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 .
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 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.
Disposition of the Claims
Claims 1-11 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.
Claims 1, 3, and 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated over Shinchi (KR 20200115083 A, of record).
Regarding claim 1, Shinchi teaches an optical laminate (Fig. 2, 101), comprising: a laminate film including a substrate (10) and a surface-treated layer (30); and a retardation member (stack of retardation layers 71 and 72 connected by adhesive 80), wherein the substrate of the laminate film and the retardation member are arranged adjacent to each other (Fig. 2), wherein the retardation member includes a first retardation layer (71), an adhesive layer (80), and a second retardation layer (72) in the stated order (see Fig. 2), and wherein the adhesive layer has a thickness of 0.5 um or more and 1.3 um or less (¶109, a 1 micron adhesive between the retardation layers).
Regarding claim 3, Shinchi teaches the optical laminate according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the adhesive layer is a cured layer of a resin (¶74-75).
Regarding claim 5, Shinchi teaches the optical laminate according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the substrate of the laminate film contains a (meth)acrylic resin (Figs. 1 and 2, ¶63, ¶65, ¶72).
Regarding claim 6, Shinchi teaches the optical laminate according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the surface-treated layer of the laminate film has an antireflection function (Figs. 1 and 2, ¶18, ¶20, and ¶111).
Regarding claim 7, Shinchi teaches the optical laminate according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the first retardation layer shows a refractive index characteristic of nx>ny~nz and satisfies a relationship of Re(450)<Re(550)<Re(650) where Re(450) represents an in-plane retardation measured at 23°C with light having a wavelength of 450 nm, Re(550) represents an in-plane retardation measured at 23°C with light having a wavelength of 550 nm, and Re(650) represents an in-plane retardation measured at 23°C with light having a wavelength of 650 nm (Figs. 1 and 2, ¶59, ¶61, ¶64, ¶68, ¶70).
Regarding claim 8, Shinchi teaches the optical laminate according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the second retardation layer shows a refractive index characteristic of nz>=nx>=ny (Figs. 1 and 2, ¶70, ¶72).
Regarding claim 9, Shinchi teaches the optical laminate according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the optical laminate has a Y value of a single layer transmittance subjected to visibility correction of 93% or more (Figs. 1 and 2, ¶33, ¶109).
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
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.
Claims 2, 4, 10, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shinchi as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of 3M (KR 2020 0066672 A, of record).
Regarding claim 2 and 4, Shinchi teaches the optical laminate according to claim 1, but does not explicitly show wherein the optical laminate has a laminate smoothness of 0.7 arcmin or less.
3M explicitly shows rendering optical surfaces having retardation layers stacked thereon to be smooth (¶1, ¶69, ¶71-72, ¶165).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have rendered the laminate of Shinchi as smooth as possible according to the teachings of 3M toward improving optical quality, thereby achieving the claimed range.
Regarding claim 10 and 11, drawn to device and method using the laminate of claim 1, Shinchi the optical laminate of claim 1, but does not explicitly show a lens unit to be used in a display system configured to display an image to a user, the lens unit comprising: a reflection-type polarizing member configured to reflect light, which has been emitted toward a front side from a display surface of a display element configured to display the image, and has passed through a polarizing member and a first A/4 member; a first lens portion arranged on an optical path between the display element and the reflection-type polarizing member;a half mirror arranged between the display element and the first lens portion, the half mirror being configured to transmit the light emitted from the display element and to reflect the light reflected by the reflection-type polarizing member toward the reflection-type polarizing member; a second lens portion arranged on the front side of the reflection-type polarizing member; and the optical laminate of claim 1 arranged on an optical path between the half mirror and the reflection-type polarizing member.
3M drawn to polarizing optical systems explicitly shows a reflection-type polarizing member (Figs. 1 and 2) configured to reflect light, which has been emitted toward a front side from a display surface of a display element (250) configured to display the image, and has passed through a polarizing member and a first lambda/4 member (“In some embodiments, the display 250 emits light in the blocking polarization state of the reflective polarizer, and the retarders 235 and 239 are arranged such that light emitted by the display is first incident on the reflective polarizer in the blocking polarization state”);
a first lens portion (226) arranged on an optical path between the display element and the reflection-type polarizing member (222);
a half mirror (242) arranged between the display element and the first lens portion (Fig. 2), the half mirror being configured to transmit the light emitted from the display element and to reflect the light reflected by the reflection-type polarizing member toward the reflection-type polarizing member (“The partial reflector can be, for example, a half mirror … In some embodiments, the partial reflector can be a reflective polarizer, or can have a polarization dependent reflectance.”);
a second lens portion (210) arranged on the front side of the reflection-type polarizing member (Fig. 2); and retardation member arranged on an optical path between the half mirror and the reflection-type polarizing member (Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the laminate of Shinchi in the position of the retardation member of 3M and thus improved the contrast of the image through improved polarization discrimination.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, and generally discloses laminates having retardation layers.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COLLIN X BEATTY whose telephone number is (571)270-1255. The examiner can normally be reached M - F, 10am - 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, Thomas Pham can be reached on 5712723689. 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.
/COLLIN X BEATTY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights