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 .
Applicant’s amendments filed on 1 April 2026 and 7 April 2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 6, 9, 15, and 17 have been amended. No claims have been cancelled. Claims 15-22 have been added. Claims 1-22 are still pending in this application, with only claims 1 and 6 being independent.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1 April 2026 and 7 April 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant alleges Hsu fails to disclose or teach the newly added limitations based on Hsu’s paragraph [0030]. The Examiner respectfully disagrees as Hsu’s optical plate includes three distinct layers. For more information, see the rejection below.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9, 13-15, 17, 21, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hsu et al (US2008/0130117; hereinafter “Hsu”).
Regarding 1, Hsu, at least figs. 1-6, discloses a light diffusion sheet (22; at least figs. 1, 4-6) incorporated in a backlight unit (20; at least figs. 1 and 4-6) having a prism sheet (23; at least figs. 1 and 4-6) comprising a first surface to serve as a light emitting surface and a second surface to serve as a light incident surface, wherein
the light diffusion sheet (22) is disposed below the prism sheet (23) in the backlight unit (20);
a plurality of recesses (231; as seen in at least figs. 1 and 4-6) having a substantially inverted quadrangular pyramid shape (as seen in figs. 2 and 4; as described in at least the abstract and paragraph [0025]) are provided on one of the first surface and the second surface;
a plurality of linear structures (at least 211; as seen in at least figs. 1 and 4-6) extending in a predetermined direction are provided on another one of the first surface and the second surface (as seen in at least figs. 1 and 4-6) and
an apex angle of the plurality of recesses is 100° or more (as disclosed in at least paragraph [0025]).
Regarding claim 2, Hsu discloses the light diffusion sheet of claim 1, wherein the plurality of linear structures (211) constitute a prism, a hairline, a lenticular, or a diffractive grating (as disclosed in at least paragraph [0024]).
Regarding claim 3, Hsu discloses the light diffusion sheet of claim 1, wherein the plurality of linear structures (211) constitute a prism with an apex angle of 95° or less; and the apex angle of the plurality of recesses is 110° or more and 130° or less (as disclosed in at least paragraph [0025]).
Regarding claim 5, Hsu discloses the light diffusion sheet of claim 1, wherein the plurality of recesses (231) are arrayed in a two-dimensional matrix (2030; as seen in at least fig. 2), and the array direction crosses the predetermined direction (as seen in at least figs. 1 and 4-6).
Regarding claim 6, Hsu, in at least figs. 1-6, discloses a light diffusion sheet (22; at least figs. 1 and 4-6) incorporated in a backlight (20; at least figs. 1 and 4-6) having a prism sheet (23; at least figs. 1 and 4-6) comprising a first surface to serve as a light emitting surface and a second surface to serve as a light incident surface, wherein
the light diffusion sheet (22) is disposed below the prism sheet (23) in the backlight unit (20);
a plurality of recesses (231; as seen in at least figs. 1 and 4-6) having a substantially inverted quadrangular pyramid shape (as seen in figs. 2 and 4) are provided on one of the first surface and the second surface (as seen in at least figs. 1-6);
a plurality of linear structures (at least 211; as seen in at least figs. 1 and 4-6) extending in a predetermined direction are provided on another one of the first surface and the second surface (as seen in at least figs. 1 and 4-6);
the plurality of linear structures (211) constitute a prism with an apex angle of 95° or more (as disclosed in at least paragraph [0025]); and
the apex angle of the plurality of recesses (231) is 85° or more and 95° or less (as disclosed in at least paragraph [0025]).
Regarding claim 7, Hsu discloses a backlight unit built in a liquid crystal display device and leading light rays emitted from a plurality of light sources toward a display screen (not shown in the figures but disclosed in the abstract), comprising: the light diffusion sheet of claim 1 between the display screen and the plurality of light sources (at least 32) (as seen in at least fig. 6).
Regarding claim 9, Hsu discloses the light diffusion sheet including a plurality of light diffusion sheets layered and placed between the display screen and the plurality of light sources (as seen in at least fig. 6).
Regarding claim 13, Hsu discloses a liquid crystal display device, comprising: the backlight unit of claim 7; and a liquid crystal display panel (as disclosed in at least the abstract).
Regarding claim 14. Hsu discloses the claimed invention as indicated above. However, regarding the limitation “an information device comprising the liquid crystal display device of claim 13”, it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations.
Regarding claim 15, Hsu discloses a backlight unit built in a liquid crystal display device and leading light rays emitted from a plurality of light sources toward a display screen (not shown in the figures but disclosed in the abstract), comprising: the light diffusion sheet of claim 6 between the display screen and the plurality of light sources (at least 32) (as seen in at least fig. 6).
Regarding claim 17, Hsu discloses the light diffusion sheet including a plurality of light diffusion sheets layered and placed between the display screen and the plurality of light sources (as seen in at least fig. 6).
Regarding claim 21, Hsu discloses a liquid crystal display device, comprising: the backlight unit of claim 7; and a liquid crystal display panel (as disclosed in at least the abstract).
Regarding claim 22, Hsu discloses the claimed invention as indicated above. However, regarding the limitation “an information device comprising the liquid crystal display device of claim 21”, it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 4, 8, 10-12, 16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hsu as applied to at least claims 1 and 6 above.
Regarding claim 4, Hsu discloses the light diffusion sheet of claim 1, wherein the plurality of linear structures constitute a prism (as disclosed in at least paragraph [0024]) as well as a wide range of apex angles of the plurality of recesses (as disclosed in at least paragraph [0025]). However, Hsu does not specifically disclose the apex angle of the plurality of recesses in a range including and between 130° and 150°.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to make Hsu’s apex angle of the plurality of recesses is 130° or more and 150° or less, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
One would be motivated to do so because to achieve the desired light distribution output.
Regarding claims 8 and 16, Hsu discloses the backlight unit of claim 7, at least the plurality of light sources (32) on a housing (31) opposite to the display screen when viewed from the light diffusion sheet (as seen in at least fig. 6).
Hsu further discloses the prior art has the plurality of light sources (12) arranged on a reflective sheet. Furthermore, it is old and well-known in the art to provide a reflective sheet around light sources of a backlight to efficiently direct the light rays to the optical display panel of the LCD.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include a reflector to Hsu’s housing (31) in order to direct the rays to the optical stack (20).
Regarding claims 10, 11, 18, and 19, Hsu discloses the claimed invention as indicated above.
Hsu does not specifically disclose a plurality of diffusion sheets.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to make
Hsu’s light diffusion sheet including the plurality of light diffusion sheets includes a first light diffusion sheet and a second light diffusion sheet; and a direction in which the plurality of linear structures on the first light diffusion sheet extend crosses a direction in which the plurality of linear structures on the second light diffusion sheet extend; or
Another light diffusion sheet between the display screen and the light diffusion sheet, wherein a plurality of other recesses having a substantially inverted quadrangular pyramid shape are provided on one surface of the other light diffusion sheet, and the apex angle of the plurality of the other recesses are smaller than the apex angle of the plurality of recesses.
Since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art, one would have been motivated to do so as it is old and well-known in the art to duplicate diffusion sheets in order to evenly distribute light from the light sources across the entire backlight for uniform illumination.
Regarding claims 12 and 20, Hsu discloses the backlight unit of claim 7 as indicated above.
Hsu does not specifically disclose the specific disclose the distance between the light sources and the light diffusion sheet.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to make the distance between the plurality of light sources and the light diffusion sheet is 1 mm or less, since it has been held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device (see at least MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A)).
One would have been motived to do so to make a thinner backlight unit to meet market demands for thin LCD displays.
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 LEAH S MACCHIAROLO whose telephone number is (571)272-2719. The examiner can normally be reached M-F approx 8:30am to 4:30pm.
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, Jong-Suk (James) Lee can be reached at 571.272.7044. 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.
/LEAH MACCHIAROLO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights