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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/18/2025 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation under 35 USC § 112(f) or 35 USC 112 (pre-AIA ) sixth paragraph
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Use of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is invoked is rebutted when the function is recited with sufficient structure, material, or acts within the claim itself to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is not invoked is rebutted when the claim element recites function but fails to recite sufficiently definite structure, material or acts to perform that function.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: a control unit configured to estimate in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation: page 3, paragraph 13 recites “a central processing unit (CPU)”. Therefore, the examiner believes that the first heating element contains metal to generate heat; and the control unit contains CPU.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance With 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Son et al. (US. Pub. No. 2021/0050391, hereinafter “Son”) in view of Kawai et al. (US. Pub. No. 2017/0365723, hereinafter “Kawai”).
As to claims 1 and 12, (Original) Son disclose an electronic device [figure 1, electronic device], associated with its method for controlling the electronic device, comprising:
a display portion [figure 3C, display portion DA including a pixel PDL including a] including a self-light-emitting element (light emitting layer EL)] a pixel including a self-light-emitting element;
a first heating element [figure 3C, heating pattern IP to generate heat] configured to generate heat in accordance with a value of a first current flowing outside the display portion [paragraph 76, Accordingly, temperature of the heating pattern IP is increased by the induced current flowing through the heating pattern IP (located in peripheral area PA outside the display area DA), and the first heat shrink layer 150 and the second heat shrink layer 160 are heated too].
Son doesn’t disclose a control unit configured to estimate, using a value of the first current, a temperature distribution of the display portion.
Kawai teaches to estimate, using a value of a first current, a temperature distribution of a device portion [paragraph 143, when heating the getter 30 by electric conduction via the through electrodes 20, it is possible to accurately estimate a temperature distribution of the getter 30 and the periphery of the getter 30 from the temperature T.sub.C and an electric conduction current value at the end surface 24 of the second end portion 22 of the through electrode 20].
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 electronic device of Son to estimate, using a value of a first current, a temperature distribution of a display portion, as taught by Kawai, in order to reduce the distance between the getter and the element mounting area; therefore reducing the external size (Kawai, paragraph 28).
As to claim 3, (Currently Amended) Son, as modified by Kawai, discloses the electronic device according to claim 1
wherein the control unit estimates the temperature distribution, based on information
indicating a relationship between the value of the first current and the temperature distribution [Kawai, paragraph 143, when heating the getter 30 by electric conduction via the through electrodes 20, it is possible to accurately estimate a temperature distribution of the getter 30 and the periphery of the getter 30 from the temperature T.sub.C and an electric conduction current value at the end surface 24 of the second end portion 22 of the through electrode 20]. In addition, the same rationale is used as in rejection for claim 1.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Son in view of Kawai, further in view of Kim et al. (US. Pub. No. 2020/0388225, hereinafter “Kim”).
As to claim 2, (Original) Son, as modified by Kawai, discloses the electronic device according to claim 1.
Son, as modified by Kawai, doesn’t disclose wherein the control unit corrects an image signal supplied to the pixel, based on the temperature distribution.
Kim teaches to correct an image signal supplied to a pixel based on a temperature distribution [figures 7 and 16, temperature and aging information is input to the image correction circuit, paragraphs 91-92, image correction circuitry 52 in processor core complex 12 corrects or compensates an input image signal, paragraph 41, the correct image is sent to a pixel 64 of the display panel 62, corresponding to display 18].
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 electronic device of Son to correct an image signal supplied to a pixel based on a temperature distribution, as taught by Kim, in order to improve performance of the display device (Kim, paragraph 3).
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Son in view of Kawai, further in view of Nakamura et al. (US. Pub. No. 2011/0069061, hereinafter “Nakamura”).
As to claim 9, (Currently Amended) Son, as modified by Kawai, discloses the electronic device according to claim l
Son, as modified by Kawai, doesn’t disclose a current measuring unit configured to measure the value of the first current.
Nakamura teaches a current measuring unit configured to measure a value of a first current [paragraph 89, from the current measurement circuit 26, the measurement signal processing circuit 27 obtains the current signal 26A of the reference pixel].
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 electronic device of Son to include a current measuring unit to measure a value of a first current, as taught by Nakamura, in order to accurately prevent a seizure (Nakamura, paragraph 8).
As to claim 10, (Original) Son, as modified by Kawai and Nakamura, discloses the electronic device according to claim 9, further comprising:
a display panel [Son, figure 1, display panel including the display portion DA] including the display portion; and
a circuit substrate connected to the display panel [Nakamura, figure 1, a circuit substrate 20 connected to display panel 12],
wherein the current measuring unit is provided on the circuit substrate [Nakamura, figure 1, current measuring circuit 26 is provided on the circuit substrate 20]. In addition, the same rationale is used as in rejection for claim 9.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-8 and 11 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: None of the prior art, made of record, singularly or in combination, teaches or fairly suggests the features presented in the combination limitations of dependent claim 4, such as “wherein the control unit estimates, using a value of the first current, a temperature of a region corresponding to an arrangement of the first heating element in the display portion”, recited by claim 4, which is not taught by Son in view of Furukawa; “wherein the display portion includes a plurality of unit regions, and the control unit estimates, using the value of the first current, a temperature corresponding to the first heating element in each of the plurality of unit regions”, recited by claim 5, which is not taught by Son in view of Furukawa; “wherein the control unit estimates the temperature distribution, using a moving average value of the first current with respect to an elapsed time”, recited by claim 8, which is not taught by Son in view of Furukawa; and “a battery, a CPU, and a driver circuit configured to drive the pixel, wherein the first heating element is any one of the battery, the CPU, and the driver circuit”, recited by claim 11, which is not taught by Son in view of Furukawa.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Schneider et al. (US. Pub. No. 2006/0214888) is considered as pertinent art to claims 1 and 12 relating to image correction.
Kaneko et al. (US. Pub. No. 2006/0267625) is also considered as pertinent art to claims 1 and 12 relating to a display portion including a pixel.
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
Prosecution Insights