www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`
`16/244,975
`
`01/10/2019
`
`TOShikaZu KOUDO
`
`20295.0040USW1
`
`1058
`
`53148
`
`759°
`
`02/06/2020
`
`HAMRE, SCHUMANN, MUELLER & LARSON RC.
`45 South Seventh Street
`Suite 2700
`
`MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-1683
`
`LIN” HANG
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`ART UNIT
`2626
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`02/06/2020
`
`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):
`PTOMail@hsml.eom
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`017/09 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`16/244,975
`Examiner
`HANG LIN
`
`Applicant(s)
`KOU DO et al.
`Art Unit
`2626
`
`AIA (FITF) Status
`Yes
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet wit/7 the correspondence address -
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS 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.
`|f 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). Responsive to communication(s) filed on 01/10/2019.
`CI A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a)[:] This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)
`
`This action is non-final.
`
`3)[:] 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):] 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 Expade Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)
`
`Claim(s)
`
`1—12 is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`
`
`[:1 Claim(ss)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(ss)1—3and 6— 12 is/are rejected.
`
`Claim(ss)4_5is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`S)
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`C] Claim(s
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`httpfiwww.”smogovmatentsflnit_events[pph[index.'§p or send an inquiry to PPeredhack@gsptg.ggv.
`
`Application Papers
`
`10):] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11). The drawing(s) filed on 01/10/2019 is/are: a). accepted or b)D 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)D Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a)I:I All
`
`b)C] Some**
`
`c)[j None of the:
`
`1C] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2E] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`3C] 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)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date_
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) E] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) CI Other-
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20200202
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/244,975
`Art Unit: 2626
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Status of Application
`
`1.
`
`Claims 1-12 are pending in the instant application.
`
`Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
`
`2.
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013,
`
`is being examined
`
`under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`Claim Objections
`
`3.
`
`Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: there is a lack of
`
`antecedent basis for the recitation of “the extended display region” in line 2 of claim 11.
`
`Appropriate correction is required.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
`
`4.
`
`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 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 aquotation 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 —
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/244,975
`Art Unit: 2626
`
`Page 3
`
`(a)(1 ) the claimed inventionwas patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use,
`on sale orothenNise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed
`invention.
`
`5.
`
`Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hahm
`
`(US 20150082058 A1)
`
`Regarding claim 1, Hahm teaches a display device comprises afirst display
`
`panel and a second display panel. (Figs.1 and 2 shows two display panel which are first
`
`display 110 or 210 and display 120 or 220 form a display device. Para 32-40)
`
`disposed farther from an observer than the first display panel, wherein an image
`
`display region of the second display panel is larger than an image display region of the
`
`first display panel. (Fig.
`
`1 shows image on second display 120 is further from observer
`
`and the image is bigger. Para 32-40).
`
`Regarding claim 2, Hahm already teaches the display device according to claim
`
`And Hahm further teaches wherein an outer periphery of the image display
`
`region of the second display panel is located outside an outer periphery of the image
`
`display region of the first display panel in planar view. (Figs 1 and 2 show herein an
`
`outer periphery of the image display region of the second display panel 120 or 220 is
`
`located outside an outer periphery of the image display region of the first display panel
`
`110 or 210 in planar view)
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/244,975
`Art Unit: 2626
`
`Page 4
`
`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 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 maynotbe obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed
`invention is not identicallydisclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the
`claimed invention and the priorartare such that the claimed invention as awhole would have
`been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having
`ordinaryskill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentabilityshall notbe
`negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
`
`The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148
`
`USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
`
`6.
`
`Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hahm (US
`
`20150082058 A1)
`
`Regarding claim 3, Hahm already teaches the display device according to claim
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/244,975
`Art Unit: 2626
`
`Page 5
`
`And Hahm further teaches wherein the image display region of the second
`
`display panel includes an opposed display region and an extended display region
`
`around the opposed display region, (Figs 1 and 2 shows and inner region and outer
`
`region of the display around the inner region)
`
`However Hahm does not teach (i) an opposed display region facing the image
`
`display region of the first display panel in planar view.
`
`(ii) the second display panel displays an image identical to an image displayed at
`
`an end of the opposed display region in the extended display region.
`
`However, regarding to the aforementioned feature (i).
`
`However It would have been obvious that that the that the first display panel can
`
`be moved to be facing the an opposed display region in planar view by an user.
`
`Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill,
`
`in the art at the
`
`time of invention,
`
`to modify Hahm to teach an opposed display region facing the image
`
`display region of the first display panel in planar view as it is only a simple change of
`
`displacement of the phone by the user.
`
`Regarding to the aforementioned feature (ii),
`
`It is obvious to one of skilled in the art that the display panel can be used to
`
`display image in adroste effect format.
`
`Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill,
`
`in the art at the
`
`time of invention,
`
`to modify Hahm to teach the second display panel displays an image
`
`identical to an image displayed at an end of the opposed display region in the extended
`
`display region which would a result of displaying an image in a droste effect format.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/244,975
`Art Unit: 2626
`
`Page 6
`
`7.
`
`Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hahm
`
`(US 20150082058 A1), further in view of Zou et al. (US 20180024798 A1, Chinese
`
`priority patent application CN201510784840 published 04/06/2016)
`
`Regarding claim 6, Hahm already teaches the display device according to claim
`
`And Hahm further teaches the display device further comprising an image
`
`processor that generates first image data for displaying a color image in the image
`
`display region of the first display panel and second image data for displaying an image
`
`in the image display region of the second display panel based on an input video signal.
`
`(Para 32-40, Figs 1 and 20)
`
`However Hahm does not teach second image data for displaying a black-and-
`
`white image in the image display region of the second display panel.
`
`However Zou teaches a display can be switch ed to black and white mode. (Para
`
`59)
`
`Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill,
`
`in the art at the
`
`time of invention,
`
`to modify Hahn with Zou to teach second image data for displaying a
`
`black-and-white image in the image display region of the second display panel in order
`
`to switch the display into black and white mode depending on user preference.
`
`Regarding claim 7, please refer to the rejection for claim 3 in combination with
`
`claim 6.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/244,975
`Art Unit: 2626
`
`Page 7
`
`8.
`
`Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hahm
`
`(US 20150082058 A1), further in view of Hur et al. (US 20160180789 A1).
`
`Regarding claim 8, Hahm already teaches the display device according to claim
`
`And Hahm already teaches wherein the image display region of the second
`
`display panel includes an opposed display region and an extended display region
`
`around the opposed display region, (Figs 1 and 2 shows and inner region and outer
`
`region of the display around the inner region)
`
`However Hahm does not teach
`
`(i) an opposed display region facing the image display region of the first display
`
`panel in planar view.
`
`(ii) a plurality of signal lines to which a signal for image display is supplied from a
`
`drive circuit are arranged in the image display region of the second display panel, and a
`
`plurality of the signal lines are electrically connected to a first output terminal of the drive
`
`circuit in the extended display region.
`
`However, regarding to the aforementioned feature (i).
`
`However It would have been obvious that that the that the first display panel can
`
`be moved to be facing the an opposed display region in planar view by an user.
`
`Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill,
`
`in the art at the
`
`time of invention,
`
`to modify Hahm to teach an opposed display region facing the image
`
`display region of the first display panel in planar view as it is only a simple change of
`
`displacement of the phone by the user.
`
`Regarding to the aforementioned feature (ii),
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/244,975
`Art Unit: 2626
`
`Page 8
`
`Hur teaches a plurality of signal lines to which a signal for image display is
`
`supplied from a drive circuit are arranged in the image display region of the second
`
`display panel, and a plurality of the signal lines are electrically connected to a first
`
`output terminal of the drive circuit in the extended display region.
`
`(Fig. 1: data driver and
`
`gate driver are the driver circuit, and G1 and G2 are the signal line.)
`
`Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill,
`
`in the art at the
`
`time of invention,
`
`to modify Hahm with Hur to teach a plurality of signal lines to which a
`
`signal for image display is supplied from a drive circuit are arranged in the image
`
`display region of the second display panel, and a plurality of the signal lines are
`
`electrically connected to a first output terminal of the drive circuit in the extended display
`
`region in order to produce the predictable result of display image with the driving circuit
`
`as taught by Hur.
`
`Regarding claim 9, Hahm and Hur already teach the display device according to
`
`claim 8,
`
`And Hur further teaches wherein a plurality of another signal lines are electrically
`
`connected to a second output terminal of the drive circuit in the extended display region,
`
`the first output terminal is closer to the opposed display region than the second output
`
`terminal, (Fig.
`
`1 shows D1-Dm are the another signal lines, and output terminal of Gn is
`
`closer to the opposed display region across by Gn and D1 than the second output
`
`terminal)
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/244,975
`Art Unit: 2626
`
`Page 9
`
`However Hahm and Hur do not teach and a number of signal lines electrically
`
`connected to the first output terminal is smaller than a number of signal lines electrically
`
`connected to the second output terminal.
`
`However it would have obvious the with the display resolution 1080p that the
`
`number of signal lines electrically connected to the first output terminal is smaller than a
`
`number of signal lines electrically connected to the second output terminal as the
`
`number of pixel would be 1920 across and 1080 vertically.
`
`Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill,
`
`in the art at the
`
`time of invention,
`
`to modify Hahm and Hur to teach a number of signal lines electrically
`
`connected to the first output terminal is smaller than a number of signal lines electrically
`
`connected to the second output terminal as it would have been obvious with the display
`
`resolution of 10809 as shown above which would offer an exemplary display resolution.
`
`Regarding claim 10, Hahm and Hur already teach the display device according to
`
`claim 8,
`
`And Hur further teaches wherein in the extended display region, the signal for the
`
`image display is simultaneously supplied to the plurality of signal lines electrically
`
`connected to the first output terminal. (Para 18)
`
`Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill,
`
`in the art at the
`
`time of invention,
`
`to modify Hahm and Hur with this additional teaching of Hur in order to
`
`produce the predictable result of display image with the method as taught by Hur.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/244,975
`Art Unit: 2626
`
`Page 10
`
`9.
`
`Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hahm (US
`
`20150082058 A1), further in view of Alonso et al. (US 20170347474 A1).
`
`Regarding claim 11, Hahm already teaches the display device according to claim
`
`However Hahm does not teach wherein a plurality of pixels arranged in the
`
`extended display region overlap a black matrix formed around the image display region
`
`of the first display panel in planar view.
`
`However Alonso teaches black matrix around display region (Para 23)
`
`Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill,
`
`in the art at the
`
`time of invention,
`
`to modify Hahm with Alonso to teach wherein a plurality of pixels
`
`arranged in the extended display region overlap a black matrix formed around the
`
`image display region of the first display panel in planar view as the user can simply
`
`displace the second displace to be over the first display so as to make the overlapping
`
`of the pixels of the second display with black matrix.
`
`10.
`
`Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hahm (US
`
`20150082058 A1), further in View of Hirota et al. (US 20150035738 A1).
`
`Regarding claim 12, Hahm already teaches the display device according to claim
`
`And Hahm already teaches wherein the image display region of the second
`
`display panel includes an opposed display region and an extended display region
`
`around the opposed display region, (Figs 1 and 2 shows and inner region and outer
`
`region of the display around the inner region)
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/244,975
`Art Unit: 2626
`
`Page 11
`
`However Hahm does not teach (i) an opposed display region facing the image
`
`display region of the first display panel in planar view.
`
`(ii) a part of the plurality of pixels arranged in the extended display region is
`
`larger than a pixel arranged in the opposed display region.
`
`However, regarding to the aforementioned feature (i).
`
`However It would have been obvious that that the that the first display panel can
`
`be moved to be facing the an opposed display region in planar view by an user.
`
`Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill,
`
`in the art at the
`
`time of invention,
`
`to modify Hahm to teach an opposed display region facing the image
`
`display region of the first display panel in planar view as it is only a simple change of
`
`displacement of the phone by the user.
`
`Regarding to the aforementioned feature (ii),
`
`However Hirota teach a part of the plurality of pixels arranged in the extended
`
`display region is larger than a pixel arranged in the opposed display region.
`
`(Fig. 2,
`
`Para 37. So the R pixel in the extended display region would be larger than the G pixel
`
`in the opposed display region)
`
`Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill,
`
`in the art at the
`
`time of invention,
`
`to modify Hahm with Hirota to teach a part of the plurality of pixels
`
`arranged in the extended display region is larger than a pixel arranged in the opposed
`
`display region in order to produce the predictable result of image display by adopting
`
`the pixel structure as taught by Hirota.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/244,975
`Art Unit: 2626
`
`Page 12
`
`Allowable Subject Matter
`
`11.
`
`Claims 4 and 5 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
`
`12.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to HANG LIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7596.
`
`The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 8am-5pm.
`
`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, Temesghen Ghebretinsae can be reached on 571-272-3017. 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 https://ppair-
`
`my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/244,975
`Art Unit: 2626
`
`Page 13
`
`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.
`
`/HANG LlN/
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2626
`
`