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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/18/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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 1-5, 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ota (US 20220137281 A1, of record IDS) in view of Kurita et al. (US 20150243206 A1) (Kurita, hereafter).
Regarding claim 1, Ota discloses (Figures 1-19 and corresponding text) a liquid crystal display device (Figure 1, π39)including a display panel and a back light (π39-π40), (Figure 2)the back light 20 ; 33having a light source (30) and a group of optical sheets (50), the light source including a light source substrate ((Figure 9: $61) and light emitting diodes (60) arranged on the light source substrate (61), see figure 3, being divided into segments in a plan view, the segment (Figure 9) including at least one light emitting diode (60). Ota fails to explicitly disclose wherein the segment is surrounded by a stacked structure of a lower reflection wall and an upper reflection wall.
Kurita discloses (Figures 2A-2D) in figure 2A, the plurality of the reflection units (114) are provided such that each light source (each LED chip 112) is surrounded by four of the reflection units (114) arranged in two rows and two columns, and the reflection unit (114) is disposed in the vicinity of the center of four of the LED chips (112) arranged in two rows and two columns. In addition, in the example in FIG. 2A, the reflection unit (114) is provided such that the bottom surface of the quadrangular pyramid is in parallel with the LED substrate (110)and four sides (bases) constituting the bottom surface of the reflection unit (114) face the four LED chips (112) described above at positions closest to the reflection unit (114); in this configuration it is possible to level light from the light emission unit (111), and suppress the leakage of the light from the light emission unit (111) to areas corresponding to the other light emission units (111) (leakage of light). By extension, it is possible to increase the degree of improvement of contrast by local dimming control (brightness control for each light emission unit corresponding to the feature of an image) (π64-π70).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date modify the liquid crystal display device of Ota as disclosed by Kurita wherein the segment is surrounded by a stacked structure of a lower reflection wall and an upper reflection wall the motivation being to suppress the leakage of the light from the light emission unit to other areas of light emission and to some possible increase the degree of improvement of contrast by local dimming control (brightness control for each light emission unit corresponding to the feature of an image).
Regarding claim 2, Ota discloses (Figure 5: #62) wherein the light emitting diode is covered by a transparent resin (π52).
Regarding claims 3-5 Ota as modified by Kurita discloses the upper and lower reflection wall. Ota as modified by Kurita discloses fails to explicitly discloses wherein a thickness of the transparent resin is same as that of the lower reflection wall or thicker than that of the lower reflection wall (claim3), wherein a width of the lower reflection wall is same or larger than a height of the lower reflection wall (claim 4); wherein a width of the upper reflection wall is same or larger than a height of the upper reflection wall (claim 5).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date further modify the liquid crystal display device of Ota as modified by Kurita discloses wherein a thickness of the transparent resin is same as that of the lower reflection wall or thicker than that of the lower reflection wall, wherein a width of the lower reflection wall is same or larger than a height of the lower reflection wall; wherein a width of the upper reflection wall is same or larger than a height of the upper reflection wall
Regarding claim 7, Ota further discloses wherein the transparent resin is formed from silicone resin (π52).
Regarding claim 8, the limitation wherein an optical sheet group is disposed on the upper reflection wall, an area surrounded by the transparent resin, the upper reflection wall, and the optical sheet group is an empty space etc do not appear to contain any additional features which define more than slight constructional changes which come within the scope of the customary (design) practice followed by persons skilled in the art, especially as the advantages thus achieved can be readily contemplated in advance. Alternatively, these limitations are not deemed patentable since the applicant’s disclosure fails to show such limitations to solve any problems or to yield any unobvious advantage that is not within the scope of the teachings applied. Therefore, such limitations would be a matter of design alternative.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify the liquid crystal display of Ota as modified by Kurita wherein an optical sheet group is disposed on the upper reflection wall, an area surrounded by the transparent resin, the upper reflection wall, and the optical sheet group is an empty space, since matters of design alternative require only routine skill.
Regarding claim 9, Ota discloses wherein the optical sheet group includes a color conversion sheet (π18, π45)
Regarding claim 10, Ota discloses wherein the optical sheet group includes a prism sheet (π45).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ota (US 20220137281 A1) in view of Kurita et al. (US 20150243206 A1) (Kurita, hereafter)., and in further view of Moon et al. (US 20200013932 A1 ) (Moon, hereafter).
Ota as modified by Kurita discloses the liquid crystal display device set forth above (see rejection claim 1). Ota as modified by Kurita disclose the upper and lower wall (see rejection claim 1). Ota as modified by Kurita failed to explicitly disclose wherein the lower reflection wall and the upper reflection wall are formed from silicone resin containing reflective pigments.
Moon discloses (Figure 10, claim 1, π180-π190) semiconductor device package comprising: a semiconductor device including a substrate, a light emitting structure, the package containing reflection member (130) surrounding the emission area (100).TiO2(reflectivity/scattering particle added to a white silicone resin (π186-π188).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify the liquid crystal display of Ota as disclosed by Moon wherein the lower reflection wall and the upper reflection wall are formed from silicone resin containing reflective pigments the motivation being to provide a device of improved . light extraction efficiency and white light conversion efficiency.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found in the 892 and below:
US 20120307489 A1 reflectors surround the LEDs
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRACIE Y GREEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3104. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thursday, 10am-8pm.
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.
/TRACIE Y GREEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights