DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Title
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: ADAPTIVE DISPLAY BACKLIGHT CONTROL SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING THE BACKLIGHT USING HUMAN PRESENCE AND ATTENTION SENSORS.
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 time-wise 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 claims at issue 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); and 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 a non-statutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based e-Terminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An e-Terminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about e-Terminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-7 of Patent No. 12,347,395 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because: claim 1 in view of Yoshinaga et al. (US 2007/0247524 A1) teaches them, as provided below.
Application
Patent
1. An adaptive display backlight control system, comprising:
a microcontroller unit;
a human presence sensor, electrically connected with the microcontroller unit, used to sense whether a person is in front of a display;
a human attention sensor, electrically connected with the microcontroller unit, being implemented by an image sensor and an intelligence operator that
determines whether the person in front of the display is paying attention to the display according to images of pupil centers or cornea reflection images of the person captured by the image sensor; and
a backlight regulation module, electrically connected with the microcontroller unit, used to regulate a driving voltage of a backlight module of the display according to a backlight-regulation instruction generated by the microcontroller unit;
wherein the microcontroller unit generates the backlight-regulation instruction being outputted to the backlight regulation module according to a signal generated by the human presence sensor relating to whether the person is present in front of the display and a signal generated by the human attention sensor relating to whether the person is paying attention to the display.
1. An adaptive display backlight control system, comprising:
a microcontroller unit;
a human presence sensor, electrically connected with the microcontroller unit, used to sense whether a person is in front of a display;
a human attention sensor, electrically connected with the microcontroller unit, being implemented by an image sensor and an intelligence operator that defines an operating range in front of the display and determines whether the person in front of the display is paying attention to the display according to images
captured by the image sensor within the operating range; and
a backlight regulation module, electrically connected with the microcontroller unit, used to regulate a driving voltage of a backlight module of the display according to a backlight-regulation instruction generated by the microcontroller unit;
wherein the microcontroller unit generates the backlight-regulation instruction being outputted to the backlight regulation module according to a signal generated by the human presence sensor relating to whether the person is present in front of the display and a signal generated by the human attention sensor relating to whether the person is paying attention to the display.
Patent claim 1 teaches all the limitations but determining … according to the images of “pupil centers or cornea reflection images of the person”.
However, Yoshinaga teaches the concept of determining … according to the images of pupil centers or cornea reflection images of the person (Yoshinaga, FIGS. 8-10, [0068], “In a step 51, first of all, detection is made on the central positions of the pupils from among the face picture”).
At the time of effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the “gaze detector 216” taught by Bui to further detect “the central positions of the pupils from among the face picture”, as taught by Yoshinaga, in order to provide “a technology being suitable for grasping data of level of attention paid” (Yoshinaga, [0007]).
As to claims 2-3, they recite substantially the same limitations as in patent claims 2-3, respectively, and are not allowable.
As to claim 4, it recites substantially the same limitations as in patent claim 1, ll. 11-12, and are not allowable.
As to claims 5-8, they recite substantially the same limitations as in patent claims 4-7, respectively, and are not allowable.
As to claim 9, it differs from claim 1 only in that it is the method for adaptively controlling the display backlight control system of claim 1. It recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 1, and is not allowable for the same reason above. Please see claim 1 for detailed analysis.
As to claim 10, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 2, and is not allowable for the same reason above.
As to claim 11, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 4, and is not allowable for the same reason above.
As to claims 12-15, they recite substantially the same limitations as in claims 5-8, respectively, and are not allowable for the same reason above.
as to claim 16, it differs from claims 1 and 7 only in that it is the method for adaptively controlling the display backlight control system of claims 1 and 7. It recites substantially the same limitations as in combined claims 1 and 7, and is not allowable for the same reason above. Please see claim 1 for detailed analysis.
As to claim 17, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 2, and is not allowable for the same reason above.
As to claims 18-19, they recite substantially the same limitations as in claim 1, ll. 6 and 7-9, respectively, and are not allowable for the same reason above.
As to claim 20, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 4, and is not allowable for the same reason above.
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 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, 8-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bui et al. (US 2022/0147142 A1) in view of Yoshinaga et al. (US 2007/0247524 A1).
As to claim 1, Bui teaches an adaptive display backlight control system (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0029], “system 100” comprising “backlight 110”), comprising:
a microcontroller unit (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0029], “processor 109”);
a human presence sensor (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0036], “display panel controller 130 of FIG. 1 serves to process the image data generated by the image sensor(s) 114”), electrically connected with the microcontroller unit (Bui, see FIGS. 1-3, [0029], “processor 109”), used to sense whether a person is in front of a display (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0036], “to determine whether the user 106 is present within the imaging FoV 116”);
a human attention sensor (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0047], “based on the analysis of the gaze of the user 106, the display panel controller 130 determines”), electrically connected with the microcontroller unit (Bui, see FIGS. 1-3, [0029], “processor 109”), being implemented by an image sensor and an intelligence operator that determines whether the person in front of the display is paying attention to the display (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0024], “if two eyes are detected in the image data, examples disclosed herein determine that the user is looking at the display screen”; Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0047], “whether the user 106 is attentive to the display screen 108 (e.g., paying attention to content on the display screen 108)”) according to images of pupil centers or cornea reflection images of the person captured by the image sensor (Yoshinaga, FIGS. 8-10, [0068], “In a step 51, first of all, detection is made on the central positions of the pupils from among the face picture”); and
a backlight regulation module (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0071], “backlight manager 220” controlled by “backlight rule(s) 224” according to “gaze detector 216”), electrically connected with the microcontroller unit (Bui, see FIGS. 1-3, [0029], “processor 109”), used to regulate a driving voltage of a backlight module (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0072], “backlight 110”) of the display (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0072], “display screen 108”) according to a backlight-regulation instruction (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0072], “backlight rule(s) 224”) generated by the microcontroller unit (Bui, see FIGS. 1-3, [0029], “processor 109”);
wherein the microcontroller unit (Bui, see FIGS. 1-3, [0029], “processor 109”) generates the backlight-regulation instruction (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0072], “backlight rule(s) 224”) being outputted to the backlight regulation module (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0071], “backlight manager 220”) according to a signal generated by the human presence sensor (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0081], “user presence detector 212”) relating to whether the person is present in front of the display (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0081], “detects a face in the imaging FoV 116”) and a signal generated by the human attention sensor (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0083], “gaze detector 216”) relating to whether the person is paying attention to the display (Bui, FIGS. 1-5, [0084], “display panel controller 130 determines that the user is attentive based on a direction of a gaze of the user relative to the image sensor(s) 114 of FIGS. 1 and 2 (e.g., as determined based on the image data 208 and the face detection model(s) 214)”).
Bui does not teach determining … “according to images of pupil centers or cornea reflection images of the person captured by the image sensor”.
However, Yoshinaga teaches the concept of determining … according to images of pupil centers or cornea reflection images of the person captured by the image sensor (Yoshinaga, FIGS. 8-10, [0068], “In a step 51, first of all, detection is made on the central positions of the pupils from among the face picture”).
At the time of effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the “gaze detector 216” taught by Bui to further detect “the central positions of the pupils from among the face picture”, as taught by Yoshinaga, in order to provide “a technology being suitable for grasping data of level of attention paid” (Yoshinaga, [0007]).
As to claim 2, Bui teaches the adaptive display backlight control system according to claim 1, further comprising an ambient light sensor (Bui, FIGS. 1-2, [0058], “ambient light sensor(s) 144”), electrically connected with the microcontroller unit (Bui, see FIGS. 1-3, [0029], “processor 109”), used to determine information of an ambient light around the display and enable the microcontroller unit to further regulate the driving voltage being outputted to the backlight module according to signals generated by the ambient light sensor (Bui, FIGS. 1-2, [0058], “measure illuminance and generate data indicative of light (e.g., intensity) in the surrounding environment in which the user device 104 is located. In the example of FIG. 1, if data from the ambient light sensor(s) 144 indicates that the room is dark or dimly lit, the display panel controller 130 instructs the backlight 110 to gradually dim or increase brightness to account for an increased sensitivity of the user 106 to changes in brightness in a dark environment”).
As to claim 3, Bui teaches the adaptive display backlight control system according to claim 1, wherein the human presence sensor is implemented by a proximity sensor for determining whether the person is in front of the display (Bui, [0021], “As another example, some devices include proximity sensors that detect user presence relative to the device”).
At the time of effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the “image sensor(s) 114” taught by Bui to be further configured to operate in association with another “proximity sensor”, as taught by Bui, in order to increase the accuracy while lowering cost.
As to claim 4, Bui teaches the adaptive display backlight control system according to claim 1, wherein the intelligence operator defines an operating range in front of the display (Bui, FIG. 1, [0048], “when the user 106 is in the display FoV 132, the example display panel controller 130 of FIG. 1 determines a user field of view 138 based on a position of the user 106 within the display FoV 132 (e.g., based on x and y coordinates within the display FoV 132) and an angle of a face of the user 106 relative to the image sensor(s) 114 of the user device 104”) and the images of pupil centers or the cornea reflection images of the person are captured by the image sensor within the operating range (Bui, FIG. 1, [0024], e.g., “ if two eyes are detected in the image data, examples disclosed herein determine that the user is looking at the display screen”).
As to claim 5, Bui teaches the adaptive display backlight control system according to claim 1,wherein, when the microcontroller unit determines that the person is present in front of the display according to the signal generated by the human presence sensor (Bui, FIG. 3, [0081], “user presence detector 212” → “face detected” → “backlight and panel on (default %) 222, 224”) and determines that the person is paying attention to the display according to the signal generated by the human attention sensor (Bui, FIG. 3, [0084], “gaze detector 216” → “face detect” → “backlight on (default %) 224”), the microcontroller unit generates the backlight-regulation instruction (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0072], “backlight rule(s) 224”) for controlling the backlight regulation module (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0071], “backlight manager 220”) to drive the backlight module to emit a normal backlight (Bui, FIGS. 3-4, “backlight on (default %)”).
As to claim 6, Bui teaches the adaptive display backlight control system according to claim 1, wherein, when the microcontroller unit determines that the person is present in front of the display according to the signal generated by the human presence sensor (Bui, FIG. 3, [0081], “user presence detector 212” → “face detected” → “backlight and panel on (default %) 222, 224”) and determines that the person is not paying attention to the display according to the signal generated by the human attention sensor (Bui, FIG. 3, [0084], “gaze detector 216” → “face turn 45°” → “backlight dim (90% of default) 224”), the microcontroller unit generates the backlight-regulation instruction for controlling the backlight regulation module (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0071], “backlight manager 220”) to drive the backlight module to emit a regulated backlight (Bui, FIG. 3, “backlight dim (90% of default) 224”).
As to claim 8, Bui teaches the adaptive display backlight control system according to claim 1, wherein, when the microcontroller unit determines that the person is not present in front of the display according to the signal generated by the human presence sensor (Bui, FIG. 3, [0081], “user presence detector 212” → “no face detected” → “backlight and panel off (0%) 222, 224”), the microcontroller unit generates the backlight-regulation instruction for controlling the backlight regulation module (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0071], “backlight manager 220”) to drive the backlight module to emit a backlight under a power-saving mode or turn off the backlight of the display (Bui, FIG. 3, [0081], “backlight and panel off (0%) 222, 224”).
As to claim 9, it differs from claim 1 only in that it is the method for adaptively controlling the display backlight control system of claim 1. It recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 1, and Bui in view of Yoshinaga teaches them. Examiner renders the same motivation as in claim 1. Please see claim 1 for detailed analysis.
As to claim 10, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 2, and Bui teaches them. Please see claim 2 for detailed analysis.
As to claim 11, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 4, and Bui teaches them. Please see claim 4 for detailed analysis.
As to claims 12-13, they recite substantially the same limitations as in claims 5-6, respectively, and Bui teaches them. Please see claims 5-6 for detailed analysis.
As to claim 15, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 8, and Bui teaches them. Please see claim 8 for detailed analysis.
Claims 7, 14 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bui et al. (US 2022/0147142 A1) in view of Yoshinaga et al. (US 2007/0247524 A1) and Ooi et al. (US 2016/0335989 A1).
As to claim 7, Bui teaches the adaptive display backlight control system according to claim 6, wherein the adaptive display backlight control system determines whether the person is not paying attention to the display (Bui, FIG. 1, [0024], e.g., “ if two eyes are detected in the image data, examples disclosed herein determine that the user is looking at the display screen”).
Bui does not teach “wherein the adaptive display backlight control system uses a timer to set up a non-attention time and a light-dimming time; when it is determined that a time that the person is not paying attention to the display reaches the non-attention time, the backlight regulation module is regulated according to a ratio within the light-dimming time until the backlight module is turned off”.
However, Ooi teaches the concept of a timer (Ooi, FIG. 6, [0093], “timer”) to set up a non-presence time (Ooi, FIG. 6, [0093], “has face been detected S123?” → NO → e.g., “between 10 seconds and 30 seconds”) and a light-dimming time (Ooi, FIG. 6, [0108], e.g., “ T1 seconds” or “T2 seconds”);
when it is determined that a time that the person is not present in front of the display reaches the non-presence time (Ooi, FIG. 6, [0093], “has face been detected S123?” → NO → e.g., “between 10 seconds and 30 seconds”), the backlight regulation module is regulated according to a ratio within the light-dimming time until the backlight module is turned off (Ooi, FIG. 6, [0093], “power consumption is steadily suppressed up to about half, for example, by decreasing the brightness of the display panel 102” until “turning main power off S129”).
At the time of effective filing date, given that Bui teaches the concept of determining whether the person is not paying attention to the display in association with the user’s presence in front of the display determined by images captured by the image sensor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the “gaze detector 216” taught by Bui to further comprise the “timer” to be associated with the attention determination, as taught by Ooi, in order to provide a display device and a control method “capable of efficiently executing the power save control with a high degree of accuracy by combining the user's moving body detection and face detection” (Ooi, [0008]).
As to claim 14, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 7, and Ooi teaches them. Examiner renders the same motivation as in claim 7. Please see claim 7 for detailed analysis.
as to claim 16, it differs from claims 1 and 7 only in that it is the method for adaptively controlling the display backlight control system of the combined claims 1 and 7. It recites substantially the same limitations as in the combined claims 1 and 7, and Bui in view of Yoshinaga and Ooi teaches them. Examiner renders the same motivations as in claim 1 and 7. Please see claims 1 and 7 for detailed analysis.
As to claim 17, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 2, and Bui teaches them. Please see claim 2 for detailed analysis.
As to claim 18, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 1, ll. 6, and Bui teaches them. Please see claim 1 for detailed analysis.
As to claim 19, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 1, ll. 7-9, and Yoshinaga teaches them. Examiner renders the same motivation as in claim 1. Please see claim 1 for detailed analysis.
As to claim 20, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 4, and Bui teaches them. Please see claim 4 for detailed analysis.
Conclusion
The prior arts made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure: Bui et al. (US 2021/0327394 A1) teaches the concept of “face analyzer to identify a presence of a face of a user” (Abs.); Moore et al. (US 2013/0248717 A1) teaches the concept of “determining that a user is present based on the received image signal” (Abs.); Chen (US 2018/0136719 A1) teaches the concept of “determining at least one adjustable brightness display area in the user’s focus according to the focus point” (Abs.); Sharma et al. (US 2018/0188803 A1) teaches the concept of “context aware backlighting techniques” (Abs.); Raghavulu et al. (US 2023/0195196 A1) teaches the concept of “display panel human presence detection” (Abs.); and Azam et al. (US 2020/0142471 A1) teaches the concept of “determining whether the user is present at the display” (Abs.).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD J HONG whose telephone number is (571) 270-7765. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM EST.
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 on (571) 272-7772. 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.
May 29, 2026
/RICHARD J HONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2623
***
Prosecution Insights