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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/22/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Objection/s to the Specification
The title of the invention, “ACTUATING MODULE AND PROJECTION DEVICE,” is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - AIA 35 USC § 103
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.
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, 13-17, 29-36, 42, and 43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin (US 20200301118 A1) in view of Lee (US 20070035701 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Lin teaches an actuating module (100), comprising a frame (110, 112, 114, 120, and/or 140), a light-transmitting element (180), at least one actuator (160, 162, 164, 170, 172 and/or 174), wherein: the light-transmitting element (180) is disposed on the frame (110, 112, 114, 120, and/or 140); a part of the at least one actuator (160, 162, 164, 170, 172 and/or 174) is connected to the frame (110, 112, 114, 120, and/or 140) for driving the frame (110, 112, 114, 120, and/or 140) to vibrate ([0031]-[0035]).
Lin does not explicitly teach a light shielding member where the light shielding member overlaps at least a part of an incident surface, a light emitting surface or one of a combination thereof of the light-transmitting element (180) for reflecting and/or absorbing a light beam.
Lee teaches a light shielding member (32, 100, 200; Fig. 2, 5, and 6).
The combination of Lin and Lee consequently results in the light shielding member (32, 100, 200 of Lee) overlaps at least a part of an incident surface, a light emitting surface or one of a combination thereof of the light-transmitting element (180 of Lin) for reflecting and/or absorbing a light beam (Fig. 4 of Lee).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to combine Lin with Lee; because it improves contrast in the projected image ([0021] of Lee).
Regarding claim 17, Lin teaches a projection device (400; Fig. 1-13), comprising an illumination system (312, 316, 317, 318), an optomechanical module (100, 319, 320), and a projection lens (260), wherein: the illumination system (312, 316, 317, 318) is configured to provide an illumination light beam; the optomechanical module (100, 319, 320) comprises a light valve (320) and an actuating module (100), wherein: the light valve (320) is disposed on a transmission path of the illumination light beam for converting the illumination light beam into an image light beam (on-beam of the DMD; [0028], [0037]) and an ineffective light beam (flat/off-beam of the DMD; [0028], [0037]); and the actuating module (100) is disposed on a transmission path of the image light beam (on-beam) to shift the transmission path of the image light beam (on-beam), and the actuating module (100) comprises a frame (110, 112, 114, 120, and/or 140), a light-transmitting element (180), at least one actuator (160, 162, 164, 170, 172 and/or 174), and the light-transmitting element (180) is fixed on the frame (110, 112, 114, 120, and/or 140); the at least one actuator (160, 162, 164, 170, 172 and/or 174) is connected to the frame (110, 112, 114, 120, and/or 140) for driving the frame (110, 112, 114, 120, and/or 140) to vibrate; and the projection lens (260) is disposed on the transmission path of the image light beam (on-beam) from the optomechanical module (100, 319, 320) for projecting the image light beam (on-beam) out of the projection device (400; Fig. 1-13).
Lin does not explicitly teach a light shielding member, wherein: the light shielding member overlaps at least a part of an incident surface, a light emitting surface or one of a combination thereof of the light-transmitting element (180) for reflecting and/or absorbing at least a part of the ineffective light beam (flat/off-beam); and
Lee teaches a light shielding member (32, 100, 200; Fig. 2, 5, and 6).
The combination of Lin and Lee consequently results in the light shielding member (32, 100, 200 of Lee) overlaps at least a part of an incident surface, a light emitting surface or one of a combination thereof of the light-transmitting element (180 of Lin) for reflecting and/or absorbing at least a part of the ineffective light beam (flat/off-beam; Fig. 4; [0055]-[0060] of Lee).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to combine Lin with Lee; because it improves contrast in the projected image ([0021] of Lee).
Regarding claims 13, 14, 16, 29, 30, and 33, Lee further teaches the light shield member (32, 100, 200) is formed on the prism by coating (Fig. 6; [0062]-[0063]), but does not teach the light shielding member is formed on the light-transmitting element and vibrate together according to the frame.
Having light shield coating formed on the prism or the light-transmitting element (and vibrate together according to the frame) amounts to rearrangement of parts that does not affect the functionality or operation of the device in anyway. Rearrangement of parts without changing the operation of the reference device prima facie deemed obvious. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claims 15 and 31, Lee further teaches the light shielding member (32, 100, 200) connected to a cover (30; Fig. 2) the frame (Fig. 5) and on the prism (26, Fig. 6).
Having the light shielding member (32, 100, 200 of Lee) connected to the frame (110, 112, 114, 120, and/or 140 of Lin), which results in a distance between the light shielding member (100 of Lee) and the light-transmitting element (180 of Lin), amounts to rearrangement of parts that does not affect the functionality or operation of the device in anyway. Rearrangement of parts without changing the operation of the reference device prima facie deemed obvious. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claim 32, the combination of Lin and Lee consequently results in the light-transmitting element (180 of Lin) is disposed on the transmission path of the image light beam (on-beam), and there is a distance between an orthographic projection of the light shielding member (32, 100, 200 of Lee) on the light-transmitting element (180 of Lin) and an imaging range of the image light beam (on-beam) on the light-transmitting element (180, Fig. 3A and 13 of Lin; Fig. 4 of Lee).
Regarding claim 34, the combination of Lin and Lee consequently results in the light shielding member (32, 100, 200 of Lee) is disposed on a transmission path of the ineffective light beam (flat/off-beam), and a shortest distance between the light shielding member (32, 100, 200 of Lee) and the image light beam (on-beam) is greater than zero (Fig. 4 of Lee).
Regarding claim 35, Lin further teaches the optomechanical module (100, 319, 320) further comprises a light guiding prism (319) configured to guide the illumination light beam from the illumination system (312, 316, 317, 318) to the light valve (320) and guide the image light beam (on-beam) from the light valve (320) to the actuating module (100).
Regarding claim 36, the combination of Lin and Lee consequently results in an orthographic projection of the light shielding member (32, 100, 200 of Lee) on a light emitting surface of the light guiding prism (26 of Lee) and the image light beam (on-beam) do not overlap (Fig. 4 of Lee).
Regarding claim 42, the combination of Lin and Lee consequently results in the light shielding member (32, 100, 200 of Lee) reflects or absorbs at least a part of the ineffective light beam (flat/off-beam) which is less than or equal to 30% of the entire ineffective light beam (flat/off-beam).
Regarding claim 43, neither Lin nor Lee teaches a back focal length (distance between the projection lens and the DMD 320) of the projection lens is less than 38.5 mm.
Having the back focal length (distance between the projection lens and the DMD 320) of the projection lens less than 38.5 mm is a matter design choice; hence it is prima facie obvious.
Claims 37-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin in view of Lee and in further view of Chen (US 20200159097 A1).
Regarding claim 37, neither Lin nor Lee teaches the optomechanical module (100, 319, 320) further comprises a heat dissipation member disposed between the light guiding prism (319) and the actuating module (100), the heat dissipation member is disposed on a transmission path of the ineffective light beam (flat/off-beam), and a shortest distance between the heat dissipation member and the image light beam (on-beam) is greater than zero.
Chen teaches having a heat dissipation member (212) disposed between the light guiding prism (190) and the projection lens (Fig. 5 and 6), the heat dissipation member (212) disposed on a transmission path of the ineffective light beam (second state), and a shortest distance between the heat dissipation member (212) and the image light beam (first state) is greater than zero (Fig. 5 and 6; [0030], [0033]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to combine Lin and Lee with Chen, which consequently results in heat dissipation member disposed between the light guiding prism and the actuating module; because it prevents overheating that shorten the life of the projector.
Regarding claim 38, the combination of Lin, Lee and Chen, consequently results in a thickness of the light shielding member (214 of Chen) in a transmission direction of the ineffective light beam (flat/off-beam) is less than a thickness of the heat dissipation member (212 of Chen) in a transmission direction of the ineffective light beam (flat/off-beam; Fig. 6 and 7).
Regarding claim 39, the combination of Lin, Lee and Chen, consequently results in a shortest distance between the light shielding member (214 of Chen) and the image light beam (on-beam) is less than the shortest distance between the heat dissipation member (212 of Chen) and the image light beam (on-beam; Fig. 5 and 6).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-12, 18-28, 40 and 41 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.
Regarding claims 2 and 18, the closest prior art references, Lin, Lee and Chen, do not teach, by themselves or in combination with one another, “the light shielding member comprises a light absorbing layer and a reflective layer, the incident surface faces a first side of the actuating module, the light emitting surface faces a second side of the actuating module, the reflective layer is configured to reflect a first light beam from the first side, and the light absorbing layer is configured to absorb a second light beam from the second side.” Furthermore, there is no teaching, suggestion or motivation in the prior art references to modify the references in such manner that results in the above claimed limitation/s; hence the invention as claimed by claims 2 and 18 is not obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Claims 3-12 and 19-28 depend, directly or indirectly, on claim 2 and 18, respectively; hence they are also allowable.
Regarding claim 40, the closest prior art references, Lin, Lee and Chen, do not teach, by themselves or in combination with one another, “the heat dissipation member has a first side and a second side opposite to each other, the first side of the heat dissipation member faces the light shielding member, the ineffective light beam comprises a first ineffective light beam and a second ineffective light beam, the first ineffective light beam is transmitted to the light shielding member, and the second ineffective light beam is transmitted to the second side of the heat dissipation member.” Furthermore, there is no teaching, suggestion or motivation in the prior art references to modify the references in such manner that results in the above claimed limitation/s; hence the invention as claimed by claims 2 and 18 is not obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Claim 41 depend, directly or indirectly, on claim 40, respectively; hence it is also allowable.
Conclusion
The prior art references cited in PTO-892 are made of record and considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Patent documents, US 20220291575 A1, US 20210286239 A1, US 20200159098 A1, US 20170142378 A1, US 20190094675 A1, US 20180020196 A1, US 20070019165 A1, US 20060274273 A1, US 20050270626 A1, US 20050264792 A1, US 20050030609 A1, US 20040136044 A1, US 20020126264 A1, US 20020033992 A1, US 6349006 B1, US 6560048 B1, and US 5838504 A, disclose projection systems having optical path shifter or a light shielding member between the light valve and the projection lens.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAO-LUAN Q LE whose telephone number is (571)270-5362. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday; 9:00AM-5:00PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Minh-Toan Ton can be reached on (571) 272 230303. 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.
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
Or faxed to:
(571) 273-8300, (for formal communications intended for entry)
Or:
(571) 273-7490, (for informal or draft communications, please label “PROPOSED” or “DRAFT”)
Hand-delivered responses should be brought to:
Customer Service Window
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
/BAO-LUAN Q LE/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Prosecution Insights