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 .
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, 4, 11, 12 and 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bell et al. (US 2018/0188536).
In regard to claims 1 and 11, Bell et al. teach an optical element comprising: a first dimming panel comprising a first liquid crystal layer disposed between first upper and lower transparent electrodes (paragraph 41, fig. 6 elements 150a and 166); and a second dimming panel overlying the first dimming panel and comprising a second liquid crystal layer disposed between second upper and lower transparent electrodes (paragraph 41, fig. 6 elements 150b and 166), wherein the first liquid crystal layer is configured to scatter, absorb, or reflect light incident on the first dimming panel, and the second liquid crystal layer is configured to absorb or reflect light incident on the second dimming panel (paragraph 67, Bell et al. teach using guest host panels which absorb light).
In regard to claims 2 and 12, Bell et al. teach wherein at least one of the first upper and lower transparent electrodes comprises an array of individually-addressable electrodes (paragraph 52 and fig. 4. Bell et al. teach addressing the pixels on an individual basis to control light passage).
In regard to claims 4 and 15, Bell et al. teach wherein the first dimming panel is configured as a world-side panel and the second dimming panel is configured as an eye-side panel (see fig. 4. The first panel 150a faces elements 154 and 160 which are a light source and real world object. 150b faces the eyeball).
In regard to claim 16, Bell et al. teach wherein the first active layer comprises an assembly selected from the group consisting of a polymer-stabilized liquid crystal (PSLC), liquid crystal physical gel (LCPG), polymer-dispersed liquid crystal (PDLC), polymer-stabilized cholesteric texture (PSCT), polymer network liquid crystal (PNLC), guest-host liquid crystal (GHLC) (paragraph 67), photochromic (PhCh) layer, electrochromic (EC) layer, reversible metal electrodeposition (RME) structure, and ferroelectric nematic liquid crystal (FNLC).
In regard to claim 17, Bell et al. teach wherein the second active layer comprises an assembly selected from the group consisting of guest-host liquid crystal (GHLC) (paragraph 67), photochromic (PhCh) layer, electrochromic (EC) layer, reversible metal electrodeposition (RME) structure, and ferroelectric nematic liquid crystal (FNLC).
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) 3, 5-10, 13 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bell et al. in view of Imai et al. (US 2025/0004336).
In regard to claims 3 and 13, Bell et al. teach all the elements of claim 3 except wherein the first upper transparent electrode comprises an array of individually-addressable electrodes and the first lower transparent electrode comprises a blanket electrode.
Imai et al. teach wherein the first upper transparent electrode comprises an array of individually-addressable electrodes (paragraph 90, each pixel has a pixel electrode) and the first lower transparent electrode comprises a blanket electrode (paragraph 92, common electrode is a single conductive film).
The two are analogous art because they both deal with the same field of invention of liquid crystals.
At the time of invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the apparatus of Bell et al. with the electrodes and control layers of Imai et al. The rationale is as follows: At the time of invention it would have been obvious to provide the apparatus of Bell et al. with the electrodes and control layers of Imai et al. because the electrodes and control layers of Imai et al. would equally well in the apparatus of Bell et al. as it does separately. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the layers of Imai et al. would allow for the individual control of each pixel ensuring accurate light modulation.
In regard to claim 5, Imai et al. teach a first upper alignment layer disposed between the first liquid crystal layer and the first upper transparent electrode and a first lower alignment layer disposed between the first liquid crystal layer and the first lower transparent electrode (fig. 11C elements 41, 42 and paragraph 158).
In regard to claim 6, Imai et al. teach wherein the first liquid crystal layer directly contacts the first upper alignment layer and the first lower alignment layer (fig. 11C and paragraph 158).
In regard to claim 7, Bell et al. teach first and second liquid crystal layers (fig. 6) but do not teach a second upper alignment layer disposed between the second liquid crystal layer and the second upper transparent electrode and a second lower alignment layer disposed between the second liquid crystal layer and the second lower transparent electrode.
Imai et al. teach a second upper alignment layer disposed between the second liquid crystal layer and the second upper transparent electrode and a second lower alignment layer disposed between the second liquid crystal layer and the second lower transparent electrode (fig. 11C elements 41, 42 and paragraph 158).
In regard to claim 8, Imai et al. teach wherein the second liquid crystal layer directly contacts the second upper alignment layer and the second lower alignment layer (fig. 11C and paragraph 158).
In regard to claim 9, see the rejections for claims 5 and 7 above.
In regard to claim 10, see the rejections for claims 6 and 8 above.
In regard to claim 14, Bell et al. teach a second upper and second lower electrodes (see fig. 6).
Imai et al. teach wherein the upper transparent electrode comprises an array of individually-addressable electrodes (paragraph 90) and the lower transparent electrode comprises a blanket electrode (paragraph 92).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19 and 20 are allowed.
Claim 18 is 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 an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art fails to teach or make obvious the transmissivity and haze of the first and second panels. The specific values of the haze and transmissivity are not taught by the prior art.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH R HALEY whose telephone number is (571)272-0574. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am-5pm.
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, Amr Awad can be reached at 571-272-7764. 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.
/JOSEPH R HALEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2621
Prosecution Insights