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 .
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 13, and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)&(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 20200158943 A1 (Calafiore).
Regarding claim 1:
Calafiore discloses an apparatus comprising:
an optical grating (Optical grating of Fig. 3E) including a plurality of embedded, slanted optical grating structures (Fig. 3E, grating lines [318] are embedded and slanted).
Regarding claim 2:
Calafiore discloses the apparatus of claim 1 wherein
the grating structures [318] are embedded within a lithography resist (Para. [0031] and figs. 3A and 3B, the nanoimprint lithography layer [304] is a lithography resist.).
Regarding claim 4:
Calafiore discloses the apparatus of claim 2 wherein
the grating structures [318] are slanted with respect to outer surfaces of the lithography resist (Fig. 3E, transparent matrix [326]). (Fig. 3E shows that the grating structures [318] are slanted with respect to the outer surfaces of [326])
Regarding claim 13:
Calafiore discloses a method comprising:
pressing a surface of an imprint tool (Fig. 3A & 3B, imprint tool [306]) into an imprint material (Fig. 3A & 3B, [304]) to form an imprinted structure (Fig. 3B, ridges [312]) that includes a plurality of grating supports composed of the imprint material (Fig. 3C shows that the structures [312] are used to support grating structures [318]), wherein the imprint material is disposed over a substrate (Fig. 3A, substrate [302]), and wherein the grating supports are inclined with respect to a plane of the substrate (Fig. 3B shows that the grating supports are inclined with respect to the plane of the substrate [302]); and
covering at least a portion of each of the grating supports [312] with a deposition material to form optical grating structures. (Fig. 3C shows the grating structures [318] are deposited on one side of each grating structure [312].)
Regarding claim 16:
Calafiore discloses the method of claim 13 wherein
the deposition material is an inorganic material. (Para. [0032] the material of grating lines may be an inorganic material such as silicon oxide.)
Regarding claim 17
Calafiore discloses the method of claim 13 wherein
the imprint material [304] comprises a lithography resist. (Para. [0031] and figs. 3A and 3B, the nanoimprint lithography layer [304] is a lithography resist.).
Regarding claim 18:
Calafiore discloses the method of claim 13
wherein covering at least a portion of each of the grating supports with a deposition material includes performing an angled deposition in which the deposition material is evaporated onto the grating supports. (Para. [0033] the diffraction grating is produced by evaporating the material onto the grating supports of the resin at an oblique angle.)
Regarding claim 19:
Calafiore discloses the method of claim 18 wherein
performing an angled deposition (Fig. 4A & 4B showing angled deposition [420]) includes performing e-beam evaporation (Para. [0042], the deposition may be performed by electron beam evaporation.).
Claims 1, 5-11, 13-15, 18, 20, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)&(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 20050078374 A1 (Taira et al.).
Regarding claim 1:
Taira discloses an apparatus comprising:
an optical grating (Fig. 4, Transmission grating [20]) including a plurality of embedded, slanted optical grating structures (Fig. 4. Slanted grating structures [23]).
Regarding claim 5:
Taira discloses the apparatus of claim 1 wherein
the grating structures [23] are embedded within a material (Fig. 4, Resin [22]), and wherein the grating structures [23] are slanted with respect to outer surfaces of the material [22]. (Fig. 4 shows that grating structures [23] are slanted with respect to the surfaces of material [22]. Also Para. [0064] discloses that the structures [23] are inclined at an angle.)
Regarding claim 6:
Taira discloses the apparatus of claim 1 wherein
the grating structures [23] are embedded within at least one cured material (Para. [0056] discloses that resin [22] may be a photocuring resin.).
Regarding claim 7:
Taira discloses the apparatus of claim 1 wherein
the grating structures [23] have a refractive index that is higher than a refractive index of a material [22] in which the grating structures [23] are embedded. (Para. [0065] the grating structures [23] are described as having a high refractive index while in Para. [0091] the refractive index of resin [22] is described as low.)
Regarding claim 8:
Taira discloses the apparatus of claim 1
wherein the grating structures [23] are composed of an inorganic material. (Para. [0064] describe the grating structures [23] as metallic)
Regarding claim 9:
Taira disclose the apparatus of claim 1
wherein the optical grating is disposed on a support that has a stepped perimeter. (The optical grating is formed by disposing grating structures [23] on the stepped grating supports [22a], see fig. 5a showing that [22a] are formed in a stepped shape.)
Regarding claim 10:
Taira discloses the apparatus of claim 9 wherein
at least part of the stepped perimeter is covered by a material within which the grating structures are embedded. (Fig. 5c shows the stepped grating supports [22a] is covered by the material the grating structures [23] are embedded in.)
Regarding claim 11:
Taira discloses the apparatus of claim 1 wherein
the optical grating is mounted on a flexible layer (Fig. 9a shows the optical grating [10]&[20] mounted on adhesive layer [304] which is a flexible layer.).
Regarding claim 13:
Taira discloses a method comprising:
pressing a surface of an imprint tool (Para. [0065] the mold used for formation) into an imprint material (Para. [0065] Resin layer [22a]) to form an imprinted structure (Fig. 5a structure of resin layer [22a]) that includes a plurality of grating supports composed of the imprint material (Fig. 5b shows that the structure of resin layer [22a] is used to support grating structures [23]), wherein the imprint material is disposed over a substrate (Para. [0065], the resin layer [22a] is formed on a substrate), and wherein the grating supports are inclined with respect to a plane of the substrate (Fig. 5a-c shows that the grating supports are inclined with respect to the plane of the substrate (not labeled)); and
covering at least a portion of each of the grating supports with a deposition material to form optical grating structures. (Fig. 5b-c and para. [0065] the grating structures [23] are deposited on one side of each diffraction grating surface.)
Regarding claim 14:
Taira discloses the method of claim 13 further including:
depositing a backfill material (Fig. 5a, resin [22b]) onto the grating supports (Fig. 5b, grating supports of [22a]) and the grating structures (Fig. 5b, grating structures [23]) to cover previously exposed surfaces of the grating structures so that the grating structures are embedded between the imprint material and the backfill material (Fig. 5c shows the completed optical grating with grating structures [23] embedded), and are inclined with respect to the plane of the substrate (Fig. 5c shows the grating structures [23] are inclined with respect to the plane of the substrate (not labelled)).
Regarding claim 15:
Taira discloses the method of claim 14 wherein
the backfill material has a same composition as the imprint material. (Para. [0065], “The resin layer [22a] and the resin layer [22b] can be made of the same type of resin, for example.”)
Regarding claim 18:
Taira discloses the method of claim 13
wherein covering at least a portion of each of the grating supports with a deposition material includes performing an angled deposition in which the deposition material is evaporated onto the grating supports. (Para. [0046] the diffraction grating is produced by evaporating the material onto the grating supports of the resin at an oblique angle.)
Regarding claim 20:
Taira discloses the method of claim 14 wherein
the grating structures [23] have a refractive index that is higher than a refractive index of the imprint material [22a] and a refractive index of the backfill material [22b]. (Para. [0065] the grating structures [23] are described as having a high refractive index while in Para. [0091] the refractive index of resin [22] is described as low.)
Regarding claim 22:
Taira discloses the method of claim 13 wherein
covering at least a portion of each of the grating supports with a deposition material to form optical grating structures [23] includes covering only a portion of each of the grating supports with the deposition material. (Fig. 5b shows that grating structures [23] are formed on only one surface of the grating supports of resin [22a])
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200158943 A1 (Calafiore) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of US 20060001969 A1 (Wang).
Regarding claim 3:
Although Calafiore discloses the apparatus of claim 2
It fails to teach
wherein the lithography resist comprises a polymethyl methacrylate resist. (Calafiore teaches that the lithography resist may include an acrylic acid but does not teach that it is PMMA)
Wang teaches an optical grating with a lithography resist (See para. [0105])
wherein the lithography resist (Fig. 6A [630]) comprises a polymethyl methacrylate resist. (Para. [0105] teaches that the resist can be PMMA)
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 the lithography resist comprise a polymethyl methacrylate resist as taught by Wang in the apparatus of Calafiore for the purpose of providing a transparent lithography resist for forming the optical grating.
Claims 12 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20050078374 A1 (Taira et al.) in view of US 20150162244 A1 (Holden et al.).
Regarding claim 12:
Although Taira discloses the apparatus of claim 11
Taira fails to teach
wherein the flexible layer is composed of a UV-release or thermal-release dicing tape.
Holden teaches a lithographic process for forming layered structures further including
the flexible layer is composed of a UV-release or thermal-release dicing tape. (Para. [0039] teaches the use of a UV or thermal release dicing tape for the purpose of releasing the substrate after production.)
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 the flexible layer is composed of a UV-release or thermal-release dicing tape as taught by Holden in the apparatus of Taira for the purpose of allowing release of the substrate after production.
Regarding claim 21:
Although Taira discloses the method of claim 14
Taira fails to teach
removing the substrate after depositing the backfill material.
Holden teaches a lithographic process for forming layered structures further including
removing the substrate after depositing the backfill material. (Para. [0070] teaches that after completion of the lithographic process the substrate [614] may be removed)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to removing the substrate after depositing the backfill material as taught by Holden in the method of Taira for the purpose of using the substrate as a support during manufacturing.
Conclusion
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