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
The amendment filed on 2-20-26 has been entered and fully considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1, and 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US 2019/0266974) in view of Langendijk (US 2006/0098033), Tominaga (US 2019/0287473), and Selan (US 2020/0228788).
Regarding claim 1, Chen (Fig. 1-5) discloses a display system comprising:
a mounting unit (100) configured to be worn on a head of a user (“worn on or about a user's head” discussed in [0030]) so as to cover both eyes of the user (“surround viewing region 106, which includes the user's field of vision, allowing the user to look through lenses 104 of head-mounted-display device 102 without interference from outside light” discussed in [0035]);
two display devices (140A and 140B) each having a display area (122A and 122B) in which a plurality of sub-pixels (152A, 152B, and 152C) are arrayed in a matrix (shown in Fig. 4B) having a row-column configuration (eg. rows 154 and columns 156); and
a drive circuit (124) configured to output sub-pixel signals for displaying an image in the display area (“display driver circuit 124 for driving subpixels” discussed in [0040]), wherein the sub-pixels include a plurality of first sub-pixels (152A), a plurality of second sub-pixels (152B), and a plurality of third sub-pixels (152C),
wherein the color of the first sub-pixels, the color of the second sub-pixels, and the color of the third sub-pixels are different from one another (152A is red, 152B is green, and 152C is blue, as discussed in [0045]),
wherein the two display devices each comprise a plurality of signal lines (158A and 158B, respectively) that extend along the column direction (“data lines 158A and data lines 158B may each extend parallel to corresponding pixel columns” discussed in [0050]) and transmit the sub-pixel signals to the sub-pixels (“data lines for driving subpixels of left- and right-eye display regions in accordance with scanning and data signals from display driver circuit 124” discussed in [0043]),
wherein the display area of a first display device of the two display devices is arranged to face one of the eyes of the user (122A is a “left-eye display region” as discussed in [0043]), and the display area of a second display device of the two display devices is arranged to face the other of the eyes of the user (similarly, 122B is a “right-eye display region,” see also “visible to a user's left and right eyes” as discussed in [0043]),
wherein the two display devices are disposed in the mounting unit such that the column direction of the first display device (the direction θ1 seen in Fig. 5A, which is the same as the direction of the data lines, as discussed above, and “data lines 158A may each extend at an angle θ1” discussed in [0050]) and the column direction of the second display device (the direction θ2 seen in Fig. 5A, which is the same as the direction of the data lines, as discussed above, and “data lines 158B may each extend at an angle θ2” discussed in [0050]) are different directions (different directions to the left and right, respectively, as seen in Fig. 5A),
wherein the first angle is an angle between an orthogonal direction orthogonal to an array direction in which the two display devices are arranged (the displays are arranged side by side as seen in Fig. 5A, eg. the horizontal direction “X”) and the column direction of the first display device in plan view (the data lines extend in the column direction, “data lines 158A and data lines 158B may each extend parallel to corresponding pixel columns” and “data lines 158A may each extend at an angle θ1 from the X-axis” as discussed in [0050], also seen in the top of Fig. 5A),
wherein the second angle is an angle between the orthogonal direction and the column direction of the second display device in plan view (similarly, “data lines 158B may each extend at an angle θ2 from the X-axis” discussed in [0050]).
However, while Chen discloses each the pixels 150 have three sub-pixels 152A, 152B, and 152C, Chen fails to teach or suggest details of the order of the sub-pixels throughout the rest of the display area, and so fails to teach or suggest details of any sub-pixel pattern, and also fails to teach or suggest any details of the driving method, and so fails to teach or suggest “column inversion driving.”
Langendijk (Fig. 6) discloses a display system comprising:
a display device having a display area (seen in Fig. 6) in which a plurality of sub-pixels (R, G, and B) are arrayed in a matrix having a row-column configuration (eg. the horizontal row direction and vertical column direction); and
wherein the color of the first sub-pixels, the color of the second sub-pixels, and the color of the third sub-pixels are different from one another (R is red, G is green, and B is blue, as discussed in [0067]),
wherein, in the display area, the first sub-pixels, the second sub-pixels, and the third sub-pixels are arrayed such that the first sub-pixel, the second sub-pixel, and the third sub-pixel are repeatedly disposed along a row direction in order as listed (as seen in Fig. 6, from left to right in each row, the pixels are repeatedly ordered R, G, and B) and that the first sub-pixel, the second sub-pixel, and the third sub-pixel are repeatedly disposed along a column direction in the order as listed (as seen in Fig. 6, from bottom to top in each column, the pixels are repeatedly ordered R, G, and B),
wherein, in the display area, the first sub-pixels are continuously arrayed along an inclined direction inclined with respect to the row direction and the column direction (as seen in Fig. 2B, the red sub-pixels R are arranged in diagonal lines, from top left to bottom right, with respect to the horizontal and vertical directions of the rows and columns), the second sub-pixels are continuously arrayed along the inclined direction (similarly, green sub-pixels G are in arranged in diagonal lines), and the third sub-pixels are continuously arrayed along the inclined direction (similarly, blue sub-pixels B are arranged in diagonal lines).
