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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claims are drawn to a computer-readable medium that can be interpreted as a transitory medium. The specification does not preclude the medium from being a carrier wave or embodied on a transitory medium.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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(s) 1, 15 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated Aubert et al. (US 2014/0300594).
In regard to claim 1, Aubert et al. teach a display method, applied to a display apparatus, comprising a pixel electrode array composed of a plurality of pixel electrodes (fig. 2 and elements 15), wherein the method comprises: acquiring position information of a target content in the pixel electrode array (paragraph 39 outputting images); charging target pixel electrodes corresponding with each of coordinate point positions in the position information respectively until reaching a target voltage matching each of the target pixel electrodes (paragraph 47, charging pixels with the image to be displayed); controlling discrete droplets in the display apparatus to move to the coordinate point positions corresponding with each of the target pixel electrodes respectively, based on the target voltage matching each of the target pixel electrodes (element 12 and paragraph 38); and powering off each of the target pixel electrodes, displaying the target content by the discrete droplets (paragraph 51).
In regard to claim 15, Aubert et al. teach a display apparatus, comprising a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the processor is configured to execute the computer program to implement steps of the method according to claim 1 (paragraph 46, Aubert et al. shows a control system with a processor which must contain a memory and computer program).
In regard to claim 18, Aubert et al. teach a computer-readable storage medium, storing a computer program, wherein the computer program is executed by a processor to implement steps of the method according to claim 1 (paragraph 46, Aubert et al. shows a control system with a processor which must contain a computer program).
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.
Claim(s) 2, 16 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aubert et al. in view of Choi et al. (US 2013/0076722).
In regard to claim 2, Aubert et al. teach wherein the charging target pixel electrodes corresponding with each of the coordinate point positions in the position information respectively until reaching a target voltage matching each of the target pixel electrodes comprises: determining a driving circuit associated with the target pixel electrodes at each of the coordinate point positions in the position information respectively (fig. 3 and paragraph 49) but does not teach for each of the target pixel electrodes, under the condition that the driving circuit associated with the target pixel electrodes is in the on state, charging the target pixel electrodes to an intermediate voltage based on a source driver associated with the driving circuit associated with the target pixel electrodes; and charging the target pixel electrodes from the intermediate voltage to the target voltage based on a power supply voltage associated with the driving circuit.
Choi et al. teach for each of the target pixel electrodes, under the condition that the driving circuit associated with the target pixel electrodes is in the on state, charging the target pixel electrodes to an intermediate voltage based on a source driver associated with the driving circuit associated with the target pixel electrodes; and charging the target pixel electrodes from the intermediate voltage to the target voltage based on a power supply voltage associated with the driving circuit (fig. 4 SW2, fig. 6 SP2 and paragraph 110).
The two are analogous art because they both deal with the same field of invention of electrowetting displays.
Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the apparatus of Aubert et al. with the intermediate voltage of Choi et al. The rationale is as follows: Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to provide the apparatus of Aubert et al. with the intermediate voltage of Choi et al. because the intermediate voltage of Choi et al. would prevent the data driver from being overloaded and would improve driving characteristics.
In regard to claim 16, Aubert et al. teach a display apparatus, comprising a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the processor is configured to execute the computer program to implement steps of the method according to claim 1 (paragraph 46, Aubert et al. shows a control system with a processor which must contain a memory and computer program).
In regard to claim 19, Aubert et al. teach a computer-readable storage medium, storing a computer program, wherein the computer program is executed by a processor to implement steps of the method according to claim 1 (paragraph 46, Aubert et al. shows a control system with a processor which must contain a computer program).
Claim(s) 3, 17 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aubert et al. in view of Komiya (US 2005/0104820).
In regard to claim 3, Aubert et al. teach wherein the driving circuit comprises: a gate driver (element 30) and the source driver associated with the target pixel electrodes (element 41), a gate line (31) associated with the gate driver, and a data line (42), a first transistor (53), a target pixel electrode (54) and a storage capacitor (55) which are associated with the source driver; but does not teach a second transistor, a third transistor, wherein the for each of the target pixel electrodes, under the condition that the driving circuit associated with the target pixel electrodes is in an on state, charging the target pixel electrodes to an intermediate voltage based on a source driver associated with the driving circuit associated with the target pixel electrodes comprises: providing, by the gate driver, a scanning signal to the first transistor and the second transistor through the gate line to turn on the first transistor and the second transistor; providing, by the source driver, a data signal to the second transistor through the first transistor in the on state based on the data line to turn on the second transistor; charging, by the source driver, the target pixel electrodes to the intermediate voltage through the first transistor and the third transistor in the on state; wherein the charging the target pixel electrodes from the intermediate voltage to the target voltage based on a power supply voltage associated with the driving circuit comprises: charging, the power supply voltage, the target pixel electrodes from the intermediate voltage to the target voltage through the second transistor in the on state; and maintaining, by the storage capacitor, the target voltage of the target pixel electrodes within a target time period.
Komiya teaches a second transistor (M1), a third transistor (M4), wherein the for each of the target pixel electrodes, under the condition that the driving circuit associated with the target pixel electrodes is in an on state, charging the target pixel electrodes to an intermediate voltage based on a source driver associated with the driving circuit associated with the target pixel electrodes comprises: providing, by the gate driver, a scanning signal to the first transistor and the second transistor through the gate line to turn on the first transistor and the second transistor (SN connected to both M3 and M4); providing, by the source driver, a data signal to the second transistor through the first transistor in the on state based on the data line to turn on the second transistor (fig. 5A, the data signal Dm is provided to M1 through M3); charging, the target pixel electrodes to the intermediate voltage through the first transistor and the third transistor in the on state (figs. 5A, 6A and paragraphs 50-53); wherein the charging the target pixel electrodes from the intermediate voltage to the target voltage based on a power supply voltage associated with the driving circuit comprises: charging, the power supply voltage, the target pixel electrodes from the intermediate voltage to the target voltage through the second transistor in the on state (fig. 5A, when M1 is active VDD is applied); and maintaining, by the storage capacitor, the target voltage of the target pixel electrodes within a target time period (fig. 5A, the capacitor C1 maintains the voltage on the gate of M1) but does not teach the intermediate voltage being charged by the source driver (Komiya teaches a separate precharge driver).
The two are analogous art because they both deal with the same field of invention of electrowetting displays.
Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the apparatus of Aubert et al. with the precharge circuit of Komiya. The rationale is as follows: Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to provide the apparatus of Aubert et al. with the precharge circuit of Komiya because the precharge circuit of Komiya would reduce the programming time for the data voltage.
Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the apparatus of Aubert et al. and Komiya with a combined source and precharge driving circuit. The rationale is as follows: Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to provide the apparatus of Aubert et al. and Komiya with a combined source and precharge driving circuit because combining the two circuits would reduce the number of parts. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the combination of two circuits into one would work predictably and would reduce manufacturing complexity.
In regard to claim 17, Aubert et al. teach a display apparatus, comprising a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the processor is configured to execute the computer program to implement steps of the method according to claim 1 (paragraph 46, Aubert et al. shows a control system with a processor which must contain a memory and computer program).
In regard to claim 20, Aubert et al. teach a computer-readable storage medium, storing a computer program, wherein the computer program is executed by a processor to implement steps of the method according to claim 1 (paragraph 46, Aubert et al. shows a control system with a processor which must contain a computer program).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aubert et al. in view of Tobita (US 2004/0066360).
In regard to claim 6, Aubert et al. teach all the elements of claim 6 except Acquiring an interval power-on cycle for each of the target pixel electrodes; determining the latest power-on time point for the target pixel electrodes, and determining a time interval between the power-on time point and a current time point; and powering each of the target pixel electrodes periodically based on an association relationship between the time interval and the interval power-on cycle.
