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 .
Response to Amendment
An amendment filed on 11/06/2025 in response to the Office Action mailed on 08/07/2025 is
being acknowledged and entered into the record. The present Final rejection is made by taking into fully
consideration all the amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 7 of the remarks, filed on 11/06/2025, with respect to the
objection to the drawings have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection to the
drawings has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 7 of the remarks, filed on 11/06/2025, with respect to the
112(b) rejection of Claim 2 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection has been
withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-9 of the remarks, filed 11/06/2025, with respect to the
rejections of claim 1 and claim 9 under 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made for both Claim 1 and Claim 9 in view of previously applied prior art of Nakabayashi/Cho/Sato and newly found prior art of Lancashire. The combination of Nakabayashi/Cho/Sato/Lancashire teaches the newly added limitations in amended Claim 1. i.e., Nakabayashi teaches the light-adjusting member 26 and the light source part 31 overlap in a plan view (see Fig. 3: 26, 31), Cho teaches the recess 36b overlaps the through-hole (the opening between the two parts of the light-adjusting member 50 in Fig. 4b) in the plan view (Fig. 4b: 20, 50, 30, 36b, paragraph 0068), and Lancashire teaches the recess 422 is positioned away from the light source part 605 in the plan view (Fig. 7: 205, 422, 605, paragraph 0041, 0044). Furthermore, a new ground of 112(b) rejection is made for Claim 9 as detailed below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the recess" in lines 10 and 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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, and 3-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakabayashi et al. (US 20210247051 A1), in view of Cho (US 20180335559 A1), Sato (US 20090003002 A1) and Lancashire (US 20160085011 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Nakabayashi et al. teaches a light-emitting module, comprising:
a light source part 31 (Fig. 3: 31, paragraph 0052);
a light-transmitting member 34, 25 including a first light-transmitting part 34 contacting a lateral surface of the light source part 31, and a second light-transmitting part 25 positioned at an upper side of the light source part 31 and the first light-transmitting part 34 (Fig. 3: 25, 34, 31, paragraph 0047, 0056);
and a light-adjusting member 26 located at an upper side of the light source part 31, the first light-transmitting part 34, and the second light-transmitting part 25 (Fig. 3: 25, 31, 34, 25, paragraph 0048),
and the light-adjusting member 26 and the light source part 31 overlap in a plan view (see Fig. 3: 26, 31).
Nakabayashi et al. fails to teach the light-adjusting member having a through-hole positioned away from the light source part in a plan view, the light-transmitting member having a recess communicating with the through-hole, at least a portion of the recess being positioned lower than a lower surface of the light-adjusting member, the recess overlaps the through-hole in the plan view, the recess is positioned away from the light source part in the plan view.
However, Cho teaches a light-emitting module, comprising a light source part 20, a light-transmitting member 30, and a light-adjusting member 50, the light-adjusting member 50 having a through-hole (the opening between the two parts of the light-adjusting member 50 in Fig. 4b), the light-transmitting member 30 having a recess 36b communicating with the through-hole, at least a portion of the recess 36b being positioned lower than a lower surface of the light-adjusting member 50, the recess 36b overlaps the through-hole in the plan view (Fig. 4b: 20, 50, 30, 36b, paragraph 0068).
Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have combined the teachings of Nakabayashi et al. and Cho in order for the light-adjusting member to have a through-hole, the light-transmitting member to have a recess communicating with the through-hole, at least a portion of the recess being positioned lower than a lower surface of the light-adjusting member, the recess overlaps the through-hole in the plan view. Doing so would uniformly spread the light emitted from the light source, thereby suppressing the phenomenon of white spots, as recognized by Cho (paragraph 0012).
The combination of Nakabayashi et al. and Cho fails to explicitly teach that the through-hole is positioned away from the light source part in a plan view, the recess is positioned away from the light source part in the plan view.
However, Sato teaches a light-emitting module, comprising a light-adjusting member 6 having a through-hole (openings in the light-adjusting member 6 in Fig. 1) positioned away from the light source part 2 in a plan view (Fig. 1: 2, 6, paragraph 0165).
Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have combined the teachings of Nakabayashi et al., Cho and Sato in order to have the through-hole of the light-adjusting member be positioned away from the light source part in a plan view. Doing so would improve the uniformity of light emitted by the light source, as recognized by Sato (paragraph 0197).
Further, Lancashire teaches a light-emitting module, comprising a light-transmitting member 205 having a recess 422 positioned away from the light source part 605 in a plan view (Fig. 7: 205, 422, 605, paragraph 0041, 0044).
Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have combined the teachings of Nakabayashi et al., Cho and Lancashire in order to have the recess of the light-transmitting member be positioned away from the light source part in a plan view. Doing so would provide a light field with symmetrically gradual luminosity, particularly useful for signposting applications, as recognized by Lancashire (paragraph 0046).
Regarding Claim 3, Sato teaches wherein the light-adjusting member 6 includes one or more additional through-holes in the plan view, and all of the through hole and the one or more additional through-holes are positioned away from the light source part 2 in the plan view (see Fig. 1: 2, 6).
Regarding Claim 4, Sato, in a different embodiment, teaches wherein the through-hole 65 (of light-adjusting member 64) includes a line-shaped portion in the plan view (Fig. 10A: 65, Fig. 10B: 64).
Note that through-hole 65 are defined as slits which are line-shaped (see paragraph 0224, 0227).
Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have combined the different embodiments of Sato in order to have the through-hole include a line-shaped portion in the plan view. By doing so, the light that is emitted from the light source part can easily passes through the light-adjusting through-hole.
Regarding Claim 5, Nakabayashi et al. teaches a light guide member 20 having a first surface 20a, a second surface 20b at a side opposite to the first surface 20a, and a housing part 30 extending from the first surface 20a to the second surface 20b, the light source part 31 being located in the housing part 30 (see annotated Fig. 3: 20, 20a, 20b, 30, 31, paragraph 0035).
Note that the portion 30 of Fig. 3 between the first surface 20a and second surface 20b of the light guide member 20 is interpreted as the housing part in which the light source part 31 is housed.
Regarding Claim 6, Nakabayashi et al. teaches wherein at least a portion of an outer edge of the light-adjusting member 26 is positioned outward from an outer edge of the housing part 30 in the plan view (see annotated Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
602
1430
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 3 of Nakabayashi et al. (US 20210247051 A1)
Regarding Claim 7, Nakabayashi et al. teaches wherein the light guide member 20 has a hole part 23 open at a first surface side 20a of the light guide member 20 (see Fig. 3, paragraph 0040).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakabayashi et al. (US 20210247051 A1), in view of Cho (US 20180335559 A1) and Sato (US 20090003002 A1), as applied to Claim 1 above, further in view of Iwakura (US 20220026043 A1).
Nakabayashi et al. teaches wherein the light-adjusting member 26 includes a resin member and a reflector (paragraph 0048), except that a refractive index of the reflector is lower than a refractive index of the resin member.
However, Iwakura teaches a light-emitting module, comprising a light-adjusting member 41 wherein the light-adjusting member 41 includes a resin member 41a and a reflector 41b and a refractive index of the reflector 41b is lower than a refractive index of the resin member 41a (Fig. 3A: 41, 41a, 41b, paragraph 0040).
Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have combined the teachings of Nakabayashi et al., and Iwakura in order to have a refractive index of the reflector be lower than a refractive index of the resin member. Doing so would increase the reflectance of the light-adjusting member (as recognized by Iwakura in paragraph 0006), thereby limiting the light that escapes from directly above the light source.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakabayashi et al. (US 20210247051 A1), in view of Cho (US 20180335559 A1) and Sato (US 20090003002 A1), as applied to Claim 7 above, further in view of Wagatsuma et al. (WO 2016121197 A1).
The combination of Nakabayashi et al., Cho, Sato and Lancashire fails to teach wherein the second light-transmitting part contacts a surface of the light guide member defining the hole part.
However, Wagatsuma et al. teaches a light-emitting module, comprising a second light-transmitting part 77, wherein the second light-transmitting part 77 contacts a surface of the light guide member 51 defining a hole part 55a, 55b (Fig. 3b: 77, 51, 55a, 55b, Abstract, paragraph 0040, 0050, in English translation of Wagatsuma et al.).
Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have combined the teachings of Nakabayashi et al., Sato, Cho and Wagatsuma et al. in order to have the second light-transmitting part contact a surface of the light guide member defining the hole part. By doing so, the amount of illumination light that diffuses inside the light guide member is controlled so that a sufficient but not excessive amount of illumination light is supplied almost evenly throughout the entire interior of the light guide member, as recognized by Wagatsuma et al. (paragraph 0050).
Claims 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakabayashi et al. (US 20210247051 A1), in view of Cho (US 20180335559 A1), Sato (US 20090003002 A1) and Lancashire (US 20160085011 A1).
Nakabayashi et al. teaches a method for manufacturing a light-emitting module, the method comprising, in order: providing an intermediate body 30, the intermediate body 30 comprising a light source part 31, a light-transmitting member 34 contacting a lateral surface of the light source part 31, and a light-adjusting member 26 positioned at an upper side of the light source part 31 and the light-transmitting member 34, the light-adjusting member 26 and the light source part 31 overlap in a plan view (Fig.3: 30, 31, 34, 26, paragraph 0052, 0048).
Nakabayashi et al. fails to teach forming a through-hole in the light-adjusting member, the through-hole being positioned away from the light source part in a plan view, the recess overlaps the through-hole in the plan view, the recess is positioned away from the light source part in the plan view.
However, Sato teaches a method for manufacturing a light-emitting module, the method comprising forming a through-hole 65 in the light-adjusting member 64, the through-hole 65 being positioned away from the light source part 2 in a plan view (Fig. 10A: 64, 65, Fig 10B: 2, 64, and paragraph 0227, 0228).
Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have combined the teachings of Nakabayashi et al. and Sato in order form a through-hole in the light-adjusting member, the through-hole being positioned away from the light source part in a plan view. Doing so would enable the emission of uniform light, as recognized by Sato (paragraph 0228).
Further, Cho teaches a light-emitting module, comprising a light source part 20, a light-transmitting member 30, and a light-adjusting member 50, the light-adjusting member 50 having a through-hole (the opening between the two parts of the light-adjusting member 50 in Fig. 4b), the light-transmitting member 30 having a recess 36b, the recess 36b overlaps the through-hole in the plan view (Fig. 4b: 20, 50, 30, 36b, paragraph 0068).
Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have combined the teachings of Nakabayashi et al. and Cho in order to have the recess overlap the through-hole in the plan view. Doing so would uniformly spread the light emitted from the light source, thereby suppressing the phenomenon of white spots, as recognized by Cho (paragraph 0012).
Further, Lancashire teaches a light-emitting module, comprising a light-transmitting member 205 having a recess 422 positioned away from the light source part 605 in a plan view (Fig. 7: 205, 422, 605, paragraph 0041, 0044).
Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have combined the teachings of Nakabayashi et al., Cho and Lancashire in order to have the recess of the light-transmitting member be positioned away from the light source part in a plan view. Doing so would provide a light field with symmetrically gradual luminosity, particularly useful for signposting applications, as recognized by Lancashire (paragraph 0046).
Regarding Claim 11, Nakabayashi et al. fails to teach wherein the forming of the through-hole includes forming a recess in the light-transmitting member, and wherein the recess communicates with the through-hole.
However, Cho teaches wherein the forming of the through-hole (the opening between the two parts of the light-adjusting member 50 in Fig. 4b) includes forming a recess 36b in the light-transmitting member 30, and wherein the recess 36b communicates with the through-hole (Fig. 4b: 50, 36b, paragraph 0068).
Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have combined the teachings of Nakabayashi et al., Sato and Cho in order to form the through-hole, which includes forming a recess in the light-transmitting member, and wherein the recess communicates with the through-hole. Doing so would uniformly spread the light emitted from the light source, thereby suppressing the phenomenon of white spots, as recognized by Cho (paragraph 0012).
Claims 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakabayashi et al. (US 20210247051 A1), in view of Cho (US 20180335559 A1), Sato (US 20090003002 A1) and Lancashire (US 20160085011 A1), as applied to Claim 9 above, further in view of Eguchi (JP 2003347734 A).
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Nakabayashi et al. Cho, , Sato and Lancashire fails to teach wherein the forming of the through-hole includes forming the through-hole by laser irradiation.
However, Eguchi teaches a method for manufacturing a semiconductor device, the method comprising forming a through hole VH, wherein the forming of the through-hole VH includes forming the through-hole VH by laser irradiation (Fig. 1: VH, paragraph 0017 in English Translation of Eguchi).
Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have combined the teachings of Nakabayashi et al., Cho, Sato, Lancashire and Eguchi in order to form the through-hole by laser irradiation. Doing so would enable dry processing and size reduction of a device, as recognized by Eguchi (see Abstract, paragraph 0009 in English Translation of Eguchi).
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of Nakabayashi et al. Cho, , Sato and Lancashire fails to teach performing ozone cleaning or a plasma treatment of the light-adjusting member after the forming of the through-hole.
However, Eguchi teaches performing ozone cleaning or a plasma treatment after the forming of the through-hole VH (paragraph 0012 in English Translation of Eguchi).
Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have adopted the desmearing process of Eguchi in the manufacturing method of Nakabayashi et al./Cho/Sato/Lancashire in order to perform ozone cleaning or a plasma treatment of the light-adjusting member after the forming of the through-hole. Doing so would enable a desmearing process in which unwanted residue left from forming the through-hole are eliminated, as recognized by Eguchi (paragraph 0028 in English Translation of Eguchi).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakabayashi et al. (US 20210247051 A1), in view of Cho (US 20180335559 A1), Sato (US 20090003002 A1) and Lancashire (US 20160085011 A1), as applied to Claim 9 above, further in view of Watanabe et al. (US 20200089051 A1).
Nakabayashi et al. fails to teach wherein in the providing of the intermediate body, the light-adjusting member includes a first region overlapping the light source part in the plan view, a second region being positioned away from the light source part in the plan view, and a hole part being positioned in the second region and being open at a surface of the light-adjusting member facing the light-transmitting member, and at least a portion of a surface of the light-adjusting member defining the hole part contacts the light-transmitting member.
However, Sato teaches wherein in the providing of the intermediate body, the light-adjusting member 63, 64 includes a first region 63 overlapping the light source part 2 in the plan view, a second region 64 being positioned away from the light source part 2 in the plan view, and a hole part (one of the many openings between second regions 64) being positioned in the second region 64 and being open at a surface of the light-adjusting member 64 facing the light-transmitting member 3, and at least a portion of a surface of the light-adjusting member 64 defining the hole part contacts the light-transmitting member 3 (Fig. 10B: 63, 64, 2, 3, paragraph 0227).
The combination of Nakabayashi et al., Cho, Sato and Lancashire fails to teach wherein the method further comprises removing a portion of the second region positioned outward from the through-hole after the forming of the through-hole, and the portion of the second region includes the hole part.
However, Watanabe et al. teaches a method for manufacturing a light-emitting module, the method comprising forming a through-hole 45 in the light-adjusting member 40: 41, 42, the through-hole 45 being positioned away from the light source part 30 in a plan view (Fig. 1: 30, 40, 41, 42, 45, Fig 2E: 45, 41, 42, and paragraph 0071), and removing a portion of the second region positioned outward from the through-hole 45 after the forming of the through-hole 45, and the portion of the second region includes the hole part 44 (Fig. 2G: 45, 44, paragraph 0073, 0074).
Note that a region of the light-adjusting member 40: 41, 42 is removed by means of punching forming holes 44 (see Fig. 2G, paragraph 0074) and this region is interpreted as the second region of the light-adjusting member 40: 41, 42.
Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have combined the teachings of Nakabayashi et al., Sato, and Watanabe et al. in order to remove a portion of the second region positioned outward from the through-hole after the forming of the through-hole, and the portion of the second region includes the hole part. Doing so would complete the processing steps for the light-adjusting member, as recognized by Watanabe et al. (paragraph 0074).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding Claim 14, the prior art of record fails to disclose, teach, suggest or render obvious the limitation “ wherein a maximum length of the recess in the lateral direction is less than a maximum length of the through-hole in the lateral direction in a cross-sectional view”.
Conclusion
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAMNA F IQBAL whose telephone number is 571-272-1587. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8.30 am - 5.30 pm EST.
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, Kretelia Graham can be reached at 571-272-5055. 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.
/HAMNA FATHIMA IQBAL/Examiner, Art Unit 2817 03/27/2026
/Kretelia Graham/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2817 April 6, 2026