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.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 2 are objected to because of the following informalities:
With regard to Claim 1, “at least a partial region” should be changed to –at least one partial region--.
With regard to Claim 2, each instance of “the at least the partial region” should be changed to –the at least one partial region--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 102
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, 2, and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Deguchi (JP2012-005139).
With regard to Claim 1, Deguchi discloses in Fig. 1 an image projection system (1) comprising:
a light source (9) to emit light;
an image display element (8) to modulate the light emitted from the light source to display an image based on an input image;
a projection optical system (10) configured to project the image displayed on the image display element; and
circuitry (2-7, 12-17, SB) configured to inverse gradation of at least one partial region of the input image in response to a receipt of a command information generated when a predetermined condition is satisfied (herein considered to be when a blackboard mode is set) (see, e.g., Abstract, “…, when a blackboard mode is set, the original character color and the original background color of the document image are inverted…”).
With regard to Claim 2, Deguchi discloses the system set forth above, wherein the circuitry is further configured to determine whether to start inversing gradation of the at least the partial region in response to a receipt of an operation input (herein considered to be when a blackboard mode is set) (“… In the projector apparatus 1, three types of projection modes, ie, a normal mode, an automatic mode, and a blackboard mode are prepared as projection modes, and the user can selectively set one of the projection modes. The blackboard mode is a projection mode provided on the premise that the blackboard mode is used when projecting on the blackboard”); and
inverse the gradation of the at least one partial region based on a determination of starting the inversing gradation.
With regard to Claim 4, Deguchi discloses the system set forth above, wherein the circuitry is further configured to convert the input image having multiple-color gradation into a monochromatic gradation to perform monochrome processing (“the imaging unit 52 is a solid-state imaging device (CCD or the like) that images the projection plane 100 on which the projector device 51 displays a projected image, and an imaging signal output from the solid-state imaging device is converted into digital image data (monochrome image data)”).
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deguchi (JP2012-005139) in view of Fu et al. (CN 113495422).
With regard to Claim 3, Deguchi discloses the system set forth above, but lacks a clear disclosure of the circuitry further configured to change a threshold of an average brightness of the image displayed on the image display element according to an operation input.
In an analogous projection field of endeavor, Fu et al. discloses a system comprising, among other features, circuitry configured to change a threshold of an average brightness of the image displayed on the image display element according to an operation input (“Through the above steps, the brightness of the ambient light can be monitored in real time, and the projection brightness of the optical machine can be adjusted. In one embodiment of the embodiment, it can make the camera unit 3 every one end time Δ t (such as 10 seconds, 15 seconds; 20 seconds) shooting a projection image, the front step can be measured to obtain a plurality of ambient light brightness, assuming that the latest ambient light brightness is Ln, the average value of the 10 ambient light brightness is La, when | Ln-La | > Lb, Lb is the preset brightness change threshold value; then judging that the ambient light has large change, adjusting the projection brightness. According to the value of Ln-La, controlling the projection brightness to light or dimming. The preset mode comprises a manual adjusting mode, a semi-automatic adjusting mode and an automatic adjusting mode. Wherein, when the projection device is in the semi-automatic adjusting mode, when the projection device automatically adjusts the projection brightness, the user also can be manually intervened to adjust”).
Before the effective filing date of the present application, it would have been obvious to modify Deguchi by incorporating the circuitry taught by Fu et al. in order to provide optimized image quality.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deguchi (JP2012-005139).
With regard to Claims 9 and 10, Deguchi discloses the system set forth above, but lacks a clear disclosure of the light source emitting first, second, and third lights meeting the claimed relationship/equation. Absent any showing of criticality and/or unpredictability, selecting a desired wavelength for each light in order to produce images of desired quality/characteristic would have been known to one of ordinary skill in the art. Before the effective filing date of the present application, it would have been obvious to modify Deguchi by providing the light source emitting the claimed wavelengths in order to provide image outputs of desired quality.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-8 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:
With regard to Claim 5, the prior art of record fail to anticipate and/or render obvious, either solely or in combination, an image projection system comprising, among other features, circuitry configured to convert a gradation of a pixel higher than a first threshold in the input image into a first gradation higher than the first threshold.
Claims 6-8 are allowed at least by virtue of their respective dependency based upon an allowable base claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure:
Takada et al. (WO 2019/193995)
Nakagawa (JP 2014-186104)
Nakada (CN 103428508)
Liu et al. (CN 115373204)
Telephone/Fax Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PASCAL M. BUI-PHO whose telephone number is (571)272-2714. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM 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, Jonathan T. Moffat can be reached at (571) 272-4390. 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.
/PASCAL M BUI PHO/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3798
Prosecution Insights