i.e. display 1, is adjusted or maintained at higher brightness and higher contrast). Lin is used to teach the claim limitation “wherein the rendering engine is configured to gradually adjust the attribute from a first attribute value to a second attribute value over a predetermined time period”. Lin teaches to gradually adjust an attribute from a first attribute value to a second attribute value over a predetermined time period (figure 6, S660, paragraph 57, the controller gradually adjusts the screen brightness from the second brightness value back to the first brightness value in a similar manner). As above, if Applicant believes that the current invention is different from Examiner’s interpretation of the prior art, the claim language should be amended to reflect the difference and more clearly define Applicant’s invention. However, based on the currently pending claim language, Examiner maintains the rejections of the independent claims 16 and 35. Claim Objections Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “adjusting the attribute of the at least one display” in line 5 is suggest to read “adjusting the attribute of the one display”. 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) 16-21, 23-27 and 30-35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US. Pub. No. 2020/0241824, hereinafter “Lee”) in view of Shen et al. (US. Pub. No. 2016/0048022, hereinafter “Shen”). As to claims 16 and 35, (Currently Amended) Lee discloses a multi-display controller [figure 2, controller 206 for multi-display 108], associated with its method for controlling multiple displays, comprising: a focus detector [figure 2, 202-204 to detect an attention of a user 210] configured to detect an attention of a user [paragraph 73, The interior camera 202 constantly monitors the eye movement of driver 210 to predict the driver's line of sight. Where the interior camera 202 is unable to detect the eyes of driver 210 to accurately predict the driver's line of sight, the head movement sensor 203 and/or body movement sensor 204 monitors the head and body movement, respectively, of driver 210 to determine the direction of view of the driver and predict the driver's line of sight]; and one or more rendering engines configured to vary an attribute of on the attention of the user [figures 3A-D, active zone is at enhanced level (high brightness, magnified) based on the user’s line of sight, abstract, a controller determining an active zone and a non-active zone of the one or more displays based on the user's line of sight. The one or more displays are configured to operate the active zone at an enhanced level, paragraph 76, the active zone, i.e. display 1, is adjusted or maintained at higher brightness and higher contrast]. Lee does not disclose wherein the rendering engine is configured to delay adjusting the attribute of the at least one display until the attention of the user is either on or not on the at least one display for a predetermined time period. Shen teaches to delay adjusting an attribute of at least one display until the attention of a user is either on or not on the at least one display for a predetermined time period [paragraph 44, if the wearable device determines based on the position of the user eye that the user is looking at the display, the wearable device may return the brightness of the display from the dimmed display brightness to a previous display brightness level or a default display brightness level. In one example, the wearable device may return the brightness to a previous display brightness level or the default display brightness level if the wearable device determines that the user is looking at the display for a predetermined period of time.]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the controller of Lee to wherein the rendering engine is configured to delay adjusting the attribute of the at least one display until the attention of the user is either on or not on the at least one display for a predetermined time period, as taught by Shen, in order to adjust a brightness of a display of the wearable device based on the detected position of the user eye (Shen, paragraph 5). As to claim 17, (Original) Lee discloses the controller of claim 16: wherein the focus detector is configured to detect at least one of the user’s: gaze, eye movements [abstract, a controller determining an active zone and a non-active zone of the one or more displays based on the user's line of sight. The one or more displays are configured to operate the active zone at an enhanced level, paragraph 73, The interior camera 202 constantly monitors the eye movement of driver 210 to predict the driver's line of sight], touch, voice command, or body positioning. As to claim 18, (Original) Lee discloses the controller of claim 16: wherein the focus detector is at least one of: a camera [figure 2, interior camera 202, paragraph 73, The interior camera 202 constantly monitors the eye movement of driver 210 to predict the driver's line of sight], a touch sensitive display, a button, a microphone, an infrared detector, a wireless device, or a pressure sensor. As to claim 19, (Original) Lee discloses the controller of claim 16: wherein the focus detector is configured to detect an attention of each user in a set of two or more users [paragraph 17, The display system may be configured to allow multiple users to use the system at the same time. For example, when more than one user's line of sight is detected on one display, each line of sight determines one active zone which can be operated as disclosed herein. Say when a driver is looking at a gauge reading displayed on an integrated infotainment and instrument cluster single display, and a front passenger is looking at media content displayed on the same integrated display, the gauge reading and the media content each become an active zone]. As to claim 20, (Original) Lee discloses the controller of claim 16: wherein the focus detector is configured to detect a separate attention for each user in a set of users [paragraph 17, The display system may be configured to allow multiple users to use the system at the same time. For example, when more than one user's line of sight is detected on one display, each line of sight determines one active zone which can be operated as disclosed herein. Say when a driver is looking at a gauge reading displayed on an integrated infotainment and instrument cluster single display, and a front passenger is looking at media content displayed on the same integrated display, the gauge reading and the media content each become an active zone]; and wherein the rendering engine is configured to separately vary an attribute of those displays that have the separate attention of each user in the set of users [paragraph 17, The display system may be configured to allow multiple users to use the system at the same time. For example, when more than one user's line of sight is detected on one display, each line of sight determines one active zone which can be operated as disclosed herein. Say when a driver is looking at a gauge reading displayed on an integrated infotainment and instrument cluster single display, and a front passenger is looking at media content displayed on the same integrated display, the gauge reading and the media content each become an active zone]. As to claim 21, (Original) Lee discloses the controller of claim 20: wherein the set of users includes a driver and a passenger [paragraph 17, The display system may be configured to allow multiple users to use the system at the same time. For example, when more than one user's line of sight is detected on one display, each line of sight determines one active zone which can be operated as disclosed herein. Say when a driver is looking at a gauge reading displayed on an integrated infotainment and instrument cluster single display, and a front passenger is looking at media content displayed on the same integrated display, the gauge reading and the media content each become an active zone]. As to claim 23, (Currently Amended) Lee discloses the controller of claim 16: wherein the attribute includes at least one of: a power supplied, a power mode, network communications bandwidth, refresh rate, brightness, or pixel resolution or other parameters which may affect the quality of rendered image [figures 3A-D, active zone is at enhanced level (high brightness, magnified) based on the user’s line of sight, abstract, a controller determining an active zone and a non-active zone of the one or more displays based on the user's line of sight. The one or more displays are configured to operate the active zone at an enhanced level, paragraph 76, the active zone, i.e. display 1, is adjusted or maintained at higher brightness and higher contrast]. As to claim 24, (Original) Lee discloses the controller of claim 16: wherein the rendering engine is configured to adjust the attribute of the at least one display to a higher quality as soon as the attention of the user is on the at least one display [figures 3A-D, active zone is at enhanced level (high brightness, magnified) based on the user’s line of sight, abstract, a controller determining an active zone and a non-active zone of the one or more displays based on the user's line of sight. The one or more displays are configured to operate the active zone at an enhanced level, paragraph 76, the active zone, i.e. display 1, is adjusted or maintained at higher brightness and higher contrast]. As to claim 25, (Original) Lee discloses the controller of claim 24: wherein the rendering engine is configured to adjust the attribute of the at least one display to a highest quality [figures 3A-D, active zone is at enhanced level (high brightness, magnified) based on the user’s line of sight, abstract, a controller determining an active zone and a non-active zone of the one or more displays based on the user's line of sight. The one or more displays are configured to operate the active zone at an enhanced level, paragraph 76, the active zone, i.e. display 1, is adjusted or maintained at higher brightness and higher contrast]. As to claim 26, (Original) Lee discloses the controller of claim 16: wherein the rendering engine is configured to adjust the attribute of the at least one display to a lower quality as soon as the attention of the user is not on the at least one display [paragraph 20, the active zone may be operated at full illumination, e.g. at full colour and/or brightness. Where prior art vehicle displays may all be operated at the same colour and/or brightness, the disclosed system may only operate the active zone at full colour and/or brightness. The distraction from lesser important display(s) and/or content in the non-active zone at any point in time may be reduced or removed]. As to claim 27, (Original) Lee discloses the controller of claim 26: wherein the rendering engine is configured to adjust the attribute of the at least one display to a lowest quality [paragraph 20, the active zone may be operated at full illumination, e.g. at full colour and/or brightness. Where prior art vehicle displays may all be operated at the same colour and/or brightness, the disclosed system may only operate the active zone at full colour and/or brightness. The distraction from lesser important display(s) and/or content in the non-active zone at any point in time may be reduced or removed]. As to claim 30, (Original) Lee discloses the controller of claim 16: wherein the display is at least one of: a vehicle display, a windshield display, a dashboard display, an instrument cluster display, a steering wheel display, a center console display [figures 3A-D, windshield display, dashboard display,, center console display], a back seat display, a head rest display, a ceiling display, a vehicle body panel display, a smartphone display, a paired display, a wirelessly connected display, an office display, a concert display, a home display, a security display, a light show display, a computer display, a set of light elements, or a television display. As to claim 31, (Original) Lee discloses the controller of claim 16: wherein each display in the set of displays is separately operable [paragraph 72, a controller 206 configured to determine an active zone and a non-active zone of the p displays 208 based on the driver's line of sight, wherein the p displays 208 are configured to operate the active zone at an enhanced level as compared to the non-active zone.]