DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 12-15, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon (US 20230043004 A1) in view of Hammer (WO 2013124345 A1).
Regarding claim 1:
Kwon discloses:
1. A modular display device (100) [Kwon: Fig. 2B: display apparatus with assembled display modules; ¶ 0053: “the display panel 110 may be implemented by connecting and assembling a plurality of display modules 110-1 . . . 110-n”], comprising:
a display unit (110) [Kwon: Fig. 2B: display panel 110] including at least one display module (110-1, 110-2, ..., 110-n) [Kwon: Fig. 2B: display modules 110-1 . . . 110-n];
a storage (120) [Kwon: Fig. 2A: memory 130] storing at least one instruction [Kwon: ¶ 0154: “computer instructions for performing processing operations of a device according to the various embodiments described above may be stored in a non-transitory computer-readable medium”];
and at least one processor (130) [Kwon: Fig. 2A: processor 140] executing the at least one instruction [Kwon: ¶ 0154: “when executed by the processor of the particular device”],
wherein the at least one processor (130) [Kwon: Fig. 2A: processor 140] is configured to:
calculate a load of a full screen based on input image data [Kwon: ¶ 0080: “obtain an average brightness value corresponding to an input image based on a gray level value of the input image. The average brightness value according to an embodiment may include an average picture level (APL) value”; Examiner: The specification defines the load as calculated from the average picture level of the full screen (PGPUB spec at ¶ 0080); Kwon’s frame-wide APL value is such a load.];
calculate a peak gain for output image luminance based on the load [Kwon: Fig.7: luminance 710; ¶ 0113: “identify the luminance 710 of the display apparatus 100 based on the obtained APL value 701…the luminance value corresponding to the input image having the APL greater than the threshold value may have a relationship inversely proportional to the APL of the image”; Examiner: Under the BRI of “peak gain” as a weight for adjusting the output image luminance (PGPUB spec at ¶ 0080), the APL-derived operating luminance that scales the panel drive, and the per-module peak luminance level of ¶ 0078, each constitute a peak gain calculated based on the load.];
calculate a heat generation level of the at least one display module (110-1, 110-2, ..., 110-n) [Kwon: Fig. 2B: display modules 110-1 . . . 110-n ; ¶ 0081: “obtain the heating estimation data of the input image based on the gray level value of the input image and the heating characteristic information stored in the memory 130”; ¶ 0121: “obtain a heating estimation value for each of the plurality of pixels included in the first LED module 110-1”]
and control the peak gain based on the heat generation level of the at least one display module (110-1, 110-2, ..., 110-n) [Kwon: Fig. 2B: display modules 110-1 . . . 110-n; Fig. 7: reduced luminance 720; ¶ 0114: “obtain luminance adjustment information if it is identified that the display apparatus 100 operating with the normal operating luminance 710 needs to operate with the reduced luminance 720 based on the heating estimation data corresponding to the input image”; ¶ 0115: “control the panel driver 120 based on the compensated APL value 702 to control the display apparatus 100 to operate with the reduced luminance 720”].
However, Kwon does not expressly disclose:
calculating the heat generation level based on the peak gain.
Hammer discloses:
calculating the heat generation level based on the peak gain [Hammer: (p. 2, lines 23-26): “ a memory for storing data representing an estimate of current temperature as a function of position on a display screen and an update circuit configured to update the stored data successively dependent on successive ones of images”; (p. 2, lines 29-31): “the update circuit is configured to update the stored data dependent on the successive ones of images according to a result obtainable by applying the low pass filtered gain to the images”; Examiner: Hammer’s stored temperature estimate is computed from image content without temperature sensors, i.e., a calculated heat generation level, and updating it from the gain-applied images is calculating it based on the applied gain.];
controlling the gain based on the calculated heat generation level [Hammer: (p. 2, lines 4-6): “gain is selected to reduce the gain in an area with higher estimated temperature relative to gain in areas with lower estimated temperature”].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kwon’s modular display apparatus so that its heating estimation is calculated from the gain-applied images as taught by Hammer, in order to obtain what Hammer calls “a more accurate estimate” of the heat each display module actually generates, since the heat generated is set by the gain-adjusted drive rather than the raw input image; the combination would predictably cause the heat generation level to track each module’s gain-scaled output so that the peak gain is reduced before the module overheats.
Regarding claim 2:
Kwon in view of Hammer discloses:
2. The display device of claim 1.
Kwon further discloses:
wherein the at least one processor (130) [Kwon: Fig. 2A: processor 140] is configured to:
predict whether the at least one display module (110-1, 110-2, ..., 110-n) [Kwon: Fig. 2B: display modules 110-1 . . . 110-n] exceeds a reference operating temperature by calculating the heat generation level in units of the at least one display module (110-1, 110-2, ..., 110-n) [Kwon: Fig. 2B: display modules 110-1 . . . 110-n; ¶ 0121: “obtain a heating estimation value for each of the plurality of pixels included in the first LED module 110-1”; ¶ 0085: “When the heating estimation value corresponding to the input image is equal to or greater than the threshold value”; Examiner: Comparing the per-module calculated heating estimation value against the threshold value is predicting, in units of the display module, whether it will exceed a reference operating temperature; the specification treats the threshold on the calculated heat level as the reference-operating-temperature criterion (PGPUB spec ¶ 0084).];
and execute a gain limit algorithm when it is predicted that the at least one display module (110-1, 110-2, ..., 110-n) [Kwon: Fig. 2B: display modules 110-1 . . . 110-n] will exceed the reference operating temperature, based on the heat generation level [Kwon: ¶ 0085: “the processor 140 may add (or sum) the APL value corresponding to the input image and the obtained compensated APL value to obtain the modified APL value, and control the panel driver 120 based on the modified APL value”; Fig.7: reduced luminance 720; Examiner: Limiting the operating luminance to the reduced luminance upon the threshold exceedance is a gain limit algorithm under the BRI of spec ¶ 0009.].
Regarding claim 3:
Kwon in view of Hammer discloses:
3. The display device of claim 1.
Kwon further discloses:
wherein the at least one processor (130) [Kwon: Fig. 2A: processor 140] is configured to:
extract an average picture level (APL) for the full screen from the input image data [Kwon: ¶ 0137: “obtaining an average brightness value corresponding to an input image based on a gray level value of the input image in operation S1110. The average brightness value according to an embodiment may include an average picture level (APL) value”];
and calculate the load of the full screen based on the average picture level [Kwon: ¶ 0084: “The processor 140 may obtain an APL value for each frame of the input image”; Examiner: the frame-wise average brightness value obtained as the APL is the load of the full screen calculated based on that APL (PGPUB spec ¶ 0080 itself derives the load from the APL)].
Regarding claim 12:
Kwon in view of Hammer discloses:
12. The display device of claim 1.
Kwon further discloses:
wherein the at least one processor (130) [Kwon: Fig. 2A: processor 140] is configured to: extract at least one high luminance area included in at least one of four adjacent display modules (110-1, 110-2, ..., 110-n) [Kwon: Fig. 2B: four assembled display modules 110-1, 110-2, 110-3, 110-4; ¶ 0104: “The processor 140 may identify a ratio of the pixel area where the heating estimate value is greater than or equal to the threshold value Hhot”; Examiner: The identified elevated-heating pixel area is a high luminance area and Kwon’s assembly is exactly four adjacent display modules.];
calculate a dispersion degree of the at least one high luminance area [Kwon: ¶ 0107: “ the heat diffusion modeling may refer to a technique for estimating the temperature of a plurality of pixels included in the display panel 110 in consideration that heat generated in a specific pixel affects at least one pixel located near the corresponding pixel”; ¶ 0109: “a region 622 adjacent to the Earth 621 as having the highest temperature … according to the spread of heat generated from the pixels contained in the earth 621 among regions 622, 623 located within a critical distance”; Examiner: Applying the heat diffusion modeling data quantifies the spatial distribution of the high-heating areas, raising the corrected values where they are concentrated and lowering them where dispersed, which is calculating a dispersion degree; the direction matches the specification, which increases the heat level as the dispersion degree decreases (spec ¶ 0102).];
and calculate the heat generation level of the at least one of the four adjacent display modules (110-1, 110-2, ..., 110-n) [Kwon: Fig. 2B: display modules 110-1 . . . 110-n] based on the dispersion degree. [Kwon: ¶ 0086: “The processor 140 may apply the heat diffusion modeling data to the heating estimation value for each pixel to correct the heating estimation value for each pixel, and obtain a heating estimation value corresponding to the input image based on the corrected value of the heating estimation for each pixel”; ¶ 0121: “obtain a heating estimation value for each of the plurality of pixels included in the first LED module 110-1 ”].
Regarding claim 13:
Kwon in view of Hammer discloses:
13. The display device of claim 12.
Kwon further discloses:
wherein the at least one processor (130) [Kwon: Fig. 2A: processor 140] is configured to execute a gain limit algorithm for controlling the peak gain when a summed size of the at least one high luminance area included in the at least one of the four adjacent display modules (110-1, 110-2, ..., 110-n) [Kwon: Fig. 2B: display modules 110-1 . . . 110-n] exceeds (110-1, 110-2, ..., 110-n) [Kwon: Fig. 2B: display modules 110-1 . . . 110-n; ¶ 0085: “the ratio of a pixel region in which the average value of the heating estimation value is greater than or equal to a threshold value… is greater than or equal to a threshold value is greater than or equal to a threshold ratio”; ¶ 0104: “ identify a ratio of the pixel area where the heating estimate value is greater than or equal to the threshold value Hhot”; Examiner: The ratio aggregates the elevated-heating pixel area across the assembled modules, a summed size, and the luminance adjustment it triggers is the gain limit algorithm.].
However, Kwon in view of Hammer does not expressly disclose:
execute a gain limit algorithm for controlling the peak gain when a summed size of the at least one high luminance area included in the at least one of the four adjacent display modules exceeds 20% to 25% of a size of the at least one display module.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to set the threshold ratio of Kwon at 20% to 25% of the size of the display module, in order to engage the luminance reduction at the aggregate bright fraction at which the module’s heating warrants it, since Kwon expressly makes the summed area ratio the trigger for the gain limit, rendering the trigger value a variable whose setting determines when overheating protection engages; arriving at the claimed 20% to 25% band involves only routine experimentation with the predictable result that the module group is dimmed before overheating.
Regarding claim 14:
Kwon discloses:
14. A method for driving a modular display device (100) [Kwon: Fig. 2B: display apparatus with assembled display modules; ¶ 0053: “the display panel 110 may be implemented by connecting and assembling a plurality of display modules 110-1 . . . 110-n”], comprising:
calculating a load of a full screen based on input image data [Kwon: ¶ 0080: “obtain an average brightness value corresponding to an input image based on a gray level value of the input image. The average brightness value according to an embodiment may include an average picture level (APL) value”; Examiner: The specification defines the load as calculated from the average picture level of the full screen (PGPUB spec at ¶ 0080); Kwon’s frame-wide APL value is such a load];
calculating a peak gain for output image luminance based on the load [Kwon: Fig.7: luminance 710; ¶ 0113: “identify the luminance 710 of the display apparatus 100 based on the obtained APL value 701…the luminance value corresponding to the input image having the APL greater than the threshold value may have a relationship inversely proportional to the APL of the image”; Examiner: Under the BRI of “peak gain” as a weight for adjusting the output image luminance (PGPUB spec at ¶ 0080), the APL-derived operating luminance that scales the panel drive, and the per-module peak luminance level of ¶ 0078, each constitute a peak gain calculated based on the load.];
calculating a heat generation level of at least one display module (110-1, 110-2, ..., 110-n) [Kwon: Fig. 2B: display modules 110-1 . . . 110-n ; ¶ 0081: “obtain the heating estimation data of the input image based on the gray level value of the input image and the heating characteristic information stored in the memory 130”; ¶ 0121: “obtain a heating estimation value for each of the plurality of pixels included in the first LED module 110-1”]
and controlling the peak gain based on the heat generation level of the at least one display module (110-1, 110-2, ..., 110-n) [Kwon: Fig. 2B: display modules 110-1 . . . 110-n; Fig. 7: reduced luminance 720; ¶ 0114: “obtain luminance adjustment information if it is identified that the display apparatus 100 operating with the normal operating luminance 710 needs to operate with the reduced luminance 720 based on the heating estimation data corresponding to the input image”; ¶ 0115: “control the panel driver 120 based on the compensated APL value 702 to control the display apparatus 100 to operate with the reduced luminance 720”].
However, Kwon does not expressly disclose:
calculating the heat generation level based on the peak gain.
Hammer discloses:
calculating the heat generation level based on the peak gain [Hammer: (p. 2, lines 23-26): “ a memory for storing data representing an estimate of current temperature as a function of position on a display screen and an update circuit configured to update the stored data successively dependent on successive ones of images”; (p. 2, lines 29-31): “the update circuit is configured to update the stored data dependent on the successive ones of images according to a result obtainable by applying the low pass filtered gain to the images”; Examiner: Hammer’s stored temperature estimate is computed from image content without temperature sensors, i.e., a calculated heat generation level, and updating it from the gain-applied images is calculating it based on the applied gain.];
controlling the gain based on the calculated heat generation level [Hammer: (p. 2, lines 4-6): “gain is selected to reduce the gain in an area with higher estimated temperature relative to gain in areas with lower estimated temperature”].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kwon’s modular display apparatus so that its heating estimation is calculated from the gain-applied images as taught by Hammer, in order to obtain what Hammer calls “a more accurate estimate” of the heat each display module actually generates, since the heat generated is set by the gain-adjusted drive rather than the raw input image; the combination would predictably cause the heat generation level to track each module’s gain-scaled output so that the peak gain is reduced before the module overheats.
Regarding claim 15:
The limitations of claim 15 have been addressed in the discussion of claim 3 above.
Regarding claim 19:
The limitations of claim 19 have been addressed in the discussion of claim 12 above.
Regarding claim 20:
Kwon discloses:
20. A non-transitory computer-readable storage (120) [Kwon: Fig. 2A: memory 130] medium storing instructions that, when executed by at least one processor (130) [Kwon: Fig. 2A: processor 140], cause the at least one processor (130) [Kwon: Fig. 2A: processor 140] to perform operations [Kwon: ¶ 0154: “computer instructions for performing processing operations of a device according to the various embodiments described above may be stored in a non-transitory computer-readable medium. The computer instructions stored in the non-transitory computer-readable medium may cause a particular device to perform processing operations on the display apparatus 100 according to the various embodiments described above when executed by the processor of the particular device”] comprising:
calculating a load of a full screen based on input image data [Kwon: ¶ 0080: “obtain an average brightness value corresponding to an input image based on a gray level value of the input image. The average brightness value according to an embodiment may include an average picture level (APL) value”; Examiner: The specification defines the load as calculated from the average picture level of the full screen (PGPUB spec at ¶ 0080); Kwon’s frame-wide APL value is such a load];
calculating a peak gain for output image luminance based on the load [Kwon: Fig.7: luminance 710; ¶ 0113: “identify the luminance 710 of the display apparatus 100 based on the obtained APL value 701…the luminance value corresponding to the input image having the APL greater than the threshold value may have a relationship inversely proportional to the APL of the image”; Examiner: Under the BRI of “peak gain” as a weight for adjusting the output image luminance (PGPUB spec at ¶ 0080), the APL-derived operating luminance that scales the panel drive, and the per-module peak luminance level of ¶ 0078, each constitute a peak gain calculated based on the load.];
calculating a heat generation level of at least one display module (110-1, 110-2, ..., 110-n) [Kwon: Fig. 2B: display modules 110-1 . . . 110-n ; ¶ 0081: “obtain the heating estimation data of the input image based on the gray level value of the input image and the heating characteristic information stored in the memory 130”; ¶ 0121: “obtain a heating estimation value for each of the plurality of pixels included in the first LED module 110-1”]
and controlling the peak gain based on the heat generation level of the at least one display module (110-1, 110-2, ..., 110-n) [Kwon: Fig. 2B: display modules 110-1 . . . 110-n; Fig. 7: reduced luminance 720; ¶ 0114: “obtain luminance adjustment information if it is identified that the display apparatus 100 operating with the normal operating luminance 710 needs to operate with the reduced luminance 720 based on the heating estimation data corresponding to the input image”; ¶ 0115: “control the panel driver 120 based on the compensated APL value 702 to control the display apparatus 100 to operate with the reduced luminance 720”].
