DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Claim 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.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakaino et al. (WO 2018221216, for which English language equivalent US 2020/0088920 will be used as the citation copy) in view of Gupta et al. (US 2013/0341590, “Gupta”).
Regarding claim 1, Sakaino teaches a color conversion film (e.g., [0012] – [0017]) comprising a support (e.g., layer 10, Figs. 1-4, [0081], [0082]), a first color conversion film ([0014] – [0017]), a second color conversion film ([0014] – [0017]). Sakaino teaches that the first color conversion layer may include an organic light emitting material that emits by excitation light having from 400 to 500 nm wavelength a peak wavelength in the range of from 500 to 580 nm ([0015]) and a second color conversion layer that may include an organic light emitting material that emits by excitation light having from 400 to 500 nm wavelength a peak wavelength in the range of from 580 to 750 nm ([0016]). Sakaino additionally teaches that the color conversion layers may include more than one of either A or B layers (i.e., corresponding to first or second color conversion layers) and that these layers may include a mixture of a plurality of light-emitting materials such that an interposed color conversion layer may be considered to be a mixing layer as presently claimed (see, [0077] – [0084]). While Sakaino teaches an intermediate layer of a color conversion film that may comprise materials of the adjacent layers as described above (and thus describes a structure wherein the intermediate layer comprises a mixture of the adjacent layers), Sakaino does not described specifically that the intermediate layer is a mixture or blend of the adjacent layers. However, such blending layers are known in the art. For example, Gupta teaches that it is known to provide both blended and non-blended layers in an emission stack in order to easily tailor light emission and various properties of the stack for use in a display device (e.g., Gupta, [0077], [0078]) and it therefore would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled artisan at the time of filing to have included a blended layer between two filter layers of Sakaino in order to permit a user to easily tailor light emission and various properties of the stack for use in a display device (e.g., Gupta, [0077], [0078]).
Regarding claim 2, Sakaino additionally teaches that the thickness of the conversion layers may be from 1 to 1000 micrometers ([0086], [0087]) and thus may read on the range of from 0.1 to 2.0 micrometers. The Examiner notes that in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Please see MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 3, Sakaino additionally teaches the inclusion of a protective film or layer on either side of the color conversion layers (see, e.g., Figs. 1 – 4, [0081], [0082], base layers 10).
Regarding claim 4, Sakaino additionally teaches the inclusion of an organic light-emitting material in the first or second color conversion layer that reads on the General Formula (1) (see, e.g., [0024] – [0034] and [0104] – [0140]).
Regarding claim 5, Sakaino teaches a color conversion film (e.g., [0012] – [0017]) comprising a support (e.g., layer 10, Figs. 1-4, [0081], [0082]), a first color conversion film ([0014] – [0017]), a second color conversion film ([0014] – [0017]). Sakaino teaches that the first (or second, depending on the orientation) color conversion layer may include an organic light emitting material that emits by excitation light having from 400 to 500 nm wavelength a peak wavelength in the range of from 500 to 580 nm ([0015]) and a second (or first, depending on the orientation) color conversion layer that may include an organic light emitting material that emits by excitation light having from 400 to 500 nm wavelength a peak wavelength in the range of from 580 to 750 nm ([0016]). Sakaino additionally teaches that the color conversion layers may include more than one of either A or B layers (i.e., corresponding to first or second color conversion layers) and that these layers may include a mixture of a plurality of light-emitting materials such that an interposed color conversion layer may be considered to be a mixing layer as presently claimed (see, [0077] – [0084]). While Sakaino teaches an intermediate layer of a color conversion film that may comprise materials of the adjacent layers as described above (and thus describes a structure wherein the intermediate layer comprises a mixture of the adjacent layers), Sakaino does not described specifically that the intermediate layer is a mixture or blend of the adjacent layers. However, such blending layers are known in the art. For example, Gupta teaches that it is known to provide both blended and non-blended layers in an emission stack in order to easily tailor light emission and various properties of the stack for use in a display device (e.g., Gupta, [0077], [0078]) and it therefore would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled artisan at the time of filing to have included a blended layer between two filter layers of Sakaino in order to permit a user to easily tailor light emission and various properties of the stack for use in a display device (e.g., Gupta, [0077], [0078]).
Regarding claim 6, Sakaino additionally teaches that the thickness of the conversion layers may be from 1 to 1000 micrometers ([0086], [0087]) and thus may read on the range of from 0.1 to 2.0 micrometers. The Examiner notes that in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Please see MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 7, Sakaino additionally teaches the inclusion of a protective film or layer on either side of the color conversion layers (see, e.g., Figs. 1 – 4, [0081], [0082], base layers 10).
Regarding claim 8, Sakaino additionally teaches the inclusion of an organic light-emitting material in the first or second color conversion layer that reads on the General Formula (1) (see, e.g., [0024] – [0034] and [0104] – [0140]).
Regarding claim 9, Sakaino additionally teaches that the color conversion layer may be applied in a backlight unit in combination with a light source ([0039], [0262]).
Regarding claim 10, Sakaino additionally teaches that the color conversion layer may be applied in a backlight unit in combination with a light source ([0039], [0262]).
Regarding claim 11, Sakaino additionally teaches that the backlight unit may be applied to a liquid crystal display device comprising a liquid crystal cell (e.g., [0262], liquid crystal display, necessarily requiring a liquid crystal cell).
Regarding claim 12, Sakaino additionally teaches that the backlight unit may be applied to a liquid crystal display device comprising a liquid crystal cell (e.g., [0262], liquid crystal display, necessarily requiring a liquid crystal cell).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY J FROST whose telephone number is (571)270-5618. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday, 8:00am to 4:00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Aaron Austin, can be reached on 571-272-8935. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ANTHONY J FROST/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1782