DETAILED ACTION
Summary
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This is a first Office Action on the merits.
Claims 1-19 are currently pending.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 4, 8, 18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 2, lines 2-4, please amend “in the ultraviolet region of the electromagnetic spectrum and/or in the visible region of the electromagnetic spectrum and/or in the infrared region of the electromagnetic spectrum” to recite “in an ultraviolet region of the electromagnetic spectrum and/or in a visible region of the electromagnetic spectrum and/or in an infrared region of the electromagnetic spectrum”;
In claim 4, line 6, please amend “its top surface” to recite “the top surface”;
In claim 8, line 3, please amend “RFID” to recite “radio-frequency identification (RFID)”;
In claim 18, line 12, please delete the extra “the”;
In claim 18, line 13, please amend “a driver’s licence, a passport” to recite “a driver’s license, or a passport”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “wherein the light emitting element is at least partially and preferably entirely arranged in the light guiding element” in lines 6-7. The term “preferably” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the term are part of the claimed invention. For purposes of examination, “wherein the light emitting element is at least partially and preferably entirely arranged in the light guiding element” has been interpreted as “wherein the light emitting element is at least partially arranged in the light guiding element”.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “the transmittance preferably being 80% or more” in line 4. The term “preferably” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the term are part of the claimed invention. For purposes of examination, the limitation has been interpreted as “the transmittance being 80% or more”.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “wherein the light guiding element is provided as at least one film and/or as at least one layer, preferably comprising or consisting of one or more polymers and/or one or more plastics and/or preferably extending along an entire width of the data carrier with respect to the transverse direction”. The term “preferably” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the term are part of the claimed invention. For purpose of examination, the limitation has been interpreted as “wherein the light guiding element is provided as at least one film and/or as at least one layer, comprising or consisting of one or more polymers and/or one or more plastics and/or extending along an entire width of the data carrier with respect to the transverse direction”.
Claims 4-6 are rejected by dependence from claim 1.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “wherein the power element is arranged in the carrier body and is preferably arranged on a top surface of the light guiding element or on a bottom surface of the light guiding element”. The term “preferably” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the term are part of the claimed invention. For purposes of examination, the limitation has been interpreted as “wherein the power element is arranged in the carrier body and is arranged on a top surface of the light guiding element or on a bottom surface of the light guiding element”.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “wherein the power element corresponds to an antenna, preferably to an RFID antenna” in lines 3-4. The term “preferably” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the term are part of the claimed invention. For purposes of examination, the limitation has been interpreted as “wherein the power element corresponds to an antenna”.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the power element" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination, claim 9 has been interpreted as depending from claim 7, which includes a recitation of “at least one power element”.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “wherein the power element corresponds to an antenna, preferably to an RFID antenna” in lines 2-3. The term “preferably” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the term are part of the claimed invention. For purposes of examination, the limitation has simply been interpreted as “wherein the power element corresponds to an antenna”.
Claim 10 is rejected by dependence from claim 8.
Claim 11 recites the limitation “a location of the power element being in connection with the further electronic module preferably differs from a location of the power element being in connection with the light emitting element” in lines 7-8. The term “preferably” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the term are part of the claimed invention. For purposes of examination, the limitation has been interpreted as “a location of the power element being in connection with the further electronic module differs from a location of the power element being in connection with the light emitting element”.
Claim 12 recites the limitation “wherein the reflection element is preferably arranged on a top surface and/or a bottom surface of the light guiding element” in lines 6-7. The term “preferably” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the term are part of the claimed invention. For purposes of examination, the limitation has been interpreted as “wherein the reflection element is arranged on a top surface and/or a bottom surface of the light guiding element”.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the reflection element" in in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination, claim 13 has been interpreted as depending from claim 12, which includes a recitation of “at least one reflection element”.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the reflection element comprises or consists of at least one metallic compound and particularly preferably in a metallic layer” in lines 2-3. The term “preferably” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the term are part of the claimed invention. For purpose of examination, the limitation has been interpreted as “the reflection element comprises or consists of at least one metallic compound and particularly in a metallic layer”.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “one of the deflection directions preferably running perpendicularly to the transverse direction” in lines 4-5. The term “preferably” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the term are part of the claimed invention. For purposes of examination, the limitation has been interpreted as “one of the deflection directions running perpendicularly to the transverse direction”.
Claim 14 recites the limitations “wherein the deflection element is preferably configured to diffuse” in line 7 and “wherein the deflection element is preferably arranged on a top surface” in line 10. The term “preferably” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the term are part of the claimed invention. For purposes of examination, the limitations have been interpreted as “wherein the deflection element is configured to diffuse” and “wherein the deflection element is arranged on a top surface” respectively.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “wherein the encapsulation element preferably is a resin” in line 4. The term “preferably” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the term are part of the claimed invention. For purposes of examination, the limitation has been interpreted as “wherein the encapsulation element is a resin”.
Claim 16 recites the limitations “wherein the blocking element preferably is arranged above and/or below” in line 4 and “wherein the blocking element is preferably configured to absorb incident light” in line 7. The term “preferably” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the term are part of the claimed invention. For purposes of examination, the limitations have been interpreted as “wherein the blocking element is arranged above and/or below” and “wherein the blocking element is configured to absorb incident light” respectively.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “wherein the security element preferably has the shape of an image and/or of an alphanumeric character and/or preferably corresponds to at least one of an imprint, an engraving, a cutting, or an ablation” in lines 6-8. The term “preferably” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the term are part of the claimed invention. For purposes of examination, the limitation has been interpreted as “wherein the security element has a shape of an image and/or of an alphanumeric character and/or corresponds to at least one of an imprint, an engraving, a cutting, or an ablation”.
Claim 18 recites the limitation “wherein the light emitting element is at least partially and preferably entirely arranged in the light guiding element” in lines 6-7. The term “preferably” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the term are part of the claimed invention. For purposes of examination, the limitation has been interpreted as “wherein the light emitting element is at least partially arranged in the light guiding element”.
Claim 19 recites the limitation “wherein the light emitting element is at least partially and preferably entirely arranged in the light guiding element” in lines 7-8. The term “preferably” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the term are part of the claimed invention. For purposes of examination, the limitation has been interpreted as “wherein the light emitting element is at least partially arranged in the light guiding element”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(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(s) 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 12, 13, and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(2) as being anticipated by KLUGE, US 2017/0243102.
Re claims 1 and 18:
KLUGE teaches a data carrier (1) for a secure article comprising:
A carrier body defining an extension direction [0039] [0063] [Figures 1b and 3]; and
At least one light emitting element (50) being arranged in the carrier body [0019] [0046] [0047] [0066] [Figure 3];
Wherein the carrier body comprises at least one light guiding element (light conducting region 21 of foil 20) [0040] [0063] [0064] [Figure 3],
Wherein the light emitting element is at least partially arranged in the light guiding element [0066] [Figure 3], and
Wherein the light guiding element is configured to guide light being emitted from the light emitting element within the light guiding element and along a transverse direction extending perpendicularly to the extension direction [0066]-[0070] [Figure 3],
Wherein the secure article is an identity card, a bank card, a smart card, a driver’s license, or a passport [0010].
Re claim 19:
KLUGE teaches a method of producing a data carrier (1), the method comprising the steps of:
Providing a carrier body defining an extension direction [0039] [Figures 1b and 3]; and
Providing at least one light emitting element (50) being arranged in the carrier body [0019] [0046] [0047] [Figure 3],
wherein the carrier body comprises at least one light guiding element (light conducting region 21 of foil 20) [0063] [0066] [Figure 3],
wherein the light emitting element is at least partially arranged in the light guiding element [0061] [0066] [Figure 3], and
wherein the light guiding element is configured to guide light being emitted from the light emitting element within the light guiding element and along a transverse direction extending perpendicularly to the extension direction [Figure 3].
Re claim 3:
KLUGE teaches the data carrier according to claim 1, wherein the light guiding element is provided as at least one film and/or as at least one layer and extending along an entire width of the data carrier with respect to the transverse direction [0063] [0064] [Figure 3].
Re claim 4:
KLUGE teaches the data carrier according to claim 1, wherein the light guiding element comprises a top surface and a bottom surface being arranged opposite to said top surface with respect to the extension direction [Figure 3], and
Wherein the light guiding element is configured to guide the light being emitted from the light emitting element by reflecting the light from the top surface and/or the bottom surface [Figure 3].
Re claim 6:
KLUGE teaches the data carrier according to claim 1, wherein the light emitting element comprises at least one of a light emitting diode (LED), an LED panel, a micro-LED, an organic light emitting diode, or a quantum dot [0019].
Re claim 7:
KLUGE teaches the data carrier according to claim 1, further comprising at least one power element that is in connection with the light emitting element and that is configured to power the light emitting element [0019], and
Wherein the power element is arranged in the carrier body [0019].
Re claim 12:
KLUGE teaches the data carrier according to claim 1, further comprising at least one reflection element, the reflection element being arranged such that light being guided within the light guiding element and being incident on the reflection element is reflected from the reflection element back into the light guiding element (i.e., first cover foil 30 and second cover foil 40 [0043] ]0066] [0067] [Figure 3]), and
Wherein the reflection element is arranged on a top surface and/or a bottom surface of the light guiding element [0043] [0066] [0067] [Figure 3].
Re claim 13:
KLUGE teaches the data carrier according to claim 12, wherein the at least one reflection element comprises or consists of at least one metallic compound and particularly a metallic layer (i.e., second cover foil has a partially and/or fully metalized surface [0016]).
Re claim 16:
KLUGE teaches the data carrier according to claim 1, further comprising at least one blocking element that is configured to block light being emitted from the light emitting element (i.e., print layer 60 is substantially light-non-transmissive [0065]) and
Wherein the blocking element is arranged above and/or below the light emitting element and/or at least partially congruent with the light emitting element, and/or wherein the blocking element is configured to absorb incident light being emitted from the light emitting element (i.e., the print layer is arranged below the light emitting element in Figure 3).
Re claim 17:
KLUGE teaches the data carrier according to claim 12, further comprising at least one security element, wherein the security element (70) is configured and arranged such as to be illuminated by the light emitted from the light emitting element and/or from light being guided within the light guiding element [0070], and
Wherein the security element has a shape of an image and/or of an alphanumeric character and/or corresponds to at least one of an imprint, an engraving, a cutting, or an ablation (i.e., symbol 70 can be a feature for machine-evaluation configured as an authenticity feature [0071]).
Claim(s) 1, 3, 6, 16, 18, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by KLUGE, EP3009964 (hereinafter referred to as KLUGE ‘964).
Re claims 1, 18, and 19:
KLUGE ‘964 teaches a data carrier (1) for a secure article comprising:
A carrier body (2) defining an extension direction [0028] [Figures 2 and 4-6]; and
At least one light emitting element (18) being arranged in the carrier body [0033] [0052]-[0055] [Figures 2 and 4-6];
Wherein the carrier body comprises at least one light guiding element (12) [0031] [0052] [Figures 2 and 4-6],
Wherein the light emitting element is at least partially arranged in the light guiding element [0033] [0052] [Figures 2 and 4-6], and
Wherein the light guiding element is configured to guide light being emitted from the light emitting element within the light guiding element and along a transverse direction extending perpendicularly to the extension direction [0035] [0052],
Wherein the secure article is an identity card, a bank card, a smart card, a driver’s license, or a passport [0002].
Re claim 3:
KLUGE ‘964 teaches the data carrier according to claim 1, wherein the light guiding element is provided as at least one film and/or as at least one layer, comprising or consisting of one or more plastics [0036].
Re claim 6:
KLUGE ‘964 teaches the data carrier according to claim 1, wherein the light emitting element comprises at least one of an LED, an LED panel, a micro LED, an OLED, or a quantum dot [0056]-[0058] [0060].
Re claim 16:
KLUGE ‘964 teaches the data carrier according to claim 1, further comprising at least one blocking element that is configured to block light being emitted from the light emitting element, and wherein the blocking element is arranged above and/or below the light emitting element (i.e., imprint layers 10A and 10B are opaque [0035] [Figures 2, and 4-6]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KLUGE, US 2017/0243102 in view of DU et al, US 2023/0161197.
Re claim 2:
KLUGE teaches the data carrier according to claim 1, wherein the light guiding element has a transmittance to light being in an ultraviolet region of the electromagnetic spectrum and/or in a visible region of the electromagnetic spectrum and/or in an infrared region of the electromagnetic spectrum (i.e., the light emitted by light source 50 is visible).
KLUGE does not teach the transmittance is 80% or more.
DU teaches a light guide for a backlight display, the light guide formed of a transparent plastic having a transmittance to light being in a visible range of the electromagnetic spectrum, the transmittance being greater than 70% over a length of 500 millimeters in the visible region (about 420-750 nanometers) and at least 95% over a path length of 50 millimeters in the visible region of about 450 nanometers to about 650 nanometers [0072].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further incorporate the teachings of DU in the data carrier of KLUGE such that the light guiding element has a transmittance in a visible region of the electromagnetic spectrum being 80% or more for the purpose of facilitating more of the light transmitted by the light emitting element to be visible to data carrier users.
Claim(s) 5 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KLUGE, US 2017/0243102 in view of PUESCHNER et al, US 2015/0317553.
Re claim 5:
KLUGE teaches the data carrier according to claim 1, wherein the data carrier can comprise a microprocessor and integrated circuitry [0010].
KLUGE does not teach the data carrier comprises an electronic module, the electronic module comprising the light emitting element.
PUESCHNER teaches a data carrier (200, 300) comprising a carrier body defining an extension direction, the carrier body comprising a light guide (132) configured to guide light emitted from a light emitting element (104), and an electronic module (smart card module 100), wherein the electronic module comprises the light emitting element [0083]-[0088] [0092]-[0100] [Figures 2A-2B].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further incorporate the teachings of PUESCHNER, such that the data carrier further comprises an electronic module comprising the light emitting element. Microprocessors and integrated circuitry in payment cards, such as the in KLUGE, are commonly provided in the art as smart card modules. The incorporation of a smart card module with the light emitting element integrated therein would be for the purpose of providing the electronic components in a compact manner on the data carrier.
Re claim 15:
KLUGE teaches the data carrier according to claim 1, but does not teach at least one encapsulation element that at least partially encapsulates the light emitting element, wherein the encapsulation element is a resin and/or is at least partially transparent and/or is regionally configured to absorb light being emitted from the light emitting element.
PUESCHNER teaches a data carrier comprising at least one encapsulation element (118) that at least partially encapsulates a light emitting element (104), wherein the encapsulation element is a transparent polymer [0067] [0068] [Figure 1].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further incorporate the teachings of PUESCHNER in the data carrier of KLUGE such that a transparent encapsulation element at least partially encapsulates the light emitting element for the purpose of protecting the light emitting element (PUESCHNER [0067]).
Claim(s) 7-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KLUGE, EP3009964.
Re claim 7:
KLUGE ‘964 teaches the data carrier according to claim 1, further comprising at least one power element (3) that is in connection with the light emitting element and that is configured to power the light emitting element [0034] [Figures 2 and 4-6], and
Wherein the power element is arranged in the carrier body and wherein the power element is arranged in the carrier body and disposed in the light guiding element [0034] [Figures 2 and 4-6].
KLUGE ‘964 does not teach the antenna is arranged on a top surface of the light guiding element or on a bottom surface of the light guiding element; However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to try different placement of the antenna within the data carrier body. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize placing the antenna on a top or bottom surface of the light guiding element, rather than within the light guiding element, is merely an alternative to disposing the antenna within the data carrier that would not affect the basic function of invention.
Re claim 8:
KLUGE ‘964 teaches the data carrier according to claim 7, wherein the power element is in wired contact or in wireless contact with the light emitting element, and/or
Wherein the power element corresponds to an antenna (3) [0034] [Figures 2 and 4-6].
Re claim 9:
KLUGE ‘964 teaches the data carrier according to claim 7, wherein the power element is configured to be powered by an external device [0034] [0045].
Re claim 10:
KLUGE ‘964 teaches the data carrier according to claim 8, further comprising at least one further electronic module (i.e., chip module) [0028],
Wherein the further electronic module is a dual interface module or a contactless module, and/or wherein the further electronic module is in connection with at least one power element [0028].
Re claim 11:
KLUGE ‘964 teaches the data carrier according to claim 10, wherein the power element being in connection with the further electronic module corresponds to the power element being in connection with the light emitting element [0028] [0034].
Re claim 14:
KLUGE ‘964 teaches the data carrier according to claim 1, further comprising at least one deflection element, the deflection element being arranged such that light being guided within the light guiding element and being incident on the deflection element and is deflected along one or more deflection directions running at an angle to the transverse direction, one or the deflection directions running perpendicular to the transverse direction (i.e., disturbance/interference pattern 21 [0047] [Figures 9-10]).
Wherein the deflection element is configured to diffuse and/or scatter incident light and/or corresponds to at least one of a diffusive ink, a scattering material, a texturation or a structural coloring, and/or wherein the deflection element is arranged on a top surface and/or a bottom surface of the light guiding element [0047].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
LOWE et al, US 2021/0158124, teaches a data carrier for a secure article comprising: a carrier body defining an extension direction, at least one light emitting element arranged at least partially within a light guiding element, wherein the light guiding element is configured to guide light being emitted from the light emitting element within the light guiding element and along a transverse direction extending perpendicularly to the extension direction [0065] [Figure 18].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA A GUDORF whose telephone number is (571)270-7607. If the Examiner cannot be reached by telephone, she can be reached through the following e-mail address: laura.gudorf@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 6:00-4:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michael Lee, can be reached at telephone number (571)272-2398. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/LAURA A GUDORF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876