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 .
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.
Claims 1-8, 11, 13, 15-16 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Veerasamy (US 8,199,264) in view of Varaprasad et al. US 2008/0268260).
As to claim 1, Veerasamy discloses in figure 2: a first substrate 202 and a second substrate 204 that are arranged opposite to each other; a light adjustment module located between the first substrate and the second substrate comprising PET layers 210, TCO layers 212 and PDLC layer 214; an ultraviolet light blocking layer 206 located between the first substrate and the light adjustment module.
Veerasamy does not disclose wherein a refractive index of the ultraviolet light blocking layer is greater than a refractive index of the first substrate. Varaprasad discloses in paragraph [0011], a conventional UV blocking coating comprising a mixture of oxides of cerium, titanium, and silicon and having a refractive index (n) of 1.55 to 1.85. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Veerasamy by providing the UV blocking layer structure of Varaprasad because conventional structures were known to be cost-effective and reliable. A refractive index of 1.55 to 1.85 would be higher than that of the first substrate, which is a glass substrate having a refractive index of about 1.5.
As to claim 2, Veerasamy in view of Varaprasad discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 1. Veerasamy further discloses in figure 2, wherein the ultraviolet light blocking layer is disposed on a surface of the light adjustment module proximate to the first substrate, but does not disclose a first adhesive located between the ultraviolet light blocking layer and the first substrate. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Veerasamy by providing a first adhesive located between the ultraviolet light blocking layer and the first substrate in order to securely attach the ultraviolet light blocking layer to the first substrate. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Veerasamy wherein a refractive index of the first adhesive layer is greater than the refractive index of the first substrate, and is less than the refractive index of the ultraviolet light blocking layer in order to increase light transmission by gradually increasing the refractive index of the multilayer structure along the light propagation direction.
As to claim 3, Veerasamy in view of Varaprasad discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 2. Furthermore, the first substrate is a glass substrate which has a refractive index of about 1.5.
As to claim 4, Veerasamy in view of Varaprasad discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 2. Veerasamy further discloses in figure 2, wherein the light adjustment module includes a first base material layer 210 (upper PET layer) and a second base material layer 210 (lower PET layer) that are arranged opposite to each other, the first base material layer is closer to the first substrate 202 than the second base material layer, and the ultraviolet light blocking layer is disposed on a surface of the first base material layer away from the second base material layer. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Veerasamy wherein the thermal expansion coefficient and the heat shrinkage of the ultraviolet blocking layer is similar to that of the first base material layer in order to prevent the structure of the device from becoming distorted due to high temperature.
As to claim 5, Veerasamy in view of Varaprasad discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 4. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Veerasamy according to claim 4, wherein the thermal expansion coefficient of the ultraviolet light blocking layer is less than or equal to 50 ppm/K and/or the heat shrinkage of the ultraviolet light blocking layer is less than or equal to 0.1% in order to minimize any structure changes caused by high temperature.
As to claim 6, Veerasamy in view of Varaprasad discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 1. Veerasamy further discloses in figure 2, wherein the ultraviolet light blocking layer 206 is disposed on a surface of the first substrate 202 proximate to the light adjustment module, the light adjustment device further comprises a first adhesive layer 208 (PVB or EVA is an adhesive) between the ultraviolet light blocking layer and the light adjustment module. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Veerasamy wherein a refractive index of the first adhesive layer is greater than the refractive index of the ultraviolet light blocking layer in order to increase light transmission by gradually increasing the refractive index of the multilayer structure along the light propagation direction.
As to claim 7, Veerasamy in view of Varaprasad discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 6. Furthermore, the first substrate is a glass substrate which has a refractive index of about 1.5.
As to claim 8, Veerasamy in view of Varaprasad discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 1. Veerasamy further discloses in figure 2, wherein an orthographic projection of the ultraviolet light blocking layer on a reference plane approximately coincides with an orthographic projection of the light adjustment module on the reference plane, and the reference plane is approximately parallel to a surface of the first substrate away from the light adjustment module.
As to claim 11, Veerasamy in view of Varaprasad discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 6. Veerasamy further discloses in figure 2, wherein an orthographic projection of the ultraviolet light blocking layer on a reference plane approximately coincides with an orthographic projection of the first substrate on the reference plane, and the reference plane is approximately parallel to a surface of the first substrate away from the light adjustment module.
As to claim 13, Veerasamy in view of Varaprasad discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 1. Varaprasad further discloses in paragraph [0011], wherein the material of the conventional ultraviolet light blocking layer includes a mixture of oxides of cerium, titanium, and silicon.
As to claim 15, Veerasamy in view of Varaprasad discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 13. Varaprasad further discloses in claim 13, wherein the thickness of the ultraviolet light blocking layer is in a range of 50 nm to 1500 nm.
As to claim 16, Veerasamy in view of Varaprasad discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 1. Veerasamy further discloses in figure 2, wherein the light adjustment device comprises a first adhesive layer 208 (upper PVB or EVA layer) and a second adhesive layer 208 (lower PVB or EVA layer), the first adhesive layer is disposed between the light adjustment module and the first substrate 202, and the second adhesive layer is disposed between the light adjustment module and the second substrate 204, wherein a material of the first adhesive layer includes a polyvinyl butyral (PVB) adhesive, and a material of the second adhesive layer includes a PVB adhesive.
As to claim 21, Veerasamy in view of Varaprasad discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 1. Veerasamy further discloses in column 15, lines 22-28, applying the disclosed light adjustment device to a vehicle windshield. Veerasamy further discloses in figure 2, wherein the first substrate 202 is closer to an outside of the vehicle than the second substrate 204.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Veerasamy (US 8,199,264) in view of Varaprasad et al. US 2008/0268260) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kakuta et al. (US 2023/0176426).
Veerasamy in view of Varaprasad discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 1, but does not disclose a first light-shielding layer disposed on a surface of the first substrate away from the light adjustment module or a surface of the first substrate proximate to the light adjustment module and arranged along an edge of the first substrate. Kakuta discloses in figure 2, a first light-shielding layer 61 disposed on a surface of the first substrate 11 away from the light adjustment module 30 and arranged along an edge of the first substrate. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Veerasamy by providing a first light-shielding layer disposed on a surface of the first substrate away from the light adjustment module and arranged along an edge of the first substrate as disclosed by Kakuta in order to prevent light leakage at the peripheral edges of the light adjustment device. Because the boundary of the light adjustment module 30 approximately coincides with an inner boundary of the first light-shielding layer, the boundary of the ultraviolet light blocking layer of Veerasamy would also coincide with the inner boundary of the first light-shielding layer.
Claims 10, 12, 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Veerasamy (US 8,199,264) in view of Varaprasad et al. US 2008/0268260) as applied to claims 8, 11 and 16 above, and further in view of Lee et al. (US 2021/0055463).
As to claim 10, Veerasamy in view of Varaprasad discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 8, but does not disclose a sealant located between the first substrate and the second substrate and surrounding the light adjustment module, the first adhesive layer and the ultraviolet light blocking layer. Lee discloses in figure 8, a sealant 40a located between the first substrate 30 and the second substrate 30 and surrounding the light adjustment module 10 and other layers disposed above and below the light adjustment module. Lee discloses in paragraph [0127] that the sealant 40a can more effectively prevent the appearance defect occurrence of the optical device, and can also more effectively reduce the light loss. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Veerasamy by providing a sealant located between the first substrate and the second substrate and surrounding the light adjustment module, the first adhesive layer and the ultraviolet light blocking layer, as disclosed by Lee, in order to prevent defects and reduce light loss.
As to claim 12, Veerasamy in view of Varaprasad discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 8, but does not disclose a sealant located between the ultraviolet light blocking layer and the second substrate and surrounding the light adjustment module and the first adhesive layer. Lee discloses in figure 8, a sealant 40a surrounding the light adjustment module 10 and the layers disposed above and below the light adjustment module. Lee discloses in paragraph [0127] that the sealant 40a can more effectively prevent the appearance defect occurrence of the optical device, and can also more effectively reduce the light loss. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Veerasamy by providing a sealant located between the ultraviolet light blocking layer and the second substrate and surrounding the light adjustment module and the first adhesive layer, as disclosed by Lee, in order to prevent defects and reduce light loss.
As to claim 17, Veerasamy in view of Varaprasad discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 16. Veerasamy further discloses in figure 2, wherein the material of the first adhesive layer 208 (upper PVB or EVA layer) includes the PVB adhesive, an orthographic projection of the first adhesive layer on a reference plane approximately coincides with an orthographic projection of the light adjustment module on the reference plane, and the reference plane is approximately parallel to a surface of the first substrate away from the light adjustment module. Veerasamy does not disclose a sealant surrounding the light adjustment module and the first adhesive layer and connected to a circumferential sidewall of the light adjustment module and a circumferential sidewall of the first adhesive layer. Lee discloses in figure 8, a sealant 40a surrounding the light adjustment module 10 and the layers disposed above and below the light adjustment module and connected to a circumferential sidewall of the light adjustment module and a circumferential sidewall of the layers disposed above and below the light adjustment module. Lee discloses in paragraph [0127] that the sealant 40a can more effectively prevent the appearance defect occurrence of the optical device, and can also more effectively reduce the light loss. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Veerasamy by providing a sealant surrounding the light adjustment module and the first adhesive layer and connected to a circumferential sidewall of the light adjustment module and a circumferential sidewall of the first adhesive layer, as disclosed by Lee, in order to prevent defects and reduce light loss.
As to claim 19, Veerasamy in view of Varaprasad discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 16. Veerasamy further discloses in figure 2, wherein the material of the second adhesive layer (lower PVB or EVA layer) includes the PVB adhesive, an orthographic projection of the second adhesive layer on a reference plane approximately coincides with an orthographic projection of the light adjustment module on the reference plane, and the reference plane is approximately parallel to a surface of the first substrate away from the light adjustment module. Veerasamy does not disclose a sealant surrounding the light adjustment module and the second adhesive layer and connected to a circumferential sidewall of the light adjustment module and a circumferential sidewall of the second adhesive layer. Lee discloses in figure 8, a sealant 40a surrounding the light adjustment module 10 and the layers disposed above and below the light adjustment module and connected to a circumferential sidewall of the light adjustment module and a circumferential sidewall of the layers disposed above and below the light adjustment module. Lee discloses in paragraph [0127] that the sealant 40a can more effectively prevent the appearance defect occurrence of the optical device, and can also more effectively reduce the light loss. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Veerasamy by providing a sealant surrounding the light adjustment module and the second adhesive layer and connected to a circumferential sidewall of the light adjustment module and a circumferential sidewall of the second adhesive layer, as disclosed by Lee, in order to prevent defects and reduce light loss.
Claims 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Veerasamy (US 8,199,264) in view of Varaprasad et al. US 2008/0268260) as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Chen et al. (US 2017/0003536) and Lee et al. (US 2021/0055463).
As to claim 18, Veerasamy in view of Varaprasad discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 16. Veerasamy further discloses in figure 2, wherein the material of the first adhesive layer 208 (upper PVB or EVA layer) includes the PVB adhesive, an orthographic projection of the first adhesive layer on a reference plane approximately coincides with an orthographic projection of the light adjustment module on the reference plane, and the reference plane is approximately parallel to a surface of the first substrate away from the light adjustment module.
Veerasamy does not disclose a first frame sealing adhesive disposed around the first adhesive layer and bonded to a circumferential sidewall of the first adhesive layer. Chen discloses in figure 4, a first frame sealing adhesive 4 disposed around the first adhesive layer 3 and bonded to a circumferential sidewall of the first adhesive layer. Chen discloses in paragraph [0037] that the frame sealing adhesive 4 can have a good supporting effect. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Veerasamy by providing a first frame sealing adhesive disposed around the first adhesive layer and bonded to a circumferential sidewall of the first adhesive layer as disclosed by Chen because of the good support effect.
Veerasamy does not disclose a sealant surrounding the light adjustment module and the first frame sealing adhesive and connected to a circumferential sidewall of the light adjustment module and a surface of the first frame sealing adhesive away from the first adhesive layer. Lee discloses in figure 8, a sealant 40a surrounding the light adjustment module 10 and the layers disposed above and below the light adjustment module and connected to a circumferential sidewall of the light adjustment module and a circumferential sidewall of the layers disposed above and below the light adjustment module. Lee discloses in paragraph [0127] that the sealant 40a can more effectively prevent the appearance defect occurrence of the optical device, and can also more effectively reduce the light loss. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Veerasamy by providing a sealant surrounding the light adjustment module and the first frame sealing adhesive and connected to a circumferential sidewall of the light adjustment module and a surface of the first frame sealing adhesive away from the first adhesive layer, as disclosed by Lee, in order to prevent defects and reduce light loss.
As to claim 20, Veerasamy in view of Varaprasad discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 16. Veerasamy further discloses in figure 2, wherein the material of the second adhesive layer 208 (lower PVB or EVA layer) includes the PVB adhesive, an orthographic projection of the second adhesive layer on a reference plane approximately coincides with an orthographic projection of the light adjustment module on the reference plane, and the reference plane is approximately parallel to a surface of the first substrate away from the light adjustment module.
Veerasamy does not disclose a second frame sealing adhesive disposed around the second adhesive layer and bonded to a circumferential sidewall of the second adhesive layer. Chen discloses in figure 4, a second frame sealing adhesive 4 disposed around the second adhesive layer 3 and bonded to a circumferential sidewall of the second adhesive layer. Chen discloses in paragraph [0037] that the frame sealing adhesive 4 can have a good supporting effect. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Veerasamy by providing a second frame sealing adhesive disposed around the second adhesive layer and bonded to a circumferential sidewall of the second adhesive layer as disclosed by Chen because of the good support effect.
Veerasamy does not disclose a sealant surrounding the light adjustment module and the second frame sealing adhesive and connected to a circumferential sidewall of the light adjustment module and a surface of the second frame sealing adhesive away from the second adhesive layer. Lee discloses in figure 8, a sealant 40a surrounding the light adjustment module 10 and the layers disposed above and below the light adjustment module and connected to a circumferential sidewall of the light adjustment module and a circumferential sidewall of the layers disposed above and below the light adjustment module. Lee discloses in paragraph [0127] that the sealant 40a can more effectively prevent the appearance defect occurrence of the optical device, and can also more effectively reduce the light loss. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Veerasamy by providing a sealant surrounding the light adjustment module and the second frame sealing adhesive and connected to a circumferential sidewall of the light adjustment module and a surface of the second frame sealing adhesive away from the second adhesive layer, as disclosed by Lee, in order to prevent defects and reduce light loss.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David Chung whose telephone number is (571)272-2288. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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.
/DAVID Y CHUNG/Examiner, Art Unit 2871