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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the Amendment After Non-Final Rejection filed 07/20/2026. Claims 1-11 are pending and have been examined.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-11 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claims 8 and 10 be found allowable, claim 10 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claims 8 and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities: The claims contain the typographic error “Windorws” in line 4. Appropriate correction is required.
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, 2, 5-8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang (US 2011/0037836) in view of Baruch et al. (US 2017/0124717), herein Baruch, in view of Reichow et al. (US 2013/0300728), herein Reichow.
Consider claim 1, Chang clearly teaches a deep surface liquid crystal display system (Fig. 1) comprising:
a first liquid crystal display (LCD) screen, the first LCD screen lacking an opaque backing layer; (Fig. 2: Light emitted by backlight module 13 transmits through second LCD 12, [0018], [0019].)
a second liquid crystal display (LCD) screen, the first LCD screen layered on top of the second LCD screen and separated from the first LCD screen by a gap; (Fig. 2: First LCD 11 is positioned below second LCD 12, [0018], [0019].) and
an adjustable frame, the first LCD screen and the second LCD screen mounted onto the adjustable frame, (Figs. 3, 4: Distance adjusting member 15 changes the distance between LCDs 11 and 12, [0023]-[0025].)
wherein the deep surface liquid crystal display system is configured to: receive video images, and cause the first LCD screen and the second LCD screen to display the images. (Stereoscopic display device 10 displays 3-D image 32, [0025].)
However, Chang does not explicitly teach receive video images, process the video images into background images and foreground images.
In an analogous art, Baruch, which discloses an image processing system, clearly teaches receive video images, process the video images into background images and foreground images. (Figs. 1-3: Image data 302 is received and processed to separate the foreground 102 and background 104, [0024], [0028], [0031], [0039].)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Chang by receive video images, process the video images into background images and foreground images, as taught by Baruch, for the benefit of allowing the foreground and background to be processed individually.
However, Chang combined with Baruch does not explicitly teach cause the first LCD screen to display the foreground images and the second LCD screen to simultaneously display the background images.
In an analogous art, Reichow, which discloses a display device, clearly teaches cause the first LCD screen to display the foreground images and the second LCD screen to simultaneously display the background images. (Fig. 1: Display element 114 displays background image stream 159 and display element 122 displays foreground image stream 169, [0047], [0048].)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Chang combined with Baruch by cause the first LCD screen to display the foreground images and the second LCD screen to simultaneously display the background images, as taught by Reichow, to achieve the predictable result of displaying stereoscopic images.
Consider claim 2, Chang combined with Baruch and Reichow clearly teaches the adjustable frame enables varying a size of the gap. (Figs. 3, 4: Distance adjusting member 15 changes the distance between LCDs 11 and 12, [0023]-[0025] Chang.)
Consider claim 5, Chang clearly teaches a method comprising:
providing a deep surface liquid crystal display system, the deep surface liquid crystal display system comprising a first liquid crystal display (LCD) screen, the first LCD screen lacking an opaque backing layer, (Fig. 2: Light emitted by backlight module 13 transmits through second LCD 12, [0018], [0019].) a second liquid crystal display (LCD) screen, the first LCD screen layered on top of the second LCD screen and separated from the first LCD screen by a gap, (Fig. 2: First LCD 11 is positioned below second LCD 12, [0018], [0019].) and an adjustable frame, the first LCD screen and the second LCD screen mounted onto the adjustable frame. (Figs. 3, 4: Distance adjusting member 15 changes the distance between LCDs 11 and 12, [0023]-[0025].)
receiving video images; and causing the first LCD screen and the second LCD screen to display the images. (Stereoscopic display device 10 displays 3-D image 32, [0025].)
However, Chang does not explicitly teach receiving video images; processing the video images into background images and foreground images.
In an analogous art, Baruch, which discloses an image processing system, clearly teaches receiving video images; processing the video images into background images and foreground images. (Figs. 1-3: Image data 302 is received and processed to separate the foreground 102 and background 104, [0024], [0028], [0031], [0039].)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Chang by receiving video images; processing the video images into background images and foreground images, as taught by Baruch, for the benefit of allowing the foreground and background to be processed individually.
However, Chang combined with Baruch does not explicitly teach causing the first LCD screen to display the foreground images and the second LCD screen to simultaneously display the background images.
In an analogous art, Reichow, which discloses a display device, clearly teaches causing the first LCD screen to display the foreground images and the second LCD screen to simultaneously display the background images. (Fig. 1: Display element 114 displays background image stream 159 and display element 122 displays foreground image stream 169, [0047], [0048].)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Chang combined with Baruch by causing the first LCD screen to display the foreground images and the second LCD screen to simultaneously display the background images, as taught by Reichow, to achieve the predictable result of displaying stereoscopic images.
