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 § 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 1-2, 6-10, and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin, US 2022/0114973 A1 (hereinafter “Lin”) in view of Li et al., US 2018/0090045 A1 (hereinafter “Li”) further in view of Bell et al., US 2015/0070337 A1 (hereinafter “Bell”).
Regarding claim 1, Lin discloses a display device (FIG. 1A and display apparatus 10 at [0018]-[0025]) comprising:
a display (FIG. 1A, panel unit 101 at [0018]-[0025] with various embodiments of a display described therein at [0020]);
an illuminance sensor (FIG. 1A and ambient light detection unit 104 at [0023]-[0024]);
memory (FIG. 1A at memory/storage unit 102 at [0020]-[0027]) that stores at least one instruction ([0024] describing data storage such as variable data and programs, the CPU being programmable at [0022]), information about a plurality of illuminance values obtained at each time (Table 1 at page 3 and [0025]-[0028] describing general ambient light information at different times of day through historical data of long-term observation), and a plurality of representative illuminance values obtained based on the plurality of illuminance values obtained at each time (Table 1 at page 2 and [0025]-[0028], reference values provided therein in accordance with luminance values); and
one or more processors (FIG. 1B and CPU 105 at [0020]-[0024]), wherein the at least one instruction, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively ([0022]-[0024]), cause the display device to:
obtain an illuminance value through the illuminance sensor (FIGS. 1A-B [0020]-[0023] and ambient light detection unit 104 detect real-time ambient light L at [0031] and S3);
identify a representative illuminance value (Table 1 at page 3 reference ambient light brightness last column) corresponding to the time at which the illuminance value is obtained among the plurality of representative illuminance values for each time stored in the memory (reference ambient light brightness values stored in Table 1 at [0025]-[0028] in relation to the time periods first column);
based on a difference between the obtained illuminance value and the identified representative illuminance value being greater than or equal to a preset threshold value (FIGS. 1B and S3 at [0031]-[0034] reference ambient light brightness and detected ambient light L is compared and difference obtained, and S4 selecting the appropriate curve, based on the range (e.g., threshold values)), obtain another illuminance value through the illuminance sensor and compare the another illuminance value to the identified representative illuminance value (FIG. 1B and steps S1-S5 will be repeated to maintain brightness throughout a day and [0005] and [0026], FIGS. 1B and S3 at [0031]-[0034] reference ambient light brightness and detected ambient light L is compared and difference obtained, and S4 selecting the appropriate curve, based on the range (e.g., threshold values)); and
control a brightness of the display based on the identified representative illuminance value (FIGS. 1B-3B and steps S1-S5 [0025]-[0028] and [0030]-[0034] for adjusting the brightness based on the table accordingly).
However, Lin does not explicitly disclose based on a difference between each illuminance value of the plurality of illuminance values obtained a preset number of times and the identified representative illuminance value being greater than or equal to the preset threshold value to control the brightness, and obtaining illuminance value for each time during a plurality of dates.
In the same field of endeavor, Li discloses brightness control based on a difference between each illuminance value of the plurality of illuminance values obtained a preset number of times (FIG. 5 and block S505 and [0037]-[0048] describing detection of illuminance intensity values and the retained value a preset number of times n) and the identified representative illuminance value being greater than or equal to the preset threshold value to control the brightness (FIG. 5 and block S505 and [0037]-[0048] describing detection of illuminance intensity values and the retained value a preset number of times n).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display luminance control based on ambient light monitoring of Lin to incorporate the multiple checks of illuminance before adjusting brightness as disclosed by Li because the references are within the same field of endeavor, namely, illuminance value based display brightness control. The motivation to combine these references would have been to improve the user experience with automatically adjusted and corrected display parameters (see Li at least at [0002]-[0003]). 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.
However, Lin in view of Li does not explicitly disclose obtaining illuminance value for each time during a plurality of dates.
In the same field of endeavor, Bell discloses an ambient light detection and brightness correction for a display , and obtaining and storing the brightness values detected during a plurality of dates (FIGS. 4-7 and 10 and [0024] multiple time instances with timestamp and collected over a duration of time and [0036]-[0042] describing storage).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the illuminance collection and brightness correction of Lin in view of Li to incorporate the brightness correction using multiple time instances of stored illuminance as disclosed by Bell because the references are within the same field of endeavor, namely, display brightness correction using historical data. The motivation to combine these references would have been to improve the user perception of displayed images in different ambient light conditions thereby reducing user frustration and improving sales of the display devices (see Bell at least at [0004]-[0006]). 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 2, Lin in view Li further in view of Bell discloses the display device of claim 1 (see above), wherein the at least one instruction, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the display device to:
cluster the plurality of illuminance values obtained at each time as at least one cluster based on the plurality of illuminance values obtained at each time (Bell FIGS. 4-7 and [0024] and [0050]describing plurality of discrete data samples collected and stored over the measured time);
identify the representative illuminance value corresponding to each cluster based on the plurality of illuminance values included in each cluster of the at least one cluster corresponding to each time (Bell at FIGS. 4-7 and [0024] and [0050] with identified temperatures for each BIN based on time); and
store the identified representative illuminance value in the memory (Bell at FIGS. 4-7 and [0024] [0036]-[0042] and [0050] storing the identified values therein).
Regarding claim 6, Lin in view Li further in view of Bell discloses the display device of claim 1 (see above), wherein the at least one instruction, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the display device to:
based on a difference between the obtained illuminance value and the identified representative illuminance value being smaller than the preset threshold value, control the brightness of the display based on the obtained illuminance value (Lin at FIGS. 1B-3B and steps S1-S5 [0025]-[0028] and [0030]-[0034] for adjusting the brightness based on the table accordingly).
Regarding claim 7, Lin in view Li further in view of Bell discloses the display device of claim 1 (see above), wherein the at least one instruction, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the display device to:
based on a difference between the obtained illuminance value and the identified representative illuminance value being smaller than the preset threshold value (Bell at FIGS. 4-8 and 10 with stored values above or below threshold values at [0024]-[0028] and [0042]-[0051],
delete the illuminance value obtained on a fastest date among the plurality of illuminance values obtained at a same time as a present time when the illuminance value is obtained through the illuminance sensor during the plurality of dates from the memory (Bell at FIGS. 6-10 and [0024] and [0038]-[0048] and [0050]-[0055] with both short time frame detection and long term detection stored, replacement, deletion would be an obvious based on known storage constraints in a current usage situation),
store the illuminance value obtained through the illuminance sensor in the memory (Bell at FIGS. 6-10 and [0024] and [0038]-[0048] and [0050]-[0055]), and
update the plurality of illuminance values corresponding to the time when the illuminance value is obtained through the illuminance sensor (Bell at FIGS. 6-10 and [0024] and [0038]-[0048] and [0050]-[0055]).
Regarding claim 8, Lin in view Li further in view of Bell discloses the display device of claim 7 (see above), wherein the at least one instruction, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the display device to:
identify the representative illuminance value based on the updated plurality of illuminance values and store the identified representative illuminance value in the memory (Lin at Table 1 at page 3 reference ambient light brightness last column and [0022]-[0030]; and Bell at FIGS. 6-10 and [0050]-[0059] disclosing storage and related color temp ranges based on the duration of ambient measurement time).
Regarding claim 9, it is similar in scope to claim 1 above, the only difference being claim 9 is directed to a method of controlling a brightness of a display device . Therefore, claim 9 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 1.
Regarding claim 10, it is similar in scope to claim 2 above; therefore, claim 10 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 2.
Regarding claim 14, it is similar in scope to claim 6 above; therefore, claim 14 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 6.
Regarding claim 15, it is similar in scope to claim 7 above; therefore, claim 15 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 7.
Regarding claim 16, it is similar in scope to claim 1 above, the only difference being claim 16 is directed to a non-transitory computer readable recording medium storing computer instructions for a display device to perform an operation (similar to claim 1 see above) when executed by one or more processor of the display device therefore, claim 16 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 1.
Regarding claim 17, it is similar in scope to claim 2 above; therefore, claim 17 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 2.
Claims 3-4, 11-12, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin in view Li further in view of Bell as applied to claims 2, 10, and 17 above, and further in view of Cho et al., US 2014/0285477 A1 (hereinafter “Cho”).
Regarding claim 3, Lin in view Li further in view of Bell discloses the display device of claim 2 (see above).
However, Lin in view Li further in view of Bell does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one instruction, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the display device to:
apply a weight value based on a date when each illuminance value of the plurality of illuminance values included in each cluster is obtained to each illuminance value of the plurality of illuminance values included in each cluster;
identify the representative illuminance value corresponding to each cluster based on the plurality of illuminance values to which the weight value applies; and
apply a larger weight value to the illuminance value obtained on a later date among the plurality of dates.
In the same field of endeavor, Cho discloses wherein the at least one instruction, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the display device to:
apply a weight value based on a date when each illuminance value of the plurality of illuminance values included in each cluster is obtained to each illuminance value of the plurality of illuminance values included in each cluster (FIGS. 1D-1I [0093]-[0095] and [0127] and [0161] describing weight to luminance values (noting Lin above, time specified illuminance data and stored in clusters));
identify the representative illuminance value corresponding to each cluster based on the plurality of illuminance values to which the weight value applies (FIGS. 1D-1I [0093]-[0095] and [0127] and [0161] describing weight to luminance values (noting Lin above, time specified illuminance data and stored in clusters)); and
apply a larger weight value to the illuminance value obtained on a later date among the plurality of dates (FIGS. 1D-1I [0093]-[0095] and [0127] and [0161] describing different weight application to luminance values (noting Lin above, time specified illuminance data and stored in clusters)).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the illuminance detection and brightness adjustment method of Lin in view Li further in view of Bell to incorporate the weight factors for illumination compensation as disclosed by Cho because the references are within the same field of endeavor, namely, brightness adjustment in a display based on historic values. The motivation to combine these references would have been to improve brightness levels for the user in commonly used settings (see Cho at least at [0007]-[0010]). 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 4, Lin in view Li further in view of Bell further in view of Cho discloses the display device of claim 3 (see above), wherein the at least one instruction, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the display device to:
obtain an arithmetic mean of the plurality of illuminance values to which the weight value applies and identify the representative illuminance value corresponding to each cluster (Cho at [0092]-[0095] describing determining an average luminance and applying the weight).
Regarding claim 11, it is similar in scope to claim 3 above; therefore, claim 11 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 3.
Regarding claim 12, it is similar in scope to claim 4 above; therefore, claim 12 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 4.
Regarding claim 18, it is similar in scope to claim 3 above; therefore, claim 18 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 3.
Regarding claim 19, it is similar in scope to claim 4 above; therefore, claim 19 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 4.
Claims 5, 13, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin in view Li further in view of Bell as applied to claims 1, 9, and 16 above, and further in view of Sun et al., US 2017/0294173 A1 (hereinafter “Sun”).
Regarding claim 5, Lin in view Li further in view of Bell discloses the display device of claim 1 (see above), However, Lin in view Li further in view of Bell does not explicitly disclose further comprising:
a communication interface, wherein the at least one instruction, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the display device to:
based on a difference between each illuminance value of the plurality of illuminance values obtained the preset number of times and the identified representative illuminance value being greater than or equal to the preset threshold value, transmit an alarm related to the illuminance sensor to an electronic device through the communication interface.
In the same field of endeavor, Cho discloses an ambient light sensing display system (10) further comprising:
a communication interface (display 14), wherein the at least one instruction, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the display device to:
based on a difference between each illuminance value of the plurality of illuminance values obtained the preset number of times and the identified representative illuminance value being greater than or equal to the preset threshold value (FIGS. 2-5 and [0028]-[0031]), transmit an alarm related to the illuminance sensor to an electronic device through the communication interface (FIGS. 2-5 and [0028]-[0031]).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the illuminance detection and brightness adjustment method of Lin in view Li further in view of Bell to incorporate alerts when the ambient light sensor is compared to a threshold as disclosed by Sun because the references are within the same field of endeavor, namely, brightness adjustment in a display based on detected ambient values. The motivation to combine these references would have been to improve operation conditions for accurate measurements of ambient values (see Sun at least at [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.
Regarding claim 13, it is similar in scope to claim 5 above; therefore, claim 13 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 5.
Regarding claim 20, it is similar in scope to claim 5 above; therefore, claim 20 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 5.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lee et al., US 2023/0134146 A1: FIG. 3 and Abstract, determination of a weight for calculated external luminance and applied to a display accordingly;
Kim et al., US 2021/0248978 A1: FIGS. 6-10 and [0109]-[0120] display target luminance control in view of illuminance value determination and thresholds;
Furusawa et al., US 2009/0122069 A1: FIGS. 4-7 and [0046]-[0056] determination of illuminance value from a sensor and comparison to reference values to adjust brightness;
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, Benjamin C. Lee can be reached at (571)272-2963. 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 2629
Prosecution Insights