. As to claim 32, (Original) Lee discloses the controller of claim 16: wherein each display in the set of displays is physically separate [figures 3A-D, set of displays is physically separate]. As to claim 33, (Original) Lee discloses the controller of claim 16: wherein each display in the set of displays includes a separate complete stand-alone set of display electronics [figures 3A-D, each display 208-1-208-8 in the set of displays 208 includes a separate complete stand-alone set of display electronics]. As to claim 34, (Original) Lee discloses the controller of claim 16: wherein each display in the set of displays only shares a common power supply [paragraph 20, power may be saved as only a subset of the displays, i.e. the active zone, is operated at enhanced illumination. Consequently, thermal dissipation due to power dissipation may be reduced, paragraph 83, driver 310 is driving to a destination entered into the navigation display and the modification in this case is to suspend the power to the non-active zone]. Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Shen, further in view of Schofield et al. (US. Pub. No. 2002/0003571, hereinafter “Schofield”). As to claim 22, (Original) Lee discloses the controller of claim 20. Lee does not disclose wherein the set of users includes a primary user and an audience of two or more additional users. Schofield teaches wherein a set of users includes a primary user and an audience of two or more additional users [figure 9, a plurality of displays to display to a set of users (driver and other passengers), paragraph 312, This image of the driver can, optionally and preferably, be displayed on a header/headliner/overhead consolemounted video screen (optionally in a picture-in-picture form as is common on home televisions) so that the rear passengers can have the image of the driver displayed to them, and so the driver can participate in their conversations by visual appearance on the overheadmounted video screen viewed by the rear passengers]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the controller of Lee to wherein a set of users includes a primary user and an audience of two or more additional users, as taught by Schofield, in order to provide a video screen at an interior mirror assembly in a way that maximizes rearward field of view by the reflector element and that enables the driver to readily view images displayed by the video screen (Schofield, paragraph 4). Claim(s) 29 and 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Shen, further in view of Lin et al. (US. Pub. No. 2009/0058887, hereinafter “Lin”). As to claim 29, (Original) Lee discloses the controller of claim 16. Lee does not disclose wherein the rendering engine is configured to gradually adjust the attribute from a first attribute value to a second attribute value over a predetermined time period. Lin teaches to gradually adjust an attribute from a first attribute value to a second attribute value over a predetermined time period [figure 6, S660, paragraph 57, the controller gradually adjusts the screen brightness from the second brightness value back to the first brightness value in a similar manner]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the controller of Lee to wherein the rendering engine is configured to gradually adjust the attribute from a first attribute value to a second attribute value over a predetermined time period, as taught by Lin, in order to allow users to achieve purposes such as document writing (Lin, paragraph 5). As to claim 36, (New) Lee discloses A multi-display controller [figure 2, controller 206 for multi-display 108], comprising: a focus detector [figure 2, 202-204 to detect an attention of a user 210] configured to detect an attention of a user [paragraph 73, The interior camera 202 constantly monitors the eye movement of driver 210 to predict the driver's line of sight. Where the interior camera 202 is unable to detect the eyes of driver 210 to accurately predict the driver's line of sight, the head movement sensor 203 and/or body movement sensor 204 monitors the head and body movement, respectively, of driver 210 to determine the direction of view of the driver and predict the driver's line of sight]; and one or more rendering engines configured to vary an attribute of one display in a set of two or more displays based on the attention of the user [figures 3A-D, active zone is at enhanced level (high brightness, magnified) based on the user’s line of sight, abstract, a controller determining an active zone and a non-active zone of the one or more displays based on the user's line of sight. The one or more displays are configured to operate the active zone at an enhanced level, paragraph 76, the active zone, i.e. display 1, is adjusted or maintained at higher brightness and higher contrast]. Lee does not disclose wherein the rendering engine is configured to gradually adjust the attribute from a first attribute value to a second attribute value over a predetermined time period. Lin teaches to gradually adjust an attribute from a first attribute value to a second attribute value over a predetermined time period [figure 6, S660, paragraph 57, the controller gradually adjusts the screen brightness from the second brightness value back to the first brightness value in a similar manner]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the controller of Lee to wherein the rendering engine is configured to gradually adjust the attribute from a first attribute value to a second attribute value over a predetermined time period, as taught by Lin, in order to allow users to achieve purposes such as document writing (Lin, paragraph 5). Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 NAN-YING YANG whose telephone number is (571)272-2211. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8am-5pm, 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, BENJAMIN LEE can be reached at (571)272-2963. 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. /NAN-YING YANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2629
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 10, 2025
Application Filed
Oct 21, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 22, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 05, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602138
TOUCH PANEL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593510
DISPLAY PANEL AND DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592193
DISPLAY PANEL AND CONTROL METHOD THEREFOR, AND DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583316
User Interface for a Vehicle and a Vehicle
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583319
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DIMMING DISPLAYS IN AUTOMOTIVE VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+8.9%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 815 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month