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 Interpretation
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.
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 target data acquirer configured to correct”
“a target data output unit configured to output”
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. However, the “a target data acquirer” and “a target data output unit” have not been found in the specification to cover the corresponding structure performing the claimed function.
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 14, the recitation of “a target data acquirer” and “a target data output unit”, in light of the claim interpretation above, have not been found in the specification to cover the corresponding structure performing the claimed function. Thus, cannot reasonably convey to one of ordinary skill in the art the inventor was in possession of the invention at the time the application was filed. What exactly is performing the functionality of the “a target data acquirer” and “a target data output unit”? Clarification is required.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1 and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jung (US 2017.0061892).
Regarding claim 1, Jung disclose:
A display device, comprising a timing controller, a pixel array, and a data signal driver; wherein each of pixel units of the pixel array comprises a light emitting device and a pixel driving circuit for driving the light emitting device to emit light, the pixel driving circuit comprises a driving transistor, the timing controller is electrically connected to the data signal driver, and the data signal driver is electrically connected to the pixel units (see Fig. 1-2; timing controller 140; data driver 120; pixel unit SP; light emitting device OLED; drive TFT DRT; 140 connected to 120 and 120 connected to SP).
the timing controller is configured to correct initial pixel data of a target pixel unit to obtain target pixel data, and output the target pixel data to the data signal driver; and the target pixel data is configured to increase a forward bias of the driving transistor of the pixel driving circuit of the target pixel unit under a normal operation scene; and the data signal driver is configured to output a driving voltage matching with the target pixel data to the target pixel unit so as to enable the driving transistor to keep forward biased in the normal operation scene (see Fig. 1-2; 11; [0186-0198]; timing controller 140 uses sensed target pixel data from compensation circuit 220 to perform correction via data driver, where the drive transistor voltage threshold is measured to determine compensation margin in order to compensate for the shift of the threshold voltage, such that if a negative shift occurs, the compensation voltage would increase the forward bias in order to properly compensate and operate the pixel in a normal state of operation).
Regarding claim 13, claim Jung disclose:
A control method applicable to a display device, the control method comprising: correcting initial pixel data of a target pixel unit to obtain target pixel data, wherein the target pixel data is configured to increase a forward bias of a driving transistor of the target pixel unit under a normal operation scene; and outputting the target pixel data to the target pixel unit (see Fig. 1-2; 11; [0186-0198]; timing controller 140 uses sensed target pixel data from compensation circuit 220 to perform correction via data driver, where the drive transistor voltage threshold is measured to determine compensation margin in order to compensate for the shift of the threshold voltage, such that if a negative shift occurs, the compensation voltage would increase the forward bias in order to properly compensate and operate the pixel in a normal state of operation).
Regarding claim 14, claim Jung disclose:
A control apparatus applicable to a display device, the control apparatus comprising: a target data acquirer configured to correct initial pixel data of a target pixel unit to obtain target pixel data, wherein the target pixel data is configured to increase a forward bias of a driving transistor of the target pixel unit under a normal operation scene; and a target data output unit configured to output the target pixel data to the target pixel unit (see Fig. 1-2; 11; [0186-0198]; timing controller 140 uses sensed target pixel data from compensation circuit 220 to perform correction via data driver, where the drive transistor voltage threshold is measured to determine compensation margin in order to compensate for the shift of the threshold voltage, such that if a negative shift occurs, the compensation voltage would increase the forward bias in order to properly compensate and operate the pixel in a normal state of operation).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung in view of Teng (US 2021.0225288).
Regarding claim 15, the rejection ofc alim 13 is incorporated herein. While Jung discloses a compensation method for the drive transistor of a display, it is not explicit as to, but would be necessitated by design – as evidenced by Teng at [0056] – to provide A non-transitory computer readable storage medium, having an executable computer program stored therein, wherein when executed by a processor, the computer program implements the control method according to claim 13, predictably providing an automated and continual way to properly compensate the pixels of the display.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-12 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 KENNETH BUKOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-7913. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday // 0730-1530.
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.
/kenneth bukowski/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2621
Prosecution Insights