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 .
Status of Claims
Claim(s) 1-10 are currently 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2009/0154197 A1 Sun et al. (hereinafter “Sun”).
Regarding claim 1
Sun teaches a microstructured light-collection film structure (corresponding to optical film 2) [Figs. 2, 4B and 7B, paras. 0025, 0029 and 0031] comprising:
a normal light-receiving optical film, having a light-receiving face (corresponding to light guide 301) [Figs. 2, 4B and 7B, paras. 0025, 0029 and 0031]; and
a plurality of microstructures (210) [Figs. 4B and 7B, paras. 0025 and 0029], in an array arrangement and arranged on the light-receiving face of a normal light-receiving optical film (301) [Figs. 2, 4B and 7B, paras. 0025, 0029 and 0031],
wherein each of the microstructures (210) comprises a bottom face (20), a first light-facing face (2104), a second light-facing face (2106), and a third light-facing face (2105) [Fig. 4B para. 0029],
the first light-facing face (2104) extends upward from an end of the bottom face (20), a first interior angle is formed between the first light-facing face (2104) and the bottom face (20) [Fig. 4B],
the second light-facing face (2106) is connected to an end of the first light-facing face (2104) away from the bottom face and extends upward [Fig. 4B], a second interior angle is formed between the second light-facing face (2106) and the first light-facing face (2104) [Fig. 4B],
one end of the third light-facing face (2105) is connected to an end of the second light-facing face (2106) away from the end thereof connected to the first light-facing face (2104) and extends downward [Fig. 4B], and another end of the third light-facing face (2105) is connected to an end of the bottom face (20) away from the end thereof connected to the first light-facing face (2104) [Fig. 4B].
PNG
media_image1.png
240
342
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 4B
Regarding claim 2
Sun teaches the microstructured light-collection film structure as set forth above, wherein the third light-facing face (2105) has a convex arc in the form of a free-form surface (“…both of the first and the second curved surfaces of any microstructure 210 can be respectively defined by a curvature function selected from the group consisting of a planar function, a spherical function, a non-spherical function and an irregular curved surface function”) [Fig. 4B and para. 0029].
Regarding claim 9
Sun teaches the microstructured light-collection film structure as set forth above, wherein the array arrangement is a symmetrical array arrangement, comprising at least but not limited to a circular symmetrical array arrangement, a polygonal symmetrical array arrangement, and a single-axis symmetrical array arrangement [Figs. 2,, 7B and 4B; para. 0029].
Regarding claim 10
Sun teaches the microstructured light-collection film structure as set forth above, wherein the array arrangement is a linear array arrangement, comprising at least but not limited to a circular linear array arrangement, a polygonal linear array arrangement, and a single-axis linear array arrangement (“the track of the microstructure 210 extending in the Y-direction can be a straight line 211”) [Fig. 5 and para. 0030].
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 7 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun, as applied to claims 1, 2, 9 and 10 above, and further in view of US 20100181014 A1, Raymond et al. (hereinafter “Raymond”).
Regarding claim 7
Sun teaches the microstructured light-collection film structure as set forth above, wherein the first interior angle is greater than or equal to 50° and less than or equal to 80° (see Fig. 4B).
If the above is found insufficient with regards to the first interior angle, Raymond teaches a microstructured light-collection film structure [Fig. 4 and para. 0062], wherein the angles between the faces of microstructures are selected such that the desired optical path length over a particular range of angles of incidence is achieved [paras. 0015, 0020 and 0065-0066].
Absent a showing of criticality or unexpected results with respect to the first interior angle (a result-effective variable), it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to optimize said parameter through routine experimentation in order to achieve the desired optical path length of received light and to capture enough reflected light. It has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art [MPEP 2144.05].
Regarding claim 8
Sun teaches the microstructured light-collection film structure as set forth above, wherein the second interior angle is greater than or equal to 120° and less than or equal to 175° (see Fig. 4B), at least a third interior angle is formed between the second light-facing face and the first light-facing face, and the third interior angle is greater than or equal to 130° and less than or equal to 160° (see Fig. 4B).
If the above is found insufficient with regards to the second and third interior angles, Raymond teaches a microstructured light-collection film structure [Fig. 4 and para. 0062], wherein the angles between the faces of microstructures are selected such that the desired optical path length over a particular range of angles of incidence is achieved [paras. 0015, 0020 and 0065-0066].
Absent a showing of criticality or unexpected results with respect to the second and third interior angles (a result-effective variable), it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to optimize said parameters through routine experimentation in order to achieve the desired optical path length of received light and to capture enough reflected light. It has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art [MPEP 2144.05].
Claim(s) 3 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun as applied to claims 1, 2, 9 and 10 above, and further in view of US 2013/0182331 A1, Hebrink et al. (hereinafter “Hebrink”) with evidentiary support provided by CN 104377258 A, Wang et al. (hereinafter “Wang”) and US 2001/0046086 A1, Wheatley et al. (hereinafter “Wheatley”).
Regarding claim 3
Sun does not teach an anti-reflective film covering the microstructures, wherein the anti-reflective film has a first refractive index n1.
Hebrink teaches a microstructured light-collection film structure (40) comprising an anti-reflective film (silica coating 46) covering the surface of a plurality of microstructures (41) [Fig. 4 and para. 0108], wherein the anti-reflective film has a first refractive index n1 (refractive index of porous silica) [paras. 0106 and 0108; see also para. 0007 of Wang for evidentiary support]. The anti-reflective coating increasing light transmission from reflection reduction [para. 0106].
Sun and Hebrink are analogous inventions in the field of microstructured light-light-collection film structures. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the microstructured light-collection film structure of Sun to comprise an antireflective film covering, as in Hebrink, in order to improve light transmission over a wider range of angles [Hebrink, para. 0106].
Regarding claim 4
Sun teaches the microstructures having a second refractive index n2 (corresponding to the material by which the microstructures 21 are formed).
Sun is silent to the material of said microstructures and therefore fails to disclose the first refractive index n1 being less than the second refractive index n2.
Hebrink teaches a microstructured light-collection film structure (40) wherein the microstructures may be made of a material such as, for example, PMMA, polyvinylidene fluoride, PE, PP, among others [paras. 0030-0031; see also para. 0007 of Wang and para. 0033 of Wheatley for evidentiary support].
Therefore, because Hebrink teaches choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable materials, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious to pursue the known options with reasonable expectation of success [see MPEP 2143]. Since Hebrink teaches that any of PMMA, polyvinylidene fluoride, PE and PP leads to the anticipated success, said materials are not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense [see MPEP 2143]. Examiner notes that choosing for example, PMMA, leads to the first refractive index n1 is less than the second refractive index n2.
The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) [MPEP 2144.07].
Claim(s) 1 and 3-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hebrink in view of Sun, with evidentiary support provided by Wang and Wheatley.
Regarding claim 1
Hebrink teaches a microstructured light-collection film structure (40) [Fig. 4 and para. 0108], comprising:
a normal light-receiving optical film (corresponding to base portion 45 which may be a separate layer form the structures 41 as indicated by dashed line 48), having a light-receiving face [Fig. 4 and para. 0108]; and
a plurality of microstructures (see structured film substrate 43 having prism structures 41), in an array arrangement and arranged on the light-receiving face of the normal light-receiving optical film (45) [Fig. 4, paras. 0082 and 0108],
wherein each of the microstructures (41) comprises a bottom face (48), a first light-facing face (see left slope of 41), a second light-facing face (area of opposing slope furthest from 48), and a third light-facing face (area of opposing slope closer to 48),
the first light-facing face extends upward from an end of the bottom face (48) [Fig. 4], a first interior angle is formed between the first light-facing face and the bottom face (48) [Fig. 4], and
one end of the third light-facing face extends downward [Fig. 4], and another end of the third light-facing face is connected to an end of the bottom face (48) away from the end thereof connected to the first light-facing face [Fig. 4].
Hebrink Does not teach a second light-facing face as required by the claim, where the second light-facing face is connected to an end of the first light-facing face away from the bottom face and extends upward, a second interior angle is formed between the second light-facing face and the first light-facing face, and wherein one end of the third light-facing face is connected to an end of the second light-facing face away from the end thereof connected to the first light-facing face.
Sun teaches a microstructured light-collection film structure (corresponding to optical film 2) [Figs. 2, 4B and 7B, paras. 0025, 0029 and 0031] comprising a plurality of microstructures (210) [Figs. 4B and 7B, paras. 0025 and 0029], in an array arrangement and arranged on the light-receiving face of a normal light-receiving optical film (corresponding to light guide 301) [Figs. 2, 4B and 7B, paras. 0025, 0029 and 0031],
wherein each of the microstructures (210) comprises a bottom face (20), a first light-facing face (2104), a second light-facing face (2106), and a third light-facing face (2105) [Fig. 4B para. 0029],
the first light-facing face (2104) extends upward from an end of the bottom face (20), a first interior angle is formed between the first light-facing face (2104) and the bottom face (20) [Fig. 4B],
the second light-facing face (2106) is connected to an end of the first light-facing face (2104) away from the bottom face and extends upward [Fig. 4B], a second interior angle is formed between the second light-facing face (2106) and the first light-facing face (2104) [Fig. 4B],
one end of the third light-facing face (2105) is connected to an end of the second light-facing face (2106) away from the end thereof connected to the first light-facing face (2104) and extends downward [Fig. 4B], and another end of the third light-facing face (2105) is connected to an end of the bottom face (20) away from the end thereof connected to the first light-facing face (2104) [Fig. 4B].
The microstructures of Sun, compared to prism microstructures as those disclosed in Hebrink, increase the energy usage efficiency with respect to the frontal and normalized view angle of its optical film [paras. 0032 and 0034].
Sun and Hebrink are analogous inventions in the field of microstructured optical films. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the microstructures of Hebrink with the microstructures of Sun thereby providing increased energy usage efficiency with respect to the frontal and normalized view angle of its optical film compared to prism microstructures [para. 0032].
Examiner notes that the above combination teaches the limitation “one end of the third light-facing face is connected to an end of the second light-facing face away from the end thereof connected to the first light-facing face and extends downward”.
Regarding claim 3
Hebrink the microstructured light-collection film structure as set forth above, comprising an anti-reflective film (porous silica coating 46) covering the surface of a plurality of microstructures (41) [Hebrink, Fig. 4 and para. 0108], wherein the anti-reflective film (46) has a first refractive index n1 [Hebrink, Fig. 4, paras. 0106 and 0108; see also para. 0007 of Wang for evidentiary support].
Regarding claim 4
Hebrink teaches the microstructured light-collection film structure as set forth above, wherein each of the microstructures (41) has a second refractive index n2 (corresponding to that of PMMA), and the first refractive index n1 is less than the second refractive index n2 [Hebrink, para. 0108; see also para. 0007 of Wang and para. 0033 of Wheatley for evidentiary support].
Regarding claim 5
Hebrink teaches the microstructured light-collection film structure as set forth above, wherein the normal light-receiving optical film (45) has a third refractive index n3 (the support backing may be, for example, PET), and the second refractive index n2 is less than the third refractive index n3 [Hebrink, paras. 0029 and 0108; see para. 0033 of Wheatley for evidentiary support].
Regarding claim 6
Hebrink teaches the microstructured light-collection film structure as set forth above, further comprising an optical adhesive (49) arranged below the normal light-receiving optical film (45) [Fig. 4 and para. 0108], wherein the optical adhesive (49) has a fourth refractive index n4, and the third refractive index n3 is less than the fourth refractive index n4 (adhesive is optically clear) [paras. 0108 and 0153].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2019/0237603 A1, O’Neill et al. teaches a microstructured optical film structure (400e) [Fig. 4E and para. 0068], comprising:
a normal light-receiving optical film (corresponding to base layer 411), having a light-receiving face [Fig. 4E and para. 0079]; and
a plurality of microstructures (see second sub-layer 412 comprising microstructures 450), in an array arrangement and arranged on the light-receiving face of the normal light-receiving optical film (411) [Fig. 4E and para. 0079],
wherein each of the microstructures (450) comprises a bottom face (411b), a first light-facing face (see left slope of 450), a second light-facing face (area of opposing slope furthest from 411b), and a third light-facing face (area of opposing slope closer to 411b),
the first light-facing face extends upward from an end of the bottom face (411b) [Fig. 4E and para. 0079]], a first interior angle is formed between the first light-facing face and the bottom face (411b) [Fig. 4E and para. 0079], and
one end of the third light-facing face extends downward [Fig. 4E and para. 0079], and another end of the third light-facing face is connected to an end of the bottom face (411b) away from the end thereof connected to the first light-facing face [Fig. 4E and para. 0079].
PNG
media_image2.png
184
350
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAYLA GONZALEZ RAMOS whose telephone number is (571)272-5054. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 9:00-5:00 - EST.
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, Allison Bourke can be reached at (303)297-4684. 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.
/MAYLA GONZALEZ RAMOS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1721