Mira123
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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 6 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 6 recites “wherein the afterimage compensation data is generated by Equations 4 to 6:
CD[i] =B*MaxCompN*DDI[i], DDI[i]> 0,
CD[i] = C*MaxCompP*DDI[i], DDI[i] < 0, and
CD[i] = 0, DDI[i] = 0 “ although it is clear that 3 equations are listed to perform the afterimage compensation the claim language or the specification do not specify which is equation 4, equation 5, equation 6.
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.
Claims 1, 4, 5, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akutsu (US 2007/0164946) in view of Shiomi (US 2008/0158443).
Regarding claims 1 and 7, Akutsu teaches A display device comprising: a display panel including pixels; a data driving circuit which provides a data signal to the display panel; a scan driving circuit which provides a scan signal to the display panel (Fig. 16, data driver 3, scan driver 4, pixels ); a data compensation circuit which compensates input image data and generates output image data corresponding to the data signal (Fig. 1 data compensation unit), the data compensation circuit including: a reference frame data generating block which generates (i)th reference frame data (current frame data), where i is an integer greater than or equal to 2, based on (i-1)th reference frame data that is generated in an (i-1)th display frame (previous frame data) and (i)th output image data that is generated based on the (i-1)th reference frame data in an (i)th display frame (current frame data that updated/compensated from previous frame data);a reference frame memory device which stores reference frame data (frame memory 115); and a compensating block which generates the (i)th output image data by generating (i)th conversion image data based on (i)th input image data that is input in the (i)th display frame, by generating afterimage compensation data for each of the pixels based on the (i)th conversion image data and the (i-1)th reference frame data, and by compensating the (i)th input image data based on the afterimage compensation data (114a uses a previous frame data and a current frame data to create compensation and conversion data); and a timing control circuit which controls the data driving circuit, the scan driving circuit, and the data compensation circuit (Fig. 16, control circuit 12). Although Akutsu teaches the limitations as discussed above, he does not explicitly teach a reference frame memory device which stores the (i)th reference frame data when the (i)th reference frame data is generated in the (i)th display frame and provides the (i)th reference frame data in an (i+l)th display frame; a memory control block which controls the reference frame memory device.
However in the field of compensating image data Shiomi teaches teach a reference frame memory device which stores the (i)th reference frame data when the (i)th reference frame data is generated in the (i)th display frame and provides the (i)th reference frame data in an (i+l)th display frame; a memory control block which controls the reference frame memory device ([0238]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill it the art to combine the method as taught by Akutsu with the method as taught by Shiomi. This combination would provide an improved view experience for a user as taught by Shiomi (abstract).
Regarding claim 4, Akutsa teaches wherein the compensating block determines a luminance compensation amount of the afterimage compensation data based on a difference between a reference gray scale value according to the (i-I )th reference frame data and a gray scale value according to the (i)th conversion image data ([0297-0302]).
Regarding claim 5, Akusta teaches when the gray scale value is greater than the reference gray scale value, the compensating block generates the afterimage compensation data which performs a compensation of decreasing a luminance of the (i)th input image data, when the gray scale value is smaller than the reference gray scale value, the compensating block generates the afterimage compensation data which performs a compensation of increasing the luminance of the (i)th input image data, and when the gray scale value is equal to the reference gray scale value, the compensating block generates the afterimage compensation data which does not perform a compensation of adjusting the luminance of the (i)th input image data ([0299][0301][0303]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3 and 8-9 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDRE L MATTHEWS whose telephone number is (571)270-5806. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-6:00.
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, Amr Awad can be reached at 571-272-7764. 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.
/ANDRE L MATTHEWS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2621
Prosecution Insights