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 .
Response to Amendment and Arguments
The Amendment filed 05/20/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 3-4 and 10-13 are currently pending in this application.
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 4-11, filed 05/20/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 3-4 and 10-13 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been considered but are moot. Regarding limitations of the instant case in view of the amended Claims and upon further considerations, a new ground(s) of rejection, necessitated by the amendments is made in view of different interpretation of the previously applied references and/or new prior art as presented in this Office action.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the combined limitations of “the first reflective surface and the second reflective surface each comprise a plane, and the slope of the first reflective surface is less than the slope of the second reflective surface; wherein the reflective portion further comprises a third reflective surface, the third reflective surface is located between the first reflective surface and the second reflective surface, …and the slope of the third reflective surface is greater than or less than the slope of the first reflective surface and the slope of the second reflective surface; wherein the third reflective surface comprises a plane” in claim 1 (which claim 4 depends on) and “the second reflective surface is adjacent to the light outlet, and the second reflective surface is perpendicular to the bottom surface” in claim 4 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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, 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun (US 2022/0206339) in view of Dai (US 2022/0221760).
Regarding claim 1, Sun teaches a reflective element (the reflection structure 120 in Fig. 2-14, [0034-0106]), adapted to a backlight module (the backlight module 10 in Fig. 2-16), wherein the backlight module (the backlight module 10 in Fig. 2-16) comprises a plurality of light-emitting elements (the multiple light-emitting elements 110 in Fig. 2-14), and the reflective element (the reflection structure 120 in Fig. 2-14) comprises:
a body (the body of 120/121/122 in Fig. 2-14, [0043], the reflection structure 120 is an integrally arranged mesh structure; multiple first sub-reflection structures 121 are identical in structure and multiple second sub-reflection structures 122 are identical in structure), provided with a top surface (the top surface of 120/122/121 in Fig. 2-14), a bottom surface (the bottom surface of 120/122/121 in Fig. 2-14), and a plurality of light source grooves (the grooves formed by 120/121/122 for 110 in Fig. 2-14), wherein the top surface (the top surface of 120/122/121 in Fig. 2-14) is opposite to the bottom surface (the bottom surface of 120/122/121 in Fig. 2-14), each of the light source grooves (the grooves formed by 120/121/122 for 110 in Fig. 2-14) is provided with a light outlet (the upper light outlet of the grooves formed by 120/121/122 in Fig. 3-4), a bottom (the bottom of the grooves formed by 120/121/122 in Fig. 3-4), and a reflective portion (the portion of the grooves corresponding to the reflection surface A in Fig. 3-4, [0050]), the light outlets (the upper light outlets of the grooves formed by 120/121/122 in Fig. 3-4) are formed on (Fig. 3-4) the top surface (the top surface of 120/122/121 in Fig. 2-14), the bottoms (the bottoms of the grooves formed by 120/121/122 in Fig. 3-4) are opposite to (Fig. 3-4) the light outlets (the upper light outlets of the grooves formed by 120/121/122 in Fig. 3-4) and are adapted to arrange the light-emitting elements (the multiple light-emitting elements 110 in Fig. 2-14), the reflective portions (the portions of the grooves corresponding to the reflection surface A in Fig. 3-4) are located between the light outlets (the upper light outlet of the grooves formed by 120/121/122 in Fig. 3-4) and the bottoms (the bottoms of the grooves formed by 120/121/122 in Fig. 3-4) and are adapted to surround the light-emitting elements (the multiple light-emitting elements 110 in Fig. 2-14), each of the reflective portions (the portions of the grooves corresponding to the reflection surface A in Fig. 3-4) comprises a first reflective surface (the surface corresponding to A1 in Fig. 4) and a second reflective surface (the surface corresponding to A2 in Fig. 4), the first reflective surface (the surface corresponding to A1 in Fig. 4) is located between the second reflective surface (the surface corresponding to A2 in Fig. 4) and the bottom (the bottom of the grooves formed by 120/121/122 in Fig. 3-4), and the second reflective surface (the surface corresponding to A2 in Fig. 4) is located between the first reflective surface (the surface corresponding to A1 in Fig. 4) and the light outlet (the upper light outlets of the grooves formed by 120/121/122 in Fig. 3-4);
Sun teaches that each of the reflective portions (the portions of the grooves corresponding to the reflection surface A in Fig. 3-4) comprising the first reflective surface (the surface corresponding to A1 in Fig. 4) and the second reflective surface (the surface corresponding to A2 in Fig. 4) is the plane surface or the curved surface ([0050]). Sun does not explicitly point out that wherein a slope of the first reflective surface relative to the bottom surface is different from a slope of the second reflective surface relative to the bottom surface, or a curvature of the first reflective surface is different from a curvature of the second reflective surface; wherein the first reflective surface and the second reflective surface each comprise a plane, and the slope of the first reflective surface is less than the slope of the second reflective surface; wherein the reflective portion further comprises a third reflective surface, the third reflective surface is located between the first reflective surface and the second reflective surface, and a slope of the third reflective surface relative to the bottom surface is different from the slope of the first reflective surface and the slope of the second reflective surface; wherein the third reflective surface is adjacent to the first reflective surface and the second reflective surface, and the slope of the third reflective surface is greater than or less than the slope of the first reflective surface and the slope of the second reflective surface; wherein the third reflective surface comprises a plane.
Dai teaches that (Fig. 4-5, [0041, 0046-0058]) the slope of a side surface of a reflective element gradually increases from a bottom (Fig. 4-5, [0047]), a reflective portion (the reflective sheet in Fig. 4-5) comprises a first reflective surface (the surface corresponding to the angle/slope a1 in Fig. 4, Fig. 5, [0047-0049]) and a second reflective surface (the surface corresponding to the angle/slope an in Fig. 4, Fig. 5, [0047-0049]) each comprising a plane (Fig. 4-5, [0047, 0041]), and the slope of the first reflective surface is less than the slope of the second reflective surface (Fig. 4-5, [0047], the slope of the side surface of the reflective sheet plate gradually increases from the bottom); wherein the reflective portion further comprises a third reflective surface (the surface corresponding to the angle/slope a2, a3 or a4 in Fig. 4, Fig. 5, [0047-0049]), the third reflective surface (the surface corresponding to the angle/slope a2, a3 or a4 in Fig. 4, Fig. 5, [0047-0049]) is located between the first reflective surface and the second reflective surface (Fig. 4 and Fig. 5), and a slope of the third reflective surface (the surface corresponding to the angle/slope a2, a3 or a4 in Fig. 4, Fig. 5, [0047-0049]) relative to the bottom surface is different from the slope of the first reflective surface and the slope of the second reflective surface (Fig. 4-5, [0047], the slope of the side surface of the reflective sheet plate gradually increases from the bottom); wherein the third reflective surface (the surface corresponding to the angle/slope a2, a3 or a4 in Fig. 4, Fig. 5, [0047-0049]) is adjacent to the first reflective surface (the surface corresponding to the angle/slope a1 in Fig. 4, Fig. 5, [0047-0049]) and the second reflective surface (the surface corresponding to the angle/slope an in Fig. 4, Fig. 5, [0047-0049]), and the slope of the third reflective surface (the surface corresponding to the angle/slope a2, a3 or a4 in Fig. 4, Fig. 5, [0047-0049]) is greater than or less than the slope of the first reflective surface and the slope of the second reflective surface (Fig. 4-5, [0047], the slope of the side surface of the reflective sheet plate gradually increases from the bottom); wherein the third reflective surface comprises a plane (Fig. 4-5, [0047, 0041]).
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 Dai for the system of Sun such that in the system of Sun, the slope of the side surface of the reflective element of the system of Sun gradually increases from a bottom, therefore, wherein a slope of the first reflective surface relative to the bottom surface is different from a slope of the second reflective surface relative to the bottom surface, or a curvature of the first reflective surface is different from a curvature of the second reflective surface; wherein the first reflective surface and the second reflective surface each comprise a plane, and the slope of the first reflective surface is less than the slope of the second reflective surface; wherein the reflective portion further comprises a third reflective surface, the third reflective surface is located between the first reflective surface and the second reflective surface, and a slope of the third reflective surface relative to the bottom surface is different from the slope of the first reflective surface and the slope of the second reflective surface; wherein the third reflective surface is adjacent to the first reflective surface and the second reflective surface, and the slope of the third reflective surface is greater than or less than the slope of the first reflective surface and the slope of the second reflective surface; wherein the third reflective surface comprises a plane. The motivation is that the light can be more uniformly mixed in a light-mixing cavity, and the light can be more uniformly irradiated out (Dai, [0047]).
Regarding claim 3, Sun does not teach the following elements.
Dai teaches the following elements (Fig. 4-5, [0041, 0046-0058]):
(Claim 3) the slope of the first reflective surface (the surface corresponding to the angle/slope a1 in Fig. 4, Fig. 5, [0047-0049]) is between 0 and 1.5 (Fig. 4 and Fig. 5, picture 5, the slope=H/L, which is between 0 and 1).
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 Dai for the system of Sun in view of Dai such that in the system of Sun in view of Dai,
(Claim 3) the slope of the first reflective surface is between 0 and 1.5.
The motivation is that the light can be more uniformly mixed in a light-mixing cavity, and the light can be more uniformly irradiated out (Dai, [0047]).
PNG
media_image1.png
326
348
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Picture 5, from Fig. 4 of Dai (US 2022/0221760)
Regarding claim 13, Sun also teaches the following elements:
(Claim 13) the bottoms of the light source grooves each is provided with an opening (the opening of 120 for 110 in Fig. 2-4, [0043-0044], the reflection structure 120 is an integrally arranged mesh structure; multiple first sub-reflection structures 121 are identical in structure and multiple second sub-reflection structures 122 are identical in structure, the first sub-reflection structure 121 and the second sub-reflection structure 122 intersect with each other to limit at least a part of edges of the arrangement area of the light-emitting element 110), the opening (the opening of 120 for 110 in Fig. 2-4) faces the light outlet (the upper light outlets of the grooves formed by 120/121/122 in Fig. 3-4) and is adapted to arrange the light-emitting element (the multiple light-emitting elements 110 in Fig. 2-14), and a shape of the opening (the opening of 120 for 110 in Fig. 2-4, [0043-0044]) comprises a circle or a quadrilateral (Fig. 2, [0043-0044]).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Dai as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Su (CN112859446A).
Regarding claim 4, Sun teaches that the second reflective surface (the surface corresponding to A2 in Fig. 4). Sun does not teach the following elements.
Su teaches the following elements (Fig. 1-2A and 3A, Pages 4-6 of English translation of CN112859446A):
(Claim 4) the second reflective surface (the surface corresponding to S2 in Picture 2, Fig. 1-2A and 3A) is substantially perpendicular to the bottom surface (Picture 2, Fig. 3A).
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 Su for the system of Sun in view of Dai such that in the system of Sun in view of Dai,
(Claim 4) the second reflective surface is adjacent to the light outlet, and the second reflective surface is perpendicular to the bottom surface.
The motivation is to avoid light leakage, avoid generating light halo effect, and improve the light utilization rate (Su, Page 6, Paragraph 2-3).
PNG
media_image2.png
248
426
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Picture 2, from Fig. 3A of Su (CN112859446A)
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Dai as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chi (US 2025/0076704).
Regarding claim 10, Sun teaches there is a distance between the two adjacent light outlets in the light outlets on the top surface (Fig. 2-4). Sun does not teach the following elements.
Chi teaches the following elements (Fig. 1-2, [0026, 0110-0111]):
(Claim 10) there is a distance (Fig. 1-2, [0026, 0110-0111], the minimum distance between two adjacent upper ports OP2 is greater than or equal to 0.2 mm and less than or equal to 2 mm) between the two adjacent light outlets in the light outlets on the top surface (Fig. 1-2, [0026, 0110-0111]), and the distance is between 0.01 mm and 2 mm (Fig. 1-2, [0026, 0110-0111]).
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 Chi for the system of Sun in view of Dai such that in the system of Sun in view of Dai,
(Claim 10) there is a distance between the two adjacent light outlets in the light outlets on the top surface, and the distance is between 0.01 mm and 2 mm.
The motivation is to improve the brightness uniformity (Chi, [0066]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Dai as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Matsui (JP2002032029A).
Regarding claim 12, Sun teaches that the top surface (the top surface of 120/122/121 in Fig. 2-14) further comprises a curved surface (Fig. 3-4), the curved surface of the top surface is located between the two adjacent light outlets (Fig. 3-4) in the light outlets (the upper light outlet of the grooves formed by 120/121/122 in Fig. 3-4), and a curvature radius of the curved surface of the top surface (Fig. 3-4). Sun does not teach the following elements.
Matsui (JP2002032029A) teaches the following elements (Fig. 2-4, Page 5 of English translation of JP2002032029A):
(Claim 12) a curvature radius of a curved surface (8 in Fig. 2-4, Page 5, Paragraph 3-4) of a top surface (8 in Fig. 2-4) is about several mm to 1 cm or less. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to recognize that the claimed range of 0.01 mm and 2 mm 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 Matsui (JP2002032029A) for the system of Sun in view of Dai to try and recognize that in the system of Sun in view of Dai,
(Claim 12) a curvature radius of the curved surface of the top surface is between 0.01 mm and 2 mm.
The motivation is that the illumination of the high luminance and light uniformity is realized (Matsui (JP2002032029A), Abs).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 is 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:
None of the prior art of record discloses or suggests all the combination of a reflective element as set forth in claim 11.
Regarding claim 11, none of the prior art discloses or suggests a reflective element recited in claim 10, wherein “the first reflective surface and the second reflective surface each comprise a plane, and the slope of the first reflective surface is less than the slope of the second reflective surface; the third reflective surface is located between the first reflective surface and the second reflective surface, the slope of the third reflective surface is greater than or less than the slope of the first reflective surface and the slope of the second reflective surface; wherein the third reflective surface comprises a plane, there is a distance between the two adjacent light outlets in the light outlets on the top surface, and the distance is between 0.01 mm and 2 mm, wherein there is a plane in an area between the two adjacent light outlets on the top surface, the plane is adjacent to the two reflective portions of the two adjacent light source grooves, and a sharp corner is formed between the plane and each of the two reflective portions” in combination with the other required elements of the claim.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
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
Prosecution Insights