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 § 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3, 6, 7, 10, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang, Zhiyong, Tao Zhan, and Shin‐Tson Wu. "Polarization‐independent liquid crystal‐based refractive index sensor." Journal of the Society for Information Display 29.5 (2021): 305-310, hereinafter “Yang”, and further in view of Hsiung, Chan-Te, and Cheng-Sheng Huang. "Refractive index sensor based on a gradient grating period guided-mode resonance." IEEE Photonics Technology Letters 31.3 (2019): 253-256, hereinafter “Hsiung”.
Regarding claim 1, Yang teaches an optical element (abstract, Fig. 1) comprising:
a liquid crystal layer that is formed of a composition including a liquid crystal compound (as shown in Fig. 1, page 306, Sec 2. Col. 1, paragraph 1),
wherein the liquid crystal layer has a liquid crystal alignment pattern in which an orientation of an optical axis derived from the liquid crystal compound changes while continuously rotating toward at least one direction of in-plane directions (as shown in Fig. 1, page 306, Sec 2. Col. 1, paragraph 1- Col. 2, paragraph 1),
the liquid crystal layer further has a resonance structure (page 306, Sec 2. Col. 1, paragraph 2).
Yang is silent regarding in a case where a length over which the orientation of the optical axis derived from the liquid crystal compound rotates by 180° in a plane is set as a single period, a length of the single period in the liquid crystal alignment pattern gradually changes in the one direction.
However, Hsiung teaches a refractive index sensor based on a gradient grating period GMP (abstract, Fig. 1) including in a case where a length over which the orientation of the optical axis derived from the liquid crystal compound rotates by 180° in a plane is set as a single period, a length of the single period in the liquid crystal alignment pattern gradually changes in the one direction (pages 253, Sec. II A – page 254 Sec. II B).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Yang with the teaching of Hsiung by including in a case where a length over which the orientation of the optical axis derived from the liquid crystal compound rotates by 180° in a plane is set as a single period, a length of the single period in the liquid crystal alignment pattern gradually changes in the one direction in order to have light that can excite the device’s resonance and reflect while the other light is transmitted.
Regarding claim 2, Yang teaches wherein the length of the single period in the liquid crystal alignment pattern of the liquid crystal layer is 0.3 μm to 1.2 μm (Sec. 2, col. 2, paragraph 1; 400 nm), and
a thickness of the liquid crystal layer is 1 μm to 5 μm (Sec. 2, col. 2, paragraph 1; 1.591 μm).
Regarding claim 3, Yang is silent regarding wherein in a region where the length of the single period increases monotonically or decreases monotonically in the one direction, in a case where a length of the single period at a reference position is represented by Λ1 and a length of the single period at a position spaced from the reference position by a distance x is represented by ΛX with a certain point as a reference, 0<|ΛX−Λ1|/x≤1×10−2 is satisfied.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein in a region where the length of the single period increases monotonically or decreases monotonically in the one direction, in a case where a length of the single period at a reference position is represented by Λ1 and a length of the single period at a position spaced from the reference position by a distance x is represented by ΛX with a certain point as a reference, 0<|ΛX−Λ1|/x≤1×10−2 is satisfied as it has been held that the particular placement of an element in a measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice. In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975). In this case, one would chose the claimed design in order to have a smooth change in the light as the device is rotated.
Regarding claim 6, Yang teaches an optical sensor comprising: the optical element according to claim 1 (page 306, Sec. 2, paragraph 1).
Regarding claim 7, Yang is silent regarding wherein in a region where the length of the single period increases monotonically or decreases monotonically in the one direction, in a case where a length of the single period at a reference position is represented by Λ1 and a length of the single period at a position spaced from the reference position by a distance x is represented by ΛX with a certain point as a reference, 0<|ΛX−Λ1|/x≤1×10−2 is satisfied.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein in a region where the length of the single period increases monotonically or decreases monotonically in the one direction, in a case where a length of the single period at a reference position is represented by Λ1 and a length of the single period at a position spaced from the reference position by a distance x is represented by ΛX with a certain point as a reference, 0<|ΛX−Λ1|/x≤1×10−2 is satisfied as it has been held that the particular placement of an element in a measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice. In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975). In this case, one would chose the claimed design in order to have a smooth change in the light as the device is rotated.
Regarding claim 10, Yang teaches an optical sensor comprising: the optical element according to claim 2 (page 306, Sec. 2, paragraph 1).
Regarding claim 13, Yang teaches an optical sensor comprising: the optical element according to claim 3 (page 306, Sec. 2, paragraph 1).
Claims 4, 5, and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang and Hsiung as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yanai et al. (US 2020/0326462 A1), hereinafter “Yanai”.
Regarding claim 4, Yang is silent regarding wherein the liquid crystal layer has a liquid crystal alignment pattern in which a rotation direction in which the orientation of the optical axis derived from the liquid crystal compound continuously rotates is reversed with a certain point as a boundary in a direction along the one direction.
However, Yanai teaches an optical sensor (abstract, Fig 1) including wherein the liquid crystal layer has a liquid crystal alignment pattern in which a rotation direction in which the orientation of the optical axis derived from the liquid crystal compound continuously rotates is reversed with a certain point as a boundary in a direction along the one direction (as shown in fig 7, ref 16; paragraphs [0203]-[0206]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Yang with the teaching of Yanai by including wherein the liquid crystal layer has a liquid crystal alignment pattern in which a rotation direction in which the orientation of the optical axis derived from the liquid crystal compound continuously rotates is reversed with a certain point as a boundary in a direction along the one direction in order to allow incident from the normal direction to be gathered in a linear shape toward the center in the arrow X direction, paragraph [0207].
Regarding claim 5, Yang is silent regarding wherein the liquid crystal layer is a layer obtained by immobilizing a cholesteric liquid crystalline phase, and a helical pitch of the liquid crystal layer is 0.1 μm to 0.9 μm.
However, Yanai teaches an optical sensor (abstract, Fig 1) including wherein the liquid crystal layer is a layer obtained by immobilizing a cholesteric liquid crystalline phase (as shown in figs 2, 4, 6; paragraphs [0105]-[0106], [0112]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Yang with the teaching of Yanai by including wherein the liquid crystal layer is a layer obtained by immobilizing a cholesteric liquid crystalline phase in order to allow wavelength selective reflection properties, for example, liquid crystal layer reflect right circularly polarized light of infrared light and allows transmission, paragraph [0106].
Furthermore, It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a helical pitch of the liquid crystal layer is 0.1 μm to 0.9 μm as it has been held that the particular placement of an element in a measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice. In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975). In this case, one would chose the claimed pitch based on the light one desires to transmit.
Regarding claim 14, Yang is silent regarding wherein the liquid crystal layer is a layer obtained by immobilizing a cholesteric liquid crystalline phase, and a helical pitch of the liquid crystal layer is 0.1 μm to 0.9 μm.
However, Yanai teaches an optical sensor (abstract, Fig 1) including wherein the liquid crystal layer is a layer obtained by immobilizing a cholesteric liquid crystalline phase (as shown in figs 2, 4, 6; paragraphs [0105]-[0106], [0112]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Yang with the teaching of Yanai by including wherein the liquid crystal layer is a layer obtained by immobilizing a cholesteric liquid crystalline phase in order to allow wavelength selective reflection properties, for example, liquid crystal layer reflect right circularly polarized light of infrared light and allows transmission, paragraph [0106].
Furthermore, It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a helical pitch of the liquid crystal layer is 0.1 μm to 0.9 μm as it has been held that the particular placement of an element in a measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice. In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975). In this case, one would chose the claimed pitch based on the light one desires to transmit.
Regarding claim 15, Yang teaches an optical sensor comprising: the optical element according to claim 4 (page 306, Sec. 2, paragraph 1).
Regarding claim 16, Yang teaches an optical sensor comprising: the optical element according to claim 5 (page 306, Sec. 2, paragraph 1).
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang and Hsiung as applied to claims 1 and 2 above, and further in view of Yanai.
Regarding claim 8, Yang is silent regarding wherein the liquid crystal layer has a liquid crystal alignment pattern in which a rotation direction in which the orientation of the optical axis derived from the liquid crystal compound continuously rotates is reversed with a certain point as a boundary in a direction along the one direction.
However, Yanai teaches an optical sensor (abstract, Fig 1) including wherein the liquid crystal layer has a liquid crystal alignment pattern in which a rotation direction in which the orientation of the optical axis derived from the liquid crystal compound continuously rotates is reversed with a certain point as a boundary in a direction along the one direction (as shown in fig 7, ref 16; paragraphs [0203]-[0206]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Yang with the teaching of Yanai by including wherein the liquid crystal layer has a liquid crystal alignment pattern in which a rotation direction in which the orientation of the optical axis derived from the liquid crystal compound continuously rotates is reversed with a certain point as a boundary in a direction along the one direction in order to allow incident from the normal direction to be gathered in a linear shape toward the center in the arrow X direction, paragraph [0207].
Regarding claim 9, Yang is silent regarding wherein the liquid crystal layer is a layer obtained by immobilizing a cholesteric liquid crystalline phase, and a helical pitch of the liquid crystal layer is 0.1 μm to 0.9 μm.
However, Yanai teaches an optical sensor (abstract, Fig 1) including wherein the liquid crystal layer is a layer obtained by immobilizing a cholesteric liquid crystalline phase (as shown in figs 2, 4, 6; paragraphs [0105]-[0106], [0112]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Yang with the teaching of Yanai by including wherein the liquid crystal layer is a layer obtained by immobilizing a cholesteric liquid crystalline phase in order to allow wavelength selective reflection properties, for example, liquid crystal layer reflect right circularly polarized light of infrared light and allows transmission, paragraph [0106].
Furthermore, It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a helical pitch of the liquid crystal layer is 0.1 μm to 0.9 μm as it has been held that the particular placement of an element in a measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice. In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975). In this case, one would chose the claimed pitch based on the light one desires to transmit.
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang and Hsiung as applied to claims 1 and 3 above, and further in view of Yanai.
Regarding claim 11, Yang is silent regarding wherein the liquid crystal layer has a liquid crystal alignment pattern in which a rotation direction in which the orientation of the optical axis derived from the liquid crystal compound continuously rotates is reversed with a certain point as a boundary in a direction along the one direction.
However, Yanai teaches an optical sensor (abstract, Fig 1) including wherein the liquid crystal layer has a liquid crystal alignment pattern in which a rotation direction in which the orientation of the optical axis derived from the liquid crystal compound continuously rotates is reversed with a certain point as a boundary in a direction along the one direction (as shown in fig 7, ref 16; paragraphs [0203]-[0206]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Yang with the teaching of Yanai by including wherein the liquid crystal layer has a liquid crystal alignment pattern in which a rotation direction in which the orientation of the optical axis derived from the liquid crystal compound continuously rotates is reversed with a certain point as a boundary in a direction along the one direction in order to allow incident from the normal direction to be gathered in a linear shape toward the center in the arrow X direction, paragraph [0207].
Regarding claim 12, Yang is silent regarding wherein the liquid crystal layer is a layer obtained by immobilizing a cholesteric liquid crystalline phase, and a helical pitch of the liquid crystal layer is 0.1 μm to 0.9 μm.
However, Yanai teaches an optical sensor (abstract, Fig 1) including wherein the liquid crystal layer is a layer obtained by immobilizing a cholesteric liquid crystalline phase (as shown in figs 2, 4, 6; paragraphs [0105]-[0106], [0112]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Yang with the teaching of Yanai by including wherein the liquid crystal layer is a layer obtained by immobilizing a cholesteric liquid crystalline phase in order to allow wavelength selective reflection properties, for example, liquid crystal layer reflect right circularly polarized light of infrared light and allows transmission, paragraph [0106].
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a helical pitch of the liquid crystal layer is 0.1 μm to 0.9 μm as it has been held that the particular placement of an element in a measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice. In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975). In this case, one would chose the claimed pitch based on the light one desires to transmit.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yang, Zhiyong, Tao Zhan, and Shin-Tson Wu. "Polarization independent guided-mode resonance in liquid crystal-based polarization gratings." OSA Continuum 3.11 (2020): 3107-3115 teaches an LC based optical element sensor that can be combined with prior art of record to render at least the independent claim obvious.
Sato (US 2021/0011319) and Sato (US 2021/0011295) teaches an optical element sensor that can be combined with prior art of record to render the claims obvious.
Saitoh (18/677581 US 2024/0085320 A1) and Saitoh (18/497258 US 2024/0319420 A1) were reviewed for double patenting and no rejection is made because the pending claims contain limitations regarding the length of a single period in the LC alignment pattern gradually changes in one direction.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOMINIC J BOLOGNA whose telephone number is (571)272-9282. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30am-3:30pm.
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, Kara E Geisel can be reached at (571) 272-2416. 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.
/DOMINIC J BOLOGNA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights