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 certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/16/2024 and 04/21/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 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.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamaguchi et al. (KR 20200116861; the English translation document attached, hereinafter “Yamaguchi”).
Regarding claim 1, Yamaguchi discloses an elliptically polarizing plate (see Fig. 2 and Para. [0027] identifying the embodiment) comprising:
a polarizing plate (40; Para. [0056] “a polarizing plate 40”) including a polarizer (41; Para. [0031] “the polarizing layer 41”), a first transparent protective film (42; Paras. [0031] “the first protective layer 42” and [0074] “As the protective layer, for example, a film formed of a thermoplastic resin excellent in transparency”) bonded to a first principal surface of the polarizer (Fig. 2 and Para. [0046]), and a second transparent protective film (43; Paras. [0031], [0074]) bonded to a second principal surface of the polarizer (Fig. 2 and Para. [0046]); and
a retardation layer (21, 22; Para. [0056] “a first retardation layer 21, an adhesive layer 35, and a second retardation layer 22 in this order”) bonded onto the first transparent protective film of the polarizing plate,
the elliptically polarizing plate being a sized piece having an irregularly shape that is not a rectangle in its plan view (Para. [0038] teaching possible irregular shapes for the optical laminate”),
wherein
an angle between an absorption axis direction of the polarizer and a slow axis direction of the retardation layer is 10 to 80° (Para. [0057] teaching the angle may be 40 to 50°),
the retardation layer satisfies Re(450)<Re(550)<Re(650), wherein Re(450) represents a front retardation at a wavelength of 450 nm, Re(550) represents a front retardation at a wavelength of 550 nm, and Re(650) represents a front retardation at a wavelength of 650 nm (Para. [0057] “first retardation layer 21 is used as a quarter wave plate having reverse wavelength dispersion”), and
the retardation layer includes at least one aligned liquid crystal layer in which liquid crystal molecules are homogeneously aligned (see Para. [0032] and [0045] teaching 21 being a liquid crystal layer containing a liquid crystal compound and used as an A-plate; the examiner considers an A-plate is defined as a uniaxial retardation layer whose extraordinary optic axis lies entirely in the plate of the film, i.e., the LC molecules therein have homogeneous (planar) alignment).
Yamaguchi does not explicitly disclose the polarizer has a thickness of 15 μm or more.
However, Yamaguchi teaches the polarizer has a thickness between 2 and 40 μm (Para. [0070]) (A prima facie case of obviousness exists where claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art [MPEP 2144.05]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the polarizer as disclosed by Yamaguchi, wherein the polarizer has a thickness of 15 μm or more, for the purpose of deciding a thickness of the polarizer using a known polarizer and from the viewpoint of thinning the polarizing layer (Yamaguchi: Para. [0070]).
Regarding claim 2, Yamaguchi discloses the limitations of claim 1 above, and further discloses wherein
the retardation layer includes two or more aligned liquid crystal layers (see Paras. [0032] and [0057] teaching 21 and 22 being a liquid crystal layer containing a liquid crystal compound), and
at least one of the aligned liquid crystal layers is an aligned liquid crystal layer in which liquid crystal molecules are homogeneously aligned (see Paras. [0045], [0057] and [0124] teaching 21 is an A-plate and 22 is a C-plate) (the examiner considers an A-plate is defined as a uniaxial retardation layer whose extraordinary optic axis lies in the plate of the film, i.e., the LC molecules therein have homogeneous (planar) alignment).
Regarding claim 3, Yamaguchi discloses the limitations of claim 1 above, and further discloses wherein the retardation layer includes an aligned liquid crystal layer in which liquid crystal molecules are homogeneously aligned and an aligned liquid crystal layer in which liquid crystal molecules are homeotropically aligned (see Paras. [0045], [0057] and [0124] teaching 21 is an A-plate and 22 is a C-plate) (the examiner considers the LC molecules in an A-plate have homogeneous (planar) alignment, and the LC molecules in a C-plate stand perpendicular to the substrate, having homeotropic alignment).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamaguchi in view of Ito et al. (US 20060083867, hereinafter “Ito”).
Regarding claim 4, Yamaguchi discloses the limitations of claim 1 above.
Yamaguchi does not explicitly disclose the retardation layer includes two or more aligned liquid crystal layers in which liquid crystal molecules are homogeneously aligned, and an angle between slow axis directions of the aligned liquid crystal layers is 10 to 80°.
However, Ito teaches a retardation layer includes two or more aligned liquid crystal layers in which liquid crystal molecules are homogeneously aligned, and an angle between slow axis directions of the aligned liquid crystal layers is 60° (see Fig. 1 and Paras. [0045]-[0046] teaching the layers A and B, in which liquid crystal molecules are homogeneously aligned, and an angle between slow axis directions of the aligned liquid crystal layers is 60°).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the retardation layer as disclosed by Yamaguchi with the teachings of Ito, wherein the retardation layer includes two or more aligned liquid crystal layers in which liquid crystal molecules are homogeneously aligned, and an angle between slow axis directions of the aligned liquid crystal layers is 10 to 80°, for the purpose of using a known circularly polarized plate (Ito: Paras. [0045]-[0046]).
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamaguchi in view of Miyaki et al. (JP 2012247494; the English translation document attached, hereinafter “Miyaki”).
Regarding claim 5, Yamaguchi discloses the limitations of claim 1 above.
Yamaguchi does not necessarily disclose an on-vehicle image display device comprising:
an image display cell; and
the elliptically polarizing plate according to claim 1 disposed on a viewing-side surface of the image display cell.
However, Miyaki teaches an on-vehicle image display device (Fig. 1 and Page 4 lines 27-29, Page 12 lines 7-8) comprising:
an image display cell (10; Page 4 lines 1-2 and 31); and
a polarizing plate (31 and/or 32; Page 4 lines 30-32) disposed on a viewing-side surface of the image display cell.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the polarizing plate as disclosed by Yamaguchi with the teachings of Miyaki, to have an on-vehicle image display device comprising: an image display cell; and the elliptically polarizing plate according to claim 1 disposed on a viewing-side surface of the image display cell, for the purpose of utilizing the polarizing plate for a vehicle (Miyaki: Page 12 lines 7-8) and as conventionally known in the art.
Regarding claim 6, Yamaguchi as modified by Miyaki discloses the limitations of claim 5 above,.
Yamaguchi does not necessarily disclose the image display cell is an organic light emitting diode cell.
However, Miyaki teaches the image display cell is an organic light emitting diode cell (Page 4 lines 36-37).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the polarizing plate as disclosed by Yamaguchi with the teachings of Otani, wherein the image display cell is an organic light emitting diode cell, for the purpose of utilizing the polarizing plate for a vehicle (Miyaki: Page 12 lines 7-8) and as conventionally known in the art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN Y JUNG whose telephone number is (469)295-9076. The examiner can normally be reached on 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, Michael H Caley can be reached on (571)272-2286. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JONATHAN Y JUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights