DETAILED ACTION
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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) 1-3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakai et al (US PG Pub. No. 2017/0082895) in view of Sutherland et al (US Patent No. 6,950,173) and further in view of Doane et al (US Patent No. 4,688,900).
Regarding Claim 1: Sakai discloses, at least, in figure 1A, A polymer dispersed liquid crystal film (9 is the LC (light diffusing) film which can be PDLC,¶ [0107]) comprising in this order: a first transparent conductive film; a polymer dispersed liquid crystal layer (9) including a polymer matrix and droplets of a liquid crystal compound dispersed in the polymer matrix (¶ [0110]); and a second transparent conductive film, wherein the polymer dispersed liquid crystal film exhibits a lower haze under a voltage applied state than under a no voltage applied state(no voltage state is scattering state (high haze, ¶ [0110]), applied voltage is transparent state (low haze, ¶ [0110])),
1.) Sakai discloses the LC display (7) which would include the electrodes (first and second conductive films) but does not disclose them .
Sutherland teaches a typical PDLC device with electrodes on either side of the LC layer (col. 4, lines 30-35).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide electrodes, as claimed, as taught by Sutherland, in the device of Sakai, to provide functionality to the device of Sakai.
Sakai also fails to disclose: 2.) and wherein the haze in the no voltage applied state exhibits polarization dependency.
Doane wherein the haze (ability to transmit light) in the no voltage applied state exhibits polarization dependency (col. 14, line 65ff, it became partially clear (low haze) when stretched (no voltage being applied) and polarization dependent (col. 15, first paragraph)(no voltage is being applied to this example).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to stretch the PDLC layer of Sakai, to make it polarization dependent and eliminate the need for one separate polarizer.
Regarding Claim 2, Sakai, as modified by Doan, fails to disclose: wherein, under the no voltage applied state, a maximum value of a difference between a haze at a time when linearly polarized light vibrating in a first direction is caused to enter the polymer dispersed liquid crystal film perpendicularly to a main surface thereof and a haze at a time when linearly polarized light vibrating in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction is caused to enter the polymer dispersed liquid crystal film perpendicularly to the main surface is 10% or more.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the claimed haze relationships in the device of Sakai, as modified by Doane, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable range involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding Claim 3, Sakai discloses: wherein the liquid crystal compound includes a nematic liquid crystal compound (¶ [0087], last 2 lines)
Regarding Claim 5; Sakai fails to disclose: and a polarizer arranged on one side of the polymer dispersed liquid crystal film.
Doane (900) teaches in claim 1, using the stretched PDLC layer as a polarizer and (lines 57-58, col.4) teaches using it with another polarizer to create a light switch.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add another polarizer to the stretch PDLC configuration of Sakai, as modified by Doane, to create a light switch.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Claim(s) 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakai (895) in view of Sutherland (173) and Doane (900) and further in view of Chang et al (US PG Pub. No. 2017/0153467).
Regarding Claim 4, Sakai fails to disclose: wherein a polymer matrix-forming resin for forming the polymer matrix includes at least one kind selected from a urethane-based resin, an acrylic resin, and a polyvinyl alcohol-based resin.
Chang et al (US PG Pub. No. 2017/0153467) teaches in claims 4 and 6, page 4) using an acrylic resin in producing a PDLC composition.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to try an acrylic resin, as taught by Chang, in the PDLC composition of Sakai, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice, In re Leshin,125USPQ 416.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Claim(s) 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Doane et al (US Patent No. 4,688,900) in view of Powers et al (US PG Pub. No. 2010/0045924).
Regarding Claim 6, Doane discloses: A method of producing a polymer dispersed liquid crystal film (title), comprising in this order: applying, to a surface of a release liner, an application liquid containing a liquid crystal compound, a polymer matrix-forming resin (col. 14, lines 53-56), and a solvent (line 58, trimethylene glycol) to form an applied layer; drying the applied layer (line 62, cured) to form a polymer dispersed liquid crystal layer (title) including a polymer matrix and droplets of the liquid crystal compound dispersed in the polymer matrix (abstract) on the release liner; stretching the polymer dispersed liquid crystal layer (line 68, col. 14); obtaining a laminate of the polymer dispersed liquid crystal layer and a first transparent conductive film; and laminating a second transparent conductive film on the polymer dispersed liquid crystal layer on an opposite side to a side on which the first transparent conductive film is arranged (col. 9, lines 20-23, sandwiched between).
Doane fails to disclose a release liner.
Powers teaches in paragraph [0071]) that providing a release liner prevents what is put on it from prematurely adhering to other surfaces.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the PDLC composition of a release liner, to prevent it from prematurely adhering to other surfaces prior to transfer.
Regarding Claim 7, Sakai fails to disclose: wherein a stretching ratio of the polymer dispersed liquid crystal layer is more than 1.0 times and 5 times or less.
However, it is obvious that if the PDLC film is stretch too much, it will break and if not stretched enough will limit the polarization. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the claimed stretching ratio range, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding Claim 8, Doane discloses: wherein the liquid crystal compound includes a nematic liquid crystal compound (col. 14, lines 65).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Claim(s) 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Doane (900) and Powers (924) and further in view of Chang (467).
Regarding Claim 9, Doane fails to disclose: wherein a polymer matrix-forming resin for forming the polymer matrix includes at least one kind selected from a urethane-based resin, an acrylic resin, and a polyvinyl alcohol-based resin.(it is an epoxy resin).
Chang teaches in claims 4 and 6, page 4) using an acrylic resin as an alternative to an epoxy resin in producing a PDLC composition.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to try an acrylic resin in place of the epoxy resin of Doane, as taught by Chang, in the PDLC composition since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice, In re Leshin,125USPQ 416.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONTACT INFORMATION
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DONALD L RALEIGH whose telephone number is (571)270-3407. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7AM -3 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, James R. Greece can be reached at 571-272-3711. 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.
/DONALD L RALEIGH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875