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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed 11/10/2025 have been entered. Claims 1-15 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation is: “one or more reflection members” in claim 13.
Because this claim limitation is being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it is being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this limitation interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
For examination purpose “one or more reflection members” will be understood as “a folding mirror or an aspheric mirror” as stated in Para [0029] of the Specification.
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 1-8, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirata (US 2022/0155589, of record) in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko (US 2023/0115930, of record) and Yasuhiro (JP 2017173416, of record)
Regarding claim 1, Hirata discloses a picture generation apparatus (see Fig 2) comprising: a printed circuit board (PCB) (see Fig 4; Para [0046,0050]; LED substrate 102 which comprises a circuit board); one or more light sources disposed on the PCB and configured to emit light (see Fig 4; Para [0046]; LED elements 14a/b are placed on the LED substrate); a liquid crystal display (LCD) configured to emit an image based on the light emitted from the one or more light sources (see Fig 4; Para [0046-0047]; LCD panel 52 is configured to emit an image using light emitted from light sources 101); and an optical path control unit disposed between the PCB and the LCD and configured to change a travel path of the light emitted from the one or more light sources (see Fig 4; Para [0055]; light guide element 17 controls path of light emitted from LEDs 14a/b).
Hirata does not disclose wherein the LCD is disposed parallel to the PCB; wherein the PCB is a printed circuit board; and wherein the LCD is facing in a first direction offset from a second direction of an incident optical axis of external light, and the optical path control unit changes the travel path of the light from the one or more light sources to be in a third direction opposite to the second direction of the incident optical axis. Hirata and Scheffler-Juschtschenko are related because both disclose picture generation apparatuses
Scheffler-Juschtschenko discloses a picture generation apparatus (see Fig 4) wherein the PCB is a printed circuit board (see Fig 4; Para [0032-0033]; LEDs 231 are placed on a printed circuit board 236); and wherein the LCD is facing in a first direction offset from a second direction of an incident optical axis of external light, and the optical path control unit changes the travel path of the light from the one or more light sources to be in a third direction opposite to the second direction of the incident optical axis (see Fig 4; Para [0032-0035]; LCD display 3 is tilted in a direction offset from the incident light which arrives in a direction SL; the path control unit 33 changes the travel path of the light from one or more light sources 231).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Hirata with wherein the PCB is a printed circuit board; and wherein the LCD is facing in a first direction offset from a second direction of an incident optical axis of external light, and the optical path control unit changes the travel path of the light from the one or more light sources to be in a third direction opposite to the second direction of the incident optical axis of Scheffler-Juschtschenko for the purpose of reducing the number of optical surface on which undesired reflections may occur. (Para [0011-0013])
Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko does not disclose wherein the LCD is disposed parallel to the PCB.
Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko and Yasuhiro are related because both disclose picture generation apparatuses.
Yasuhiro discloses a picture generation apparatus (see Fig 1) wherein the LCD is disposed parallel to the PCB (see Fig 9; see Para [0002] of Description; LCD 12 is parallel to PCB 30 as seen in Fig 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko with wherein the LCD is disposed parallel to the PCB of Yasuhiro for the purpose of minimizing the deterioration of display characteristics due to reflected external light (Page 7, lines 39-47)
Regarding claim 2, Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko Yasuhiro discloses the picture generation apparatus of claim 1. Yasuhiro further discloses wherein: the LCD is configured to rotate in a first rotational direction with respect to the incident optical axis of the external light (see Fig 7; LCD 12 is configured to rotate about its own Z axis with respect to external light axis), and the optical path control unit changes the travel path of the light to a second rotational direction opposite to the first rotational direction (see Fig 7 and 9; Reflection member 14 is configured to direct light out of the device and rotates light in a clockwise fashion compared to the counterclockwise rotation of the LCD of Fig 7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Hirata in view of Ulasyuk with wherein: the LCD is configured to rotate in a first rotational direction with respect to the incident optical axis of the external light, and the optical path control unit changes the travel path of the light to a second rotational direction opposite to the first rotational direction of Yasuhiro for the purpose of minimizing the deterioration of display characteristics due to reflected external light (Page 7, lines 39-47)
Regarding claim 3, Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko and Yasuhiro discloses the picture generation apparatus of claim 1. Hirata further discloses wherein the optical path control unit comprises a prism (see Fig 4; Para [0055]; light guide element 17 is interpreted as a prism as it is translucent triangle).
Regarding claim 4, Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko and Yasuhiro discloses the picture generation apparatus of claim 3. Hirata further discloses wherein the optical path control unit comprises a Fresnel lens (see Fig 4; Para [0060]; the light guide element 17 may also comprise the light direction converting panel 54 who may have a Fresnel lens provided on an emission side).
Regarding claim 5, Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko and Yasuhiro discloses the picture generation apparatus of claim 1. Hirata further discloses wherein the optical path control unit comprises one or more lenses (see Fig 4; Para [0060]; the light guide element 17 may also comprise the light direction converting panel 54 who may have a Fresnel lens provided on an emission side).
Regarding claim 6, Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko and Yasuhiro discloses the picture generation apparatus of claim 5. Hirata further wherein each of the one or more lenses has a Fresnel lens-shape (see Fig 4; Para [0060]; the light guide element 17 may also comprise the light direction converting panel 54 who may have a Fresnel lens provided on an emission side).
Regarding claim 7, Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko and Yasuhiro discloses the picture generation apparatus of claim 1. Hirata further discloses further comprising an optical path guiding unit disposed between the PCB and the optical path control unit and configured to guide the light emitted from the light source to the optical path control unit (see Fig 4; Para [0049]; LED collimators 15 comprise the optical path guiding unit disposed between substrate 102 and light guide element 17).
Regarding claim 8, Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko and Yasuhiro discloses the picture generation apparatus of claim 7. Hirata further discloses wherein the optical path guiding unit comprises one or more collimating lenses (see Fig 4; Para [0049]; LED collimators 15 comprise the optical path guiding unit disposed between substrate 102 and light guide element 17).
Regarding claim 13, Hirata discloses a head-up display (see Fig 3) comprising: a picture generation apparatus configured to emit an image (see Fig 3; Para [0038]; a video display apparatus 48 configured to project an image); and one or more reflection members configured to reflect the image emitted from the picture generation apparatus (see Fig 3; Para [0038, 0068]; transparent sheet 51 acts as a mirror reflecting emitted light from display apparatus 48), wherein the picture generation apparatus is disposed to be offset from an incident optical axis of external light (see Fig 4; Para [0041]; the video display apparatus which includes the LCD is disposed offset from the incident external light as seen in annotated figure 4), and comprises a light source configured to emit light (see Fig 4; Para [0046]; LED elements 14a/b are placed on the LED substrate 102); a printed circuit board (PCB) (see Fig 4; Para [0046,0050]; LED substrate 102 which comprises a circuit board); a liquid crystal display (LCD) configured to emit an image based on the light emitted from the light source (see Fig 4; Para [0046-0047]; LCD panel 52 is configured to emit an image using light emitted from light sources 101); and an optical path control unit configured to change a travel path of the light emitted from the light source (see Fig 4; Para [0055]; light guide element 17 controls path of light emitted from LEDs 14a/b).
Hirata does not disclose wherein the LCD is disposed parallel to the PCB; wherein the PCB is a printed circuit board and wherein the LCD is facing in a first direction offset from a second direction of the incident optical axis, and the optical path control unit changes the travel path of the light emitted from the light source to be in a third direction opposite to the second direction of the incident optical axis. Hirata and Scheffler-Juschtschenko are related because both disclose picture generation apparatuses
Scheffler-Juschtschenko discloses a picture generation apparatus (see Fig 4) wherein the PCB is a printed circuit board (see Fig 4; Para [0032-0033]; LEDs 231 are placed on a printed circuit board 236); and wherein the LCD is facing in a first direction offset from a second direction of the incident optical axis, and the optical path control unit changes the travel path of the light emitted from the light source to be in a third direction opposite to the second direction of the incident optical axis (see Fig 4; Para [0032-0035]; LCD display 3 is tilted in a direction offset from the incident light which arrives in a direction SL; the path control unit 33 changes the travel path of the light from one or more light sources 231).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Hirata with wherein the PCB is a printed circuit board; and wherein the LCD is facing in a first direction offset from a second direction of the incident optical axis, and the optical path control unit changes the travel path of the light emitted from the light source to be in a third direction opposite to the second direction of the incident optical axis of Scheffler-Juschtschenko for the purpose of reducing the number of optical surface on which undesired reflections may occur. (Para [0011-0013])
Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko does not disclose wherein the LCD is disposed parallel to the PCB.
Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko and Yasuhiro are related because both disclose picture generation apparatuses.
Yasuhiro discloses a picture generation apparatus (see Fig 1) wherein the LCD is disposed parallel to the PCB (see Fig 9; see Para [0002] of Description; LCD 12 is parallel to PCB 30 as seen in Fig 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko with wherein the LCD is disposed parallel to the PCB of Yasuhiro for the purpose of minimizing the deterioration of display characteristics due to reflected external light (Page 7, lines 39-47)
Regarding claim 14, Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko and Yasuhiro discloses the head-up display of claim 13 (see Fig 2). Hirata further discloses wherein: the light source comprises one or more light sources configured to emit the light (see Fig 4; Para [0046]; multiple LED elements 14a/b are placed on the LED substrate 102), and the one or more light sources are disposed on the PCB (see Fig 4; Para [0046]; LED elements 14a/b are placed on the LED substrate 102)
Regarding claim 15, Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko and Yasuhiro discloses the head-up display of claim 13 (see Fig 3). Hirata further discloses wherein the optical path control unit comprises a Fresnel lens (see Fig 4; Para [0060]; the light guide element 17 may also comprise the light direction converting panel 54 who may have a Fresnel lens provided on an emission side).
Claim 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirata (US 2022/0155589, of record) in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko (US 2023/0115930, of record) and Yasuhiro (JP 2017173416, of record) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chien (US 2016/0209013, of record).
Regarding claim 9, Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko and Yasuhiro discloses the picture generation apparatus of claim 1. Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko and Yasuhiro does not disclose wherein the picture generation apparatus further comprises a control unit configured to rotate the PCB, the LCD and the optical path control unit. Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko and Yasuhiro and Chien are related because both disclose light projection devices.
Chien discloses a light projection device (see Fig 1) wherein the picture generation apparatus further comprises a control unit configured to rotate the PCB, the LCD and the optical path control unit (see Fig 1; see Claim 14; Para [0022]; an LCD display means 1f; inner circuit means and optic lens means 1j may be configured in a device that rotates together)
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko and Yasuhiro with wherein the picture generation apparatus further comprises a control unit configured to rotate the PCB, the LCD and the optical path control unit of Chien for the purpose of enabling images of enlarged size to be projected onto a preferred surface making it easier for people to see (see Abstract).
Regarding claim 10, Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko, Yasuhiro, and Chien discloses the picture generation apparatus of claim 9.
Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko does not disclose further comprising a sensing unit configured to sense at least one of an intensity and an incident angle of the external light, wherein the control unit rotates the PCB, the LCD and the optical path control unit based on at least one of the intensity and the incident angle of the external light sensed by the sensing unit.
Yasuhiro discloses a picture generation apparatus (see Fig 1) further comprising a sensing unit configured to sense at least one of an intensity and an incident angle of the external light (see Fig 1; Page 3, line 36-39; an illumination sensor 18 detects the intensity of ambient light supplied to the device), wherein the control unit rotates the PCB, the LCD and the optical path control unit based on at least one of the intensity and the incident angle of the external light sensed by the sensing unit (see Fig 1; Page 3, line 36-39; an illumination sensor 18 detects the intensity of ambient light supplied to the device and the control circuit 45 adjusts the tilt angle of the LCD based on the illuminance value; Chien discloses the rotation of the PCB, LCD, and optical path control unit)
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko with further comprising a sensing unit configured to sense at least one of an intensity and an incident angle of the external light, wherein the control unit rotates the PCB, the LCD and the optical path control unit based on at least one of the intensity and the incident angle of the external light sensed by the sensing unit of Yasuhiro for the purpose of minimizing the deterioration of display characteristics due to reflected external light (Page 7, lines 39-47)
Regarding claim 11, Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko, Yasuhiro, and Chien discloses the picture generation apparatus of claim 10.
Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko and Yasuhiro does not disclose wherein the PCB, the LCD and the optical path control unit are configured to rotate together.
Chien discloses wherein the PCB, the LCD and the optical path control unit are configured to rotate together (see Fig 1; see Claim 14; Para [0022]; an LCD display means 1f; inner circuit means and optic lens means 1j may be configured in a device that rotates together)
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko and Yasuhiro with wherein the PCB, the LCD and the optical path control unit are configured to rotate together of Chien for the purpose of enabling images of enlarged size to be projected onto a preferred surface making it easier for people to see (see Abstract).
Regarding claim 12, Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko, Yasuhiro, and Chien discloses the picture generation apparatus of claim 10.
Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko does not disclose wherein the sensing unit comprises one or more sensors.
Yasuhiro discloses wherein the sensing unit comprises one or more sensors (see Fig 1; Page 3, line 36-39; There is at least one illumination sensor 18 that detects the intensity of ambient light supplied to the device)
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Hirata in view of Scheffler-Juschtschenko with wherein the sensing unit comprises one or more sensors of Yasuhiro for the purpose of minimizing the deterioration of display characteristics due to reflected external light (Page 7, lines 39-47)
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 GABRIEL ANDRES SANZ whose telephone number is (571)272-3844. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 am -5:30 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Pinping Sun can be reached at (571) 270-1284. 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.
/G.A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/WILLIAM R ALEXANDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872