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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in China on 06/22/2021. A certified copy of the CN202110690919.8 application has been received.
Joint Inventors
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.
Response to Amendments
Applicant’s amendment filed 11/11/2025 has been considered and entered.
The rejections under 35 USC 112 set forth in the office action received 08/14/2025 are withdrawn in view of the applicant’s amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection of claim 1 (Pages 13-14 of the remarks received 11/11/2025) under 35 USC 102 as applied the amended claims received 11/11/2025 have been fully considered but are moot in view of a new ground(s) of rejection below under 35 USC 103 in further view of Ko (See the Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 section of this office action).
Additionally, examiner notes that the convex presenting reflection surface corresponds to the embodiment of figure 14, considered to be an obvious variant of the embodiment of shown in figure 13, wherein the convex presenting reflection surface is not present. Should Applicant assert that these are not obvious variants, a restriction may be necessary.
Applicant's arguments with respect to the rejection of claim 8 (Pages 14-16 of the remarks received 11/11/2025) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With regards to claim 8, Applicant has stated that “…Stark does not disclose the features of "the refraction surface presents to comprise a plurality of arc segments, and a radius of an arc segment far away from the light-emission surface is smaller than a radius of an arc segment close to the light-emission surface" in claim 8…”. However, examiner respectfully disagrees.
Applicant has stated that “…each independent arc segment defined by the curved part between 72, 73 and 74 can basically be regarded as a plurality of arc segments on the same circle, and the diameters of the plurality of arc segments are all the same…”. However, fig 19 of Stark visibly shows at least two distinct arc segments wherein the radius of the arc segment further away from the light emission surface is smaller than that of the segment closer to the light emission surface (See Below).
PNG
media_image1.png
404
398
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Additionally, Examiner notes that Applicant has stated that “…Large, Tang, and Ibrahim do not remedy the deficiencies of Stark…”. Examiner respectfully disagrees - Even if Stark did not disclose the limitations of claim 8 (which is not conceded), Tang would still teach the relevant elements of the structure of claim 2 (Tang/Figs1&2).
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 1-11, 13, 16-21, and 23-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stark (US 20060077544 A1) in view of Ko (US 20140328059 A1).
With regards to claim 1, Stark discloses a light guide component, comprising:
an upper light guide portion, comprising a light-emission surface (Fig19/Flat upper surface of element 400) and a refraction surface (Fig18/Curved upper surface of element 400); and
a lower light guide portion, arranged opposite to the upper light guide portion, and the lower light guide portion comprising
a light incident surface (Lower surface of element 400) and
a reflection surface (Reflection surface 55), wherein the light-emission surface and the light incident surface are arranged substantially parallel to each other (Fig19), and the refraction surface and the reflection surface are respectively arranged at an edge of the light guide component (Fig19);
the light guide component is configured to allow a first deflected light (First deflected light 72 [Ray]) entering the light incident surface to be projected onto one of the refraction surface and the light-emission surface, refracted by one of the refraction surface and the light-emission surface and emitted out of the light guide component (Fig19); and
the light guide component is configured to allow a second deflected light (Second deflected light 74 [Ray]) entering the light incident surface to be projected onto the reflection surface, reflected to one of the refraction surface and the light-emission surface by the reflection surface, refracted by one of the refraction surface and the light-emission surface and emitted out of the light guide component (Fig19)
Stark is silent regarding the reflection surface presenting as a convex arc segment in a cross section of the light guide component. However, the practice of forming a reflection surface to present as a convex arc segment exists in the art as exemplified by Ko.
Stark and Ko are considered to be analogous in the field of light guide display devices. Stark discloses a light guide component with a reflection surface. Ko discloses a reflection surface that presents as a convex arc segment. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the reflection surface of Stark such that it presented as a convex arc segment as suggested by Ko since doing so would facilitate the generation of an enlarged image.
With regards to claim 2, Stark and Ko together disclose the light guide component according to claim 1, wherein the light guide component is configured such that:
upon observing each point on the light-emission surface and the refraction surface on a side where the upper light guide portion is located in a viewing angle smaller than a first threshold angle, at least one of the first deflected light and the second deflected light is observed (Fig19/Light paths depicted by elements 72, 73, and 74).
With regards to claim 3, Stark and Ko together disclose the light guide component according to claim 1, wherein the light guide component is in a shape of a flat plate (Figs10&19/Flat plate displayed by view of device displayed in fig19).
With regards to claim 4 Stark and Ko together disclose the light guide component according to any one of claim 1, wherein
the light guide component extends in an extension direction with a cross section of the light guide component keeping constant (Figs10&19/Cross section shown in fig 19 remains constant, at minimum, a distance defined by a width of C2 in fig10); and
in the cross section of the light guide component, the refraction surface presents as a convex curve line segment (Figs19/Convex curve line segment defined by elements 72-74).
With regards to claim 5, Stark and Ko together disclose the light guide component according to claim 4, wherein in the cross section of the light guide component, the refraction surface extends continuously from the light-emission surface (Fig19), the refraction surface presents as a continuous curve line segment (Fig19), and from a direction close to the light-emission surface to a direction far from the light-emission surface, angles of tangent lines at respective points of the refraction surface with respect to an extension line of the light-emission surface gradually increase (Fig19).
With regards to claim 6, Stark and Ko together disclose the light guide component according to claim 5, wherein in the cross section of the light guide component, the refraction surface presents as a single arc segment (Fig 19/Arc segment defined by elements 72, 73, and 74).
With regards to claim 7, Stark and Ko together disclose the light guide component according to claim 6, wherein a radius of the single arc segment is in a range of 2 mm - 10 mm (Stark/Fig6/Curve defined by the two right-most instances of element 72, as presented within 9x10 mm coordinate system).
With regards to claim 8, Stark and Ko together disclose the light guide component according to claim 5, wherein in the cross section of the light guide component, the refraction surface presents to comprise a plurality of arc segments, and a radius of an arc segment far away from the light-emission surface is smaller than a radius of an arc segment close to the light-emission surface (Fig19/Individual arc segments defined by curved portions between elements 72, element 73, and element 74).
With regards to claim 9, Stark and Ko together disclose the light guide component according to claim 8, wherein in the cross section of the light guide component, the plurality of arc segments comprise a third arc segment, a second arc segment and a first arc segment which are provided sequentially, and the first arc segment is further away from the light-emission surface than the second arc segment, a radius of the first arc segment is smaller than a radius of the second arc segment, and the radius of the second arc segment is smaller than a radius of the third arc segment (Fig19/Individual arc segments defined by curved portions between elements 72, element 73, and element 74).
With regards to claim 10, Stark and Ko together disclose the light guide component according to claim 8, wherein radiuses of the plurality of arc segments are respectively in a range of 2 mm - 20 mm (Stark/Fig6/Curves as presented within 9x10 mm coordinate system).
With regards to claim 11, Stark and Ko together disclose the light guide component according to any one of claim 1, wherein
the reflection surface comprises totally reflective surface (Fig19) [See 35 USC 112 section of this office action].
With regards to claim 13, Stark and Ko together disclose the light guide component according to claim 1,
wherein in a cross section of the light guide component, an overall thickness of the light guide component is in a range of 5 mm-20 mm (Stark/Fig6/10mm thickness of element 400), and the overall thickness is a distance between the light-emission surface and the light incident surface.
wherein in a cross section of the light guide component, a first width of the refraction surface is in a range of 2 mm - 10 mm (Stark/Fig6/9mm width of curved region), a first thickness of the refraction surface is in a range of 2 mm-8 mm (Stark/Fig6/3.44mm thickness of curved region), the first width is a distance that the refraction surface extends in a direction parallel to the light incident surface, and the first thickness is a distance that the refraction surface extends in a direction perpendicular to the light incident surface.
wherein in a cross section of the light guide component, a second width of the reflection surface is in a range of 0.64 mm-2.15 mm (Stark/Figs6&19/2.7 width of elements 32 and 33), a second thickness of the reflection surface is in a range of 2 mm-16 mm (Stark/Fig6/9mm thickness of region defined by coordinate [9.0,6.6] and elements 32-33), the second width is a distance that the reflection surface extends in a direction parallel to the light incident surface, and the second thickness is a distance that the reflection surface extends in a direction perpendicular to the light incident surface.
With regards to claim 16, Stark and Ko together disclose the light guide component according to claim 1, further comprising an abutment surface, wherein the abutment surface is connected between the refraction surface and the reflection surface and is perpendicular to the light-emission surface and the light incident surface, so that the light guide component and an adjacent light guide component abut against each other through the abutment surface (Stark/Figs19&28/Abutment surface between individual devices in fig28).
With regards to claim 17, Stark and Ko together disclose the light guide component according to claim 16, wherein a length of the abutment surface is in a range of 0.3 mm - 1 mm (Stark/Figs6&28/A length of the abutment surface [Thickness of layer defined elements 30-33 wherein said thickness is a length composing in part the abutment surface).
With regards to claim 18, Stark and Ko together disclose a display device, comprising:
a plurality of display panels (Stark/Figs19&28/Display panel 30 [Display region] of figure 19 and plurality of display panels in figure 28), wherein a splicing seam that does not emit light is provided between two adjacent display panels (Stark/Fig19/Splicing seam 33 [Inactive region]); and
the light guide component according to claim 1, wherein
the light guide component is provided on a display side of each of the plurality of display panels, so that the light incident surface is attached to the display panel (Stark/Fig19/Placement of element 400 with respect to element 30),
the refraction surface and the reflection surface are close to the splicing seam, two adjacent light guide components are arranged symmetrically with respect to the splicing seam (Stark/Figures 19 and 28), and
an orthographic projection of the reflection surface on a display plane of the display panel completely covers the splicing seam (Stark/Figs19 and 28/Light paths defined by elements 73 and 74 in fig19).
With regards to claim 19, Stark and Ko together disclose the display device according to claim 18, but is silent regarding the presence of bezels in the referenced embodiment. However, Stark and Ko do disclose a splicing seam comprising a plurality of bezels in different embodiment, (Stark/Fig1/Bezel defined by dark lines inclusive of elements 50 and 60), wherein each bezel comprises a first bezel segment extending perpendicular to the display plane of the display panel, a second bezel segment extending from the first bezel segment toward an interior of the display panel, and a third bezel segment extending from the second bezel segment toward the interior of the display panel, wherein the second bezel segment and the third bezel segment are on the display side of the display panel, wherein bezels surround each one of a plurality of display panels (Stark/Fig1/Upper, lower, and side portions respectively of each bezel structure).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the display device disclosed by Stark and Ko such that it included bezels as suggested by a different embodiment taught by Stark and Ko, wherein the reflection surface disclosed by Stark and Ko abuts against the third bezel segment, and a bezel bent angle between the third bezel segment and the display plane is equal to an angle of the light guide component between the light incident surface and the reflection surface disclosed by Stark and Ko, since doing so would further secure the components in place while preserving desired emission characteristics of the device.
With regards to claim 20, Stark and Ko together disclose the display device according to claim 18, wherein the light guide component further comprises an abutment surface, the abutment surface is connected between the refraction surface and the reflection surface and is perpendicular to the light-emission surface and the light incident surface, and two adjacent light guide components abut against each other through the abutment surface (Stark/Figs19&28/Abutment surfaces between individual devices in fig28), but is silent regarding the presence of bezels in the referenced embodiment. However, Stark and Ko do not disclose a splicing seam comprising a plurality of bezels in a different embodiment, wherein the splicing seam comprises a plurality of bezels, each bezel surrounds one of the plurality of display panels, and each bezel comprises a first bezel segment surrounding the display panel and extending perpendicular to the display plane of the display panel (Stark/Fig1/Bezel defined by dark lines inclusive of elements 50 and 60). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the bezels taught by Stark and Ko to the display device disclosed by Stark and Ko since doing so would further secure the components structurally, while preserving desired emission characteristics of the device.
With regards to claim 21, Stark and Ko together disclose the display device according to claim 18, wherein
in a cross section of the light guide component, a second width of the reflection surface is in a range of LO/2 mm to (LO/2+0.2) mm, and LO is a width of the splicing seam (Stark/Fig6&28/0.5LO = 2.7mm); and
in the cross section of the light guide component, the refraction surface presents as a single arc segment, a radius of the single arc segment is in a range of (LO/2+0.5) mm to (LO/2+9) mm, and LO is a width of the splicing seam (Stark/Fig6/Figure suggests arc segment radii between 0.5LO+0.5 = 3.2mm and 0.5LO+9 = 11.7mm).
With regards to claim 23, Stark and Ko together disclose a method for manufacturing the display device according to claim 19, comprising:
providing the plurality of display panels, wherein the splicing seam that does not emit light is formed between two adjacent display panels (Stark/Figs19&28/Position of splicing seams 33 as shown in fig19 when display devices are arranged as shown in fig 28);
providing the light guide component (Stark/Fig19); and
attaching the light guide component onto the display side of the display panel, so that the reflection surface abuts against the third bezel segment to position the light guide component with respect to the display panel (Stark/Figs1&19).
With regards to claim 24, Stark and Ko together disclose a method for manufacturing the display device according to claim 20, comprising:
providing the plurality of display panels, wherein the splicing seam that does not emit light is formed between two adjacent display panels (Stark/Figs19&28/Position of splicing seams 33 as shown in fig19 when display devices are arranged as shown in fig 28);
providing the light guide component (Stark/Fig19); and
attaching the light guide component onto the display side of the display panel, so that the abutment surface is aligned with the first bezel segment to position the light guide component with respect to the display panel (Stark/Figs1&19).
Conclusion
This prior art, made of record, but not relied upon, is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure since the following references have similar structure and/or use similar structure and/or similar optical elements to what is disclosed and/or claimed in the instant application:
Maeda (US 20160054623 A1) [Fig12]
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 Marc E Manheim whose telephone number is (703)756-1873. The examiner can normally be reached 6:30am - 5pm E.T., Monday - Tuesday and Thursday - Friday.
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, Thomas A Hollweg can be reached at (571) 270-1739. 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.
/MARC E MANHEIM/Examiner, Art Unit 2874
/THOMAS A HOLLWEG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874