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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 13-18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction requirement in the reply filed on May 13, 2026.
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I in the reply filed on May 13, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the grounds that there is no serious search burden on Examiner. This is not found persuasive because as set forth in the Restriction mailed April 22, 2026, Group I requires searching in at least subgroups G02B6/005 and G02B6/0023, while Group 2 (claims 13-18) requires separate searching in at least subgroup G02B5/1819 for specific details of the diffractive gratings not recited in the combination of Group 1. The prior art applicable to Group 1 (particularly a primary reference) would not likely be applicable to Group 2 because the invention of Group 2 requires search and examination of the details of diffractive gratings not generally found in subgroups related to waveguides/backlights/LCDs. Moreover, claims 6-11 of Group 1 further recite a Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) with the waveguide recited in claims 1-5, thus requiring additional searching in subgroups such as G02F2201/305 and G02F1/2955. Finally, Group 1 also contains claims directed to separate species (at least claims 2-4 are directed to different species/embodiments of Figures 6-8) which Examiner chose not to further restrict as an election of species within the restriction. For at least the foregoing reasons, Examiner finds the restriction proper and finds there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Li et al (US 2024/0248324).
Regarding claim 1, Li discloses a backlight comprising: a waveguide 130 configured to receive a collimated RGB beam (see at least para [0055]); a plurality of color-selective diffractive gratings 130a,130b,130c disposed on the waveguide, wherein each color-selective diffractive grating of the plurality of the plurality of color-selective diffractive gratings is configured to out-couple a beam of a single color from the waveguide, and a beam in-coupler (see para [0056] and list of different types of collimators including lenses, reflectors and mirrors, all of which serve to collimate (make parallel) beams of light which is an adjustment of an angle of incidence into the waveguide) configured to adjust an angle of incidence into the waveguide with respect to the collimated RGB beam (see at least Figures 3B-3C and paras [0055]-[0069]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-12 are allowed.
Claims 2-5 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Mukawa et al US 2006/0228073
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN P GRAMLING whose telephone number is (571)272-9082. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-5pm 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, Abdulmajeed Aziz can be reached at (571) 270-5046. 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.
/SEAN P GRAMLING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights