DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2/04/2026 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/04/2026 has been considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
Claims 1-3, 13, 15, 16, 19, 21-23, 21-23, 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumai (US Patent Publication Number 2019/0196080 A1) in view of Hansen (US Patent Publication Number 2005/0146720 A1).
Kumai teaches, as in independent claim 1, a polarization element (Figs. 1 and 2) comprising a substrate (2) having a predetermined light transmittance in a predetermined wavelength region1 (¶0037 “the substrate 2, a transmissive substrate such as a glass substrate”), and a plurality of polarization portions (41 +51) disposed on a main surface of the substrate (2), substrate portions (2a) which are parts of the substrate (2) where the plurality of polarization portions (41+51) are not disposed (Fig. 2), wherein each of the plurality of polarization portions (41 +51) includes a plurality of metal portions (41) which extend in one direction (Fig. 1 shows the portions extending in the x-direction), and each of the plurality of metal portions (41) has a width (Fig.2 “40 nm”), a pitch (Fig.2 “140 nm”), and a thickness (Fig. 2 “240 nm”), and the widths, the pitches, and the thicknesses are the same among the plurality of metal portions2 (¶0047 “wire grid polarization element 1 in which the wire-shaped metal layer 41 is an aluminum layer having a thickness (height) of 240 nm and a width of 40 nm, a pitch between the wire-shaped metal layers 41 is 140 nm”), and wherein each of the plurality of the polarization portions (41 +51) is spaced apart from each other by the substrate portions (2a) along a predetermined direction (Fig. 1 shows the portions extending in the x-direction), the polarization portions have an area3, Kumai fails to teach ratio of a total area of the polarization portions included in a predetermined area of the main surface to the predetermined area gradually changes along the predetermined direction so that at least one of light transmittance and polarization degree gradually changes in the predetermined direction on the main surface of the substrate. In a related art, Hansen teaches a polarization element (see annotated figure below), wherein a total area of the polarization portions (see annotated figure below) included in a predetermined area (178, 176, 174) of the main surface to the predetermined area4 (¶0074 “re-grid polarizer 38o can have elements 174-178 that transition from one width to another in adjacent zones or regions. For example, the elements can have elongated regions perpendicular to the elements with the width in each region increasing or decreasing by adjacent region”) gradually changes along the predetermined direction so that at least one of light transmittance and polarization degree gradually changes in the predetermined direction on the main surface of the substrate5
PNG
media_image1.png
434
440
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified a polarization element, as taught by Kumai, with the total area of the polarization portions, as taught by Hansen, to have provided a wire grid polarizer that will separate the polarization states of the light with a certain degree of efficiency (¶0066).
Kumai fails to teach, as in claim 2, wherein the polarization portions are made different in size. In a related art, Hansen teaches wherein the polarization portions are made different in size along the predetermined direction (¶0074 “re-grid polarizer 38o can have elements 174-178 that transition from one width to another in adjacent zones or regions”) to change the ratio of the total area of the polarization portions included in the predetermined area of the main surface to the predetermined area (Fig.13b-13d).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified a polarization element, as taught by Kumai and Hansen, with the total area of the polarization portions, as taught by Hansen, to have provided a wire grid polarizer that will separate the polarization states of the light with a certain degree of efficiency (¶0066).
Kumai fails to teach, as in claim 3, wherein the number of the polarization portions is varied along the predetermined direction. In a related art, Hansen teaches wherein the number of the polarization portions is varied along the predetermined direction6 (Fig.13a-13d).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified a polarization element, as taught by Kumai and Hansen, with the total area of the polarization portions, as taught by Hansen, to have provided a wire grid polarizer that will separate the polarization states of the light with a certain degree of efficiency (¶0066).
Kumai teaches, as in claim 13, wherein the predetermined direction is perpendicular to a longitudinal direction in which the metal portions extend (¶0074 “the elements can have elongated regions perpendicular to the elements with the pitch in each region increasing or decreasing by adjacent region”).
Kumai teaches, as claimed in claim 15, wherein the plurality of metal portions (41 +51) are provided in the substrate (2a) and top surfaces (61) of the metal portions (41) are exposed.
Kumai teaches, as in claim 16, wherein the plurality of metal portions (41+ 51) are provided on the substrate (2).
Kumai teaches, as in claim 19, wherein the plurality of metal portions (41+51) are columnar (see Fig.1) and extends perpendicularly (element 41 sits upright on substrate 2, as shown in Fig.1 and 2) to the main surface (2a) of the substrate (2).
Kumai teaches, as in claim 21, a polarization element (Figs. 1 and 2) comprising: a substrate (2) having a predetermined light transmittance in a predetermined wavelength region (¶0037 “the substrate 2, a transmissive substrate such as a glass substrate”); a first region (see annotated figure 1 below) disposed on a first part of a main surface of the substrate (2) and including a plurality of first polarization portions (41 +51) and first substrate portions (2a), each of the plurality of first polarization portions (41 +51) being spaced apart by the first substrate portions (2a); a second region (see annotated figure 1 below) disposed on a second part of the main surface of the substrate and including a plurality of second polarization portions (41 +51) and second substrate portions (2a), each of the plurality of second polarization portions (41 +51) being spaced apart by the second substrate portions (2a); and a third region (see annotated figure below) disposed on a third part of the main surface of the substrate (2) and including a plurality of third polarization portions (41 +51) and third substrate portions (2a), each of the plurality of third polarization portions (see annotated figure 1 below) being spaced apart by the third substrate portions (2a), wherein: the plurality of first, second and third polarization portions have the same wire-grid structure (see Figs 1 and 2 which shows the pattern), the first, second, and third regions have a first polarization portion occupancy ratio (the ratio being the area of the polarization portions to the 1st region), a second polarization portion occupancy ratio (the ratio being the area of the polarization portions to the 2nd region), and a third polarization portion occupancy ratio (the ratio being the area of the polarization portions to the 3rd region), respectively, Kumai fails to teach the first, second, and third regions have a first polarization portion occupancy ratio, a second polarization portion occupancy ratio, and a third polarization portion occupancy ratio, respectively, each of which is defined as the ratio of a total area of the plurality of polarization portions corresponding included per unit area of the respective region, and the first, second, and third polarization portion occupancy ratios decrease in order from the first to the third region, so that polarization degree decreases in the same order. In a related art, Hansen teaches a polarization element wherein the first (178), second (176), and third (174) regions have a first polarization portion occupancy ratio (the ratio being the area of the polarization portions to the 178), a second polarization portion occupancy ratio (the ratio being the area of the polarization portions to the 176), and a third polarization portion occupancy ratio (ratio of area of the polarization portions to the 174), respectively, each of which is defined as the ratio of a total are7of the plurality of polarization portions (See annotated figure 13b below) corresponding included per unit area of the respective region (178/176/174), and the first, second, and third polarization portion occupancy ratios decrease in order from the first to the third region, so that polarization degree decreases in the same order8.
PNG
media_image2.png
446
740
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
478
540
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified a polarization element, as taught by Kumai, with the total area of the polarization portions, as taught by Hansen, to have provided a wire grid polarizer that will separate the polarization states of the light with a certain degree of efficiency (¶0066).
Kumai fails to teach, as claimed in claim 22, wherein the first, second, and third regions are arranged on the main surface of the substrate along a predetermined direction and provide a gradation of polarization degree along the predetermined direction. In a related art, Hansen teaches wherein the first (178), second (176), and third regions (174) are arranged on the main surface of the substrate along a predetermined direction and provide a gradation of polarization degree along the predetermined direction9.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified a polarization element, as taught by Kumai and Hansen, with the first, second, and third regions, as taught by Hansen, to have provided a wire grid polarizer that will separate the polarization states of the light with a certain degree of efficiency (¶0066).
Kumai fails to teach, as claimed in claim 23, wherein the first, second, and third polarization portions have at least one shape selected from the group consisting of square, rectangle, circle, oval, diamond-shaped, triangle, and polygon. In a related art, Hansen teaches wherein the first (178), second (176), and third regions (174) polarization portions have at least one shape selected from the group consisting of rectangle (see Fig.13a).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified a polarization element, as taught by Kumai and Hansen, with the first, second, and third regions, as taught by Hansen, to have provided a wire grid polarizer that will separate the polarization states of the light with a certain degree of efficiency (¶0066).
Kumai teaches, as claimed in claim 29, wherein the same wire-grid structure includes a plurality of metal portions (41), and each of the metal portions has the same width (Fig.2 “40 nm”), the same pitch (Fig.2 “140 nm”), and the same thickness (Fig.2 “240 nm”), among the first, second, and third regions (See regions on annotated figure 1 above).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumai (US Patent Publication Number 2019/0196080 A1) in view of Hansen (US Patent Publication Number 2005/0146720 A1) and in further view of Cok (US Patent Publication Number 2015/0279688 A1).
Kumai and Hansen fail to teach, as in claim 17, wherein the substrate includes a plurality of teeth on the main surface and each of the plurality of metal portions are provided on a top and one side surface of each of the plurality of teeth. In a related art, Cok teaches wherein the substrate (20) includes a plurality of teeth (protruding portion of 20) on the main surface and each of the plurality of metal portions (50) are provided on a top and one side surface of each of the plurality of teeth (Fig. 12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified a polarization element, as taught by Kumai and Hansen, with the metal portions, as taught by Cok for the purpose of providing improved transparency, reduced weight, thickness, and cost (¶0012).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Kumai (US Patent Publication Number 2019/0196080 A1) in view of Hansen (US Patent Publication Number 2005/0146720 A1) and in further view of Takakuwa (US Patent Publication Number 2013/0120698 A1).
Kumai and Hansen fail to teach, as in claim 18, wherein the polarization portions are arranged in a modular grid. In a related art, Takakuwa teaches wherein the polarization portions are arranged in a modular grid (30a-30c).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified a polarization element, as taught by Kumai and Hansen, with the metal portions, as taught by Takakuwa, for the purpose of providing a way to reduce or prevent deterioration in a polarization characteristic due to an arrangement difference of the connection portions between the wire grid polarizers (¶0017).
Claims 26 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Kumai (US Patent Publication Number 2019/0196080 A1) in view of Hansen (US Patent Publication Number 2005/0146720 A1) and in further view of Qin (US Patent Publication Number 2019/0326682 A1).
Kumai and Hansen fail to teach, as in claim 26, wherein: each of the first, second, and third polarization portions is arranged in two dimensions along a first direction and a second direction intersecting the first direction, and the first, second, and third regions are arranged along the first direction. In a related art, Qin teaches wherein (See Fig. 4) each of the first, second, and third polarization portions (151) is arranged in two dimensions (first and second directions) along a first direction and a second direction intersecting the first direction (see Fig. 4), and the first second, and third regions are arranged along the first direction (See annotated Figure below regions are in the first direction as labeled in Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified a polarization element, as taught by Kumai and Hansen, with the first, second, and third polarization portions, as taught by Qin for the purpose of providing a way so the light transmission position and the light transmittance may be flexibly set (¶0042).
PNG
media_image4.png
361
636
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Kumai and Hansen fail to teach, as in claim 27, wherein each of the first, second, and third polarization portions is arranged in a square-array regularly along the first direction and the second direction perpendicular to the first direction. In a related art, Qin teaches wherein each of the first, second, and third polarization portions (151) is arranged in a square-array regularly along the first direction and the second direction perpendicular to the first direction (See Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified a polarization element, as taught by Kumai and Hansen, with the first, second, and third polarization portions, as taught by Qin for the purpose of providing a way so the light transmission position and the light transmittance may be flexibly set (¶0042).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 24, 25 and 28 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art fails to teach all of the limitations of claim 6 which includes wherein the polarization portions are arranged with a first distance between adjacent polarization portions in the predetermined direction, wherein the polarization portions are arranged with a second distance between adjacent polarization portions in a direction perpendicular to the predetermined direction, and wherein the first and second distances are larger than the pitch P2 of the metal portions.
The prior art fails to teach all of the limitations of independent claim 24 which includes wherein each of the first, second, and third polarization portions in a plan view has a size of 1 pm to 1 mm in a longitudinal direction and a transverse direction, and wherein the same wire-grid structure includes a periodic structure with a pitch of 400 nm or less.
The prior art fails to teach all of the limitations of independent claim 25 which includes wherein the same wire-grid structure includes a periodic structure with a pitch, and adjacent polarization portions in the first, second, and third regions are arranged with respective first, second, and third pitches, each pitch being larger than the pitch, the first pitch, the second pitch, and the third pitch are different from each other or the same.
The prior art fails to teach all of the limitations of independent claim 28 which includes a fourth region disposed on a fourth part of the main surface of the substrate and including a plurality of fourth polarization portions, adjacent fourth polarization portions in contact with each other, wherein: the plurality of the fourth polarization portions have the same wire-grid structure as the first, second, and third polarization portions, the fourth region has a fourth polarization portion occupancy ratio defined as the ratio of the total area of the fourth polarization portions per unit area of the fourth region, and the fourth polarization portion occupancy ratio is 100% and a polarization degree of the fourth region is the highest among the regions of the polarization element.
Claim 30 is allowed.
The prior art fails to teach all of the limitations of independent claim 30 which includes wherein each of the plurality of first, second, and third non-polarization portions is a part of the substrate, the first, second, and third regions have a first non-polarization portion occupancy ratio, a second non-polarization portion occupancy ratio, and a third non-polarization portion occupancy ratio, respectively, each of which is defined as the ratio of a total area of the plurality of non-polarization portions corresponding included per unit area of the respective region, and the first, second, and third non-polarization portion occupancy ratios decrease in order from the first to the third region, so that polarization degree increases in the same order.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOURNEY F SUMLAR whose telephone number is (571)270-0656. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4pm.
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, Ricky Mack can be reached on 571-272-2333. 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.
JOURNEY F. SUMLAR
Examiner
Art Unit 2872
12 March 2026
/RICKY L MACK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
1 Quartz is known to have a light transmittance of 85%–93% in the visible range.
2 This value is for every wire shape metal layer 41 in the array shown in Fig. 1.
3 Area = Length x width.
4 Area = length x width. Therefore, the polarization portions inherently have a total area and each predetermined area 178, 176, 174 have a total area. Since the width is decreasing from predetermined area 178 to 174 then this would cause the area to change.
5 For light transmittance, as the wire width decreases, this would mean the light transmittance would increase because more light could pass through. For the polarization, as the wire width decreases, the polarization decreases because the blocking of the polarization becomes weaker and more unwanted polarization leaks through.
6 More portions in Fig. 13a than in Fig. 13d
7 Area = length x width. Therefore, the polarization portions inherently have a total area and each predetermined area 178, 176, 174 have a total area.
8For the polarization, as the wire width decreases, the polarization decreases because the blocking of the polarization becomes weaker and more unwanted polarization leaks through.
9 The varying of width in the direction shown in the annotated figure 13b above would cause a graduation of polarization degree (lower polarization).