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 .
Status
The filing on 12/12/2025 amended claims 1, 3, 8, and added claim 19. Claims 1-19 are pending claim 1-6 and 8-18 are rejected and claim 7 is 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. Claim 19 is allowed.
Objection/s to the Application, Drawings and Claims
The filing on 12/12/2025 appropriately amended the title; hence the objections to the title made the last office action are withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - AIA 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 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.
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.
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 of this title, 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, 5, 6, and 8-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Osumi (US 20090009727 A1) in view of Terawaki (US 20230189473 A1) and in further view of Matsumoto (US 20100302463 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Osumi teaches projection device (Fig. 1-8B), comprising a housing (10), a spacer plate (wall/s between R3, R2 and R1), and a heat dissipation module (50), wherein the spacer plate (wall/s between R3, R2 and R1) is disposed in the housing (10), and the spacer plate (wall/s between R3, R2 and R1) is configured to divide the housing (10) into a first space (R3 and/or R2) and a second space (R1), wherein the first space (R3 and/or R2) is smaller than the second space (R1); the heat dissipation module (50) comprises a radiator (51), a heat dissipation plate (103), a driving element (52), and a tube (53), and the radiator (51), the heat dissipation plate (103), and the driving element (52) are connected to one another by the tube (53) to form a loop, wherein the radiator (51) is located in the first space (R3 and/or R2), and the heat dissipation plate (103) is located in the second space (R1); the first space (R3 and/or R2) has a first air inlet (at 15) and a first air outlet (16), and the radiator (51) is adjacent to the first air inlet (at 15; Fig. 1) and the first air outlet (16), and the radiator (51) is closer to the first air inlet (at 15) than the first air outlet (16), wherein a first cooling air flow enters the first space (R3 and/or R2) from the first air inlet (at 15), flows through the radiator (51), and is discharged from the first air outlet (16); and the second space (R1) has a second air inlet (11) and a second air outlet (12), wherein a second cooling air flow enters the second space (R1) from the second air inlet (11), and is discharged from the second air outlet (12).
Osumi does not teach the driving element (52) is located in the second space (R1) and the radiator (51) is closer to the first air outlet (16) than the first air inlet (at 15).
Terawaki teaches the driving element (27) is located in the second space (3).
Matsumoto teaches radiator (42) is closer to the first air outlet (at F1) than any air inlet (Fig. 1; [0039]).
Rearranging the driving element (52) to be located in the second space (R1) and the radiator (51) to be closer to the first air outlet (16) than the first air inlet (at 15) does not change the operation of the projection system in anyway.
Rearrangement of parts without changing the operation of the reference device is prima facie obvious. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claim 2, Osumi further teaches a projection lens (31) connected to the housing (10), wherein the housing (10) has a first side (front) and a second side (back) opposite to each other and a third side (left/right) and a fourth side (right/left) opposite to each other, the third side (left/right) and the fourth side (right/left) are connected to the first side (front) and the second side (back), and the projection lens (31) is located on the first side (front; Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 3, Osumi further teaches the first air outlet (16) located on the fourth side (left); and one of the second air inlet (11) and the second air outlet (12) is located on the first side (front),
Osumi does not explicitly teach first air inlet (at 15) is located on a top of the housing (10) and the other of the second air inlet (11) and the second air outlet (12) is located on the second side (back).
Having the other of the first air inlet (at 15) located on a top of the housing (10) and the other of the second air inlet (11) and the second air outlet (12) is located on the second side (back) amounts rearrangement of parts that does not affect the principle of operation of the device in any way.
Rearrangement of parts without changing the operation of the reference device is prima facie obvious. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claim 5, Osumi further teaches the first space (R3 and/or R2) comprises a first subspace (R3) and a second subspace (R2).
Osumi does not explicitly teach the first subspace (R3) located at a corner where the first side (front) and the third side (left/right) are connected, and the second subspace (R2) is located at a corner where the second side (back) and the fourth side (right/left) are connected.
Rearranging the first subspace (R3) at a corner where the first side (front) and the third side (left/right) are connected, and the second subspace (R2) at a corner where the second side (back) and the fourth side (right/left) are connected requires only rearrangement of parts that does not changing the principle of operation in anyway.
Rearrangement of parts without changing the operation of the reference device is prima facie obvious. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claim 6, Osumi further teaches the first air inlet (at 15) comprises a first sub air inlet (at 15) and a first sub air inlet (14), and the first air outlet (16) comprises a first sub air outlet (16) and a second sub air outlet (13); one of the first sub air inlet (at 15) and the first sub air outlet (16) located on the third side (left), and one of the first sub air inlet (14) and the second sub air outlet (13) located on a top (bottom when the projector is hung from the ceiling) of the housing (10), and the other of the first sub air inlet (14) and the second sub air outlet (13) is located on the fourth side (right) (right); and one of the second air inlet (11) and the second air outlet (12) located on the first side (front).
Osumi does not teach the other of the first sub air inlet (at 15) and the first sub air outlet (16) located on the first side (front); and the other of the second air inlet (11) and the second air outlet (12) located on second side (back).
Rearranging the other of the first sub air inlet (at 15) and the first sub air outlet (16) located on the first side (front) and the other of the second air inlet (11) and the second air outlet (12) located on second side (back) amounts to rearrangement of parts that does not changing the principle of operation in any way.
Rearrangement of parts without changing the operation of the reference device is prima facie obvious. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claim 8, Osumi further teaches one of the first air inlet (at 15) located on the second side (back); and one of the second air inlet (11) and the second air outlet (12) is located on the first side (front).
Osumi does not explicitly teach the first air inlet (at 15) located on a top of the housing (10), the first air outlet (16) located on the second side (back), or the other of the second air inlet (11) and the second air outlet (12) located on the second side (back)
Rearranging the first air inlet (at 15) on a top of the housing (10) and the other of the second air inlet (11), the first air outlet (16) located on the second side (back), and the second air outlet (12) located on the second side (back) amounts to rearrangement of parts that does not changing the principle of operation in any way.
Rearrangement of parts without changing the operation of the reference device is prima facie obvious. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claim 9, Osumi further teaches one of the first air inlet (at 15) and the first air outlet (16) is located on the fourth side (left), and the other of the first air inlet (at 15) and the first air outlet (16) is located on the second side (back); and one of the second air inlet (11) and the second air outlet (12) is located on the first side (front), and
Osumi does not explicitly teach the other of the second air inlet (11) and the second air outlet (12) located on the second side (back).
Rearranging the other of the second air inlet (11) and the second air outlet (12) on the second side (back) amounts to rearrangement of parts that does not changing the principle of operation in any way.
Rearrangement of parts without changing the operation of the reference device is prima facie obvious. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claim 10, Osumi does not explicitly teach the first space (R3 and/or R2) gradually decreases from the fourth side (right/left) to the third side (left/right) to present a trapezoidal space.
Having the shape as such the first space (R3 and/or R2) gradually decreases from the fourth side (right/left) to the third side (left/right) to present a trapezoidal space does not affect the functionality of the projection system in any way.
Change in shape that does not affect the functionality to the reference device is prima facie obvious. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) (The court held that the configuration of the claimed disposable plastic nursing container was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant.). In Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device.
Regarding claim 11, Osumi further teaches a system fan (12) disposed in the second space (R1).
Osumi does not teach the system fan (12) adjacent to the second side (back).
Rearranging the system fan (12) adjacent to the second side (back) amounts to rearrangement of parts that does not changing the principle of operation in any way.
Rearrangement of parts without changing the operation of the reference device is prima facie obvious. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claim 12, Osumi further teaches the first space (R3 and/or R2) being a rectangular space (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 13, Osumi further teaches the heat dissipation module (50) further comprises a heat dissipation fan (15) disposed on one side of the radiator (51) and located in the first space (R3 and/or R2).
Regarding claim 14, Osumi further teaches the spacer plate (wall/s between R3, R2 and R1) having a void, and the tube (53) passing through the void to be connected to the radiator (51) located in the first space (R3 and/or R2) and the heat dissipation plate (103) located in the second space (R1).
Osumi does not explicitly teach the driving element (52) located in the second space (R1).
Rearranging the driving element (52) to the second space (R1) amounts to rearrangement of parts that does not changing the principle of operation in any way.
Rearrangement of parts without changing the operation of the reference device is prima facie obvious. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claim 15, Osumi does not explicitly teach a gap between the void and the tube (53), and a compressible material is filled in the gap.
Terawaki teaches a gap between the void (through hole) and the tube (12/13), and a compressible material is filled in the gap ([0024]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to further modify Osumi with Terawaki; because it allows protection against vibration.
Regarding claim 16, Osumi further teaches the housing (10) comprises a cover plate and a base, and the spacer plate (wall/s between R3, R2 and R1) is connected to the cover plate and the base (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 17, Osumi further teaches providing gasket around the walls separating the spaces ([0068]), but Osumi does not explicitly teach a compressible material having a first side and a second side opposite to each other, wherein one of the first side and the second side is in contact with the spacer plate, and the other of the first side and the second side is in contact with the cover plate or the base.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to have a gasket in contact the spacer plate and the cover plate or the base; because it is allows sealing the spaces from leaking coolant or a passing of vibration.
Regarding claim 18, Osumi further teaches an orthographic projection of the first air inlet (at 15) or the first air outlet (16) on a plane is located between an orthographic projection of the spacer plate (wall/s between R3, R2 and R1) on the plane and an orthographic projection of the radiator (51) on the plane (Fig. 1).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Osumi in view of Terawaki and Matsumoto and in further view of Usuda (US 20160299414 A1).
Regarding claim 4, neither Osumi, Terawaki nor Matsumoto explicitly teaches the radiator comprises a first radiator and a second radiator, the heat dissipation plate comprises a first heat dissipation plate and a second heat dissipation plate, the driving element comprises a first driving element and a second radiator, the tube comprises a first tube and a second tube, and the loop comprises a first loop and a second loop; the first radiator, the first heat dissipation plate, and the first driving element are connected to one another by the first tube to form the first loop; and the second radiator, the second heat dissipation plate, and the second driving element are connected to one another by the second tube to form the second loop.
Usuda teaches having a separate cooling system for the imaging module (Fig. 1-4) including a second radiator (6), a second heat dissipation plate (51), a second driving element (53), a second tube (54), and a second loop (Fig. 3); wherein the second radiator (6), the second heat dissipation plate (51), and the second driving element (53) are connected to one another by the second tube (54) to form the second loop (Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to Osumi, Terawaki and Matsumoto with Usuda; because it allows cooling the imaging module.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 is 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. Claim 19 is allowed.
Regarding claims 7 and 19, the closest prior art references, Osumi, Terawaki, Matsumoto, and Usuda, do not teach, by themselves or in combination with one another, “the first radiator is located in the first subspace, and the second radiator is located in the second subspace; the first radiator, the first heat dissipation plate, and the first driving element are connected to one another by the first tube to form the first loop; and the second radiator, the second heat dissipation plate, and the second driving element are connected to one another by the second tube to form the second loop.” Furthermore, there is no teaching, suggestion or motivation in the prior art references to modify the references in such manner that results in the above claimed limitation/s; hence the invention as claimed by claims 7 and 19 is not obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
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 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 BAO-LUAN Q LE whose telephone number is (571)270-5362. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday; 9:00AM-5:00PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Minh-Toan Ton can be reached on (571) 272 230303. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
Or faxed to:
(571) 273-8300, (for formal communications intended for entry)
Or:
(571) 273-7490, (for informal or draft communications, please label “PROPOSED” or “DRAFT”)
Hand-delivered responses should be brought to:
Customer Service Window
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
/BAO-LUAN Q LE/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882