`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`APPLICATION NO.
`
`
`
`
` FILING DATE
`
`
`FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
`
`ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.
`
`
`
`
`CONFIRMATIONNO.
`
`
`12/000,293
`
`12/11/2007
`
`Mitsuhide Miyamoto
`
`HITA-1049
`
`2699
`
`Tuan
`
`Ma
`
`nes
`
`Juan Carlos A. Marquez a
`
`c/o Stites & Harbison PLLC
`1199 North Fairfax Street
`Suite 900
`Alexandria, VA 22314-1437
`
`PATEL, SANIIV D
`
`2697
`
`
`
` NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`01/07/2013
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e-mail address(es):
`iplaw @stites.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`
` 12/000,293 MIYAMOTOET AL.
`Examiner
`Art Unit
`SANJIV D. PATEL
`2697
`
`-- The MAILING DATEof this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTH(S) OR THIRTY(30) DAYS,
`WHICHEVER IS LONGER, FROM THE MAILING DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a).
`In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Anyreply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, evenif timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1) Responsive to communication(s) filed on 19 November 2012.
`2a)L] This action is FINAL.
`2b) This action is non-final.
`3)L]
`Anelection was made bythe applicant in responseto a restriction requirementset forth during the interview on
`___; the restriction requirement and election have beenincorporated into this action.
`4)L] Sincethis application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Ex parte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims
`
`5) Claim(s) 1,.4,5,7 and 10 is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`6)L] Claim(s) __is/are allowed.
`
`7) Claim(s) 1,4,5,7 and 10 is/are rejected.
`8)L] Claim(s) ____ is/are objected to.
`
`9)L] Claim(s)
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you may beeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway
`program ata participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http/www.usoto.qov/patents/init events/pph/index isp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.qov.
`
`Application Papers
`
`10)L] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11) The drawing(s)filed on
`is/are: a)[_] accepted or b)[_] objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121(d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`
`12)[.] Acknowledgmentis made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`a)LJ All b)L] Some*c)L] None of:
`
`1.] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.L] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.L] Copiesof the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`
`
`Attachment(s)
`1) x Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`2) CT] Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 09-12)
`
`3) | Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date.
`4) Cc] Other:
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20121224
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/000,293
`Art Unit: 2697
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`1.
`
`Claims 1, 4, 5, 7 and 10 have been amendedas per Applicant’s amendment filed
`
`on November 19, 2012. Claims 2, 3, 6, 8, 9, and 11-14 have been cancelled. Claims 1,
`
`4,5, 7, and 10 are pending.
`
`Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
`
`2.
`
`A requestfor continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set
`
`forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), wasfiled in this application after final rejection. Since this
`
`application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set
`
`forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has beentimely paid, the finality of the previous Office action
`
`has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on
`
`November 19, 2012 has been entered.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
`
`3.
`
`Applicant's amendmenthas cured the defects identified in the previous office
`
`action. Therefore, the rejection of independent claims 1 and 5, and the claims
`
`depending therefrom under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, is withdrawn.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`4.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all
`
`obviousnessrejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set
`forth in section 102 of thistitle, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and
`the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/000,293
`Art Unit: 2697
`
`Page 3
`
`invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains.
`Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
`
`5.
`
`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 madein this Office action:
`
`A personshall be entitled to a patent unless —
`
`(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in
`public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in
`the United States.
`
`6.
`
`Claim 1 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as anticipated byor, in the alternative,
`
`under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious over Kondakovet al. (US 7,079,091 B2, Patented
`
`July 18, 2006).
`
`Asto claim 1, Kondakovet al. discloses a display unit, including:
`
`a screen on which plural pixels each having an OLED device are arranged ina
`
`matrix (Abstract; col. 6, Il. 59); and
`
`a detection unit which measuresa first property value of the OLED device(Fig.
`
`11, measurementcircuit/ADC 12; col. 5, Il. 30-34) of each of the plural pixels (col. 6, Il.
`
`46-48) at a predeterminedtime interval to reflect a change in thefirst property value of
`
`the OLED devicein an image signal (col. 5, Il. 63 to col. 6, Il. 6 discloses that
`
`measurementand calculation occurs at predetermined intervals withoutinterfering with
`
`an image perceived by a user. A "signal representative of the accumulated charge"is
`
`analogous to a first property),
`
`wherein the change in the first property value of the OLED deviceof a subject
`
`pixel is obtained by comparing to thefirst property value of the OLED device of the
`
`subject pixel with a second property value derived from a statistical processing of the
`
`first property value of the OLED deviceof eachofthe plural pixels (col. 4, Il. 34-47,
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/000,293
`Art Unit: 2697
`
`Page 4
`
`“adjusting driving current using measuredtransition voltage and predetermined
`
`parameters (slope andintercept) of a linear correlation betweentransition voltage
`
`and luminance"implicates statistical processingof the first property value)’ which exist
`
`on asame scanning line as the subject pixel (col. 6, Il. 46-48).
