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 § 103
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 1-3, 5-15, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Min et al (US Publication No.: US 2016/0377902 A1, “Min”) in view of Sun et al (US Publication No.: US 2011/0013120 A1, “Sun”).
Regarding Claim 1, Min discloses a transmittance-variable optical laminate (Figure 4) comprising:
A first polarizing plate (Figure 4, first polarizing plate 402B; Paragraphs 0044-0045);
A first transparent conductive layer formed on a first surface of the first polarizing plate (Figure 4, first transparent conductive layer 102; Paragraph 0031);
A second polarizing plate arranged to be opposite the first polarizing plate (Figure 4, second polarizing plate 401A; Paragraphs 0044-0045);
A second transparent conductive layer formed on a first surface of the second polarizing plate and arranged to be opposite the first transparent conductive layer (Figure 4, second transparent conductive layer 102; Paragraph 0031); and
A liquid crystal layer provided between the first transparent conductive layer and the second transparent conductive layer (Figure 4, liquid crystal layer 101; Paragraph 0010), wherein
At least one transparent conductive layer of the first and second transparent conductive layers is formed in direct contact with any of the first and second polarizing plate (Figure 4).
Min fails to disclose that at least one polarizing plate of the first and second polarizing plates has a single transmission color b* value of -6.0 to -3.0.
However, Sun discloses a similar laminate where at least one polarizing plate of the first and second polarizing plates has a single transmission color b* value of -6.0 to -3.0 (Sun, Paragraph 0035 discloses a b* value of -6.0 to -.35).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the polarizing plate as disclosed by Min to have a particular b* value as disclosed by Sun. One would have been motivated to do so for the purpose of optimizing the chromaticity of the laminate (Sun, Paragraph 0035).
Regarding Claim 2, Min in view of Sun discloses the transmittance-variable optical laminate.
Min fails to disclose that at least one polarizing plate of the first and second polarizing plates has a single transmittance color b* value of -5 to -3.5.
However, Sun discloses a similar laminate where at least one polarizing plate of the first and second polarizing plates has a single transmittance color b* value of -5 to -3.5 (Sun, Paragraph 0035 discloses a b* value of -4.0).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the polarizing plate as disclosed by Min to have a particular b* value as disclosed by Sun. One would have been motivated to do so for the purpose of optimizing the chromaticity of the laminate (Sun, Paragraph 0035).
Regarding Claim 3, Min in view of Sun discloses the transmittance-variable optical laminate of claim 1, wherein at least one polarizing plate of the first and second polarizing plates comprises at least one functional layer selected from the group consisting of a protective layer, a phase control layer, and a refractive index control layer (Min, Paragraph 0045 discloses having a protective layer disposed on the outside of a polarizing plate).
Regarding Claim 5, Min in view of Sun discloses the transmittance-variable optical laminate of claim 1, wherein at least one transparent conductive layer of the first and second transparent conductive layers has a thickness of 20 to70 nm (Min, Paragraph 0043 discloses a thickness of 50nm).
Regarding Claim 6, Min in view of Sun discloses the transmittance-variable optical laminate of claim 1.
Min fails to explicitly disclose that the at least one transparent conductive layer of the first and second transparent conductive layers has a sheet resistance value of 30 to 70 Ω/□. However, Min discloses a general environment of achieving a low sheet resistance value to achieve higher efficiency of the light modulation device (Min, Paragraph 0034). When a limitation of a claim is a result-effective variable, i.e., a variable which when modified achieves a recognized result, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges for the variable by routine experimentation (MPEP 2144.05). In the instant claim recitation, the limitation regarding the sheet resistance is the result-effective variable, and when this resistance is optimized to the appropriate value within the specified parameters of a given device, the recognized results of improving light modulation efficiency are realized. While Min does not directly disclose the exact sheet resistance, Min does disclose the general conditions recited in the instant claim, as noted above. In light of the disclosure of Min, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to discover the limitation by routine experimentation that the at least one transparent conductive layer of the first and second transparent conductive layers has a sheet resistance value of 30 to 70 Ω/□ for the purpose of improving efficiency of light modulation of a display device.
Regarding Claim 7, Min in view of Sun discloses the transmittance-variable optical laminate of claim 1, wherein at least one transparent conductive layer of the first and second transparent conductive layers is formed in direct contact with either of the first and second polarizing lates, without a separate substrate interposed therebetween (Min, Figure 4, transparent conductive layers 102 are formed directly on polarizing plates 402B/401A).
Regarding Claim 8, Min in view of Sun discloses the transmittance-variable optical laminate of claim 1, wherein at least one transparent conductive layer of the first and second transparent conductive layers is formed in direct contact with either of the first and second polarizing plates (Min, Figure 4, transparent conductive layers 102 are formed directly on polarizing plates 402B/401A).
Min fails to disclose an adhesion-aiding layer interposed therebetween.
However, Sun discloses a similar laminate comprising an adhesion-aiding layer interposed therebetween (Sun, Figure 2, adhesive 215; Paragraph 0028).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the laminate as disclosed by Min to include an adhesive layer as disclosed by Sun. One would have been motivated to do so for the purpose of optimizing the adhesion and binding between layers (Sun, Paragraph 0028).
Regarding Claim 9, Min in view of Sun discloses the transmittance-variable optical laminate of claim 1, wherein at least one transparent conductive layer of the first and second transparent conductive layers comprises one or more materials selected from the group consisting of transparent conductive oxides, metals, carbon- based materials, conductive polymers, conductive inks, and nanowires (Min, Paragraph 0031 discloses a metal layer and an oxide layer).
Regarding Claim 10, Min in view of Sun discloses the transmittance-variable optical laminate of claim 1, wherein the liquid crystal layer comprises at least one type selected from the group consisting of a ball spacer and a column spacer (Min, Paragraph 0060 discloses a ball spacer).
Regarding Claim 11, Min in view of Sun discloses the transmittance-variable optical laminate of claim 10.
Min fails to explicitly disclose that the ball spacer has a diameter of 1 to 10um. However, Min discloses a general environment of having a ball spacer within a liquid crystal compound material (Min, Paragraph 0060). When a limitation of a claim is a result-effective variable, i.e., a variable which when modified achieves a recognized result, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges for the variable by routine experimentation (MPEP 2144.05). In the instant claim recitation, the limitation regarding the size of the ball spacer is the result-effective variable, and when this size is optimized to the appropriate value within the specified parameters of a given device, the recognized results of improving light modulation efficiency are realized. While Min does not directly disclose the exact size, Min does disclose the general conditions recited in the instant claim, as noted above. In light of the disclosure of Min, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to discover the limitation by routine experimentation that the ball spacer has a diameter of 1 to 10um for the purpose of improving efficiency of light modulation of a display device.
Regarding Claim 12, Min in view of Sun discloses the transmittance-variable optical laminate of claim 10.
Min fails to explicitly disclose that the ball spacer occupies 0.01% to 10% of the area of the liquid crystal layer. However, Min discloses a general environment of having a ball spacer within a liquid crystal compound material (Min, Paragraph 0060). When a limitation of a claim is a result-effective variable, i.e., a variable which when modified achieves a recognized result, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges for the variable by routine experimentation (MPEP 2144.05). In the instant claim recitation, the limitation regarding the size of the ball spacer is the result-effective variable, and when this size is optimized to the appropriate value within the specified parameters of a given device, the recognized results of improving light modulation efficiency are realized. While Min does not directly disclose the exact occupation space, Min does disclose the general conditions recited in the instant claim, as noted above. In light of the disclosure of Min, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to discover the limitation by routine experimentation that the ball spacer occupies 0.01% to 10% of the area of the liquid crystal layer for the purpose of improving efficiency of light modulation of a display device.
Regarding Claim 13, Min in view of Sun discloses the transmittance-variable optical laminate of claim 1, further comprising at least one selected from the group consisting of an orientation film, an adhesive layer, an ultraviolet absorbing layer, and a hard coating layer (Min, Paragraph 0017 discloses an orientation film).
Regarding Claim 14, Min in view of Sun discloses a method of manufacturing the transmittance-variable optical laminate of claim 1 (Min, Paragraph 0062).
Regarding Claim 15, Min in view of Sun discloses a smart window comprising the transmittance-variable optical laminate of claim 1 (Min, Paragraph 0049).
Regarding Claim 17, Min in view of Sun discloses a window for a building, the window comprising the smart window of claim 15 (Min, Paragraph 0049).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Min in view of Sun in further view of Cho et al (US Publication No.: US 2012/0170117 A1, “Cho”).
Regarding Claim 4, Min in view of Sun discloses the transmittance-variable optical laminate of claim 1.
Min fails to disclose that at least one polarizing plate of the first and second polarizing plates has a thickness of 30 to 200 um.
However, Cho discloses a similar laminate where at least one polarizing plate of the first and second polarizing plates has a thickness of 30 to 200 um (Cho, Paragraph 0035).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the polarizing plate as disclosed by Min to have a particular thickness as disclosed by Cho. One would have been motivated to do so for the purpose of achieving high durability (Cho, Paragraphs 0034-0035).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Min in view of Sun in further view of Min et al (US Publication No.: US 2016/0291357 A1, “Min’357”).
Regarding Claim 16, Min in view of Sun discloses the smart window of claim 15.
Min fails to disclose an automobile comprising the smart window applied to at least one selected from a front window, a rear window, a side window, a sunroof window, and an interior partition.
However, Min’357 discloses an automobile comprising the smart window applied to at least one selected from a front window, a rear window, a side window, a sunroof window, and an interior partition (Min’357, Paragraph 0059).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the smart window as disclosed by Min to be included in an automobile as disclosed by Min’357. One would have been motivated to do so for the purpose of creating a sunroof with excellent UV absorption (Min’357, Paragraph 0002).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIAM QURESHI whose telephone number is (571)272-4434. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM EST M-F.
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, Michael Caley can be reached at 571-272-2286. 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.
/MARIAM QURESHI/Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights