DETAILED ACTION
Status of Application
Claims 1-20 are pending in the instant application.
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 Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: there is lack of antecedent basis for the recitation of “the horizontal plane”. 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.
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.
Claims 1-5, 13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joffer et al. (US 20080225143 A1), in view of Kim et al. (US 20250095537 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Joffer teaches a LED display comprising: at least one pixel, each pixel having three subchannels arranged in a triangular configuration; (Para 30-31. Figs 1 and 4. Each package 13A is a pixel containing red, green and blue led in a triangular configuration)
However Joffer does not teach and a control system configured to actuate any one or more of a downsampling mode or a temporal scanning mode of the LED display.
However Kim teaches a control system configured to actuate any one or more of a downsampling mode or a temporal scanning mode of the LED display. (Para 150, 161. When the color temperature of ambient light increases, the controller 300 may control each of the pixels so that light having the adjusted color temperature (or color coordinates) is generated according to the estimated color temperature in a predetermined time interval is the downsampling mode, when the ambient color temperature measured by the illumination sensor 100 decreases, the controller 300 may control the display panel so that the color temperature (or color coordinates) of light emitted by the pixels increases during the second time interval t2 is the temporal scanning mode)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Joffer with Kim to teach a control system configured to actuate any one or more of a downsampling mode or a temporal scanning mode of the LED display in order to improve image display quality by accounting for ambient light.
Regarding claim 2, Joffer and Kim already teach the LED display of claim 1, and Joffer further teaches wherein the three subchannels comprise a red LED, green LED, and a blue LED, the blue LED positioned below the red LED and the green LED, wherein a height of the triangular configuration is less than the width of the triangular configuration. (Para 30-31. Figs 1 and 4. Each package 13A is a pixel containing red, green and blue led in a triangular configuration. a height of the triangular configuration is less than the width of the triangular configuration when the three LEDs are connected through center of each LED)
Regarding claim 3, Joffer and Kim already teach the LED display of claim 1, and Kim further teaches further comprising a control system operable to switch between the downsampling mode, the temporal scanning mode, and a normal mode. (Para 150, 161. See rejection for claim 1, so when color temperature of ambient light increases is the downsampling mode, when color temperature of ambient light decreases, it is the temporal scanning mode, and a normal mode is when there is no change it is the normal mode)
Regarding claim 4, Joffer and Kim already teach the LED display of claim 3, and Kim further teaches wherein the control system is operable to switch between the downsampling mode, the temporal scanning mode, and the normal mode based on a detected light level around the LED display. (Para 150, 161. See rejection for claim 1, so when color temperature of ambient light increases is the downsampling mode, when color temperature of ambient light decreases, it is the temporal scanning mode, and a normal mode is when there is no change it is the normal mode)
Regarding claim 5, Joffer and Kim already teach the LED display of claim 1, and Joffer further comprising at least one lens associated with at least one subchannel, the at least one lens configured to direct light emitted from the at least one subchannel downwards below a horizontal plane. (Para 35. The plastic lens of LED devices shoulders and blocks the light of other LEDs. This the plastic lens make the light going in one direction instead of going to side. So depending on perspective, the direction would be downward)
Regarding claim 13, refer to rejection for claim 1.
Regarding claim 16, refer to rejection for claim 3.
Claims 1, 6-7, 9-10, 13-15, 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joffer et al. (US 20080225143 A1), in view of Kim et al. (US 20210142721 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Joffer teaches a LED display comprising: at least one pixel, each pixel having three subchannels arranged in a triangular configuration; (Para 30-31. Figs 1 and 4. Each package 13A is a pixel containing red, green and blue led in a triangular configuration)
However Joffer does not teach and a control system configured to actuate any one or more of a downsampling mode or a temporal scanning mode of the LED display.
However Kim teaches a control system configured to actuate any one or more of a downsampling mode or a temporal scanning mode of the LED display. (Para 26-27. Fig. 2A. display area 2A shows downsampling mode in fifth row of display area 210, and temporal scanning mode in second and third row of display area 210)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Joffer with Kim to teach a control system configured to actuate any one or more of a downsampling mode or a temporal scanning mode of the LED display in order to improve display viewing experience when displays with different resolution form a single display.
Regarding claim 6, Joffer and Kim already teach the LED display of claim 1, and Kim further teaches wherein the downsampling mode comprises a pixel pitch of two times P, where P is the distance between two adjacent pixels (Fig. 2A shows pixel pitch of two times P, where P is the distance between two adjacent pixels, as each rectangle is one pixel)
However Kim does not teach three out of every four pixels are off.
However Kim further teaches various pixel deactivation patterns. (Para 36-37)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Joffer and Kim with the additional teaching of Kim to teach three out of every four pixels are off in order to improve display viewing experience when displays with different resolution form a single display when the deactivation of every four pixels are off are suitable as decided by the pattern generator of Kim.
Regarding claim 7, Joffer and Kim already teach the LED display of claim 1, and Kim further teaches wherein the downsampling mode comprises a pixel pitch of P times square root of two, where P is the distance between two adjacent pixels, (Para 26-27. Fig. 2A a pixel pitch of P times square root of two, where P is the distance between two adjacent pixels, as each rectangle is one pixel)
and two out of every four pixels are off. (Fig. 2A: fifth row shows two out of every four pixels are off. Para 27)
Regarding claim 9, Joffer and Kim already teach the LED display of claim 1, and Kim further teaches wherein the temporal scanning mode comprises only one pixel being on in a grid of 2×2 pixels of the LED display for each quarter of a frame time, with a different pixel being on in each quarter of the frame time. (Para 26-27. Fig. 2A: shows one pixel in second row being on in a grid of 2×2 pixels of the LED display for each quarter of a frame time, with a different pixel being on in each quarter of the frame time when the only one pixel is located in first quarter of the display frame, and a different pixel being located in other three quarters of the display frame)
Regarding claim 10, Joffer and Kim already teach the LED display of claim 1, and Kim further teaches wherein the temporal scanning mode comprises only two diagonal pixels being on in a grid of 2×2 pixels of the LED display for each half of a frame time, with a different pixel being on in each half of the frame time. (Para 26-27. Fig. 2A: shows two diagonal pixels in second row and third row being on in a grid of 2×2 pixels of the LED display for each half of a frame time, with a different pixel being on in each half of the frame time when the two diagonal pixels is located in first half of the display frame, and a different pixel being located in second half of the display frame)
Regarding claim 13, refer to rejection for claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, Joffer and Kim already teach the method of claim 13, and Joffer further teaches further comprising inline clinching the three subchannels to a circuit board, wherein the triangular configuration has a height that is less than its width. (Para 30-31. Figs 1 and 4. Each package 13A is a pixel containing red, green and blue led in a triangular configuration. a height of the triangular configuration is less than the width of the triangular configuration when the three LEDs are connected through center of each LED)
Regarding claim 15, Joffer and Kim already teach the method of claim 13, and Joffer further teaches further comprising directing light emitted from the pixel downwards about 5° to about 15° below the horizontal plane. (Para 30. Fig. 1 shows LED package with light emission, so the horizontal plane would be located where light emitted from the pixel downwards about 5° to about 15° below the horizontal plane)
Regarding claim 17, refer to rejection for claim 7.
Regarding claim 19, refer to rejection for claim 9.
Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joffer et al. (US 20080225143 A1), in view of Kim et al. (US 20210142721 A1), further in view of Mori et al. (US 20110254879 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Joffer and Kim already teach the LED display of claim 1, However Joffer and Kim do not teach wherein the downsampling mode comprises, for each pixel, two subchannels being off and one subchannel being on.
However Mori teaches wherein the downsampling mode comprises, for each pixel, two subchannels being off and one subchannel being on. (Para 103, 124, so depending on grayscale requirement for the image, only one subchannel would be turned on)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Joffer and Kim with Mori to teach wherein the downsampling mode comprises, for each pixel, two subchannels being off and one subchannel being on in order to properly display image depending grayscale mapping of the image.
Regarding claim 18, Joffer and Kim already teach the method of claim 13,
However Joffer and Kim do not teach further comprising, in the downsampling mode, actuating for each pixel, a selection of subchannels being off at a given time.
However Mori teaches in the downsampling mode, actuating for each pixel, a selection of subchannels being off at a given time. (Para 103, 124, so depending on grayscale requirement for the image, only one subchannel would be turned on)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Joffer and Kim with Mori to teach in the downsampling mode, actuating for each pixel, a selection of subchannels being off at a given time in order to properly display image depending grayscale mapping of the image.
Claims 11-12 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joffer et al. (US 20080225143 A1), in view of Kim et al. (US 20210142721 A1), further in view of Liu et al. (US 20170186381 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Joffer and Kim already teach the LED display of claim 1, However Joffer and Kim do not teach wherein the temporal scanning mode comprises only red subchannels being on in a red third of a frame time, only green subchannels being on in a green third of the frame time, and only blue subchannels being on in a blue third of the frame time.
However Liu teaches only red subchannels being on in a red third of a frame time, only green subchannels being on in a green third of the frame time, and only blue subchannels being on in a blue third of the frame time. (Para 77. Field sequential display with RGB subpixels)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Joffer and Kim with Liu to teach wherein the temporal scanning mode comprises only red subchannels being on in a red third of a frame time, only green subchannels being on in a green third of the frame time, and only blue subchannels being on in a blue third of the frame time in order to properly display image with field sequential driving method.
Regarding claim 12, Joffer and Kim already teach the LED display of claim 1, However Joffer and Kim do not teach wherein the temporal scanning mode comprises only one subchannel being on in each pixel in each third of a frame time.
However Liu teaches only one subchannel being on in each pixel in each third of a frame time. (Para 77. Field sequential display with RGB subpixels)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Joffer and Kim with Liu to teach wherein the temporal scanning mode comprises only one subchannel being on in each pixel in each third of a frame time in order to properly display image with field sequential driving method.
Regarding claim 20, Joffer and Kim already teach the method of claim 13,
However Joffer and Kim do not teach further comprising, in the temporal scanning mode, actuating only a selection of subchannels being on in each pixel in each fraction of a frame time.
However Liu teaches actuating only a selection of subchannels being on in each pixel in each fraction of a frame time. (Para 77. Field sequential display with RGB subpixels)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Joffer and Kim with Liu to teach in the temporal scanning mode, actuating only a selection of subchannels being on in each pixel in each fraction of a frame time in order to properly display image with field sequential driving method.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HANG LIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7596. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8am-5pm.
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, Temesghen Ghebretinsae can be reached at 571-272-3017. 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.
/HANG LIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2626