`
`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
`Alexandria1 Virginia 22313- 1450
`wwwnsptogov
`
`APPLICATION NO.
`
`
`
`
`
` F ING DATE
`
`FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
`
`ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.
`
`
`
`
`
`CONF {MATION NO.
`
`12/444,616
`
`04/07/2009
`
`Kosuke Makino
`
`MAT—10255US
`
`1687
`
`52473
`7590
`mm
`W
`RATNERPRESTIA —
`PO. BOX 980
`LINGARAJU, NAV1N B
`VALLEY FORGE, PA 19482-0980
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2629
`
`MAIL DATE
`
`07/24/2012
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`PAPER
`
`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.
`
`PTOL—90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Application No.
`
`Applicant(s)
`
`
` 12/444,616 MAKINO ET AL.
`Examiner
`Art Unit
`NAVIN LINGARAJU
`2629
`
`-- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS 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 CFR1. 136(a).
`In no event however may a reply be timely filed
`after SIX () 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).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1)|Zl Responsive to communication(s) filed on 02 AQI’i/ 2012.
`
`2a)|:l This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)IXI This action is non-final.
`
`3)I:I An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`
`
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)|:l Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims
`
`5)IZ Claim(s) 1 and2is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s) _ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`6)|:| Claim(s) _ is/are allowed.
`
`7)|Xl Claim(s) 1_-2is/are rejected.
`
`8)|:| Claim(s) _ is/are objected to.
`
`9)I:I Claim(s) _ are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`
`Application Papers
`
`10)I:I The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11)I:| 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).
`
`12)I:I The oath or declaration is objected to by the Examiner. Note the attached Office Action or form PTO-152.
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`
`13)|:| Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`
`a)|:| AII
`
`b)|:l Some * c)I:I None of:
`
`1.I:I Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.|:l Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No. _
`
`3.I:I Copies of 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) IZI Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`2) I] Notice of Draftsperson‘s Patent Drawing Review (PTO-948)
`3) I] Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date _.
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`4) I] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper N0(S )/Mai| Date. _
`5)I:I NOTICQ 0f Informal Patent Application
`6)I:I Other:—
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 03-11)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20120716
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/444,616
`
`Page 2
`
`Art Unit: 2629
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1. 114
`
`1.
`
`A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set
`
`forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed 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 been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action
`
`has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2 April
`
`2012 has been entered.
`
`Claims 1-2 are pending.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`2.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all
`
`obviousness rejections 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 this title, 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
`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.
`
`3.
`
`Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sasaki
`
`(U.S. Patent Publication 2005/0212725 A1) in view of Mori (U.S. Patent 6,900,781
`
`B1), and further in view of Takagi (U.S. Patent Publication 2005/0073476 A1).
`
`Regarding claim 1, Sasaki (Fle. 3-6 and 11) discloses a method of driving a
`
`plasma display panel (plasma display panel 30) provided with a plurality of discharge
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/444,616
`
`Page 3
`
`Art Unit: 2629
`
`cells (FIG. 4 and paragraph [0042]. In particular a discharge cell is defined by X
`
`electrodes 11 and Y electrodes 12 on the top, partition walls 17 on the sides, and
`
`address electrodes 15 on the bottom), each having a scan electrode (Y electrode
`
`12) and a sustain electrode (X electrode 11), comprising:
`
`forming one-field period (one frame) by arranging a plurality of sub-fields (sub-
`
`fields SF1, SF2,
`
`SFn) including an initializing period (FIG. 5, reset period R) for
`
`generating initializing discharge at the discharge cell ([0004]. Note that the generic
`
`description of the sub-field driving method of paragraph [0004] also
`
`encompasses the device of Sasaki), an address period (FIG. 5, address period A)
`
`for generating address discharge at the discharge cell ([0004]), and a sustain period
`
`(FIG. 5 and [0044], sustain periods S1 and $2) for emitting light from the discharge
`
`cell by
`
`alternately applying at least one first sustain pulse (first sustain waveform
`
`applied during period 81) for generating emission having one peak ([0021]. Note that
`
`the first sustain waveform is distinguished from a second sustain waveform by
`
`the fact that that a second sustain waveform causes two emission peaks in one
`
`polarity change.) at the discharge cell and at least one second sustain pulse (second
`
`sustain waveform applied during period 82) for generating emission having two
`
`peaks (FIGs. 6, 11 and [0090]. In particular, when the FIG. 11 variation of the
`
`second sustain waveform is applied to the scan and sustain electrodes, emission
`
`having two peaks, i.e., discharges 105/106 and 107/108, are generated at the edge
`
`of each sustain pulse.) at the discharge cell, and
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/444,616
`
`Page 4
`
`Art Unit: 2629
`
`a rise time of the at least one first sustain pulse (first sustain waveform applied
`
`during period S1) is set independent of the ratio of discharge cells for emitting light in a
`
`respective subfield of the plurality of subfields ([0053]. In particular, second sustain
`
`waveforms 82 have a period three times that of first sustain waveforms S1,
`
`whose period is the same irrespective of display load ratio. The method of Sasaki
`
`only alters the ratio of the number of first sustain waveform pulses to the number
`
`of second sustain waveform pulses. See [0071].).
`
`Sasaki does not disclose wherein a rise time of the at least one second sustain
`
`pulse applied to the scan electrode and a rise time of the at least one second sustain
`
`pulse applied to the sustain electrode are individually set in accordance with a ratio of
`
`discharge cells for emitting light in the sustain period of sub-fields.
`
`In the same field of plasma display driving, Mori (FIG. 17) discloses wherein a
`
`rise time of the at least one second sustain pulse applied to the scan electrode and a
`
`rise time of the at least one second sustain pulse applied to the sustain electrode are
`
`individually set in accordance with a ratio of discharge cells for emitting light in the
`
`sustain period of sub-fields (In particular, these rise time of the sustain pulses, i.e.,
`
`the time taken for the voltage to rise from V9 to Vsus, determines the interval
`
`between the two emission peaks of the sustain pulse. See Fle. 4 and 6-9. Since
`
`the interval between two emission peaks is set according the screen load ratio
`
`(column 30, lines 40-47), the rise time of the sustain pulse is also set according to
`
`the screen load ratio.). Since Sasaki teaches a driving method with first and second
`
`
`
`sustain waveforms Sasaki in combination with Mori meets the limitation of the “second
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/444,616
`
`Page 5
`
`Art Unit: 2629
`
`sustain pulse.”
`
`At the time of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in
`
`the art to modify the second sustain waveform of Sasaki (FIG. 1 1) such that the rise
`
`times of the second sustain waveforms are adjusted according to the screen load ratio
`
`of a given sub-field, as disclosed in Mori. The suggestion/motivation would have been in
`
`order to minimize power consumption by those sustain pulses that are capable of
`
`generating emission with two peaks (Mari, column 30 lines 40-47).
`
`Sasaki and Mori do not disclose alternately applying at least one first sustain
`
`pulse for generating emission having one peak at the discharge cell and at least one
`
`second sustain pulse for generating emission havinq two peaks at the discharge cell, a
`
`plurality of times to the scan electrode and the sustain electrode.
`
`In the same field of plasma display driving, Takagi (FIG. 2) discloses alternately
`
`applying at least one first sustain pulse (rectangular pulse 1) for generating emission
`
`having one peak at the discharge cell and at least one second sustain pulse (offset
`
`pulse 2) for generating emission having two peaks at the discharge cell, a plurality of
`
`times to the scan electrode and the sustain electrode (FIG. 2). Since Sasaki discloses
`
`applying first and second sustain waveforms (FIG. 6), which generate emission having
`
`one (FIG. 6) and two peaks (FIG. 11), respectively, to the scan and sustain electrodes
`
`(FIG. 6), Sasaki in combination with Takagi meets the limitations of " generating
`
`emission having one peak at the discharge cell, generating emission having two peaks
`
`at the discharge cell,” and applying sustain pulses to "the scan electrode and the
`
`sustain electrode."
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/444,616
`
`Page 6
`
`Art Unit: 2629
`
`At the time of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in
`
`the art to arrange the first and second waveforms of Sasaki such that a sustain period is
`
`formed by multiple repetitions of a pattern comprising one first sustain waveform
`
`followed by one second sustain waveform, as disclosed in Takagi. The
`
`suggestion/motivation would have been in order to allow even formation of wall charges
`
`in the discharge space and facilitate uniform reset of the wall discharges in the reset
`
`period (Takagi, [0055]).
`
`4.
`
`Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sasaki,
`
`Mori, and Takagi as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kang (U.S. Patent
`
`Publication 2004/0021657 A1).
`
`Regarding claim 2, Sasaki, Mori, and Takagi do not disclose a method of driving
`
`a plasma display wherein when the ratio is larger than a predetermined threshold value,
`
`the rise time of second sustain pulse applied to the scan electrode is set longer than the
`
`rise time of second sustain pulse applied to the sustain electrode.
`
`In the same field of plasma display driving, Choi (FIG. BB) discloses wherein the
`
`rise time (Tr1) of the sustain pulse applied to the scan electrode (Y electrode) is set
`
`longer than the rise time (Tr2) of the sustain pulse applied to the sustain electrode (2
`
`electrode). Since Sasaki, Mori, and Takagi teach changing the rise time of a second
`
`sustain waveform according the screen load ratio (see the reiection of claim 1 above),
`
`Sasaki, Mori, and Takagi, in combination with Kang, meet the limitations of "when the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/444,616
`
`Page 7
`
`Art Unit: 2629
`
`ratio is larger than a predetermined threshold value" and a “second sustain pulse.”
`
`At the time of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in
`
`the art to adjust the rise times of the sustain pulses of the second sustain waveform of
`
`Sasaki such that the rise times of second sustain pulses applied to the scan electrodes
`
`are longer than the rise times of the second sustain pulses applied the sustain
`
`electrodes, as disclosed in Kang, when the screen load ratio increases beyond a
`
`particular value. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to increase the
`
`power recovery rate from the scan electrode driver when the screen load ratio is high
`
`because the scan driver has more integrated circuits and high voltage switches than the
`
`sustain driver (Kang, paragraph [0017]).
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`5.
`
`Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are
`
`moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the newly applied references being
`
`used in the current rejection.
`
`Inquiries
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to NAVIN LINGARAJU whose telephone number is
`
`(571)270-1537. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday,
`
`8:00AM to 4:30PM.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/444,616
`
`Page 8
`
`Art Unit: 2629
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
`
`supervisor, Chanh Nguyen can be reached on chanh.nguyen@uspto.gov. The fax
`
`phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is
`
`571 -273-8300.
`
`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 access to 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 automated information
`
`system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272—1000.
`
`/NAVIN LINGARAJU/
`
`Examiner, Art Unit 2629
`
`/CHANH NGUYEN/
`
`Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2629
`
`