DETAILED ACTION
Drawings
New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because the current drawings submitted are blurry and unclear for the examiner to fully understand the invention. Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepares new drawings. The corrected drawings are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The requirement for corrected drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 3, 4, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “PCB” in claims 1, 3, 4, and 5 is a relative term which renders the claims indefinite. The term “PCB” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. By describing the Display portion as being the Display PCB and not specifically stating in the claims or specification what PCB stand for renders this limitation indefinite.
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Garelli (2012/0050975).
Regarding Claim 1: Garelli teaches a transparent display device (figs. 9 and 20) comprising: a first base (top portion of 72) and a second base (84) each comprising a light-transmissive material (paragraphs [0070] and [0074]); a plurality of light sources (92L) disposed between the first base and the second base (figs. 9 and 20); a display PCB (100) disposed at an end of the first base or the second base (figs. 9 and 20); a transparent electrode connecting the light sources and the display PCB (paragraph [0108]); a photoactive layer (202) formed on the second base to convert sunlight into electrical energy (paragraph [0111] and figs. 9, 20, and 24); and a third base (26) arranged to cover the photoactive layer (figs. 9, 20, and 24).
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(s) 2-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garelli (2012/0050975).
Regarding Claim 2: Garelli teaches a battery (34) configured to store the electrical energy generated by the photoactive layer (paragraph [011]), but lacks a specific teaching of the battery is disposed at the end of the first base.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the apparatus of Garelli by having the battery is disposed at the end of the first base in order to allow for the power communication of the battery to the internal components of the apparatus as taught by Garelli wherein this would be accomplished by choosing the proper location for the battery wherein it has been held that rearranging the essential working parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding Claim 3: Garelli teaches a transparent adhesive layer laminated to the third base (paragraph [0094]) and adhered to a window (paragraph [0094]), wherein the display PCB (fig. 9) is disposed on a bezel of the window (fig. 9), but lacks a specific teaching of the battery being disposed on a bezel of the window.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the apparatus of Garelli by having the battery being disposed on a bezel of the window in order to allow for the power communication of the battery to the internal components of the apparatus as taught by Garelli wherein this would be accomplished by choosing the proper location for the battery wherein it has been held that rearranging the essential working parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding Claim 4: Garelli teaches the display PCB is powered by the battery to control the light sources (paragraph [011] and fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 5: Garelli teaches a system controller (36) configured to provide an image signal to the display PCB (paragraph [0061]), wherein the system controller is driven by power supplied from the battery (paragraph [0111] and fig. 2).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garelli (2012/0050975) as applied to the claims above, and further in view of Coverstone (2020/0288000).
Regarding Claim 6: Garelli lacks a specific teaching of wherein the light sources are arranged in a grid.
Coverstone teaches wherein the light sources are arranged in a grid (paragraph [0044]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the apparatus of Garelli by having wherein the light sources are arranged in a grid as disclosed by Coverstone in order to allow for a more versatile device accommodating lights showing and scrolling text among other advantages of the displaying features of the apparatus.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garelli (2012/0050975) as applied to the claims above, and further in view of Fukui (2019/0173012).
Regarding Claim 7: Garelli lacks a specific teaching of the photoactive layer comprises: dye molecules configured to generate electrons upon receiving solar energy; nanoporous titanium oxide particles having absorbed the dye molecules; and an electrolyte.
Fukui teaches the photoactive layer (figs. 1-2) comprises: dye molecules (paragraph [0025]) configured to generate electrons upon receiving solar energy (paragraph [0025]); nanoporous titanium oxide particles (paragraph [0041]) having absorbed the dye molecules; and an electrolyte (paragraph [0029]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the apparatus of Garelli by having the photoactive layer comprises: dye molecules configured to generate electrons upon receiving solar energy; nanoporous titanium oxide particles having absorbed the dye molecules; and an electrolyte as disclosed by Fukui in order to allow for a more effective form of solar absorption in order to maximize the potential for battery recharge while the device is in range of a solar source which in turn decreases the time the device needs to recharge from another external source.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY MICHAEL HAUGHTON whose telephone number is (571)272-9087. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-5p.
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, Imani Hayman can be reached at 571-270-5528. 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.
/ANTHONY M HAUGHTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841