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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 5/2/2023, 9/26/2024, and 3/3/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Inventorship
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Specification
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Drawings
Sixteen (16) sheets of drawings were filed on 02/02/2023 and have been accepted by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 6-7, 22, 24, and 31 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 6, line 3: “the interface” should read –an interface-.
Claim 7, line 2: “the optically functional surfaces or surfaces” should read –an optically functional surface-.
Claim 22, line 14, contains a comma in the phrase “the incoupled light such, that the…”, the comma should be removed or moved to read either –the incoupled light, such that the…- or – the incoupled light such that the…-.
In claim 24, line 2, the phrase “wherein pattern replication method” should be changed to –wherein a pattern replication method-.
Claim 31, line 3: “the wavelength conversion layer” should read –a wavelength conversion layer-.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 8-9, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “substantially variable periodic pattern” in claim 8 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially variable periodic pattern” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. “Substantially variable” is a relative term because the degree to or manner in which the periodic pattern is variable is not defined anywhere in the disclosure. Substantial variability in a periodic pattern could include a change in the period over course of a patterned surface, or a change in the shape of the pattern, or any other variation in the pattern. For the purposes of examination, claim 8 will be examined as if any variation in the pattern period, shape, or any other parameter defining the periodic pattern meets the limitations of the claim.
The term “substantially constant periodic pattern” in claim 9 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially constant periodic pattern” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. “Substantially constant” is a relative term because the degree to or manner in which the periodic pattern is constant is not defined anywhere in the disclosure. Substantial consistency in a periodic pattern could include consistency in the period over course of a patterned surface, or in the shape of the pattern, or any other characteristic of the periodic pattern. For the purposes of examination, claim 9 will be examined as if any consistency in the pattern period, shape, or any other parameter defining the periodic pattern meets the limitations of the claim.
The term “essentially flat” in claim 16 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “essentially flat” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. “Essentially flat” is a relative term because the degree to which a feature is flat is not defined anywhere in the disclosure. For instance, patterned feature such as the blade of a bread knife, that maintains an average thickness across any distance could be considered essentially flat. For the purposes of examination, claim 16 will be examined as if any layer where the average variation in the surface features of the layer is consistent across the surface of the layer meets the limitations of the claim.
The terms “essentially flat” and “substantially optically transparent” in claim 17 are relative terms which render the claim indefinite. The terms “essentially flat” and “substantially optically transparent” are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. “Essentially flat” is a relative term because the degree to which a feature is flat is not defined anywhere in the disclosure. For instance, patterned feature such as the blade of a bread knife, that maintains an average thickness across any distance could be considered essentially flat. For the purposes of examination, claim 17 will be examined as if any layer where the average variation in the surface features of the layer is consistent across the surface of the layer meets the limitations of the claim. “Substantially optically transparent” is a relative term because the degree to which a feature is optically transparent is not defined anywhere in the disclosure. A feature that allows any light to pass through it is optically transparent. For the purposes of examination, claim 17 will be examined as if any transparent material meets the limitations of the claim.
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) 22-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rao et al. (US 2020/0249568 A1 hereinafter Rao)
Regarding claim 22; Rao discloses a method for manufacturing an optical incoupling tape (Fig. 8D) comprising at least one pattern (822) formed with a number of periodic cavity features (the pattern is a grating having periodic cavity features, see Fig. 8D) embedded in a substrate material (820), said method comprises:
- manufacturing a patterned master tool for said at least one pattern by a fabrication method selected from any one of: lithographic, three-dimensional printing, micro-machining, laser engraving, or any combination thereof (Rao discloses a master mold manufactured by known processes including a micro-machining process, see Par. 132),
- transferring the pattern onto the substrate to generate a patterned substrate (Rao discloses transferring the pattern onto the substrate to generate a patterned substrate by first using the master mold to pattern a soft stamp foil, see Fig. 7A-7D, and subsequently transferring the pattern to the substrate by a lamination process, see Fig. 8A-8D); and
- generating an embedded cavity pattern or patterns by applying onto said patterned substrate an additional substrate layer or a cover layer (Rao discloses generating the embedded cavity pattern on the patterned substrate by applying an additional substrate (the soft stamp foil) to the patterned substrate, see Fig. 8A-8D wherein the patterned soft foil substrate is laminated onto a resin layer and the cavity pattern is formed in the resin layer substrate), wherein the embedded cavity pattern(s) comprise(s) cavities configured as optically functional cavities filled with a material having a refractive index different from the refractive index of the material of the substrate surrounding the cavity (Rao discloses the cavity may be filled with air, see Par. 109, and the substrate may be formed of resin with a high refractive indexes from 1.4 to as high as greater than 2, see Par 66-69), and wherein said embedded cavity pattern is configured to incouple light incident thereto and to adjust direction of the incoupled light such, that the incoupled light acquires a propagation path through a lightguide medium via a series of total internal reflections (Rao discloses that the cavity pattern forms a grating coupler which incouples light to a lightguide, see Par. 4).
Regarding claim 23; Rao discloses the method of claim 22, wherein the additional substrate layer is applied onto the patterned substrate layer by a lamination method selected from any one of:
a roll-to-roll lamination, a roll-to-sheet lamination or a sheet-to-sheet lamination (Rao discloses laminating the substrate layers using a roll-to-sheet method, see Fig. 8C and Par. 134).
Regarding claim 24; Rao discloses the method of any one of claim 22, further comprising replication of a fabricated pattern (Rao discloses that a step in the process of forming the optical incoupling tape involves replicating the pattern from the mold onto a soft foil substrate, see Fig. 7A-7D),
wherein pattern replication method is selected from any one of imprinting, extrusion replication or three-dimensional printing (the pattern is replicated by imprinting the mold pattern onto the soft foil substrate, see Fig. 7A-7D).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 1-17, 20, and 25-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furuta et al. (US 2017/0176663 A1 hereinafter Furuta) in view of Van Ostrand et al. (US2010/0085750 A1 hereinafter Van Ostrand).
Regarding claim 1; Furuta discloses an optical incoupling tape (57, Fig. 6) for a lightguide (56, Fig. 6), comprising:
- a substrate (coupling tape includes a substrate layer, see Par 105), and
- at least one pattern formed with a number of periodic pattern features (a pattern is formed in the optical incoupling tape, see Fig. 6) embedded in a substrate material and configured as optically functional embedded cavities (cavities are formed in the substrate material of the optical incoupling tape, see Fig. 6),
wherein the pattern is configured to incouple light incident thereto and to adjust direction of the incoupled light such that the incoupled light acquires a propagation path through a lightguide medium via a series of total internal reflections (the optical coupling tape is configured to enable rays of light emitted from a source to accurately enter a lightguide, see Par. 7, and the periodic pattern of the reflective surface of coupling tape will inherently adjust the direction of incoupled light), and
wherein said optical incoupling tape (57) is attachable onto at least one planar surface of the lightguide (56) (the optical coupling tape is attached to the surface of the lightguide along a planar direction perpendicular to the depicted cross-section, see Fig. 6), whereby an optical contact for light transmission between the tape and a lightguide medium is formed (the optical coupling tape is optically coupled to, and therefore in optical contact with, the lightguide, see Par. 7).
Furuta fails to disclose that the cavities are filled with a material having a refractive index different from the refractive index of the material of the substrate surrounding the cavity.
Van Ostrand teaches a light incoupling tape (101, Fig. 1A, 3C), which includes embedded cavities (303, Fig. 3C) wherein the cavities (303) can be filled with any suitable material having a refractive index different from the refractive index of the material of the substrate surrounding the cavity in order to achieve desired optical coupling performance (Par. 46). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have included embedded cavities filled with any suitable material, including a material having a different refractive index than the refractive index of the substrate within which they are embedded, such as those taught by Van Ostrand within the light incoupling tape disclosed by Furuta in order to achieve desired optical coupling performance between the incoupling tape and the lightguide.
Regarding claim 2; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses the optical incoupling tape (57) of claim 1.
Furuta further discloses that the incoupled light is redirected at an interface between each said cavity and the material of the substrate surrounding the cavity to acquire the propagation path through the lightguide (56) medium (the reflective optical incoupling tape redirects light at an interface between the resin substrate of the tape and the air filling the cavity of the tape),
whereupon an angle of incidence at an interface between the lightguide medium and an ambient, and, optionally, an angle of incidence at the interface between each cavity and the material of the substrate surrounding the cavity is/are larger than or equal to a critical angle of total internal reflection (the lightguide disclosed by Furuta carries light along the lightguide medium wherein the light is incident on the lightguide at an interface with the ambient between the source/optical coupling tape and the face of the lightguide, it is an inherent property of a lightguide that light coupled into the lightguide and traveling along the lightguide medium has an angle of incidence greater than the critical angle of total internal reflection).
Regarding claim 3; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses the optical incoupling tape (57) of claim 1.
Furuta further discloses that the at least one pattern is configured to perform an optical function related to incoupling and adjusting direction of light received thereto (the pattern is configured to adjust the direction of light reflected off of the reflective optical incoupling tape and which will have an impact on the incoupling of light to the lightguide),
wherein said optical function is selected from a group consisting of: a reflection function, an absorption function, a transmittal function, a collimation function, a refraction function, a diffraction function, a polarization function, and any combination thereof (the optical incoupling tape is a reflective tape, and any pattern in the shape of the tape will change the direction of the reflections off of the optical incoupling tape).
Regarding claim 4; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses the optical incoupling tape (57) of claim 1.
Furuta further discloses that the pattern is rendered optically functional by providing a cavity or a group of cavities in the pattern with a number of parameters,
wherein the number of parameters comprises any combination of parameters selected from the group consisting of: dimensions, shape, cross-sectional profile, orientation, periodicity, and fill factor (the cavities of the pattern inherently have dimensions, a shape, cross sectional profile, orientation, which will alter the direction of light incident on the reflective surface of the tape).
Regarding claim 5; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses the optical incoupling tape (57) of claim 1.
Furuta further discloses that each individual cavity in the pattern has a number of optically functional surfaces (each cavity of the optical incoupling tape has two surfaces when meet at a point in the middle of the cavity, see Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 6; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses the optical incoupling tape (57) of claim 1.
Furuta further discloses that the optically functional surface or surfaces is/are established by any surface or surfaces formed at the interface between each cavity and the material of the substrate surrounding the cavity (the optically functional surface of the optical incoupling tape is established by the surface formed at the interface between each cavity and the substrate material).
Regarding claim 7; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses the optical incoupling tape (57) of claim 1.
Furuta further discloses that the optically functional surface or surfaces in each individual cavity in the pattern is/are established with any one of a low refractive index reflector, a polarizer, a diffuser, an absorber, or any combination thereof (the optical incoupling tape acts as a diffuser, see Par. 13).
Regarding claim 8, Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses the optical incoupling tape (57) of claim 1.
Furuta further discloses that the cavities are configured and arranged in the pattern such, as to form a substantially variable periodic pattern (the cavities are configured in a pattern of varied shapes, curves and wedges, which form a variable periodic pattern, see Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 9; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses the optical incoupling tape (57) of claim 1.
Furuta further discloses that the cavities are configured and arranged in the pattern such as to form a substantially constant periodic pattern (the cavities are configured and arranged in a substantially constant periodic pattern, see Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 10; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses the optical incoupling tape (57) of claim 1.
Furuta further discloses that in the pattern of the cavities are established with discrete or at least partly continuous pattern features (the cavities depicted in Fig. 6 each end at a discrete line where the substrate is thinnest, the abrupt change in direction is inherently discontinuous).
Regarding claim 11; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses the optical incoupling tape (57) of claim 1.
Furuta further discloses that the optical incoupling tape (57) comprises a number of patterns (curves and wedges, see Fig. 6) arranged in periodic segments, each segment having a predefined area and a length of a period (the patterns are depicted in regular periodic segments which inherently have a predefined area and length of the period, see Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 12; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses the optical incoupling tape (57) of claim 1.
Furuta further discloses that the patterns are configured variable by a number of cavity-related parameters, wherein the number of cavity-related parameters comprises an individual parameter or any combination of parameters selected from the group consisting of dimensions, shape, cross-sectional profile, orientation, position, periodicity, and fill factor (the pattern is a varied pattern of curves and wedges wherein there is variation in cavity-related parameters including dimensions, shape, cross-sectional profile, position, and fill factor, see Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 13; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses the optical incoupling tape (57) of claim 1.
Furuta further discloses that the cavities are established with two-dimensional-or three-dimensional pattern features having cross-sectional profiles selected from the group consisting of linear, rectangular, triangular, blazed, slanted, trapezoid, curved, wave-shaped and sinusoidal profiles (the cavities are depicted patterned with three-dimensional curved cross-sectional profiles, see Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 14; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses the optical incoupling tape (57) of claim 1.
Furuta fails to disclose that the cavities are filled with a gaseous material, such as air.
Van Ostrand teaches that the cavities (303, Fig. 3C) can be filled with any suitable material, including a gaseous material such as air, having a refractive index different from the refractive index of the material of the substrate surrounding the cavity in order to achieve desired optical coupling performance (Par. 46). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have included embedded cavities filled with any suitable material, including air, as taught by Van Ostrand within the light incoupling tape disclosed by Furuta in order to achieve desired optical coupling performance between the incoupling tape and the lightguide.
Regarding claim 15; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses the optical incoupling tape (57) of claim 1.
Furuta further discloses that the light incoupling tape (57) is configured attachable onto a planar surface or planar surfaces of the lightguide by adhesion (Par. 14).
Regarding claim 16; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses the optical incoupling tape (57) of claim 1.
Furuta further discloses that the pattern or patterns comprise(s) cavities formed in the substrate provided as an essentially flat, planar substrate layer (the optical coupling tape is depicted as essentially flat with cavities formed in the essentially flat layer, see Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 17; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses the optical incoupling tape of claim 1,
Furuta does not specifically disclose wherein the essentially flat, planar substrate layer, in which the cavities are formed, is made of substantially optically transparent material.
Van Ostrand teaches that the essentially flat, planar substrate layer (101; Fig. 1A, 3C) in which cavities (303, Fig. 3C) are formed, is made of substantially optically transparent material in order to provide a light guide (100, Fig. 1A) to couple light through substrate (see Par 29, 45). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have incorporated the substantially transparent substrate layer taught by Van Ostrand within the optical incoupling tape of Furuta, in order to achieve a desired optical coupling performance from the optical incoupling tape.
Regarding claim 20; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses the optical incoupling tape (57) of claim 1.
Furuta further discloses that the light incoupling tape (57) comprises a wedge structure (there is a wedge structure between each curved structure of the optical incoupling tape, see Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 25; Furuta/Van Ostrand further discloses a lightguide (Furuta; 56), comprising an optically transparent medium configured to establish a path for light propagation through the lightguide (furuta; 56), and an optical incoupling tape (57), as defined in claim 1.
Furuta further discloses said optical incoupling tape (57) being attached onto at least one planar surface of said lightguide (56) (the tape is attached to onto a planar surface the plane extending perpendicular to the cross-section, see Fig 6).
Regarding claim 26; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses the lightguide (56) of claim 25.
Furuta further discloses that the lightguide (56) comprises the optical incoupling tape (57) attached thereto by adhesion (Par. 14).
Regarding claim 27; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses use of a lightguide (56), as defined in claim 25, in illumination and/or indication (Furuta; Par. 2).
Regarding claim 28; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses an optical incoupling tape (57), in which the optical incoupling tape (57) is implemented in accordance to what is defined in claim 1.
Furuta does not specifically disclose a roll of optical incoupling tape, however Furuta does disclose that the tape has a long belt like shape, is flexible, and is capable of being rolled around a bar (see Par. 60). Rolling tapes and other strips of flexible material is a well-known technique for storing such materials, and the tape disclosed by Furuta is capable of being rolled. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have rolled the optical incoupling tape disclosed by Furuta into a roll for efficient storage.
Regarding claim 29; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses an optical unit (Furuta; Fig. 6), comprising an optical incoupling tape (57) with an adhesion layer (see Furuta; Par. 14) for a lightguide (56) attachment and at least one emitter device (Furuta; 13, Fig. 6), wherein the optical incoupling tape is configured as defined in claim 1.
Regarding claim 30; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses the optical unit of claim 29, wherein the at least one emitter device (13) is selected from a group consisting of: a Light Emitting Diode (LED), an Organic Light Emitting Diode (OLED), a laser diode, a LED bar, an OLED strip, a microchip LED strip, and a cold cathode tube (the emitter device is an LED, see Par. 80).
Claim(s) 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furuta et al. (US 2017/0176663 A1 hereinafter Furuta) in view Van Ostrand et al. (US2010/0085750 A1 hereinafter Van Ostrand) and further in view of Sitter et al (US 2018/0329207 A1 hereinafter Sitter).
Regarding claim 18; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses the optical incoupling tape of any preceding claim 1.
Furuta/Van Ostrand fails to disclose that the pattern or patterns comprise(s) cavities formed at an interface with an additional flat, planar substrate layer, provided as an optically transparent layer, a reflector layer, and/or a coloured layer.
Sitter teaches a laminated resin grating (Fig. 18) wherein a grating cavity pattern (1800, Fig. 18) comprises cavities (1810, Fig. 18) formed at an interface with an additional flat, planar substrate layer (1831, Fig. 18) provided as an optically transparent layer in order to avoid undesirable scattering of light (see Par. 44). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have incorporated cavities formed at an interface with an additional flat planar substrate layer provided as an optically transparent layer as taught by Sitter within the optical coupling tape disclosed by Furuta/Van Ostrand in order to achieve a desired optical performance from the optical incoupling tape including the reduction of undesirable scattering of incident light.
Regarding claim 19; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses the optical incoupling tape of claim 1.
Furuta/Van Ostrand fails to disclose that the tape comprises a number of embedded patterns arranged in a stacked configuration.
Sitter teaches a laminated resin grating (Fig. 18) comprising a number of embedded patterns (1820, 1831, Fig. 18) arranged in a stacked configuration (the pattens are depicted stacked, see Fig. 18) in order to reduce optical interference patterns in light interacting with the grating (Par. 44). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have incorporated stacked patterned layers as taught by Sitter within the optical coupling tape disclosed by Furuta/Van Ostrand, in order to reduce forming undesirable optical interference patterns from indecent light.
Claim(s) 21 and 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furuta et al. (US 2017/0176663 A1 hereinafter Furuta) in view Van Ostrand et al. (US2010/0085750 A1 hereinafter Van Ostrand) and further in view of Nichol et al. (US 2011/0255303 A1 hereinafter Nichol).
Regarding claim 21. Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses the optical incoupling tape (57, Fig. 6) of claim 1.
Furuta/Van Ostrand fails to disclose a wavelength conversion layer.
Nichol teaches numerous wavelength conversion layers for converting light from a blue LED source into light of a different wavelength (see Par. 139). Wavelength conversion layers are well-known in the art, and it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have incorporated wavelength conversion layers such as those taught by Nichol within the optical coupling tape disclosed by Furuta/Van Ostrand in order to convert source light from a first wavelength to a different second wavelength.
Regarding claim 31; Furuta/Van Ostrand discloses the optical incoupling tape (57) of claim 29, comprising at least one light emitter device (13, Fig. 6)) configured for emitting monochromic light (LEDs emit monochromatic light).
Furuta/Van Ostrand fails to disclose the wavelength conversion layer.
Nichol teaches numerous wavelength conversion layers for converting light from a blue LED source into light of a different wavelength (see Par. 139). Wavelength conversion layers are well-known in the art, and it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have incorporated wavelength conversion layers such as those taught by Nichol within the optical coupling tape disclosed by Furuta/Van Ostrand in order to convert source light from a first wavelength to a different second wavelength.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lee et al. (US 2019/0064420 A1) see entire disclosure;
Kotz et al. (US 5,995,690) see entire disclosure;
Gangopadhyay et al. (US 2018/0050904 A1) see entire disclosure;
Mayrhofer et al. (US 2013/0161938 A1) see entire disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC P STRUTH whose telephone number is (571)270-7351. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Uyen-Chau N Le can be reached on 571-272-2397. 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.
/ERIC PAUL STRUTH/Examiner, Art Unit 2874
/UYEN CHAU N LE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874