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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 11, 13-15, and 20-21 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.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 and 3 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3, 11, 12, and 13 of copending Application No. 19109756 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the instant application are anticipated by or obvious in view of the claims of the copending application as follows:
Regarding claim 1 of the instant application, Claims 1 of the reference application recites a projection device comprising: a light guide; a first light source disposed at a first side of the light guide; a lens group disposed at a fourth side of the light guide; and a first side lens disposed between the first side of the light guide and the first light source (lines 1-5 of claim 1 of the reference application), wherein the first side of the light guide is overlapped with the fourth side of the light guide in an optical-axis direction of the lens group (lines 8-9 of claim 1 of the reference application), and the first side lens is in contact with the light guide (“the first side lens and the Nth lens are in contact with the light guide”, line 10 of claim 1 of the reference application).
Regarding claim 3 of the instant application, Claims 1, 3, 11, 12, and 13 of the reference application recite: a second light source disposed on a second side of the light guide (line 2 of claim 3 of the reference application); a third light source disposed on a third side of the light guide (lines 1-2 of claim 11 of the reference application); a second side lens disposed between the second side of the light guide and the second light source (lines 1-2 of claim 12 of the reference application); and a third side lens disposed between the third side of the light guide and the third light source (lines 1-2 of claim 13 of the reference application)
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 10 recites in lines 1-2 “the projection device according to claim 10, comprising,” this is indefinite in that the claim as written is dependent upon itself and it is therefore unclear what limitations the claim requires.
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) 1-3, 6, 12, and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gu et al. (CN 213583792 U, with reference made to provided machine translation, Gu).
As per claim 1, Gu teaches (in figures 1-3) a projection device comprising: a light guide (light guide assembly 3); a first light source (second light source 12) disposed at a first side of the light guide; a lens group (refractive component 4) disposed at a fourth side of the light guide; and a first side lens (second lens 22) disposed between the first side of the light guide and the first light source, wherein the first side of the light guide is overlapped with the fourth side of the light guide in an optical-axis direction of the lens group, and the first side lens is in contact with the light guide (see figures and paragraph 45).
As per claim 2, Gu teaches (in figures 1-3) that the lens group includes first to N-th lenses (three shown in figure 3), wherein the first lens is disposed farthest from the fourth side of the light guide, of which a side opposite to a side facing the fourth side is convex (shown in figure 3)
As per claim 3, Gu teaches (in figures 1-3) a second light source (third light source 13) disposed on a second side of the light guide; a third light source (first light source 11) disposed on a third side of the light guide; a second side lens (third lens 23) disposed between the second side of the light guide and the second light source; and a third side lens (first lens 21) disposed between the third side of the light guide and the third light source.
As per claim 6, Gu teaches (in figures 1-3) that a side surface of the light guide (light guide assembly 3) is larger than or equal to a side of the first side lens (second lens 22) adjacent to the light guide (see figure 2).
As per claim 18, Gu teaches (in figures 1-3) that the second side of the light guide (light guide assembly 3) is disposed to face the third side of the light guide with the light guide interposed therebetween (see figure 3).
As per claim 19, Gu teaches (in figures 1-3) that the N-th lens (lens of refractive component 4 contacting light guide assembly 3 as shown in figure 3) is in contact with the light guide (light guide assembly 3).
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) 4, 7, 12, 16, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (CN 213583792 U, with reference made to provided machine translation, Gu) as applied to claim 1 above and in further view of Huang (US Pub. 20090303707).
As per claim 4, Gu teaches (in figures 1-3) that the first side lens (second lens 22) is in contact with the light guide (light guide assembly 3) (see figures and paragraph 45).
Gu does not explicitly teach that a radius of curvature of the first side lens is 100 mm or more on an optical axis of a side adjacent to the light guide.
However, Huang teaches forming lens module (21, 22, and 23) comprising a first to third side lenses (212 in 21 and lenses corresponding to 212 in lens modules 22 and 23) which have surfaces (2122 in 21 and surfaces corresponding to 2122 in lens modules 22 and 23) in contact with a light guide (24) which is flat (infinite radius of curvature, see paragraph 27) in order to improve utilization efficiency of the light source and miniaturizing the projection apparatus (see figures and paragraph 30).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the side lens in Gu with the lens modules of Huang in order to improve utilization efficiency of the light source and miniaturizing the projection apparatus.
As per claim 7, Gu does not explicitly teach that a side of the first side lens adjacent to the light guide is a flat surface.
However, Huang teaches forming lens module (21, 22, and 23) comprising a first to third side lenses (212 in 21 and lenses corresponding to 212 in lens modules 22 and 23) which have surfaces (2122 in 21 and surfaces corresponding to 2122 in lens modules 22 and 23) in contact with a light guide (24) which is flat (infinite radius of curvature, see paragraph 27) in order to improve utilization efficiency of the light source and miniaturizing the projection apparatus (see figures and paragraph 30).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the side lens in Gu with the lens modules of Huang in order to improve utilization efficiency of the light source and miniaturizing the projection apparatus.
As per claim 12, Gu teaches (in figures 1-3) that the first side lens (second lens 22) is a convex lens (paragraph 41).
Gu does not explicitly teach that that a side of the first side lens adjacent to the first light source is convex.
However, Huang teaches forming lens module (21, 22, and 23) comprising a first to third side lens (212 in 21 and lenses corresponding to 212 in lens modules 22 and 23) wherein sides of the first to third side lens (2121 in 21 and surfaces corresponding to 2121 in lens modules 22 and 23) adjacent to the first to third light sources (11, 12, and 13) respectively are convex in order to improve utilization efficiency of the light source and miniaturizing the projection apparatus (see figures and paragraph 30).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the side lens in Gu with the lens modules of Huang in order to improve utilization efficiency of the light source and miniaturizing the projection apparatus.
As per claim 16, Gu teaches (in figures 1-3) that the second side lens (third lens 23) is a convex lens (paragraph 41).
Gu does not explicitly teach that a side of the second side lens adjacent to the second light source is convex.
However, Huang teaches forming lens module (21, 22, and 23) comprising a first to third side lens (212 in 21 and lenses corresponding to 212 in lens modules 22 and 23) wherein sides of the first to third side lens (2121 in 21 and surfaces corresponding to 2121 in lens modules 22 and 23) adjacent to the first to third light sources (11, 12, and 13) respectively are convex in order to improve utilization efficiency of the light source and miniaturizing the projection apparatus (see figures and paragraph 30).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the side lens in Gu with the lens modules of Huang in order to improve utilization efficiency of the light source and miniaturizing the projection apparatus.
As per claim 17, Gu teaches (in figures 1-3) that the third side lens (first lens 21) is a convex lens (paragraph 41).
However, Huang teaches forming lens module (21, 22, and 23) comprising a first to third side lens (212 in 21 and lenses corresponding to 212 in lens modules 22 and 23) wherein sides of the first to third side lens (2121 in 21 and surfaces corresponding to 2121 in lens modules 22 and 23) adjacent to the first to third light sources (11, 12, and 13) respectively are convex in order to improve utilization efficiency of the light source and miniaturizing the projection apparatus (see figures and paragraph 30).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the side lens in Gu with the lens modules of Huang in order to improve utilization efficiency of the light source and miniaturizing the projection apparatus.
Claim(s) 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (CN 213583792 U, with reference made to provided machine translation, Gu) as applied to claim 1 above and in further view of Suzuki et al. (US Pub. 20180081156, Suzuki).
As per claim 5, Gu does not explicitly teach that the light guide and the first side lens are in contact with each other by an adhesive.
However, Suzuki teaches (in figure 1) connecting optical lens elements (L8 and L9) using an adhesive.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to secure the first side lens and the light guide together using an adhesive as suggested by Suzuki.
The motivation would have been to ensure a strong bond and that alignment is maintained.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Jun (KR 20010045715A) teaches (in figures 5-6) a projection device comprising: a light guide (170); a first light source (163) disposed at a first side of the light guide; a lens group (183) disposed at a fourth side of the light guide; and a first side lens (181) disposed between the first side of the light guide and the first light source, wherein the first side of the light guide is overlapped with the fourth side of the light guide in an optical-axis direction of the lens group however Jun teaches providing an adjustable space (D2) between the first light source (163) and the light guide (170) and therefore does not teach that the first side lens is in contact with the light guide (see figures and paragraph 45).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER P GROSS whose telephone number is (571)272-5660. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-6pm 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, Jennifer Carruth can be reached at (571) 272-9791. 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.
/ALEXANDER P GROSS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights