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 .
Response to Arguments
Arguments and amendments filed 18 September 2026 have been fully considered, but are moot in view of a new rejection.
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)(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) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hwang (US 2011.0147770).
Regarding claim 1, Hwang disclose:
A display device, comprising: a first optical element, a second optical element and a third optical element, wherein the second optical element has a first edge extending along a first direction and a second edge extending along a second direction different from the first direction, the first optical element is disposed adjacent to the first edge, and the third optical element is disposed adjacent to the second edge; and a first transparent region, a second transparent region, a third transparent region and a fourth transparent region, wherein the first optical element, the second optical element and the third optical element are surrounded by the first transparent region, the second transparent region, the third transparent region and the fourth transparent region; wherein areas of the first transparent region, the second transparent region, the third transparent region and the fourth transparent region are greater than areas of the first optical element, the second optical element and the third optical element; wherein the first transparent region, the second transparent region, the third transparent region and the fourth transparent region do not overlap any wire, wherein a transparent area of the first transparent region, a transparent area of the second transparent region, a transparent area of the third transparent region and a transparent area of the fourth transparent region are the same (see Fig. 5 (annotated below for the specific arrangement in each first (d1) direction and second (d2) direction); the transparent regions do not overlap any wire LP and the areas of the first to fourth transparent regions are the same).
PNG
media_image1.png
708
666
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Hwang further disclose:
the first transparent region, the first optical element, the second optical element and the third transparent region are arranged along the second direction (see Fig. 5 (annotated above) the transparent region,, first and second optical elements and the third transparent region is arranged along second direction X)
Regarding claim 3, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Hwang further disclose:
the second transparent region, the second optical element, the third optical element and the fourth transparent region are arranged along the first direction (see Fig. 5 (annotated above) second transparent region, second and third optical elements and the fourth transparent region are arranged along first direction Y)
Regarding claim 4, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Hwang further disclose:
a sum of a width of the first optical element in the second direction and a width of the second optical element in the second direction is smaller than a width of the second transparent region in the second direction (see Fig. 5 (annotated above) sum of width of first and second optical elements smaller than width of second transparent region in second direction X)
Regarding claim 5, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Hwang further disclose:
a sum of a width of the first optical element in the second direction and a width of the second optical element in the second direction is smaller than a width of the fourth transparent region in the second direction (see Fig. 5 (annotated above)sum of width of the first and second optical elements smaller than width of fourth transparent region in second direction X)
Regarding claim 6, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Hwang further disclose:
a sum of a width of the second optical element in the first direction and a width of the third optical element in the first direction is smaller than a width of the first transparent region in the first direction (see Fig. 5 (annotated above); sum of width of second and third optical elements is smaller than width of the first transparent region in first direction Y)
Regarding claim 7, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Hwang further disclose:
a sum of a width of the second optical element in the first direction and a width of the third optical element in the first direction is smaller than a width of the third transparent region in the first direction (see Fig. 5 (annotated above); sum of width of second and third optical elements is smaller than width of the third transparent region in first direction Y)
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH BUKOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-7913. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday // 0730-1530.
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.
/kenneth bukowski/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2621
Prosecution Insights