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 .
Preliminary Amendment
The preliminary amendment filed 6/6/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-2, 4, 6-7, 9, 13, 18, 20, 24, and 27-28 have been amended. Claims 3, 5, 8, 10-12, 14, and 25 have been cancelled. No claims have been added. Claims 1-2, 4, 6-7, 9, 13, 15-24, and 26-28 are still pending in this application, with Claims 1 and 15 being independent.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
Figure 1 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated (as described in para. [0003] and [0046] on pgs. 1 and 8 of the Specification as filed). See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “optical isolation layer and/or a thermal insulation film layer” in Claim 17 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 27 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “at least portion of the light introducing medium” in line 4 of the claim is grammatically incorrect. The Examiner respectfully suggests amending it to be --at least a portion of the light introducing medium-- to correct the typographical error.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “the at least portion of the light introducing medium” in lines 5-6 of the claim is grammatically incorrect. The Examiner respectfully suggests amending it to be either --the at least a portion of the light introducing medium--, or alternatively, --the
Regarding claim 27, the limitation “a covering component configured to cove” in line 2 of the claim is grammatically incorrect, since the word “cove” is not a verb. The Examiner respectfully suggests amending it to be --a covering component configured to cover-- to correct the typographical error.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a covering component configured to cover outside of the light introducing medium and the light source” in Claim 27.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 7 and 24 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.
Regarding claim 7, the limitation “wherein a refractive index of the light introducing medium is equal to a refractive index of the optical waveguide medium layer or is within a preset range” in lines 1-3 of the claim renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what the metes and bounds of the claimed “preset range” are, rendering the exact scope of the claim unascertainable as it is unclear if any refractive index values would be excluded from the claimed range. A review of the Specification as filed shows that the light introducing medium’s refractive index is described as “the preset range of the refractive index of the light introducing medium 1 is 1.35-1.65” (as described in par. [0077] on pg. 13 of the Specification as filed). Therefore, for the purpose of examination, the claimed range has been interpreted as best understood to fall within the range described within the Specification as filed.
Regarding claim 24, the limitation “optionally h:a:b=1:8:200” in line 6 of the claim renders the claim indefinite because a broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, Claim 24 recites the broad recitation “wherein a light propagation distance of the optical waveguide medium layer is defined as b, a distance between the third surface and the fourth surface of the light introducing medium is defined as a, and a distance between the second surface of the light introducing medium and the first main surface of the optical waveguide medium layer is defined as h; where b=20a to 30a, and a=6h to 10h” in lines 1-5 of the claim, and the claim also recites “optionally h:a:b=1:8:200” in line 6 of the claim which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Additionally, according to MPEP 2111.04, "Claim scope is not limited by claim language that suggests or makes optional but does not require steps to be performed." The recitations of Claim 24 that follow the term "optionally" are therefore not required elements of this claim and are thus given no patentable weight. Since these elements have no patentable weight because they are merely optional, no prior art is required to teach these elements in order for this claim to be rejected.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4, and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vasylyev (US 2017/0045666).
Regarding claim 1, Vasylyev discloses a light incidence structure configured to guide light into an optical waveguide medium layer (a face-lit waveguide illumination system 900 which comprises a plurality of highly elongated light coupling elements 2 attached to a first broad-area surface 110 of a waveguiding substrate 190 to guide light into the waveguiding substrate; see Figs. 1-8, 15; para. [0078]-[0089]), the optical waveguide medium layer having at least a first main surface for light incidence (first broad-area surface 110 serves as an incident surface for the optical waveguide medium layer 190; see Figs. 1, 3, 5, 6-8, 15; para. [0079]-[0081], [0084], [0087]-[0088], [0099]), the light incident structure comprising a light introducing medium, at least a portion of the light introducing medium being formed on the first main surface of the optical waveguide medium layer by curing, such that the at least a portion of the light introducing medium is a part of the optical waveguide medium layer (a plurality of highly elongated light coupling elements 2 are attached to the first main surface 110 of the optical waveguide medium layer 190 with good optical contact by being bonded to the surface by a highly transmissive optically clear adhesive applied in liquid form and then cured, or can be overmolded onto the surface; see Figs. 1-3, 5-8, 15; para. [0081]-[0089], [0104]-[0112], [0245]), and the light introducing medium having at least one incident surface for light incidence (each light introducing medium 2 comprises a light input face 4 at a first terminal end thereof; see Figs. 1-3, 5-8, 15; para. [0081], [0089], [0096], [0104], [0108]-[0110]); and a light emitting source, wherein light emitted by the light emitting source enters the light introducing medium through the incident surface, and the light enters the optical waveguide medium layer from the first main surface after being refracted by the light introducing medium (a linear array of LED sources 32 having the same spacing as the plurality of light introducing media 2 are positioned in registration with the incident surfaces 4 of the light introducing media to emit light which is directed into the optical waveguide medium layer 190 through its first main surface 110; see Figs. 1-8, 15; para. [0089]-[0098], [0103]-[0106], [0123]-[0135], [0144]).
Regarding the limitation “at least a portion of the light introducing medium being formed on the first main surface of the optical waveguide medium layer by curing” (emphasis added), the Applicant is advised that, even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. “The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964, (Fed. Cir. 1985). In this case, the cited limitations failed to distinguish the claimed structure from the patented device of Vasylyev. See MPEP § 2113.
Regarding claim 2, Vasylyev discloses wherein the light introducing medium is a protruding structure located on the first main surface of the optical waveguide medium layer (each light introducing medium 2 protrudes above the first main surface 110 of the optical waveguide medium layer 190; see Figs. 1-3, 5-8, 15; para. [0081]-[0089], [0104]-[0112]), and the first main surface is a flat surface or a curved surface (the first main surface 110 is a flat, planar surface; see Figs. 1, 3, 5, 6-8, 15; para. [0079]-[0081], [0084], [0087]-[0088], [0099]).
Regarding claim 4, Vasylyev discloses wherein the optical waveguide medium layer has a second main surface opposite to the first main surface (the optical waveguide medium layer 190 comprises an opposing second broad-area surface 112 extending substantially parallel to the first main surface 110; see Figs. 1, 3, 7-8, 15; para. [0079], [0099]), a light reflection portion is disposed on the second main surface (a light emission area 200 having a plurality of light extraction features 20 distributed over the area can be applied to the second main surface 112 or the first main surface 110, or to both surfaces; see Fig. 1; para. [0099]-[0100]), the light entering the optical waveguide medium layer is reflected at the light reflection portion (the light reflection portion 200 comprises various light extraction features 20 that reflect light propagating through the optical waveguide medium layer to extract light via scattering reflection to emit light; see Fig. 1; para. [0099]-[0100]), and the light reflection portion is in a preset pattern (the light reflection portion 200 comprises various light extraction features arranged in a pattern; see Fig. 1; para. [0099]-[0100]).
Regarding claim 6, Vasylyev discloses wherein the incident surface is a flat surface, a convex mirror surface, or a concave mirror surface (each incident surface 4 is a flat surface; see Figs. 1-3, 5-8, 15; para. [0081], [0089], [0096], [0104], [0108]-[0110]).
Regarding claim 7, Vasylyev discloses wherein a refractive index of the light introducing medium is equal to a refractive index of the optical waveguide medium layer or is within a preset range (the light introducing media 2 are preferably made from a highly transmissive material that has a refractive index similar or substantially the same as that of the optical waveguide medium layer 190; see par. [0086]), wherein a visible light transmittance of the light introducing medium is greater than or equal to a visible light transmittance of the optical waveguide medium layer (the light introducing media 2 and the optical waveguide medium layer 190 can be made of the same glass material having the same transmittance to visible light, i.e. both structures are transparent; see para. [0076], [0080], [0086]-[0087], [0107], [0251]).
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.
Claims 9 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vasylyev (US 2017/0045666) in view of Pasquarelli (US 2023/0118480). The teachings of Vasylyev have been discussed above.
Regarding claim 9, Vasylyev teaches wherein the light introducing medium is integrally formed with the optical waveguide medium layer, or wherein the light introducing medium is formed by curing a liquid with a viscosity on the optical waveguide medium layer (the array of light emitting sources 32, optical waveguide medium layer 190, and light introducing media 2 can form an integrally formed, single-piece illumination system; see Figs. 1-3, 5-8, 15; para. [0081]-[0089], [0104]-[0112], [0245]); and the light emitting source is disposed on the optical waveguide medium layer and adjacent to the incident surface (the light emitting source 32 is disposed on the first main surface 110 of the optical waveguide medium layer 190 and directly adjacent to the incident surface 4 of the light introducing medium 2; see Fig. 15; para. [0089]-[0098], [0103]-[0106], [0123]-[0135], [0144], [0184]).
However, the teachings of Vasylyev fail to disclose or fairly suggest the light incidence structure further comprises a cover plate, the cover plate has a first end and a second end opposite to each other, the first end of the cover plate is connected to the optical waveguide medium layer, the second end of the cover plate is inclined in a direction away from the optical waveguide medium layer, and the light introducing medium is located between the cover plate and the optical waveguide medium layer; the incident surface is located between the second end of the cover plate and the optical waveguide medium layer, or the incident surface is located between a position adjacent to the second end of the cover plate and the optical waveguide medium layer.
Pasquarelli teaches a light incidence structure configured to guide light into an optical waveguide medium layer (illuminators 22 which guide light into an inner window pane body 18 which is formed as a light-conducting layer in which light coupled into its volume propagates; see Figs. 1-2; para. [0048]-[0058]), the optical waveguide medium layer having at least a first main surface for light incidence (the optical waveguide medium layer 18 comprises a first main surface (the lower surface in Fig. 2) onto which the illuminators 22 are mounted to emit light into the waveguide layer; see Figs. 1-2; para. [0049]-[0051], [0055]-[0058]), the light incidence structure comprising a light introducing medium (the illuminators 22 each comprise a bar-shaped input coupling element 28 which emits light into the optical waveguide medium layer 18; see Figs. 1-2; para. [0054]-[0058]), at least a portion of the light introducing medium being formed on the first main surface of the optical waveguide medium layer by curing, such that at least a portion of the light introducing medium is a part of the optical waveguide medium layer (each light introducing medium 28 is attached to the optical waveguide medium layer 18 by an optically clear adhesive layer 30; see Figs. 1-2; para. [0055], [0058]), and the light introducing medium having at least one incident surface for light incidence (each light introducing medium 28 has a light incident surface which receives light from the light source 24 and its light conductor 26; see Figs. 1-2; para. [0053]-[0055], [0058]); and a light emitting source, wherein light emitted by the light emitting source enters the optical waveguide medium layer from the first main surface after being refracted by the light introducing medium (light source 24 emits light into light conductor 26 to be input into the light introducing medium 28 and then into the optical waveguide medium layer 18; see Figs. 1-2; par. [0053]-[0055], [0058]); the light incidence structure further comprising a cover plate, the cover plate having a first end and a second end opposite to each other (a cladding element 32 is provided which covers the light incidence structure 22 and has a first end connected to the optical waveguide medium layer 18 and an opposing second end; see Fig. 2; par. [0057]), the first end of the cover plate connected to the optical waveguide medium layer (as shown in Fig. 2), the second end of the cover plate inclined in a direction away from the optical waveguide medium layer (as shown in Fig. 2), and the light introducing medium is located between the cover plate and the optical waveguide medium layer (the light introducing medium 28 is disposed inside the cover plate 32 to be positioned between the cover plate and the optical waveguide medium layer 18; see Fig. 2; par. [0057]); wherein the incident surface is located between the second end of the cover plate and the optical waveguide medium layer, or the incident surface is located between a position adjacent to the second end of the cover plate and the optical waveguide medium layer (every surface of the light introducing medium is located between the second end of the cover plate 32 and the optical waveguide medium layer 18, as shown in Fig. 2).
