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 § 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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
In line 7 of claim 1, it is unclear what is meant by the phrase “the liquid crystal compound is vertically aligned” since there does not appear to be a reference plane such as an in-plane of the light absorption anisotropic film from which the angle of alignment of 90[Symbol font/0xB0] for vertical alignment is determined. For the purposes of examination, the reference plane is deemed to be an in-plane of the film, such that the liquid crystal compound is aligned parallel to the thickness axis of the film, and perpendicular to the in-plane axis of the film.
In lines 12-14, 19-21, 23-25 of claim 1, in lines 3-5 of claim 6, and in lines 3-5 of claim 16, it is unclear exactly what is meant by the recitation of “a monovalent group in which -CH2- constituting a monovalent aliphatic hydrocarbon group having 1 to 20 carbon atoms which may have a monovalent substituent is substituted with a divalent substituent”. Does it mean that one -CH2- of an aliphatic hydrocarbon group having 1 to 20 carbon atoms, is substituted with a divalent substituent, and the aliphatic hydrocarbon group optionally has a monovalent substituent, or something different? For purposes of examination, the first interpretation is used.
Claims 2-20 depend on and include all the subject matter of claim 1, but none provide any solutions to the indefinite issue described above.
Clarification and amendment preferably with more punctuation, accompanied by relevant citation(s) from the specification are required.
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.
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.
Claims 1-6, 8-10, 13-16, 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoshino (US 2018/0362768) in view of Ichihashi (Clarivate Analytics English translation of JP-H11305036-A).
Regarding claim 1, Hoshino teaches a light absorption anisotropic film ([0277]) formed of a liquid crystal composition (coloring composition 1 [0277], example 1, Table 1 [0331]) containing a liquid crystal compound (liquid crystalline compound L1, example 1, Table 1 [0331]), a dichroic substance represented by Formula (C-1) of Applicant (Dye 1: D1 [0276] shown below, example 1, Table 1 [0331]) where Ra1 of Applicant = a monovalent group in which a -CH2- constituting a monovalent aliphatic hydrocarbon group having 12 carbon atoms is substituted with a divalent substituent -O- and has a monovalent substituent -O-(C=O)-CH=CH2, Rb11 of Applicant = a monovalent aliphatic hydrocarbon group having 2 carbon atoms, and Rb12 of Applicant = a monovalent aliphatic hydrocarbon group having 6 carbon atoms which has a monovalent substituent -O-(C=O)-CH=CH2; and a dichroic substance represented by Formula (C-2) of Applicant (Dye 2: D2 [0276] shown below, example 1, Table 1 [0331]) where Ra2 of Applicant = a monovalent group in which -CH2- constitutes a monovalent aliphatic hydrocarbon group having 2 carbon atoms and a monovalent substituent -O-(C=O)-CH(CH3)2, Rb21 of Applicant = a monovalent aliphatic hydrocarbon group having 2 carbon atoms, and Rb22 of Applicant = a monovalent aliphatic hydrocarbon group having 2 carbon atoms which has a monovalent substituent -O-(C=O)-CH=CH2, Ara = Arc = a divalent aromatic phenyl group; na of Applicant = nc of Applicant = 1, where na + nc = 2; and Ra1 of Applicant and Ra2 of Applicant represent different groups, and -N(Rb11)(Rb12) of Applicant and -N(Rb21)(Rb22) of Applicant are groups that are different from each other, wherein a total content of the dichroic substance represented by Formula (C-1) of Applicant and the dichroic substance represented by Formula (C-2) of Applicant is 42% by mass with respect to a total mass of a solid content of the liquid crystal composition (100x(1.24+1.70)/(3.75+1.24+1.70+0.28+0.03), Example 1 [0331]) which is within the claimed range of 4.5% by mass or greater.
PNG
media_image1.png
268
1182
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Hoshino fails to teach that the liquid crystal compound is vertically aligned parallel to the thickness axis, and hence perpendicular to the in-plane axis, of the light absorption anisotropic film.
However, Ichihashi teaches that in a light absorption anisotropic film formed of a liquid crystal composition containing a liquid crystal compound and a dichroic substance (dichroic dye [0007]), the liquid crystal compound is vertically aligned along with the dichroic substance (vertical alignment treatment [0010]), for the purpose of providing the desired directional light absorption anisotropy.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time, to have vertically aligned the liquid crystal compound along with the dichroic substances in the liquid crystal composition of the light absorption anisotropic film of Hoshino, in order to obtain the desired directional light absorption anisotropy, as taught by Ichihashi.
Regarding claim 2, Hoshino teaches that a total content of the dichroic substance represented by Formula (C-1) of Applicant and the dichroic substance represented by Formula (C-2) of Applicant is 42% by mass with respect to a total mass of a solid content of the liquid crystal composition (100x(1.24+1.70)/(3.75+1.24+1.70+0.28+0.03), Example 1 [0331]) which is within the claimed range of 6.5% by mass or greater.
Regarding claim 3, Hoshino teaches that a mass ratio of a content of the dichroic substance represented by Formula (C-1) to a content of the dichroic substance represented by Formula (C-2) in the liquid crystal composition is 0.72 (1.24/1.70, Example 1 [0331]) which is within the claimed range of 0.100 to 10.0.
Regarding claims 4-5, Hoshino teaches that in Formula (C-1),
Rb11 of Applicant = -CH2CH3 (Dye 1: D1 [0276] shown above), and Rb12 of Applicant = -(CH2)6-O-(C=O)-CH=CH2 (Dye 1: D1 [0276] shown above), where Rb12 of Applicant with the carbonyl group being able to conjugate with the adjacent carbon-carbon double bond, is expected to be more polar and hence less hydrophobic than Rb11 of Applicant with its less polar and hence more hydrophobic aliphatic alkyl group. Accordingly, a value of a Hansen solubility parameter of the more polar and less hydrophobic Rb12 of Applicant is expected to be greater than a value of a Hansen solubility parameter of the less polar and more hydrophobic Rb11 of Applicant.
In addition, Hoshino teaches that in Formula (C-2), Rb21 of Applicant = -CH2CH3 (Dye 2: D2 [0276] shown above), and Rb22 of Applicant = -(CH2)2-O-(C=O)-CH=CH2 (Dye 2: D2 [0276] shown above), where Rb22 of Applicant with the carbonyl group being able to conjugate with the adjacent carbon-carbon double bond, is expected to be more polar and hence less hydrophobic than Rb21 of Applicant with its aliphatic alkyl group. Accordingly, a value of a Hansen solubility parameter of the more polar and less hydrophobic Rb22 of Applicant is expected to be greater than a value of a Hansen solubility parameter of the less polar and more hydrophobic Rb21 of Applicant.
Furthermore, Hoshino teaches that Rb12 of Applicant = -(CH2)6-O-(C=O)-CH=CH2 in Formula (C-1) of Applicant (Dye 1: D1 [0276] shown above) and Rb22 of Applicant = -(CH2)2-O-(C=O)-CH=CH2 in Formula (C-2) of Applicant (Dye 2: D2 [0276] shown above) are homologs in that the only difference between them is that the aliphatic -(CH2)2- chain of Rb22 is shorter, having 4 less carbon atoms than the aliphatic -(CH2)6- chain of Rb12, such that an absolute value of a difference in the Hansen solubility parameter between Rb12 in Formula (C-1) and Rb22 of Applicant in Formula (C-2) of Applicant is expected to be within the claimed range of 3.0 or less, or 1.0 or less.
Regarding claim 6, Hoshino teaches that Rb22 in Formula (C-2) of Applicant = a monovalent aliphatic hydrocarbon group having 2 carbon atoms which has a monovalent substituent -O-(C=O)-CH=CH2 (Dye 2: D2 [0276], example 1, Table 1 [0331]).
Regarding claim 8, Hoshino teaches that the liquid crystal compound includes a polymer liquid crystal compound (thermotropic liquid crystalline polymer [0096]).
Regarding claim 9, Hoshino teaches an optical film (laminate [0187]) comprising: a transparent film base material (light transmittance of base is preferably 80% or higher [0191]); and the light absorption anisotropic film which is disposed on the transparent film base material (formed on the base [0187]).
Regarding claim 10, Hoshino teaches that the optical film further comprises an alignment film between the transparent film base material and the light absorption anisotropic film ([0188]).
Regarding claim 13, Hoshino teaches that a mass ratio of a content of the dichroic substance represented by Formula (C-1) to a content of the dichroic substance represented by Formula (C-2) in the liquid crystal composition is 0.72 (1.24/1.70, Example 1 [0331]) which is within the claimed range of 0.100 to 10.0.
Regarding claims 14-15, Hoshino teaches that in Formula (C-1), Rb11 of Applicant = -CH2CH3 (Dye 1: D1 [0276] shown above), and Rb12 of Applicant = -(CH2)6-O-(C=O)-CH=CH2 (Dye 1: D1 [0276] shown above), where Rb12 of Applicant with the carbonyl group being able to conjugate with the adjacent carbon-carbon double bond, is expected to be more polar and hence less hydrophobic than Rb11 of Applicant with its less polar and hence more hydrophobic aliphatic alkyl group. Accordingly, a value of a Hansen solubility parameter of the more polar and less hydrophobic Rb12 of Applicant is expected to be greater than a value of a Hansen solubility parameter of the less polar and more hydrophobic Rb11 of Applicant.
In addition, Hoshino teaches that in Formula (C-2), Rb21 of Applicant = -CH2CH3 (Dye 2: D2 [0276] shown above), and Rb22 of Applicant = -(CH2)2-O-(C=O)-CH=CH2 (Dye 2: D2 [0276] shown above), where Rb22 of Applicant with the carbonyl group being able to conjugate with the adjacent carbon-carbon double bond, is expected to be more polar and hence less hydrophobic than Rb21 of Applicant with its less polar and hence more hydrophobic aliphatic alkyl group. Accordingly, a value of a Hansen solubility parameter of the more polar and less hydrophobic Rb22 of Applicant is expected to be greater than a value of a Hansen solubility parameter of the less polar and more hydrophobic Rb21 of Applicant.
Furthermore, Hoshino teaches that Rb12 of Applicant = -(CH2)6-O-(C=O)-CH=CH2 in Formula (C-1) of Applicant (Dye 1: D1 [0276] shown above) and Rb22 of Applicant = -(CH2)2-O-(C=O)-CH=CH2 in Formula (C-2) of Applicant (Dye 2: D2 [0276] shown above) are homologs in that the only difference between them is that the aliphatic -(CH2)2- chain of Rb22 is shorter, having 4 less carbon atoms than the aliphatic -(CH2)6- chain of Rb12, such that an absolute value of a difference in the Hansen solubility parameter between Rb12 in Formula (C-1) and Rb22 of Applicant in Formula (C-2) of Applicant is expected to be within the claimed range of 3.0 or less, or 1.0 or less.
Regarding claim 16, Hoshino teaches that Rb22 in Formula (C-2) of Applicant = a monovalent aliphatic hydrocarbon group having 2 carbon atoms which has a monovalent substituent -O-(C=O)-CH=CH2 (Dye 2: D2 [0276], example 1, Table 1 [0331]).
Regarding claim 18, Hoshino teaches that the liquid crystal compound includes a polymer liquid crystal compound (thermotropic liquid crystalline polymer [0096]).
Regarding claim 19, Hoshino teaches an optical film (laminate [0187]) comprising: a transparent film base material (light transmittance of base is preferably 80% or higher [0191]); and the light absorption anisotropic film which is disposed on the transparent film base material (formed on the base [0187]).
Regarding claim 20, Hoshino teaches that the optical film further comprises an alignment film between the transparent film base material and the light absorption anisotropic film ([0188]).
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoshino in view of Ichihashi, as applied to claims 1-6, 8-10, 13-16, 18-20 above, and further in view of Terada (Clarivate Analytics English translation of JP-2015200754 -A).
Hoshino, as modified by Ichihashi, teaches the optical film comprising: a transparent film base material and the light absorption anisotropic film which is disposed on the transparent film base material, as described above.
Regarding claim 11, Hoshino fails to teach that the optical film further comprises a polarizer.
However, Terada teaches that an optical film (polarizing plate 10, 3rd para of page 10) comprising: a light anisotropic film (optical anisotropic film 1, 3rd para of page 10), further comprises a polarizer (3, 3rd para of page 10), for the purpose of providing the desired control in light incident angle which in turn, impacts and hence controls the viewing angle (light incident angle dependency, 4th last para of page 11).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time, to have further comprised a polarizer in addition to the light absorption anisotropic film in the optical film of Hoshino, as modified by Ichihashi, in order to control the light incident angle which in turn, impacts and hence controls the viewing angle, as taught by Terada.
Regarding claim 12, Hoshino teaches a display device (liquid crystal display device [0233]) comprising: a display element (liquid crystal cell [0232]) and the optical film (laminate [0231]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to Sow-Fun Hon whose telephone number is (571)272-1492. The examiner is on a flexible schedule but can usually be reached during a regular workweek between the hours of 10:00 AM and 6:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Aaron Austin, can be reached at (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 Center (https://patentcenter.uspto.gov). Should you have any questions on the Patent Center 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.
/Sophie Hon/
Sow-Fun Hon
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1782