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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in the Republic of Korea on 7/26/2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement has been considered and placed in the record on file and is in compliance with USPTO requirements.
Drawings
The Drawings have been considered and placed in the record on file and are in compliance with USPTO requirements.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 28, 29, and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhai (US 2026/0004707 A1 hereinafter Zhai).
In regards to claim 28, Zhai discloses a driving method of a display device comprising:
a first driving step in which a light emitting device emits light with a first luminance in a first sub-frame period (see figure 18 and paragraph 0106, instantaneous luminance in subframe Z5 is greater than the instantaneous luminance in subframe Z6); and
a second driving step in which the light emitting device emits light with a second luminance that is different from the first luminance in a second sub-frame period that is different from the first sub-frame period (see figure 18 and paragraph 0106, instantaneous luminance in subframe Z5 is greater than the instantaneous luminance in subframe Z6),
wherein the light emitting device is driven during a frame period for expressing one frame (see figure 18, one frame includes two subframes Z5 and Z6),
wherein the frame period includes the first sub-frame period and the second sub-frame period (see figure 18, one frame includes two subframes Z5 and Z6),
wherein, in the first driving step, the light emitting device emits light at the first luminance that is brighter than the second luminance (see figure 18 and paragraph 0106, instantaneous luminance in subframe Z5 is greater than the instantaneous luminance in subframe Z6).
In regards to claim 29, as recited in claim 28, Zhai further discloses wherein a first voltage is supplied to the light emitting device in the first driving step, wherein a second voltage that is different from the first voltage is supplied to the light emitting device in the second driving step, wherein the first voltage is greater than the second voltage (see paragraph 0106, voltage of V3 during subframe Z5 and voltage of V4 during subframe Z6 and V3 > V4).
In regards to claim 31, as recited in claim 28, Zhai further discloses wherein the display device includes a column line electrically connected to a first electrode of the light emitting device, wherein the column line is supplied with a first driving voltage in the first sub-frame period, wherein the column line is supplied with a second driving voltage that is different from the first driving voltage in the second sub-frame period, wherein the first driving voltage is greater than the second driving voltage (see paragraph 0106, voltage of V3 during subframe Z5 and voltage of V4 during subframe Z6 and V3 > V4).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miller et al. (US 2009/0021455 A1 hereinafter Miller) in view of Zhai (US 2026/0004707 A1 hereinafter Zhai).
In regards to claim 1, Miller discloses a display device comprising:
a light emitting device with a first electrode and a second electrode (see figure 4 and paragraph 0042, each pixel contains a diode 92);
a column line electrically connected to the first electrode (see figure 4, column driver 6 connected to one end of the diode 92);
a row line electrically connected to the second electrode (see figure 4, row driver 4 connected to one end of the diode 92); and
a driver electrically connected to the column line and the row line, the driver configured to control an emission of the light emitting device in each of a plurality of sub-frame periods (see figure 4, row and column drivers drive the diode to emit light).
However, Miller fails to particularly disclose wherein the light emitting device emits light with a first luminance in a first sub-frame period,
wherein the light emitting device emits light with a second luminance that is different from the first luminance in a second sub-frame period different from the first sub-frame period,
wherein the first luminance is brighter than the second luminance.
Zhai teaches wherein the light emitting device emits light with a first luminance in a first sub-frame period (see figure 18 and paragraph 0106, instantaneous luminance in subframe Z5 is greater than the instantaneous luminance in subframe Z6),
wherein the light emitting device emits light with a second luminance that is different from the first luminance in a second sub-frame period different from the first sub-frame period (see figure 18 and paragraph 0106, instantaneous luminance in subframe Z5 is greater than the instantaneous luminance in subframe Z6),
wherein the first luminance is brighter than the second luminance (see figure 18 and paragraph 0106, instantaneous luminance in subframe Z5 is greater than the instantaneous luminance in subframe Z6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Miller and include different luminance in consecutive subframes as taught by Zhai, thereby using known techniques to yield predictable results.
In regards to claim 2, as recited in claim 1, Zhai further teaches wherein the column line is supplied with a first driving voltage in the first sub-frame period, wherein the column line is supplied with a second driving voltage that is different from the first driving voltage in the second sub-frame period, wherein the first driving voltage is greater than the second driving voltage (see paragraph 0106, voltage of V3 during subframe Z5 and voltage of V4 during subframe Z6 and V3 > V4).
In regards to claim 3, as recited in claim 1, Zhai further teaches wherein the light emitting device emits light at the first luminance during the first sub-frame period and then switches to a non-emission state, and emits light at the second luminance during the second sub-frame period and then switches to a non-emission state (see figure 18, light emission in t1, followed by a blanking period and then light emission in t2 followed by a blanking period).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-27 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: none of the cited prior art teach or suggest the limitations of wherein the column driver includes a voltage control transistor electrically connected between the first electrode and a first voltage node and an emission control transistor electrically connected between the first electrode and a driving voltage node.
Claims 4-10, 30, and 32 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER J KOHLMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5503. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5:30.
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 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.
/CHRISTOPHER J KOHLMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2628
Prosecution Insights