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.
Claims 1, 2, 4-9, and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Plank et al. (US 20220150395 A1, hereafter Plank).
Regarding claim 1, Plank teaches an electronic system, comprising:
a substrate comprising at least one lighting unit (120) and at least one driving unit (160) corresponding to the lighting unit, wherein the driving unit comprises a signal receiver (150) (Fig. 1, [0023]-[0024], where the display device 110 has an illumination element 120, driver circuit 160, and optical receiver 150 formed on a substrate); and
a control unit including a signal providing unit (140) for providing an optical signal (141) to the signal receiver (Fig. 1, [0022], where the optical transmitter 140 transmits an optical control signal 141 encoded with control information);
wherein the driving unit provides an electrical signal (151) to the corresponding lighting unit according to the optical signal received by the signal receiver from the signal providing unit of the control unit (Fig. 1, [0022]-[0024], where the illumination element 121 emits light in accordance with the control information provided by the optical control signal by way of conversion to electrical signal 151).
Regarding claim 2, Plank teaches the electronic system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the signal providing unit comprises a laser transmitter ([0022], where the optical transmitter may comprise a laser diode).
Regarding claim 4, Plank teaches the electronic system as claimed in claim 1, wherein a light spot projected by the signal providing unit covers at least partial of the signal receiver of the driving unit ([0026], where the optical connection is sufficient to transmit between the optical emitter 140 and the optical receiver 150).
Regarding claim 5, Plank teaches the electronic system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the substrate comprises plural lighting units and plural driving units corresponding to the lighting units respectively ([0030]-[0031], where there is a plurality of illumination sub-elements and corresponding driver circuits).
Regarding claim 6, Plank teaches the electronic system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the driving unit comprises a plurality of traces and a driving element, and the driving element and the signal receiver are electrically connected to the traces ([0023]-[0024], where the driver circuit 160 includes elements such as transistors for driving the illumination element and receives the electrical control signal from the optical receiver 150).
Regarding claim 7, Plank teaches the electronic system as claimed in claim 6, wherein the driving element comprises an integrated circuit or a thin film driving element ([0025], where the driver circuit may comprise a thin-film transistor).
Regarding claim 8, Plank teaches the electronic system as claimed in claim 7, wherein the thin film driving element comprises a thin film transistor ([0025], where the driver circuit may comprise a thin-film transistor).
Regarding claim 9, Plank teaches the electronic system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the substrate comprises a patterned layer electrically connected to the lighting unit and the driving unit ([0024], where the driver circuit 160 is formed on the substrate and is electrically connected to the illumination element 120).
Regarding claim 16, Plank teaches the electronic system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the lighting unit comprises at least one lighting element, and the lighting element comprises a self-emitting element ([0030], where the illumination element may comprise a LED).
Regarding claim 17, Plank teaches the electronic system as claimed in claim 16, wherein the self-emitting element comprises a LED, a mini-LED, or a micro-LED ([0030], where the illumination element may comprise a LED).
Regarding claim 18, Plank teaches the electronic system as claimed in claim 6, wherein the driving element and the signal receiver are integrated into one module ([0023]-[0024], where both the optical receiver 150 and driver circuit 160 are integrated into the display device).
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 10-12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Plank et al. (US 20220150395 A1, hereafter Plank) in view of Moran et al. (US 20230410725 A1, hereafter Moran).
Regarding claim 10, Plank would show the electronic system as claimed in claim 9. But, Plank does not explicitly teach the electronic system wherein the patterned layer comprises power lines. However, this was well known in the art as evidenced by Moran ([0034], where LEDs are powered by traces disposed on the substrate). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the illumination elements of Plank would require power and providing power as taught by Moran would have yielded a predictable result.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Plank and Moran would show the electronic system as claimed in claim 10. Moran in the combination further teaches the electronic system wherein the power lines include a metallic material or a transparent conductive material or a combination thereof ([0034], where the traces are metal).
Regarding claim 12, Plank would show the electronic system as claimed in claim 1. But, Plank does not explicitly teach the electronic system wherein the substrate is a transparent substrate. However, this was well known in the art as evidenced by Moran (Fig. 1, [0038], where the substrate 106 is transparent). Plank and Moran both teach display devices comprising an array of light emitting elements. Plank is silent with respect to the opacity of the substrate. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the illumination elements of Plank on a transparent substrate so as to enable other light to pass through the device.
Regarding claim 15, Plank would show the electronic system as claimed in claim 1. But, Plank does not explicitly teach the electronic system wherein the substrate is a wind shield. However, this was well known in the art as evidenced by Moran (Fig. 1, [0038], where the substrate is a vehicle windshield). Plank and Moran both teach display devices comprising an array of light emitting elements. Plank is silent with respect to the context of the substrate. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the illumination elements of Plank on a wind shield so as to display information to the user while permitting light to pass through the transparent substrate.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 13, and 14 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER D MCLOONE whose telephone number is (571)272-4631. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 AM - 5 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, Amr Awad can be reached at 5712727764. 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.
/PETER D MCLOONE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2621
Prosecution Insights