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
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.
Claims 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schreiber et al (US 2011/0228231; hereinafter referred to as Schreiber).
Regarding Claim 20, Schreiber teaches a projection display (Figure 10) comprising:
a microprojector (Figure 10; wherein the claimed microprojector is a combination of the Field Lenses 2, Imaging Structures 3, Projection Lens Array 4, Cover Glass 18, LED Plane 19 and Substrate 20), and
a light source (Figure 10; Light Source 1) for illuminating the microprojector (see Figure 10 and Paragraph [0031]; wherein it is disclosed that the light source (1) illuminates a field lens array (2), in the immediate vicinity of which the array of imaging structures (3) is situated); the microprojector (Figure 10; wherein the claimed microprojector is a combination of the Field Lenses 2, Imaging Structures 3, Projection Lens Array 4, Cover Glass 18, LED Plane 19 and Substrate 20) comprising:
a transparent support (Figure 10; Substrate 20);
a projector lens array (Figure 10; Projection Lens Array 4) with a plurality of projector lenses (see Figure 10) arranged on the transparent support (see Figure 10; wherein the lenses of the projection lens array 4 are arranged on the substrate 20), the projector lens array (Figure 10; Projection Lens Array 4) comprising a plurality of projector lenses (see Figure 10);
an object structure array (Figure 10; Imaging Structures 3) arranged on the transparent support (Figure 10; Substrate 20) on a side of the support (Figure 10; Substrate 20) facing away from the projector lens array (see Figure 10; wherein the imaging structures 3 are arranged on a side of the substrate 20 facing away from the projection lens array 4), the object structure array (Figure 10; Imaging Structures 3) comprising a plurality of essentially identical object structures (see Figure 10), wherein at least one projector lens (Figure 10; Projection Lens Array 4) is associated with one object structure (see Figure 10; wherein there is a one to one correspondence between the imaging structures 3 and the lenses of the projection lens array 4), such that the projections of the object structures (Figure 10; Imaging Structures 3) superpose through the projector lenses (Figure 10; Projection Lens Array 4) to form an overall image (see Figure 10 and Paragraph [0031]; wherein it is disclosed that the projection lens array images a superimposition of all individual images onto a screen (5)); and
a condenser lens layer (Figure 10; Field Lenses 2) arranged on the object structures (Figure 10; Imaging Structures 3), into which layer condenser lenses (Figure 10; Field Lenses 2) embossed (see Figure 10).
Regarding Claim 21, Schreiber teaches the limitations of claim 20 as detailed above.
Schreiber further teaches the condenser lens layer (Figure 10; Field Lenses 2) comprises flat regions between embossed condenser lenses (see Figure 10).
Regarding Claim 22, Schreiber teaches the limitations of claim 21 as detailed above.
Schreiber further teaches the condenser lens layer (Figure 10; Field Lenses 2) is adjacent to the object structure array (see Figure 10; wherein the field lenses 2 are adjacent to the imaging structures 3).
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 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schreiber et al (US 2011/0228231; hereinafter referred to as Schreiber) as applied to claim 21, in view of Takayama et al (US 2018/0224581; hereinafter referred to as Takayama).
Regarding Claim 23, Schreiber teaches the limitations of claim 21 as detailed above.
Schreiber does not expressly disclose that the condenser lens layer is a UV-molded layer.
Takayama discloses a condenser lens layer (Figure 3; Lenticular Lens 12) which is a UV-molded layer (see Paragraph [0090]; wherein it is disclosed that the lenticular lens 12 may be formed by coating the main surface of the light guide plate body 11 with a liquid UV curable resin material or laminating a sheet state UV curable resin material on the main surface of the light guide plate body 11, followed by pressing on a roll mold, transferring a lenticular lens shape formed on the surface of the mold and then applying UV to cure in accordance with the above procedure).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the condenser lens layer of Schreiber such that the condenser lens layer is a UV-molded layer, as taught by Takayama, because doing so would allow for the entire main surface of the light guide plate body to be made successfully in contact with the mold, whereby the size accuracy of the lenticular lens to be formed on the main surface of the light guide plate body 11 is high (see Takayama Paragraph [0041]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-19 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance.
Regarding Claim 1, the prior art of record, whether taken alone or in combination, fails to teach, suggest or render obvious the limitations which require wherein the illumination layer comprises a first electrode, a second electrode, and a light-emitting layer arranged between the first electrode and the second electrode, and wherein the first electrode is a transparent electrode, wherein the light-emitting layer comprises a first region with a light-emitting material and a second region with a low-index material comprising an index of refraction that is smaller than the index of refraction of the light- emitting material, wherein the second region is arranged adjacent to the first region in a multiply repeating manner, wherein the low-index material forms a grid that is oriented in a plane parallel to the first electrode.
These limitations in combination with the other limitations of claim 1 renders the claim non-obvious over the prior art of record.
Dependent claims 2-12 are likewise allowable by virtue of their dependency upon allowable independent claim 1.
Regarding Claim 13, the prior art of record, whether taken alone or in combination, fails to teach, suggest or render obvious the limitations which require the illumination layer comprises a first electrode, a second electrode, and light-emitting layer sections arranged between the first electrode and the second electrode, wherein the first electrode is a transparent electrode, and wherein the illumination layer is arranged on the object structure array, wherein the light-emitting layer comprises a first region with a light-emitting material and a second region with a low-index material comprising an index of refraction that is smaller than the index of refraction of the light- emitting material, and wherein the low-index material forms a grid that is oriented in a plane parallel to the first electrode.
These limitations in combination with the other limitations of claim 13 renders the claim non-obvious over the prior art of record.
Dependent claim 14-19 are likewise allowable by virtue of their dependency upon allowable independent claim 13.
As it pertains to the limitations of claim 1, the closest prior art of record Schreiber (US 2011/0228231) teaches a projection display (Figure 10) comprising: a transparent support (Figure 10; Substrate 20); a projector lens array (Figure 10; Projection Lens Array 4) with a plurality of projector lenses arranged on the transparent support (see Figure 10); an object structure array (Figure 10; Imaging Structures 3) arranged on the transparent support (Figure 10; Substrate 20) on a side of the support (Figure 10; Substrate 20) facing away from the projector lens array (see Figure 10; wherein the imaging structures 3 are arranged on a side of the substrate 20 facing away from the projection lens array 4), the object structure array (Figure 10; Imaging Structures 3) comprising a plurality of essentially identical object structures (see Figure 10), wherein at least one projector lens (Figure 10; Projection Lens Array 4) is associated with one object structure (see Figure 10; wherein there is a one to one correspondence between the imaging structures 3 and the lenses of the projection lens array 4), such that the projections of the object structures (Figure 10; Imaging Structures 3) superpose through the projector lenses (Figure 10; Projection Lens Array 4) to form an overall image (see Figure 10 and Paragraph [0031]; wherein it is disclosed that the projection lens array images a superimposition of all individual images onto a screen (5)); and an illumination layer (Figure 10; Light Source 1) for illuminating the object structures (see Figure 10 and Paragraph [0031]; wherein it is disclosed that the light source (1) illuminates a field lens array (2), in the immediate vicinity of which the array of imaging structures (3) is situated), the illumination layer (Figure 10; Light Source 1) being arranged on the object structure array such that the object structure array (Figure 10; Imaging Structures 3) being between the transparent support (Figure 10; Substrate 20) and the illumination layer (see Figure 10).
However, Schreiber fails to teach, suggest or render obvious the limitations requiring the illumination layer comprises a first electrode, a second electrode, and a light-emitting layer arranged between the first electrode and the second electrode, and wherein the first electrode is a transparent electrode, wherein the light-emitting layer comprises a first region with a light-emitting material and a second region with a low-index material comprising an index of refraction that is smaller than the index of refraction of the light- emitting material, wherein the second region is arranged adjacent to the first region in a multiply repeating manner, wherein the low-index material forms a grid that is oriented in a plane parallel to the first electrode.
As it pertains to the limitations of claim 13, the closest prior art of record Schreiber (US 2011/0228231) teaches a projection display (Figure 10) comprising: a transparent support (Figure 10; Substrate 20); a projector lens array (Figure 10; Projection Lens Array 4) with a plurality of projector lenses arranged on the transparent support (see Figure 10), the projector lens array (Figure 10; Projection Lens Array 4) comprising a plurality of projector lenses (see Figure 10); an object structure array (Figure 10; Imaging Structures 3) arranged on the transparent support (Figure 10; Substrate 20) on a side of the support (Figure 10; Substrate 20) facing away from the projector lens array (see Figure 10; wherein the imaging structures 3 are arranged on a side of the substrate 20 facing away from the projection lens array 4), the object structure array (Figure 10; Imaging Structures 3) comprising a plurality of essentially identical object structures (see Figure 10), wherein at least one projector lens (Figure 10; Projection Lens Array 4) is associated with one object structure (see Figure 10; wherein there is a one to one correspondence between the imaging structures 3 and the lenses of the projection lens array 4), such that the projections of the object structures (Figure 10; Imaging Structures 3) superpose through the projector lenses (Figure 10; Projection Lens Array 4) to form an overall image (see Figure 10 and Paragraph [0031]; wherein it is disclosed that the projection lens array images a superimposition of all individual images onto a screen (5)); and an illumination layer (Figure 10; Light Source 1) for illuminating the object structures (see Figure 10 and Paragraph [0031]; wherein it is disclosed that the light source (1) illuminates a field lens array (2), in the immediate vicinity of which the array of imaging structures (3) is situated).
However, Schreiber fails to teach, suggest or render obvious the limitations requiring the illumination layer comprises a first electrode, a second electrode, and light-emitting layer sections arranged between the first electrode and the second electrode, wherein the first electrode is a transparent electrode, and wherein the illumination layer is arranged on the object structure array, wherein the light-emitting layer comprises a first region with a light-emitting material and a second region with a low-index material comprising an index of refraction that is smaller than the index of refraction of the light- emitting material, and wherein the low-index material forms a grid that is oriented in a plane parallel to the first electrode.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER A LAMB II whose telephone number is (571)270-0648. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10am - 5pm 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, Minh-Toan Ton can be reached at (571) 272-2303. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER A LAMB II/Examiner, Art Unit 2882