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 .
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 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.
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 of this title, 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 1-13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harrold (EP0887692A2) in view of Takeda (US 2009/0046228).
Regarding claim 1, Harrold teaches a variable transmittance optical stack (the stack corresponding 3, 4, 4a 5, 6, 7, 10 and 8 in Fig. 3, Fig. 1-2 and Fig. 4-37, Col. 1-20) comprising:
a first polarizing plate (the plate corresponding to the polarizer 8, the plate including 8 and 9, or the plate including 8, 9 and 11 in Fig. 3);
a first transparent conductive layer (the layer corresponding to the transparent conducting electrode 10 in Fig. 3) provided on one surface of the first polarizing plate (Fig. 3);
a second polarizing plate (the plate corresponding to the polarizer 3 in Fig. 3 and Fig. 5) opposing the first polarizing plate (Fig. 3);
a second transparent conductive layer (the layer corresponding to the transparent conducting electrode 4 in Fig. 3 and Fig. 5) provided on one surface of the second polarizing plate (Fig. 3), and opposing the first transparent conductive layer (Fig. 3); and
a liquid crystal layer (the layer corresponding to the liquid crystal 6 in Fig. 3) provided between the first transparent conductive layer and the second transparent conductive layer (Fig. 3),
wherein the liquid crystal layer is driven in a twisted nematic (TN) mode (Col. 9, Lines 1-8, Col. 12, Lines 41-58),
wherein at least one transparent conductive layer of the first transparent conductive layer (the layer corresponding to the transparent conducting electrode 10 in Fig. 3) and the second transparent conductive layer (the layer corresponding to the transparent conducting electrode 4 in Fig. 3 and Fig. 5) is formed by directly contacting (Fig. 3) with the first polarizing plate (the plate corresponding to the polarizer 8, the plate including 8 and 9, or the plate including 8, 9 and 11 in Fig. 3) or the second polarizing plate (the plate corresponding to the polarizer 3 in Fig. 3 and Fig. 5) opposing the first polarizing plate (Fig. 3),
Harrold does not teach that at least one polarizing plate of the first polarizing plate and the second polarizing plate includes a polarizer and a first optical functional film provided on one surface of the polarizer, wherein the first optical functional film has an in-plane retardation (Rin) from 40 nm to 100 nm, and a thickness-directional retardation (Rth) from 120 nm to 210 nm.
Takeda teaches that (Fig. 1a-1b, Abs, [0036-0044, 0055, 0060-0061]) at least one polarizing plate of a first polarizing plate (the plate corresponding to 20 and 30 in Fig. 1a or 20, 50 and 30 in Fig. 1b) and a second polarizing plate (the plate corresponding to 20’ and 40 in Fig. 1a-1b) includes a polarizer (20 in Fig. 1a-1b) and a first optical functional film (30 in Fig. 1a-1b, [0039, 0060-0061]) provided on one surface of the polarizer (Fig. 1a-1b), wherein the first optical functional film (30 in Fig. 1a-1b, [0039, 0060-0061]) has an in-plane retardation (Rin) from 90 nm to 200 nm ([0039, 0060]), and a thickness-directional retardation (Rth) from 120 nm to 250 nm ([0039, 0060]); or has an in-plane retardation (Rin) from 50 nm to 150 nm ([0039, 0061]), and a thickness-directional retardation (Rth) from 50 nm to 150 nm ([0039, 0061]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to recognize that the claimed ranges of from 40 nm to 100 nm and from 120 nm to 210 nm overlap with the ranges disclosed by the prior art (MPEP 2144. 05 I.).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to the artisan of ordinary skill to employ the above elements as taught by Takeda for the system of Harrold to try and recognize that in the system of Harrold, at least one polarizing plate of the first polarizing plate and the second polarizing plate includes a polarizer and a first optical functional film provided on one surface of the polarizer, wherein the first optical functional film has an in-plane retardation (Rin) from 40 nm to 100 nm, and a thickness-directional retardation (Rth) from 120 nm to 210 nm. The motivation is to provide a liquid crystal display apparatus which have an excellent screen contrast, a small color shift, and small display unevenness (Takeda, [0009]).
Regarding claims 2-5, Harrold does not teach the following elements.
Takeda teaches the following elements (Fig. 1a-1b, Abs, [0036-0044, 0055, 0060-0061]):
(Claim 2) a second optical functional film (40 in Fig. 1a-1b, [0040, 0072-0073]) provided on one surface of the first optical functional film (Fig. 1a-1b).
(Claim 3) at least one optical functional film of the first optical functional film (30 in Fig. 1a-1b, [0039, 0060-0061]) and the second optical functional film (40 in Fig. 1a-1b, [0040, 0072-0073]) is a retardation film ([0060-0061, 0073, 0048]).
(Claim 4) the second optical functional film (40 in Fig. 1a-1b, [0040, 0072-0073]) has a refractive index nx, ny, nz in an x, y, z axial direction that meets a relationship of nx=ny≥nz ([0072]).
(Claim 5) the second optical functional film (40 in Fig. 1a-1b, [0040, 0073]) has a thickness-directional retardation (Rth) from 50 to 250 nm. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to recognize that the claimed range of from 0 to 120 nm overlaps with the ranges disclosed by the prior art (MPEP 2144. 05 I.).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to the artisan of ordinary skill to employ the above elements as taught by Takeda for the system of Harrold in view of Takeda such that in the system of Harrold in view of Takeda,
(Claim 2) a second optical functional film provided on one surface of the first optical functional film.
(Claim 3) at least one optical functional film of the first optical functional film and the second optical functional film is a retardation film.
(Claim 4) the second optical functional film has a refractive index nx, ny, nz in an x, y, z axial direction that meets a relationship of nx=ny≥nz.
(Claim 5) the second optical functional film has a thickness-directional retardation (Rth) from 0 to 120 nm.
The motivation is to provide a liquid crystal display apparatus which have an excellent screen contrast, a small color shift, and small display unevenness (Takeda, [0009]).
Regarding claims 6-13 and 16, Harrold also teaches the following elements:
(Claim 6) at least one transparent conductive layer of the first transparent conductive layer (the layer corresponding to the transparent conducting electrode 10 in Fig. 3) and the second transparent conductive layer (the layer corresponding to the transparent conducting electrode 4 in Fig. 3 and Fig. 5) is formed by directly contacting (Fig. 3) with the first polarizing plate (the plate corresponding to the polarizer 8, the plate including 8 and 9, or the plate including 8, 9 and 11 in Fig. 3) or the second polarizing plate (the plate corresponding to the polarizer 3 in Fig. 3 and Fig. 5) without a separate or additional substrate (Fig. 3) between the polarizing plate and the transparent conductive layer (Fig. 3).
(Claim 7) at least one transparent conductive layer (the layer corresponding to the transparent conducting electrode 4 in Fig. 5) of the first transparent conductive layer (the layer corresponding to the transparent conducting electrode 10 in Fig. 3) and the second transparent conductive layer (the layer corresponding to the transparent conducting electrode 4 in Fig. 3 and Fig. 5) further comprises a highly adhesive layer (2 in Fig. 5) between the first polarizing plate (the plate corresponding to the polarizer 8, the plate including 8 and 9, or the plate including 8, 9 and 11 in Fig. 3) or the second polarizing plate (the plate corresponding to the polarizer 3 in Fig. 3 and Fig. 5) and the transparent conductive layer (the layer corresponding to the transparent conducting electrode 4 in Fig. 5).
(Claim 8) at least one polarizing plate of the first polarizing plate (the plate corresponding to plate including 8, 9 and 11 in Fig. 3) and the second polarizing plate (the plate corresponding to the polarizer 3 in Fig. 3 and Fig. 5) further comprises at least one protective film (11 and/or 9 in Fig. 3).
(Claim 9) the protective film (11 in Fig. 3) comprises one or more types selected from a group consisting of polyethylene terephthalate, polyethylene isophthalate, polyethylene naphthalate, polybutylene terephthalate, diacetyl cellulose, triacetyl cellulose, polycarbonate, polyethylene, polypropylene, polymethyl acrylate, polymethyl methacrylate, polyethyl acrylate, polyethyl methacrylate, and cyclic olefin polymer (Col. 10, Lines 15-22).
(Claim 10) at least one polarizing plate of the first polarizing plate (the plate corresponding to the polarizer 8, or the plate including 8 and 9 in Fig. 3) and the second polarizing plate (the plate corresponding to the polarizer 3 in Fig. 3 and Fig. 5) has a thickness less than 30 μm (Col. 11, Lines 3-7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to recognize that the claimed range of from 30 μm to 200 μm very close to overlaps with the range disclosed by the prior art (MPEP 2144. 05 I.). Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to the artisan of ordinary skill to recognize and try the claimed range of from 30 μm to 200 μm for the system of Harrold since this would help to facilitate the deposition of stable transparent conducting electrodes (Harrold, Col. 11, Lines 3-5).
(Claim 11) at least one transparent conductive layer of the first transparent conductive layer (the layer corresponding to the transparent conducting electrode 10 in Fig. 3) and the second transparent conductive layer (the layer corresponding to the transparent conducting electrode 4 in Fig. 3 and Fig. 5) comprises one or more types selected from a group consisting of transparent conductive oxide (Col. 11, Lines 8-9), metal, carbonaceous materials, conductive polymers, conductive ink, and nanowires.
(Claim 12) the liquid crystal layer comprises one or more types selected from a group consisting of a ball spacer (Col. 8, Line 55 to Col. 9, Line 2) and a column spacer.
(Claim 13) the ball spacer has a diameter from 1 μm to 10 μm (Col. 8, Lines 55-56).
(Claim 16) A manufacturing method (Fig. 3, Col. 8-12) for the variable transmittance optical stack (the stack corresponding 3, 4, 4a 5, 6, 7, 10 and 8 in Fig. 3, Fig. 1-2 and Fig. 4-37, Col. 1-20).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harrold in view of Takeda as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Miura (US 2018/0307077).
Regarding claim 14, Harrold does not teach the following elements.
Miura teaches the following elements (Fig. 10, Fig. 1, Abs, [0011, 0013, 0094-0095]):
(Claim 14) an occupancy area of a ball spacer in a liquid crystal layer is from 0.01% to 10% of the area of the liquid crystal layer (Fig. 10, Abs, [0011, 0013, 0095]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to the artisan of ordinary skill to employ the above elements as taught by Miura for the system of Harrold in view of Takeda such that in the system of Harrold in view of Takeda,
(Claim 14) an occupancy area of the ball spacer in the liquid crystal layer is from 0.01% to 10% of the area of the liquid crystal layer.
The motivation is to effectively avoid a reduction in quality, and prevent diffracted light from being visually recognized (Miura, [0134, 0139]).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harrold in view of Takeda as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hsu (US 2015/0370382).
Regarding claim 15, Harrold does not teach the following elements.
Hsu teaches the following elements (Fig. 1A, [0009, 0038, 0044]):
(Claim 15) a variable transmittance optical stack (Fig. 1A) further comprising: a refractive index-matching layer (15/151/152 in Fig. 1A, [0038]) having a refractive index from 1.3 to 2.5 ([0038]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to recognize that the claimed range of from 1.4 to 2.6 overlaps with the range disclosed by the prior art (MPEP 2144. 05 I.).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to the artisan of ordinary skill to employ the above elements as taught by Hsu for the system of Harrold in view of Takeda such that in the system of Harrold in view of Takeda,
(Claim 15) the variable transmittance optical stack further comprising: a refractive index-matching layer having a refractive index from 1.4 to 2.6.
The motivation is that the difference of the reflectivities between the patterned portion and non-patterned portion of the patterned electrode layer is minimized (Hsu, [0038]).
Claims 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harrold in view of Takeda as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Gim (US 2022/0299690).
Regarding claims 17-19, Harrold does not teach the following elements.
Gim teaches the following elements (Fig. 1-5, Abs, [0007, 0134-0139]):
(Claim 17) A smart window ([0134-0139, 0007]) comprising a variable transmittance optical stack ([0007, 0139], Fig. 1-5).
(Claim 18) A vehicle ([0134-0137]) in which the smart window ([0134-0139, 0007]) is applied to at least one of a front window, a rear window, a side window, a sunroof window, and an inner partition thereof ([0134-0138]).
(Claim 19) A window and a door of a building ([0134]), the window and the door comprising the smart window ([0134]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to the artisan of ordinary skill to employ the above elements as taught by Gim for the system of Harrold in view of Takeda such that in the system of Harrold in view of Takeda,
(Claim 17) A smart window comprising the variable transmittance optical stack.
(Claim 18) A vehicle in which the smart window is applied to at least one of a front window, a rear window, a side window, a sunroof window, and an inner partition thereof.
(Claim 19) A window and a door of a building, the window and the door comprising the smart window.
The motivation is to a light modulation device having excellent optical properties including transmittance-variable characteristics for a building or a vehicles (Gim, [0134, 0139]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAN LIU whose telephone number is (571)270-0383. The examiner can normally be reached on 9am-5pm EST M-F.
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, Jennifer Carruth can be reached on 571-272-9791. 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.
/Shan Liu/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871