DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This office action is in response to a filing of 4/15/2026.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2/10/2026 complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the examiner considered the information disclosure statement.
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.
Claims 1, 3-5 and 7-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daisuke et al. (WO2021060247) in view of Yanokochi et al. (US20220206203).
Regarding claim 1, Daisuke teaches a phase difference plate (Daisuke, abstract, figs.1-21, this retardation plate comprises a first optically anisotropic layer in which the spiral axis of a stick-shaped liquid crystal compound is aligned with the direction of thickness and which has an in-plane phase difference) comprising: at least three or more optically anisotropic layers (Daisuke, fig.2, three optically anisotropic layers, 102, 104 and 103), wherein the optically anisotropic layers are laminated in a state of being in direct contact with each other (see Daisuke, fig.2, the optically anisotropic layers 102, 104 and 103 are laminated in a state of being in direct contact with each other), and the phase difference plate includes a second optically anisotropic layer (Daisuke, fig.2, a second optically anisotropic layer has been referred as the second optically anisotropic layer 103; page 23, paragraph [0060], 103 Second optically anisotropic layer) which is a layer formed by fixing a rod-like liquid crystal compound twist-aligned along a helical axis extending in a thickness direction (Daisuke, fig.2, paragraph [0021], second optically anisotropic layers,103 is twisted and oriented with the thickness direction as the helical axis).
Daisuke does not explicitly teach wherein the phase difference plate includes a first optically anisotropic layer which is a layer formed by fixing a vertically aligned disk-like liquid crystal compound.
However, in the analogous optically anisotropic layers, Yanokochi teaches optically anisotropic layers (figs.1-13, abstract, first, a second, and a third optically anisotropic layer), and further teaches
wherein the phase difference plate (Yanokochi, figs.1-13, paragraph [0010], a circularly polarizing plate in an organic EL display device) includes a first optically anisotropic layer (Yanokochi, a first optically anisotropic layer has been referred as the optical anisotropic layer 18 of Yanokochi) which is a layer formed by fixing a vertically aligned disk-like liquid crystal compound (Yanokochi, paragraph [0121], the optically anisotropic layer 18 is preferably a layer formed by fixing an alignment state of a homeotropically aligned liquid crystal compound).
Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the phase difference plate of Daisuke with the specific layer as taught by Yanokochi for the purpose to provide an optical film that has a thin thickness, is suitable in terms of continuous productivity, and exhibits suppressed tinting of black color in a front direction and an oblique direction in a case of being used as a circularly polarizing plate in an organic EL display device (Yanokochi, paragraph [0010]).
Regarding claim 3, Combination Daisuke-Yanokochi discloses the invention as described in Claim 1 and Daisuke further teaches wherein a product And of a refractive index anisotropy Δn of the second optically anisotropic layer at a wavelength of 550 nm and a thickness d of the second optically anisotropic layer is 120 to 240 nm (Daisuke, 137.5nm; paragraph [0024], the second optically anisotropic layer 103 used in the retardation plate which is the product (Δn2·d2) of the refractive index anisotropy Δn2 at a wavelength of 550 nm and the thickness d2 of the liquid crystal layer, is substantially 137.5 nm).
Regarding claim 4, Combination Daisuke-Yanokochi discloses the invention as described in Claim 1 and Daisuke further teaches wherein the phase difference plate includes a third optically anisotropic layer which is a layer formed by fixing a vertically aligned rod-like liquid crystal compound (Daisuke, fig.2, 104 Third optically anisotropic layer of Daisuke, page 7, paragraph [0013], the third optically anisotropic layer, 104 is a layer containing a vertically aligned liquid crystal compound).
Regarding claim 5, Combination Daisuke-Yanokochi discloses the invention as described in Claim 4 and Daisuke further teaches wherein a thickness direction retardation of the third optically anisotropic layer at a wavelength of 550 nm is −120 to −10 nm (see annotated image, Daisuke, Table 1, the thickness direction retardation of the third optically anisotropic layer at a wavelength of 550 nm, Rth = −120, page 2, Daisuke’s claim 1, the third optically anisotropic layer is a layer containing a vertically aligned liquid crystal compound, and the thickness direction retardation value Rth is -150 to -80 nm---further, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum range or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.05 Section II, Subsection A, citing In re Aller,105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A. 1955)).
PNG
media_image1.png
602
1428
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Combination Daisuke-Yanokochi discloses the invention as described in Claim 1 and Daisuke further teaches wherein a refractive index of the optically anisotropic layer is more than 1.53 (1.6725; page 20, n<sub>z</sub> = 1.6725; paragraph [0048], the refractive index components, n<sub>z</sub>).
Regarding claim 8, Combination Daisuke-Yanokochi discloses the invention as described in Claim 1 and Daisuke further teaches wherein a phase difference plate with a temporary support (Daisuke, page 14, paragraph [0032], The polarizing element preferably includes a base material, also called a support or a supporting film) for protecting the polarizing element), comprising: the phase difference plate according to claim 1 (see claim 1); and a temporary support (Daisuke, described above).
Regarding claim 9, Combination Daisuke-Yanokochi discloses the invention as described in Claim 1 and Daisuke further teaches wherein a circularly polarizing plate (Daisuke page 23, paragraph [0060], 105 Circularly polarizing plate) comprising: the phase difference plate according to claim 1; and a polarizer (Daisuke, page 23, paragraph [0060], 106 Polarizing element, polarizing plate).
Regarding claim 10, Combination Daisuke-Yanokochi discloses the invention as described in Claim 9 and Daisuke further teaches wherein a luminosity corrected single transmittance of the polarizer is 42% or more (Daisuke, page 20, Polarizing element: using spectral data of luminous-corrected single transmittance Ys = 41.5%).
Regarding claim 11, Combination Daisuke-Yanokochi discloses the invention as described in Claim 1 and Daisuke further teaches wherein a display device (Daisuke, page 23, an organic EL display device) comprising: the phase difference plate according to claim 1 (see claim 1).
Regarding claim 12, Combination Daisuke-Yanokochi discloses the invention as described in Claim 1 and Yanokochi further teaches wherein further teaches wherein the phase difference plate (figs.1-13, abstract, first, a second, and a third optically anisotropic layer) includes only one optically anisotropic layer (paragraph [0016], the second optically anisotropic layer) which is a layer formed by fixing a rod-like liquid crystal compound twist-aligned along a helical axis extending in a thickness direction (paragraph [0016] the second optically anisotropic layer is a layer formed by fixing a twist-aligned liquid crystal compound having a helical axis in a thickness direction).
Thus it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the phase difference plate of Daisuke with the specific layer as taught by Yanokochi for the purpose to provide an optical film that has a thin thickness, is suitable in terms of continuous productivity, and exhibits suppressed tinting of black color in a front direction and an oblique direction in a case of being used as a circularly polarizing plate in an organic EL display device (Yanokochi, paragraph [0010]).
Regarding claim 13, Combination Daisuke-Yanokochi discloses the invention as described in Claim 1 and Daisuke further teaches wherein at least one layer selected from the group consisting of the first optically anisotropic layer and the second optically anisotropic layer (described in claim 1)includes a photo-alignment polymer (Daisuke, paragraph [0027], photo-alignment film may be used in which an alignment film is formed by imparting anisotropy to a polymer film by applying linearly polarized ultraviolet light).
Regarding claim 14, Combination Daisuke-Yanokochi discloses the invention as described in Claim 1 and Daisuke further teaches wherein the phase difference plate includes a third optically anisotropic layer which is a layer formed by fixing a vertically aligned rod-like liquid crystal compound (Daisuke, fig.2, 104 Third optically anisotropic layer of Daisuke, page 7, paragraph [0013], the third optically anisotropic layer, 104 is a layer containing a vertically aligned liquid crystal compound),
at least one layer selected from the group consisting of the first optically anisotropic layer, the second optically anisotropic layer and the third optically anisotropic layer (described in claim 1) includes a photo-alignment polymer (Daisuke, paragraph [0027], photo-alignment film may be used in which an alignment film is formed by imparting anisotropy to a polymer film by applying linearly polarized ultraviolet light).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daisuke et al. (WO2021060247) in view of Yanokochi et al. (US20220206203), and further in view of Takahashi et al. (US20240118474, hereafter call Takahashi’474’).
Regarding claim 2, combination Daisuke-Yanokochi discloses the invention as described in Claim 1, Daisuke does not explicitly teach wherein an in-plane retardation of the first optically anisotropic layer at a wavelength of 550 nm is 120 to 240 nm.
However, in the analogous the phase difference plate, Takahashi’474’ teaches (Takahashi’474’, abstract, a phase difference film), and further wherein
an in-plane retardation of the first optically anisotropic layer (Takahashi’474’, the optically anisotropic layer 14A has been referred to as the first optically anisotropic; paragraph [0100], the optically anisotropic layer 14A is not particularly limited as long as it is a negative A-plate, and examples thereof include a layer formed by fixing a disk-like liquid crystal compound that is vertically aligned and whose optical axis) at a wavelength of 550 nm is 120 to 240 nm (paragraph [0024] (8) The phase difference film according to (1), in which the optically anisotropic layer X is a positive A-plate or a negative A-plate; paragraph [0027], (9) The phase difference film according to (8), in which an in-plane retardation of the optically anisotropic layer X at a wavelength of 550 nm is 120 to 240 nm).
Further, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum range or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.05 Section II, Subsection A, citing In re Aller,105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A. 1955)).
Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the phase difference plate of combination Daisuke-Yanokochi with the specific layer as taught by Takahashi’474’ for the purpose to provide a phase difference film that has a small change in tint in a case where the phase difference film is applied to a display device as a circularly polarizing plate in combination with a polarizer, and the display device is observed from an oblique direction at all azimuthal angles (Takahashi’474’, paragraph [0006]).
Claims 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daisuke et al. (WO2021060247) in view of Yanokochi et al. (US20220206203), and further in view of Takahashi et al. (US20110063547).
Regarding claim 6, Combination Daisuke-Yanokochi discloses the invention as described in Claim 4, but Daisuke does not explicitly teach wherein the phase difference plate includes the first optically anisotropic layer, the second optically anisotropic layer, and the third optically anisotropic layer in this order.
However, in the analogous the phase difference plate, Takahashi teaches (Takahashi, abstract, The present invention provides an elliptical polarizer with excellent viewing angle characteristics. the elliptical polarizer comprises at least a first polarizer, a first optically anisotropic layer, a second optically anisotropic layer, and a third optically anisotropic layer, laminated in this order, the first optically anisotropic layer satisfying [1] 50≦Re1≦500, [2] 30≦Rth1≦750, and [3] 0.6≦Rth1/Re1≦1.5, the second optically anisotropic layer satisfying [4] 0≦Re2≦20 and [5] −500≦Rth2≦−30, and the third optically anisotropic layer satisfying [6] 100≦Re3≦180, [7] 50≦Rth3≦600, and [8] 0.5≦Rth3/Re3≦3.5, wherein Re indicates the retardation value in the plane of each optically anisotropic layer and Rth indicates the retardation value in the thickness direction of each optically anisotropic layer), and further wherein
the phase difference plate (Takahashi, abstract, the phase difference plate has been referred as the elliptical polarizer) includes the first optically anisotropic layer, the second optically anisotropic layer, and the third optically anisotropic layer in this order (Takahashi, abstract, the elliptical polarizer comprises at least a first polarizer, a first optically anisotropic layer, a second optically anisotropic layer, and a third optically anisotropic layer, laminated in this order).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the phase difference plate of combination Daisuke-Yanokochi with the specific layers in this order as taught by Takahashi for the purpose to provide an elliptical polarizer which is inexpensive and excellent in viewing angle characteristics, for a vertical alignment type liquid crystal display device and a vertical alignment type liquid crystal display device. (Takahashi, paragraph [0012]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered, see Remarks Page. 5-8 with respect to the 35 U.S.C.& 103 rejection have been fully considered and are not persuasive.
In the remarks, applicant argues that:
Referring to the optically anisotropic layer 18 of Yanokuchi, it is described to be "a layer formed by fixing a homeotropically aligned liquid crystal compound." However, a disk-like liquid crystal compound being homeotropically aligned means the alignment in which the surface of the disk of the disk-like liquid crystal compound is parallel to the surface of the substrate, while the column stands vertically or perpendicularly to the substrate. In fact, referring to instant Claim 2, it recites that an in-plane retardation of the first optically anisotropic layer (which is a layer formed by fixing a vertically aligned disk-like liquid crystal compound) at a wavelength of 550 nm is 120 to 240 nm, which greatly differs from Yanokuchi.
In response to applicant's argument(s) of 1
The singular elements recited by the claims are not required by Applicant’s claim language to be exclusive. The preamble word “comprising” is open-ended and thus does not require the exclusivity of the recited elements, but allows the reference or combination of references to contain other elements as well. Additionally, “[t]he word ‘comprising’ transitioning from the preamble to the body signals that the entire claim is presumptively open-ended.” In Gillette Co. v. Energizer Holdings Inc., 405 F.3d 1367, 74 USPQ2d 1586 (Fed. Cir. 2005). See also Mars Inc. v. H.J. Heinz Co., 377 F.3d 1369, 1376, 71 USPQ2d 1837, 1843 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (“like the term comprising,’ the terms containing’ and mixture’ are open-ended.”), Invitrogen Corp. v. Biocrest Mfg., L.P., 327 F.3d 1364, 1368, 66 USPQ2d 1631, 1634 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (“The transition comprising’ in a method claim indicates that the claim is open-ended and allows for additional steps.”); Genentech, Inc. v. Chiron Corp., 112 F.3d 495, 501, 42 USPQ2d 1608, 1613 (Fed. Cir. 1997). (MPEP §2111.02.).).
Further, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., Inc., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). The test for obviousness is not whether the features may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
In this case, described in claim 1, Daisuke in view of Yanokochi, Daisuke does not explicitly teach wherein the phase difference plate includes a first optically anisotropic layer which is a layer formed by fixing a vertically aligned disk-like liquid crystal compound. However, in the analogous optically anisotropic layers, Yanokochi teaches optically anisotropic layers (figs.1-13, abstract, first, a second, and a third optically anisotropic layer), and further teaches
wherein the phase difference plate (Yanokochi, figs.1-13, paragraph [0010], a circularly polarizing plate in an organic EL display device) includes a first optically anisotropic layer (Yanokochi, a first optically anisotropic layer has been referred as the optical anisotropic layer 18 of Yanokochi) which is a layer formed by fixing a vertically aligned disk-like liquid crystal compound (Yanokochi, paragraph [0121], the optically anisotropic layer 18 is preferably a layer formed by fixing an alignment state of a homeotropically aligned liquid crystal compound). Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the phase difference plate of Daisuke with the specific layer as taught by Yanokochi for the purpose to provide an optical film that has a thin thickness, is suitable in terms of continuous productivity, and exhibits suppressed tinting of black color in a front direction and an oblique direction in a case of being used as a circularly polarizing plate in an organic EL display device (Yanokochi, paragraph [0010]).
Examiner's Note
Regarding the references, the Examiner cites particular figures, paragraphs, columns and line numbers in the reference(s), as applied to the claims above. Although the particular citations are representative teachings and are applied to specific limitations within the claims, other passages, internally cited references, and figures may also apply. In preparing a response, it is respectfully requested that the Applicant fully consider the references, in their entirety, as potentially disclosing or teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as fully consider the context of the passage as taught by the reference(s) or as disclosed by the Examiner.
Conclusion
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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KUEI-JEN LEE EDENFIELD whose telephone number is (571)272-3005. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. -Thurs 8:00 am - 5:30 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Pinping Sun can be reached on (571) 270-1284. 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 application 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 Services Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199(In USA or Canada) or 571-272-1000.
/KUEI-JEN L EDENFIELD/
Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/WILLIAM R ALEXANDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights