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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 6, and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20190339568 A1 (Pan; Po-Hung).
PNG
media_image1.png
598
432
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
718
358
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Per claim 1, Pan teaches an optical device [500], comprising a substrate [520] with a front surface [520T], a back surface [520R] and a circumferential side surface [area corresponding to 150 up to the side surface of the substrate] free of light absorbent material [the portion form the seal to the substrate side surface], wherein at least one portion of an edge of the front surface has a texturization [embedded pattern 580], wherein recesses of the texturization are filled with a light-absorbent material [shielding layer 510], and wherein the circumferential side surface is free of light-absorbent material [see figure 1A and figure 5, shielding layer 510 is form within the surface of the substrate towards the edge of the display], the at least one portion of the edge of the front surface having the texturization with recesses filled with the light-absorbent material provides a front edge surface [the top surface is the front surface and the edge region include the portion with embedded material 510].
Per claim 2, Pan teaches the optical device of claim 1, wherein the recesses of the texturization extend from the front surface into the substrate [see figure 5 enlarged portion].
Per claim 4, Pan teaches the optical device any of claim 1, wherein the front edge surface which is at the same level as an adjacent non-edge surface of the front surface [the front surface of the substrate at the non-edge portion is at the same level as the edge portion from the seal to the side surface of the substrate].
Per claim 6, Pan teaches the optical device of claim 1, wherein the optical device is selected from the group consisting of: a waveguide, a wave guide combiner, a flat optical device, a substrate having optical structures, a cover glass, a lens and a metasurface lens [the device is a substrate of a display which is an optical device].
Per claim 8, Pan teaches the optical device of claim 1, wherein the substrate is made of transparent material comprising one or more constituents selected from the group consisting of silicon (Si), silicon dioxide (SiO2), fused silica, quartz, silicon carbide (SiC), germanium (Ge), silicon germanium (SiGe), indium phosphide (InP), gallium arsenide (GaAs), gallium nitride (GaN), sapphire, lithium tantalate (LiTaO3), lithium niobate (LiNbO3), or combinations thereof [see paragraph 0025: “The material of the top substrate 120 may be glass, quartz, or the like.”]
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 3, 5, 10-12, 14-22, and 24-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20190339568 A1 (Pan; Po-Hung).
Per claims 3, 5, and 24, Pan teaches the optical device of claim 1 or 2 but lacks at least one portion of an edge of the back surface has a texturization, and wherein the recesses of the texturization extend from the back surface into the substrate and are filled with a light-absorbent material. However, official notice is hereby taken that it would have been common knowledge to form recesses of the texturization to extend from the back surface into the substrate and are filled with a light-absorbent material to improve the adhesion strength of the sealant and reduce light leakage. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per claim 10, Pan teaches a method of manufacturing a plurality of optical devices, comprising: - defining individual edges of the plurality of optical devices on a substrate surface [580]; - texturizing at least one portion of the individual edges by removing material from the substrate surface [see paragraph 0040: “he top substrate 520 may be patterned by, for example, dry or wet etching.”]; - filling recesses of the at least one texturized portion with a light-absorbent material [510], but lacks - cutting the plurality of optical devices out of the substrate. However, official notice is hereby taken that it would have been common knowledge to cut the plurality of optical devices out of the substrate to reduce manufacturing costs. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per claim 11, Pan teaches the method of claim 10, wherein filling the recesses of the at least one texturized portion with the light-absorbent material comprises pushing the light-absorbent material into the recesses of the at least one texturized portion [see paragraph 0034: “a wet process such as an inkjet printing process may be performed to form the patterned light shielding layer”].
Per claim 12, Pan teaches the method of claim 10 or 11, but lacks filling the recesses of the at least one texturized portion with the light-absorbent material comprises using a screen-printing method. However, official notice is hereby taken that it would have been common knowledge to filling the recesses of the at least one texturized portion with the light-absorbent material comprises using a screen-printing method to reduce manufacturing costs. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per claim 14, Pan teaches the method of claim 10, but lacks the step of removing material from the substrate surface comprises using one or more techniques selected from the group consisting of: wet etching, dry etching and laser ablation. However, official notice is hereby taken that it would have been common knowledge to remove material from the substrate surface comprises using one or more techniques selected from the group consisting of: wet etching, dry etching and laser ablation to simplify manufacturing. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per claim 15, Pan teaches the method of claim 10, wherein texturizing comprises creating one or more of a random texture, a targeted random texture, a randomized grating, an oriented grating, or a microstructure [see figure 5, an oriented grating is shown]
Per claims 16, 17, and 22, Pan teaches the method of claim 10, but the at least one portion of the individual edges has a band width W of 1.0 mm <W< 3.0 mm, or 1.5 mm <W< 2.5 mm, and wherein the at least one portion of the individual edges comprises a first portion having a first width W1 and a second portion having a second width W2, wherein the first width W1 is smaller than the second width W2. However, official notice is hereby taken that it would have been common knowledge to form one portion of the individual edges has a band width W of 1.0 mm <W< 3.0 mm or 1.5 mm <W< 2.5 mm, and wherein the at least one portion of the individual edges comprises a first portion having a first width W1 and a second portion having a second width W2, wherein the first width W1 is smaller than the second width W2. Reduced unviewable edges and decreased the bezel would have been an expected benefit. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per claim 18, Pan teaches the method of claim 10, but lacks curing the light-absorbent material, particularly prior to cutting the plurality of optical devices out of the substrate. However, official notice is hereby taken that it would have been common knowledge cure the light-absorbent material, prior to cutting the plurality of optical devices out of the substrate to simplify manufacturing. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per claim 19, Pan teaches the method of any of claim[[s]] 10 to 18, wherein the optical devices are selected from the group consisting of: a waveguide, a wave guide combiner, a flat optical device, a substrate having optical structures, a cover glass, a lens and a metasurface lens [the device is a substrate of a display which is an optical device].
Per claim 20, Pan teaches the method of claim 10, wherein the substrate is made of transparent material comprising one or more constituents selected from the group consisting of silicon (Si), silicon dioxide (SiO2), fused silica, quartz, silicon carbide (SiC), germanium (Ge), silicon germanium (SiGe), indium phosphide (InP), gallium arsenide (GaAs), gallium nitride (GaN), sapphire, lithium tantalate (LiTaO3), lithium niobate (LiNbO3), or combinations thereof [see paragraph 0025: “The material of the top substrate 120 may be glass, quartz, or the like.”]
Per claim 21, Pan teaches the method of claim 15, but lack the texturizing comprising a plurality of micro pyramids. However, official notice is hereby taken that it would have been common knowledge form the texture with a plurality of micro pyramids to simplify manufacturing. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per claim 25, Pan teaches the optical device of claim 24 but lacks the back surface of the substrate is an exposed surface that is free of an overlying layer. However, official notice is hereby taken that it would have been common knowledge to form the back surface of the substrate to expose surface to be free of an overlying layer to reduce cell thickness. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20190339568 A1 (Pan; Po-Hung), as applied to claims 3, 5, 10-12, 14-22, and 24-25 above, and further in view of US 20090115942 A1.
PNG
media_image3.png
280
416
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Per claim 23, Pan teaches the optical device of claim 1, but lacks the front surface of the substrate is an exposed surface that is free of an overlying layer. However, 942 teaches a substrate with a top surface free of overlying layers and a lower surface with textured area. An expected benefit of combining 942 with Pan would have been simplified manufacturing. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine 942 with Pan.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 13 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.
Per claim 13, the prior art teaches the method of claim 10. In combination with the limitations above, the prior art does not teach a refractive index of the light-absorbent material substantially matches a refractive index of the substrate.
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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-6, 8, and 10-25 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES A DUDEK whose telephone number is (571)272-2290. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6:30-4:30 MT.
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, Jennifer Carruth can be reached at 571-272-9791. 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.
/JAMES A DUDEK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
