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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/21/2026 is being considered by the
examiner.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for domestic priority based on Provisional
application 63/352,517 filed on June 15, 2022.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/21/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
An amendment filed on 07/21/2026 in response to the Office Action mailed on 04/20/2026 is
being acknowledged and entered into the record. The present Non-Final rejection is made by taking into fully consideration all the amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 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.
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 1, 2, 4, 7-9, and 11-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Baek et al. (WO 2020085737 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Baek et al. teaches a light source, comprising:
a transparent flexible substrate 131 (see annotated Fig. 6: 131,paragraph 60, 61);
Note that according to paragraph 61, the transparent substrate 131 may include polycarbonate, which is a well-known flexible material.
a sparse array of light-emitting diodes (LEDs) 133 disposed on the transparent flexible substrate 131 (see annotated Fig. 5-6: 131, 133, paragraph 60);
and a rigid substrate 110 adhered to the transparent flexible substrate 131 with an adhesive (inherently present in the adhesive layer 141) such that the sparse array of LEDs 133 is located between the rigid substrate 110 and the transparent flexible substrate 131 and only the adhesive is disposed between the sparse array of LEDs 133 and the rigid substrate 110 (see annotated Fig. 6: 110, 131, 133, 141, paragraph 98, 100, 145, 146, 187).
Note that the substrate 110 of Fig. 6 maybe made of glass (see paragraph 100), which is a well-known rigid substrate. Further note the according to paragraphs 145-146, the sealing layer 141 is used to bond the substrates together and may include PVB resin, a thermoplastic polymer well-known in the art for its strong adhesive properties, and thus would inherently comprise an adhesive.
PNG
media_image1.png
627
1151
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 6 of Baek et al. (WO 2020085737 A1)
Regarding Claim 2, Baek et al. teaches the light source of claim 1, wherein the rigid substrate 110 is adhered to the transparent flexible substrate 131 with an adhesive layer 141, the sparse array of LEDs 133 being encapsulated in an adhesive of the adhesive layer 141 (Fig. 6: 141, 110, 131, 133, paragraph 144-146).
Regarding Claim 4, Baek et al. teaches the light source of claim 1, wherein the rigid substrate 110 is substantially transparent (paragraph 98, 100).
Regarding Claim 7, Baek et al. teaches the light source of claim 1, further comprising transparent electrical traces 132 configured to electrically power the LEDs 133 of the sparse array of LEDs 133 (Fig. 6: 132, paragraph 126).
Regarding Claim 8, Baek et al. teaches the light source of claim 1, wherein the sparse array of LEDs 133 includes two or more LEDs that emit light at a same wavelength (paragraph 0025).
Regarding Claim 9, Baek et al. teaches the light source of claim 1, wherein the sparse array of LEDs 133 includes two or more LEDs that emit light at different wavelengths (paragraph 0025).
Regarding Claim 11, Baek et al. teaches the light source of claim 1, wherein the rigid substrate 110 is substantially flat (paragraph 101).
Regarding Claim 12, Baek et al. teaches the light source of claim 1, wherein the rigid substrate 110 is curved (paragraph 101).
Regarding Claim 13, Baek et al. teaches the light source of claim 1, wherein the rigid substrate 110 is a single unitary element (paragraph 100, 105).
Regarding Claim 14, Baek et al. teaches the light source of claim 1, wherein the rigid substrate 110 includes multiple rigid substrate elements (see Fig. 5, paragraph 105).
Note that in an exemplary embodiment, a plurality of transparent displays are provided (see paragraph 105), and each display will comprise a rigid substrate giving rise to multiple rigid substrates.
Regarding Claim 15, Baek et al. teaches a method for fabricating a light source, the method comprising:
providing a transparent flexible substrate 131 (see annotated Fig. 6: 131,paragraph 60, 61);
Note that according to paragraph 61, the transparent substrate 131 may include polycarbonate, which is a well-known flexible material.
disposing a sparse array of light-emitting diodes (LEDs) 133 on the transparent flexible substrate 131 (see annotated Fig. 5-6: 131, 133, paragraph 60);
and adhering a rigid substrate 110 adhered to the transparent flexible substrate 131 with an adhesive (inherently present in the adhesive layer 141) such that the sparse array of LEDs 133 is located between the rigid substrate 110 and the transparent flexible substrate 131 and only the adhesive is disposed between the sparse array of LEDs 133 and the rigid substrate 110 (see annotated Fig. 6: 110, 131, 133, 141, paragraph 98, 100, 145, 146, 187).
Note that the substrate 110 of Fig. 6 maybe made of glass (see paragraph 100), which is a well-known rigid substrate. Further note the according to paragraphs 145-146, the sealing layer 141 is used to bond the substrates together and may include PVB resin, a thermoplastic polymer well-known in the art for its strong adhesive properties, and thus would inherently comprise an adhesive.
Regarding Claim 16, Baek et al. teaches the method of claim 15, wherein the rigid substrate 110 is adhered to the transparent flexible substrate 131 with an adhesive layer 141, the sparse array of LEDs 133 being encapsulated in an adhesive of the adhesive layer 141 (Fig. 6: 141, 110, 131, 133, paragraph 144-146).
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.
Rejection Note: Italicized claim limitations are limitations not explicitly disclosed in the primary
reference but disclosed in the secondary references.
Claims 3, 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baek et al. (WO 2020085737 A1), as applied to Claim 1 above, further in view of Blum et al. (US 10634912 B2).
Regarding Claim 3, Baek et al. teaches the light source of claim 1,
wherein: the rigid substrate 110 is substantially transparent (paragraph 100);
and the adhesive has a refractive index that is between a refractive index of the transparent flexible substrate and a refractive index of the rigid substrate, inclusive.
