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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 11, 12, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Okuno (JP2013120250A).
With respect to claim 1, Okuno discloses a projection display apparatus (see figs.1 and 5), comprising: a solid-state light source array ([0029]: The laser light emitter 11A is composed of a plurality of blue laser diodes arranged in an array)that includes a plurality of solid-state light sources array ([0029]: The laser light emitter 11A is composed of a plurality of blue laser diodes arranged in an array); and a first diffuser plate (14 in fig.1) that diffuses light emitted from the solid-state light source array; wherein the first diffuser plate has different diffusion characteristics in a first direction and a second direction intersecting the first direction (see the anisotropic diffusor 14), such that a diffusion angle in the second direction is larger than a diffusion angle in the first direction ([0030]: The anisotropic diffusion plate 14 is for diffusing the light flux to be transmitted, and is formed so that the diffusion angle is different depending on the direction.; also see the affect in fig.3),the solid-state light source array includes a plurality of emitters ([0029]: The laser light emitter 11A is composed of a plurality of blue laser diodes arranged in an array ), and the larger diffusion angle (see diffusion angle disclosed in para.[0030] and see the effect in figs.3 and 4 A and B) in the second direction provided by the first diffuser plate causes each of a plurality of spots of light emitted from respective ones of the plurality of emitters and transmitted through the first diffuser plate to have a length in the second direction that is greater than a length in the first direction (see the transformation of substantially circular laser light into elliptical shape: para.[0030]:” the diffusion angle can be adjusted depending on the direction by appropriately changing the pattern shape. Therefore, the surface shape of the substantially circular laser beam transmitted through the anisotropic diffusion plate 14 can be set to be changed into any elliptical shape by setting the pattern shape.”).
With respect to claim 4, Okuno discloses the projection display apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of solid-state light sources is a laser diode (see 11A ).
With respect to claim 11, Okuno discloses the projection display apparatus according to Claim 1, wherein the solid-state light source array includes a first solid-state light source array (111A or 111R) and a second solid-state light source array (111R or 111B), the projection display apparatus further comprises: a light combiner (113G and R) for combing the light emitted respectively from the first solid-state light source array and the second solid-state light source array; a lens (116) transmitting light flux emitted from the light combiner, the first solid-state light source array (111A or 111R) is disposed on a first side, the second solid-state light source array (111B is disposed on both sides of the optical axis in fig.5) is disposed on a second side that is opposite to the first side with respect to an optical axis of the lens (111B is disposed on both sides of the optical axis in fig.5), and the light emitted from the first solid-state light source array and the light a light emitted from the second solid-state light source array incident on the lens are adjacent to each other in the first direction (disclosed by the overlap of light beams 111B and 111R in fig.5, which discloses adjacency of some set of beams along any direction).
With respect to claim 12, Okuno discloses the projection display apparatus according to Claim 1, further comprising: a light uniformizing element (see 117 in fig.5) that uniformizes the light diffused by the first diffuser plate (see 114 in fig.5); a light modulation element (131 in fig.5) that modulates the light uniformized by the light uniformizing element (see 117) with an image signal to generate image light; and a projection unit (140 in fig.5) that projects the image light generated by the light modulation element (131 in fig.5).
With respect to claim 13, Okuno discloses the projection display apparatus according to Claim 12, wherein the light uniformizing element (117) is a rod integrator (see 117).
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.
Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okuno (JP2013120250A)in view of Kobayashi (United States Patent Application Publication 2015/0124277 A1).
With respect to claims 2, Okuno discloses the projection display apparatus according to claim 1, but does not disclose comprising a movement mechanism that vibrates the first diffuser plate in the first direction or the second direction at a certain cycle.
Kobayashi teaches a projection display apparatus, comprising: a solid-state light source array that includes a plurality of solid-state light sources (241, 242, 243); a first diffuser plate (229 in fig.3) that diffuses light emitted from the solid-state light source array; a light uniformizing element (217) that uniformizes the light diffused by the first diffuser plate; a light modulation element (225) that modulates the light uniformized by the light uniformizing element with an image signal to generate image light; and a projection unit (227) that projects the image light generated by the light modulation element, comprising a movement mechanism that vibrates the first diffuser plate in the first direction or the second direction at a certain cycle (see [0052]:” As shown in FIG. 4, the vibration motor 234 is attached to the anisotropic diffusion plate 229 so as to minutely vibrate the anisotropic diffusion plate 229 at 60 Hz to 200 Hz. The direction of the minute vibration is parallel to the direction of the long side of the rectangular cells of the fly-eye lens array 217 described above, and the amplitude of the vibration is 200 .mu.m, which is almost the same as the size of the long side of the cells.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the lasers of Okuno with the teaching of Kobayashi so that a movement mechanism that vibrates the first diffuser plate in the first direction or the second direction at a certain cycle to improve homogenization of the light source.
Claim(s) 3 and 6-8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okuno (JP2013120250A) in view of Kasazumi (United States Patent Application Publication 2008/0165401).
With respect to claims 3, and 6-8, Okuno discloses the projection display apparatus according to Claim 1, Okuno discloses a light uniformizing element (117 in fig.5) that uniformizes the light diffused by the first diffuser plate (114) but does not discloses further comprising a second diffuser plate that has a substantially same diffusion characteristics in the first direction and the second direction, wherein the second diffuser plate is disposed between the solid-state light source array and the first diffuser plate, further comprising a movement mechanism that vibrates the second diffuser plate in the first direction or the second direction at a certain cycle, further comprising a second diffuser plate that has a substantially same diffusion characteristics in the first direction and the second direction, wherein the second diffuser plate is disposed between the first diffuser plate and the light uniformizing element, further comprising a movement mechanism that vibrates the second diffuser plate in the first direction or the second direction at a certain cycle.
Kasazumi discloses a second diffuser plate (10a or 10b) that has a substantially same diffusion characteristics in the first direction and the second direction, wherein the second diffuser plate (10b) is disposed between the light source and the first diffuser plate (10a), further comprising a movement mechanism that vibrates the second diffuser plate in the first direction or the second direction at a certain cycle (see the operation in fig.4), wherein the light uniformizing element is a rod integrator (see 4 in fig.4), further comprising a second diffuser plate (10a) that has a substantially same diffusion characteristics in the first direction and the second direction, wherein the second diffuser plate is disposed between the first diffuser plate (10b) and the light uniformizing element (4), further comprising a movement mechanism that vibrates the second diffuser plate in the first direction or the second direction at a certain cycle (see 10a).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display apparatus with the teaching of Okuno with the teaching of Kasazumi so that a second diffuser plate that has a substantially same diffusion characteristics in the first direction and the second direction, wherein the second diffuser plate is disposed between the solid-state light source array and the first diffuser plate, further comprising a movement mechanism that vibrates the second diffuser plate in the first direction or the second direction at a certain cycle, wherein the light uniformizing element is a rod integrator to improve image quality by enhancing the homogeneity of the light beam.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-4, 6-9, 11-14 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.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 and 14 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.
With respect to claim 9, the prior art of record does not disclose or render obvious the projection display apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the light emitted from the solid-state light source array has a first diffusion angle component in the first direction and a second diffusion angle component in the second direction, and is incident on the first diffuser plate, the first diffuser plate has diffusion characteristics of a first diffusion angle in the first direction and a second diffusion angle in the second direction, and a sum of the first diffusion angle component and the first diffusion angle substantially coincides with a sum of the second diffusion angle component and the second diffusion angle.
With respect to claim 14, the prior art of record does not disclose or render obvious a projection display apparatus, comprising: a solid-state light source array that includes a plurality of solid-state light sources; and a first diffuser plate that diffuses light emitted from the solid-state light source array; wherein the first diffuser plate has different diffusion characteristics in a first direction and a second direction intersecting the first direction, such that a diffusion angle in the second direction is larger than a diffusion angle in the first direction, the solid-state light source array includes a plurality of emitters, and the larger diffusion angle in the second direction provided by the first diffuser plate causes each of a plurality of spots of light emitted from respective ones of the plurality of emitters and transmitted through the first diffuser plate to have a length in the second direction that is greater than a length in the first direction wherein, the first diffuser plate allows the light emitted from the solid-state light source array to be transmitted through the first diffuser plate to diffuse the light emitted to have an aspect ratio of an angle distribution that is approximately 1
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERRY L. BROOKS whose telephone number is (571)270-5711. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-4:00 PM.
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, Toan Ton can be reached on 5712722303. 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.
/JERRY L BROOKS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882