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.
The following title is suggested: METHOD, APPARATUS, AND DISPLAY DEVICE FOR REDUCING AND ENLARGING A VIRTUAL KEYBOARD WITH RESPECT TO CENTER WITHIN A SELECTED RANGE AND TIME INTERVAL
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, 6-7, 9-10, and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aurongzeb et al., US 2019/0278323 A1 (hereinafter “Aurongzeb”) in view of Hong et al., US 2021/0366359 A1 (hereinafter “Hong”).
Regarding claim 1, Aurongzeb discloses a display device (FIG. 3, and [0073]-[0077]) dual display handling system 300) comprising:
a display panel (FIGS. 3-8 [0073]-[0077] and first display 311, second display screen 321 of display handling system 300) including a first display area (FIGS. 3-8 [0073]-[0077] and first display 311) configured to display a virtual keyboard (FIG. 5 and [0081] in a laptop orientation virtual keyboard on display screen 520, orientation dependent on whether 520 or 510) including a plurality of virtual keys (virtual keys are an inherent feature of a virtual keyboard) and a second display area (FIGS. 3-8 [0073]-[0077] second display screen 321) adjacent to the first display area (FIGS. 3-8 [0073]-[0077] second display screen 321 adjacent to first display 311);
However, although Aurongzeb discloses various methods of preventing burn-in of the static images of the displays (see generally, Abstract), Aurongzeb does not explicitly disclose a data driver configured to provide a data voltage to the display panel; and
a controller configured to provide a data signal to the data driver, wherein the controller configured to generate the data signal
to reduce or enlarge the virtual keyboard with respect to a center of the virtual keyboard within a selected range at a selected time interval.
In the same field of endeavor, Hong discloses a data driver ([0057]-[0059] data driver) configured to provide a data voltage ([0058] data voltage produced by gate driver via shift register) to the display panel (gate lines providing the voltage to the panel at [0058]); and
a controller (FIG. 9-11 and controller 180, 370 at [0116] and [0120]-[0128]) configured to provide a data signal ([0128] controller produces a data signal in view of [0057]-[0059]) to the data driver ([0128] controller produces a data signal in view of [0057]-[0059]),
wherein the controller configured to generate the data signal to reduce or enlarge the virtual keyboard with respect to a center of the virtual keyboard (see FIGS. 1-3 and [0026]-[0032] and [0035]-[0039] describing up scaling and cropping based on the center of the image) within a selected range (FIGS. 1-5 and offset at [0039] and scaling at [0045]) at a selected time interval ([0040] [0065] and [0100] describing predetermined time elapsed).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the dual display system with burn-in reduction methods of Aurongzeb to incorporate the display components and scaling/cropping determination as disclosed by Hong because the references are within the same field of endeavor, namely, display devices with methods of reducing burn in for static/still/fixed pattern images. The motivation to combine these references would have been to reduce burn-in (see Hong at [0004]). Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the prior art to achieve the claimed invention and there would have been a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 6, Aurongzeb in view of Hong discloses the display device of claim 1 (see above), wherein a first data signal corresponds to the virtual keyboard at a first time point and a second data signal corresponds to the virtual keyboard at a second time point after the selected time interval from the first time point (Hong frame comparison [0040]-[0044] and FIGS. 3-4), and wherein the controller is configured to generate a plurality of data signals by mixing the first data signal and the second data signal over a plurality of frames between the first time point and the second time point (Hong mixer 374 generates the OSD at [0159]-[0163]).
Regarding claim 7, Aurongzeb in view of Hong discloses the display device of claim 6 (see above), wherein a mixing ratio of the first data signal decreases and a mixing ratio of the second data signal increases during the plurality of frames (Hong mixer 374 generates the OSD at [0159]-[0163]).