However, Kwon does not expressly disclose:
calculating the heat generation level based on the peak gain.
Hammer discloses:
calculating the heat generation level based on the peak gain [Hammer: (p. 2, lines 23-26): “ a memory for storing data representing an estimate of current temperature as a function of position on a display screen and an update circuit configured to update the stored data successively dependent on successive ones of images”; (p. 2, lines 29-31): “the update circuit is configured to update the stored data dependent on the successive ones of images according to a result obtainable by applying the low pass filtered gain to the images”; Examiner: Hammer’s stored temperature estimate is computed from image content without temperature sensors, i.e., a calculated heat generation level, and updating it from the gain-applied images is calculating it based on the applied gain.];
controlling the gain based on the calculated heat generation level [Hammer: (p. 2, lines 4-6): “gain is selected to reduce the gain in an area with higher estimated temperature relative to gain in areas with lower estimated temperature”].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kwon’s modular display apparatus so that its heating estimation is calculated from the gain-applied images as taught by Hammer, in order to obtain what Hammer calls “a more accurate estimate” of the heat each display module actually generates, since the heat generated is set by the gain-adjusted drive rather than the raw input image; the combination would predictably cause the heat generation level to track each module’s gain-scaled output so that the peak gain is reduced before the module overheats.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon (US 20230043004 A1) in view of Hammer (WO 2013124345 A1) and further in view of Kim (US 20170124959 A1).
Regarding claim 4:
Kwon in view of Hammer discloses:
4. The display device of claim 1.
However, Kwon in view of Hammer does not expressly disclose:
wherein the at least one processor (130) is configured to:
calculate a normal gain that minimizes the output image luminance based on the load;
and calculate a maximum gain that maximizes the output image luminance based on the load.
Kim discloses:
wherein the at least one processor (130) is configured to:
calculate a normal gain that minimizes the output image luminance based on the load [Kim: Fig. 7: temperature controller 133b; ¶ 0049: “a bottom gain curve defining how the minimum luminance decreases as the temperature of the display device rises”; ¶ 0050: “The luminance control part 133c generates a temperature-dependent luminance, which varies with temperature and average picture level”; Examiner: The bottom gain bounding the minimum output luminance is the normal gain, and the generated luminance varies with the average picture level.];
and calculate a maximum gain that maximizes the output image luminance based on the load [Kim: Fig.7: temperature controller 133b; ¶ 0049: “a top gain curve defining how the maximum luminance decreases as the temperature of the display device rises”; Examiner: The top gain bounding the maximum output luminance is the maximum gain, likewise varying with the average picture level per ¶ 0050.].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kwon in view of Hammer to bound its APL-derived operating luminance between a maximum gain and a normal gain as taught by Kim, in order to obtain the improved picture quality Kim states, since bounding the load-based gain between the defined maximum and minimum luminance values keeps the output within the panel’s intended range while the heating-based reduction operates; the results of applying Kim’s known two-curve gain bounding to Kwon’s like APL-based luminance control is predictable.
Claim(s) 5-8, and 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon (US 20230043004 A1) in view of Hammer (WO 2013124345 A1) and further in view of Inokawa (US 20180144690 A1).
Regarding claim 5:
Kwon in view of Hammer discloses:
5. The display device of claim 1.
Kwon further discloses:
wherein the at least one processor (130) [Kwon: Fig. 2A: processor 140] is configured to:
extract a high luminance area of the at least one display module (110-1, 110-2, ..., 110-n) [Kwon: Fig. 2B: display modules 110-1 . . . 110-n] based on the peak gain [Kwon: ¶ 0085: “the ratio of a pixel region in which the average value of the heating estimation value is greater than or equal to a threshold value or the heating estimation value is greater than or equal to a threshold value is greater than or equal to a threshold ratio”; Examiner: The extracted pixel region of elevated heating estimation is a high luminance area, since the heating estimation derives from the gray level values of the image (¶ 0081).].
However, Kwon in view of Hammer does not expressly disclose:
and calculate the heat generation level based on a size of the high luminance area.
