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 U.S.C. § 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.
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.
Claims 1 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chua et al. (US Pub. 20070018558), hereinafter referred to as Chua and Song et al., (US Pub. 20150185410), hereinafter referred to as Song,
Regarding claim 1, Chua teaches a display apparatus Chua (600, Fig. 6, para. 31) comprising: a light source device (Chua, 602, Fig. 6, para. 31, NOTE: per para. 31 LED 602 may be any type of LED in accordance with an embodiment of Chua) configured to emit light; a light guide plate (Chua, 604, Fig. 4, para. 32); a display panel configured to display the light emitted from the light source device (Chua, not shown, para. 31, notes that the LED’s may be used for backlighting an illuminate display device); wherein the light source device comprises: a substrate (Chua, 108, Fig. 1, para. 20); a first light source (Chua, 102, Fig. 1, para. 20) and a second light source (Chua 104, Fig. 1, para. 20) that are electrically connected to the substrate (Chua, 118, Fig. 1, para. 22); a light conversion member (Chua, 120, Fig. 1, para. 23) configured to convert a wavelength of light emitted from the first light source and the second light source; wherein the first light source is on a first side of the light conversion member, and the second light source is on a second side of the light conversion member opposite to the first side (Chua, Fig. 1, light source 102 is on the left side of photoluminescent material 120, while 104 is on the right side, with a significant column of 120 located between the two light sources), and wherein the first light source and the second light source are disposed on a common side of the light guide plate (Chua, Fig. 6, shows LED 602 on one side of light guide plate 604).
Chua does not teach an optical sheet disposed at a rear of the display panel, and a conversion member cover covering the light conversion member and configured to allow light to pass therethrough,
However, Song teaches a backlight assembly and display wherein there is an optical sheet (Song, 260, Fig. 1, para. 58) disposed at the rear of the display panel between the light guide plate (Song, 240, Fig. 1, para. 58) and the display panel (Song, 100, Fig. 1, para. 48). Song additionally teaches a light conversion member (Song, 220, Figs. 1, 2, para. 58) comprising a barrier layer (Song, 220c, paras. 68, 73) which protects the conversion layer (Song, 220b, Fig. 2, para. 73).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to have modified the display apparatus of Chua by incorporating the optical sheet and light conversion cover of Song in order to modulate the optical characteristics of the emitted light (Song, para. 82) and to protect the conversion member from external moisture and oxygen (Song, para. 73).
Regarding claim 3, modified Chua teaches the display apparatus of claim 1, wherein the conversion member cover (Song, 220c, Fig. 2, para. 68) is disposed on the substrate. It would have been obvious to dispose the conversion member cover of Song onto the substrate (108) of Chua.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chua and Song as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Im, et al. (US Pub. 20150042919), hereinafter referred to as Im.
Regarding claim 16, modified Chua teaches he display apparatus of claim 1, but does not teach wherein the first light source is inclined at a first angle relative to the substrate and the second light source is inclined at a second angle relative to the substrate, the first angle and the second angle being opposite from each other, and wherein the first light source and the second light source face each other.
However, Im teaches a liquid crystal display apparatus wherein one of the LED backlight sources can be angled (Im, 531, Fig. 15, para. 99-102). This angle is changeable to incrementally vary the amount of illumination (Im, para. 102). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to angle the light sources of Chua in order to provide an optimal amount of illumination (Im, para. 102).
Claims 5, 7, 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chua and Song as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zhou et al. (US Pub. 20210408342) hereinafter referred to as Zhou.
Regarding claim 5, modified Chua teaches the display apparatus of claim 1, but does not teach wherein the light source device further comprises a light source cover covering the first light source and the second light source; and configured to block light emitted from the first light source and the second light source.
However, Zhou teaches a light emitting device wherein the light source (Zhou, 530, Fig. 5D, para. 74) are surrounded on two sides by a light reflective material (Zhou, 542, Fig. 5D, para. 74-75). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to combine the apparatus of Chua and Song with the reflective material of Zhou to attain the desired color temperature using less photoluminescence material (Zhou, para. 75).
Regarding claim 7, modified Chua. teaches the display apparatus of claim 5, wherein the light conversion member (Chua, 120, Fig. 1) is disposed on a first side of the first light source (Chua, 102, Fig. 1) and a first side of the second light source (Chua, 104, Fig. 1) opposite to a second side of the first light source and a second side of the second light source on which the substrate is located (Chua, Fig. 1 shows light conversion member 120 is disposed above both light sources away from the substrate).
Regarding claim 8, modified Chua teaches the display apparatus of claim 7, wherein the light source device further comprises a reflective member (Song, 220a, Fig. 2, paras. 68-69) covering at least a portion of the conversion member cover and configured to reflect light.
Regarding claim 17, modified Chua teaches the display apparatus of claim 5, but does not explicitly teach wherein the light source cover covers at least three surfaces of the first light source and three surfaces of the second light source, leaving at least one uncovered surface of the first light source and one uncovered surface of the second light source to face each other.
However, in Zhou, Fig. 5D, the light source cover (Zhou, 542, Fig. 5D) covers the left and right sides of the light source (Zhou, 530, Fig. 5D, para. 74). Additionally, the light source cover is disposed on the front and rear of the light source (Zhou, para. 75,on an axis in and out of the page).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to place a light source cover surrounding the four sides (left, right front, and rear) of the light emitting element to attain the desired color temperature using less photoluminescence material and reducing manufacturing costs (Zhou, para. 75).
Claims 9, 12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chua, Song and Zhou as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Im
Regarding claim 9, modified Chua teaches the display apparatus of claim 7, but does not teach wherein the first light source and the second light source are inclined with respect to the substrate.
However, Im teaches a liquid crystal display apparatus wherein one of the LED backlight sources can be angled (Im, 531, Fig. 15, para. 99-102). This angle is changeable to incrementally vary the amount of illumination (Im, para. 102). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to angle the light sources of Chua in order to provide an optimal amount of illumination (Im, para. 102).
Regarding claim 12, modified Chua teaches the display apparatus of claim 9, wherein the light source device further comprises a substrate reflection layer (Im, 570, Fig. 15, para. 99) between the substrate (Im, 512, Fig. 15, para. 98) and the light source cover (Zhou, 542, Fig. 5D, para. 74-75) and configured to reflect light.
Regarding claim 15, modified Song D. teaches the display apparatus of claim 9, wherein the light source cover (Zhou, 542, Fig. 5D, para. 74-75) covers at least two surfaces of the first light source and the second light source (Zhou, 530, Fig. 5D, para. 74).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, page 7, line 8 page 8, line 18 , filed 4 August 2026, with respect to claims 1-3, 5, 7-9, 12 and 15 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claim 1 has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in view of Chua and Song.
Applicant’s arguments centered on the addition of the light guide plate to the claim and the two light sources on the same side of the light guide plate, while being on opposing sides of the light conversion member. In Chua there are multiple LEDs (Chua, Fig. 6) which are all situated on one side of the light guide plate and each contains two light sources wherein the two light sources are locate on either side of the light conversion member (Chua, Fig. 1).
Because claim 1 was rejected under Song D., Song H. and Im, the original rejections of dependent claims are withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in view of Chua and Song in the case of claim 3, and further in view Zhou in the case of claims 5, 7, 8, and further in view of both Zhou and Im in the case of 9, 12, and 15.
Applicant made no specific argument in relation to dependent claims, and amendments were limited to the addition of the second light source.
Applicant additionally submitted two additional claims, which were rejected under Chua, Song and Im with regards to claim 16, and under Chua, Song and Zhou with regards to claim 17. Applicant again made no specific arguments regarding claims 16 and 17, stating they should be patentable based on their dependency on claim 1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yan (US Pub. 20140209939) teaches an LED package with a conversion member .
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 KIERAN M CUNNINGHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-9654. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30-5:30.
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 at 5712703042. 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.
/KIERAN M. CUNNINGHAM/Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/Britt Hanley/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