Regarding claim 9, Aurongzeb in view of Hong discloses the display device of claim 1 (see above), wherein the display panel is foldable along a folding line, wherein the first display area is located on a first side of the folding line, and wherein the second display area is located on a second side of the folding line (Aurongzeb FIGS. 3-8 and foldable displays with hinges at [0075] and [0081]-[0083] and [0085]-[0087], the folding line is the hinge or crease between displays).
Regarding claim 10, Aurongzeb discloses a display device (FIG. 3, and [0073]-[0077]) dual display handling system 300) comprising:
a display panel (FIGS. 3-8 [0073]-[0077] and first display 311, second display screen 321 of display handling system 300) including a first display area (FIGS. 3-8 [0073]-[0077] and first display 311) configured to display a virtual keyboard (FIG. 5 and [0081] in a laptop orientation virtual keyboard on display screen 520, orientation dependent on whether 520 or 510) including a plurality of virtual keys (virtual keys are an inherent feature of a virtual keyboard) and a second display area (FIGS. 3-8 [0073]-[0077] second display screen 321) adjacent to the first display area (FIGS. 3-8 [0073]-[0077] second display screen 321 adjacent to first display 311);
However, although Aurongzeb discloses various methods of preventing burn-in of the static images of the displays (see generally, Abstract), Aurongzeb does not explicitly disclose a data driver configured to provide a data voltage to the display panel; and
a controller configured to provide a data signal to the data driver, wherein the controller configured to generate the data signal
wherein the controller configured to generate the data signal to reduce or enlarge each of the plurality of the virtual keys with respect to a center of each of the plurality of the virtual keys within a selected range at a selected time interval.
In the same field of endeavor, Hong discloses a data driver ([0057]-[0059] data driver) configured to provide a data voltage ([0058] data voltage produced by gate driver via shift register) to the display panel (gate lines providing the voltage to the panel at [0058]); and
a controller (FIG. 9-11 and controller 180, 370 at [0116] and [0120]-[0128]) configured to provide a data signal ([0128] controller produces a data signal in view of [0057]-[0059]) to the data driver ([0128] controller produces a data signal in view of [0057]-[0059]),
wherein the controller configured to generate the data signal to reduce or enlarge each of the plurality of the virtual keys with respect to a center of each of the plurality of the virtual keys (see FIGS. 1-3 and [0026]-[0032] and [0035]-[0039] describing up scaling and cropping based on the center of the image, noting performed for each displayed element) within a selected range (FIGS. 1-5 and offset at [0039] and scaling at [0045]) at a selected time interval ([0040] [0065] and [0100] describing predetermined time elapsed).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the dual display system with burn-in reduction methods of Aurongzeb to incorporate the display components and scaling/cropping determination as disclosed by Hong because the references are within the same field of endeavor, namely, display devices with methods of reducing burn in for static/still/fixed pattern images. The motivation to combine these references would have been to reduce burn-in (see Hong at [0004]). Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the prior art to achieve the claimed invention and there would have been a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 15, it is similar in scope to claim 6 above. Therefore, claim 15 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 6.
Regarding claim 16, it is similar in scope to claim 7 above. Therefore, claim 16 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 7.
Regarding claim 17, Aurongzeb discloses an electronic apparatus (FIG. 3, generally 300) comprising a display device (FIG. 3, and [0073]-[0077]) dual display handling system 300) configured to display an image and a processor ([0036] and [0050] and [0059] and FIG. 10 GPU 106 and FIG. 1 at [0097] configured to provide input image data to the display device (FIG. 10 and GPU and controller capable of providing graphics to the display [0097]-[0100]),
comprising:
a display panel (FIGS. 3-8 [0073]-[0077] and first display 311, second display screen 321 of display handling system 300) including a first display area (FIGS. 3-8 [0073]-[0077] and first display 311) configured to display a virtual keyboard (FIG. 5 and [0081] in a laptop orientation virtual keyboard on display screen 520, orientation dependent on whether 520 or 510) including a plurality of virtual keys (virtual keys are an inherent feature of a virtual keyboard) and a second display area (FIGS. 3-8 [0073]-[0077] second display screen 321) adjacent to the first display area (FIGS. 3-8 [0073]-[0077] second display screen 321 adjacent to first display 311);
However, although Aurongzeb discloses various methods of preventing burn-in of the static images of the displays (see generally, Abstract), Aurongzeb does not explicitly disclose a data driver configured to provide a data voltage to the display panel; and a controller configured to generate a data signal based on the input image data and to provide the data signal to the data driver, wherein the controller configured to generate the data signal to reduce or enlarge the virtual keyboard with respect to a center of the virtual keyboard within a selected range at a selected time interval.
In the same field of endeavor, Hong discloses a data driver ([0057]-[0059] data driver) configured to provide a data voltage ([0058] data voltage produced by gate driver via shift register) to the display panel (gate lines providing the voltage to the panel at [0058]); and
a controller (FIG. 9-11 and controller 180, 370 at [0116] and [0120]-[0128]) configured to provide a data signal ([0128] controller produces a data signal in view of [0057]-[0059]) based on the input image data (input image data [0025]) and to provide the data signal to the data driver ([0128] controller produces a data signal in view of [0057]-[0059]),
wherein the controller configured to generate the data signal to reduce or enlarge the virtual keyboard with respect to a center of the virtual keyboard (see FIGS. 1-3 and [0026]-[0032] and [0035]-[0039] describing up scaling and cropping based on the center of the image) within a selected range (FIGS. 1-5 and offset at [0039] and scaling at [0045]) at a selected time interval ([0040] [0065] and [0100] describing predetermined time elapsed).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the dual display system with burn-in reduction methods of Aurongzeb to incorporate the display components and scaling/cropping determination as disclosed by Hong because the references are within the same field of endeavor, namely, display devices with methods of reducing burn in for static/still/fixed pattern images. The motivation to combine these references would have been to reduce burn-in (see Hong at [0004]). Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the prior art to achieve the claimed invention and there would have been a reasonable expectation of success.
Claims 2-5, 11-14, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aurongzeb in view of Hong as applied to claims 1, 10, and 17 above, and further in view of Tsuzuki, US 2005/0018046 A1 (hereinafter “Tsuzuki”).
Regarding claim 2, Aurongzeb in view of Hong discloses the display device of claim 1 (see above).
However, Aurongzeb in view of Hong does not explicitly disclose wherein the virtual keyboard is configured to be reduced or enlarged while maintaining a length ratio of a long side of the virtual keyboard to a short side of the virtual keyboard.
In the same field of endeavor, Tsuzuki discloses wherein the virtual keyboard is configured to be reduced or enlarged while maintaining a length ratio of a long side of the virtual keyboard to a short side of the virtual keyboard (FIGS. 1-3 and [0024]-[0028] and [0035] area ratio of x and y are constant for each zone, one zone may constitute the entire keyboard, at [0051] shift may occur with distance from the center kept substantially constant).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the burn-in prevention for a display device and virtual keyboard of Aurongzeb in view of Hong to incorporate the ratio maintenance and shifting when avoiding burn-in as disclosed by Tsuzuki because the references are within the same field of endeavor, namely, burn-in prevention techniques for display devices. The motivation to combine these references would have been to prevent burn-in with efficiency and without bothering the viewer (see Tsuzuki at [0002]-[0012]). Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the prior art to achieve the claimed invention and there would have been a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 3, Aurongzeb in view of Hong further in view of Tsuzuki discloses the display device of claim 2 (see above), wherein the short side of the virtual keyboard is configured to be reduced or enlarged by one pixel at the selected time interval (Tsuzuki at [0043]-[0044]).
Regarding claim 4, Aurongzeb in view of Hong discloses the display device of claim 1 (see above).
However, Aurongzeb in view of Hong does not explicitly disclose wherein the selected range is from 99% to 100% of an initial size of the virtual keyboard.
In the same field of endeavor, Tsuzuki discloses wherein the selected range is from 99% to 100% of an initial size of the virtual keyboard (Tsuzuki at [0043]-[0044], single pixel shift would be within the range as understood by one of ordinary skill).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the burn-in prevention for a display device and virtual keyboard of Aurongzeb in view of Hong to incorporate the pixel shift by Tsuzuki because the references are within the same field of endeavor, namely, burn-in prevention techniques for display devices. The motivation to combine these references would have been to prevent burn-in with efficiency and without bothering the viewer (see Tsuzuki at [0002]-[0012]). Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the prior art to achieve the claimed invention and there would have been a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 5, Aurongzeb in view of Hong discloses the display device of claim 1 (see above).
However, Aurongzeb in view of Hong does not explicitly disclose wherein the selected time interval is in a range from 20 seconds to 40 seconds.
In the same field of endeavor, Tsuzuki discloses wherein the selected time interval is in a range from 20 seconds to 40 seconds ([0043] describing less than 1 minute intervals known, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to determine a range of the interval times given finite resources (e.g., materials, costs, processing speeds, etc.), and one of ordinary skill would be able to determine the range using known techniques with a reasonable expectation of success).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the burn-in prevention for a display device and virtual keyboard of Aurongzeb in view of Hong to incorporate the ratio maintenance and shifting when avoiding burn-in as disclosed by Tsuzuki because the references are within the same field of endeavor, namely, burn-in prevention techniques for display devices. The motivation to combine these references would have been to prevent burn-in with efficiency and without bothering the viewer (see Tsuzuki at [0002]-[0012]). Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the prior art to achieve the claimed invention and there would have been a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 11, it is similar in scope to claim 2 above. Therefore, claim 11 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 2.
Regarding claim 12, it is similar in scope to claim 3 above. Therefore, claim 12 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 3.
Regarding claim 13, it is similar in scope to claim 4 above. Therefore, claim 13 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 4.
Regarding claim 14, it is similar in scope to claim 5 above. Therefore, claim 14 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 5.
Regarding claim 18, it is similar in scope to claim 2 above. Therefore, claim 18 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 2.
Regarding claim 19, it is similar in scope to claim 3 above. Therefore, claim 19 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 3.
Regarding claim 20, it is similar in scope to claim 4 above. Therefore, claim 20 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 4.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aurongzeb in view of Hong as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Law et al., US 2014/0218298 A1 (hereinafter “Law”).
Regarding claim 8, Aurongzeb in view of Hong discloses the display device of claim 1 (see above).
However, Aurongzeb in view of Hong does not explicitly disclose wherein the controller is configured to compensate a plurality of touch areas for the plurality of virtual keys in response to reduction or enlargement of the virtual keyboard.
In the same field of endeavor, Law discloses wherein the controller ([0017]) is configured to compensate a plurality of touch areas for the plurality of virtual keys in response to reduction or enlargement of the virtual keyboard (FIGS. 5-7 and [0031]-[0035] with touch input aligning in accordance with the resizing of the keys).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the burn-in prevention for a display device and virtual keyboard of Aurongzeb in view of Hong to incorporate the rearrangement of touch points in accordance with a resizing of a virtual keyboard as disclosed by Law because the references are within the same field of endeavor, namely, adjustable images on display devices. The motivation to combine these references would have been to accurately and dynamically detect input in accordance with touch by the user on an optimal keyboard arrangement (see Law at [0002]-[0005]). Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the prior art to achieve the claimed invention and there would have been a reasonable expectation of success.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Koh et al., US 2020/0218204 A1;
Nagaoka, US 2007/0229664 A1;
Enoki et al., US 2005/0204313 A1;
Edwards et al., US 2020/0379632 A1;
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARVESH J NADKARNI whose telephone number is (571)270-7562. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-5PM M-F.
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, LunYi Lao can be reached at (571) 272-7671. 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.
/SARVESH J NADKARNI/Examiner, Art Unit 2621