DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sato et al. (US 2020/0326579).
Regarding claim 1, Sato discloses a liquid crystal optical element (see figures 1 and 8, for instance) comprising: an optical waveguide (42, see fig. 8) comprising a first main surface (facing the light source 40) and a second main surface (facing element 10) opposed to the first main surface; a first alignment film (24B) disposed on the second main surface; a first liquid crystal layer (26B) which overlaps the first alignment film (24B), which comprises a first cholesteric liquid crystal ([0078]), and which reflects at least part of light incident through the optical waveguide (42) toward the optical waveguide; a second alignment film (24G) which overlaps the first liquid crystal layer (26B); and a second liquid crystal layer (26G) which overlaps the second alignment film (24G), which comprises a second cholesteric liquid crystal ([0078]), and which reflects at least part of light incident through the optical waveguide toward the optical waveguide (see figure 1).
Regarding claim 2, Sato discloses the liquid crystal optical element of claim 1, wherein the first alignment film (24B) and the second alignment film (24G) are optical alignment films of any one of a photodecomposition type, a photodimerization type, and a photoisomerization type (see [0108]-[0111]).
Regarding claim 3, Sato discloses the liquid crystal optical element of claim 1, wherein the first cholesteric liquid crystal (26B) and the second cholesteric liquid crystal (26G) have an equal helical pitch and turn in directions opposite to each other (see paragraphs [0250]-[0251] for instance).
Regarding claim 4, Sato discloses the liquid crystal optical element of claim 1, wherein the first cholesteric liquid crystal (26B) and the second cholesteric liquid crystal (26G) have different helical pitches (see paragraphs [0459]-[0468]).
Regarding claim 5, Sato discloses the liquid crystal optical element of claim 1, wherein the first cholesteric liquid crystal (26B) and the second cholesteric liquid crystal (26G) have an equal helical pitch and turn in the same direction (see [0130]-[0132]).
Regarding claim 7, Sato discloses a liquid crystal optical element (see figures 1 and 8, for instance) comprising: an optical waveguide (42, see fig. 8) comprising a first main surface (facing the light source 40) and a second main surface (facing element 10) opposed to the first main surface; a first alignment film (24B) disposed on the second main surface; a first liquid crystal layer (26B) which overlaps the first alignment film (24B), which comprises a first cholesteric liquid crystal ([0078]), and which reflects at least part of light incident through the optical waveguide (42) toward the optical waveguide; a protective layer (20) which overlaps the first liquid crystal layer (26B); a second alignment film (24G) which overlaps the protective layer (20); and a second liquid crystal layer (26G) which overlaps the second alignment film (24G), which comprises a second cholesteric liquid crystal ([0078]), and which reflects at least part of light incident through the optical waveguide (42) toward the optical waveguide.
Regarding claim 8, Sato discloses the liquid crystal optical element of claim 7, wherein the protective layer (20) is formed of polyvinyl alcohol ([0096]).
Regarding claim 9, Sato discloses the liquid crystal optical element of claim 7, wherein the first alignment film (24B) and the second alignment film (24G) are optical alignment films of any one of a photodecomposition type, a photodimerization type, and a photoisomerization type ([0108]-[0111]).
Regarding claim 10, Sato discloses the liquid crystal optical element of claim 7, wherein the first cholesteric liquid crystal (26B) and the second cholesteric liquid crystal (26G) have an equal helical pitch and turn in directions opposite to each other (see paragraphs [0250]-[0251] for instance).
Regarding claim 11, Sato discloses the liquid crystal optical element of claim 7, wherein the first cholesteric liquid crystal (26B) and the second cholesteric liquid crystal (26G) have different helical pitches (see paragraphs [0459]-[0468]).
Regarding claim 12, Sato discloses the liquid crystal optical element of claim 7, wherein the first cholesteric liquid crystal (26B) and the second cholesteric liquid crystal (26G) have an equal helical pitch and turn in the same direction (see [0130]-[0132]).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 6 and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato in view of Kashima (US 2004/0212766).
Regarding claim 6, Sato discloses the liquid crystal optical element of claim 1, further comprising: a third alignment film (24R) which overlaps the second liquid crystal layer (26G); a third liquid crystal layer (26R) which overlaps the third alignment film (24R), which comprises a third cholesteric liquid crystal ([0078]), and which reflects at least part of light incident through the optical waveguide (42) toward the optical waveguide. However, Sato does not expressly disclose a fourth alignment film which overlaps the third liquid crystal layer; and a fourth liquid crystal layer which overlaps the fourth alignment film, which comprises a fourth cholesteric liquid crystal, and which reflects at least part of light incident through the optical waveguide toward the optical waveguide, wherein the first cholesteric liquid crystal and the third cholesteric liquid crystal have an equal helical pitch and turn in directions opposite to each other, the second cholesteric liquid crystal and the fourth cholesteric liquid crystal have an equal helical pitch and turn in directions opposite to each other, and the first cholesteric liquid crystal and the second cholesteric liquid crystal have different helical pitches.
