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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to Application No. 19/107,809 filed 02/28/2025. Claims 1-11 are pending and have been examined.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/28/2025 was considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 4, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Claim 4 contains the limitation “an IR reflection film is arranged specular the IR light sources.” It is unknown how a film could be arranged “specular” a light source.
Claims 10 and 11 contain the contradictory limitations of a space between the display and light guide being free of optical diffusion elements and a diffuser layer being included in the same space.
Therefore, the claims contain subject matter which one skilled in the art to which it pertains would not be able to make and/or use the invention.
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.
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, 4, 6, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harbach et al. (US 2010/0073584), herein Harbach, in view of Long et al. (US 2022/0091316), herein Long.
Consider claim 1, Harbach clearly teaches a display device with an IR camera for a vehicle, (Fig. 1: Display apparatus 20, [0008], [0010]) comprising
- a display having a front side with a display area and a back side, (Fig. 2: LCD 32, [0010])
- a backlighting unit having backlighting light sources and having a light guide which comprises a light emission side, a back side facing away from the latter and a circumferential edge side connecting the front side to the back side, wherein the backlighting light sources radiate visible light into at least a portion of the edge side, (Fig. 2: Lighting apparatus 34 includes lightpipe 36 which is side-lit by LEDs 38, [0010].)
- wherein the intermediate space between the back side of the display and the light emission side of the light guide is free of optical light diffusion elements, (Fig. 2: No optical light diffusion elements are located between lighting apparatus 34 and LCD 32.)
- a reflection film arranged on the back side of the light guide or opposite thereto for reflecting backlighting light and for transmitting IR light, wherein the reflection film has a back side facing away from the light guide, (Fig. 2 Long-pass filter 26 reflects visible light from lighting apparatus 34 and allows IR light from IR LEDs 28 to pass through, [0010].)
-IR light sources and an IR photodiode array, all of which are arranged facing the back side of the reflection film, (Fig. 2: IR LEDs 28 and imaging chip 30 are arranged behind long-pass filter 26, [0010], [0012].) and
- wherein IR light from the IR light sources passes through the reflection film, the light guide and the display and thus reaches a region in front of the display area, and IR light from the IR light sources reflected at an object potentially located in this region passes through the display, the light guide and the reflection film and thus reaches the IR photodiode array. (Figs. 1, 2: IR light from IR LEDs 28 passes through long-pass filter 26, lightpipe 36 and LCD 32 and is reflected by the occupant 22 and recorded by imaging chip 30, [0002], [0008], [0010]-[0012].)
However, Harbach does not explicitly teach a first specular reflection polarization film arranged on the back side of the display or opposite thereto for reflecting visible backlighting light, the polarization of which deviates from the polarization direction of the back-side polarization filter of the display, wherein backlighting light reflected by the specular reflection polarization film can be reflected back from the reflection film towards the specular reflection polarization film while changing its polarization direction, wherein IR light from the IR light sources and reflected IR light passes through the first specular reflection polarization film.
In an analogous art, Long, which discloses a display system, clearly teaches a first specular reflection polarization film arranged on the back side of the display or opposite thereto for reflecting visible backlighting light, the polarization of which deviates from the polarization direction of the back-side polarization filter of the display, wherein backlighting light reflected by the specular reflection polarization film can be reflected back from the reflection film towards the specular reflection polarization film while changing its polarization direction, (Fig. 2: Reflective polarizer 40 reflects light in a second polarization state 70d back to reflector 30 wherein the polarization state changes and is passed back through light guide plate 20, [0045].) wherein IR light from the IR light sources and reflected IR light passes through the first specular reflection polarization film. (Fig. 2: Infrared light emitted from light source 60 and reflected IR light passes through reflective polarizer 40, [0044]-[0046].)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Harbach by a first specular reflection polarization film arranged on the back side of the display or opposite thereto for reflecting visible backlighting light, the polarization of which deviates from the polarization direction of the back-side polarization filter of the display, wherein backlighting light reflected by the specular reflection polarization film can be reflected back from the reflection film towards the specular reflection polarization film while changing its polarization direction, wherein IR light from the IR light sources and reflected IR light passes through the first specular reflection polarization film, as taught by Long, for the benefit of transmitting polarized light.
Consider claim 4, Harbach combined with Long clearly teaches the first specular reflection polarization film also reflects IR light, the polarization of which deviates from the polarization direction of the back-side polarization filter of the display, and wherein in that an IR reflection film is arranged specular the IR light sources for reflecting IR light reflected by the first specular reflection polarization film while changing the polarization direction. (Fig. 2: Reflective polarizer 40 reflects IR light in a second polarization state 70d back to reflector 30 wherein the polarization state changes and is passed back through light guide plate 20, [0044], [0045] Long.)
Consider claim 6, Harbach combined with Long clearly teaches the IR light sources emit NIR light and that the IR photodiode array is an NIR photodiode array. (IR LEDs 28 can emit light in the near-infrared range, [0010], [0011] Harbach.)
Consider claim 10, Harbach combined with Long clearly teaches a diffuser layer for scattering the backlighting light is located in the intermediate space between the light emission side of the light guide and the back side of the display, which allows the IR light from the IR light sources to pass through without scattering. (Fig. 1: Optical diffuser 10 has a first scattering rate R1 for visible light and a second scattering rate R2 for IR light, wherein R1 is greater than R2, [0039] Long.)
Consider claim 11, Harbach combined with Long clearly teaches the diffuser layer, which is neutral to IR light, is arranged between the light guide and the specular reflection polarization film or between the specular reflection polarization film and the display. (Fig. 1: Optical diffuser 10 has a first scattering rate R1 for visible light and a second scattering rate R2 for IR light, wherein R1 is greater than R2, [0039] Long.)
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harbach et al. (US 2010/0073584) in view of Long et al. (US 2022/0091316) in view of Shiau et al. (US 2007/0279933), herein Shiau.
Consider claim 2, Harbach combined with Long clearly teaches the light guide. (Fig. 2: Lightpipe 36, [0010] Harbach)
However, Harbach combined with Long does not explicitly teach the light guide is configured as a light guide film.
In an analogous art, Shiau, which discloses a lighting system, clearly teaches the light guide is configured as a light guide film. (Fig. 2: Brightness enhancement film 56, [0025])
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Harbach combined with Long by the light guide is configured as a light guide film, as taught by Shiau, for the benefit of enhancing the brightness of the light module.
Consider claim 3, Harbach combined with Long and Shiau clearly teaches the light guide has a light guide film and a light guide plate which are bonded together by an optical adhesive layer. (Fig. 2: Brightness enhancement film 56 and adhesive layer 60, [0025] Shiau)
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harbach et al. (US 2010/0073584) in view of Long et al. (US 2022/0091316) in view of Ra (US 2009/0190059).
Consider claim 7, Harbach combined with Long clearly teaches the IR photodiode array.
However, Harbach combined with Long does not explicitly teach the IR photodiode array is two-dimensional.
In an analogous art, Ra, which discloses a display system, clearly teaches the IR photodiode array is two-dimensional. (Figs. 2, 4: Infrared light sources 2100, [0092])
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Harbach combined with Long by the IR photodiode array is two-dimensional, as taught by Ra, to achieve the predictable result of producing IR light.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harbach et al. (US 2010/0073584) in view of Long et al. (US 2022/0091316) in view of Ishikawa et al. (US 2024/0100946), herein Ishikawa.
Consider claim 8, Harbach combined with Long clearly teaches the display device.
However, Harbach combined with Long does not explicitly teach a touch panel for manual input of commands by touching the display area of the display.
In an analogous art, Ishikawa, which discloses a display system, clearly teaches a touch panel for manual input of commands by touching the display area of the display. (Fig. 1: Display device 7 includes a touch panel, [0046].)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Harbach combined with Long by a touch panel for manual input of commands by touching the display area of the display, as taught by Ishikawa, to achieve the predictable result of receiving user input.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harbach et al. (US 2010/0073584) in view of Long et al. (US 2022/0091316) in view of Meyers (US 2017/0242303).
Consider claim 9, Harbach combined with Long clearly teaches the reflection film and the IR photodiode array. (Fig. 2, [0010] Harbach)
However, Harbach combined with Long does not explicitly teach at least one optical lens arranged between the reflection film and the IR photodiode array.
In an analogous art, Meyers, which discloses a display system, clearly teaches at least one optical lens arranged on the IR photodiode array. (Figs. 3, 5: Lens 508 is arranged over light source 502, [0034], [0036].)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Harbach combined with Long by at least one optical lens arranged between the reflection film and the IR photodiode array, as taught by Meyers, for the benefit of directing the emitted light.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 is 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
In the case of amending the claimed invention, applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN R SCHNURR whose telephone number is (571)270-1458. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6a-4p.
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, Brian Pendleton can be reached at (571)272-7527. 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.
/JOHN R SCHNURR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425
