DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6/25/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 5/26/2026 is acknowledged. Accordingly, claims 10-11 and 20-22 have been cancelled, claim 1 has been amended, thus currently claims 1-9 and 12-19 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-9 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Marcori Franco (WO 2012052946 A1, hereinafter, “Marcori”, newly cited by the Examiner).
Regarding claim 1, Marcori teaches an optical element (automotive light 1, see figures 1-2) comprising:
a first light function (standard rear illumination, see ¶ 31 of translated best mode) and a second light function (interferometric effect, see ¶ 21 of translated best mode), wherein the second light function (interferometric effect) is different from the first light function (standard illumination);
a light source (light source 4 and first auxiliary light source 8, see fig 2), a first light guide unit (light-guiding sheet 7, see fig 2) and a second light guide unit (lenticular half-shell 5);
wherein the light source (4 and 8) is configured to emit light rays (as expected from light sources) for the first light function (standard illumination by 4) and the second light function (interferometric effect by 8), and the light source (4, 8) is configured to emit light rays at least towards the first light guide unit (7);
a scattering layer (light-guiding sheet 9, see fig 2), being segregate and apart from both the first light guide unit (7) and the second light guide unit (5), and arranged between the first light guide unit (7) and the second light guide unit (5), the scattering layer (9) adapted to scatter light (as light from 8 and 7 travels through 9) from the first light guide unit (7);
wherein the first light guide unit (7) is arranged upstream of the second light guide unit (9) in a main emergence direction (towards the right of fig 2) of the optical element (1), and at least a portion of light from the first light guide unit (7) emerges through the second light guide unit (5);
a holder assembly (rear shell 2 and cup-shaped body 3, see fig 2) having the light source (4 and 8) and portions of a first holder (2) and a second holder (3), wherein the second holder (3) does not extend beyond the second light guide unit (5) in the main emergence direction (towards the right of 1).
Regarding claim 2, Marcori teaches wherein the first light guide unit (7) and the second light guide unit (5) are plate-like light guides (as seen in fig 2), and arranged in such a way as to be stacked one in front of the other in the main emergence direction (as clearly seen in fig 2).
Regarding claim 3, Marcori teaches wherein the first light guide unit (7) and the second light guide unit (5) extend substantially perpendicular to the main emergence direction (towards the right of 1, as seen in fig 2).
Regarding claim 4, Marcori teaches wherein the first light guide unit (7) is configured such that light rays from the light source (8) are incident on an end face (lower end of 7) of the first light guide unit (7);
light rays from the light source propagate between a front-side surface (front side of 7) and a rear-side surface (rear side of 7) of the first light guide unit (7); and
light rays from the light source (8) emerge from the front-side surface (front side of 7) of the first light guide unit (7).
Regarding claim 6, Marcori teaches wherein the rear-side surface (rear surface of 7) of the first light guide unit (7) includes optical decoupling elements (multitude of cavities or blind holes, not labeled but clearly seen in fig 2), the optical decoupling elements (multitude of cavities or blind holes) being configured to cause light rays from the light source (8) to emerge from a front-side surface (front side of 7) of the first light guide unit (7).
Regarding claim 7, Marcori teaches wherein at least a portion of the rear-side surface (rear surface of 7) of the first light guide unit (7) is inclined towards the front-side surface (front surface of 7, as seen in fig 2) of the first light guide unit (7), to reflect light rays from the light source (8) towards the front-side surface of the first light guide unit (7).
Regarding claim 8, Marcori teaches wherein the rear-side surface (rear surface of 7) of the first light guide unit (7) includes multiple totally reflecting small faces (multitude of cavities or blind holes, not labeled but clearly seen in fig 2) configured to totally reflect light rays from the light source (8) towards the front-side surface (front side of 7) of the first light guide unit (7).
Regarding claim 9, Marcori teaches further including a reflective layer (inner surface 3i, see fig 2), the reflective layer (3i) being arranged upstream of the first light guide unit (7) in the main emergence direction (towards the right of 1), to reflect light (at least stray light) from the first light guide unit (7) towards the second light guide unit (5).
Regarding claim 15, Marcori teaches wherein the light source (4, 8) only comprises a first light source (4), the first light source (4) emitting light rays towards the first light guide unit (7), and the second light guide unit (5) only transmits light rays from the first light guide unit (7).
Regarding claim 16, Marcori teaches wherein the first light guide unit (7) and the second light guide unit (5) being held by the holder (2, 3).
Regarding claim 17, Marcori teaches wherein the holder (2, 3) at least partially surrounds peripheral outer edges (upper edges of 7) of the first light guide unit (7) and the second light guide unit (5).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 5 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marcori in view of Hikmet et al. (WO 2014202726 A1, hereinafter, “Hikmet”, previously cited by the Examiner).
Regarding claim 5, Marcori does not teach wherein scattering particles are included inside the first light guide unit, the scattering particles being configured to scatter light rays from the light source.
Hikmet teaches an optical element (light emitting device 103, see figure 14) having a light source illuminating a first light guide unit (transparent heat sink element 302) and a second light guide unit (first light guide 4);
wherein scattering particles (scattering material 10) are included inside the first light guide unit (302), the scattering particles (10) being configured to scatter light rays (as seen in fig 14) from the light source (2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filled date of the claimed invention to incorporate the scattering particles as taught by Hikmet into the teachings of Marcori in order to provide a diffused light to the first light guide unit. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification to emit a more even light output.
Regarding claim 13, Marcori does not teach wherein scattering particles are included inside the second light guide unit, the scattering particles being configured to scatter light rays from the second light source.
Hikmet teaches an optical element (light emitting device 106, see figure 17, and figure 14 to show common elements and features to all embodiments) having a first light guide unit (light guide 3) and a second light guide unit (light guide 4);
wherein the decoupling particles are scattering particles (scattering particles 10, better seen in fig 14) are included inside the second light guide unit (4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filled date of the claimed invention to incorporate the scattering particles as taught by Hikmet into the teachings of Marcori in order to provide a diffused light to the first light guide unit. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification to emit a more even light output.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12, 14 and 18-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claims 12 and 14, although Marcori teaches the optical element, as described in claims 1 and 4 above, and wherein the light source (4, 8) includes: a first light source (4), wherein light of the first light source (4) enters through the end face (rear face of 7) of the first light guide unit (7), the prior art the prior art of the record fails to teach:
(claim 12) a second light source, wherein light of the second light source enters through an end face (rear face of 9) of the second light guide unit, propagates between a front-side surface and a rear-side surface of the second light guide unit, and emerges from the front-side surface of the second light guide unit; and
(claim 14) wherein the rear-side surface of the second light guide unit includes optical decoupling elements, which are configured to cause light rays from the second light source to emerge from the front-side surface of the second light guide unit.
Regarding claims 18-19, although Marcori teaches the optical element, as described in claims 1 and 16 above, the prior art the prior art of the record fails to teach:
(claim 18) wherein the first light guide unit and the second light guide unit are clamped between the first holder and the second holder.
(claim 19) wherein a reflective layer is provided on a side of the first holder facing the first light guide unit, to reflect light from the first light guide unit towards the second light guide unit.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-9 and 12-19 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR ROJAS CADIMA whose telephone number is (571)272-8007. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9am-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, Abdulmajeed Aziz can be reached at 571-270-5046. 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.
/OMAR ROJAS CADIMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights