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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 06/20/2024 and 03/26/2025 were filed after the filing date of the claimed application on 07/25/2023. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, “an electrical wiring for the laser diode array” as recited in line 19 of claim 1 and “the first laser housing and the second laser housing are designed differently” as recited in lines 3 and 4 of claim 4 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-4 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nemoto et al. (hereinafter Nemoto) (JP H0722706 A) in view of Takiguchi et al. (hereinafter Takiguchi) (WO 2020162023 A1) and Yoshikawa et al. (hereinafter Yoshikawa) (JP H08181391 A).
(Examiner notes attached machine translations of Nemoto and Yoshikawa and the US publication (US 20220077649 A1) of Takiguchi will be used for the claim mapping of Nemoto and Takiguchi for the remainder of the instant Office Action . See PTO-892 form)
Regarding claim 1, Nemoto discloses
A laser diode arrangement for a laser projection device [Fig. 1] (Paras. [0024,0057]), comprising:
a carrier [1 Fig. 1] (Para. [0024]);
a laser diode array [lasers 20 Fig. 1] (Para. [0024]) arranged on the carrier [1 Fig. 1] (Para. [0024]), comprising a first light group [group of 20 with “a” polarization Figs. 1 and 2] (Para. [0024]) having a plurality of first laser diodes [20 with “a” polarization Fig. 1] and a second light group [group of 20 with “b” polarization Figs. 1 and 2] (Para. [0024]) having a plurality of second laser diodes [20 with “b” polarization Fig. 1],
wherein the first light group emits linearly polarized electromagnetic radiation with a first polarization direction [“a” Figs. 1 and 2] (Para. [0024]) and the second light group emits linearly polarized electromagnetic radiation with a second polarization direction [“b” Figs. 1 and 2] (Para. [0024]) and
the first polarization direction [“a” Figs. 1 and 2] and the second polarization direction [“b” Figs. 1 and 2] are perpendicular to one another (Para. [0015]),
wherein the first laser diodes [20 with “a” polarization Fig. 1] and the second laser diodes [20 with “b” polarization Fig. 1] comprise a corresponding maximum optical output power (see note below); and
an electrical wiring [22 Fig. 7] (Paras. [0013,0051]) for the laser diode array [20 Fig. 7] (Para. [0013]) is arranged on the carrier [1 Fig. 7] (Para. [0051]) in such a way that the current intensity at the first laser diodes [20 with “a” polarization Fig. 1]can be set continuously and independently of the current supply to the second laser diodes [20 with “b” polarization Fig. 1] (Para. [0051]).
Examiner notes that all laser diodes inherently have a maximum optical output power they are capable of reaching.
Nemoto fails to disclose,
characterized in that the first light group comprises at least a first laser housing accommodating at least a first laser diode; and
the second light group comprises at least a second laser housing accommodating at least a second laser diode; and
the number of first laser diodes of the laser diode array corresponds to at least twice the number of second laser diodes,
Takiguchi discloses in Fig. 1,
a laser housing [14] (Para. [0066]) accommodating at least a laser diode [11] (Para. [0067])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement a laser housing around each light emitting unit as shown in Takiguchi with the lasers in the laser diode array of Nemoto for the purpose of forming an airtight housing space. (Takiguchi Para. [0073])
Nemoto in view of Takiguchi fails to disclose,
the number of first laser diodes of the laser diode array corresponds to at least twice the number of second laser diodes
Yoshikawa discloses in Fig. 17,
A number of first lasers [123 shown by white dots Fig. 17] (Para. [0074]) with a first polarization direction (Para. [0074]) of a laser array [Fig. 17] corresponds to at least twice the number of second lasers [120 shown by horizontal lines in dots Fig. 17] (Para. [0074]) with a second polarization direction (Para. [0074])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the larger number of lasers in a first polarization direction relative to the amount of laser diodes in a second polarization direction as shown in Yoshikawa with the laser diodes of the modified device of Nemoto for the purpose of controlling the amount of light from each desired polarization direction. (Yoshikawa Paras. [0072,0074])
Regarding claim 2, Nemoto in view of Takiguchi and Yoshikawa discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above and further discloses,
characterized in that the number of first laser diodes [Nemoto 20 with “a” polarization Fig. 1] of the laser diode array corresponds to at most five times the number of second laser diodes [Nemoto 20 with “b” polarization Fig. 1] .
Examiner notes Yoshikawa discloses in paragraph [0070] that each array (corresponding to rows shown in Fig. 17) includes eight lasers. Therefore, the number of lasers of a polarization direction shown with lasers of 123 equates to 5 rows of 8 lasers (40 total) and the amount of laser of a polarization direction shown with lasers of 120 equates to 2 rows of 8 lasers (16 total). These amounts fall under the maximum amount limited in the claim of at most 5 times.
Regarding claim 3, Nemoto in view of Takiguchi and Yoshikawa discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above and further discloses,
characterized in that the first laser diode [Nemoto 20 with “a” polarization Fig. 1] and the second laser diode [Nemoto 20 with “b” polarization Fig. 1] are identical in construction (See Nemoto Fig. 4) (Nemoto Paras. [0024,0029]) and the first laser housing [housing shown in Takiguchi Fig. 1] and the second laser housing [housing shown in Takiguchi Fig. 1] are of matching design [housing shown in Takiguchi Fig. 1], wherein in each case a housing axis [direction laser 20 is facing Nemoto] (Nemoto Para. [0017,0024]) is present which predetermines the polarization direction (Nemoto Para. [0017,0024]), and the first laser housings [housing shown in Takiguchi Fig. 1] assigned to the first light group [Nemoto lasers 20 with “a” polarization Fig. 1] being arranged on the carrier [Nemoto 1 Fig. 1] (Nemoto Para. [0024]) in such a way that their housing axes are perpendicular to those of the second laser housings assigned to the second light group [Nemoto lasers 20 with “b” polarization Fig. 1] (Nemoto Paras. [0017,0024])
Regarding claim 4, Nemoto in view of Takiguchi and Yoshikawa discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above and further discloses,
characterized in that the first laser diode [lasers 20 with “a” polarization Nemoto Fig. 1] and the second laser diode [lasers 20 with “b” polarization Nemoto Fig. 1] have a different structure (Nemoto Paras. [0017,0024]) and/or the first laser housing and the second laser housing are designed differently.
For the purposes of examination in the instant case of claim 4, the interpretation of the optional limitation is understood to be “characterized in that the first laser diode and the second laser diode have a different structure”
Examiner notes that the first [lasers 20 with “a” polarization Nemoto Fig. 1] and second laser diodes [lasers 20 with “a” polarization Nemoto Fig. 1] of Nemoto are arranged facing different directions and therefore are understood to have a differing structure at least in the direction the lasers are facing on the substrate.
Regarding claim 5, Nemoto in view of Takiguchi and Yoshikawa discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above and further discloses in Takiguchi Fig. 1,
characterized in that the first laser housing [14 Takiguchi Fig. 1] (Takiguchi Para. [0066]) accommodates a single first laser diode [14 Takiguchi housing laser 20 of Nemoto Figs. 1] (Takiguchi Paras. [0066,0067])
and/or the second laser housing accommodates a single second laser diode [14 Takiguchi housing laser 20 of Nemoto Figs. 1] (Takiguchi Paras. [0066,0067]).
For the purposes of examination in the instant application, the interpretation of claim 5 is understood to be “… accommodates a single first laser diode and the second laser housing accommodates a single second laser diode.”
Regarding claim 7, Nemoto in view of Takiguchi and Yoshikawa discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above and further discloses
characterized in that one or more microlenses [Nemoto 32 Figs. 5 and 13] (Nemoto Para. [0049]) are associated with each laser housing [Takiguchi 14 Fig. 1].
Regarding claim 8, Nemoto in view of Takiguchi and Yoshikawa discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above and further discloses,
characterized in that a microlens array [Nemoto 32 Figs. 5 and 13] (Nemoto Para. [0049]), which is stationary relative to the common carrier [Nemoto 1 Fig. 1] (Para. [0024]), spans the laser diode array [Nemoto lasers 20 Fig. 1] as a whole (Nemoto Para. [0049]).
Regarding claim 9, Nemoto in view of Takiguchi and Yoshikawa discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above and further discloses,
characterized in that an electrode arrangement [Nemoto 22 Fig. 7] (Nemoto Para. [0051]) for electrical contacting (Nemoto Para. [0051]) is guided out of the respective laser housing [Takiguchi 14 Fig. 1].
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nemoto in view of Takiguchi and Yoshikawa as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hemenway et al (hereinafter Hemenway) (US 20170271837 A1)
Regarding claim 6, Nemoto in view of Takiguchi and Yoshikawa disclose the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above but fails to disclose,
characterized in that the first laser housing accommodates a plurality of first laser diodes identical in construction and/or the second laser housing accommodates a plurality of second laser diodes identical in construction.
Hemenway discloses in Fig. 4A,
a first laser housing [406a] (Para. [0040]) accommodating a plurality of first laser diodes [408 in 406a] (Para. [0040]) identical in construction (Para. [0040]) and a second laser housing [406b] (Para. [0040]) accommodating a plurality of second laser diodes [408 in 406b] (Para. [0043]) identical in construction (Para. [0043]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the housing of the modified device of Nemoto comprising a plurality of laser diodes as shown in Hemenway for the purpose of providing packages that allow different outputs to be formed from the separate housings. (Hemenway Para. [0044]).
Claims 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nemoto in view of Takiguchi and Yoshikawa as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Takagi et al. (hereinafter Takagi) (US 20190068936 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Nemoto in view of Takiguchi and Yoshikawa discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above and further discloses,
an Illumination unit comprising a laser diode arrangement according to claim 1 (Nemoto Para. [0011]) (see rejection of claim 1 above)
Nemoto in view of Takiguchi and Yoshikawa fails to disclose,
a polarization beam splitter;
a wavelength conversion element; and
a superposition optics,
wherein the polarization beam splitter is arranged in a beam path emitted from the laser diode arrangement and is configured such that the polarized electromagnetic radiation emitted by the first light group is directed with the first polarization direction into a beam path leading to the wavelength conversion element and the polarized electromagnetic radiation with the second polarization direction emitted by the second light group is fed into a blue channel; and
the superposition optics combines fluorescent radiation emitted from the wavelength- conversion element and the radiation from the blue channel into an illumination beam path.
Takagi discloses in Fig. 2,
a polarization beam splitter [50] (Para. [0046]);
a wavelength conversion element [27] (Para. [0049]); and
a superposition optics [31] (Para. [0058]),
wherein the polarization beam splitter [50] (Para. [0046]) is arranged in a beam path [BL] (Para. [0041]) emitted from a laser arrangement [21] (Para. [0039]) and is configured such that the polarized electromagnetic radiation emitted by a first light group [BLs] (Para. [0046]) is directed with the first polarization direction [s-polarization] (Para. [0046]) into a beam path leading to the wavelength conversion element [27] (Para. [0048]) and the polarized electromagnetic radiation with the second polarization direction [p-polarization] (Para. [0046]) emitted by a second light group [BLp] (Para. [0046]) is fed into a blue channel (Para. [0051]); and
the superposition optics [31] combines fluorescent radiation [YL] emitted from the wavelength- conversion element [27] (Para. [0050]) and the radiation from the blue channel (Paras. [0053-0056]) into an illumination beam path [WL] (Para. [0058])
the illumination unit [2] being included inside a projector system [1 Fig. 1] (Paras. [0028,0086]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the laser diode arrangement of the modified device of Nemoto into the illumination unit included inside a projector as shown in Takagi for the purpose of stably emitting illumination light and projecting with high-luminance. (Takagi Para. [0086])
Regarding claim 11, Nemoto in view of Takiguchi, Yoshikawa and Takagi as applied to claim 10 above further discloses in Takagi,
A laser projection device [1 Fig. 1] (Paras. [0027,0028]) comprising an imaging system [Fig. 1] and an illumination unit [2] (Para. [0028]) according to claim 10 (see rejection of claim 10 above) for illuminating an imaging system [Fig. 1] (Para.0028]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Examiner particularly notes (US 20160164258 A1) which discloses the joint use of laser diodes with perpendicular polarization directions. See PTO-892 form.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNTER J NELSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5318. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8:30am-5:00 ET.
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, MinSun Harvey can be reached at (571) 272-1835. 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.
/H.J.N./Examiner, Art Unit 2828
/XINNING(Tom) NIU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828