Therefore, the combination of Chen and Langendijk would provide a display system wherein the two display devices are disposed in the mounting unit such that the column direction of the first display device (the direction θ1 seen in Fig. 5A of Chen, which corresponds to the vertical direction in Fig. 6 of Langendijk, parallel to the columns), the inclined direction of the first display device (the inclined direction of the pixels of Langendijk is diagonally from top left to bottom right with respect to the direction of the columns, as seen in Fig. 6, or in other words, 45 degrees off counterclockwise from the column direction, and so corresponds to a roughly horizontal direction X in Fig. 5A of Chen), the column direction of the second display device (the direction θ2 seen in Fig. 5A of Chen, which corresponds to the vertical direction in Fig. 6 of Langendijk, parallel to the columns), and the inclined direction of the second display device (the inclined direction of the pixels of Langendijk is diagonally from top left to bottom right with respect to the direction of the columns, as seen in Fig. 6, or in other words, 45 degrees off counterclockwise from the column direction, and so corresponds to a roughly vertical direction Y in Fig. 5A of Chen) are different directions (the θ1, X, θ2, and Y directions are each different and roughly upwards to the left, horizontal, upwards to the right, and vertical, respectively, as seen in Fig. 5A of Chen).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen so the sub-pixels are arranged along the rows and columns to form inclined directions as taught by Langendijk because this provides a “simple array design, and a better color homogeneity” (see [0069]).
However, Chen and Langendijk still fail to teach or suggest a column inversion driving method.
Tominaga (Fig. 19) discloses a display system comprising:
a display device (1) having a display area (4) in which a plurality of sub-pixels (13) are arrayed in a matrix having a row-column configuration (eg. the horizontal row direction and vertical column direction seen in Fig. 1); and
a drive circuit (6) configured to output sub-pixel signals for displaying an image in the display area (“drive circuit 6 respectively applies voltages depending on a video signal to the data lines 12. With this, the voltages depending on the video signal are respectively written to the pixel electrodes 16 included in the pixel circuits 13” discussed in [0037]),
wherein the sub-pixels include a plurality of first sub-pixels, a plurality of second sub-pixels, and a plurality of third sub-pixels (an “R subpixel,” a “G subpixel,” and a “B subpixel,” respectively),
wherein the color of the first sub-pixels, the color of the second sub-pixels, and the color of the third sub-pixels are different from one another (“a pixel circuit for displaying red is referred to as a R pixel circuit, a pixel for displaying green is referred to as a G pixel circuit, and a pixel circuit for displaying blue is referred to as a B pixel circuit” as discussed in [0033]),
wherein the drive circuit outputs the sub-pixel signals by a column inversion driving method (“column inversion drive” discussed in [0004]) in which polarities of the sub-pixel signals are different between two signal lines adjacent to each other in the row direction (eg. as seen in Fig. 19, the top left R sub-pixel is positive, while the G sub-pixel that is adjacent to it in the row direction, ie. on the right, is negative, see also “the polarity of the voltage written to the pixel circuit is inverted every column of the pixel circuits” discussed in [0004]) and the polarities of the sub-pixel signals are periodically inverted (“the polarity of the voltage written to the pixel circuit is inverted in a next frame” discussed in [0004]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen and Langendijk to use a column inversion driving method as taught by Tominaga because each are directed towards LCD displays (see [0030] of Chen, [0018] of Langendijk, and [0002] of Tominaga), and this provides a “thin, light-weight, low power consumption display device” (see [0002]).
However, Chen, Langendijk, and Tominaga still fail to teach or suggest wherein the first angle and second angle are different.
Selan (Fig. 1 and 3) discloses a display system comprising:
a mounting unit (100) configured to be worn on a head of a user (102) so as to cover both eyes of the user (as seen in Fig. 1);
two display devices (104) each having a display area in which a plurality of sub-pixels (310) are arrayed in a matrix having a row-column configuration (as seen in the top of Fig. 3, see also “pixels are arranged in vertical columns and horizontal rows on the display panel” discussed in [0036]); and
wherein the sub-pixels include a plurality of first sub-pixels (eg. the red subpixels “R”), a plurality of second sub-pixels (eg. the green subpixels “G”), and a plurality of third sub-pixels (eg. the blue subpixels “B”),
wherein the color of the first sub-pixels, the color of the second sub-pixels, and the color of the third sub-pixels are different from one another (red, green, and blue, respectively, as discussed above),
wherein the display area of a first display device (104(1) of the two display devices is arranged to face one of the eyes of the user (as seen in Fig. 3, 104(1) faces the user’s left eye, see also “first lens-and-display assembly may correspond to the user's 102 left eye” discussed in [0020]), and the display area of a second display device (104(2)) of the two display devices is arranged to face the other of the eyes of the user (as seen in Fig. 3, 104(2) faces the user’s left eye, see also “the second lens-and-display assembly may correspond to the user's 102 right eye” discussed in [0020]),
wherein the two display devices are disposed in the mounting unit such that the column direction of the first display device and the column direction of the second display device are different directions (as seen in Fig. 3, the column direction of 104(1) is rotated clockwise, while the column direction of 104(2) is rotated in a different direction, counter-clockwise),
wherein a first angle is an angle between an orthogonal direction orthogonal to an array direction in which the two display devices are arranged (ie. horizontally in Fig. 3) and the column direction of the first display device in plan view (as seen in Fig. 3, 104(1) is rotated relative to the horizontal direction, with the angle labelled “θ” in the figure),
wherein a second angle is an angle between the orthogonal direction and the column direction of the second display device in plan view (as seen in Fig. 3, 104(2) is rotated relative to the horizontal direction, with the angle also labelled “θ” in the figure”), and
wherein the first angle and the second angle are different (“the first display panel 104(1) is rotated 45 degrees” while “the second display panel 104(2) is rotated 44 degrees” as discussed in [0034]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen, Langendijk, and Tominaga so the first and second angles are different as taught by Selan because having different angles “within two degrees” prevents “additional problems that degrade the viewing experience” while still providing “mitigation of panel artifacts” (see [0035]), while reducing the tolerances required by the display angles.
