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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
[0020] discloses Doping the liquid crystal with the surfactant may enhance homeotropic anchoring between the reflective mirror 108 and a polyimide used to treat the glass layer 103. Greater than 5 wt% surfactant may prevent liquid crystal switching.
[0021] discloses A hard coating layer 108 is disposed on the reflective mirror 107 oppositive the liquid crystal layer 106. The hard coating layer 108 may be added to the top of an electro-optic modulator 100 to protect the electro-optic modulator 100.
Numeral “108” refer to both “the reflective mirror 108” and “hard coating layer 108”.
Examiner suggests review entire specification and correct any deficiencies.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1, 8 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of copending Application No. 19006662 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both applications recite substantially similar claim limitations.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
19/006855
19006662 (reference application)
claim 1, An electro-optic modulator comprising:
a glass layer;
a homeotropic alignment layer disposed on the glass layer;
a liquid crystal layer disposed on the homeotropic alignment layer opposite the glass layer,
wherein the liquid crystal layer includes a surfactant; and
a reflective mirror disposed on the liquid crystal layer opposite the homeotropic alignment layer.
An electro-optic modulator comprising:
a liquid crystal layer disposed on the first homeotropic alignment layer opposite the glass layer,
wherein the liquid crystal layer includes a negative dielectric liquid crystal;
a second homeotropic alignment layer disposed on the liquid crystal layer opposite the first homeotropic alignment layer; and
a reflective mirror disposed on the second homeotropic alignment layer opposite the liquid crystal layer.
claim 8, An imaging system comprising:
an illumination source configured to generate illumination;
a stage configured to hold a sample;
a detector to generate an image of at least a portion of the sample; and
an electro-optic modulator disposed in a path of illumination from the illumination source and separated from the sample by an air gap, wherein the electro-optic modulator includes:
a glass layer;
a homeotropic alignment layer disposed on the glass layer; a liquid crystal layer disposed on the homeotropic alignment layer opposite the glass layer,
wherein the liquid crystal layer includes a surfactant; and a reflective mirror disposed on the liquid crystal layer opposite the homeotropic alignment layer.
8. An imaging system comprising:
an illumination source configured to generate illumination;
a stage configured to hold a sample;
a detector to generate an image of at least a portion of the sample; and
an electro-optic modulator disposed in a path of illumination from the illumination source and separated from the sample by an air gap, wherein the electro-optic modulator includes:
a liquid crystal layer disposed on the first homeotropic alignment layer opposite the glass layer,
wherein the liquid crystal layer includes a negative dielectric liquid crystal;
a second homeotropic alignment layer disposed on the liquid crystal layer opposite the first homeotropic alignment layer; and
a reflective mirror disposed on the second homeotropic alignment layer opposite the liquid crystal layer.
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.
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.
Claims 1 – 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jun et al. (U.S. Patent Publication 20100177313 A1) in view of Bao et al. (U.S. Patent Publication 20230295693 A1).
PNG
media_image1.png
450
590
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Jun discloses “An electro-optic modulator comprising:
a glass layer; (Fig 1, [0073] The upper substrate 10 may be made of a glass substrate whose thickness is about 0.5 mm.)
a homeotropic alignment layer (Fig. 1, lower and upper alignment films 18 and 16) disposed on the glass layer; ([0076] [0077])
a liquid crystal layer (Fig. 1, a liquid crystal layer 20 [0079] [0085]) disposed on the homeotropic alignment layer opposite the glass layer, and
a reflective mirror (Fig. 1 reflecting film 26) disposed on the liquid crystal layer opposite the homeotropic alignment layer. ([0082] [0085])
Jun does not disclose “wherein the liquid crystal layer includes a surfactant;”.
Bao discloses “wherein the liquid crystal layer includes a surfactant;”. ([0009] Liquid crystals (LCs) have been used as transducers to sense and optically report a wide range of stimuli, including temperature (thermometers), electric fields (liquid crystal displays), and chemical and biological species, including synthetic surfactants, phospholipids, peptides, proteins, and bacterial toxins. Advantageously, the optical changes produced by LCs can be easily observed when viewed between crossed polarizers. However, LCs have not yet been used to develop assays for the detection and identification of RNA viruses.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate surfactant by Bao into device of Jun. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve efficiency. (Bao: [0009])
Regarding claims 2, 9, Jun and Bao disclose further comprising a polarizer disposed on the glass layer opposite the homeotropic alignment layer. (Jun Fig. 1, [0071] [0072] [0073] [0047])
Regarding claims 3, 10, Jun and Bao disclose further comprising an antireflective layer disposed between the polarizer and the homeotropic alignment layer. (Jun Fig. 1, [0071] [0072] [0073] [0047])
Regarding claims 4, 11, Jun and Bao disclose further comprising a conductive layer disposed between the glass layer and the homeotropic alignment layer. (Jun Fig. 1, [0071] [0072] [0073] [0047])
Regarding claims 5, 12, Jun and Bao disclose wherein the conductive layer is a transparent electrode. (Jun Fig. 1, [0071] [0072] [0073] [0047])
Regarding claims 6, 13, Jun and Bao disclose further comprising a hard coating layer disposed on the reflective mirror oppositive the homeotropic alignment layer. (Jun Fig. 1, [0071] [0077] [0082] [0047])
Regarding claims 7, 14, Jun and Bao disclose wherein the liquid crystal layer includes a negative dielectric liquid crystal. (Jun Fig. 1, [0318] [0320] [0321] [0331])
Regarding claim 8, Jun discloses An imaging system comprising:
an illumination source (Fig. 4, light source 214 [0092]) configured to generate illumination;
a stage (Fig. 4, flat display device 200 [0090]) configured to hold a sample;
a detector (Fig 4, CCD camera 220; [0091]) to generate an image of at least a portion of the sample; and
an electro-optic modulator disposed in a path of illumination from the illumination source and separated from the sample by an air gap, (Fig. 4) wherein the electro-optic modulator includes:
a glass layer; (Fig 1, [0073] The upper substrate 10 may be made of a glass substrate whose thickness is about 0.5 mm.)
a homeotropic alignment layer (Fig. 1, lower and upper alignment films 18 and 16) disposed on the glass layer; ([0076] [0077])
a liquid crystal layer (Fig. 1, a liquid crystal layer 20 [0079] [0085]) disposed on the homeotropic alignment layer opposite the glass layer, and
a reflective mirror (Fig. 1 reflecting film 26) disposed on the liquid crystal layer opposite the homeotropic alignment layer. ([0082] [0085])
Jun does not disclose “wherein the liquid crystal layer includes a surfactant;”.
Bao discloses “wherein the liquid crystal layer includes a surfactant;”. ([0009] Liquid crystals (LCs) have been used as transducers to sense and optically report a wide range of stimuli, including temperature (thermometers), electric fields (liquid crystal displays), and chemical and biological species, including synthetic surfactants, phospholipids, peptides, proteins, and bacterial toxins. Advantageously, the optical changes produced by LCs can be easily observed when viewed between crossed polarizers. However, LCs have not yet been used to develop assays for the detection and identification of RNA viruses.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate surfactant by Bao into device of Jun. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve efficiency. (Bao: [0009])
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUN-NAN LIN whose telephone number is (571)272-5646. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:30am - 6pm.
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, Benjamin C Lee can be reached at 571-2722963. 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.
/CHUN-NAN LIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2629
Prosecution Insights