Blum et al. teaches a light source comprising an adhesive layer, wherein the adhesive has a refractive index that is between a refractive index of the transparent flexible substrate and a refractive index of the rigid substrate, inclusive (column 39, lines 16-27).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Baek et al. and Blum et al. in order to have the adhesive have a refractive index that is between a refractive index of the transparent flexible substrate and a refractive index of the rigid substrate, inclusive. Doing so would minimize diffraction effects, as recognized by Blum et al. (column 39, lines 21-23).
Regarding Claim 5, Baek et al. fails to explicitly teach the light source of claim 1, wherein the sparse array of LEDs has a light- emitting area that is less than or equal to 5% of a surface area of the sparse array.
However, Blum et al. teaches a light source, wherein the sparse array of LEDs has a light- emitting area that is less than or equal to 5% of a surface area of the sparse array (column 26, lines 35-44).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Baek et al. and Blum et al. in order to have the sparse array of LEDs have a light- emitting area that is less than or equal to 5% of a surface area of the sparse array. Doing so would preserve the transparency of the light source and minimize visual obstruction.
Regarding Claim 6, Baek et al. fails to explicitly teach the light source of claim 1, wherein the sparse array of LEDs has a light- emitting area that is less than or equal to 1% of a surface area of the sparse array
However, Blum et al. teaches a light source, wherein the sparse array of LEDs has a light- emitting area that is less than or equal to 1% of a surface area of the sparse array (column 54, lines 1-3, column 38, lines 12-15).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Baek et al. and Blum et al. in order to have the sparse array of LEDs have a light- emitting area that is less than or equal to 1% of a surface area of the sparse array. Doing so would preserve the transparency of the light source and minimize visual obstruction.
Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baek et al. (WO 2020085737 A1), in view of Blum et al. (US 10634912 B2).
Regarding Claim 18, Baek et al. teaches a light source, comprising:
a transparent flexible substrate 131 (see annotated Fig. 6: 131,paragraph 60, 61);
Note that according to paragraph 61, the transparent substrate 131 may include polycarbonate, which is a well-known flexible material.
a sparse array of light-emitting diodes (LEDs) 133 on the transparent flexible substrate 131 (see annotated Fig. 5-6: 131, 133, paragraph 60);
the sparse array of LEDs 133 having a light-emitting area that is less than or equal to 10% of a surface area of the sparse array;
and a rigid substrate 110 adhered to the transparent flexible substrate 131 with an adhesive (inherently present in the adhesive layer 141) such that the sparse array of LEDs 133 is located between the rigid substrate 110 and the transparent flexible substrate 131 and only the adhesive is disposed between the sparse array of LEDs 133 and the rigid substrate 110 (see annotated Fig. 6: 110, 131, 133, 141, paragraph 98, 100, 145, 146, 187).
Note that the substrate 110 of Fig. 6 maybe made of glass (see paragraph 100), which is a well-known rigid substrate. Further note the according to paragraphs 145-146, the sealing layer 141 is used to bond the substrates together and may include PVB resin, a thermoplastic polymer well-known in the art for its strong adhesive properties, and thus would inherently comprise an adhesive.
Blum et al. teaches a light source comprising the following limitation not explicitly disclosed in Baek et al.:
the sparse array of LEDs having a light- emitting area that is less than or equal to 10% of a surface area of the sparse array (column 26, lines 35-44).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Baek et al. and Blum et al. in order to have the sparse array of LEDs have a light- emitting area that is less than or equal to 10% of a surface area of the sparse array. Doing so would preserve the transparency of the light source and minimize visual obstruction.
Regarding Claim 19, Baek et al. teaches the light source of claim 18, wherein the sparse array of LEDs 133 includes two or more LEDs that emit light at a same wavelength (paragraph 0025).
Regarding Claim 20, Baek et al. teaches the light source of claim 18, wherein the sparse array of LEDs 133 includes two or more LEDs that emit light at different wavelengths (paragraph 0025).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baek et al. (WO 2020085737 A1), as applied to Claim 1 above, in view of Han (US 20140085913 A1).
Regarding Claim 10, Baek et al. fails to explicitly teach the light source of claim 1, wherein the rigid substrate is specularly reflective.
However, Han teaches a light source, wherein the rigid substrate 100 is specularly reflective (fig. 2: 100, paragraph 0019).
Note that the rigid substrate 100 is a rearview mirror of a vehicle which is inherently specularly reflective.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Baek et al. and Han in order to have the rigid substrate be specularly reflective . Doing so would improve the versatility of the light source enabling it to be used in reflective surfaces such as rearview mirrors of vehicles.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baek et al. (WO 2020085737 A1), as applied to Claim 15 above, further in view of Blum et al. (US 10634912 B2).
Regarding Claim 17, Baek et al. fails to explicitly teach the method of Claim 16, wherein the adhesive has a refractive index that is between a refractive index of the transparent flexible substrate and a refractive index of the rigid substrate, inclusive.
However, Blum et al. teaches a light source comprising an adhesive layer, wherein the adhesive has a refractive index that is between a refractive index of the transparent flexible substrate and a refractive index of the rigid substrate, inclusive (column 39, lines 16-27).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Baek et al. and Blum et al. in order to have the adhesive have a refractive index that is between a refractive index of the transparent flexible substrate and a refractive index of the rigid substrate, inclusive. Doing so would minimize diffraction effects, as recognized by Blum et al. (column 39, lines 21-23).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAMNA F IQBAL whose telephone number is 571-272-1587. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8.30 am - 5.30 pm 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, Kretelia Graham can be reached at 571-272-5055. 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.
/HAMNA FATHIMA IQBAL/Examiner, Art Unit 2817 07/29/2026
/Kretelia Graham/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2817
Prosecution Insights