Regarding claim 4, Chen, Langendijk, Tominaga, and Selan disclose a display system as discussed above, and Chen further discloses wherein the first sub-pixel is a red sub-pixel (“subpixel 152A may emit light having a first wavelength and/or range of wavelengths (e.g., red light)” discussed in [0045]), wherein the second sub-pixel is a green sub-pixel (“subpixel 152B may emit light having a second wavelength and/or range of wavelengths (e.g., green light)” discussed in [0045]), and wherein the third sub-pixel is a blue sub-pixel (“subpixel 152C may emit light having a third wavelength and/or range of wavelengths (e.g., blue light)” discussed in [0045]).
Regarding claim 5, Chen, Langendijk, Tominaga, and Selan disclose a display system as discussed above, and Selan further discloses wherein a fifth angle between the column direction of the first display device and the column direction of the second display device is less than 90° (as discussed above, the first panel is rotated by 45 degrees while the second panel is rotated by 44 degrees, see [0034], and so the combined fifth angle between the two would be 89°, which is less than 90°, see also “The amount of rotation, 0, by which each panel 104 is rotated may be… within a range of 40 to 50 degrees” discussed in [0035]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Chen, Langendijk, Tominaga, and Selan for the same reasons as discussed above.
Regarding claim 6, Chen, Langendijk, Tominaga, and Selan disclose a display system as discussed above, and Selan further discloses wherein the fifth angle is no less than 60° and less than 90° (as discussed above, the two panels are rotated 45° and 44° degrees, and so the fifth angle is 89°).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Chen, Langendijk, Tominaga, and Selan for the same reasons as discussed above.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen, Langendijk, Tominaga, and Selan as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Murata et al. (US 2024/0160052).
Regarding claim 3, Chen, Langendijk, Tominaga, and Selan disclose a display system as discussed above, and although Chen discloses the sub-pixels having “rectangular peripheries,” Chen, Langendijk, Tominaga, and Selan fail to provide specific details of the pitch of the sub-pixels.
Murata (Fig. 9) discloses a display system comprising:
a display device having a display area (eg. a “liquid crystal display” as discussed in [0152]) in which a plurality of sub-pixels (21P) are arrayed in a matrix (as seen in Fig. 9, also “plurality of pixels arranged in the in-plane direction in a matrix pattern” discussed in [0127]); and
wherein the sub-pixels include a plurality of first sub-pixels (corresponding to 212CR), a plurality of second sub-pixels (corresponding to 212CG), and a plurality of third sub-pixels (corresponding to 212CB),
wherein the color of the first sub-pixels, the color of the second sub-pixels, and the color of the third sub-pixels are different from one another (“red color filters 212CR, green color filters 212CG, and blue color filters 212CB” discussed in [0159]),
wherein the ratio of a second pitch (the “length of each pixel 21P in the lengthwise direction (top-bottom direction)” which is “170 μm” as discussed in [0157]) to a first pitch (“length of each pixel 21P in the widthwise direction (left-right direction)” which is “70 μm” as discussed in [0157]) is equal to or higher than 4/3 and smaller than 3 (170/70 = 2.43 which is greater than 4/3 and less than 3), wherein the second pitch is a pitch of two sub-pixels of the sub-pixels that are adjacent to each other in the column direction in plan view (as discussed above, corresponding to “the lengthwise direction (top-bottom direction)”), and wherein the first pitch is a pitch of two sub-pixels of the sub-pixels that are adjacent to each other in the row direction in plan view (as discussed above, corresponding to “the widthwise direction (left-right direction)”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen, Langendijk, Tominaga, and Selan to use the specific pixel pitches as taught by Murata because each are directed towards LCD displays (see [0152] of Murata), and this provides a display that is “thin profile, light weight, and low power consumption” (see [0003]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 has been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
In view of the amendments, the reference of Selan has been added for new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 JONATHAN M BLANCHA whose telephone number is (571)270-5890. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 9-5.
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, Chanh Nguyen can be reached at 5712727772. 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.
/JONATHAN M BLANCHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2623