`
`In the event thatit is found that Kondakovetal. does not disclose the claimed
`
`aspectof “which exist on a same scanning line as the subject pixel," then given the
`
`disclosure by Kondakovetal. that the present invention can use 1) a single test pixel in
`
`the OLED device, or 2) representative pixels in the array of OLED pixels, or 3) every
`
`pixel in the array of OLED pixels (col. 6, Il. 46-48), it would have been obvious to a
`
`person having ordinaryskill in the art at the time of invention to try and compareto the
`
`first property value of the OLED deviceof the subject pixel with a second property value
`
`derived fromastatistical processing of the first property value of the OLED device of
`
`eachofthe plural pixels which exist on a same scanning line as the subject pixel, since
`
`the numberof representative pixel combinations is ostensiblyfinite.
`
`7.
`
`Claims 4, 5, 7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable
`
`over Kondakovetal. (US 7,079,091 B2, Patented July 18, 2006) in view of Kabeetal.
`
`(JP 2002-278513-A, Published September 27, 2002).
`
`As to claim 4, Kondakovetal. discloses the display unit according to claim 1.
`
`Kondakovetal. implies but does not expressly disclose a line memoryfor storing the
`
`first property value of the OLED device of each ofthe plural pixels that exist on the
`
`" See also Kabeet al. at 4 [001 0]-[0011] which discloses computing an average — orstatistical mean — of
`brightness of a plurality of pixels comprising an image. See also Final Office Action dated July 18, 2012
`at pages 3-4.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/000,293
`Art Unit: 2697
`
`Page 5
`
`scanning line (See Fig. 11; col. 6, Il. 9-13, it is well Known in the art that
`
`microcontrollers/microprocessors have memoryin the form of registers and caches).
`
`However, Kabeet al. does disclose a line memoryfor storing the first property
`
`value of the OLED device of eachof the plural pixels that exist on the scanning line (4
`
`[0030] affirmatively discloses "First, it describes about the method of measuring the
`
`current value whichflows into each organic EL device... The current amount which
`
`flows into each organic EL deviceatthis time is measured by a current measurement
`
`element, and a memory device is made to memorizea test result."; See also { [0060]
`
`which describes how current which flows into each organic EL element is measured).
`
`Kondakovetal. discloses a base OLED display device upon which the claimed
`
`invention is an improvement. Kabeetal. discloses a comparable OLED display device
`
`which has been improved in the same wayasthe claimed invention. Hence, it would
`
`have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to
`
`add the teachings of Kabeetal. to that of Kondakovet al. for the predictable result of
`
`minimizing luminance variation among pixels (Kabe etal. at | [0010]-[001 1]).
`
`As to claim 5, Kondakovetal. discloses a display unit including a screen on
`
`whichplural pixels each having an OLED device are arranged in a matrix (Abstract; col.
`
`6, Il. 59), which measuresa first property value of the OLED device (Fig. 11,
`
`measurementcircuit/ADC 12; col. 5, Il. 30-34) of each of the plural pixels (col. 6, Il. 46-
`
`48) at a predetermined time interval to reflect a change in the first property value of the
`
`OLED device in an image signal(col. 5, Il. 63 to col. 6, Il. 6 discloses that measurement
`
`and calculation occurs at predeterminedintervals without interfering with an image
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/000,293
`Art Unit: 2697
`
`Page 6
`
`perceived by a user. A "signal representative of the accumulated charge" is analogous
`
`to a first property),
`
`wherein the change in the first property value of the OLED device of a subject
`
`pixel is obtained by comparing the first property value of the OLED device of the subject
`
`pixel with a second property value derived from a statistical processing ofthe first
`
`property value of the OLED device of each ofthe plural pixels (col. 4, Il. 34-47,
`
`“adjusting driving current using measuredtransition voltage and predetermined
`
`parameters (slope andintercept) of a linear correlation between transition voltage
`
`and luminance"implicatesstatistical processing of the first property value) which exist
`
`on asame scanning line as the subject pixel (col. 6, Il. 46-48), and
`
`While Kondakovetal. reasonably suggests comparing the subject pixel with
`
`each of the plural pixels which exist on a same scanning line as the subjectpixel,
`
`Kondakovetal. does not expressly disclose this aspect and thatthefirst property value
`
`of the OLED device of eachof the plural pixels that exist on the same scanning line as
`
`the subject pixel is in a predetermined rangeofthe first property value of the OLED
`
`device of the subjectpixel.
`
`However, Kabeet al. does disclose comparing the subject pixel with each of the
`
`plural pixels which exist on a same scanning line as the subjectpixel (Figs. 6-11 &
`
`[0028]-[0050] also describe, for example, how current in three OLED pixels on the same
`
`line are measured, averaged- statistically processed, then used to correct a subject
`
`OLED pixel on the same line), and thatthe first property value of the OLED deviceof
`
`eachofthe plural pixels that exist on the same scanning line as the subject pixel is in a
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/000,293
`Art Unit: 2697
`
`Page 7
`
`predetermined rangeofthe first property value of the OLED device of the subjectpixel
`
`({ [0010]-[001 1], in particular, discloses computing an average — or statistical mean — of
`
`brightnessof a plurality of pixels comprising an image suchthat the averageis
`
`subsequently used to generate correction information to compensateindividual OLEDs
`
`suchthat their emitted brightness is uniform.
`
`It follows that the first property of each of
`
`the plurality of pixels is necessarily within a predetermined range of the subject pixelin
`
`order that the brightness remain uniform).
`
`Kondakovetal. discloses a base OLED display device upon which the claimed
`
`invention is an improvement. Kabeet al. discloses a comparable OLED display device
`
`which has been improved in the same wayasthe claimed invention. Hence, it would
`
`have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to
`
`add the teachings of Kabeetal. to that of Kondakov etal. for the predictable result of
`
`minimizing luminance variation among pixels (Kabe etal. at | [0010]-[001 1]).
`
`As to claim 7, the combination of Kondakovet al. and Kabeetal. discloses the
`
`display unit according to claim 5. Kondakovetal. further discloses thatthe first property
`
`value of the OLED device of the subject pixel is represented by a voltage between
`
`terminals of the OLED device(col. 4, Il. 34-51, The “transition voltage” is measured
`
`betweenthe terminals of an OLED device; col. 6, Il. 46-48).
`
`wherein the first property value of the OLED device of each ofthe plural pixels
`
`that exist on the same scanning line as the subject pixel is represented by a voltage
`
`between terminals of the OLED device (Fig. 11; col. 4, ll. 34-51, The “transition voltage”
`
`is measured betweenthe terminals of an OLED device; col. 6, Il. 46-48), and
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/000,293
`Art Unit: 2697
`
`Page 8
`
`wherein the first property value of the OLED device of each of the plural pixels
`
`that exist on the same scanning line as the subject pixel is represented by the voltage
`
`betweenterminals of the OLED device for receiving a specific current application within
`
`a predetermined range (Fig. 11; col. 4, Il. 34-51, The “transition voltage” is measured
`
`betweenthe terminals of an OLED device; col. 6, Il. 46-48).
`
`Asto claim 10, the combination of Kondakovet al. and Kabeetal. discloses the
`
`display unit according to claim 5. Kabeetal. further discloses a line memoryfor storing
`
`the first property value of the OLED deviceof each of the plural pixels ({ [0030]
`
`affirmatively discloses "First, it describes about the method of measuring the current
`
`
`value which flows into each organic EL device... Tne current amount which flows into
`
`each organic EL device atthis time is measured by a current measurement element,
`
`and a memory device is made to memorize a test result.";) that exist on the scanning
`
`line (Figs. 6-11 & | [0028]-[0050] also describe, for example, how current in three OLED
`
`pixels on the same line are measured, averaged- statistically processed, then used to
`
`correct a subject OLED pixel on the same line).
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`8.
`
`Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 4, 5, 7 and 10 have been
`
`considered but they are believed to be addressed above, and therefore, are mootin
`
`view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
`
`Additionally, Applicant contends that Kabeetal. is different from the claim 1 of
`
`the present application in that Kabeetal. is directed to correcting brightness
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/000,293
`Art Unit: 2697
`
`Page 9
`
`unevenness due to deviations in the driving TFT characteristics (Applicant's Response,
`
`Page 13). Examiner respectfully points out that regardless of the purpose of Kabe’s et
`
`al. invention, Kabe et al. nonetheless affirmatively discloses measuring the current
`
`flowing in each organic EL element of an OLED display panel, as articulated in the
`
`rejection of the claims above.
`
`Conclusion
`
`9.
`
`The prior art madeof record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
`
`applicant's disclosure.
`
`Cok (US 2005/0110728 A1, Published May 26, 2005) is made ofrecordfor its
`
`method of aging compensation in an OLED display (Fig. 1).
`
`Anyinquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to SANJIV D. PATEL whosetelephone numberis
`
`(571)270-5731. The examiner can normally be reached on Mondayto Friday, 8:30AM
`
`to 5PM.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
`
`supervisor, Alexander Eisen can be reached on 571-272-7687. The fax phone number
`
`for the organization wherethis application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/000,293
`Art Unit: 2697
`
`Page 10
`
`Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the
`
`Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for
`
`published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
`
`Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only.
`
`For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should
`
`you have questions on accessto the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic
`
`Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a
`
`USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automatedinformation
`
`system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA)or 571-272-1000.
`
`/SANJIV D PATEL/
`Examiner, Art Unit 2697
`
`12/28/2012
`
`/Alexander Eisen/
`Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2697
`
`