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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2/3/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 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 (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.
Claim(s) 1,3-6,12,14, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (JP S639956 A) in view of Shei et al (US 20050168127) in view of Mancini et al (US 20050079650)
Regarding Claim 1,
(JP S639956 A) discloses (Drawing 10) a frame (12) having a through hole (the gap between 12); and a sealing resin (19) disposed to close the through hole entirely.
(JP S639956 A) does not disclose the sealing resin is a light-absorbing film including a light-absorbing compound and wherein an average Young's modulus of the light-absorbing film measured by continuous stiffness measurement is 2.5 GPa or less.
Shei et al discloses [0026] the sealing resin is a light-absorbing film including a light-absorbing compound (fluorescent powder 132).
Mancini et al discloses wherein an average Young's modulus of the light-absorbing film measured by continuous stiffness measurement is 2.5 GPa or less ([0025], “…polymeric, containing an appreciable amount of hydrogen, having a low density value of .about.0.9 g/cc, a hardness value of 2.0 GPa…”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify (JP S639956 A) to include Shei et al’s light absorbing film motivated by the desire to generate a white light and to further include Mancini et al’s Young's modulus of the light-absorbing film measured by continuous stiffness measurement is 2.5 GPa or less [0025] motivated by the desire to improve adhesion (ABSTRACT).
Regarding Claim 3,
In addition to (JP S639956 A), Shei et al and Mancini et al, (JP S639956 A) discloses (Fig. 10) wherein the frame (12) has a first face in contact with the through hole (the gap in between 12), the first face (vertical direction) extending along a plane parallel to a principal surface of the light-absorbing film (element 19 of JP S639956 A and it would have absorbing properties taught by Shei et al).
Regarding Claim 4,
In addition to (JP S639956 A), Shei et al and Mancini et al, (JP S639956 A) discloses (Fig. 10) wherein the light-absorbing film (19) has a thickness smaller than a dimension of the frame (12) in a thickness direction of the light-absorbing film (19).
Regarding Claim 5,
In addition to (JP S639956 A), Shei et al and Mancini et al, (JP S639956 A) discloses (Fig. 10) wherein the light-absorbing film (19) has a first principal surface between one end and the other end of the frame (12) in a thickness direction of the light-absorbing film (19)
Regarding Claim 6,
In addition to (JP S639956 A), Shei et al and Mancini et al, (JP S639956 A) discloses (Fig. 10) wherein the light-absorbing film (19) has a second principal surface lying in the same plane with one end of the frame (12) in a thickness direction of the light-absorbing film (19)
Regarding Claim 12,
In addition to (JP S639956 A), Shei et al and Mancini et al, (JP S639956 A) discloses (Fig. 10) wherein the light-absorbing film (19) has a thickness of 1 mu.m to 1000 mu.m. One would have recognized the thickness is a result-effective variable able to be optimized for absorbing light.
Regarding Claim 14,
(JP S639956 A) discloses (Drawing 10) sealing resin (19) into a through hole of a frame (12) having a through hole (the gap between 12); and a sealing resin (19) disposed to completely close the through hole.
(JP S639956 A) does not disclose supplying a light absorbing composition including a light absorbing compound into a through hole, curing the light absorbing composition to form a light absorbing film, the sealing resin is a light-absorbing film including a light-absorbing compound and wherein an average Young's modulus of the light-absorbing film measured by continuous stiffness measurement is 2.5 GPa or less.
Shei et al discloses [0026] the sealing resin is a light-absorbing film including a light-absorbing compound (fluorescent powder 132) and curing the light absorbing film by exciting light.
Mancini et al discloses wherein an average Young's modulus of the light-absorbing film measured by continuous stiffness measurement is 2.5 GPa or less ([0025], “…polymeric, containing an appreciable amount of hydrogen, having a low density value of .about.0.9 g/cc, a hardness value of 2.0 GPa…”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify (JP S639956 A) to include Shei et al’s light absorbing film motivated by the desire to generate a white light and to further include Mancini et al’s Young's modulus of the light-absorbing film measured by continuous stiffness measurement is 2.5 GPa or less [0025] motivated by the desire to improve adhesion (ABSTRACT).
Claim Rejections - 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 (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.
Claim(s) 2,7-9, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (JP S639956 A) in view of Shei et al (US 20050168127) in view of Yamasaki et al (US 20130129375).
Regarding Claim 2,
(JP S639956 A) and Shei et al discloses everything as disclosed above.
(JP S639956 A) and Shei et al does not disclose wherein an average coefficient of linear expansion of a material of the frame in a range of 0°C to 60°C is 0.2 x10-5 [/°C] to 25 x10-5[/°C] and the average coefficient of linear expansion of a material of the frame in a range of 0°C to 60°C is 0.2 x10-5 [/°C] to 25 x10-5[/°C.
Yamasaki et al discloses average coefficient of linear expansion of a material of the frame in a range of 0°C to 60°C is 0.2 x10-5 [/°C] to 25 x10-5[/°C. [0092]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art (JP S639956 A) and Shei et al to include Yamasaki et al’s average coefficient of linear expansion of a material of the frame in a range of 0°C to 60°C is 0.2 x10-5 [/°C] to 25 x10-5[/°C motivated by the desire to prevent waving of the sheet member after being left standing in high temperature environments [0080][0092]
Regarding Claim 7,
In addition to (JP S639956 A) and Shei et al and Yamasaki et al, (JP S639956 A) discloses (Fig. 2B-2D) wherein the through hole frame (12) includes at least one selected from a group consisting a recessed portion (is the hole itself) inside.
Regarding Claim 8,
In addition to (JP S639956 A) and Shei et al and Yamasaki et al, (JP S639956 A) discloses (Fig. 10) wherein the light-absorbing film (19) is in contact with at least a portion of the recessed portion (gap of 12) in a thickness direction of the light-absorbing film (19).
Regarding Claim 9,
In addition to (JP S639956 A) and Shei et al and Yamasaki et al, (JP S639956 A) discloses (Fig. 10) wherein the light- absorbing film (19) is in contact with at least two of faces forming the recessed portion (gap of 12) inside the through hole.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (JP S639956 A) in view of Shei et al (US 20050168127) in view of Kishimoto et al (US 20060001005)
Regarding Claim 11,
(JP S639956 A) and Shei et al discloses everything as disclosed above.
(JP S639956 A) and Shei et al does not disclose wherein the light-absorbing film has a transmission spectrum satisfying the following requirements (I), (II), (III), (IV), (V), (VI), and (VII):(I) a first cut-off wavelength at which a transmittance is 50% lies in a wavelength range of 380 nmto 440 nm; (II) a second cut-off wavelength at which a transmittance is 50% lies in a wavelength range of 600 nm to 720 nm; (III) a maximum transmittance in a wavelength range of 300 nm to 350 nm is 1% or less; (IV) an average transmittance in a wavelength range of 450 nm to 600 nm is 75% or more; (V) a maximum transmittance in a wavelength range of 750 nm to 1000 nm is 5% or less; (VI) a maximum transmittance in a wavelength range of 800 nm to 950 nm is 4% or less; and (VII) a transmittance at a wavelength of 1100 nm is 20% or less.
Kishimoto et al disclose wherein the light-absorbing film has a transmission spectrum satisfying the following requirements (I), (II), (III), (IV), (V), (VI), and (VII):(I) a first cut-off wavelength at which a transmittance is 50% lies in a wavelength range of 380 nmto 440 nm; (II) a second cut-off wavelength at which a transmittance is 50% lies in a wavelength range of 600 nm to 720 nm; (III) a maximum transmittance in a wavelength range of 300 nm to 350 nm is 1% or less; (IV) an average transmittance in a wavelength range of 450 nm to 600 nm is 75% or more; (V) a maximum transmittance in a wavelength range of 750 nm to 1000 nm is 5% or less; (VI) a maximum transmittance in a wavelength range of 800 nm to 950 nm is 4% or less; and (VII) a transmittance at a wavelength of 1100 nm is 20% or less. [0055-0060]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify (JP S639956 A) and Shei et al to include Kishimoto et al’s light-absorbing film (18) has a transmission spectrum satisfying the following requirements (I), (II), (III), (IV), (V), (VI), and (VII):(I) a first cut-off wavelength at which a transmittance is 50% lies in a wavelength range of 380 nmto 440 nm; (II) a second cut-off wavelength at which a transmittance is 50% lies in a wavelength range of 600 nm to 720 nm; (III) a maximum transmittance in a wavelength range of 300 nm to 350 nm is 1% or less; (IV) an average transmittance in a wavelength range of 450 nm to 600 nm is 75% or more; (V) a maximum transmittance in a wavelength range of 750 nm to 1000 nm is 5% or less; (VI) a maximum transmittance in a wavelength range of 800 nm to 950 nm is 4% or less; and (VII) a transmittance at a wavelength of 1100 nm is 20% or less motivated by the desire apmplify a signal light and a laser emission [0052][0055-0060].
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (JP S639956 A) in view of Shei et al (US 20050168127) in view of Ohman et al (US 20060289787)
Regarding Claim 13,
(JP S639956 A) and Shei et al discloses everything as disclosed above.
(JP S639956 A) and Shei et al does not disclose an imaging device; a lens configured to allow transmission of light from a subject and collect light to the imaging device; and the optical filter.
Ohman et al discloses an imaging device; a lens configured to allow transmission of light from a subject and collect light to the imaging device; and the optical filter.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify (JP S639956 A) and Shei et al to include Ohman et al’s imaging device; a lens configured to allow transmission of light from a subject and collect light to the imaging device; and the optical filter [0060] motivated by the desire to set up an optical assay arrangement with an optical reader [0060].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10 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.
Regarding Claim 10,
The prior art does not disclose nor would it be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include another reference to disclose wherein the frame is a flat plate having a first end face and a second end face as principal surfaces, the frame has a through hole penetrating the frame in a thickness direction of the frame, the frame includes a protruding portion protruding toward a central portion of the through hole, the protruding portion includes a first face substantially parallel to either the first end face or the second end face, the light-absorbing film has a first principal surface and a second principal surface, the second principal surface is joined to either the first end face or the second end face at the same level, and a ratio of a thickness of the light-absorbing film to t2 is more than 1 and 2 or less, where t2 is a length in a thickness direction of the frame, the length being between the first face and either one of the first end face or the second end face being joined to the second principal surface of the light-absorbing film at the same level.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUCY P CHIEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8579. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM PST Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday.
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, Michael Caley can be reached at 571-272-2286. 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.
/LUCY P CHIEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871