Kashima discloses an optical element (see figures 1-4, for instance), including a fourth alignment film (52) which overlaps the third liquid crystal layer (12’); and a fourth liquid crystal layer (12) which overlaps the fourth alignment film (52), which comprises a fourth cholesteric liquid crystal ([0065]-[0066]), and which reflects at least part of light incident through the optical waveguide toward the optical waveguide, wherein the first cholesteric liquid crystal (22’) and the third cholesteric liquid crystal (12’) have an equal helical pitch and turn in directions opposite to each other (see fig. 3B), the second cholesteric liquid crystal (22) and the fourth cholesteric liquid crystal (12) have an equal helical pitch and turn in directions opposite to each other (see fig. 3B), and the first cholesteric liquid crystal and the second cholesteric liquid crystal have different helical pitches ([0088]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the fourth liquid crystal layer structure as Kashima in the device of Sato. The motivation for doing so would have been to decrease the amount of ultraviolet light in a wider wave range that enters a liquid crystal cell, as taught by Kashima ([0063]).
Regarding claim 13, Sato discloses a liquid crystal optical element (see figures 1 and 8, for instance) comprising: an optical waveguide (42, see fig. 8) comprising a first main surface (facing the light source 40) and a second main surface (facing element 10) opposed to the first main surface; a first alignment film (24B) disposed on the second main surface; a first liquid crystal layer (26B) which overlaps the first alignment film (24B), which comprises a first cholesteric liquid crystal ([0078]), and which reflects at least part of light incident through the optical waveguide (42) toward the optical waveguide; a first protective layer (20) which overlaps the first liquid crystal layer (26B); a second alignment film (24G) which overlaps the first protective layer (20); and a second liquid crystal layer (26G) which overlaps the second alignment film (24G), which comprises a second cholesteric liquid crystal ([0078]), and which reflects at least part of light incident through the optical waveguide (42) toward the optical waveguide; a second protective layer (20, beneath 24G) which overlaps the second liquid crystal layer (26G); a third alignment film (24R) which overlaps the second protective layer (20); a third liquid crystal layer (26R) which overlaps the third alignment film (24R), which comprises a third cholesteric liquid crystal ([0078]), and which reflects at least part of light incident through the optical waveguide (42) toward the optical waveguide; a third protective layer (20) which overlaps the third liquid crystal layer (26R). However, Sato does not expressly disclose a fourth alignment film which overlaps the third protective layer; and a fourth liquid crystal layer which overlaps the fourth alignment film, which comprises a fourth cholesteric liquid crystal, and which reflects at least part of light incident through the optical waveguide toward the optical waveguide.
Kashima discloses an optical element (see figures 1-4, for instance), including a fourth alignment film (52) which overlaps the third liquid crystal layer (12’); and a fourth liquid crystal layer (12) which overlaps the fourth alignment film (52), which comprises a fourth cholesteric liquid crystal ([0065]-[0066]), and which reflects at least part of light incident through the optical waveguide toward the optical waveguide.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the fourth liquid crystal layer structure as Kashima in the device of Sato. The motivation for doing so would have been to decrease the amount of ultraviolet light in a wider wave range that enters a liquid crystal cell, as taught by Kashima ([0063]).
Regarding claim 14, Sato in view of Kashima discloses the liquid crystal optical element of claim 13, wherein the first cholesteric liquid crystal (22’) and the third cholesteric liquid crystal (12’) have an equal helical pitch and turn in directions opposite to each other (see fig. 3B), the second cholesteric liquid crystal (22) and the fourth cholesteric liquid crystal (12) have an equal helical pitch and turn in directions opposite to each other (see fig. 3B), and the first cholesteric liquid crystal and the second cholesteric liquid crystal have different helical pitches ([0088]).
Regarding claim 15, Sato in view of Kashima discloses the liquid crystal optical element of claim 13, wherein the first protective layer (20, top), the second protective layer (20, middle), and the third protective layer (20, bottom) are formed of polyvinyl alcohol ([0096]).
Regarding claim 16, Sato in view of Kashima discloses the liquid crystal optical element of claim 13, wherein the first alignment film (24B), the second alignment film (24G), the third alignment film (24R), and the fourth alignment film (Kashima 52) are optical alignment films of any one of a photodecomposition type, a photodimerization type, and a photoisomerization type ([0108]-[0111]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANAEL R BRIGGS whose telephone number is (571)272-8992. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 5:00 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, 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 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.
/NATHANAEL R BRIGGS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871 11/4/2025
Prosecution Insights