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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 06/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues that Zhou et al. does not disclose the limitation as presented in claim 1. The examiner respectfully disagrees. Zhou et al. (figures 1-4) discloses a transmissive wavelength tunable hyperspectral filter as shown including a pseudo-layer formed by arranging a plurality of the twisted liquid crystal layers at a preset inter-layer pitch (P) in a lengthwise direction of the helical axis (the pitch of the chiral nematic liquid crystal material is rotated by 2π in the direction of the spiral axis; see at least page 4, first paragraph); wherein the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film comprises: a chiral dopant having a property of diffusing toward a direction in which ultraviolet (UV) rays are irradiated; and a photopolymerizable polymer configured to fix the twisted liquid crystal complexes on the pseudo-layer through a UV curing reaction, wherein the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film is configured to: change the inter-layer pitch over the plurality of twisted liquid crystal layers by applying an electric field to the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film to vary the cone angle of the twisted liquid crystal complexes; irradiate UV rays onto an upper end of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film to form a polymer network based on the photopolymerizable polymer, thereby stabilizing the twisted liquid crystal layer corresponding to a partial area of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film to form a twisted liquid crystal layer composite including one or more twisted liquid crystal layers having the same inter-layer pitch; return other plurality of twisted liquid crystal layers, excluding the formed twisted liquid crystal layer composite, to have an initial inter-layer pitch by removing the applied electric field; and form the pseudo-layer by arranging the plurality of twisted liquid crystal layer composites to achieve an inter-layer pitch gradient through a staged adjustment of electric fields by repeating the above processes.
The limitation, “wherein the specific wavelength region is set based on an average refractive index (n) of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film and an inter-layer pitch (P) of the twisted liquid crystal layer therein so as to satisfy the equation below, and wherein the inter-layer pitch (P) of the twisted liquid crystal layer is determined by the cone angle of the twisted liquid crystal complex: here, n is the average refractive index of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film, and P is the inter-layer pitch of the twisted liquid crystal” is functional in nature. Such a functional limitation is only given patentable weight insofar as it imparts a structural limitation. Here, Sung et al. discloses the structural limitations required to perform the function as claimed. It is further noted that apparatus claims must be structurally distinguishable from the prior art and that the manner of operating the device does not differentiate the apparatus claim from the prior art (see e.g. MPEP 2114). In other words, the prior art need not perform the function, but must merely be capable of doing so.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: The limitation “wherein the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film further comprises a chiral dopant having a property of diffusing toward a direction in which UV rays are irradiated; and a photopolymerizable polymer configured to fix the twisted liquid crystal complexes on the pseudo-layer through UV curing reaction, wherein, when the UV rays are irradiated onto an upper end of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film, the chiral dopant diffuses toward the direction of the irradiated UV rays, thereby forming a concentration gradient of the chiral dopant within the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film, and wherein the pseudo-layer is formed by adjusting a concentration of the chiral dopant such that the inter-layer pitch of the twisted liquid crystal layer located at an upper portion of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film becomes narrower and the inter-layer pitch of the twisted liquid crystal layer located at a lower portion thereof becomes wider according to the concentration gradient of the chiral dopant” appears to be a conditional claim. For examining purposes, the examiner assumes the first and last parts of the limitation is no longer valid if the UV rays are not irradiated onto an upper end of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film. Appropriate correction is 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 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 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al. (WO 2018/145494) in view of Zhou et al. (WO 2019/144648; hereinafter Zhou’648).
Regarding claim 1, Zhou et al. (figures 1-4) discloses a transmissive wavelength tunable hyperspectral filter having a layered twisted liquid crystal thin film, wherein
at least two or more layered twisted liquid crystal thin films having different broadband reflection bandgaps laminated to each other (3 and 4; The spiral direction of the chiral nematic phase liquid crystal (6) in the first adjusting area (3) is opposite to the spiral direction of the chiral nematic phase liquid crystal (6) in the second adjusting area (4), so that the total reflection of an infrared band can be implemented; see at least abstract and figure 4),
wherein each of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin films comprises:
a twisted liquid crystal layer including a plurality of unit liquid crystal molecules (3), and formed by arranging twisted liquid crystal complexes along a helical axis (the pitch of the chiral nematic liquid crystal material is rotated by 2π in the direction of the spiral axis; see at least page 4, first paragraph), and
a pseudo-layer formed by arranging a plurality of the twisted liquid crystal layers at a preset inter-layer pitch (P) in a lengthwise direction of the helical axis (the pitch of the chiral nematic liquid crystal material is rotated by 2π in the direction of the spiral axis; see at least page 4, first paragraph);
wherein the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film comprises:
a chiral dopant having a property of diffusing toward a direction in which ultraviolet (UV) rays are irradiated; and
a photopolymerizable polymer configured to fix the twisted liquid crystal complexes on the pseudo-layer through a UV curing reaction,
wherein the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film is configured to:
change the inter-layer pitch over the plurality of twisted liquid crystal layers by applying an electric field to the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film to vary the cone angle of the twisted liquid crystal complexes;
irradiate UV rays onto an upper end of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film to form a polymer network based on the photopolymerizable polymer, thereby stabilizing the twisted liquid crystal layer corresponding to a partial area of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film to form a twisted liquid crystal layer composite including one or more twisted liquid crystal layers having the same inter-layer pitch;
return other plurality of twisted liquid crystal layers, excluding the formed twisted liquid crystal layer composite, to have an initial inter-layer pitch by removing the applied electric field; and
form the pseudo-layer by arranging the plurality of twisted liquid crystal layer composites to achieve an inter-layer pitch gradient through a staged adjustment of electric fields by repeating the above processes.
The limitation “a chiral dopant having a property of diffusing toward a direction in which ultraviolet (UV) rays are irradiated; and a photopolymerizable polymer configured to fix the twisted liquid crystal complexes on the pseudo-layer through a UV curing reaction, wherein the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film is configured to: change the inter-layer pitch over the plurality of twisted liquid crystal layers by applying an electric field to the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film to vary the cone angle of the twisted liquid crystal complexes; irradiate UV rays onto an upper end of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film to form a polymer network based on the photopolymerizable polymer, thereby stabilizing the twisted liquid crystal layer corresponding to a partial area of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film to form a twisted liquid crystal layer composite including one or more twisted liquid crystal layers having the same inter-layer pitch; return other plurality of twisted liquid crystal layers, excluding the formed twisted liquid crystal layer composite, to have an initial inter-layer pitch by removing the applied electric field; and form the pseudo-layer by arranging the plurality of twisted liquid crystal layer composites to achieve an inter-layer pitch gradient through a staged adjustment of electric fields by repeating the above processes” is a product by process claim. Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). See MPEP §2113.
Zhou et al. discloses the limitations as shown in the rejection of claim 1 above. However, Zhou et al. is silent regarding each of the twisted liquid crystal complexes defining a preset cone angle with respect to the helical axis. Zhou’648 (figures 3-4) teaches each of the twisted liquid crystal complexes defining a preset cone angle with respect to the helical axis. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the filter as taught by Zhou’648 in order to achieve an infrared reflecting device having an infrared response bandwidth that can be tuned to zero.
Regarding claim 2, Zhou et al. (figures 1-3) inherently discloses wherein the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film is configured to selectively reflect only light of a specific wavelength region through Bragg reflection,
wherein the specific wavelength region is set based on an average refractive index (n) of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film and an inter-layer pitch (P) of the twisted liquid crystal layer therein so as to satisfy the equation below (The chiral nematic liquid crystal moves such that the pitch of the chiral negative liquid crystal changes. In the energized state, in the adjustment zone, the polymer network moves toward the negative electrode by capturing cations, and the chiral nematic liquid crystal is dispersed in the polymer network, and the chiral nematic liquid crystal is driven by the polymer network; see at least page 4, second paragraph), and
wherein the inter-layer pitch (P) of the twisted liquid crystal layer is determined by the cone angle of the twisted liquid crystal complex: lambda = np (see at least page 4, second paragraph),
here, n is the average refractive index of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film, and P is the inter-layer pitch of the twisted liquid crystal.
The limitation, “wherein the specific wavelength region is set based on an average refractive index (n) of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film and an inter-layer pitch (P) of the twisted liquid crystal layer therein so as to satisfy the equation below, and wherein the inter-layer pitch (P) of the twisted liquid crystal layer is determined by the cone angle of the twisted liquid crystal complex: here, n is the average refractive index of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film, and P is the inter-layer pitch of the twisted liquid crystal” is functional in nature. Such a functional limitation is only given patentable weight insofar as it imparts a structural limitation. Here, Sung et al. discloses the structural limitations required to perform the function as claimed. It is further noted that apparatus claims must be structurally distinguishable from the prior art and that the manner of operating the device does not differentiate the apparatus claim from the prior art (see e.g. MPEP 2114). In other words, the prior art need not perform the function, but must merely be capable of doing so.
Regarding claim 3, Zhou et al. (figures 1-3) discloses wherein the broadband reflection bandgap of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film is shifted by a change in the inter-layer pitch of the twisted liquid crystal layer through application of external stimuli, and
is configured to transmit only light of a wavelength region corresponding to the shifted broadband reflection bandgap (infrared reflecting device capable of realizing infrared total reflection in a certain band and realizing reflection band adjustment; see at least page 4, 3rd paragraph).
The limitation, “a broadband reflection bandgap of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film is shifted by a change in the inter-layer pitch of the twisted liquid crystal layer through application of external stimuli, and transmit only light of a wavelength region corresponding to the shifted broadband reflection bandga” is functional in nature. Such a functional limitation is only given patentable weight insofar as it imparts a structural limitation. Here, Sung et al. discloses the structural limitations required to perform the function as claimed. It is further noted that apparatus claims must be structurally distinguishable from the prior art and that the manner of operating the device does not differentiate the apparatus claim from the prior art (see e.g. MPEP 2114). In other words, the prior art need not perform the function, but must merely be capable of doing so.
Regarding claim 4, Zhou et al. (figures 1-3) discloses wherein the external is any one stimulus selected from the group consisting of an electric field, temperature, moisture, bacteria, and light (electrodes 2).
Regarding claim 5, Zhou et al. (figures 1-3) discloses wherein the two or more layered twisted liquid crystal thin films are configured to exhibit different shifts in their respective broadband reflection bandgaps in response to the application of the external stimulus (figures 2-3).
The limitation “wherein the two or more layered twisted liquid crystal thin films are configured to exhibit different shifts in their respective broadband reflection bandgaps in response to the application of the external stimulus” is a product by process claim. Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). See MPEP §2113.
Regarding claim 6, Zhou et al. (figures 1-3) discloses wherein the pseudo-layer is formed by arranging the plurality of twisted liquid crystal layers in an interior of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film such that the plurality of twisted liquid crystal layers form an inter-layer pitch gradient (The chiral nematic liquid crystal moves such that the pitch of the chiral negative liquid crystal changes. In the energized state, in the adjustment zone, the polymer network moves toward the negative electrode by capturing cations, and the chiral nematic liquid crystal is dispersed in the polymer network, and the chiral nematic liquid crystal is driven by the polymer network; see at least page 4, second paragraph).
The limitation “wherein the pseudo-layer is formed by arranging the plurality of twisted liquid crystal layers in an interior of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film such that the plurality of twisted liquid crystal layers form an inter-layer pitch gradient” is a product by process claim. Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). See MPEP §2113.
Regarding claim 7, Zhou et al. (figures 1-3) wherein the pseudo-layer is formed by arranging a plurality of twisted liquid crystal layer composites each composed of one or more twisted liquid crystal layers having the same inter-layer pitch such that the plurality of twisted liquid crystal layer composites form an inter-layer pitch gradient (The chiral nematic liquid crystal moves such that the pitch of the chiral negative liquid crystal changes. In the energized state, in the adjustment zone, the polymer network moves toward the negative electrode by capturing cations, and the chiral nematic liquid crystal is dispersed in the polymer network, and the chiral nematic liquid crystal is driven by the polymer network; see at least page 4, second paragraph).
The limitation “wherein the pseudo-layer is formed by arranging a plurality of twisted liquid crystal layer composites each composed of one or more twisted liquid crystal layers having the same inter-layer pitch such that the plurality of twisted liquid crystal layer composites form an inter-layer pitch gradient” is a product by process claim. Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). See MPEP §2113.
Regarding claim 8, Zhou et al. (figures 1-3) discloses wherein the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film further comprises a chiral dopant having a property of diffusing toward a direction in which UV rays are irradiated; and a photopolymerizable polymer configured to fix the twisted liquid crystal complexes on the pseudo-layer through UV curing reaction, wherein, when the UV rays are irradiated onto an upper end of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film, the chiral dopant diffuses toward the direction of the irradiated UV rays, thereby forming a concentration gradient of the chiral dopant within the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film, and wherein the pseudo-layer is formed by adjusting a concentration of the chiral dopant such that the inter-layer pitch of he twisted liquid crystal layer located at an upper portion of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film becomes narrower and the inter-layer pitch of the twisted liquid crystal layer located at a lower portion thereof becomes wider according to the concentration gradient of the chiral dopant (Forming a first adjustment region and a second adjustment region, respectively, the first adjustment region and the second adjustment region are filled with a liquid crystal layer, the liquid crystal layer comprises a mixed liquid crystal material, and the mixed liquid crystal material comprises a chiral nematic Phase liquid crystal, monomer, photoinitiator and chiral dopant, chiral nematic liquid crystal can reflect infrared light, and the pitch of the chiral nematic liquid crystal material is rotated by 2π in the direction of the spiral axis; see at least page 4, first paragraph).
The limitation “wherein the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film further comprises a chiral dopant having a property of diffusing toward a direction in which UV rays are irradiated; and a photopolymerizable polymer configured to fix the twisted liquid crystal complexes on the pseudo-layer through UV curing reaction, wherein, when the UV rays are irradiated onto an upper end of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film, the chiral dopant diffuses toward the direction of the irradiated UV rays, thereby forming a concentration gradient of the chiral dopant within the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film, and wherein the pseudo-layer is formed by adjusting a concentration of the chiral dopant such that the inter-layer pitch of he twisted liquid crystal layer located at an upper portion of the layered twisted liquid crystal thin film becomes narrower and the inter-layer pitch of the twisted liquid crystal layer located at a lower portion thereof becomes wider according to the concentration gradient of the chiral dopant” is a product by process claim. Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). See MPEP §2113.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAUREN NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1428. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday, 8:00 AM -6:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jennifer Carruth, can be reached at 571-272-9791. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/LAUREN NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights