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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Claims 1, and 5-12 in the reply filed on 30 April 2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 5-6, 8, 10, and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 2015068945 A (Norizuki et al.).
Regarding claim 1:
Norizuki discloses a light absorption filter (“The present invention relates to a photosensitive resin composition, an infrared transmission filter and a method of manufacturing the same, an infrared sensor and a color filter.”, the light absorption filter is a color filter.) comprising:
a resin (Alkali-soluble resin, See paragraph starting “As the alkali-soluble resin, polyhydroxystyrene resins, polysiloxane resins, acrylic resins, acrylamide resins, and acrylic / acrylamide copolymer resins are preferable from the viewpoint of heat resistance, and from the viewpoint of control of developability, Acrylic resins, acrylamide resins and acrylic / acrylamide copolymer resins are preferred.”);
a compound A having an acid group (The resin above is bonded to an acid group, see “Examples of groups promoting alkali solubility (hereinafter, also referred to as acid groups) include, for example, carboxyl groups, phosphoric acid groups, sulfonic acid groups, and phenolic hydroxyl groups, but they are soluble in organic solvents and developed with weak alkaline aqueous solutions.”);
a compound B that forms a hydrogen bond with the acid group contained in the compound A and generates a radical upon ultraviolet irradiation (See paras. Under section titled “Photoinitiator”, The photoinitiator may include benzophenone, a photoinitiator that generates radicals upon exposure to ultraviolet radiation and forms a hydrogen bond.); and
a dye having a main absorption wavelength band in a wavelength range of 400 to 700 nm. (The invention has a squarylium dye with a maximum absorption wavelength in the visible light region, the range 500 to 700 nm is the visible light region, See Para. “Patent Document 1 discloses a photopolymerizable composition containing a metal complex of a squalilium compound, a radical generator and a compound having at least one ethylenically unsaturated double bond. Patent Document 2 discloses an optical filter characterized by containing a squarylium dye-metal complex compound having a maximum partial absorption in the visible light region and having a specific partial structure, and a binder. Patent Document 3 discloses an optical filter characterized by containing a squarylium compound having a specific structure.” The examiner additionally notes that by definition any colored dye or “colorant” will have a maximum absorption wavelength in the visible light region.)
Regarding claim 5:
Norizuki discloses an optical filter that is obtained by subjecting the light absorption filter according to claim 1 to mask exposure by ultraviolet irradiation. (See para. of section titled “Exposing Step”, “In the exposing step, the colored layer (infrared ray transmitting composition layer) formed in the colored layer forming step is exposed in a pattern. In the exposure in this step, it is preferable to perform the exposure of the colored layer by exposing it through a predetermined mask pattern and curing only the colored layer irradiated with light. As the radiation that can be used for exposure, particularly radiations such as g-rays, h-rays and i-rays are preferably used, and i-rays are particularly preferable. The irradiation dose is preferably 30 mJ / cm 2 to 1500 mJ / cm 2, more preferably 50 mJ / cm 2 to 1000 mJ / cm 2, and most preferably 80 mJ / cm 2 to 500 mJ / cm 2.”)
Regarding claim 6:
Norizuki discloses an organic electroluminescent display device (See text “The color filter of the present invention can be used not only for the above solid-state imaging device but also for image display devices such as liquid crystal display devices and organic EL display devices, and is particularly suitable for use in liquid crystal display devices.”), comprising the optical filter according to claim 5.
Regarding claim 8:
Norizuki discloses an inorganic electroluminescent display device (See text “The color filter of the present invention can be used not only for the above solid-state imaging device but also for image display devices such as liquid crystal display devices and organic EL display devices, and is particularly suitable for use in liquid crystal display devices.”, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize “such as … organic EL display devices” to include inorganic electroluminescent display devices for the purposes of having an included optical filter.), comprising the optical filter according to claim 5.
Regarding claim 10:
Claim 10 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 6 above as Norizuki discloses the use of the optical filter in display devices with liquid crystal displays as an example.
Regarding claim 12:
Norizuki discloses a manufacturing method for an optical filter, comprising irradiating the light absorption filter according to claim 1 with an ultraviolet ray to carry out mask exposure. (Reasons for rejection are the same as those for claim 5 above.)
Claim Rejections - 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 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.
Claim(s) 7,9, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2015068945 A (Norizuki et al.) in view of US 20100025641 A1 (Jimbo et al.).
Regarding claim 7:
Norizuki discloses the organic electroluminescent display device according to claim 6,
Norizuki fails to disclose
wherein a layer that inhibits light absorption of the compound B is provided on a viewer side with respect to the optical filter. (Norizuki is silent on the details of additional layers of the organic electroluminescent display device.)
Jimbo teaches an optical filter (See abstract.) for use in a display device (Para. [0028]) wherein
a layer that inhibits light absorption of ultraviolet light is provided on a viewer side with respect to the optical filter. (Para. [0106]-[0110], an ultraviolet absorbing layer is included on the “light incidence side of the film”, this is the same side as the viewer side. This ultraviolet absorbing layer prevents color deterioration from the optical filter absorbing ultraviolet light. This serves the same purpose as preventing the compound B from absorbing additional ultraviolet light.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a layer that inhibits light absorption of the compound B provided on a viewer side with respect to the optical filter as taught by Jimbo in the organic electroluminescent display device of Norizuki for the purpose of preventing the color degradation of the optical filter due to the absorption of ultraviolet light.
Regarding claim 9
Norizuki discloses the inorganic electroluminescent display device according to claim 8,
Norizuki fails to disclose
wherein a layer that inhibits light absorption of the compound B is provided on a viewer side with respect to the optical filter. (Norizuki is silent on the details of additional layers of the organic electroluminescent display device.)
a layer that inhibits
Jimbo teaches an optical filter (See abstract.) for use in a display device (Para. [0028]) wherein
a layer that inhibits light absorption of ultraviolet light is provided on a viewer side with respect to the optical filter. (Para. [0106]-[0110], an ultraviolet absorbing layer is included on the “light incidence side of the film”, this is the same side as the viewer side. This ultraviolet absorbing layer prevents color deterioration from the optical filter absorbing ultraviolet light. This serves the same purpose as preventing the compound B from absorbing additional ultraviolet light.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a layer that inhibits light absorption of the compound B provided on a viewer side with respect to the optical filter as taught by Jimbo in the organic electroluminescent display device of Norizuki for the purpose of preventing the color degradation of the optical filter due to the absorption of ultraviolet light.
Regarding claim 11:
Norizuki discloses the liquid crystal display device according to claim 10,
Norizuki fails to disclose
wherein a layer that inhibits light absorption of the compound B is provided on a viewer side with respect to the optical filter. (Norizuki is silent on the details of additional layers of the organic electroluminescent display device.)
a layer that inhibits
Jimbo teaches an optical filter (See abstract.) for use in a display device (Para. [0028]) wherein
a layer that inhibits light absorption of ultraviolet light is provided on a viewer side with respect to the optical filter. (Para. [0106]-[0110], an ultraviolet absorbing layer is included on the “light incidence side of the film”, this is the same side as the viewer side. This ultraviolet absorbing layer prevents color deterioration from the optical filter absorbing ultraviolet light. This serves the same purpose as preventing the compound B from absorbing additional ultraviolet light.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a layer that inhibits light absorption of the compound B provided on a viewer side with respect to the optical filter as taught by Jimbo in the organic electroluminescent display device of Norizuki for the purpose of preventing the color degradation of the optical filter due to the absorption of ultraviolet light.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 5804257 A (Hayashida et al.) Discloses a similar film with polysilane instead of resin. US 20140045106 A1 (Fujita et al.) Discloses a similar film to the film of Norizuki.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SETH D MOSER whose telephone number is (703)756-5803. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 10am-6pm.
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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571)270-1782. 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.
/SETH D MOSER/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/BUMSUK WON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights