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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Double Patenting
The non-statutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A non-statutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on non-statutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a non-statutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-10 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-21 of U.S. Patent No. 12,315,423 [Patent]. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the patent is a species of the genus application. The scope of protection of claim 1 sought by the pending application is encompassed by the scope of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,315,423. As such claim 1 of the pending application is anticipated by claim 1 of the Patent.
See below for example.
Patent
1. A display apparatus comprising:
a display panel;
a driving controller which divides input image data into a plurality of partial image data corresponding to a plurality of display areas of the display panel, calculates local loads corresponding to the plurality of partial image data, determines a scale factor based on the local loads, applies the scale factor to the input image data, and generates a data signal, the driving controller including:
a scale factor determiner which determines the scale factor based on a maximum value among the local loads; and
a data driver which converts the data signal to a data voltage and outputs the data voltage to the display panel,
wherein the scale factor for a center display area corresponding to a center of the display panel among the plurality of display areas is determined differently from the scale factor for an edge display area corresponding to an edge of the display panel among the plurality of display areas,
wherein when an edge local load corresponding to the edge display area exceeds an edge threshold value, an edge scale factor is determined to be less than one,
wherein when a center local load corresponding to the center display area exceeds a center threshold value, a center scale factor is determined to be less than one, and
wherein the edge threshold value is less than the center threshold value.
Application
1. A display apparatus comprising:
a display panel;
a driving controller which divides input image data into a plurality of partial image data corresponding to a plurality of display areas of the display panel, calculates local loads corresponding to the plurality of partial image data, determines a scale factor based on the local loads, applies the scale factor to the input image data, and generates a data signal; and
a data driver which converts the data signal to a data voltage and outputs the data voltage to the display panel,
wherein the scale factor for a center display area corresponding to a center of the display panel among the plurality of display areas is determined differently from the scale factor for an edge display area corresponding to an edge of the display panel among the plurality of display areas,
wherein when an edge local load corresponding to the edge display area exceeds an edge threshold value, an edge scale factor is determined to be less than one,
wherein when a center local load corresponding to the center display area exceeds a center threshold value, a center scale factor is determined to be less than one, and
wherein the edge threshold value is less than the center threshold value.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GUSTAVO POLO whose telephone number is (571)270-7613. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-5pm PT.
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, Patrick Edouard can be reached at (571)272-7603. 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.
/Gustavo Polo/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2622