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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 04/29/2026 has been entered.
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 was 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 04/29/2026 has been considered and entered.
Response to Arguments
The applicant’s arguments filed 04/29/2026 have been fully considered but are moot in view of the newly filed claims.
With regards to claim 25, applicant has argued that Stark does not teach “…radiuses of the plurality of arc segments are respectively in a range of 2 mm-20 mm” in addition to the other claim limitations and that the above renders claim 25 allowable over the prior art. However, examiner respectfully disagrees.
Stark discloses the plurality of arc segments as existing only within a 9 x 10 mm area. It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233). While stark does not explicitly state the range of values used for the relevant radii, Stark does disclose the general conditions of the claim as they pertain to plurality of arc segments. Thus, a person possessing ordinary skill in the art would be able to discover the optimum or workable ranges for the relevant radii.
Furthermore, even if Stark did not disclose the general conditions of the claim and/or the implementation of the relevant range was somehow beyond the capabilities of a person possessing ordinary skill in the art (neither of which are conceded), Examiner notes that radii within the relevant range were implemented in relevant contexts before the earliest priority date of the claimed invention, as seen in devices such as that of Sekiguchi (US 20140071657 A1).
For at least the above reasons, the combination of Stark and Bo is relied upon to disclose the limitations of claim 25.
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 1-3, 7, 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) and in further view of Watanabe (US 9075258 B2).
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 (Fig19/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)
the light guide component extends in an extension direction with a cross section of the light guide component keeping constant (Stark/Figs10&19/Cross section shown in fig 19 remains constant, at minimum, a distance defined by a width of C2 in fig10),
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),
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).
Stark is silent regarding the reflection surface presenting as a convex arc segment and the refraction surface presenting as a single arc segment in a cross section of the light guide component. However, the practices of configuring a reflection surface to present as a convex arc segment in a cross section of the light guide component and configuring a refraction surface to present as a single arc segment in a cross section of the light guide component exist in the art as exemplified by Ko and Watanabe respectively.
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.
Stark, Ko, and Watanabe are considered to be analogous in the field of light guide display devices. Stark discloses a curved refraction surface. Kim discloses a curved refraction surface which presents as a single arc segment (Watanabe/Fig2/Column 9/Lines 14-16 [“…an arc…”]). 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 refraction surface of Stark such that presents as a single arc segment as suggested by Watanabe since doing so would facilitate simplified production of the light guide component.
With regards to claim 2, Stark, Ko, and Watanabe 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, Ko, and Watanabe 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 7, Stark, Ko, and Watanabe together disclose the light guide component according to claim 1, 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 11, Stark, Ko, and Watanabe 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, Ko, and Watanabe 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, Ko, and Watanabe 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, Ko, and Watanabe 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, Ko, and Watanabe 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, Ko, and Watanabe 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, Ko, and Watanabe 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, Ko, and Watanabe 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, Ko, and Watanabe 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, Ko, and Watanabe 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).
Claims 25-29 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 25, 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)
the light guide component extends in an extension direction with a cross section of the light guide component keeping constant (Stark/Figs10&19/Cross section shown in fig 19 remains constant, at minimum, a distance defined by a width of C2 in fig10),
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),
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),
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),
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).
Stark does not explicitly state that radii of the plurality of arc segments are respectively in a range of 2 mm - 20 mm. However, Stark does disclose the plurality of arc segments as existing only within a 9 x 10 mm area. It would have been obvious to select values in a range of 2 mm to 20 mm for the plurality of arc segments of Stark since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. 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 26, 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 27, Stark and Ko together disclose the light guide component according to claim 25, 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 28, Stark and Ko together disclose the light guide component according to claim 25, 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 29, 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 25, 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).
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:
Watanabe (US 8692737 B2) [Figs1-5]
Sekiguchi (US 20140071657 A1) [Fig3]
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
Prosecution Insights