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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/03/2023 has been considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Receipt is acknowledged of applicant’s amendment filed 10/03/2023. Claims 1-18 are pending and an action on the merits is as follows.
Specification was amended
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 8 recite that the positional deviation amount of the "reference position P2" of the light emitting element with respect to the "planned arrangement position P1" is set to delta Pn. However, the definitions of the "planned arrangement position" and the "reference position" are unclear, which makes the invention unclear. Even if it means that the "planned arrangement position" is a position where the light emitting element is planned to be arranged at the design stage of the display device, and the "reference position" is a position where the light emitting element is finally arranged in the display device, etc., since such a "planned position" can change depending on human subjectivity and cannot be said to be a position that can be objectively recognized from the finally obtained display device, an ordinary person skilled in the art would not readily understand whether or not a specific product (display device) falls within the scope of the invention of the present application{,}; i.e. which makes the scope of the invention unclear. Therefore, claims 2-7 and 9-18 respectively are rejected due to their dependency upon claims 1 and 8.
To further persecution, the Examiner takes the position that US 20120099193 A1, paragraphs 68-paragraph 77 will be understood to teach “ΔPn of a reference position P2 from a predetermined arrangement position P1 on a bottom surface of the corresponding cavity of the plurality of cavities, where n is an integer greater than or equal to 2 and ΔPn is a scalar quantity, the displacement ΔPn has an average less than or equal to a predetermined value” of claim 1 and “the displacement ΔPn is divided into a first displacement ΔPnx and a second displacement ΔPny, where ΔPnx and ΔPny are vector quantities, the first displacement ΔPnx is a displacement of the reference position P2 in x-direction from the predetermined arrangement position P1, and the second displacement ΔPny is a displacement of the reference position P2 in y-direction from the predetermined arrangement position P1, the first displacement ΔPnx has an average with an absolute value less than or equal to a first predetermined value W1, and the second displacement ΔPny has an average with an absolute value less than or equal to a second predetermined value W2” of claim 8.
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 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US 20120099193 A1 , of record ids) ( Yang, hereafter).
Regarding claims 1, 4-8, 10-13, and 17, Yang discloses (Figures 1a-6 and corresponding text) an LED stereoscopic display device 200 comprises a substrate (204), a plurality of first pixel areas (206), and a plurality of second pixel areas (208). The first pixel areas (206) and the second pixel areas (208) are alternately arranged along a direction P and disposed on the substrate (204). Each first pixel area (206) comprises a plurality of first pixel units (210), each first pixel unit (210) comprises a plurality of first LED packaging structures (212), each first LED packaging structure (212) further comprises a first base (246), each second LED packaging structure (230) further comprises a second base (248), each first base (246) comprises a first accommodation space (250) (cavity) and a first central axis (252), each second base (248) comprises a second accommodation space (254) (cavity) and a second central axis (256), the first LED die (214) is disposed in the first accommodation space (250), the second LED die (232) is disposed in the second accommodation space (254), the first LED die (214) is disposed on a left side of the first central axis (252), and the second LED die (232) is disposed on a right side of the second central axis (256),
Yang fails to explicitly disclose ΔPn of a reference position P2 from a predetermined arrangement position P1 on a bottom surface of the corresponding cavity of the plurality of cavities, where n is an integer greater than or equal to 2 and ΔPn is a scalar quantity, the displacement ΔPn has an average less than or equal to a predetermined value.
However, Yang discloses the amount of positional deviation between
the first accommodation space (250) and the second accommodation space (254) and the
first LED die (214) and the second LED die (232) is unknown, but since at least the first
LED die (214) and the second LED die (232) are arranged in the first accommodation space
(250) and the second accommodation space (254), respectively, it is clear that the
amount of positional deviation is equal to or less than a predetermined value
Yang further discloses that(Figure 6) the distances can be adjusted (π76); distances can be determined by a distance between the first LED die 214 and the first central axis 252 is changed according to the position of the first LED packaging structure 212 on the substrate 204, and a distance between the second LED die 232 and the second central axis 256 is changed according to the position of the second LED packaging structure 230 on the substrate 204 (π68-π77) & (112 rejection)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Yang based upon Yang wherein ΔPn of a reference position P2 from a predetermined arrangement position P1 on a bottom surface of the corresponding cavity of the plurality of cavities, where n is an integer greater than or equal to 2 and ΔPn is a scalar quantity, the displacement ΔPn has an average less than or equal to a predetermined value, 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.
Regarding claims 8 and 10-13, same applies to Claim 8 as above. Regarding Claims 10-13, in the invention described above , the adjacent first LED die( 214) and second LED die (232 )are displaced
substantially in opposite directions.
Regarding 2 ,3, and 9, Yang fails to explicitly disclose wherein the displacement ΔPn is less than or equal to a half of a distance from the predetermined arrangement position P1 to an edge of the bottom surface of the corresponding cavity (claim 2); wherein the predetermined value is less than or equal to ⅕ of a distance from the predetermined arrangement position P1 to an edge of the bottom surface of the corresponding cavity (Claim 3); wherein the first predetermined value W1 is less than or equal to a half of a distance from the predetermined arrangement position P1 to an edge of the bottom surface of the corresponding cavity in the x-direction, and the second predetermined value W2 is less than or equal to a half of a distance from the predetermined arrangement position P1 to an edge of the bottom surface of the corresponding cavity in the y-direction (Claim 9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify the display device of Yang wherein the displacement ΔPn is less than or equal to a half of a distance from the predetermined arrangement position P1 to an edge of the bottom surface of the corresponding cavity; wherein the predetermined value is less than or equal to ⅕ of a distance from the predetermined arrangement position P1 to an edge of the bottom surface of the corresponding cavity; wherein the first predetermined value W1 is less than or equal to a half of a distance from the predetermined arrangement position P1 to an edge of the bottom surface of the corresponding cavity in the x-direction, and the second predetermined value W2 is less than or equal to a half of a distance from the predetermined arrangement position P1 to an edge of the bottom surface of the corresponding cavity in the y-direction since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. in re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claims 14-16 and 18, the limitations wherein each cavity of the plurality of cavities has a depth to reflect a half or more of light emitted from a corresponding light emitter of the plurality of light emitters a plurality of times off an inner peripheral surface of the each cavity(claim 14); wherein each cavity of the plurality of cavities has a depth to reflect light with maximum intensity emitted from a corresponding light emitter of the plurality of light emitters a plurality of times off an inner peripheral surface of the each cavity (Claim 15); wherein each cavity of the plurality of cavities has a depth being three times or more a height of the corresponding light emitter of the plurality of light emitters(claim 16); wherein each cavity of the plurality of cavities has a light-reflective inner peripheral surface (claim 18) etc do not etc do not appear to contain any additional features which define more than slight constructional changes which come within the scope of the customary (design) practice followed by persons skilled in the art, especially as the advantages thus achieved can be readily contemplated in advance. Alternatively, these limitations are not deemed patentable since the applicant’s disclosure fails to show such limitations to solve any problems or to yield any unobvious advantage that is not within the scope of the teachings applied. Therefore, such limitations would be a matter of design alternative.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify the display device of Yang wherein each cavity of the plurality of cavities has a depth to reflect a half or more of light emitted from a corresponding light emitter of the plurality of light emitters a plurality of times off an inner peripheral surface of the each cavity(claim 14); wherein each cavity of the plurality of cavities has a depth to reflect light with maximum intensity emitted from a corresponding light emitter of the plurality of light emitters a plurality of times off an inner peripheral surface of the each cavity (Claim 15); wherein each cavity of the plurality of cavities has a depth being three times or more a height of the corresponding light emitter of the plurality of light emitters(claim 16); wherein each cavity of the plurality of cavities has a light-reflective inner peripheral surface the motivation being to light efficient display and since design alternative requires routine skill in the art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found in the 892 and below:
US 20190056543 A1-General state of the art- improved display device and an electronic apparatus
US 20090237914 A1-GENERAL STATE OF THE ART- stereoscopic display .
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRACIE Y GREEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3104. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thursday, 10am-8pm.
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, James R Greece can be reached at (571)272-3711. 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.
/TRACIE Y GREEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875