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 .
Status
The filing on 06/02/2026 amended claim 1, added claim 8 and cancelled claim 4. Claims 1, 3, and 5-8 are pending and rejected on new grounds of rejections necessitated by the amendments of claim 1.
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 1, 3, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ruan (US 20100053563 A1) in view of Kase (US 20180275497 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ruan teaches projection video display device comprising: an optical system (150) that projects video light; a projection lens (180) on which the video light is incident; a light blocking member (160, 170) that absorbs and converts into heat a part of unnecessary light unnecessary for the projection lens (180) in the video light, the light blocking member (160, 170) including a reflector (162b/c); and a light absorber (174) which absorbs a light reflected by the light blocking member (160, 170), wherein the reflector (162b/c) is disposed on an external surface of the light blocking member (160, 170) to be inclined at a predetermined inclination angle with respect to the external surface of the light blocking member (160, 170).
Ruan does not teach a heat dissipator that dissipates heat of the light absorber to outside air.
Kase teaches a heat dissipator (90a, 92, 92a, 921) that dissipates heat of the light absorber (94) to outside air ([0060], [0064], [0074]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to combine Ruan with Kase; because it prevents overheating that shorten the life of the projector.
Regarding claim 3, Ruan further teaches the light blocking member (160, 170) has a curved surface (162) having a predetermined curvature (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 5, Ruan further teaches the light blocking member (160, 170) is disposed at a position where a light from the optical system (150) enters (Fig. 1-5).
Regarding claim 8, Ruan further teaches the light blocking member (160, 170) further includes a first light blocking portion (first portion of 160, 170) that absorbs a part of the unnecessary light unnecessary for the projection lens in the video light.
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ruan in view of Kase and in further view of Kang (US 20070268593 A1).
Regarding claims 6 and 7, Ruan does not explicitly teach the projection lens (180) and the light blocking member (160, 170) are made of a same material.
Kase teaches the blocking member (90, 91, 92, 921, and/or 93) being made of aluminum ([0060]). Kang teaches the projection lens being made of aluminum ([0049], Abstract).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to having the projection lens and the blocking member being made of aluminum; because it allows efficient heat dissipation.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claim 1 have been fully considered but are found not persuasive; hence the rejection/s of all pending claims are maintained.
Regarding claim 1, applicant/s argue,
Regarding Kase, this reference has been relied upon in connection with the claimed "heat dissipator", and the following is disclosed in Kase in paragraphs [0063] and [0064]:
[0063] The reflecting portion 93 is formed on a rear surface of the main body portion 92a which is a side facing the space S1. The reflecting portion 93 reflects discarded light Lb2 which is guided by the display device 51 and guides it to a portion of the wall portion 90a where the light absorbing portion 94 is formed.
[0064] The light absorbing portion 94 is formed on an inner surface of the wall portion 90a which faces the space S1. The light absorbing portion 94 is formed by forming a coating on an inner wall or providing a separate light absorbing member on the inner wall. The light absorbing portion 94 absorbs light in the visible light wavelength range. The light absorbing portion 94 converts discarded light Lb2 shined thereon into heat and transmits the heat to the wall portion 90a of the heat dissipating unit 90. The light absorbing portion 94 may be provided partially or entirely in the interior of the heat dissipating unit 90.
Thus, as evident from paragraphs [0063] and [0064] of Kase, and as shown in Fig. 5 of Kase, the light absorbing portion 94 does not absorb light reflected by a light blocking member that absorbs light. Instead, as explained in paragraphs [0063] and [0064], the light absorbing portion 94 absorbs light that was reflected by the reflecting portion 93.
Thus, because Kase utilizes an internal component (i.e., reflecting portion 93) of the heat dissipating unit 90 to perform the reflection before the light absorbing portion 94 can absorb it, Applicant respectfully submits that Kase does not disclose the heat dissipator of claim 1 because the heat dissipator of claim 1 dissipates heat of a light absorber that absorbs light reflected by a light blocking member which both absorbs light and reflects light.
In this regard, Applicant notes that claim 1 indicates that the light blocking member "absorbs and converts into heat a part of unnecessary light..." and also includes "a reflector". In direct contrast, paragraph [0063] of Kase makes it clear that the reflecting portion 93 merely reflects the incoming discarded light.
Thus, because the reflecting portion 93 of Kase does not absorb and convert into heat a part of unnecessary light, and instead performs a pure reflection before the light absorbing portion 94 absorbs the light, Applicant respectfully submits that Kase does not disclose or suggest a heat dissipator that dissipates heat of a light absorber that absorbs light reflected by the light blocking member of claim 1.
Further, even if Kase is considered in combination with Ruan, Applicant submits that such references would not teach the above-noted combination of features recited in claim 1 of "a light blocking member that absorbs and converts into heat a part of unnecessary light...", "a light absorber which absorbs a light reflected by the light blocking member" and "a heat dissipator that dissipates heat of the light absorber".
In particular, because Kase teaches a heat dissipating unit 90 where the incoming light must first strike an internal reflecting portion 93 disposed on the heat sink 92 before it can ever reach the light absorbing portion 94, it is clear that the cited prior art references, even if considered in combination, do not teach or suggest a heat dissipator that dissipates heat of a light absorber that absorbs light reflected by a light blocking member which both absorbs light and reflects light. (Remarks; p. 4 – 6).
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Kase clearly teaches a heat dissipator (92, 921) that dissipates heat of the light absorber (94) to outside air, specifically in [0074].
The light absorbing portion 94 absorbs the discarded light Lb2 and transforms it into heat. The heat transformed from the discarded light Lb2 in the light absorbing portion 94 is transmitted to the wall portion 90a. The heat sink 92 dissipates the heat in the wall portion 90a mainly from the fins 921.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 mailing date of this final action.
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