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 § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AlA), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 12, applicant does not explicitly point out or disclose where support in the specification can be found for the newly recited claim.
Claim 12 recites the high-brightness display screen according to claim 6, wherein an orthographic projection of the first light reflective film onto the first surface of the light guide plate forms a first orthographic projection; an orthographic projection of the second light reflective film onto the first surface of the light guide plate forms a second orthographic projection; an edge of the first orthographic projection coincides with an edge of the second orthographic projection; the rest part of the first orthographic projection locates outside of the second orthographic projection.
It is unclear where support for the newly recited claim can be found in the specification and drawings. Thus the claim is rejected for new matter.
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.
Claim(s) 6,7, and 12are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsukawa (US 2015/0146110 A1) in view of Sugiura (US 2014/0375897 A1) and Zhong et al. (US 2017/0045775 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Matsukawa teaches a high-brightness display screen, comprising: a light guide plate (20; see at least figure 4);
a backlight source (28; LED board 30; see at least figure 4 and abstract of Matsukawa), having a light emitting surface facing a side surface of the light guide plate (20; see at least figure 4);
a first light reflective film (26a; see at least figure 4), disposed at a rear surface of the light guide plate (20; see at least figure 4);
a liquid crystal glass (liquid crystal panel 16; see at least figure 4), disposed above the light guide plate (20, see at least figure 4);
a second light reflective film (26b), disposed at an edge of a surface of the light guide plate (20; see at least figure 4);
a light-transmitting film material (18; see at least figure 4), disposed on the first surface of the light guide plate (20; see at least figure 4);
and a housing (see at least figures 1-4); wherein a side edge of the second light reflective film (26b; see at least figure 4) facing the backlight source (28; see at least figure 4) is adjacent to the backlight source; and the light guide plate (20; see at least figure 4), the backlight source (28; see at least figure 4), the liquid crystal glass (16; see at least figure 4), and the second light reflective film (26b) are disposed in the housing (see at least figure 4).
Matsukawa does not explicitly teach wherein the first surface of the second light reflective film is a surface of the light guide plate facing towards the liquid crystal glass and the other side edge of the second light reflective film away from the back light source is attached to the light-transmitting film material.
Sugiura teaches wherein the first surface of the second light reflective film (20) is a surface of the light guide plate (19; figure 3; paragraph [0057]) facing towards the liquid crystal glass (11; figure 3) and the other side edge of the second light reflective film (20; paragraph [0057]) away from the back light source (17; figure 3 and paragraph [0057]) is attached to the light-transmitting film material (15; see at least figure 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the display screen of Matsukawa to have the second light reflective film disposed between the liquid crystal panel and the light transmitting film material of the embodiment of figures 1-4 as taught by Sugiura in order to reduce uneven brightness. (see at least paragraph [0012] of Sugiura).
Matsukawa modified by Sugiura et al. does not explicitly teach the second reflective film directly attached to an edge of a first surface of the light guide plate and a lateral side of the second light reflective film away from the backlight source is directly attached to a lateral side of the first light reflective film facing the backlight source.
PNG
media_image1.png
234
470
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Zhong et al. teaches teach the second reflective film (24; figure 7) directly attached to an edge of a first surface of the light guide plate (22) and a lateral side of the second light reflective film (24) away from the backlight source (42) is directly attached to a lateral side of the first light reflective film (see figure 7 where a corner edge of 23 is attached to second reflective film 24) facing the backlight source (42; see figure 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the display screen of Matsukawa to have the second reflective film be directly attached to an edge of a first surface of the light guide plate and a lateral side of the second light reflective film away from the backlight source is directly attached to a lateral side of the first light reflective film facing the backlight source as taught by Zhong et al. in order to raise the usage ratio of the light (see paragraph [0060] of Zhong et al.).
Regarding claim 7, Matsukawa teaches the high-brightness display screen according to claim 6, wherein the high- brightness display screen further comprises a brightness enhancement module (18), the brightness enhancement module is disposed between the first surface of the light guide plate (20) and a rear surface of the liquid crystal glass (16); a first side edge of the second light reflective film (26b) is the side edge of the second light reflective film facing the backlight source (28; see at least figure 4) and is adjacent to the backlight source (28; see at least figure 4), and a second side edge of the second light reflective film (26b) is adjacent to a side surface of the brightness enhancement module (18; see at least figure 4).
Regarding claim 12, Matsukawa modified by Sugiura and Zhong et al. teaches the high-brightness display screen according to claim 6, but Matsukawa does not teach wherein an orthographic projection of the first light reflective film onto the first surface of the light guide plate forms a first orthographic projection; an orthographic projection of the second light reflective film onto the first surface of the light guide plate forms a second orthographic projection; an edge of the first orthographic projection coincides with an edge of the second orthographic projection; the rest part of the first orthographic projection locates outside of the second orthographic projection.
Sugiura further teaches wherein an orthographic projection (see figure 7) of the first light reflective film (23) onto the first surface of the light guide plate (22) forms a first orthographic projection (see figure 7); an orthographic projection (221) of the second light reflective film (24) onto the first surface of the light guide plate (22) forms a second orthographic projection (see figure 7); an edge of the first orthographic projection (see figure 7) coincides with an edge of the second orthographic projection (see figure 7); the rest part of the first orthographic projection locates outside of the second orthographic projection (see figure 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the display screen of Matsukawa to include orthographic projections of the first and second light reflective films as taught by Zhong et al. in order to increase the scattering result of the light guide plate and prevent light loss (see paragraph [0058] of Zhong et al.)
Claim(s) 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsukawa (US 2015/0146110 A1) in view of Sugiura (US 2014/0375897 A1) and Zhong et al. (US 2017/0045775 A1) as applied to claim 7 above and further in view of Yeo et al. (US 2006/0056166 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Matsukawa modified by Sugiura and Zhong et al. teaches the high-brightness display screen according to claim 7, and Matsukawa further teaches a diffusion film (18a; see at least figure 4) but Matsukawa does not explicitly teach wherein the brightness enhancement module comprises a lower brightness enhancement film, an upper brightness enhancement film, and a dual brightness enhancement film (DBEF); the diffusion film is disposed on the first surface of the light guide plate, the lower brightness enhancement film is disposed on a surface of the diffusion film, the upper brightness enhancement film is disposed on a surface of the lower brightness enhancement film, and the DBEF is disposed on a surface of the upper brightness enhancement film.
Yeo et al. teaches an LCD Backlight comprising a light guide comprising one or more collimating films such as 3M’s Brightness Enhancement Film added to the top of the light guide to direct more light toward the on-axis direction and a reflective polarizer such as 3M’s DBEF film can be added to increase the brightness through polarized light recycling (Paragraph 0130).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the display screen of Matsukawa to include a brightness enhancement films and a dual brightness enhancement film as taught by Yeo et al. to increase brightness of the LCD backlight (see paragraph [0130] of Yeo et al.)
Regarding claim 9, Matsukawa teaches the high-brightness display screen according to claim 8, and further teaches wherein the second side edge of the second light reflective film (26b; see at least figure 6) is adjacent to a side surface of the diffusion film (18a; see figure 6).
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsukawa (US 2015/0146110 A1) in view of Sugiura (US 2014/0375897 A1) and Zhong et al. (US 2017/0045775 A1) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Yeo et al. (US 2006/0056166 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Matsukawa modified by Sugiura and Zhong et al. teaches the high-brightness display screen according to claim 6, and Matsukawa further teaches the second light reflective film (326d) is arranged on and covers the second region of the first surface and extends out of edges of the second region (see at least figure 16).
Matsukawa does not explicitly teach wherein the high-brightness display screen further comprises a brightness enhancement module, the first surface of the light guide plate comprises a first region and a second region, the brightness enhancement module is arranged on and cover the first region, and the second region is disposed between the first region and the side surface of the light guide plate.
Yeo et al. teaches an LCD Backlight comprising a light guide comprising one or more collimating films such as 3M’s Brightness Enhancement Film added to the top of the light guide to direct more light toward the on-axis direction and a reflective polarizer such as 3M’s DBEF film can be added to increase the brightness through polarized light recycling (Paragraph 0130).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the display screen of Matsukawa to include a brightness enhancement films and a dual brightness enhancement film as taught by Yeo et al. to increase brightness of the LCD backlight (see paragraph [0130] of Yeo et al.).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 6-10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection necessitated by applicant’s amendment of independent claim 6. Claim 6 has been amended to include the limitation, “a lateral side of the second light reflective film away from the backlight source is directly attached to a lateral side of the first light reflective film facing the backlight source”. A new reference, Zhong et al. (US 2017/0045775 A1), has been found to teach the newly recited limitation. Therefore claim 6 remain rejected.
Dependent claims 7-10 and 12 are rejected based on dependency on a rejected base claim.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA MCMILLAN APENTENG whose telephone number is (571)272-5510. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 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, 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.
/JESSICA M APENTENG/Examiner, Art Unit 2875
/ABDULMAJEED AZIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2875