DETAILED ACTION
This office action follows a reply filed on December 19, 2025. Claims 1 and 36 have been amended. Claims 1, 3, 25-28 and 33-37 are currently pending and under examination.
The texts of those sections of Title 35 U.S. Code are not included in this section and can be found in a prior Office action.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1, 3, 25-27 and 36-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida (US 5,066,099) in view of Ludwig (US 5,307,205), and further in view of Pudleiner (US 2015/0355536) and JP 2004-284038, as evidenced by Macrolex Dyes (Macrolex Dyes-Product Range and Properties, Lanxess, 2021, 20 pages). For convenience, the machine translation of JP ‘038 will be cited below.
Yoshida teaches a rear projection screen comprising a light diffusing layer comprising a transparent binder supporting the light diffuser dispersed in the light diffusing layer, where the transparent binder for supporting the light diffuser can be colored to obtain a further enhanced contrast (Abstract), where the light diffuser is taught to include organic materials such as acrylic resin, polycarbonate resin, etc. (col. 7, ll. 61-68) with a particle size of 0.4-10 micron (col. 8, ll. 1-16), further teaching that a combination of light diffusers can be used, specifically a combination of a first light diffuser having particle size of 0.4-10 micron and a second light diffuser with a particle size of 30-1000 micron, where the usable materials are those previously mentioned (col. 15, ll. 21-29). Yoshida teaches when using a combination of first and second light diffusers, it is possible to obtain a rear projection screen which is high in brightness and efficiency of light diffusion and has a wide viewing angle and good mass producibility.
Yoshida teaches that when the transparent binder in the light diffusing layer is colored to be light gray, the ambient light will be absorbed by the light diffusing layer more than the video light, when using a CRT (cathode-ray tube) video source, which allows for a good contrast to be obtained (col. 10, ll. 25-43).
Yoshida does not teach the refractive index of the light diffuser particles.
Ludwig teaches a rear projection screen formed by combining in laminated form an unmodified clear matrix resin layer with a second sheet containing light diffusing polymer particles (Abstract), where the second layer preferably also containing colorant or tint for the purpose of providing contrast, preferably a neutral gray tint (col. 2, ll. 46-55), and the light diffusing particles are taught as organic polymeric compounds, exemplified as light diffusing polymer particles having a particle size of 5 microns (col. 5-6). Ludwig teaches the light diffusing agent to include particles of an organic polymeric compound, where specific examples include alkyl (meth)acrylate type resins, where the light diffusing agents may be homopolymers thereof (col. 3, ll. 21-29), where methyl methacrylate is exemplified as a suitable alkyl (meth)acrylate. Ludwig teaches the particle size as 0.1-500 microns, and exemplifies a particle size of 2-15 micron (col. 3-4). Ludwig teaches that the refractive index of the light diffusing agent is within 0.2 units of that of the matrix in light of obtaining good diffusion properties, where the matrix is exemplified as polymethyl (meth)acrylate, with a refractive index of 1.49 (col. 6, ll. 26-34), suggesting the light diffusing agent as having a refractive index of 1.47-1.51.
Yoshida and Ludwig both teach rear projection screens comprising a gray tinted diffusing layer; however, do not teach or suggest the makeup of the actual gray colorant.
Pudleiner teaches a rear-projection film comprising a grey layer comprising a transparent plastic and at least one color pigment or dye in an amount of about 0.01-10 wt%, which includes those from the Macrolex range of colorants, e.g. Macrolex Violet B GR (Solvent Violet 13, also known in the art as 1-hydroxy-4-(p-tolylamino)anthracene-9,10-dione), Macrolex Orange 3G (Solvent Orange 60, 12H-phthaloperin-12-one), Macrolex Red 5B (Solvent Red 52, anthraquinone), Macrolex Green 5B (Solvent Green 3, 1,4-bis(p-tolylamino)anthraquinone), Macrolex Blue RR (Solvent Blue 97, Anthraquinone) or a mixture of these, as evidenced by Macrolex Dyes (pp. 6-7).
JP ‘038 teaches that gray dyeing can be obtained by a combination of Macrolex Red EG (Solvent Red 135, also known in the art as 8,9,10,11-tetrachloro-12H-phthaloperin-12-one), Macrolex Violet B, and Macrolex Green G (Solvent Green 28, anthraquinone).
Therefore, choosing a mixture of Macrolex Red EG (Solvent Red 135, 8,9,10,11-tetrachloro-12H-phthaloperin-12-one), Macrolex Violet B GR (Solvent Violet 13, also known in the art as 1-hydroxy-4-(p-tolylamino)anthracene-9,10-dione), and Macrolex Green 5B (Solvent Green 3, 1,4-bis(p-tolylamino)anthraquinone) as the gray colorant in Yoshida is prima facie obvious, as Pudleiner teaches the Macrolex colorants as suitable for preparing a gray tint to polymeric matrices used in rear projection films, and JP ‘038 teaches that a combination of Macrolex red, violet and green can be used to form a gray colorant.
Pudleiner teaches that the transmittance of the grey layer for light in the wavelength range from 450-600 nm is from 10-70% and teaches that across more than 70% of the film area, the transmittance differs by ±10% or less (p. 1, [0015]). Pudleiner teaches the thickness of the grey layer as 0.05-9.25 mm (p. 4, [0078]). The transmittance overlaps with the claimed range of 10-30%, and one of ordinary skill would expect the grey layer to possess the same transmission and variation, as claimed, as the grey layer suggested by Pudleiner is the same as that claimed, which exemplifies the inclusion of about 0.01 wt% colorant in the matrix polymer for determining transmittance.
Yoshida in view of Ludwig and further in view of Pudleiner and JP ‘038 is prima facie obvious over instant claims 1, 3 and 36.
As to claim 25, using masterbatches to incorporate colorants is prima facie obvious, as taught by Pudleiner (Example 2).
As to claims 26 and 27, Ludwig exemplifies preparing a molded article by way of co-extrusion (col. 6).
As to claim 37, Yoshida teaches a combination of a first light diffuser having a particle size of 0.4-10 micron and a second light diffuser with a particle size of 30-1000 micron, the ranges of which overlap with the claimed ranges of 4-6 micron and 35-60 micron, and it has been held that overlapping ranges are sufficient to establish prima facie obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have selected from the overlapping portion of the range taught by the reference because overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness.
Claims 28 and 33-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida (US 5,066,099) and Ludwig (US 5,307,205) in view of Pudleiner (US 2015/0355536) and JP 2004-284038, as applied above to claims 1-3, 20, 26, 27 and 36-37, and further in view of Guo (US 2015/0168604).
Yoshida and Ludwig in view of Pudleiner and JP ‘038 is prima facie obvious over instant claims 1-3, 20, 26, 27 and 36-37, as described above and applied herein as such, as Yoshida and Ludwig teach gray tinted rear projection screens comprising light diffusing particles, where Pudleiner and JP ‘038 teach that a combination of 8,9,10,11-tetrachloro-12H-phthaloperin-12-one, 1-hydroxy-4-(p-tolylamino)anthracene-9,10-dione and 1,4-bis(p-tolylamino)anthraquinone is suitable for preparing a gray colorant in rear projection screens.
Guo teaches that light diffusing compositions can be used to provide articles such as rear projection screens for televisions, as well as LED display covers, such as those used in automotive lights (p. 5-6, [0063]).
Therefore, using the compositions of Yoshida or Ludwig in view of Pudleiner and JP ‘038 as covers for LED lights is prima facie obvious, as Guo teaches that light diffusing layers are suitable for use in rear projection screens and a LED display covers and LED covers for automotive lights, which are known to use a white LED.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 19, 2025 have been addressed in the rejection above, where Pudleiner teaches the newly claimed limitation.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIEANN R JOHNSTON whose telephone number is (571)270-7344. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:00 AM - 4:00 PM 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, Randy Gulakowski can be reached at (571)272-1302. 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.
/Brieann R Johnston/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766