Inokawa discloses:
and calculate the heat generation level based on a size of the high luminance area [Inokawa: ¶ 0046: “the larger the area of the high-luminance area is, the higher the temperature becomes”; ¶ 0048: “temperatures of high-luminance areas of various sizes are measured in place of the area coefficient, and an APL value obtained when reaching a predetermined temperature is set as a threshold value. Then, in a case where an APL value of a measurement area of a certain size exceeds the threshold value corresponding to that size, it is determined that the measurement area has reached the predetermined temperature”; Examiner: Determining through size-specific thresholds that the high-luminance area has reached the predetermined temperature is calculating the heat generation level based on the size of the high luminance area; Inokawa’s ADP detects “a high-luminance area that can [be] presumed as a high-temperature area” ¶ 0040.].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kwon in view of Hammer to calculate the heat generation level based on the size of the extracted high luminance area as taught by Inokawa, in order to prevent a temperature rise in that area as Inokawa states, since Inokawa teaches that the larger the high luminance area the higher the temperature becomes; evaluating the area against size-specific thresholds would predictably flag a display module for luminance reduction before the predetermined temperature is reached.
Regarding claim 6:
Kwon in view of Hammer and further in view of Inokawa discloses:
6. The display device of claim 5.
Inokawa further discloses:
wherein the high luminance area has a luminance in a range of 1000 nits to 2000 nits [Inokawa: ¶ 0003: “in a case where a bright area of an image is displayed with high luminance (e.g., about 1000 cd/m.sup.2), more currents flow in that area than in other areas. Therefore, if the same area is continuously displayed with high luminance, a temperature rises in that area”; Examiner: 1000 cd/m2 equals to 1000 nits, within the claimed range; the high-luminance areas detected by Inokawa’s ADP are the bright areas so characterized.].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to operated the combined device with the detected high luminance area at the luminance of about 1000 nits and above, in order to protect precisely the areas Inokawa identifies as heating at the luminance, the claimed range of 1000 to 2000 nits encompassing the disclosed value; with the luminance defining a high luminance area established by Inokawa as the condition under which the area heats, arriving at the claimed band involves only routine selection with the disclosed operating conditions.
Regarding claim 7:
Kwon in view of Hammer and further in view of Inokawa discloses:
7. The display device of claim 5.
Kwon further discloses:
wherein the at least one processor (130) [Kwon: Fig. 2A: processor 140] is configured to execute a gain limit algorithm for controlling the peak gain when a size of the high luminance area exceeds (110-1, 110-2, ..., 110-n) [Kwon: Fig. 2B: display modules 110-1 . . . 110-n; ¶ 0085: “the processor 140 may obtain luminance adjustment information corresponding to the input image if the ratio of a pixel region in which the average value of the heating estimation value is greater than or equal to a threshold value … is greater than or equal to a threshold value is greater than or equal to a threshold ratio, and control the panel driver 120 to adjust the luminance of the display apparatus 100”; Examiner: The luminance adjustment triggered when the elevated-heating region’s ratio meets the threshold ratio is a gain limit algorithm keyed to the size of the high luminance area relative to the screen, applied in units of the display module per ¶ 0121.].
However, Kwon in view of Hammer, and further in view of Inokawa does not expressly disclose:
execute a gain limit algorithm for controlling the peak gain when a size of the high luminance area exceeds 20% to 25% of a size of the at least one display module.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to set the threshold ratio of Kwon at 20% to 25% of the size of the display module, in order to engage the luminance reduction at the area fraction at which the module’s heating warrants it, since Kwon expressly makes the area ratio trigger for the gain limit and Inokawa establishes that the temperature rises with the size of the high luminance area, making the trigger ratio a variable whose value determines when overheating protection engages; arriving at the claimed 20% to 25% band from that recognized variable involves only routine experimentation, with the predictable result that modules whose bright regions occupy roughly a quarter of their area are dimmed before overheating.
Regarding claim 8:
Kwon in view of Hammer and further in view of Inokawa discloses:
8. The display device of claim 7.
Kwon further discloses:
wherein the at least one processor (130) [Kwon: Fig. 2A: processor 140] is configured to control at least one of a maximum gain holding time, a gain control slope, or a gain limit, based on the heat generation level of the at least one display module (110-1, 110-2, ..., 110-n) [Kwon: Fig. 2B: display modules 110-1 . . . 110-n; Fig.7: reduced luminance 720; ¶ 0114: “obtain luminance adjustment information based on the heating estimation data corresponding to the input image. For example, the processor 140 may obtain luminance adjustment information if it is identified that the display apparatus 100 operating with the normal operating luminance 710 needs to operate with the reduced luminance 720 based on the heating estimation data corresponding to the input image”; Examiner: The reduced luminance 720 set from heating estimation data is the gain limit.].
Regarding claim 16:
The limitations of claim 16 have been addressed in the discussion of claim 5 above.
Regarding claim 17:
The limitations of claim 17 have been addressed in the discussion of claim 7 above.
Regarding claim 18:
The limitations of claim 18 have been addressed in the discussion of claim 8 above.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon (US 20230043004 A1) in view of Hammer (WO 2013124345 A1), Inokawa (US 20180144690 A1) and further in view of Lee (US 20210295760 A1).
Regarding claim 11:
Kwon in view of Hammer and further in view of Inokawa discloses:
11. The display device of claim 8.
However, Kwon in view of Hammer, and further in view of Inokawa does not expressly disclose:
wherein the gain limit algorithm is configured to decrease the gain limit as a number of the at least one display module (110-1, 110-2, ..., 110-n) including the high luminance area increases.
Lee discloses:
wherein the gain limit algorithm is configured to decrease the gain limit as a number of the at least one display module (110-1, 110-2, ..., 110-n) including the high luminance area increases [Lee: ¶ 0066: “the processor 140 may calculate the maximum power amount available in each of the plurality of the display modules 110-1 to 110-n based on the total power capacity that may be provided by the plurality of driving modules 120-1 to 120-n and an individual consumed power amount of each of the plurality of display modules 110-1 to 110-n. Thereafter, the processor 140 may calculate a peak luminance level of each of the plurality of display modules 110-1 to 110-n based on the calculated maximum power amount”; Examiner: Each module’s peak luminance level is its gain limit. Because the maximum power amount available to each module is calculated from a fixed total capacity against the individual consumed power of every module, an increase in the number of modules displaying high luminance areas raises the individual consumed amounts and thereby decreases the maximum power amount, and hence the peak luminance level, available to each module.].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the gain limit algorithm of Kwon in view of Hammer, further in view of Inokawa to decrease the gain limit as the number of display modules including the high luminance areas increases, by allocating each module’s limiting luminance from the total power capacity and the module’s individual consumed power amounts as taught by Lee, in order to keep the assembled modules within the total power capacity the driving modules can provide, since Lee’s allocation makes each module’s limit shrink as more modules draw heavily; the result of applying Lee’s known per-module power budgeting to the like modular apparatus of Kwon is predictable.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-10 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 a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 9:
The prior art does not teach or suggest either singularly or in combination the at least claimed “wherein the gain limit algorithm is configured to decrease the maximum gain holding time as a number of the at least one display module including the high luminance area increases”, in combination with the other recited claim features.
Regarding claim 10:
The prior art does not teach or suggest either singularly or in combination the at least claimed “wherein the gain limit algorithm is configured to increase the gain control slope as a number of the at least one display module including the high luminance area increases”, in combination with the other recited claim features.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Park (US 20180005586 A1) discloses:
“A display device according to example embodiments includes an image analyzer configured to calculate contrast and load of an image of a frame based on R, G, and B image data input corresponding to the frame, an image processor configured to control a peak control coefficient applied to W image data to adaptively control peak luminance based on the contrast and the load, and to respectively generate R′, G′, and B′ image data by subtracting a product of the W image data and the peak control coefficient from each of the R, G, and B image data, a display panel including a plurality of pixels, a data driver configured to generate a data signal based on the R′, G′, B, and W image data, and to provide the data signal to the display panel, and a scan driver configured to provide a scan signal to the display panel,” as recited in the abstract.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Koosha Sharifi-Tafreshi whose telephone number is (571)270-5897. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8AM to 5PM EST.
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.
/KOOSHA SHARIFI-TAFRESHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2628
Prosecution Insights