DETAILED ACTION
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: Display Device with Display Panel, Dimming Panel, and Blurring Process.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory 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 nonstatutory 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 nonstatutory 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 nonstatutory 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 1-2 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2 of U.S. Patent No. 11942048. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims are shown to be subject to nonstatutory double patenting rejections by comparing the claims of the current application with the claims of the patent as shown below. The claims of the patent cover the same subject matter as the claims of the current application.
Note that the prohibition of nonstatutory double patenting rejections under 35 USC 121 does not apply because the subject matter of the current claims was not restricted from the application resulting in US Patent No. 11942048. See MPEP 804.01.
US Application 19/225695
US Patent No. 11942048
Claim 1: A display device comprising: a display panel comprising a plurality of pixels; a dimming panel that is disposed so as to face the display panel on one surface side of the display panel and comprises a plurality of dimming pixels; and a light source configured to emit light that travels from the dimming panel toward the display panel, wherein in controlling the pixels in accordance with an input image signal such that at least one of the pixels is lit up in white, when a first pixel disposed farther than a predetermined distance from a border between a display area of the display panel and a frame area of the display panel is lit up in white, a blurring process is applied such that more than one of the dimming pixels transmit light, a blurring region is formed that is a region including the dimming pixels to which the blurring process is applied, and light from the light source is transmitted through the blurring region and the first pixel and emitted to another surface side of the display panel, and when a second pixel disposed closer to the border than the first pixel is lit up in white, the blurring process is not applied.
Claim 1: A display device comprising: a display panel comprising a plurality of pixels; a dimming panel that is disposed so as to face the display panel on one surface side of the display panel and comprises a plurality of dimming pixels; and a light source configured to emit light that travels from the dimming panel toward the display panel, wherein when any of the pixels is controlled to be lit up in white in accordance with an input image signal, and a predetermined condition is satisfied, a blurring process is applied so that more than one of the dimming pixels transmit light, a blurring region is formed that is a region including the dimming pixels to which the blurring process is applied, and light from the light source is transmitted through the blurring region and the pixel and emitted to another surface side of the display panel, when any of the pixels is controlled to be lit up in white in accordance with the input image signal and the predetermined condition is not satisfied, the blurring region is not formed, any of the dimming pixels located in a position overlapping the pixel on a straight line along a direction in which the display panel faces the dimming panel is controlled to transmit light, and light from the light source is transmitted through the dimming pixel and the pixel and emitted to the other surface side of the display panel, and the predetermined condition is satisfied when the pixel that is controlled to be lit up in white is at a predetermined distance or farther from an outer edge of a display area provided with the pixels on the display panel.
Claim 2: wherein the second pixel is disposed adjacent to the border.
Claim 2: wherein the predetermined condition is not satisfied when the pixel that is controlled to be lit up in white is located adjacent to the outer edge.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “when a second pixel disposed closer to the border than the first pixel is lit up in white, the blurring process is not applied” is unclear as to its scope and appears to be potentially contradictory with the earlier limitation “when a first pixel disposed farther than a predetermined distance from a border between a display area of the display panel and a frame area of the display panel is lit up in white, a blurring process is applied”. The potential contradiction occurs because the limitation “when a second pixel disposed closer to the border than the first pixel” could read on a second pixel that is closer to the border than a first pixel that is farther that the predetermined distance by a certain amount while the second pixel is also farther than the predetermined distance from the border. But the limitation “when a first pixel disposed farther than a predetermined distance from a border between a display area of the display panel and a frame area of the display panel is lit up in white, a blurring process is applied” suggests that pixels farther than the predetermined distance from the border undergo a blurring process. In other words, it is not clear whether the second pixel must be closer to the border than the predetermined distance, or if there is an apparent contraction in the claim. Claims 2-3 depend from claim 1 and share the rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20020114532 A1 teaches only averaging colors of pixels at least a threshold distance away from a border of an image segment ([56]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GENE W LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7148. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30am-6:00pm.
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, Matthew Eason can be reached at 571-270-7230. 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.
/Gene W Lee/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2624