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 10/24/2024 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 11, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kusafuka et al. (2021/0271128) in view of Miao et al. (2025/0035975).
Regarding claim 1, Kusafuka discloses a display device (Figure 6, 1, display device) comprising: a backlight (60, light source); a first image display panel configured to receive direct light from the backlight (10, display panel); and a second image display panel (20, barrier panel) disposed with a gap interposed between the second image display panel and the first image display panel and configured to receive light transmitted through the first image display panel (50, half-wavelength plate, separates 10, display panel, and 20, barrier panel, thus the two panels are viewed to be separated by a gap), wherein the first image display panel comprises: a first polarizing plate configured to transmit light polarized in a first direction and block light polarized in a direction different from the first direction (41, first polarizing plate; [0065] teaches 41, first polarizing plate, transmits linearly polarized light in the horizontal direction; Examiner notes that light in the vertical direction is blocked; Figure 10); and a first color filter provided between at least the first polarizing plate and the second image display panel (16, color filter substrate), the second image display panel comprises: a second polarizing plate configured to transmit light polarized in a second direction different from the first direction and block light polarized in a direction different from the second direction (44, fourth polarizing plate; [0079] and Figure 10 teach 44, fourth polarizing plate, transmits linearly polarized light in the vertical direction; Examiner notes that light in the horizontal direction is blocked); and a second color filter provided between at least the second polarizing plate and the first image display panel (26, black matrix substrate; Examiner notes that using broadest reasonable interpretation, the black matrix portion that partitions respective pixels blocks light, thus can be considered a color filter), and another polarizing plate is not provided between the first image display panel and the second image display panel (Figure 6 depicts that the only element between 10, display panel, and 20, barrier panel, is 50, half-wavelength plate).
Kusafuka fails to teach the thickness of the first color filter is different from the thickness of the second color filter. Kusafuka and Miao are related because both teach a display device.
Miao teaches a display device wherein the thickness of the first color filter is different from the thickness of the second color filter (Figure 11B, BM1, first black matrix, or BM2, second black matrix, have a different thickness than 81, color resist layer).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Kusafuka to incorporate the teachings of Miao and provide the thickness of the first color filter is different from the thickness of the second color filter. Doing so would allow for an improved shading ratio as well as reduction of unwanted light/color leakage.
Regarding claim 2, the modified Kusafuka discloses the display device according to claim 1, wherein the first color filter is thinner than the second color filter (Miao: Figure 11B, 81, color resist layer, is thinner than BM2, second black matrix).
Regarding claim 3, the modified Kusafuka discloses the display device according to claim 1, wherein the second color filter is thinner than the first color filter (Miao: Figure 11B, BM1, first black matrix, is thinner than 81, color resist layer).
Regarding claim 11, the modified Kusafuka discloses the display device according to claim 1, wherein an image output region of the first image display panel and an image output region of the second image display panel overlap when viewed in a direction of a line of sight of a viewer (Figure 1).
Regarding claim 13, the modified Kusafuka discloses a head-up display (Figure 1, 100, head-up display) configured to allow an image reflected by a light-transmitting member configured to transmit and reflect incident light (2c, optical member) to be visually recognized as a virtual image (4, virtual image) by a viewer (5L, left eye, 5R, right eye) in such a manner that the virtual image is superimposed on a real image transmitted through the light-transmitting member ([0090] teaches the optical member may be a front windshield of a vehicle, thus interpreted as the virtual image being superimposed on a real world image which is exterior to the windshield), the head-up display comprising: the display device according to claim 11 (1, display device); and a magnifying optical system configured to magnify an image displayed on the display device and project the magnified image onto the light-transmitting member (2 optical system; [0023, 0084] teaches 2, optical system, is configured to enlarge or reduce the parallax image).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-10 and 12-14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fails to teach or suggest the limitations of claims 4 and 12, along with the structural limitations positively recited in the claims they respectively depend from in a manner that would be appropriate under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103. Claims 5-10 are dependent on claim 4 and are therefore objected to for at least the same reason. Claims 13 and 14 are dependent on claim 12 and are therefore objected to for at least the same reason.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Weindorf (2022/0268974), Kusafuka (2022/0187618), Kusafuka (2021/0243419), Ono (10,191,337), Newton (2019/0005872), Otani (2016/0216553), Ramanathan (2014/0267203), Kitagawa (2011/0141405), Zeng (2024/0292704), Ma (2020/0333650), Jiao (2016/0266436), You (2014/0063421), Hagiwara (2013/0107182), and Ohno (5,705,302) disclose relevant display devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BALRAM T PARBADIA whose telephone number is (571)270-0602. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday - Friday.
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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571) 272-2713. 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.
/BALRAM T PARBADIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights