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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 8/5/24 and 6/24/24 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 1-17, 31 and 36-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al., US 2023/0127424 in view of Huang, US 2004/0184257 and further in view of Kaszkiel et al., DE 102009010720.
Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches An illumination device (Figure 6 and [0038]) comprising: a light guide plate (10) comprising a transparent substrate (110) and a light extraction film (130) on the transparent substrate, the light guide plate comprising one or more edges (see Figures 5 and 6); and one or more light sources configured to irradiate light to the one or more edges of the light guide plate ([0036]), wherein the light extraction film comprises: a matrix layer (130); and a plurality of scattering particles (120) embedded in the matrix layer (see Figure 6). Kim further teaches the density of the scattering particles increases as the distance from the light source increases, thereby improving uniformity of light emission from the device. Kim is silent as to first areas where the density is constant and second areas where the density varies along a Gaussian profile.
However, in the same field of endeavor of illumination devices, Huang teaches the light guide plate comprises first areas (Figure 1, area 325) in which a volume density of the plurality of scattering particles of the light extraction film is substantially constant (id), and second areas (Figure 1, main region in which either the size or density of the particles varies along the length of the light guide plate) in which the volume density of the plurality of scattering particles of the light extraction film varies (id). Further, it is well known to those of ordinary skill in the art that providing a uniform density of scattering particles in an area close to the light sources helps to increase light emission efficiency, and providing a varying density in areas farther from the light sources helps to prevent dark spots. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide both uniform and varying densities of scattering particles in the Kim device to ensure both efficiency and uniformity of emission. Kim and Huang are silent as to the scattering particles varying along a Gaussian profile.
However, in the same field of endeavor of illumination devices, Kaszkiel teaches scattering particles varied along a Gaussian profile ([0083-0085] and Figures 5-6). Further, it was well known to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing that varying scattering particles along a Gaussian profile would improve luminance uniformity. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to vary the scattering particle density of the Kim and Huang devices along a Gaussian profile to further improve luminance uniformity.
Regarding claim 2, Kim, Huang and Kaszkiel teach the invention as explained above regarding claim 1 and Huang further teaches the first areas are adjacent to corners of the light guide plate (see Figure 1, first areas 325). Further, it is well known to those of ordinary skill in the art that providing a uniform density of scattering particles in an area close to the light sources helps to increase light emission efficiency, and providing a varying density in areas farther from the light sources helps to prevent dark spots. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide both uniform and varying densities of scattering particles in the Kim device to ensure both efficiency and uniformity of emission.
Regarding claim 3, Kim, Huang and Kaszkiel teach the invention as explained above regarding claim 1 and Huang further teaches each of the first areas include corresponding one of corners of the light guide plate (Figure 1, first areas 325). Further, it is well known to those of ordinary skill in the art that providing a uniform density of scattering particles in an area close to the light sources helps to increase light emission efficiency, and providing a varying density in areas farther from the light sources helps to prevent dark spots. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide both uniform and varying densities of scattering particles in the Kim device to ensure both efficiency and uniformity of emission.
Regarding claim 4, Kim, Huang and Kaszkiel teach the invention as explained above regarding claim 1 and further it is the position of the examiner that lacking criticality and unexpected results, it would have been an obvious matter of routine experimentation to determine the optimum workable sum of areas of the first areas based on measurable changes in luminance uniformity and brightness.
Regarding claim 5, Kim, Huang and Kaszkiel teach the invention as explained above regarding claim 1 and further it is the position of the examiner that lacking criticality and unexpected results, it would have been an obvious matter of routine experimentation to determine the optimum workable sum of areas of the first areas based on measurable changes in luminance uniformity and brightness.
Regarding claim 6, Kim, Huang and Kaszkiel teach the invention as explained above regarding claim 1 and further it is the position of the examiner that lacking criticality and unexpected results, it would have been an obvious matter of routine experimentation to determine the optimum workable sum of areas of the first areas based on measurable changes in luminance uniformity and brightness.
Regarding claim 7, Kim, Huang and Kaszkiel teach the invention as explained above regarding claim 1 and further it is the position of the examiner that lacking criticality and unexpected results, it would have been an obvious matter of routine experimentation to determine the optimum workable sum of areas of the first areas based on measurable changes in luminance uniformity and brightness.
Regarding claim 8, Kim, Huang and Kaszkiel teach the invention as explained above regarding claim 1 and further it is the position of the examiner that lacking criticality and unexpected results, altering the shape of the light guide plate from rectangular to square would have been an obvious matter of design choice. Further, amending the shape and relative placement of the first area would have been an obvious matter of design choice and routine experimentation based on well known and measurable results to determine uniformity and brightness.
Regarding claim 9, Kim, Huang and Kaszkiel teach the invention as explained above regarding claim 1 and further it is the position of the examiner that lacking criticality and unexpected results, altering the shape of the light guide plate from rectangular to square would have been an obvious matter of design choice. Further, amending the shape and relative placement of the first area would have been an obvious matter of design choice and routine experimentation based on well-known and measurable results to determine uniformity and brightness.
Regarding claim 10, Kim, Huang and Kaszkiel teach the invention as explained above regarding claim 1 and further it is the position of the examiner that lacking criticality and unexpected results, altering the shape of the light guide plate from rectangular to square would have been an obvious matter of design choice. Further, amending the shape and relative placement of the first area would have been an obvious matter of design choice and routine experimentation based on well-known and measurable results to determine uniformity and brightness.
Regarding claim 11, Kim, Huang and Kaszkiel teach the invention as explained above regarding claim 1 and Huang further teaches the light guide plate further comprises a third area surrounded by the first areas and the second areas, and the volume density of the plurality of scattering particles of the light extraction film in the third area varies Figure 4, main area density varies). Further, it is well known to those of ordinary skill in the art that providing a uniform density of scattering particles in an area close to the light sources helps to increase light emission efficiency, and providing a varying density in areas farther from the light sources helps to prevent dark spots. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide both uniform and varying densities of scattering particles in the Kim device to ensure both efficiency and uniformity of emission. Kim and Huang are silent as to the scattering particles varying along a Gaussian profile.
However, in the same field of endeavor of illumination devices, Kaszkiel teaches scattering particles varied along a Gaussian profile ([0083-0085] and Figures 5-6). Further, it was well known to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing that varying scattering particles along a Gaussian profile would improve luminance uniformity. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to vary the scattering particle density of the Kim and Huang devices along a Gaussian profile to further improve luminance uniformity.
Regarding claim 12, Kim, Huang and Kaszkiel teach the invention as explained above regarding claim 11 and Huang further teaches the volume density of the plurality of scattering particles of the light extraction film in the second areas and the third area varies with a distance from a center of the light guide plate as a variable (see Figure 4, density varies with a distance from a center of the plate). Further, it is well known to those of ordinary skill in the art that providing a uniform density of scattering particles in an area close to the light sources helps to increase light emission efficiency, and providing a varying density in areas farther from the light sources helps to prevent dark spots. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide both uniform and varying densities of scattering particles in the Kim device to ensure both efficiency and uniformity of emission. Kim and Huang are silent as to the scattering particles varying along a Gaussian profile.
However, in the same field of endeavor of illumination devices, Kaszkiel teaches scattering particles varied along a Gaussian profile ([0083-0085] and Figures 5-6). Further, it was well known to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing that varying scattering particles along a Gaussian profile would improve luminance uniformity. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to vary the scattering particle density of the Kim and Huang devices along a Gaussian profile to further improve luminance uniformity.
Regarding claim 13, Kim, Huang and Kaszkiel teach the invention as explained above regarding claim 11 and further it is the position of the examiner that lacking criticality and unexpected results, it would have been an obvious matter of routine experimentation to determine the optimum average volume density of the scattering particles in each of the first areas relative to the other areas, based on measurable results regarding uniformity and brightness.
Regarding claim 14, Kim, Huang and Kaszkiel teach the invention as explained above regarding claim 11 and further it is the position of the examiner that lacking criticality and unexpected results, it would have been an obvious matter of routine experimentation to determine the optimum average volume density of the scattering particles in each of the first areas relative to the other areas, based on measurable results regarding uniformity and brightness.
Regarding claim 15, Kim, Huang and Kaszkiel teach the invention as explained above regarding claim 11 and further it is the position of the examiner that lacking criticality and unexpected results, it would have been an obvious matter of routine experimentation to determine the optimum average volume density of the scattering particles in each of the first areas relative to the other areas, based on measurable results regarding uniformity and brightness.
Regarding claim 16, Kim, Huang and Kaszkiel teach the invention as explained above regarding claim 11 and further it is the position of the examiner that lacking criticality and unexpected results, it would have been an obvious matter of routine experimentation to determine the optimum average volume density of the scattering particles in each of the first areas relative to the other areas, based on measurable results regarding uniformity and brightness.
Regarding claim 17, Kim, Huang and Kaszkiel teach the invention as explained above regarding claim 11 and further it is the position of the examiner that lacking criticality and unexpected results, it would have been an obvious matter of routine experimentation to determine the optimum average volume density of the scattering particles in each of the first areas relative to the other areas, based on measurable results regarding uniformity and brightness.
Regarding claim 31, Kim teaches an illumination device (Abstract) comprising: a light guide plate (10, Figure 6) comprising a transparent substrate (110) having a polygonal planar shape (rectangle) and a light extraction film (130) on the transparent substrate; and a plurality of light sources ([0036]) configured to irradiate light to each of edges of the light guide plate (id), wherein the light extraction film comprises: a matrix layer (130); and a plurality of scattering particles (120) embedded in the matrix layer. Kim further teaches the density of the scattering particles increases as the distance from the light source increases, thereby improving uniformity of light emission from the device. Kim is silent as to first areas where the density is constant and second areas where the density varies along a Gaussian profile.
In the same field of endeavor of illumination devices, Huang teaches the light guide plate comprises first areas including corners of the polygon (areas 325, Figure 1) and second areas between adjacent first areas (see Figure 1), a volume density of the plurality of scattering particles of the light extraction film in the first areas is substantially constant (id), the volume density of the plurality of scattering particles of the light extraction film in the second areas continuously varies (see scattering particles in main area where they vary either by size or density, so they are closer together or larger as they move away from the light sources). Further, it is well known to those of ordinary skill in the art that providing a uniform density of scattering particles in an area close to the light sources helps to increase light emission efficiency, and providing a varying density in areas farther from the light sources helps to prevent dark spots. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide both uniform and varying densities of scattering particles in the Kim device to ensure both efficiency and uniformity of emission. Kim and Huang are silent as to the scattering particles discontinuously varying.
However, in the same field of endeavor of illumination devices, Kaszkiel teaches the volume density of the plurality of scattering particles of the light extraction film discontinuously varies at a boundary between the first and second areas ([0083-0085] and Figures 5-6). Further, it was well known to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing that varying scattering particles along a Gaussian profile would improve luminance uniformity. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to vary the scattering particle density of the Kim and Huang devices along a Gaussian profile to further improve luminance uniformity.
Regarding claim 36, Kim, Huang and Kaszkiel teach the invention as explained above regarding claim 31 and Huang further teaches the light guide plate further comprises a third area surrounded by the first areas and the second areas, and the volume density of the plurality of scattering particles of the light extraction film in the second areas and the third area varies along a distance from the light sources (Figure 1, second area is the upper half of the light guide plate and third area is the bottom half of the light guide plate). Further, it is well known to those of ordinary skill in the art that providing a uniform density of scattering particles in an area close to the light sources helps to increase light emission efficiency, and providing a varying density in areas farther from the light sources helps to prevent dark spots. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide both uniform and varying densities of scattering particles in the Kim device to ensure both efficiency and uniformity of emission. Kim and Huang are silent as to the scattering particles varying along a Gaussian profile.
However, in the same field of endeavor of illumination devices, Kaszkiel teaches scattering particles varied along a Gaussian profile ([0083-0085] and Figures 5-6). Further, it was well known to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing that varying scattering particles along a Gaussian profile would improve luminance uniformity. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to vary the scattering particle density of the Kim and Huang devices along a Gaussian profile to further improve luminance uniformity.
Regarding claim 37, Kim teaches a method of manufacturing a light guide plate (see [0061-0062] for example, and Figure 6), the method comprising: preparing a printing solution comprising a matrix and a plurality of scattering particles ([0062]); providing droplets of the printing solution to form a light extraction film on a transparent substrate (id); and curing the light extraction film ([0059], Gravure printing requires curing). Kim further teaches the density of the scattering particles increases as the distance from the light source increases, thereby improving uniformity of light emission from the device. Kim is silent as to first areas where the density is constant and second areas where the density varies along a Gaussian profile.
However, in the same field of endeavor of illumination devices, Huang teaches the light guide plate comprises first areas (Figure 1, area 325) in which a volume density of the plurality of scattering particles of the light extraction film is substantially constant (id), and second areas (Figure 1, main region in which either the size or density of the particles varies along the length of the light guide plate) in which the volume density of the plurality of scattering particles of the light extraction film varies (id). Further, it is well known to those of ordinary skill in the art that providing a uniform density of scattering particles in an area close to the light sources helps to increase light emission efficiency, and providing a varying density in areas farther from the light sources helps to prevent dark spots. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide both uniform and varying densities of scattering particles in the Kim device to ensure both efficiency and uniformity of emission. Kim and Huang are silent as to the scattering particles varying along a Gaussian profile.
However, in the same field of endeavor of illumination devices, Kaszkiel teaches scattering particles varied along a Gaussian profile ([0083-0085] and Figures 5-6). Further, it was well known to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing that varying scattering particles along a Gaussian profile would improve luminance uniformity. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to vary the scattering particle density of the Kim and Huang devices along a Gaussian profile to further improve luminance uniformity.
Regarding claim 38, Kim, Huang and Kaszkiel teach the invention as explained above regarding claim 37 and Kim further teaches the providing of the droplets comprises adjusting a volume density of the plurality of scattering particles of the light extraction film of the first portion and the second portion by adjusting a number of droplets provided per unit area ([0064]).
Regarding claim 39, Kim, Huang and Kaszkiel teach the invention as explained above regarding claim 37 and Kim further teaches the providing of the droplets comprises adjusting a volume density of the plurality of scattering particles of the light extraction film of the first portion and the second portion by adjusting a content of the plurality of scattering particles comprised in the droplets ([0064]).
Regarding claim 40, Kim teaches An illumination device (abstract) comprising: a light guide plate (Figure 6, light guide plate 10) comprising a transparent substrate (110), and a light extraction film (130) on the transparent substrate, the light guide plate comprising one or more edges ([0036] and Figure 6); and one or more light sources ([0036]) configured to irradiate light to the one or more edges of the light guide plate (id), wherein the light extraction film comprises: a matrix layer (130); and a plurality of scattering particles (120) embedded in the matrix layer. Kim further teaches the density of the scattering particles increases as the distance from the light source increases, thereby improving uniformity of light emission from the device. Kim is silent as to first areas where the density is constant and second areas where the density varies along a quantized Gaussian profile.
However, in the same field of endeavor of illumination devices, Huang teaches the light guide plate comprises first areas (Figure 1, area 325) in which a volume density of the plurality of scattering particles of the light extraction film is substantially constant (id), and second areas (Figure 1, main region in which either the size or density of the particles varies along the length of the light guide plate) in which the volume density of the plurality of scattering particles of the light extraction film varies (id). Further, it is well known to those of ordinary skill in the art that providing a uniform density of scattering particles in an area close to the light sources helps to increase light emission efficiency, and providing a varying density in areas farther from the light sources helps to prevent dark spots. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide both uniform and varying densities of scattering particles in the Kim device to ensure both efficiency and uniformity of emission. Kim and Huang are silent as to the scattering particles varying along a quantized Gaussian profile.
However, in the same field of endeavor of illumination devices, Kaszkiel teaches scattering particles varied along a quantized Gaussian profile ([0083-0085] and Figures 5-6). Further, it was well known to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing that varying scattering particles along a Gaussian profile would improve luminance uniformity. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to vary the scattering particle density of the Kim and Huang devices along a Gaussian profile to further improve luminance uniformity.
Regarding claim 41, Kim, Huang and Kaszkiel teach the invention as explained above regarding claim 40 and further it is the position of the examiner that lacking criticality and unexpected results, it would have been an obvious matter of routine experimentation to determine the optimum workable volume density variation based on measurable changes in luminance uniformity and brightness.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kim et al., US 2020/0103583 teaches a method of manufacturing a light guide plate and further teaches forming a light scattering layer on the light guide plate. Kim fails to teach a Gaussian distribution of the scattering particles.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARY-ELLEN BOWMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5383. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday; 7:00 am-5:00 pm.
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, James Greece can be reached at (571) 272-3711. 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.
MARY ELLEN BOWMAN
Examiner
Art Unit 2875
/MARY ELLEN BOWMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875