DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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 § 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.
2. Claim(s) 1-2, 8, 14, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yuyama (US Patent/PGPub. No. 6069676).
Regarding Claim 1,
Yuyama teaches
a display system (Col. 3, Ln. 20-26, FIG. 1, i.e. sequential color display device), comprising:
a display (Col. 3, Ln. 20-26, FIG. 1, i.e. LED box 3) comprising an emitter (Col. 3, Ln. 20-26, FIG. 1, i.e. red, green and blue color LEDs 2a, 2b and 2c) for emitting light (Col. 3, Ln. 20-26, FIG. 1, i.e. three color light sources); and
a display controller (Col. 3, Ln. 34-45, FIG. 1, i.e. light quantity controlling unit 11) configured to apply an amount of color correction (Col. 3, Ln. 34-45, FIG. 1, i.e. white balance … light quantity controlling voltage signal) to the display to adjust respective amounts of light (Col. 4, Ln. 1-5, FIG. 2, i.e. changing quantity of color light emitted from each LED) of two or more wavelengths (Col. 3, Ln. 55-59, FIG. 1, i.e. red, green and blue LEDs 2a, 2b and 2c (Please note that red, green, and blue would emit different wavelengths corresponding to their colors)) emitted by the display, the amount of color correction applied to the emitter decreasing (Col. 3, Ln. 45-54, FIG. 1, i.e. detected value … is lower than the reference voltage) with increased intensity of the light (Col. 3, Ln. 45-54, FIG. 1, i.e. quantity of light is increased) emitted by the emitter (i.e. when the voltage is decreased (sensed by photosensors), the quantity of light is increased).
Regarding Claim 2,
Yuyama teaches
the display system of claim 1, wherein:
applying the color correction to the display comprises increasing (i.e. please see above citation(s)) a magnitude (Col. 3, Ln. 45-54, FIG. 1, i.e. control circuit compares the level of the input signal with a reference voltage) of an electrical stimulus applied to (Col. 3, Ln. 45-54, FIG. 1, i.e. increasing the current flowing through the corresponding LED) the emitter (i.e. please see above citation(s)).
Regarding Claim 8,
Yuyama teaches
the display system of claim 1, wherein:
the display controller determines the amount of color correction to be applied to the emitter (i.e. please see above citation(s)) based on image data (Col. 1, Ln. 34-45, FIG. 1, i.e. display information; Col. 3, Ln. 20-25, FIG. 1, i.e. red, green and blue color LEDs 2a, 2b and 2c)) received by the display controller (i.e. please see above citation(s)).
Regarding Claim 14,
Yuyama teaches
a method (Col. 6, Ln. 8-10, FIG. 1, i.e. mounting method), comprising:
determining an amount of color correction (Col. 3, Ln. 34-45, FIG. 1, i.e. white balance … light quantity controlling voltage signal) to apply to a display to adjust respective amounts of light (Col. 4, Ln. 1-5, FIG. 2, i.e. changing quantity of color light emitted from each LED) of two or more wavelengths (Col. 3, Ln. 55-59, FIG. 1, i.e. red, green and blue LEDs 2a, 2b and 2c (Please note that red, green, and blue would emit different wavelengths corresponding to their colors)) emitted by the display, the amount of color correction decreasing (Col. 3, Ln. 45-54, FIG. 1, i.e. detected value … is lower than the reference voltage) with increased intensity of the light (Col. 3, Ln. 45-54, FIG. 1, i.e. quantity of light is increased) emitted by an emitter (Col. 3, Ln. 20-26, FIG. 1, i.e. red, green and blue color LEDs 2a, 2b and 2c) of the display (i.e. please see above citation(s)); and
applying (Col. 3, Ln. 34-45, FIG. 1, i.e. white balance … light quantity controlling voltage signal) the amount of color correction to the display (i.e. please see above citation(s)).
Regarding Claim 18,
Yuyama teaches
the method of claim 14, wherein:
applying the color correction to the display comprises increasing (i.e. please see above citation(s)) a magnitude (Col. 3, Ln. 45-54, FIG. 1, i.e. control circuit compares the level of the input signal with a reference voltage) of an electrical stimulus applied to (Col. 3, Ln. 45-54, FIG. 1, i.e. increasing the current flowing through the corresponding LED) the emitter (i.e. please see above citation(s)).
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 of this title, 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.
3. Claim(s) 9-10 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuyama (US Patent/PGPub. No. 6069676) in view of Xin et al. (US Patent/PGPub. No. 20240078961).
Regarding Claim 9,
Yuyama teaches
the display system of claim 8.
However, Yuyama does not explicitly teach
wherein:
the display controller further determines the amount of color correction to be applied to the emitter based on a brightness configuration setting of the display system.
In the same field of endeavor, Xin et al. teach
wherein:
the display controller ([0111], FIG. 23, i.e. control circuitry 412) further determines the amount of color correction to be applied ([0111], FIG. 23, i.e. determining pixel luminance levels) to the emitter ([0118], FIG. 23, i.e. array 428 of pixels 436) based on a brightness configuration setting ([0111], FIG. 23, i.e. on ambient light conditions, user-adjusted display brightness settings) of the display system ([0110], FIG. 23, i.e. electronic device 410).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention’s effective date was filed to combine Yuyama teaching of display comprising color corrections of plurality of LEDs with Xin et al. teaching of display comprising color corrections based on system and/or user settings to correctly compensate display luminance based on ambient condition and/or effectively enhance user’s preference via user’s input (Xin et al.’s [0111]).
Regarding Claim 10, the display system of claim 9, wherein:
Xin et al. teach
the brightness configuration setting (i.e. please see above citation(s)) is determined at least in part based on an ambient light level in an environment ([0111], FIG. 23, i.e. on ambient light conditions) of the display (i.e. please see above citation(s)).
Regarding Claim 20,
Yuyama teaches
cause the display system (Col. 3, Ln. 20-26, FIG. 1, i.e. sequential color display device) to perform operations comprising:
determining an amount of color correction (Col. 3, Ln. 34-45, FIG. 1, i.e. white balance … light quantity controlling voltage signal) to apply to a display to adjust respective amounts of light (Col. 4, Ln. 1-5, FIG. 2, i.e. changing quantity of color light emitted from each LED) of two or more wavelengths (Col. 3, Ln. 55-59, FIG. 1, i.e. red, green and blue LEDs 2a, 2b and 2c (Please note that red, green, and blue would emit different wavelengths corresponding to their colors)) emitted by the display, the amount of color correction decreasing (Col. 3, Ln. 45-54, FIG. 1, i.e. detected value … is lower than the reference voltage) with increased intensity of the light (Col. 3, Ln. 45-54, FIG. 1, i.e. quantity of light is increased) emitted by an emitter of the display (i.e. when the voltage is decreased (sensed by photosensors), the quantity of light is increased); and
applying (Col. 3, Ln. 34-45, FIG. 1, i.e. white balance … light quantity controlling voltage signal) the amount of color correction to the display(i.e. please see above citation(s)).
However, Yuyama does not explicitly teach
a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, the computer-readable storage medium including instructions that when executed by at least one processor of a display system.
In the same field of endeavor, Xin et al. teach
a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium ([0052], FIG. 1, i.e. non-transitory computer-readable medium), the computer-readable storage medium including instructions ([0052], FIG. 1, i.e. storing instructions) that when executed by at least one processor ([0052], FIG. 1, i.e. processor core complex 18) of a display system ([0052], FIG. 1, i.e. electronic display 12).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention’s effective date was filed to realize that Yuyama teaching of display comprising color corrections of plurality of LEDs would have included processor performing the process compensating deteriorating of LED light sources although not explicitly discussed but specifically disclosed by Xin et al. teaching of display comprising processor/memory carrying out instructions/steps to compensate aging to methodically compensate display brightness utilizing processor executing instructions stored in a memory (Xin et al.’s [0052]).
4. Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuyama (US Patent/PGPub. No. 6069676) in view of Olchovik (US Patent/PGPub. No. 20230120576).
Regarding Claim 13,
Yuyama teaches
the display system of claim 1.
However, Yuyama does not explicitly teach
wherein:
the amount of color correction applied to the display is based on a calibration process performed during manufacturing of the display.
In the same field of endeavor, Olchovik teaches
wherein:
the amount of color correction ([0007], FIG. 1, i.e. pixel-level demura) applied to the display ([0007], FIG. 1, i.e. OLED display) is based on a calibration process performed during manufacturing of the display ([0007], FIG. 1, i.e. correction value is applied during OLED display manufacture).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention’s effective date was filed to combine Yuyama teaching of display comprising color corrections of plurality of LEDs with Olchovik teaching of display comprising color corrections at manufacturer to effectively increase luminance uniformity “out-of-the-box” (Olchovik’s [0007]).
Allowable Subject Matter
5. Claim(s) 3-7, 11-12, 15-17, and 19 is/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.
6. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Xin et al. (US PGPUB./Pat. No. 20240078961) teach systems and methods are described herein to control brightness based on image content or other inputs to a display system. A dual-control system may integrate both slow control operations and fast control operations into a cohesive brightness management system. By using both shorter-term (e.g., fast control) and longer-term (e.g., slow control) brightness adjustment operations, the electronic device may quickly respond to high luminance and high brightness situations that may cause burn-in into the display, image artifacts, or other damage. Responding quickly to these high consumption situations may prevent damage or perceivable upset to an ongoing process, among other benefits.
Yuyama (US Patent/PGPub. No. 6069676) teaches red, green and blue light sources, and a shutter are provided. Photosensors are provided for detecting the luminance of each of the light sources. A controller is provided for sequentially operating each of the light sources, the shutter, and the photosensor in synchronism with each other at regular intervals. A luminance control circuit is provided for comparing a luminance detected by the photosensor with a reference value and for controlling the luminance of each of the light sources based on the comparison so as to keep a color balance of the light emitted from the color display device.
The subject matter of the claim(s) that could neither be found/suggested nor obviously combinable in the prior arts of record. The subject matter was a device/method including
“…the electrical stimulus is current;
the emitter comprises at least one light emitting diode (LED);
when the magnitude of the electrical stimulus is a minimum electrical stimulus magnitude, the amount of color non-uniformity correction applied is a maximum amount; and
the minimum electrical stimulus magnitude is determined based on a minimum current requirement of the at least one LED.” (Claim 3),
“…the display is a color sequential display; and
applying the color correction comprises:
scaling relative magnitudes of an electrical stimulus applied during each color sub-frame time period of a plurality of color sub-frame time periods.” (Claim 6; Claims 11-12, 15, 17, and 19 are similar),
in combination with the other elements (or steps) of the device or apparatus and method recited in the claims.
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 VINH TANG LAM whose telephone number is (571) 270-3704. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM.
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, Nitin K Patel can be reached at (571) 272-7677. 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.
/VINH T LAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2628