Tobita teaches Acquiring an interval power-on cycle for each of the target pixel electrodes; determining the latest power-on time point for the target pixel electrodes, and determining a time interval between the power-on time point and a current time point a prescribed time interval (see paragraph 56, Tobita teaches refresh at prescribed time intervals after a data writing operation); and powering each of the target pixel electrodes periodically based on an association relationship between the time interval and the interval power-on cycle (paragraphs 55 and 56).
The two are analogous art because they both deal with the same field of invention of displays.
Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the apparatus of Aubert et al. with the data refresh of Tobita. The rationale is as follows: Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to provide the apparatus of Aubert et al. data refresh of Tobita because the data refresh of Tobita would prevent image degradation and improve display quality in low frequency driving operations.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aubert et al. in view of Kosaka et al. (US 2018/0085756).
In regard to claim 7, Aubert et al. teach all the elements of claim 7 except wherein the controlling discrete droplets in the display apparatus to move to the coordinate point positions corresponding with each of the target pixel electrodes respectively, based on the target voltage matching each of the target pixel electrodes comprises: for each of the target pixel electrodes, adjusting a contact angle of the discrete droplets on the side of the target pixel electrodes based on the target voltage matching each of the target pixel electrodes; and controlling the discrete droplets to move to the coordinate point positions corresponding to the target pixel electrodes based on a relationship between an adjusted contact angle and the target voltage (paragraphs 101 and 102).
The two are analogous art because they both deal with the same field of invention of electrowetting displays.
Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the apparatus of Aubert et al. with the contact angle control of Kosaka et al. The rationale is as follows: Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to provide the apparatus of Aubert et al. with the contact angle control of Kosaka et al. because the contact angle control of Kosaka et al. would work equally as well in the apparatus of Aubert et al. as it does in the apparatus of Kosaka et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the control of Kosaka et al. would provide predictable result and would allow for accurate control of the device.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aubert et al. in view of Hadwen et al. (US 2020/0175932).
In regard to claim 8, Aubert et al. teach wherein the display apparatus further comprises a lower substrate (element 7) and an upper substrate (element 8); wherein: the pixel electrode array is configured on a side of the lower substrate away from the upper substrate to form an electrode layer (fig. 1 element 15) but does not teach a transistor layer is arranged in the same layer as the electrode layer on a side of the lower substrate close to the upper substrate; a first hydrophobic layer is laid on a side of the electrode layer away from the lower substrate, and the first hydrophobic layer is used to isolate the discrete droplets from the electrode layer to ensure smooth movement of the discrete droplets; a second hydrophobic layer is configured on a side of the upper substrate close to the first hydrophobic layer; and the discrete droplets are filled between the first hydrophobic layer and the second hydrophobic layer to form a droplet layer.
Hadwen et al. teach a transistor layer is arranged in the same layer as the electrode layer on a side of the lower substrate close to the upper substrate (element 46 and paragraph 7, uppermost layer of lower substrate is patterned for the array of element electrodes); a first hydrophobic layer is laid on a side of the electrode layer away from the lower substrate, and the first hydrophobic layer is used to isolate the discrete droplets from the electrode layer to ensure smooth movement of the discrete droplets (element 64 and paragraphs 8-10); a second hydrophobic layer is configured on a side of the upper substrate close to the first hydrophobic layer (element 68); and the discrete droplets are filled between the first hydrophobic layer and the second hydrophobic layer to form a droplet layer (fig. 3).
The two are analogous art because they both deal with the same field of invention of electrowetting displays.
Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the apparatus of Aubert et al. with the second hydrophobic layer of Hadwen et al. The rationale is as follows: Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to provide the apparatus of Aubert et al. with the second hydrophobic layer of Hadwen et al. because the second hydrophobic layer would allow for additional control of the liquid and improve display characteristics.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aubert et al. in view of Choi et al. further considered with Hadwen et al.
In regard to claim 9, Aubert et al. and Choi et al. teach wherein the display apparatus further comprises a lower substrate (element 7) and an upper substrate (element 8); wherein: the pixel electrode array is configured on a side of the lower substrate away from the upper substrate to form an electrode layer (fig. 1 element 15) but does not teach a transistor layer is arranged in the same layer as the electrode layer on a side of the lower substrate close to the upper substrate; a first hydrophobic layer is laid on a side of the electrode layer away from the lower substrate, and the first hydrophobic layer is used to isolate the discrete droplets from the electrode layer to ensure smooth movement of the discrete droplets; a second hydrophobic layer is configured on a side of the upper substrate close to the first hydrophobic layer; and the discrete droplets are filled between the first hydrophobic layer and the second hydrophobic layer to form a droplet layer.
Hadwen et al. teach a transistor layer is arranged in the same layer as the electrode layer on a side of the lower substrate close to the upper substrate (element 46 and paragraph 7, uppermost layer of lower substrate is patterned for the array of element electrodes); a first hydrophobic layer is laid on a side of the electrode layer away from the lower substrate, and the first hydrophobic layer is used to isolate the discrete droplets from the electrode layer to ensure smooth movement of the discrete droplets (element 64 and paragraphs 8-10); a second hydrophobic layer is configured on a side of the upper substrate close to the first hydrophobic layer (element 68); and the discrete droplets are filled between the first hydrophobic layer and the second hydrophobic layer to form a droplet layer (fig. 3).
The three are analogous art because they all deal with the same field of invention of electrowetting displays.
Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the apparatus of Aubert et al. and Choi et al. with the second hydrophobic layer of Hadwen et al. The rationale is as follows: Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to provide the apparatus of Aubert et al. and Choi et al. with the second hydrophobic layer of Hadwen et al. because the second hydrophobic layer would allow for additional control of the liquid and improve display characteristics.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aubert et al. in view of Komiya further considered with Hadwen et al.
In regard to claim 10, Aubert et al. and Komiya teach wherein the display apparatus further comprises a lower substrate (element 7) and an upper substrate (element 8); wherein: the pixel electrode array is configured on a side of the lower substrate away from the upper substrate to form an electrode layer (fig. 1 element 15) but does not teach a transistor layer is arranged in the same layer as the electrode layer on a side of the lower substrate close to the upper substrate; a first hydrophobic layer is laid on a side of the electrode layer away from the lower substrate, and the first hydrophobic layer is used to isolate the discrete droplets from the electrode layer to ensure smooth movement of the discrete droplets; a second hydrophobic layer is configured on a side of the upper substrate close to the first hydrophobic layer; and the discrete droplets are filled between the first hydrophobic layer and the second hydrophobic layer to form a droplet layer.
Hadwen et al. teach a transistor layer is arranged in the same layer as the electrode layer on a side of the lower substrate close to the upper substrate (element 46 and paragraph 7, uppermost layer of lower substrate is patterned for the array of element electrodes); a first hydrophobic layer is laid on a side of the electrode layer away from the lower substrate, and the first hydrophobic layer is used to isolate the discrete droplets from the electrode layer to ensure smooth movement of the discrete droplets (element 64 and paragraphs 8-10); a second hydrophobic layer is configured on a side of the upper substrate close to the first hydrophobic layer (element 68); and the discrete droplets are filled between the first hydrophobic layer and the second hydrophobic layer to form a droplet layer (fig. 3).
The three are analogous art because they all deal with the same field of invention of displays.
Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the apparatus of Aubert et al. and Komiya with the second hydrophobic layer of Hadwen et al. The rationale is as follows: Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to provide the apparatus of Aubert et al. and Komiya with the second hydrophobic layer of Hadwen et al. because the second hydrophobic layer would allow for additional control of the liquid and improve display characteristics.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aubert et al. in view of Tobita further considered with Hadwen et al.
In regard to claim 13, Aubert et al. and Tobita teach wherein the display apparatus further comprises a lower substrate (element 7) and an upper substrate (element 8); wherein: the pixel electrode array is configured on a side of the lower substrate away from the upper substrate to form an electrode layer (fig. 1 element 15) but does not teach a transistor layer is arranged in the same layer as the electrode layer on a side of the lower substrate close to the upper substrate; a first hydrophobic layer is laid on a side of the electrode layer away from the lower substrate, and the first hydrophobic layer is used to isolate the discrete droplets from the electrode layer to ensure smooth movement of the discrete droplets; a second hydrophobic layer is configured on a side of the upper substrate close to the first hydrophobic layer; and the discrete droplets are filled between the first hydrophobic layer and the second hydrophobic layer to form a droplet layer.
Hadwen et al. teach a transistor layer is arranged in the same layer as the electrode layer on a side of the lower substrate close to the upper substrate (element 46 and paragraph 7, uppermost layer of lower substrate is patterned for the array of element electrodes); a first hydrophobic layer is laid on a side of the electrode layer away from the lower substrate, and the first hydrophobic layer is used to isolate the discrete droplets from the electrode layer to ensure smooth movement of the discrete droplets (element 64 and paragraphs 8-10); a second hydrophobic layer is configured on a side of the upper substrate close to the first hydrophobic layer (element 68); and the discrete droplets are filled between the first hydrophobic layer and the second hydrophobic layer to form a droplet layer (fig. 3).
The three are analogous art because they all deal with the same field of invention of displays.
Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the apparatus of Aubert et al. and Tobita with the second hydrophobic layer of Hadwen et al. The rationale is as follows: Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to provide the apparatus of Aubert et al. and Tobita with the second hydrophobic layer of Hadwen et al. because the second hydrophobic layer would allow for additional control of the liquid and improve display characteristics.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aubert et al. in view of Kosaka et al. further considered with Hadwen et al.
In regard to claim 14, Aubert et al. and Kosaka et al. teach wherein the display apparatus further comprises a lower substrate (element 7) and an upper substrate (element 8); wherein: the pixel electrode array is configured on a side of the lower substrate away from the upper substrate to form an electrode layer (fig. 1 element 15) but does not teach a transistor layer is arranged in the same layer as the electrode layer on a side of the lower substrate close to the upper substrate; a first hydrophobic layer is laid on a side of the electrode layer away from the lower substrate, and the first hydrophobic layer is used to isolate the discrete droplets from the electrode layer to ensure smooth movement of the discrete droplets; a second hydrophobic layer is configured on a side of the upper substrate close to the first hydrophobic layer; and the discrete droplets are filled between the first hydrophobic layer and the second hydrophobic layer to form a droplet layer.
Hadwen et al. teach a transistor layer is arranged in the same layer as the electrode layer on a side of the lower substrate close to the upper substrate (element 46 and paragraph 7, uppermost layer of lower substrate is patterned for the array of element electrodes); a first hydrophobic layer is laid on a side of the electrode layer away from the lower substrate, and the first hydrophobic layer is used to isolate the discrete droplets from the electrode layer to ensure smooth movement of the discrete droplets (element 64 and paragraphs 8-10); a second hydrophobic layer is configured on a side of the upper substrate close to the first hydrophobic layer (element 68); and the discrete droplets are filled between the first hydrophobic layer and the second hydrophobic layer to form a droplet layer (fig. 3).
The three are analogous art because they all deal with the same field of invention of electrowetting displays.
Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the apparatus of Aubert et al. and Kosaka et al. with the second hydrophobic layer of Hadwen et al. The rationale is as follows: Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to provide the apparatus of Aubert et al. and Kosaka et al. with the second hydrophobic layer of Hadwen et al. because the second hydrophobic layer would allow for additional control of the liquid and improve display characteristics.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 5, 11 and 12 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 an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art fails to teach or make obvious a droplet replacement area configured with a droplet replacement whole in combination with the claim’s other features.
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.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH R HALEY whose telephone number is (571)272-0574. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am-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, Amr Awad can be reached at 571-272-7764. 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.
/JOSEPH R HALEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2621
Prosecution Insights