DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 2, 6, 7, 11 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yu et al. US 2011/0164318 A1.
Regarding claims 1, 2, 6 and 7, Yu discloses:
A display device (Figs. 1, 5A, 5B, 5D, 11A), comprising:
a display pane (Fig. 1; 30) including sub-pixels (Figs. 1 and 11; 35) arranged in a first direction (Fig. 11A, horizontal) and a second direction (Fig. 11A, vertical) perpendicular to the first direction, the sub-pixels each including a light emitting surface (Fig. 11A; R, G, B) facing a third direction (Fig. 11A; out of the page) that is perpendicular to the first direction and the second direction; and
lenses (Fig. 1; 120a of 100a) at least partially overlapping the sub-pixels in the third direction, each of the lenses having a long side having an angle greater than 0 degree with respect to the second direction (Fig. 11A; 120f aligned with R pixels at Ɵ horizontal direction),
wherein the lenses comprise:
a first lens including a first curved surface (Figs. 5A, 5B; 122-124 and Fig. 5D; 122-128) that is curved with respect to the third direction and a first side surface (Figs. 5A, 5B; 121, 125 and Fig. 5D; 121, 129) that is connected to one edge of the first curved surface, the first side surface being inclined at a first angle with respect to the third direction;
a second lens including a second curved surface that is curved with respect to the third direction and a second side surface connected to one edge of the second curved surface, the second side surface being inclined at a second angle with respect to the third direction (Figs. 5A, 5B, 5D, 11A; same as first lens above);
a common lower surface (Figs. 5A, 5B, 5D, 11A; bottom of 110) of the first lens and the second lens; and
a flat surface (Figs. 5A, 5B, 5D, 11A; top of 110) connecting the first side surface and the second side surface to each other and extending in parallel to the common lower surface,
wherein a magnitude of each of the first angle and the second angle is greater than 0 degrees (Figs. 5A, 5B, 5D).
(claim 2) Figs. 5A, 5B, 5D, 11A.
(claim 6) Figs. 5A, 5B, 5C portions, 5D.
(claim 7) Figs. 5C; portions.
Regarding claims 11 and 12, Yu discloses:
A method of manufacturing a display device (Figs. 1, 5A, 5B, 5D, 9, 11A), the method comprising:
preparing a display panel (Fig. 1; 30) including a plurality of sub-pixels (35);
positioning a lens array (Fig. 1; 120a of 100a) on the display panel, the lens array including a first lens including a first curved surface (Figs. 5A, 5B; 122-124 and Fig. 5D; 122-128) and a first side surface (Figs. 5A, 5B; 121, 125 and Fig. 5D; 121, 129) connected to one edge of the first curved surface, a second lens including a second curved surface (same as above in reference to first lens) and a second side surface (same as above in reference to first lens) connected to one edge of the second curved surface, a common lower surface (Figs. 5A, 5B, 5D, 11A; bottom of 110) of the first lens and the second lens, and a flat surface (Figs. 5A, 5B, 5D, 11A; top of 110) connecting the first side surface and the second side surface to one another and extending parallel to the common lower surface; and
aligning the lens array and the display panel with one another using at least some of the sub-pixels observed through the flat surface (Fig. 11A; 120f aligned with R pixels at Ɵ horizontal direction).
(claim 12) Figs. 1 and 9.
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.
Claim 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu et al. US 2011/0164318 A1.
Regarding claim 5, although Yu does not specifically disclose “wherein a magnitude of each of the first angle and the second angle is less than 3 degrees”, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to determine the claimed first and second angle criteria to meet the overall objective of improving viewing angles, reducing color bleeding thereby increasing image quality of 3D images. Furthermore, 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.
Claims 10, 16 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu et al. US 2011/0164318 A1 in view of Ha US 2022/0221803 A1.
Regarding claim 10, Yu does not disclose:
wherein the display panel further comprises align marks at least partially overlapping the flat surface.
Ha discloses a publication from a similar field of endeavor in which:
wherein the display panel (DP) further comprises align marks (AM_P) (Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to employ the alignment marks of Ha on the similar display panel of Yu such that they at least partially overlapping the flat surface to provide proper, accurate alignment of the lens array thereby meeting the overall objective of improving viewing angles, reducing color bleeding thereby increasing image quality of 3D images.
Regarding claims 16 and 17, Yu discloses:
A method of manufacturing a display device (Figs. 1, 5A, 5B, 5D, 9, 11A), the method comprising:
preparing a display panel (Fig. 1; 30) including a plurality of sub-pixels (35);
positioning a lens array (Fig. 1; 120a of 100a) on the display panel, the lens array including a first lens including a first curved surface (Figs. 5A, 5B; 122-124 and Fig. 5D; 122-128) and a first side surface (Figs. 5A, 5B; 121, 125 and Fig. 5D; 121, 129) connected to one edge of the first curved surface, a second lens including a second curved surface (same as above in reference to first lens) and a second side surface (same as above in reference to first lens) connected to one edge of the second curved surface, a common lower surface (Figs. 5A, 5B, 5D, 11A; bottom of 110) of the first lens and the second lens, and a flat surface (Figs. 5A, 5B, 5D, 11A; top of 110) connecting the first side surface and the second side surface to one another and extending parallel to the common lower surface; and
Yu does not disclose:
the display panel including a plurality of alignment marks; and
aligning the lens array and the display panel with one another.
Ha discloses a publication from a similar field of endeavor in which:
the display panel (DP) including a plurality of alignment marks (AM_P) (Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to employ the alignment marks of Ha on the similar display panel of Yu using the alignment marks observed through the flat surface to provide proper, accurate alignment of the lens array thereby meeting the overall objective of improving viewing angles, reducing color bleeding thereby increasing image quality of 3D images.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 4, 8, 9, 13-15 and 18-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art fails to teach or clearly suggest the limitations of claim 3 stating “wherein a length in the first direction of the flat surface is longer than a length in the first direction of any one of the sub-pixels, and wherein a length in the first direction of the first curved surface or a length in the first direction of the second curved surface is longer than the length in the first direction of the flat surface”; of claim 4 stating “wherein a length in the first direction of the flat surface is at least two times longer than a length in the first direction of any one of the sub- pixels”; of claim 8 stating “a light blocker contacting the first side surface, the second side surface, and the flat surface”; of claim 13 stating “forming a light blocker on the flat surface after the lens array and the display panel are aligned”; of claim 15 stating “wherein a width of the flat surface is greater than a width of any one of the sub-pixels”; of claim 18 stating “forming a light blocker on the flat surface after the lens array and the display panel are aligned”; and of claim 20 stating “wherein a width of the flat surface is greater than a width of any one of the sub-pixels”. In light of these limitations, the prior art fails to anticipate or make obvious the claimed invention.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERROL V FERNANDES whose telephone number is (571)270-7433. The examiner can normally be reached on 9-5:30.
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, Britt Hanley can be reached on 571-270-3042. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ERROL V FERNANDES/Primary Examiner, AU 2893