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 .
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed on 03/09/2026 are acknowledged and accepted. Claims 1, 4, and 7 are amended, no Claims are canceled/withdrawn, no Claims have been added, and Claims 1-16 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
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.
Claims 1, 4, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “collects” in claims 1, 4, and 7 are relative terms which render the claim indefinite. The term “collect” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear what conditions would need to be met in order for the holographic optical component to ‘collect the part of the first linearly polarized light.’ Further, without a standard provided from the specification, one of ordinary skill could not determine the difference between a holographic element that collects part of the polarized light and a holographic element that does not collect part of the polarized light.
For examination purposes, the Office interprets the term ‘collect’ to mean an optical element that may converge, collimate, or redirect the incident light.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/27/2026 is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 6-8, 11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20180180889 A1), previously cited, and Takagi (US 20190265493 A1), previously cited, and further in view of Komura (JP7500386B2), newly cited.
All references to Komura (JP7500386B2) will be made to English language equivalent Komura (US20220113544A1).
Regarding claim 1, Lee teaches in Fig. 3: a display device (Fig. 3) comprising:
a display panel (“display module 210”; [0045]) configured to emit display light that is linearly polarized light (“display module displaying an image and outputting first linear polarized light”; [0011]);
a first retardation film (220) that faces the display panel (“a first quarter wave (λ/4) plate 220”; [0045], see Fig. 3 in which 220 faces 210);
a (“half mirror 230”; [0048]) that is bonded to the first retardation film (220, see Fig. 3);
a second retardation film (240) that is bonded to the (230, see Fig. 3); and
a reflective polarizer (250) that faces the second retardation film (240)(“reflective polarizing plate 250 is arranged between the second quarter wave plate 240”; [0052]), reflects first linearly polarized light, and transmits second linearly polarized light that is orthogonal to the first linearly polarized light (“reflective polarizing plate 250 passes through first linear polarized light custom-character and reflects second linear polarized light”; [0052], since the terms “first linearly polarized” and “second linearly polarized” are arbitrary, any combination of polarizations in which one polarization is reflected and the other passes through would read on the limitation), wherein
an air layer is interposed between the second retardation film (240) and the reflective polarizer (250) (b is a distance between the second quarter wave plate and the reflective polarizing plate; Fig. 3),
However, lee fails to explicitly teach to a configuration such that: the optical element is a holographic optical element, and wherein a surface of the second retardation film facing the reflective polarizer is covered with an antireflective film, and the holographic optical element reflects and diffracts a part of the first linearly polarized light incident thereon, and collects the part of the first linearly polarized light.
However, in a related invention in the field of display devices, Takagi teaches, in Fig. 1, the half mirror may be a holographical optical element such that “it is also conceivable that a function equivalent to an action by the half mirror 21 is obtained by providing an optical function surface such as a diffraction element, e.g., a volume hologram, instead of the half mirror” (Takagi, [0087]). Furthermore, Takagi teaches in Fig. 1: a surface of the second retardation (240) film facing the reflective polarizer is covered with an antireflective film (“occurrence of ghost light or the like may further be suppressed, by appropriately providing AR coating on a lens surface of each lens”; [0084]). One of ordinary skill would assume that any layer of the device could be covered in an AR coting as taught by Takagi.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee to incorporate the teachings of Takagi to provide a device in which the optical element is a holographic element and a surface of the second retardation film facing the reflective polarizer is covered with an antireflective film, for the purpose of suppressing ghost light (Takagi, [0084]).
However, Takagi fails to explicitly teach to a configuration such that: the holographic optical element reflects and diffracts a part of the first linearly polarized light incident thereon, and collects the part of the first linearly polarized light.
However, in a related invention in the field of display devices, Komura teaches in Fig. 9: the holographic optical element reflects and diffracts a part of the first linearly polarized light incident thereon (“The holographic optical element 20 is configured to have a lens effect to reflect/diffract a part of the incident light and to condense the light. The holographic optical element 20 has an interference fringe pattern to diffract the incident light to predetermined directions.”; [0108]), and collects the part of the first linearly polarized light (the term ‘collect’ is relative term, any optical component with incident light projected on its surface would be understood to essentially ‘collect’ the incident light in the optical system).
Furthermore, Komura teaches this configuration such that “The holographic optical element 20 is configured to have a lens effect to reflect/diffract a part of the incident light and to condense the light. The holographic optical element 20 has an interference fringe pattern to diffract the incident light to predetermined directions” (Komura, [0108]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee and Takagi to incorporate the teachings of Komura to provide a device in which the holographic optical element reflects and diffracts a part of the first linearly polarized light incident thereon, and collects the part of the first linearly polarized light, for the purpose of condensing the light and diffracting it into predetermined directions (Komura, [0108]).
Regarding claim 3, Lee, Takagi, and Komura teach the display device according to claim 1. Lee further teaches:
an air layer is interposed between the first retardation film (220) and the display panel (210, see Fig. 3).
Lee fails to explicitly teach: a surface of the first retardation film facing the display panel is covered with an antireflective film.
However, Takagi teaches in Fig. 1: a surface of the first retardation film (“polarization conversion member 13 is a quarter wavelength plate”; [0035]) facing the display panel is covered with an antireflective film (“occurrence of ghost light or the like may further be suppressed, by appropriately providing AR coating on a lens surface of each lens”; [0084]).
Furthermore, one of ordinary skill would assume that any layer of the device could be covered in an AR coting as taught by Takagi.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee to incorporate the teachings of Takagi to provide a device in which a surface of the first retardation film facing the display panel is covered with an antireflective film, for the purpose of suppressing ghost light (Takagi, [0084]).
Regarding claim 8, Lee, Takagi, and Komura teach the display device according to claim 1. Lee further teaches: the first retardation film (220) and the second retardation film (240) are quarter-wave plates (“a first quarter wave plate converting the first linear polarized light to first circular polarized light; … a second quarter wave plate converting the first circular polarized light to second linear polarized light”; [0011]).
Regarding claim 4, Lee teaches in Fig. 3: a display device comprising:
a display panel (“display module 210”; [0045]) configured to emit display light that is linearly polarized light (“display module displaying an image and outputting first linear polarized light”; [0011]);
a first retardation film (220) that faces the display panel (“a first quarter wave (λ/4) plate 220”; [0045], see Fig. 3 in which 220 faces 210);
a (“half mirror 230”; [0048]) that is bonded to the first retardation film (220, see Fig. 3);
a second retardation film (240) that faces the (230, see Fig. 3).
The embodiment in Fig. 3 of Lee fails to explicitly teach: the optical element is a holographic optical element, and wherein a reflective polarizer that is bonded to the second retardation film, reflects first linearly polarized light, and transmits second linearly polarized light that is orthogonal to the first linearly polarized light, wherein an air layer is interposed between the holographic optical element and the second retardation film, each of a surface of the holographic optical element facing the second retardation film and a surface of the second retardation film facing the holographic optical element is covered with an antireflective film.
However, the embodiment as shown in Fig. 4 of Lee teaches: an air layer is interposed between the (230) and the second retardation film (240)(see Fig. 4 in which there is an air layer between 230 and 240).
The embodiment as shown in Fig. 4 of Lee fails to explicitly teach: the optical element is a holographic optical element, and wherein a reflective polarizer that is bonded to the second retardation film, reflects first linearly polarized light, and transmits second linearly polarized light that is orthogonal to the first linearly polarized light, wherein … each of a surface of the holographic optical element facing the second retardation film and a surface of the second retardation film facing the holographic optical element is covered with an antireflective film, and wherein the holographic optical element reflects and diffracts a part of the first linearly polarized light incident thereon, and collects the part of the first linearly polarized light.
However, in a related invention in the field of display devices, Takagi teaches, in Fig. 1, the half mirror may be a holographical optical element such that “it is also conceivable that a function equivalent to an action by the half mirror 21 is obtained by providing an optical function surface such as a diffraction element, e.g., a volume hologram, instead of the half mirror” (Takagi, [0087]). Furthermore, Takagi teaches in Fig. 1: a reflective polarizer (“semi-transmissive reflection type polarization plate 23”; [0037]) that is bonded to the second retardation film (“polarization conversion member 22 being the quarter wavelength plate”; [0037], see Fig. 1 om which 23 and 22 are bonded), reflects first linearly polarized light, and transmits second linearly polarized light that is orthogonal to the first linearly polarized light (“a polarization state of light changes each time the light passes through the polarization conversion member 22, and the semi-transmissive reflection type polarization plate 23 transmits or reflects the incident component”; [0038]), wherein …
each of a surface of the holographic optical element facing the second retardation film and a surface of the second retardation film facing the holographic optical element is covered with an antireflective film (“occurrence of ghost light or the like may further be suppressed, by appropriately providing AR coating on a lens surface of each lens”; [0084]). One of ordinary skill would assume that it would be approximate to provide an AR coting on any desired layer as taught by Takagi.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the embodiments of Lee to incorporate the teachings of Takagi to provide a device in which the optical element is a holographic element and a surface of the second retardation film facing the reflective polarizer is covered with an antireflective film, for the purpose of suppressing ghost light (Takagi, [0084]).
However, Takagi fails to explicitly teach to a configuration such that: the holographic optical element reflects and diffracts a part of the first linearly polarized light incident thereon, and collects the part of the first linearly polarized light.
However, in a related invention in the field of display devices, Komura teaches in Fig. 9: the holographic optical element reflects and diffracts a part of the first linearly polarized light incident thereon (“The holographic optical element 20 is configured to have a lens effect to reflect/diffract a part of the incident light and to condense the light. The holographic optical element 20 has an interference fringe pattern to diffract the incident light to predetermined directions.”; [0108]), and collects the part of the first linearly polarized light (the term ‘collect’ is relative term, any optical component with incident light projected on its surface would be understood to essentially ‘collect’ the incident light in the optical system).
Furthermore, Komura teaches this configuration such that “The holographic optical element 20 is configured to have a lens effect to reflect/diffract a part of the incident light and to condense the light. The holographic optical element 20 has an interference fringe pattern to diffract the incident light to predetermined directions” (Komura, [0108]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee and Takagi to incorporate the teachings of Komura to provide a device in which the holographic optical element reflects and diffracts a part of the first linearly polarized light incident thereon, and collects the part of the first linearly polarized light, for the purpose of condensing the light and diffracting it into predetermined directions (Komura, [0108]).
Regarding claim 6, Lee, Takagi, and Komura teach the display device according to claim 4. Lee further teaches:
an air layer is interposed between the first retardation film (220) and the display panel (210, see Fig. 3).
Lee fails to explicitly teach: a surface of the first retardation film facing the display panel is covered with an antireflective film.
However, Takagi teaches in Fig. 1: a surface of the first retardation film (“polarization conversion member 13 is a quarter wavelength plate”; [0035]) facing the display panel is covered with an antireflective film (“occurrence of ghost light or the like may further be suppressed, by appropriately providing AR coating on a lens surface of each lens”; [0084]).
Furthermore, one of ordinary skill would assume that any layer of the device could be covered in an AR coting as taught by Takagi.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee to incorporate the teachings of Takagi to provide a device in which a surface of the first retardation film facing the display panel is covered with an antireflective film, for the purpose of suppressing ghost light (Takagi, [0084]).
Regarding claim 11, Lee, Takagi, and Komura teach the display device according to claim 4. Lee further teaches: the first retardation film (220) and the second retardation film (240) are quarter-wave plates (“a first quarter wave plate converting the first linear polarized light to first circular polarized light; … a second quarter wave plate converting the first circular polarized light to second linear polarized light”; [0011]).
Regarding claim 7, Lee teaches in Fig. 4: a display device (Fig. 4) comprising:
a display panel (“display module 210”; [0045]) configured to emit display light that is linearly polarized light (“display module displaying an image and outputting first linear polarized light”; [0011]);
a first retardation film (220) that faces the display panel (“a first quarter wave (λ/4) plate 220”; [0045], see Fig. 4 in which 220 faces 210);
a (“half mirror 230”; [0048]) that faces the first retardation film (220, see Fig. 4);
a second retardation film (240) that faces the (230, see Fig. 4); and
a reflective polarizer (250) that faces the second retardation film (240)(“reflective polarizing plate 250 is arranged between the second quarter wave plate 240”; [0052]), reflects first linearly polarized light, and transmits second linearly polarized light that is orthogonal to the first linearly polarized light (“reflective polarizing plate 250 passes through first linear polarized light custom-character and reflects second linear polarized light”; [0052], since the terms “first linearly polarized” and “second linearly polarized” are arbitrary, any combination of polarizations in which one polarization is reflected and the other is passes through would read on the limitation), wherein
air layers is interposed each between the first retardation film (220) and the display panel (210) (see Fig. 4 in which there is an air layer between 210 and 220), between the (230) and the first retardation film (220) (see Fig. 4), between the second retardation film (340) and the holographic optical element (230) (see Fig. 4), and between the reflective polarizer (250) and the second retardation film (240) (see Fig. 4 in which an air layer is disposed between each of 210, 220, 230, 240, and 250).
Lee fails to explicitly teach: the optical element is a holographic optical element, and wherein each of a surface of the first retardation film facing the display panel, a surface of the first retardation film facing the holographic optical element, a surface of the holographic optical element facing the first retardation film, a surface of the holographic optical element facing the second retardation film, a surface of the second retardation film facing the holographic optical element, and a surface of the second retardation film facing the reflective polarizer being covered with an antireflective film, and wherein the holographic optical element reflects and diffracts a part of the first linearly polarized light incident thereon, and collects the part of the first linearly polarized light.
However, in a related invention in the field of display devices, Takagi teaches, in Fig. 1, the half mirror may be a holographical optical element such that “it is also conceivable that a function equivalent to an action by the half mirror 21 is obtained by providing an optical function surface such as a diffraction element, e.g., a volume hologram, instead of the half mirror” (Takagi, [0087]). Takagi further teaches in Fig. 1: each of a surface of the first retardation film facing the display panel, a surface of the first retardation film facing the holographic optical element, a surface of the holographic optical element facing the first retardation film, a surface of the holographic optical element facing the second retardation film, a surface of the second retardation film facing the holographic optical element, and a surface of the second retardation film facing the reflective polarizer being covered with an antireflective film (“occurrence of ghost light or the like may further be suppressed, by appropriately providing AR coating on a lens surface of each lens”; [0084]). One of ordinary skill would assume that any layer of the device could be covered in an AR coting as taught by Takagi.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee to incorporate the teachings of Takagi to provide a device in which the optical element is a holographic element and a surfaces of the optical elements are covered in AR coatings, for the purpose of suppressing ghost light (Takagi, [0084]).
However, Takagi fails to explicitly teach to a configuration such that: the holographic optical element reflects and diffracts a part of the first linearly polarized light incident thereon, and collects the part of the first linearly polarized light.
However, in a related invention in the field of display devices, Komura teaches in Fig. 9: the holographic optical element reflects and diffracts a part of the first linearly polarized light incident thereon (“The holographic optical element 20 is configured to have a lens effect to reflect/diffract a part of the incident light and to condense the light. The holographic optical element 20 has an interference fringe pattern to diffract the incident light to predetermined directions.”; [0108]), and collects the part of the first linearly polarized light (the term ‘collect’ is relative term, any optical component with incident light projected on its surface would be understood to essentially ‘collect’ the incident light in the optical system).
Furthermore, Komura teaches this configuration such that “The holographic optical element 20 is configured to have a lens effect to reflect/diffract a part of the incident light and to condense the light. The holographic optical element 20 has an interference fringe pattern to diffract the incident light to predetermined directions” (Komura, [0108]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee and Takagi to incorporate the teachings of Komura to provide a device in which the holographic optical element reflects and diffracts a part of the first linearly polarized light incident thereon, and collects the part of the first linearly polarized light, for the purpose of condensing the light and diffracting it into predetermined directions (Komura, [0108]).
Regarding claim 14, Lee, Takagi, and Komura teach the display device according to claim 7. Lee further teaches: the first retardation film (220) and the second retardation film (240) are quarter-wave plates (“a first quarter wave plate converting the first linear polarized light to first circular polarized light; … a second quarter wave plate converting the first circular polarized light to second linear polarized light”; [0011]).
Claims 2, 5, 9-10, 12-13, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20180180889 A1), Takagi (US 20190265493 A1), and Komura (JP7500386B2), as in independent claims 1, 4 and 7, and further in view of Komura (JP7480013B2), previously cited.
All citations to Komura (JP7480013B2) will be made to the English language equivalent Komura (US 11536885 B2), hereinafter Komura855.
Regarding claim 2, Lee, Takagi, and Komura teach the display device according to claim 1. Lee, Takagi, and Komura fail to explicitly teach: the first retardation film is bonded to the display panel.
However, in a related invention in the field of display panels Komura855 teaches in Fig. 13: the first retardation film (“the first retardation film R1”; col 14 lines 5-13) is bonded to the display panel (“display panel 2”; col 14 lines 5-13) (see Fig. 13 in which R1 is clearly cemented to the display panel 2).
Furthermore, Komura855 teaches this configuration such that “the display panel 2R emits the display light DLR. The display light DLR is the first linearly polarized light LP1. The display light DLR is converted into the first circularly polarized light CP1 when transmitted through the first retardation film R1” (Komura855, col 21 lines 45-50).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee, Takagi, and Komura to incorporate the teachings of Komura855 to provide a device in which the first retardation film is bonded to the display panel, for the purpose of converting the display light into circularly polarized light when transmitted through the first retardation film (Komura855, col 21 lines 45-50).
Regarding claim 9, Lee, Takagi, and Komura teach the display device according to claim 1. Lee further teaches: the display panel includes a liquid crystal panel (“the display module 210 may be realized as a display device such as a liquid crystal display”; [0046]).
Lee and Takagi fail to explicitly teach: a polarizer that faces the first retardation film.
However, in a related invention in the field of display panels Komura855 teaches in Fig. 13: the display panel (“a display panel 2”; col 4 line 17) includes a liquid crystal panel (“display panel 2 is not limited to a liquid crystal panel”; col 4 line 32) and a polarizer that faces the first retardation film (“display panel 2 comprises a … a polarizer PL2”; col 14 lines 5-7, “The second polarizer PL2 is arranged between the second substrate SUB2 and the first retardation film R1”; col 14 lines 11-13).
Furthermore, Komura855 teaches this configuration such that “Part of the illumination light modulated in the display region DA is transmitted through the second polarizer PL2, and converted into display light DLR of the linearly polarized light for a right eye and display light DLL of the linearly polarized light for a left eye” (Komura855, col 14 lines 21-26).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee, Takagi, and Komura to incorporate the teachings of Komura855 to provide a device in which a polarizer faces the first retardation film, for the purpose of converting the display light into linearly polarized light in order to accommodate the viewing of both the right and left eye (Komura855, col 14 lines 21-26).
Regarding claim 10, Lee, Takagi, Komura, and Komura855 teach the display device according to claim 9. Lee and Takagi fail to explicitly teach: an illumination device that illuminates the liquid crystal panel, wherein the illumination device includes a first laser element configured to emit blue laser light, a second laser element configured to emit green laser light, and a third laser element configured to emit red laser light.
However, in a related invention in the field of display panels Komura855 teaches in Fig. 13: an illumination device that illuminates the liquid crystal panel (“the display panel 2 is a display panel comprising a self-luminous light emitting element, the illumination device 3”; col 4 lines 32-37, “display panel 2 is not limited to a liquid crystal panel”; col 4 line 32), wherein
the illumination device (3) includes a first laser element configured to emit blue laser light, a second laser element configured to emit green laser light, and a third laser element configured to emit red laser light (“illumination device 3 corresponds to the illumination device 3 described with reference to FIG. 12, and comprises the first light emitting element LDB emitting blue laser light of the center wavelength λb, the second light emitting element LDG emitting green laser light of the center wavelength λg, and the third light emitting element LDR emitting red laser light of the center wavelength λr”; col 13 lines 64-67 and col 14 lines 1-3).
Furthermore, Komura855 teaches this configuration such that “The light emitted from the light emitting element LD desirably has a narrow spectral width (or a high color purity). For this reason, a laser light source is desirably used as the light emitting element LD” (Komura855, col 13 lines 40-43). Adaxially, Komura teaches that the “light of each wavelength can be condensed efficiently, a chromatic aberration can be reduced, and a clear image can be visually recognized by the user” (Komura855, col 18 lines 62-65).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee, Takagi, and Komura to incorporate the teachings of Komura855 to provide a device in which an illumination device that illuminates the liquid crystal panel, wherein the illumination device includes a first laser element configured to emit blue laser light, a second laser element configured to emit green laser light, and a third laser element configured to emit red laser light, for the purpose of using a light source with a narrow spectral width such that the light of each wavelength can be condensed efficiently ensuring a clear image to be visually recognized by the viewer (Komura855, col 14 lines 21-26 and col 18 lines 62-65).
Regarding claim 5, Lee, Takagi, and Komura teach the display device according to claim 4. Lee and Takagi fail to explicitly teach: the first retardation film is bonded to the display panel.
However, in a related invention in the field of display panels Komura855 teaches in Fig. 13: the first retardation film (“the first retardation film R1”; col 14 lines 5-13) is bonded to the display panel (“display panel 2”; col 14 lines 5-13) (see Fig. 13 in which R1 is clearly cemented to the display panel 2).
Furthermore, Komura855 teaches this configuration such that “the display panel 2R emits the display light DLR. The display light DLR is the first linearly polarized light LP1. The display light DLR is converted into the first circularly polarized light CP1 when transmitted through the first retardation film R1” (Komura855, col 21 lines 45-50).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee, Takagi, and Komura to incorporate the teachings of Komura855 to provide a device in which the first retardation film is bonded to the display panel, for the purpose of converting the display light into circularly polarized light when transmitted through the first retardation film (Komura855, col 21 lines 45-50).
Regarding claim 12, Lee, Takagi, and Komura teach the display device according to claim 4. Lee further teaches: the display panel includes a liquid crystal panel (“the display module 210 may be realized as a display device such as a liquid crystal display”; [0046]).
Lee and Takagi fail to explicitly teach: a polarizer that faces the first retardation film.
However, in a related invention in the field of display panels Komura855 teaches in Fig. 13: the display panel (“a display panel 2”; col 4 line 17) includes a liquid crystal panel (“display panel 2 is not limited to a liquid crystal panel”; col 4 line 32) and a polarizer that faces the first retardation film (“display panel 2 comprises a … a polarizer PL2”; col 14 lines 5-7, “The second polarizer PL2 is arranged between the second substrate SUB2 and the first retardation film R1”; col 14 lines 11-13).
Furthermore, Komura855 teaches this configuration such that “Part of the illumination light modulated in the display region DA is transmitted through the second polarizer PL2, and converted into display light DLR of the linearly polarized light for a right eye and display light DLL of the linearly polarized light for a left eye” (Komura855, col 14 lines 21-26).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee, Takagi, and Komura to incorporate the teachings of Komura855 to provide a device in which a polarizer faces the first retardation film, for the purpose of converting the display light into linearly polarized light in order to accommodate the viewing of both the right and left eye (Komura855, col 14 lines 21-26).
Regarding claim 13, Lee, Takagi, Komura, and Komura855 teach the display device according to claim 12. Lee and Takagi fail to explicitly teach: an illumination device that illuminates the liquid crystal panel, wherein the illumination device includes a first laser element configured to emit blue laser light, a second laser element configured to emit green laser light, and a third laser element configured to emit red laser light.
However, in a related invention in the field of display panels Komura855 teaches in Fig. 13: an illumination device that illuminates the liquid crystal panel (“the display panel 2 is a display panel comprising a self-luminous light emitting element, the illumination device 3”; col 4 lines 32-37, “display panel 2 is not limited to a liquid crystal panel”; col 4 line 32), wherein
the illumination device (3) includes a first laser element configured to emit blue laser light, a second laser element configured to emit green laser light, and a third laser element configured to emit red laser light (“illumination device 3 corresponds to the illumination device 3 described with reference to FIG. 12, and comprises the first light emitting element LDB emitting blue laser light of the center wavelength λb, the second light emitting element LDG emitting green laser light of the center wavelength λg, and the third light emitting element LDR emitting red laser light of the center wavelength λr”; col 13 lines 64-67 and col 14 lines 1-3).
Furthermore, Komura855 teaches this configuration such that “The light emitted from the light emitting element LD desirably has a narrow spectral width (or a high color purity). For this reason, a laser light source is desirably used as the light emitting element LD” (Komura855, col 13 lines 40-43). Adaxially, Komura teaches that the “light of each wavelength can be condensed efficiently, a chromatic aberration can be reduced, and a clear image can be visually recognized by the user” (Komura855, col 18 lines 62-65).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee, Takagi, and Komura to incorporate the teachings of Komura855 to provide a device in which an illumination device that illuminates the liquid crystal panel, wherein the illumination device includes a first laser element configured to emit blue laser light, a second laser element configured to emit green laser light, and a third laser element configured to emit red laser light, for the purpose of using a light source with a narrow spectral width such that the light of each wavelength can be condensed efficiently ensuring a clear image to be visually recognized by the viewer (Komura855, col 14 lines 21-26 and col 18 lines 62-65).
Regarding claim 15, Lee, Takagi, and Komura teach the display device according to claim 7. Lee further teaches: the display panel includes a liquid crystal panel (“the display module 210 may be realized as a display device such as a liquid crystal display”; [0046]).
Lee and Takagi fail to explicitly teach: a polarizer that faces the first retardation film.
However, in a related invention in the field of display panels Komura855 teaches in Fig. 13: the display panel (“a display panel 2”; col 4 line 17) includes a liquid crystal panel (“display panel 2 is not limited to a liquid crystal panel”; col 4 line 32) and a polarizer that faces the first retardation film (“display panel 2 comprises a … a polarizer PL2”; col 14 lines 5-7, “The second polarizer PL2 is arranged between the second substrate SUB2 and the first retardation film R1”; col 14 lines 11-13).
Furthermore, Komura855 teaches this configuration such that “Part of the illumination light modulated in the display region DA is transmitted through the second polarizer PL2, and converted into display light DLR of the linearly polarized light for a right eye and display light DLL of the linearly polarized light for a left eye” (Komura855, col 14 lines 21-26).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee, Takagi, and Komura to incorporate the teachings of Komura855 to provide a device in which a polarizer faces the first retardation film, for the purpose of converting the display light into linearly polarized light in order to accommodate the viewing of both the right and left eye (Komura855, col 14 lines 21-26).
Regarding claim 16, Lee, Takagi, Komura, and Komura855 teach the display device according to claim 15. Lee and Takagi fail to explicitly teach: an illumination device that illuminates the liquid crystal panel, wherein the illumination device includes a first laser element configured to emit blue laser light, a second laser element configured to emit green laser light, and a third laser element configured to emit red laser light.
However, in a related invention in the field of display panels Komura855 teaches in Fig. 13: an illumination device that illuminates the liquid crystal panel (“the display panel 2 is a display panel comprising a self-luminous light emitting element, the illumination device 3”; col 4 lines 32-37, “display panel 2 is not limited to a liquid crystal panel”; col 4 line 32), wherein
the illumination device (3) includes a first laser element configured to emit blue laser light, a second laser element configured to emit green laser light, and a third laser element configured to emit red laser light (“illumination device 3 corresponds to the illumination device 3 described with reference to FIG. 12, and comprises the first light emitting element LDB emitting blue laser light of the center wavelength λb, the second light emitting element LDG emitting green laser light of the center wavelength λg, and the third light emitting element LDR emitting red laser light of the center wavelength λr”; col 13 lines 64-67 and col 14 lines 1-3).
Furthermore, Komura855 teaches this configuration such that “The light emitted from the light emitting element LD desirably has a narrow spectral width (or a high color purity). For this reason, a laser light source is desirably used as the light emitting element LD” (Komura855, col 13 lines 40-43). Adaxially, Komura teaches that the “light of each wavelength can be condensed efficiently, a chromatic aberration can be reduced, and a clear image can be visually recognized by the user” (Komura855, col 18 lines 62-65).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee, Takagi, and Komura to incorporate the teachings of Komura855 to provide a device in which an illumination device that illuminates the liquid crystal panel, wherein the illumination device includes a first laser element configured to emit blue laser light, a second laser element configured to emit green laser light, and a third laser element configured to emit red laser light, for the purpose of using a light source with a narrow spectral width such that the light of each wavelength can be condensed efficiently ensuring a clear image to be visually recognized by the viewer (Komura855, col 14 lines 21-26 and col 18 lines 62-65).
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 RUBY L KAUFFMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1738. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30am - 5pm 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, Thomas Pham can be reached at (571) 272-3689. 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.
/RUBY L KAUFFMAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/THOMAS K PHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights