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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Drawings
The drawings filed 5-9-25 have been accepted by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Lai et al. (US 2018/0366083).
Regarding claim 1, Lai (Fig. 2, 6, and 7) discloses a display device comprising:
a display panel (seen in Fig. 2) comprising a plurality of pixel rows (eg. rows corresponding to each the lines 4) comprising a plurality of pixels (3);
a compensation driver (71) configured to generate an i-th compensation coefficient (as “(V2−V1)×k” in step 2012) based on a difference between an (i-1)-th image data provided to an (i-1)-th pixel row among the plurality of pixel rows (“acquiring a charging voltage value V1 corresponding to the previous row of pixel electrodes” discussed in [0038]) and an i-th image data provided to an i-th pixel row among the plurality of pixel rows (“acquiring a pre-determined charging voltage value V2 corresponding to the present row of to-be-charged pixel electrodes” discussed in [0038]), and configured to generate an i-th compensation data (V3) provided to the i-th pixel row by applying the i-th compensation coefficient to the i-th image data (eg. “V3=V2+(V2−V1)×k” as discussed in [0038]); and
a data driver (72) configured to generate a data signal based on the i-th compensation data (from 71) and to supply the data signal to the i-th pixel row (in step 2022, “charging the present row of to-be-charged pixel electrodes according to the compensated charging voltage value V3” discussed in [0039], see also “72 is electrically connected with each data line 5” discussed in [0045]),
wherein i is a natural number greater than 1 (“71 is used for compensating a charging voltage value corresponding to first N rows of to-be-charged pixel electrodes 3” and “N is an integer greater than… 1” discussed in [0044], and so for example, i can be equal to 2).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai in view of Brahma et al. (US 2024/0038175).
Regarding claim 19, Lai (Fig. 2, 6, and 7) discloses an electronic device comprising:
a display device (seen in Fig. 10), the display device comprising:
a display panel (100, also seen in Fig. 2) comprising a plurality of pixel rows (eg. rows corresponding to each the lines 4) comprising a plurality of pixels (3);
a compensation driver (71) configured to generate an i-th compensation coefficient (as “(V2−V1)×k” in step 2012) based on a difference between an (i-1)-th image data provided to an (i-1)-th pixel row among the plurality of pixel rows (“acquiring a charging voltage value V1 corresponding to the previous row of pixel electrodes” discussed in [0038]) and an i-th image data provided to an i-th pixel row among the plurality of pixel rows (“acquiring a pre-determined charging voltage value V2 corresponding to the present row of to-be-charged pixel electrodes” discussed in [0038]), and configured to generate an i-th compensation data (V3) provided to the i-th pixel row by applying the i-th compensation coefficient to the i-th image data (eg. “V3=V2+(V2−V1)×k” as discussed in [0038]); and
a data driver (72) configured to generate a data signal based on the i-th compensation data (from 71) and to supply the data signal to the i-th pixel row (in step 2022, “charging the present row of to-be-charged pixel electrodes according to the compensated charging voltage value V3” discussed in [0039], see also “72 is electrically connected with each data line 5” discussed in [0045]),
wherein i is a natural number greater than 1 (“71 is used for compensating a charging voltage value corresponding to first N rows of to-be-charged pixel electrodes 3” and “N is an integer greater than… 1” discussed in [0044], and so for example, i can be equal to 2).
However, Lai fails to teach or suggest an input/output device configured to receive input data and provide output data or a processor connected to the input/output device and configured to perform computations based on the input data.
Brahma (Fig. 1, 2, and 6) discloses an electronic device comprising:
an input/output device (16) configured to receive input data (“image data may be received” with 16 as discussed in [0031]) and provide output data (16 can be used to “communicate data with the portable storage device” as discussed in [0028]);
a processor (18) connected to the input/output device (as seen in Fig. 1, see also “I/O port 16 may enable the processor core complex 18 to…” discussed in [0028]) and configured to perform computations based on the input data (eg. “an image frame of content based on pixel or image data generated by the processor core complex 18” discussed in [0031]); and
a display device (12) configured to receive input data from the processor (“display 12 may display an image frame” from the processor as discussed in [0031]), the display device comprising:
a display panel (eg. the array of 54, seen in Fig. 6) comprising a plurality of pixel rows (eg. rows corresponding to each the lines 56) comprising a plurality of pixels (54, seen in Fig. 8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lai to include an input/output device configured to receive input data and provide output data or a processor connected to the input/output device and configured to perform computations based on the input data as taught by Brahma because this allows the device to operate various “applications” (eg. as discussed in [0030]) which can provide additional functionality to a user.
Regarding claim 20, Lai and Brahma disclose an electronic device as discussed above, and Brahma further discloses wherein the electronic device is a smartphone (seen in Fig. 2, specifically called a “smart phone” in [0032]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Lai and Brahma for the same reasons as discussed above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-18 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 15, Lai (Fig. 2, 6, and 7) discloses a driving method of a display device, comprising:
receiving current row data applied to a current pixel row comprising a plurality of pixels (“acquiring a pre-determined charging voltage value V2 corresponding to the present row of to-be-charged pixel electrodes” discussed in [0038]);
generating a voltage change amount (as “(V2−V1)×k” in step 2012) based on a difference between a previous row data and the current row data (as part of 2012, shown as “(V2-V1)” in the equation);
generating a compensation coefficient corresponding to the current pixel row (k); and
generating compensation row data (V3) applied to the current pixel row by applying the compensation coefficient to the current row data (eg. “V3=V2+(V2−V1)×k” as discussed in [0038]).
However, Lai fails to teach or suggest generating a compensation coefficient corresponding to the current pixel row “by subtracting the voltage change amount from an accumulated voltage change amount.”
Brahma (Fig. 1, 2, and 10) discloses a driving method of a display device, comprising:
receiving current row data applied to a current pixel row comprising a plurality of pixels (as “ROW n” in the image data 48A, seen in Fig. 11A);
generating a voltage change amount (output from 180) based on a difference between a previous row data (eg. the ROW n-1 data seen in 186, see “previous rows of image data as buffered image data 186” discussed in [0060]) and the current row data (with 180, “a difference between the present image data 48A and the previous image data” discussed in [0063]);
generating compensation row data applied to the current pixel row by applying a compensation coefficient to the current row data (with 212, “212 may combine the one or more values of the image data 48 and the compensation values 166 to generate adjusted image data 48B” discussed in [0076]).
However, Brahma still fails to teach or suggest “generating a compensation coefficient corresponding to the current pixel row by subtracting the voltage change amount from an accumulated voltage change amount.”
Zheng et al. (US 2018/00613558) discloses a driving method of a display device including compensating for an accumulated voltage change amount (eg. “determine expected net charge accumulation resulting from writing the first display pixel row and the second display pixel row before actually writing the first display pixel row” as discussed in [0084], and then “determine a target common voltage signal based at least in part on the expected net charge accumulation” as discussed in [0085]).
However, each of the currently cited references of record still fails to teach or suggest “generating a compensation coefficient corresponding to the current pixel row by subtracting the voltage change amount from an accumulated voltage change amount” when combined with each of the other claim limitations.
Claims 16-18 are dependent upon claim 15 and so are allowable for the same reasons as discussed above.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Claims 2-14 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:
Regarding claim 2, Lai discloses a display device as discussed above, wherein the compensation driver comprises:
a data comparator (as part of 71) configured to calculate the difference between the (i- 1)-th image data and the i-th image data to generate i-th change data (as part of 2012, shown as “(V2-V1)” in the equation in [0038]);
a data converter (72) configured to convert the i-th change data into an i-th voltage change amount (eg. “charging the present row of to-be-charged pixel electrodes according to the compensated charging voltage value V3” as discussed in [0039]).
However, Lai fails to teach or suggest “a calculator configured to generate the i-th compensation coefficient based on the i-th voltage change amount and an accumulated voltage change amount,” or “wherein the accumulated voltage change amount is a value obtained by accumulating and adding the voltage change amount received from the data converter.”
Brahma discloses a display device wherein the compensation driver comprises:
a data comparator (180) configured to calculate the difference between the (i- 1)-th image data and the i-th image data (eg. the ROW n-1 data seen in 186, see “previous rows of image data as buffered image data 186” discussed in [0060]) to generate i-th change data (“a difference between the present image data 48A and the previous image data” discussed in [0063]);
a data converter configured to convert the i-th change data (sent from Fig. 11A to Fig. 11B as “B”) corresponding to grayscale change (eg. the “change in data voltage (e.g., ΔV.sub.DATA) 208” discussed in [0067]) into an i-th voltage change amount (called “compensation values 166” in [0069]).
However, Brahms fails to teach or suggest “a calculator configured to generate the i-th compensation coefficient based on the i-th voltage change amount and an accumulated voltage change amount,” or “wherein the accumulated voltage change amount is a value obtained by accumulating and adding the voltage change amount received from the data converter.”
Zheng discloses a display device including compensating for an accumulated voltage change amount (eg. “determine expected net charge accumulation resulting from writing the first display pixel row and the second display pixel row before actually writing the first display pixel row” as discussed in [0084], and then “determine a target common voltage signal based at least in part on the expected net charge accumulation” as discussed in [0085]).
However, each of the currently cited references of record still fails to teach or suggest “a calculator configured to generate the i-th compensation coefficient based on the i-th voltage change amount and an accumulated voltage change amount,” or “wherein the accumulated voltage change amount is a value obtained by accumulating and adding the voltage change amount received from the data converter” when combined with each of the other claim limitations.
Claims 3-14 are dependent upon claim 2, and so would be allowable for the same reasons as discussed above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN M BLANCHA whose telephone number is (571)270-5890. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 9-5.
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, Chanh Nguyen can be reached at 5712727772. 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.
/JONATHAN M BLANCHA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2623
Prosecution Insights