Consider claim 6, Chang combined with Baruch and Reichow clearly teaches the video images are included within one of a MPEG-4 Part 14 (MP4) file, an Audio Video Interleave (AVI) file, a QuickTime File Format (MOV) file, a Windows Media Video (WMV) file, a Matroska Multimedia Container (MKV) file, a Flash Video (FLV) file, a Moving Picture Experts Group (MPEG) file and a Third Generation Partnership Project (3GP) file. (The video can be formatted as .mov, .wmv, .avi, .mpg, etc., [0035] Reichow.)
Consider claim 7, Chang clearly teaches a method comprising:
providing a deep surface liquid crystal display system, the deep surface liquid crystal display system comprising a first liquid crystal display (LCD) screen, the first LCD screen lacking an opaque backing layer, (Fig. 2: Light emitted by backlight module 13 transmits through second LCD 12, [0018], [0019].) a second liquid crystal display (LCD) screen, the first LCD screen layered on top of the second LCD screen and separated from the first LCD screen by a gap, (Fig. 2: First LCD 11 is positioned below second LCD 12, [0018], [0019].) and an adjustable frame, the first LCD screen and the second LCD screen mounted onto the adjustable frame. (Figs. 3, 4: Distance adjusting member 15 changes the distance between LCDs 11 and 12, [0023]-[0025].)
causing the first LCD screen and the second LCD screen to display the images. (Stereoscopic display device 10 displays 3-D image 32, [0025].)
However, Chang does not explicitly teach processing video images into background images and foreground images.
In an analogous art, Baruch, which discloses an image processing system, clearly teaches processing video images into background images and foreground images. (Figs. 1-3: Image data 302 is received and processed to separate the foreground 102 and background 104, [0024], [0028], [0031], [0039].)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Chang by processing video images into background images and foreground images, as taught by Baruch, for the benefit of allowing the foreground and background to be processed individually.
However, Chang combined with Baruch does not explicitly teach causing the first LCD screen to display the foreground images and the second LCD screen to simultaneously display the background images.
In an analogous art, Reichow, which discloses a display device, clearly teaches causing the first LCD screen to display the foreground images and the second LCD screen to simultaneously display the background images. (Fig. 1: Display element 114 displays background image stream 159 and display element 122 displays foreground image stream 169, [0047], [0048].)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Chang combined with Baruch by causing the first LCD screen to display the foreground images and the second LCD screen to simultaneously display the background images, as taught by Reichow, to achieve the predictable result of displaying stereoscopic images.
Consider claim 8, Chang combined with Baruch and Reichow clearly teaches the video images are included within one of a MPEG-4 Part 14 (MP4) file, an Audio Video Interleave (AVI) file, a QuickTime File Format (MOV) file, a Windows Media Video (WMV) file, a Matroska Multimedia Container (MKV) file, a Flash Video (FLV) file, a Moving Picture Experts Group (MPEG) file and a Third Generation Partnership Project (3GP) file. (The video can be formatted as .mov, .wmv, .avi, .mpg, etc., [0035] Reichow.)
Consider claim 10, Chang combined with Baruch and Reichow clearly teaches the video images are included within one of a MPEG-4 Part 14 (MP4) file, an Audio Video Interleave (AVI) file, a QuickTime File Format (MOV) file, a Windows Media Video (WMV) file, a Matroska Multimedia Container (MKV) file, a Flash Video (FLV) file, a Moving Picture Experts Group (MPEG) file and a Third Generation Partnership Project (3GP) file. (The video can be formatted as .mov, .wmv, .avi, .mpg, etc., [0035] Reichow.)
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang (US 2011/0037836) in view of Baruch et al. (US 2017/0124717) in view of Reichow et al. (US 2013/0300728) in view of Smithwick et al. (US 2014/0192281), herein Smithwick.
Consider claim 3, Chang combined with Baruch and Reichow clearly teaches the gap between the first LCD screen and the second LCD screen. (Fig. 2 Chang)
However, Chang combined with Baruch and Reichow does not explicitly teach the gap ranges from 1.75 inches to 2.75 inches.
In an analogous art, Smithwick, which discloses a display device, clearly teaches the gap ranges from 1.75 inches to 2.75 inches. (Fig. 2: Screens 212, 222 are separated by a distance ranging from less than an inch to two feet or more, [0041].)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Chang combined with Baruch and Reichow by the gap ranges from 1.75 inches to 2.75 inches, as taught by Smithwick, to achieve the predictable result of displaying stereoscopic images.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang (US 2011/0037836) in view of Baruch et al. (US 2017/0124717) in view of Reichow et al. (US 2013/0300728) in view of Lee et al. (US 2025/0286989), herein Lee.
Consider claim 4, Chang combined with Baruch and Reichow clearly teaches the gap between the first LCD screen and the second LCD screen. (Fig. 2 Chang)
However, Chang combined with Baruch and Reichow does not explicitly teach one or more additional transparent LCD screens positioned in the gap between the first LCD screen and the second LCD screen.
In an analogous art, Lee, which discloses a display device, clearly teaches one or more additional transparent LCD screens positioned in the gap between the first LCD screen and the second LCD screen. (Fig. 5: LCD screens 10, 20, 30, [0053], [0152])
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Chang combined with Baruch and Reichow by one or more additional transparent LCD screens positioned in the gap between the first LCD screen and the second LCD screen, as taught by Lee, for the benefit of increasing resolution of the display ([0154] Lee).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang (US 2011/0037836) in view of Baruch et al. (US 2017/0124717) in view of Reichow et al. (US 2013/0300728) in view of Kim et al. (US 2012/0327082), herein Kim.
Consider claim 9, Chang clearly teaches a method comprising:
providing a deep surface liquid crystal display system, the deep surface liquid crystal display system comprising a first liquid crystal display (LCD) screen, the first LCD screen lacking an opaque backing layer, (Fig. 2: Light emitted by backlight module 13 transmits through second LCD 12, [0018], [0019].) a second liquid crystal display (LCD) screen, the first LCD screen layered on top of the second LCD screen separated by a gap, (Fig. 2: First LCD 11 is positioned below second LCD 12, [0018], [0019].) and an adjustable aluminum frame, the first LCD screen and the second LCD screen mounted onto the adjustable frame. (Figs. 3, 4: Distance adjusting member 15 changes the distance between LCDs 11 and 12, [0023]-[0025].)
However, Chang does not explicitly teach receiving video images; processing the video images into background images and foreground images.
In an analogous art, Baruch, which discloses an image processing system, clearly teaches receiving video images; processing the video images into background images and foreground images. (Figs. 1-3: Image data 302 is received and processed to separate the foreground 102 and background 104, [0024], [0028], [0031], [0039].)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Chang by receiving video images; processing the video images into background images and foreground images, as taught by Baruch, for the benefit of allowing the foreground and background to be processed individually.
However, Chang combined with Baruch does not explicitly teach causing the first LCD screen to display the foreground images and the second LCD screen to simultaneously display the background images.
In an analogous art, Reichow, which discloses a display device, clearly teaches causing the first LCD screen to display the foreground images and the second LCD screen to simultaneously display the background images. (Fig. 1: Display element 114 displays background image stream 159 and display element 122 displays foreground image stream 169, [0047], [0048].)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Chang combined with Baruch by causing the first LCD screen to display the foreground images and the second LCD screen to simultaneously display the background images, as taught by Reichow, to achieve the predictable result of displaying stereoscopic images.
However, Chang combined with Baruch and Reichow does not explicitly teach create a leaping effect of a smaller background image moving forward toward a viewer and becoming a larger foreground image on the first LCD screen.
In an analogous art, Kim, which discloses a display device, clearly teaches create a leaping effect of a smaller background image moving forward toward a viewer and becoming a larger foreground image on the first LCD screen. (Fig. 6: A series of images are displayed by LCD 220a then LCD 220b then LCD 220c to create the image of people walking from the background to foreground, [0047].)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Chang combined with Baruch and Reichow by create a leaping effect of a smaller background image moving forward toward a viewer and becoming a larger foreground image on the first LCD screen, as taught by Kim, to achieve the predictable result of displaying stereoscopic images.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang (US 2011/0037836) in view of Baruch et al. (US 2017/0124717) in view of Reichow et al. (US 2013/0300728) in view of Peng (US 2004/0246396).
Consider claim 11, Chang combined with Baruch and Reichow clearly teaches the adjustable frame.
However, Chang combined with Baruch and Reichow does not explicitly teach an aluminum frame.
In an analogous art, Peng, which discloses a display device, clearly teaches an aluminum frame. (Fig. 9: LCD aluminum frame, [0022])
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Chang combined with Baruch and Reichow by an aluminum frame, as taught by Peng, for the benefit of providing a light weight and environmentally friendly frame ([0007] Peng).
Conclusion
In the case of amending the claimed invention, applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
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 JOHN R SCHNURR whose telephone number is (571)270-1458. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6a-4p.
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, Brian Pendleton can be reached at (571)272-7527. 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.
/JOHN R SCHNURR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425
Prosecution Insights