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 .
EXAMINER’S AMENDMENT
An examiner’s amendment to the record appears below. Should the changes and/or additions be unacceptable to applicant, an amendment may be filed as provided by 37 CFR 1.312. To ensure consideration of such an amendment, it MUST be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee.
Authorization for this examiner’s amendment was given in an interview with Benjamin Berkowitz (Reg No. 59,349) on 01/05/26.
The application has been amended as follows:
(Currently Amended) An optical film, comprising: a transparent substrate;
one or more colored layers that contain a colorant and are provided on the transparent substrate; and
one or more functional layers that are provided on a side opposite to the transparent substrate with the one or more colored layers interposed therebetween, wherein
the one or more colored layers contain
a first color material in which a maximum absorption wavelength is in a range of 470 nm or more and 530 nm or less and a half-width of an absorption spectrum thereof is 15 nm or more and 45 nm or less, and
a second color material in which a maximum absorption wavelength is in a range of 560 nm or more and 620 nm or less and a half-width of an absorption spectrum thereof is 15 nm or more and 55 nm or less,
at least the one or more functional layers or the one or more colored layers contain a black organic pigment,
the one or more functional layers as a whole have an ultraviolet shielding rate of 85% or more, a surface of the optical film on the side closer to the one or more functional layers has a pencil hardness of H or more at a load of 500 g, and
each of values a* and b* of a hue of the optical film that are defined by the following formulas
(1) to (9) is in a range of -5 or more and +5 or less:
[Math. 1]
a
*
=
500
f
X
X
n
-
f
Y
Y
n
…
(
1
)
[Math. 2]
b
*
=
200
f
Y
Y
n
-
f
Z
Z
n
…
(
2
)
[Math. 3]
1
t
3
t
>
6
29
3
1
3
29
6
2
t
+
4
29
t
≤
6
29
3
…(3)
[Math. 4]
R
1
λ
%
=
100
-
R
2
λ
100
x
T
λ
100
x
T
λ
100
x
R
E
λ
…
(
4
)
[Math. 5]
R
λ
%
=
R
1
λ
+
R
2
λ
…
(
5
)
[Math. 6]
X
=
k
x
∫
380
780
P
D
65
λ
x
R
λ
x
x
~
(
λ
)
d
λ
…
(
6
)
[Math. 7]
Y
=
k
x
∫
380
780
P
D
65
λ
x
R
λ
x
y
~
(
λ
)
d
λ
…
(
7
)
[Math. 8]
Z
=
k
x
∫
380
780
P
D
65
λ
x
R
λ
x
z
~
(
λ
)
d
λ
…
(
8
)
[Math. 9]
k
=
100
∫
380
780
P
D
65
λ
x
y
~
(
λ
)
d
λ
…
(
9
)
where λ is a variable representing a wavelength, and t is a variable representing a ratio of X, Y, and Z to
X
n
,
Y
n
, and
Z
n
,
the values a* and b* calculated from formulas (1) to (3) are calculated according to a calculation method for a CIE 1976 L*a*b* color space, which is a CIELAB color space,
in formulas (1) and (2),
X
n
,
Y
n
, and
Z
n
are tristimulus values at a white point of illuminant D65,
in formula (4),
R
E
(λ) is a function representing a reflectance [%] of a perfectly diffuse reflector, which is 100% at each wavelength, R2(λ) is a function representing a surface reflectance [%] of an outermost surface of the optical film on the side opposite to the one or more colored layers, and T(λ) is a function representing a transmittance [%] of the optical film,
in formulas (6) to (9),
P
D
65
is an illuminant
D
65
spectrum, and overline x (λ), overline y (λ), and overline z (λ) are CIE 1931 2 ̊ color-matching functions, and
a definite integral in the formula (6) to (9) is obtained by appropriate numerical integration, and the numerical integration is performed at a wavelength interval of,
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1 and 6-14 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 4-8 and 11-13 of copending Application No. 18/405,213 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because
Regarding Claim 1, App ‘213 teaches an optical film (Claim 1, Line 1), comprising: a transparent substrate (Claim 1, Line 2);
one or more colored layers that contain a colorant and are provided on the transparent substrate (Claim 1, Lines 6-7); and
one or more functional layers that are provided on a side opposite to the transparent substrate with the one or more colored layers interposed therebetween (Claim 1, Lines 4-5), wherein the one or more colored layers contain a first color material in which a maximum absorption wavelength is in a range of 470 nm or more and 530 nm or less and a half-width of an absorption spectrum thereof is 15 nm or more and 45 nm or less (Claim 1, Lines 9-11), and
a second color material in which a maximum absorption wavelength is in a range of 560 nm or more and 620 nm or less and a half-width of an absorption spectrum thereof is 15 nm or more and 55 nm or less (Claim 1, Lines 12-14),
at least the one or more functional layers or the one or more colored layers contain a black organic pigment (Claim 1, Lines 15-16),
the one or more functional layers as a whole have an ultraviolet shielding rate of 85% or more (Claim 1, Lines 2-3),
a surface of the optical film on the side closer to the one or more functional layers has a pencil hardness of H or more at a load of 500 g (Claim 2, Lines 1-3), and
each of values a* and b* of a hue of the optical film that are defined by the following formulas (1) to (9) is in a range of -5 or more and +5 or less (Claim 1, Lines 17-18):
[Math. 1]
a
*
=
500
f
X
X
n
-
f
Y
Y
n
…
(
1
)
[Math. 2]
b
*
=
200
f
Y
Y
n
-
f
Z
Z
n
…
(
2
)
[Math. 3]
1
t
3
t
>
6
29
3
1
3
29
6
2
t
+
4
29
t
≤
6
29
3
…(3)
[Math. 4]
R
1
λ
%
=
100
-
R
2
λ
100
x
T
λ
100
x
T
λ
100
x
R
E
λ
…
(
4
)
[Math. 5]
R
λ
%
=
R
1
λ
+
R
2
λ
…
(
5
)
[Math. 6]
X
=
k
x
∫
380
780
P
D
65
λ
x
R
λ
x
x
~
(
λ
)
d
λ
…
(
6
)
[Math. 7]
Y
=
k
x
∫
380
780
P
D
65
λ
x
R
λ
x
y
~
(
λ
)
d
λ
…
(
7
)
[Math. 8]
Z
=
k
x
∫
380
780
P
D
65
λ
x
R
λ
x
z
~
(
λ
)
d
λ
…
(
8
)
[Math. 9]
k
=
100
∫
380
780
P
D
65
λ
x
y
~
(
λ
)
d
λ
…
(
9
)
where λ is a variable representing a wavelength, and t is a variable representing a ratio of X, Y, and Z to
X
n
,
Y
n
, and
Z
n
(Claim 1, Lines 37-38),
the values a* and b* calculated from formulas (1) to (3) are calculated according to a calculation method for a CIE 1976 L*a*b* color space, which is a CIELAB color space (Claim 1, Lines 38-40),
in formulas (1) and (2),
X
n
,
Y
n
, and
Z
n
are tristimulus values at a white point of illuminant D65 (Claim 1, Lines 41-42),
in formula (4),
R
E
(λ) is a function representing a reflectance [%] of a perfectly diffuse reflector, which is 100% at each wavelength, R2(λ) is a function representing a surface reflectance [%] of an outermost surface of the optical film on the side opposite to the one or more colored layers, and T(λ) is a function representing a transmittance [%] of the optical film (Claim 1, Lines 43-46),
in formulas (6) to (9),
P
D
65
is an illuminant
D
65
spectrum, and overline x (λ), overline y (λ), and overline z (λ) are CIE 1931 2 ̊ color-matching functions, and
a definite integral in the formula (6) to (9) is obtained by appropriate numerical integration, and the numerical integration is performed at a wavelength interval of 1 nm (Claim 1, Lines 47-52).
Regarding Claim 6, App ‘213 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘213 further teaches the one or more functional layers include at least one of an antistatic layer that contains an antistatic agent and an antifouling layer that has water repellency (see Claim 11, Lines 1-3).
Regarding Claim 7, App ‘213 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘213 further teaches the one or more colored layers contain at least one of a radical scavenger, a peroxide decomposer, and a singlet oxygen quencher (see Claim 4, Lines 1-3).
Regarding Claim 8, App ‘213 teaches the limitations of claim 7 as detailed above.
App ‘213 further teaches the one or more colored layers contain, as the radical scavenger, a hindered amine light stabilizer having a molecular weight of 2000 or more (see Claim 4, Lines 1-3).
Regarding Claim 9, App ‘213 teaches the limitations of claim 7 as detailed above.
App ‘213 further teaches the one or more colored layers contain, as the singlet oxygen quencher, any of dialkyl phosphate, dialkyl dithiocarbanate, benzenedithiol, and transition metal complexes thereof (Claim 5, Lines 1-3).
Regarding Claim 10, App ‘213 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘213 further teaches the one or more colored layers further contain a third color material in which a wavelength in a wavelength range of 400 to 780 nm at which a transmittance is lowest is in a range of 650 nm or more and 780 nm or less (Claim 6, Lines 1-3).
Regarding Claim 11, App ‘213 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘213 further teaches the colorant contains at least one or more compounds selected from a group consisting of a compound having a porphyrin structure, a compound having a merocyanine structure, a compound having a phthalocyanine structure, a compound having an azo structure, a compound having a cyanine structure, a compound having a squarylium structure, a compound having a coumarin structure, a compound having a polyene structure, a compound having a quinone structure, a compound having a tetradiporphyrin structure, a compound having a pyrromethene structure, a compound having an indigo structure, and metal complexes thereof (Clam 7, Lines 1-6).
Regarding Claim 12, App ‘213 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘213 further teaches the one or more functional layers include an oxygen barrier layer that has an oxygen permeability of 10 cc/m² day atm or less (Claim 8, Lines 1-3).
Regarding Claim 13, App ‘213 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘213 further teaches a display device (see Claim 12, Line 1), comprising:
a light source (see Claim 12, Line 2); and
the optical film of claim 1 (see Claim 1).
Regarding Claim 14, App ‘213 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘213 further teaches the light source includes a plurality of light-emitting elements that emit light based on an image signal (see Claim 13, Lines 1-3).
Claims 1 and 5-14 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3-8 and 10-13 of copending Application No. 18/244,895 (reference application) in view of Morozumi et al (US 2018/0222236; hereinafter referred to as Morozumi). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because
Regarding Claim 1, App ‘895 teaches an optical film (Claim 1, Line 1), comprising: a transparent substrate (Claim 1, Line 2);
one or more colored layers that contain a colorant and are provided on the transparent substrate (Claim 1, Lines 6-7); and
one or more functional layers that are provided on a side opposite to the transparent substrate with the one or more colored layers interposed therebetween (Claim 1, Lines 6-7), wherein the one or more colored layers contain a first color material in which a maximum absorption wavelength is in a range of 470 nm or more and 530 nm or less and a half-width of an absorption spectrum thereof is 15 nm or more and 45 nm or less (Claim 1, Lines 8-11), and
a second color material in which a maximum absorption wavelength is in a range of 560 nm or more and 620 nm or less and a half-width of an absorption spectrum thereof is 15 nm or more and 55 nm or less (Claim 1, Lines 12-14),
the one or more functional layers as a whole have an ultraviolet shielding rate of 85% or more (Claim 1, Lines 2-3),
a surface of the optical film on the side closer to the one or more functional layers has a pencil hardness of H or more at a load of 500 g (Claim 3, Lines 1-2), and
each of values a* and b* of a hue of the optical film that are defined by the following formulas (1) to (9) is in a range of -5 or more and +5 or less (Claim 1, Lines 18-19):
[Math. 1]
a
*
=
500
f
X
X
n
-
f
Y
Y
n
…
(
1
)
[Math. 2]
b
*
=
200
f
Y
Y
n
-
f
Z
Z
n
…
(
2
)
[Math. 3]
1
t
3
t
>
6
29
3
1
3
29
6
2
t
+
4
29
t
≤
6
29
3
…(3)
[Math. 4]
R
1
λ
%
=
100
-
R
2
λ
100
x
T
λ
100
x
T
λ
100
x
R
E
λ
…
(
4
)
[Math. 5]
R
λ
%
=
R
1
λ
+
R
2
λ
…
(
5
)
[Math. 6]
X
=
k
x
∫
380
780
P
D
65
λ
x
R
λ
x
x
~
(
λ
)
d
λ
…
(
6
)
[Math. 7]
Y
=
k
x
∫
380
780
P
D
65
λ
x
R
λ
x
y
~
(
λ
)
d
λ
…
(
7
)
[Math. 8]
Z
=
k
x
∫
380
780
P
D
65
λ
x
R
λ
x
z
~
(
λ
)
d
λ
…
(
8
)
[Math. 9]
k
=
100
∫
380
780
P
D
65
λ
x
y
~
(
λ
)
d
λ
…
(
9
)
where λ is a variable representing a wavelength, and t is a variable representing a ratio of X, Y, and Z to
X
n
,
Y
n
, and
Z
n
, (Claim 1, Lines 38-39)
the values a* and b* calculated from formulas (1) to (3) are calculated according to a calculation method for a CIE 1976 L*a*b* color space, which is a CIELAB color space (Claim 1, Lines 40-42),
in formulas (1) and (2),
X
n
,
Y
n
, and
Z
n
are tristimulus values at a white point of illuminant D65 (Claim 1, Lines 43-44),
in formula (4),
R
E
(λ) is a function representing a reflectance [%] of a perfectly diffuse reflector, which is 100% at each wavelength, R2(λ) is a function representing a surface reflectance [%] of an outermost surface of the optical film on the side opposite to the one or more colored layers, and T(λ) is a function representing a transmittance [%] of the optical film (Claim 1, Lines 45-48),
in formulas (6) to (9),
P
D
65
is an illuminant
D
65
spectrum, and overline x (λ), overline y (λ), and overline z (λ) are CIE 1931 2 ̊ color-matching functions, and
a definite integral in the formula (6) to (9) is obtained by appropriate numerical integration, and the numerical integration is performed at a wavelength interval of 1 nm (Claim 1, Lines 49-53).
App ‘895 does not expressly disclose that the at least the one or more functional layers or the one or more colored layers contain a black organic pigment.
Morozumi discloses at least the one or more functional layers or the one or more colored layers contain a black organic pigment (see Paragraph [0078]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the optical film of App ‘895 such that the at least the one or more functional layers or the one or more colored layers contain a black organic pigment, as taught by Morozumi, because doing so would allow for the black pigment to desirably be used as a dispersion liquid (see Morozumi Paragraph [0088]).
Regarding Claim 5, App ‘895 as modified by Morozumi discloses the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘895 further discloses one or more functional layers include an ultraviolet absorption antiglare layer that has an ultraviolet shielding rate of 85% or more (Claim 1, Lines 2-3 and Claim 10, Lines 1-2).
Regarding Claim 6, App ‘895 as modified by Morozumi discloses the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘895 further discloses the one or more functional layers include at least one of an antistatic layer that contains an antistatic agent and an antifouling layer that has water repellency (Claim 11, Lines 1-3).
Regarding Claim 7, App ‘895 as modified by Morozumi discloses the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘895 further discloses the one or more colored layers contain at least one of a radical scavenger, a peroxide decomposer, and a singlet oxygen quencher (Claim 4, Lines 1-2).
Regarding Claim 8, App ‘895 as modified by Morozumi discloses the limitations of claim 7 as detailed above.
App ‘895 further discloses the one or more colored layers contain, as the radical scavenger, a hindered amine light stabilizer having a molecular weight of 2000 or more (Claim 5, Lines 1-2).
Regarding Claim 9, App ‘895 as modified by Morozumi discloses the limitations of claim 7 as detailed above.
App ‘895 further discloses the one or more colored layers contain, as the singlet oxygen quencher, any of dialkyl phosphate, dialkyl dithiocarbanate, benzenedithiol, and transition metal complexes thereof (Claim 6, Lines 1-3).
Regarding Claim 10, App ‘895 as modified by Morozumi discloses the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘895 further discloses the one or more colored layers further contain a third color material in which a wavelength in a wavelength range of 400 to 780 nm at which a transmittance is lowest is in a range of 650 nm or more and 780 nm or less (Claim 1, Lines 15-17).
Regarding Claim 11, App ‘895 as modified by Morozumi discloses the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘895 further discloses the colorant contains at least one or more compounds selected from a group consisting of a compound having a porphyrin structure, a compound having a merocyanine structure, a compound having a phthalocyanine structure, a compound having an azo structure, a compound having a cyanine structure, a compound having a squarylium structure, a compound having a coumarin structure, a compound having a polyene structure, a compound having a quinone structure, a compound having a tetradiporphyrin structure, a compound having a pyrromethene structure, a compound having an indigo structure, and metal complexes thereof (Claim 7, Lines 1-8).
Regarding Claim 12, App ‘895 as modified by Morozumi discloses the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘895 further discloses the one or more functional layers include an oxygen barrier layer that has an oxygen permeability of 10 cc/m² day atm or less (Claim 8, Lines 1-2).
Regarding Claim 13, App ‘895 as modified by Morozumi discloses the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘895 further discloses a display device, comprising: a light source; and the optical film of claim 1 (Claim 12, Lines 1-3).
Regarding Claim 14, App ‘895 as modified by Morozumi discloses the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘895 further discloses the light source includes a plurality of light-emitting elements that emit light based on an image signal (Claim 13, Lines 1-2).
Claims 1-14 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3-5 and 7-14 of copending Application No. 18/244,897 (reference application) in view of Morozumi et al (US 2018/0222236; hereinafter referred to as Morozumi). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because
Regarding Claim 1, App ‘897 teaches an optical film (Claim 1, Line 1), comprising: a transparent substrate (Claim 1, Line 2);
one or more colored layers that contain a colorant and are provided on the transparent substrate (Claim 1, Lines 3-4); and
one or more functional layers that are provided on a side opposite to the transparent substrate with the one or more colored layers interposed therebetween (Claim 1, Lines 5-6), wherein the one or more colored layers contain a first color material in which a maximum absorption wavelength is in a range of 470 nm or more and 530 nm or less and a half-width of an absorption spectrum thereof is 15 nm or more and 45 nm or less (Claim 1, Lines 7-10), and
a second color material in which a maximum absorption wavelength is in a range of 560 nm or more and 620 nm or less and a half-width of an absorption spectrum thereof is 15 nm or more and 55 nm or less (Claim 1, Lines 11-13),
the one or more functional layers as a whole have an ultraviolet shielding rate of 85% or more (Claim 1, Lines 17-18),
a surface of the optical film on the side closer to the one or more functional layers has a pencil hardness of H or more at a load of 500 g (Claim 1, Line 19), and
each of values a* and b* of a hue of the optical film that are defined by the following formulas (1) to (9) is in a range of -5 or more and +5 or less (Claim 1, Lines 21-22):
[Math. 1]
a
*
=
500
f
X
X
n
-
f
Y
Y
n
…
(
1
)
[Math. 2]
b
*
=
200
f
Y
Y
n
-
f
Z
Z
n
…
(
2
)
[Math. 3]
1
t
3
t
>
6
29
3
1
3
29
6
2
t
+
4
29
t
≤
6
29
3
…(3)
[Math. 4]
R
1
λ
%
=
100
-
R
2
λ
100
x
T
λ
100
x
T
λ
100
x
R
E
λ
…
(
4
)
[Math. 5]
R
λ
%
=
R
1
λ
+
R
2
λ
…
(
5
)
[Math. 6]
X
=
k
x
∫
380
780
P
D
65
λ
x
R
λ
x
x
~
(
λ
)
d
λ
…
(
6
)
[Math. 7]
Y
=
k
x
∫
380
780
P
D
65
λ
x
R
λ
x
y
~
(
λ
)
d
λ
…
(
7
)
[Math. 8]
Z
=
k
x
∫
380
780
P
D
65
λ
x
R
λ
x
z
~
(
λ
)
d
λ
…
(
8
)
[Math. 9]
k
=
100
∫
380
780
P
D
65
λ
x
y
~
(
λ
)
d
λ
…
(
9
)
where λ is a variable representing a wavelength, and t is a variable representing a ratio of X, Y, and Z to
X
n
,
Y
n
, and
Z
n
, (Claim 1, Lines 41-42)
the values a* and b* calculated from formulas (1) to (3) are calculated according to a calculation method for a CIE 1976 L*a*b* color space, which is a CIELAB color space (Claim 1, Lines 43-45),
in formulas (1) and (2),
X
n
,
Y
n
, and
Z
n
are tristimulus values at a white point of illuminant D65 (Claim 1, Lines 46-47),
in formula (4),
R
E
(λ) is a function representing a reflectance [%] of a perfectly diffuse reflector, which is 100% at each wavelength, R2(λ) is a function representing a surface reflectance [%] of an outermost surface of the optical film on the side opposite to the one or more colored layers, and T(λ) is a function representing a transmittance [%] of the optical film (Claim 1, Lines 48-51),
in formulas (6) to (9),
P
D
65
is an illuminant
D
65
spectrum, and overline x (λ), overline y (λ), and overline z (λ) are CIE 1931 2 ̊ color-matching functions (Claim 1, Lines 52-53), and
a definite integral in the formula (6) to (9) is obtained by appropriate numerical integration, and the numerical integration is performed at a wavelength interval of 1 nm (Claim 1, Lines 54-56).
App ‘897 does not expressly disclose that at least the one or more functional layers or the one or more colored layers contain a black organic pigment.
Morozumi discloses at least the one or more functional layers or the one or more colored layers contain a black organic pigment (see Paragraph [0078]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the optical film of App ‘897 such that the at least the one or more functional layers or the one or more colored layers contain a black organic pigment, as taught by Morozumi, because doing so would allow for the black pigment to desirably be used as a dispersion liquid (see Morozumi Paragraph [0088]).
Regarding Claim 2, App ‘897 as modified by Morozumi discloses the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘897 further discloses one of the one or more functional layers is composed of a cured film of a composition containing an energy ray-curable compound, a photopolymerization initiator, and an ultraviolet absorber, an absorption wavelength range in an ultraviolet region of the photopolymerization initiator is different from an absorption wavelength range in the ultraviolet region of the ultraviolet absorber, and an absorption wavelength range in the ultraviolet region of the cured film is a range of 290 nm or more and 370 nm or less (Claim 3, Lines 1-9).
Regarding Claim 3, App ‘897 as modified by Morozumi discloses the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘897 further discloses the one or more functional layers include a low refractive index layer that has a
lower refractive index than the one of the one or more functional layers composed of a cured film, and the low refractive index layer is located on the side facing the one or more colored layers with the one of the one or more functional layers composed of a cured film interposed therebetween (Claim 4, Lines 1-5).
Regarding Claim 4, App ‘897 as modified by Morozumi discloses the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘897 further discloses the one or more functional layers include an antiglare layer, and the antiglare layer is located on the side facing the one or more colored layers with the one of the one or more functional layers composed of a cured film interposed therebetween (Claim 5, Lines 1-4).
Regarding Claim 5, App ‘897 as modified by Morozumi discloses the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘897 further discloses the one or more functional layers include an ultraviolet absorption antiglare layer that has an ultraviolet shielding rate of 85% or more (Claim 1, Lines 17-18).
Regarding Claim 6, App ‘897 as modified by Morozumi discloses the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘897 further discloses the one or more functional layers include at least one of an antistatic layer that contains an antistatic agent and an antifouling layer that has water repellency (Claim 7, Lines 1-3).
Regarding Claim 7, App ‘897 as modified by Morozumi discloses the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘897 further discloses the one or more colored layers contain at least one of a radical scavenger, a peroxide decomposer, and a singlet oxygen quencher (Claim 8, Lines 1-2).
Regarding Claim 8, App ‘897 as modified by Morozumi discloses the limitations of claim 7 as detailed above.
App ‘897 further discloses the one or more colored layers contain, as the radical scavenger, a hindered amine light stabilizer having a molecular weight of 2000 or more (Claim 9, Lines 1-2).
Regarding Claim 9, App ‘897 as modified by Morozumi discloses the limitations of claim 8 as detailed above.
App ‘897 further discloses the one or more colored layers contain, as the singlet oxygen quencher, any of dialkyl phosphate, dialkyl dithiocarbanate, benzenedithiol, and transition metal complexes thereof (Claim 10, Lines 1-3).
Regarding Claim 10, App ‘897 as modified by Morozumi discloses the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘897 further discloses the one or more colored layers further contain a third color material in which a wavelength in a wavelength range of 400 to 780 nm at which a transmittance is lowest is in a range of 650 nm or more and 780 nm or less (Claim 1, Lines 14-16).
Regarding Claim 11, App ‘897 as modified by Morozumi discloses the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘897 further discloses the colorant contains at least one or more compounds selected from a group consisting of a compound having a porphyrin structure, a compound having a merocyanine structure, a compound having a phthalocyanine structure, a compound having an azo structure, a compound having a cyanine structure, a compound having a squarylium structure, a compound having a coumarin structure, a compound having a polyene structure, a compound having a quinone structure, a compound having a tetradiporphyrin structure, a compound having a pyrromethene structure, a compound having an indigo structure, and metal complexes thereof (Claim 11, Lines 1-8).
Regarding Claim 12, App ‘897 as modified by Morozumi discloses the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘897 further discloses the one or more functional layers include an oxygen barrier layer that has an oxygen permeability of 10 cc/m² day atm or less (Claim 12, Lines 1-2).
Regarding Claim 13, App ‘897 as modified by Morozumi discloses the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
App ‘897 further discloses a light source; and the optical film of claim 1 (Claim 13, Lines 1-3).
Regarding Claim 14, App ‘897 as modified by Morozumi discloses the limitations of claim 13 as detailed above.
App ‘897 further discloses the light source includes a plurality of light-emitting elements that emit light based on an image signal (Claim 14, Lines 1-2).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER A LAMB II whose telephone number is (571)270-0648. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10am - 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, Minh-Toan Ton can be reached at (571) 272-2303. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER A LAMB II/Examiner, Art Unit 2882