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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
In response to applicant's argument that “the optical film 124 is simply a thin film formed by mixing a plurality of nano metal particles with a polymer material”, the fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985).
Further, on page 5 of applicant’s remarks, applicant argues that “Park Gun Ho merely teaches that the silver nanoparticles in the antibacterial transparent film (220) are separated and dispersed from one another, and does not teach that they are periodically arranged so as to provide the antibacterial transparent film (220) with a periodic nano-structure” as amended.
However, newly found reference disclose Ono (Pub. No.: US 2010/0316078) discloses, at paragraph [0058], Figs. 1-3, a nanometal body 21 formed on the insulating film 16 wherein insulating film 16 is a silicon oxide film having an index of refraction of 0.1 or less (see paragraph [0055]); thus, possessing distinct optical properties as known in the art.
Ono further discloses the nanometal body 21 may include dots 22 lined up in a row at regular intervals (paragraphs [0137] thru [0142], Figs. 12A-12E).
For the above reasons, accordingly the rejection is maintained.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 8 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao (Pub. No.: US 2011/0024627) in view of Block et al. (Pub. No.: US 2019/0090766) and further in view of Fang et al. (Pub. No.: US 2017/0219818), Park Gun Ho (Pub. No.: KR 102162521) and Ono (Pub. No.: US 2010/0316078).
Consider claim 1, Yao discloses an optical sensing device (paragraphs [0030], [0033], Figs. 4, 5, 6, optical proximity sensor 10), comprising:
a substrate (paragraph [0030], Fig. 4, ceramic substrate 11);
a light source (Fig. 4, light emitter 16) disposed on the substrate (paragraph [0030], Fig. 4, light emitter 16 mounted on ceramic substrate 11);
a photodiode sensor (Fig. 4, light detector 12) disposed on the substrate, laterally spaced from the light source (paragraph [0030], light detector 12 mounted on ceramic substrate 11 and separated from light emitter 16);
a plurality of light-blocking walls (Figs. 4, 5, 6, light barrier 25) disposed vertically on the substrate, laterally located on both sides of the light source and on both sides of the photodiode sensor (paragraph [0030], Figs. 5, 6, ceramic light barrier 25, which forms a portion of ceramic housing 15, disposed over ceramic substrate 11);
a sealing layer (Figs. 4, 6, optically transmissive material 21) covering the light source, the photodiode sensor, and the light-blocking walls (paragraph [0008], Figs. 4, 6, optically transmissive material 21 is employed to fill cavities 31 and 37);
a cover plate bonded to the sealing layer (paragraph [033], Fig. 6, cover 18 may be glued or otherwise attached to the top portions of ceramic housing 15);
Yao does not specifically disclose the optical sensing device used for an optical biomedical measurement device including a plurality of light-absorption films vertically aligned with the light-blocking walls, disposed in a plurality of etching regions on a top surface of the cover plate and an optical filter film disposed on the cover plate and the light- absorption films.
Block discloses the optical sensing device used for an optical biomedical measurement device (paragraph [0020], Fig. 2A, photoplethysmographic (PPG) signal can be measured by an optical sensing system to derive corresponding physiological signals (e.g., pulse rate) including a plurality of light-absorption films (Fig. 2F, opaque mask 219) vertically aligned with the light-blocking walls, disposed in a plurality of etching regions on a top surface of the cover plate (paragraph [0047], Fig. 2F, opaque mask 219 including a material that can absorb the light rays and vertically aligned with optical isolation 216 wherein the opaque mask 219 and the optical isolation 216 can include the same materials, see paragraph [0040]) and an optical filter film disposed on the cover plate and the light-absorption films (paragraph [0038], Fig. 2F, optical film 240 can have arrangement of being disposed on a window 203; thus, on opaque mask 219).
Therefore, in order to prevent unwanted light from reaching the light detector, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have applied the same technique as suggested by Block wherein an optical sensing device used for an optical biomedical measurement device including a plurality of light-absorption films vertically aligned with the light-blocking walls, disposed in a plurality of etching regions on a top surface of the cover plate and an optical filter film disposed on the cover plate and the light- absorption films, see teaching found in Block, paragraph [0047].
The combination of Yao and Block does not specifically disclose a plurality of nano-metal particles arranged on the optical filter film.
Fang discloses a plurality of nano-metal particles arranged on the optical filter film (paragraph [0040], Fig. 2, optical film 124 may be a thin film formed by mixing a plurality of nano metal particles and a polymer material).
Therefore, in order to provide for strong antibacterial activity, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have applied the same technique as suggested by Fang in providing a plurality of nano-metal particles arranged on the optical filter film.
The combination of Yao, Block and Fang does not specifically disclose the plurality of nano-metal particles arranged with a distance therebetween; and an antibacterial optical film covering the nano-metal particles and the optical filter film.
Park Gun Ho discloses the plurality of nano-metal particles arranged with a distance therebetween (paragraph [0059], silver nanoparticles can be separated and dispersed in a particle unit); and an antibacterial optical film covering the nano-metal particles and the optical filter film (paragraphs [0008], [0032], Fig. 1, antimicrobial transparent film layer 120 is coated and provided on the top of the base film layer 110, contains silver nanoparticles).
Therefore, in order to provide for excellent antimicrobial properties, removal of static electricity from the surface and transparency, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have applied the same technique as suggested by Park Gun Ho in providing the plurality of nano-metal particles arranged with a distance therebetween; and an antibacterial optical film covering the nano-metal particles and the optical filter film, see teaching found in Park Gun Ho, paragraph [0008].
The combination of Yao, Block, Fang, and Park Gun Ho does not specifically disclose the plurality of nano-metal particles periodically arranged on the optical filter film, thereby having a periodic nano-structure.
Ono discloses the plurality of nano-metal particles periodically arranged on the optical filter film, thereby having a periodic nano-structure (paragraphs [0137] thru [0142], Figs. 12A-12E the nanometal body 21 may include dots 22 lined up in a row at regular intervals and the nanometal body 21 formed on the insulating film 16 (see paragraph [0058], Figs. 1-3) wherein insulating film 16 is a silicon oxide film having an index of refraction of 0.1 or less (see paragraph [0055])).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the plurality of nano-metal particles as disclosed by the combination of Yao, Block, Fang, and Park Gun Ho with the nanometal body including dots as taught by Ono to improve the Q value above the active layer and improve the electric-surface plasmon conversion efficiency of diodes (Ono, paragraph [0138]).
Consider claim 2, the combination of Yao, Block, Fang, and Park Gun Ho does not specifically disclose wherein the nano-metal particles are a plurality of nano-silver particles.
Ono discloses wherein the nano-metal particles are a plurality of nano-silver particles (paragraph [0060], nanometal body 21 may be composed of silver).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the plurality of nano-metal particles as disclosed by the combination of Yao, Block, Fang, and Park Gun Ho with the nanometal body including dots as taught by Ono to add to the flexibility in the composition of the single metal nanometal body (Ono, paragraph [0060]).
Consider claim 8, the combination of Yao, Block, Fang, Park Gun Ho, and Ono discloses wherein a thickness of the antibacterial optical film is greater than 5 nm (Park Gun Ho, paragraph [0036], antimicrobial transparent film layer 120 as described above may be coated with a thickness of 5-15 µm).
Consider claim 11, the combination of Yao, Block, Fang, Park Gun Ho, and Ono discloses wherein the light source is a light-emitting diode (claim 17 and paragraph [0031], Fig. 5, Light emitter 16 is preferably an IR LED).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Yao, Block, Fang, Park Gun Ho, and Ono in view of Zhong et al. (Pub. No.: CN 115610052).
Consider claim 3, the combination of Yao, Block, Fang, Park Gun Ho, and Ono does not specifically disclose wherein a ratio of an area of the nano-silver particles to an area of the optical filter film is less than 10%.
Zhong discloses wherein a ratio of an area of the nano-silver particles to an area of the optical filter film is less than 10% (claim1, paragraph [0026], Fig. 1, volume proportion of the nanosilver ions in the outer layer 12 is 5%).
Therefore, in order to ensure the optical performance of the optical plate, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have applied the same technique as suggested by Zhong wherein a ratio of an area of the nano-silver particles to an area of the optical filter film is less than 10%, see teaching found in Zhong, paragraph [0023].
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Yao, Block, Fang, Park Gun Ho, and Ono in view of Kwon et al. (Pub. No.: EP 1609826).
Consider claim 4, the combination of Yao, Block, Fang and Park Gun Ho does not specifically disclose wherein the nano-silver particles have a particle diameter of less than 5 nanometers (nm).
Kwon discloses wherein the nano-silver particles have a particle diameter of less than 5 nanometers (nm) (paragraph [0027], diameter of nano silver particles is 5 nm).
Therefore, in order to maintain antibacterial properties with a less amount of silver, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have applied the same technique as suggested by Kwon wherein the nano-silver particles have a particle diameter of less than 5 nanometers (nm), see teaching found in Kwon, paragraph [0027].
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Yao, Block, Fang, Park Gun Ho, and Ono in view of Narita (Pub. No.: JP WO2009/031344).
Consider claim 5, the combination of Yao, Block, Fang, Park Gun Ho, and Ono does not specifically disclose wherein the distance of the nano-silver particles therebetween is 50 nm to 100 nm.
Narita discloses wherein the distance of the nano-silver particles therebetween is 50 nm to 100 nm (paragraph [0016], silver nanoparticles can be arranged so that the distance between the particles is about 100 nm).
Therefore, in order to provide for a uniform dispersion of film, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have applied the same technique as suggested by Narita wherein the distance of the nano-silver particles therebetween is 50 nm to 100 nm, see teaching found in Narita, paragraph [0016].
Claim 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Yao, Block, Fang, Park Gun Ho, and Ono in view of Zan et al. (Pub. No.: US 2020/0343385).
Consider claim 6, the combination of Yao, Block, Fang, Park Gun Ho, and Ono does not specifically disclose wherein the nano-silver particles are formed by performing a thermal annealing process after forming a silver film on the optical filter film.
Zan discloses wherein the nano-silver particles are formed by performing a thermal annealing process after forming a silver film on the optical filter film (paragraph [0037], After the formation of the nano-silver particles, a thermal annealing treatment may be performed on the nano-silver particles).
Therefore, in order to provide for manufacturing of the optical filter, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have applied the same technique as suggested by Zan wherein the nano-silver particles are formed by performing a thermal annealing process after forming a silver film on the optical filter film.
Consider claim 7, the combination of Yao, Block, Fang, Park Gun Ho, and Ono does not specifically disclose wherein the thermal annealing process is performed at 300°C to 500°C for 60 minutes.
Zan discloses wherein the thermal annealing process is performed at 300°C to 500°C for 60 minutes (paragraph [0037], thermal annealing treatment performed on the thin metal layer 140 may be in a range at 300° C for 1 hour).
Therefore, in order to provide for manufacturing of the optical filter, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have applied the same technique as suggested by Zan wherein the thermal annealing process is performed at 300°C to 500°C for 60 minutes.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Yao, Block, Fang, Park Gun Ho, and Ono in view of Hori et al. (Pub. No.: JP 2015074672).
Consider claim 9, the combination of Yao, Block, Fang, Park Gun Ho, and Ono does not specifically disclose wherein the antibacterial optical film has a refractive index of 1.5 to 2.5.
Hori discloses wherein the antibacterial optical film has a refractive index of 1.5 to 2.5 (paragraphs [0031], [0071], antibacterial agent with antibacterial properties of silver having a refractive index of 1.5 to 1.54, see paragraph [0032]).
Therefore, in order to provide for an optical sheet with good performance as a protective plate, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have applied the same technique as suggested by Hori wherein the antibacterial optical film has a refractive index of 1.5 to 2.5, see teaching found in Hori, paragraph [0071].
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Yao, Block, Fang, Park Gun Ho, and Ono in view of Mao et al. (Pub. No.: CN 116394618).
Consider claim 10, the combination of Yao, Block, Fang, Park Gun Ho, and Ono does not specifically disclose wherein the antibacterial optical film is made of zinc sulfide material.
Mao discloses wherein the antibacterial optical film is made of zinc sulfide material (paragraph [0050], antibacterial high-transmittance low-fog BOPET film having an inorganic anti-reflection component comprising zinc sulfide).
Therefore, in order to improve the optical properties of the film material, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have applied the same technique as suggested by Mao wherein the antibacterial optical film is made of zinc sulfide material, see teaching found in Mao, paragraph [0041.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Yao, Block, Fang, Park Gun Ho, and Ono in view of Gao et al. (Pub. No.: US 2023/0093839).
Consider claim 12, the combination of Yao, Block, Fang, Park Gun Ho, and Ono does not specifically disclose wherein the optical filter film is formed by interleavedly stacking a plurality of titanium dioxide layers and a plurality of silicon dioxide layers.
Gao discloses wherein the optical filter film (paragraph [0097], Fig. 8, light blocking layer 330 may be provided on an upper surface of the IRC filter layer 320) is formed by interleavedly stacking a plurality of titanium dioxide layers and a plurality of silicon dioxide layers (paragraphs [0102], [0103], light blocking layer 330 may also be made of titanium dioxide (TiO2) and silicon dioxide (SiO2) through overlapping, see paragraphs [0100] and [0102]).
Therefore, in order to provide for an optical total absorption effect, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have applied the same technique as suggested by Gao wherein the optical filter film is formed by interleavedly stacking a plurality of titanium dioxide layers and a plurality of silicon dioxide layers, see teaching found in Gao, paragraph [0103].
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GERALD JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7685. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm EST.
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, Carey Michael can be reached at (571)270-7235. 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.
/Gerald Johnson/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797