Therefore, in view of Pasquarelli, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the light incidence structure of Vasylyev by providing a cover plate having a first end and a second end opposite to each other, the first end of the cover plate connected to the optical waveguide medium layer, the second end of the cover plate inclined in a direction away from the optical waveguide medium layer, the light introducing medium located between the cover plate and the optical waveguide medium layer, wherein the incidence surface is located between the second end of the cover plate and the optical waveguide medium layer, or the incident surface is located between a position adjacent to the second end of the cover plate and the optical waveguide medium layer. One would have been motivated to modify the known light incidence structure of Vasylyev by providing a cover plate having a first end and a second end opposite to each other, the first end of the cover plate connected to the optical waveguide medium layer, the second end of the cover plate inclined in a direction away from the optical waveguide medium layer, the light introducing medium located between the cover plate and the optical waveguide medium layer, wherein the incidence surface is located between the second end of the cover plate and the optical waveguide medium layer, or the incident surface is located between a position adjacent to the second end of the cover plate and the optical waveguide medium layer, as taught by Pasquarelli, in order to cover the light emitting source and the light introducing medium and thereby protect them from direct access.
Regarding claim 13, Vasylyev teaches a window, comprising an optical waveguide medium layer, an outer glass layer, and the light incidence structure according to claim 1 (the illumination system 900 (light incidence structure) is designed to illuminate a window (i.e., an outer glass layer) via the optical waveguide medium layer 190; see para. [0006], [0251]).
However, the teachings of Vasylyev fail to specifically disclose the window is a vehicle window.
Pasquarelli teaches a vehicle window (a vehicle roof 10 which comprises roof elements 12 and 14 that each define a vehicle window pane; see Figs. 1-2; para. [0048]-[0052]), comprising an optical waveguide medium layer (inner window pane body 18 acts as an optical waveguide; see Figs. 1-2; para. [0048]-[0051], [0055]-[0058]), an outer glass layer (outer window pane body 16; see Figs. 1-2; para. [0049]-[0051]), and the light incidence structure (illuminators 22; see Figs. 1-2; para. [0048]-[0058).
Therefore, in view of Pasquarelli, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the window of Vasylyev by configuring the window as a vehicle window comprising the optical waveguide medium layer, an outer glass layer, and the light incidence structure. One would have been motivated to modify the known window of Vasylyev by configuring the window as a vehicle window comprising the optical waveguide medium layer, an outer glass layer, and the light incidence structure, as taught by Pasquarelli, in order to provide a vehicle window pane with an ambient light function (see Pasquarelli, par. [0048] for the motivation).
Claims 15-19, 21, 23-24, and 26-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pasquarelli (US 2023/0118480) in view of Roelandts et al. (US 2025/0388002, hereinafter “Roelandts”).
Regarding claim 15, Pasquarelli teaches a vehicle window panel (a vehicle roof 10 which comprises roof elements 12 and 14 that each define a vehicle window pane; see Figs. 1-2; para. [0048]-[0052]), comprising an optical waveguide medium layer having a first main surface and a second main surface opposite to each other (an inner window pane body 18 which is formed as a light-conducting layer in which light coupled into its volume propagates between opposed first (i.e., bottom) and second (i.e., top) main surfaces; see Figs. 1-2; para. [0048]-[0051], [0055]-[0058]), and a light reflection patterned layer being provided on the first main surface and/or the second main surface (a print which scatters light in the direction of the vehicle interior is applied to the upper side of the optical waveguide medium layer; see par. [0058]); a light introducing medium comprising a first surface and a second surface disposed opposite to each other (illuminators 22 which each comprise an input coupling element 28 guide light into the optical waveguide medium layer 18 has a first (top) surface and an opposed second (bottom) surface; see Figs. 1-2; para. [0048]-[0058]), the light introducing medium being closely connected to the first main surface through the first surface (the light introducing medium 28 is adhered at its first/top surface to the first/bottom main surface of the optical waveguide medium layer 18 by an adhesive layer 30; see Fig. 2; para. [0055], [0058]), and a connection portion of the first main surface connected to the first surface being parallel to the first surface (as shown in Fig. 2); and a light emitting source located at one end of the light introducing medium, light from the light emitting source enters the light introducing medium, and the light introducing medium is configured to introduce light from the light emitting source into the optical waveguide medium layer (light source 24 emits light into light conductor 26 to be input into the light introducing medium 28 and then into the optical waveguide medium layer 18; see Figs. 1-2; par. [0053]-[0055], [0058]).
However, the teachings of Pasquarelli fail to disclose or fairly suggest the first surface and the second surface of the light introducing medium are disposed parallel to each other.
Roelandts teaches a vehicle window panel (a vehicle roof 10 which is a fixed glazing panoramic roof divided for example into three areas A, B, and C; see Figs. 1-4; para. [0068]-[0070]), comprising an optical waveguide medium layer having a first main surface and a second main surface opposite to each other (internal glass pane 12 having opposed first (inner surface P4) and second (top) main surfaces acts as a light guide layer; see Figs. 1-4; para. [0071]-[0078], [0080]-[0086]); a light introducing medium comprising a first surface and a second surface disposed parallel to each other (at least one coupling element 30 which is rectangular and has parallel first (top) and second (bottom) surfaces; see Figs. 1-4; para. [0069], [0081]-[0090], [0093], [0095]), the light introducing medium being closely connected to the first main surface through the first surface (the light introducing medium 30 is directly connected at its first surface to the first main surface P4 of the optical waveguide medium layer 12 via an adhesive layer 22; see Figs. 2-4; para. [0098]-[0100]), and a connection portion of the first main surface connected to the first surface being parallel to the first surface (as shown in Figs. 2-4); a light emitting source located at one end of the light introducing medium, light from the light emitting source enters the light introducing medium, and the light introducing medium is configured to introduce the light from the light emitting source into the optical waveguide medium layer (light source 20 emits light into the light introducing medium 30 to be directed into the optical waveguide medium layer 12; see Figs. 1-4; para. [0088]-[0097], [0102]).
Therefore, in view of Roelandts, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the vehicle window panel of Pasquarelli by forming the light introducing medium as a rectangular structure such that the first and second surfaces are disposed parallel to each other. One would have been motivated to modify the known vehicle window panel of Pasquarelli by forming the light introducing medium as a rectangular structure such that the first and second surfaces are disposed parallel to each other, as taught by Roelandts, in order to ensure the light introducing medium has a flat-shaped cross-section which is more easily produced (see Roelandts, para. [0026] for the motivation).
Regarding claim 16, Pasquarelli teaches wherein the light introducing medium further comprises a third surface, the light emitting source is disposed adjacent to the third surface, and the light from the light emitting source enters the light introducing medium through the third surface (each light introducing medium 28 has a light incident surface is a third surface that receives light from the light emitting source 24 and its light conductor 26; see Figs. 1-2; para. [0053]-[0055], [0058]); and the third surface is disposed as a flat surface or a curved surface (the third/incident surface of the light introducing medium is flat, as shown in Fig. 2).
However, the teachings of Pasquarelli fail to disclose or fairly suggest the light introducing medium comprises a fourth surface opposite the third surface, and the fourth surface is disposed as a flat surface or a curved surface.
Roelandts teaches wherein the light introducing medium further comprises a third surface and a fourth surface disposed parallel to each other (the light introducing medium 30 is rectangular and comprises opposed left and right side surfaces parallel to each other; as shown in Figs. 2-4), the light emitting source is disposed adjacent to the third surface (the light emitting source 20 is disposed to adjacent to the left/third surface of the light introducing medium 30; see Figs. 1-4; para. [0088]-[0097]), the light from the light emitting source enters the light introducing medium through the third surface (see Figs. 1-4; para. [0088]-[0097]); and the third surface and the fourth surface are each disposed as a flat surface or a curved surface (as shown in Figs. 2-4).
Therefore, in view of Roelandts, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the vehicle window panel of Pasquarelli by forming the light introducing medium as a rectangular structure having a fourth surface opposite the third surface, the fourth surface disposed as a flat surface or a curved surface. One would have been motivated to modify the known vehicle window panel of Pasquarelli by forming the light introducing medium as a rectangular structure having a fourth surface opposite the third surface, the fourth surface disposed as a flat surface or a curved surface, as taught by Roelandts, in order to ensure the light introducing medium has a flat-shaped cross-section which is more easily produced (see Roelandts, para. [0026] for the motivation).
However, regarding claim 17, the teachings of Pasquarelli fail to disclose or fairly suggest wherein an optical isolation layer and/or a thermal insulation film layer is disposed on the first main surface and/or the second main surface of the optical waveguide medium layer.
Roelandts teaches wherein an optical isolation layer and/or a thermal insulation film layer is disposed on the first main surface and/or the second main surface of the optical waveguide medium layer (a low-E coating is provided over the surface of the first main surface P4 of the optical waveguide medium layer 12 as a reflective thermal radiation coating; see Fig. 3; para. [0109]-[0114]).
Therefore, in view of Roelandts, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the vehicle window panel of Pasquarelli by disposing an optical isolation layer and/or a thermal insulation film layer on the first main surface and/or the second main surface of the optical waveguide medium layer. One would have been motivated to modify the known vehicle window panel of Pasquarelli by disposing an optical isolation layer and/or a thermal insulation film layer on the first main surface and/or the second main surface of the optical waveguide medium layer, as taught by Roelandts, in order to reduce the emission of thermal radiation from the pane into the interior in the summer and reduce the transmission of heat into the external environment in the winter (see Roelandts, par. [0110] for the motivation).
Regarding claim 18, Pasquarelli teaches wherein the connection portion of the first main surface connected to the first surface has a transparent region, and the transparent region represents a connection portion of the first main surface without any additional treatment (the connection portion defined by the adhesive 30 on the first main surface of the optical waveguide medium layer 18 is a transparent, optically clear adhesive and lacks any additional treatment; see Fig. 2; para. [0033], [0055], [0058]).
Regarding claim 19, Pasquarelli teaches wherein the light introducing medium is integrally formed with the optical waveguide medium layer; or the light introducing medium and the optical waveguide medium layer are manufactured separately and assembled with each other (the light introducing medium 28 is connected to the optical waveguide medium layer 18; see Figs. 1-2; para. [0048]-[0058]).
Regarding claim 21, Pasquarelli teaches wherein the light introducing medium and the optical waveguide medium layer are made of a same glass material; and/or the glass material is inorganic glass or organic glass (the optical waveguide medium layer 18 is made of an inorganic glass; see par. [0049]).
However, the teachings of Pasquarelli fail to specifically disclose the light introducing medium is made of the same inorganic or organic glass material as the optical waveguide medium layer.
Roelandts teaches wherein the light introducing medium and the optical waveguide medium layer are made of a same glass material; and/or the glass material is inorganic glass or organic glass (the at least one light introducing medium 30 is made of the same glass material used for the optical waveguide medium layer 12; see para. [0081], [0086]).
Therefore, in view of Roelandts, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the vehicle window panel of Pasquarelli by forming the light introducing medium of the same inorganic or organic glass material as the optical waveguide medium layer. One would have been motivated to modify the known vehicle window panel of Pasquarelli by forming the light introducing medium of the same inorganic or organic glass material as the optical waveguide medium layer, as taught by Roelandts, in order to ensure the light introducing medium has the same refractive index or close to the same refractive index as the optical waveguide medium layer (see Roelandts, par. [0081] for the motivation).
Regarding claim 23, Pasquarelli teaches wherein the light introducing medium is connected to at least one side of the optical waveguide medium layer (the light introducing medium 28 is adhered at its first/top surface to the first/bottom main surface of the optical waveguide medium layer 18 by an adhesive layer 30; see Fig. 2; para. [0055], [0058]); and/or the light introducing medium is in a shape of a long strip or an arc strip (each light emitting source 24 is an elongated strip; see Figs. 1-2; par. [0053]-[0055], [0058]).
Regarding claim 24, although the combined teachings of Pasquarelli modified by Roelandts fail to specifically disclose wherein a light propagation distance of the optical waveguide medium layer is defined as b, a distance between the third surface and the fourth surface of the light introducing medium is defined as a, and a distance between the second surface of the light introducing medium and the first main surface of the optical waveguide medium layer is defined as h; where b=20a to 30a, and a=6h to 10h, optionally h:a:b=1:8:200, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the vehicle window panel of Pasquarelli, as modified by Roelandts by setting a light propagation distance of the optical waveguide medium layer is defined as b, a distance between the third surface and the fourth surface of the light introducing medium is defined as a, and a distance between the second surface of the light introducing medium and the first main surface of the optical waveguide medium layer is defined as h; where b=20a to 30a, and a=6h to 10h, optionally h:a:b=1:8:200, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only ordinary skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. In this case, further modifying the known vehicle window panel of Pasquarelli by setting a light propagation distance of the optical waveguide medium layer is defined as b, a distance between the third surface and the fourth surface of the light introducing medium is defined as a, and a distance between the second surface of the light introducing medium and the first main surface of the optical waveguide medium layer is defined as h; where b=20a to 30a, and a=6h to 10h, optionally h:a:b=1:8:200 would have flown naturally to one of ordinary skill in the art as necessitated by the particular design requirements of a given application, in order to ensure the vehicle window panel fits within the dimensions of any vehicle it is designed to be used with.
Regarding claim 26, Pasquarelli teaches an outer glass layer (outer exit window pane body 16; see Figs. 1-2; para. [0049]-[0051]); and the second main surface is connected to the outer glass layer via a first adhesive layer (the top/second main surface of the optical waveguide medium layer 18 is connected to the outer glass layer 16 via a connecting layer 20 which is an adhesive layer; see Fig. 2; para. [0011], [0021], [0050]).
Regarding claim 27, Pasquarelli teaches a vehicle window panel assembly, comprising the vehicle window panel according to claim 15 (a vehicle roof 10 which comprises roof elements 12 and 14 that each define a vehicle window pane; see Figs. 1-2; para. [0048]-[0052]), and a covering component configured to cover outside of the light introducing medium and the light emitting source (a cladding element 32 is provided which covers the light introducing medium 28, the light emitting source 24, and the light conductor 26 associated with each light source; see Fig. 2; par. [0057]).
Regarding claim 28, Pasquarelli teaches a vehicle comprising the vehicle window panel according to claim 15 (a vehicle roof 10 which comprises roof elements 12 and 14 that each define a vehicle window pane; see Figs. 1-2; para. [0048]-[0052]).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pasquarelli (US 2023/0118480), as modified by Roelandts (US 2025/0388002) as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Jiang et al. (CN 111808539, previously listed on the IDS filed 6/6/2025, hereinafter “Jiang”). The teachings of Pasquarelli modified by Roelandts have been discussed above.
Pasquarelli teaches wherein the light introducing medium is fixedly connected to the optical waveguide medium layer via a curable liquid; the liquid is an optically clear adhesive or an optically clear resin (the light introducing medium 28 is fixed to the optical waveguide medium layer 18 by a connecting layer 20 which is a cured optically clear adhesive; see Fig. 2; para. [0011], [0021], [0050]); a refractive index of the liquid is in a range from 1.45 to 1.65 (the liquid adhesive layer 20 has a refractive index between 1.40-1.65, and preferably 1.48-1.56; see par. [0021]); and a visible light transmittance of the liquid is in a range from 90% to 99% (the liquid adhesive layer 20 can be transparent, which means it has a visible light transmittance of nearly 99% like all transparent objects; see par. [0011]).
However, the teachings of Pasquarelli modified by Roelandts fail to disclose or fairly suggest a haze of the liquid is equal to or less than 5%.
Jiang teaches an optically clear adhesive (OCA) and preparation method thereof (see Abstract; pg. 4, last paragraph through pg. 5, second paragraph), comprising a curable liquid which is an optically clear adhesive or an optically clear resin having a refractive index in a range from 1.45 to 1.65, a visible light transmittance in a range from 90% to 99%, and a haze of the liquid is equal to or less than 5% (the optically clear adhesive has a refractive index not less than 1.51, a light transmittance greater than or equal to 95%, and a haze that is less than or equal to 0.1%; see pg. 5, second paragraph).
Therefore, in view of Jiang, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to further modify the vehicle window panel of Pasquarelli, as modified by Roelandts, by selecting the liquid to have a haze that is less than or equal to 5%. One would have been motivated to further modify the known vehicle window panel of Pasquarelli by selecting the liquid to have a haze that is less than or equal to 5%, such as the liquid optically clear adhesive of Jiang, in order to reduce a transmittance loss rate within the adhesive (see Jiang, pg. 5, second paragraph for the motivation).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pasquarelli (US 2023/0118480), as modified by Roelandts (US 2025/0388002) as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Yuan et al. (US 2023/0174413, hereinafter “Yuan”). The teachings of Pasquarelli modified by Roelandts have been discussed above.
Pasquarelli teaches wherein a refractive index of the light introducing medium is in a range from 1.45 to 1.65 (the light introducing medium 28 has a refractive index of between 1.40-1.65, and is preferably between 1.48-1.59; see para. [0016], [0054]); a light transmittance of the light introducing medium is in a range from 80% to 99.9% (the light introducing medium (input coupling element 28) is a body of material which is transparent to light and therefore has a transmittance of nearly 100% like all transparent objects; see Claim 2).
However, the teachings of Pasquarelli modified by Roelandts fail to disclose or fairly suggest a haze of the light introducing medium is equal to or less than 5%.
Yuan teaches a microcrystalline glass structure usable in vehicle windows (see Abstract; par. [0384]) having a refractive index in a range from 1.45 to 1.65 (the microcrystalline glass has a refractive index of 1.552-1.57; see para. [0092], [0221]), a light transmittance in a range from 80% to 99.9% (the microcrystalline glass product has an average visible light transmittance of 87% or more; see par. [0045]), and a haze that is equal to or less than 5% (the microcrystalline glass structure has an average haze of 0.2% or less; see para. [0045], [0094], [0176]).
Therefore, in view of Yuan, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the vehicle window panel of Pasquarelli, as modified by Roelandts by forming the light introducing medium of a glass material having a haze that is equal to or less than 5%. One would have been motivated to further modify the known vehicle window panel of Pasquarelli by forming the light introducing medium of a glass material having a haze that is equal to or less than 5%, such as the glass material taught by Yuan, in order to reduce a transmittance loss rate within the light introducing medium.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Shao et al. (US 2025/0147227), Lin (US 2015/0009687), and Tanoue et al. (US 2011/0286237) all disclose light incidence structures configured to guide light into an optical waveguide medium layer having at least a first main surface for light incidence, with Shao and Lin each disclosing a vehicle window panel comprising the light incidence structure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM N HARRIS whose telephone number is (571)272-3609. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8:00AM- 5:00PM EST, Alternate Fridays.
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, Jong-Suk (James) Lee can be reached at 571-272-7044. 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.
/WILLIAM N HARRIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights