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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 8, 9, 11 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maurice (United States Patent Publication 5, 829, 858) in view of Hu (WO 2022052868 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Maurice discloses a projector (figs.1 and 2) comprising: a light source (comprised by 11 and 10 in figs.1 and 2) that emits first light (see the operation of 11 and 10 in figs.1 and 2); an optical system (comprised by 18 and 19 which comprise relay optics 17 in fig.1) to enlarge a luminous flux of the first light passing through beam shaping optics (see light that passes through 15 and is enlarged by at least 18 and 19 which comprise 17 in figs.1 and 2; col.7, lines 50-55: “The relay optics 17, shown in FIG. 1, images the exit pupil 16 of the light pipe onto the image plane of the image gate, i.e., the LCD light valve. The choice of the relay optics is such that the proper magnification is achieved at the desired distance. The chosen distance is such that the appropriate beam divergence is achieved at the image gate.”); a parallelizing lens (see Fresnel 20 in figs.1 and 2) that parallelizes the light enlarged by the optical system (see 18 and 19 as discussed above); a light modulator (LCD 21 in fig.2) on which the light parallelized by the parallelizing lens (see Fresnel 20 in figs.1 and 2) is incident and which modulates the incident light to generate image light; a projection lens (23 in fig.2) that projects the image light (see the operation of 23 in fig.2).
But Maurice does not disclose a wavelength converter that is irradiated with the first light and emits second light emitted at a wavelength different from a wavelength at which the first light is emitted and a light-exiting-side polarizing element on which the image light that exits out of the light modulator is incident nor discloses projecting the image light that exits out of the light-exiting-side polarizing element; and a light-incident-side polarizing element that transmits light polarized in a predetermined polarization direction and reflects light polarized in a direction other than the predetermined polarization direction, wherein nonlinearly polarized light enters the light-incident-side polarizing element, and the light-incident-side polarizing element is disposed on an optical path of the second light between the light source and the parallelizing lens at a position closer to the light source than the parallelizing lens to suppress an amount of light polarized in directions other than the predetermined polarization direction from entering the parallelizing lens.
Hu discloses a wavelength converter (see 116 in fig.7) that is irradiated with the first light (115) and emits second light (see the emission from 116 which is a phosphor element in fig.7; see 29th para. of The embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and embodiments.: In a specific embodiment, the excitation light source 115 is a blue laser (such as a blue laser diode or a blue laser diode array), the wavelength conversion device 116 includes a yellow fluorescent material; also see wherein light source can be position behind wavelength conversion device 116: see Hu: see 30th para.: “The wavelength conversion device may also be a transmissive wavelength conversion device, and the excitation light source is disposed on a side of the wavelength conversion device away from the angle distribution converter.”) emitted at a wavelength different from a wavelength at which the first light is emitted (see the emission from 116 (yellow disclosed above) and the wavelength of the first light 115 in fig.7 (blue disclosed above)), an optical system (112) that enlarges a luminous flux of the first light passing through the wavelength converter (see the wavelength converter of 116) and a luminous flux of the second light emitted from the wavelength converter (see 24th para. under The embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and embodiments: see the excitation light source 115 is a blue laser (such as a blue laser diode or a blue laser diode array), the wavelength conversion device 116 includes a yellow fluorescent material, and the blue laser excites the yellow fluorescent material to generate yellow light and unabsorbed blue light, Thus, white light outgoing light is formed) and a light-exiting-side polarizing element (see 142 in fig.7) on which the image light that exits out of the light modulator (see LCD modulator 141) is incident; a projection lens (150 in fig.7) that projects the image light that exits out of the light-exiting-side polarizing element (see the position of 150 in fig.7 with respect to light exit side polarizer 142); and a light-incident-side polarizing element (see polarizer 113) that transmits light polarized in a predetermined polarization direction (disclosed by the operation of the reflective polarization selection device 113) and reflects light polarized in a direction other than the predetermined polarization direction (again see structure and operation of reflective polarization selection device 113 in fig.7), wherein nonlinearly polarized light (see the light from phosphor 116; also see 9th para.: “The light emitted from the conical reflector 112 in this embodiment is unpolarized white light, which is incident on the reflective polarization selection device 113 along the optical path.”) enters the light-incident-side polarizing element (see operation wherein the light from phosphor 116 enters incident-side polarization element 113 in fig.7), and the light-incident-side polarizing element (see 113 in fig.7) is disposed on an optical path of the second light between the light source (115 in fig.7) and the parallelizing lens (see 114) at a position closer to the light source (115) than the parallelizing lens (114: by virtue of 113 being between the light source 115 and the 114, 113 is disposed closer to the light than the parallelizing lens; examiner notes that X is disposed closer to A than B is not the same as X is disposed closer to A than to B ) to suppress an amount of light polarized in directions other than the predetermined polarization direction from entering the parallelizing lens.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Maurice with the teaching of Hu so that a wavelength converter that is irradiated with the first light and emits second light emitted at a wavelength different from a wavelength at which the first light is emitted and a light-exiting-side polarizing element on which the image light that exits out of the light modulator is incident and so that a projection lens projects the image light that exits out of the light-exiting-side polarizing element; and a light-incident-side polarizing element that transmits light polarized in a predetermined polarization direction and reflects light polarized in a direction other than the predetermined polarization direction, wherein nonlinearly polarized light enters the light-incident-side polarizing element, and the light-incident-side polarizing element is disposed on an optical path of the second light between the light source and the parallelizing lens to improve the efficiency , lifespan and stability of the light source by implementing a wavelength conversion based illuminant and to enhance the image quality by utilizing incident and exit side polarizing elements in a liquid crystal device which improves their contrast by reducing undesired light in the optical chain.
With respect to claim 2, Maurice in view of Hu discloses the projector according to claim 1, but Maurice does not disclose wherein the light-incident-side polarizing element is disposed between the wavelength converter and the optical system.
Hu discloses wherein the light-incident-side polarizing element is disposed between the wavelength converter (116 in fig.7) and an optical system (see 114 as the optical system ; see the position of 112 and 113 which comprise the light incident side polarizing element in fig.7; or an alternative interpretation in which 113 alone comprises the light incident side polarizing element in fig.7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Maurice in view of Hu with the teaching of Hu so that the light-incident-side polarizing element is disposed between the wavelength converter and the optical system to improve the image quality by utilizing incident and exit side polarizing elements in a liquid crystal device which improves their contrast by reducing undesired light in the optical chain.
With respect to claim 8, Maurice in view of Hu discloses the projector according to claim 2, Maurice does not disclose wherein the light-incident-side polarizing element is provided so as to cover a surface of the wavelength converter that is opposite from a surface facing the light source.
Hu discloses wherein the light source is position behind the phosphor (see Hu: see 30th para.: “The wavelength conversion device may also be a transmissive wavelength conversion device, and the excitation light source is disposed on a side of the wavelength conversion device away from the angle distribution converter.” ) and discloses wherein the light-incident-side polarizing element (see wherein the light incident side polarizing element is comprised by 112 and 113 in fig.7) is provided so as to cover a surface of the wavelength converter (see 116) that is opposite from a surface facing the light source (when the light source is disposed on the side away from the angle distribution converter as disclosed in the 30th para.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Maurice in view of Hu with the teaching of Hu so that the light-incident-side polarizing element is provided so as to cover a surface of the wavelength converter that is opposite from a surface facing the light source to improve the image quality by utilizing incident and exit side polarizing elements in a liquid crystal device which improves their contrast by reducing undesired light in the optical chain.
With respect to claim 9, Maurice in view of Hu discloses the projector according to claim 1, but Maurice does not explicitly disclose wherein the light-incident-side polarizing element is disposed between the optical system and the parallelizing lens.
Hu discloses wherein the light-incident-side polarizing element (see 113 in fig.7) is disposed between the optical system (see 112 in fig.7) and the parallelizing lens (see 114 in fig.7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Maurice in view of Hu with the teaching of Hu so that the light-incident-side polarizing element is disposed between the optical system and the parallelizing lens to improve the image quality by utilizing incident and exit side polarizing elements in a liquid crystal device which improves their contrast by reducing undesired light in the optical chain.
With respect to claims 11 and 12, Maurice in view of Hu discloses the projector according to claim 1, Maurice does not disclose further comprising a phase retarder, wherein the phase retarder is a quarter waveplate, is disposed between the wavelength converter and the light-incident-side polarizing element.
Hu discloses further comprising a phase retarder (see 9th para.: “In order to reduce the number of times of recovery of the recovered first beam, a structure such as a quarter wave plate may be arranged in the conical reflector to change the polarization state of the beam. In the present invention, the reflective polarization selective device 113 may be a device such as a wire grid polarizer.”) disposed between (see the conical reflector is between 116 and 113 and the quarter wave plate is inside it as disclosed in the 9th para. above) the wavelength converter (116) and the light-incident-side polarizing element (113), wherein the phase retarder is a quarter-wave plate (see the quarter wave plate disclosed in the 9th para.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Maurice in view of Hu with the teaching of Hu so that a phase retarder disposed between the wavelength converter and the light-incident-side polarizing element, wherein the phase retarder is a quarter-wave plate to improve light utilization efficiency by reducing the number of beam recoveries.
Claim(s) 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 13 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maurice (United States Patent Publication 5, 829, 858) in view of Hu (WO 2022052868 A1) and Noba (JP 2011077444 A).
With respect to claim 3, Maurice in view of Hu discloses the projector according to claim 2, but Maurice does not disclose wherein the wavelength converter includes a phosphor layer, and a surface of the phosphor layer that is opposite from a surface facing the light source is parallel to a light-incident-side surface of the light-incident-side polarizing element.
Noba discloses wherein the wavelength converter includes a phosphor layer (34 in fig.5), and a surface of the phosphor layer (see the rear surface of 34 in fig.5) that is opposite from a surface facing the light source (see the emission surface disclosed in fig.5, 34) is parallel to a light-incident-side surface of the light-incident-side polarizing element (see the orientation of 16 and 34 disclosed in fig.5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Maurice in view of Hu with the teaching of Noba so that the wavelength converter includes a phosphor layer, and a surface of the phosphor layer that is opposite from a surface facing the light source is parallel to a light-incident-side surface of the light-incident-side polarizing element to improve the efficiency, lifespan and stability of the light source by implementing a wavelength conversion based illuminant and to enhance recovery by reducing reflections between the phosphor and light-incident-side surface of the light-incident-side polarizing element.
With respect to claim 4, Maurice in view of Hu discloses the projector according to claim 2, Maurice does not disclose wherein the light-incident-side polarizing element is in contact with the wavelength converter.
Noba discloses wherein the light-incident-side polarizing element (comprised by 15 and 16 in fig.5) is in contact with the wavelength converter (see 34 in fig.5; see fig.5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Maurice in view of Hu with the teaching of Noba so that the light-incident-side polarizing element is in contact with the wavelength converter to produce a more compact light source and projector by making optical components integral.
With respect to claims 6 and 7, Maurice in view of Hu discloses the projector according to claim 2, Maurice in combination with Hu further discloses wherein the light source is position behind the phosphor (see Hu: see 30th para.: “The wavelength conversion device may also be a transmissive wavelength conversion device, and the excitation light source is disposed on a side of the wavelength conversion device away from the angle distribution converter.” ) but does not disclose further comprising a dichroic mirror that is disposed between the light source and the wavelength converter, transmits the first light, and reflects at least part of the second light, further comprising a light transmissive member disposed between the light source and the dichroic mirror.
Noba discloses a dichroic mirror (see 13 in fig.5) that is disposed between the light source (see 11) and the wavelength converter (34), transmits the first light, and reflects at least part of the second light (see the operation of dichroic mirror 13; (see the operation of dichroic mirror 13; see abstract: “a dichroic mirror 13 for transmitting light of first wavelength and reflecting light of second wavelength are arranged between the light source 11 and the reflection type polarization element 16 to be set in order of the light source 11”)), further comprising a light transmissive member disposed between the light source and the dichroic mirror (see 37 in fig.5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Maurice in view of Hu with the teaching of Noba so that a dichroic mirror that is disposed between the light source and the wavelength converter, transmits the first light, and reflects at least part of the second light, further comprising a light transmissive member disposed between the light source and the dichroic mirror to improve the utilization efficiency by recycling light that has not been wavelength converted or passed through the reflector.
With respect to claim 10, Maurice in view Hu discloses the projector according to claim 9, Hu further discloses wherein the light source is behind the phosphor (see 30th para.: “The wavelength conversion device may also be a transmissive wavelength conversion device, and the excitation light source is disposed on a side of the wavelength conversion device away from the angle distribution converter.”) but Maurice in view of Hu does not disclose further comprising a dichroic mirror that is disposed between the light source and the wavelength converter, transmits the first light, and reflects at least part of the second light.
Noba discloses a dichroic mirror (see 13 in fig.5) that is disposed between the light source (see 11) and the wavelength converter (34), transmits the first light (see abstract disclosed below), and reflects at least part of the second light (see the operation of dichroic mirror 13; see abstract: “a dichroic mirror 13 for transmitting light of first wavelength and reflecting light of second wavelength are arranged between the light source 11 and the reflection type polarization element 16 to be set in order of the light source 11”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Maurice in view of Hu with the teaching of Noba so that a dichroic mirror that is disposed between the light source and the wavelength converter, transmits the first light, and reflects at least part of the second light, further comprising a light transmissive member disposed between the light source and the dichroic mirror to improve the utilization efficiency by recycling light that has not be wavelength converted or passed through the reflector.
With respect to claims 13 and 14, Maurice in view of Hu discloses the projector according to claim 11, but Maurice does not disclose wherein the phase retarder is in contact with the light-incident-side polarizing element, wherein the phase retarder is a quarter-wave plate.
Noba discloses wherein the phase retarder (15 in fig.5) is in contact with the light-incident-side polarizing element (16 in fig.5), wherein the phase retarder is a quarter-wave plate (see 3rd para. of Description of Embodiment: the quarter wavelength plate 15 may be interchanged.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Maurice in view of Hu with the teaching of Noba so that the phase retarder is in contact with the light-incident-side polarizing element, wherein the phase retarder is a quarter-wave plate to make light source more compact by combing optical elements integrally.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maurice (United States Patent Publication 5, 829, 858) in view of Hu (WO 2022052868 A1), Noba (JP 2011077444 A) and Ohno (WO 2013046921 A1).
With respect to claim 5, Maurice in view of Hu and Noba discloses the projector according to claim 4, Maurice in view of Hu discloses wherein the light-incident-side polarizing element is a wire grid polarizer (see 9th para. in the section, description of embodiments: In the present invention, the reflective polarization selective device 113 may be a device such as a wire grid polarizer.) and the first light being blue light ( see 29th para. of detailed description: “115 is a blue laser (such as a blue laser diode or a blue laser diode array)” ), but does not disclose a cycle of the wire grid polarizer is shorter than half of a predetermined wavelength of the first light.
Ohno discloses a cycle of the wire grid polarizer is shorter than half of a predetermined wavelength of the first light (see the 42nd para. in the section : “The width of the metal layer 13 was 42 nm, the height was 140 nm, and the period of the convex portions 15 was 110 nm.” which shorter than half of the wavelength of blue light which known in the art to range from 400 to 500nm).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Maurice in view of Hu and Noba with the teaching of Ohno so that a cycle of the wire grid polarizer is shorter than half of a predetermined wavelength of the first light to enhance the polarization effect by preventing diffraction and thereby improving the extinction ratio.
Claim 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maurice (United States Patent Publication 5, 829, 858) in view of Hu (WO 2022052868 A1), Huang (United States Patent Application Publication 20080068712 A1) and Nishikawa (United States Patent Application Publication 2007/0145255 A1).
With respect to claim 15, Maurice in view of Hu discloses the projector according to claim 1, Maurice in combination Hu discloses further comprising a rod member (see 112 in fig.7) and reflect light with which an inner wall surface of the rod member is irradiated (see the operation of 112 in fig.7).
But Maurice in view of Hu does not disclose a rod member that couples along the optical path of the second light a circumferential edge of the light source to a circumferential edge of the light-incident-side polarizing element, is provided to surround at least the light source and the light-incident-side polarizing element.
Huang discloses a rod member (comprised 32 and side wall portions that surround 42 in fig.8) that couples the second light a circumferential edge of the light source (see the bottom of 34 which is a circumferential edge of the cross section of 34: here examiner interprets circumferential edge as the external boundary or surface of a figure or object ) to a circumferential edge of the light-incident-side polarizing element (see side wall portions that surround 42 in fig.9 ), is provided to surround at least the light source (see wherein 32 surrounds the light source) and the light-incident-side polarizing element (see wherein side wall portions that surround 42 in fig.8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Maurice in view of Hu with the teaching of so that Huang the rod member couples the second light a circumferential edge of the light source to a circumferential edge of the light-incident-side polarizing element, is provided to surround at least the light source and the light-incident-side polarizing element to produce a more compact light source by precisely fitting optical components together and making optical components integral.
Maurice in view of Hu and Huang does not disclose wherein the rod member that couples, along the optical path of the second light, a circumferential edge of the light source.
Nishikawa discloses a rod member (comprised 30 in fig.1) that couples along the optical path of the second light a circumferential edge of the light source (20 in fig.1 ) to a circumferential edge of an optical element (see 50 in fig.1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Maurice in view of Hu and Huang with the teaching of so that Nishikawa so that rod member that couples along the optical path of the second light a circumferential edge of the light source to a circumferential edge of the light-incident-side polarizing element, is provided to surround at least the light source and the light-incident-side polarizing element to make the light source more compact by precisely fitting the rod member to the light source.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/01/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to claim 1, applicant argues that Hu does not disclose the light-incident-side polarizing element being disposed on the optical path of the second light between the light source and the parallelizing lens at a position closer to the light source than the parallelizing lens. Therefore, Maurice in view of Hu does not disclose the newly amended limitations of claim 1.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Hu discloses the light-incident-side polarizing element (see 113 in fig.7) is disposed on an optical path of the second light between the light source (115 in fig.7) and the parallelizing lens (see 114) at a position closer to the light source (115) than the parallelizing lens (114: by virtue of 113 being between the light source 115 and the 114, 113 is disposed closer to the light than the parallelizing lens; examiner notes that X is disposed closer to A than B is not the same as X is disposed closer to A than to B ).
Therefore, Maurice in view of Hu disclose the limitations of claim 1.
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 JERRY L. BROOKS whose telephone number is (571)270-5711. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-4:00 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, Toan Ton can be reached at 5712722303. 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.
/JERRY L BROOKS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Prosecution Insights