DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
Claims 1-8 and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kenney et al. (2022/0221624).
With respect to claim 1, Kenney teaches a light control film (100/200) comprising: a main body (130 and 131 and/or 260, 231, and 230) having a first surface (110 and/or bottom surface of 200) and a second surface (120 and/or 210) facing the first surface (Figs. 1A-2), in which a plurality of grooves extending toward the second surface is formed on the first surface (Figs. 1A-2); a filling material (140 and/or paragraph 31) filled in the plurality of grooves (Figs. 1A-2), and including a light absorbing material (paragraphs 19-20 and/or 31); and a base film (260) present in one or both sides of the main body, wherein the base film has an in-plane phase difference of at least 8,000 nm for a wavelength of 550 nm (paragraphs 50-51; *note that paragraphs 153-157 teaches a PET and/or polyester film exhibit the claimed in-plane phase difference).
As for claim 2, Kenny teaches wherein the plurality of grooves (201a-d) formed in the main body is formed to represent a straight-line shape when the first surface is observed in the normal direction of the first surface of the main body, and the slow axis of the base film and the straight-line shape are disposed to form an angle in a range of 80 degrees to 90 degrees or 0 degrees to 10 degrees (Fig. 2).
As for claim 3, Kenney teaches wherein in the plurality of grooves filled with the filling material, an average depth of regions unfilled with the filling material is in a range of 0µm (paragraph 45; note that if the groove is filled, then 0µm will be unfilled) to 3µm, and a standard deviation of depths of the unfilled regions depth is 0.2 or less (paragraph 45; note that if the groove is filled, then 0µm will be unfilled).
With respect to claim 4, Kenny teaches wherein an absolute value of a difference between a refractive index N1 of the main body and a refractive index N2 of the filling material is in a range of 0 to 0.1 (paragraph 87).
As for claim 5, Kenney teaches wherein in a cross section of the main body, each of the plurality grooves has a first side extending from the first surface of the main body toward the second surface of the main body, and a second side facing the first side and extending from the first surface toward the second surface, and a first angle formed by the first side and the normal direction of the first surface, and a second angle formed by the second side and the normal direction of the second first surface are each in a range of 0 degrees to 10 degrees (Fig. 2 and paragraphs 33-35).
As for claim 6, Kenney teaches wherein the first angle and the second angle are different from each other, where the first angle is at least 2 degrees, and the second angle is 2 degrees or less (Fig. 2 and paragraphs 33-35; *note that the claimed angles are disclosed in the Kenney and Kenney explicitly discloses the second sidewall varying depending on the first sidewall).
As for claim 7, Kenney teaches wherein in a cross section of the main body, each of the plurality grooves has a first side extending from the first surface of the main body toward the second surface of the main body, and a second side facing the first side and extending from the first surface toward the second surface, and the first side or the second side comprises a side A forming an angle A with the normal direction of the first surface, and a side B forming an angle B different from the angle A (Fig. 2 and paragraphs 33-35).
As for claim 8, Kenney teaches wherein the side B is located closer to the second surface of the main body relative to the side A, and the angle A is at least 3 degrees and the angle B is 2 degrees or less (Fig. 2 and paragraphs 33-35; *note that the claimed angles are disclosed in the Kenney and Kenney explicitly discloses the second sidewall varying depending on the first sidewall).
As for claim 10, Kenney wherein a depth of each of the plurality of grooves formed in the main body is in a range of 50 µm to 200 µm (paragraph 18), a pitch of the plurality of grooves formed in the main body is in a range of 10 pm to 100 pm or less (paragraph 37), and a width of each of the plurality of grooves formed on the first surface of the main body is in a range of 1 pm to 50 pm (paragraph 20).
As for claim 11, Kenney teaches wherein the main body has a tensile strength of 7 MPa or more (paragraph 112).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 and 12-20 are 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.
With respect 9, the prior art does not teach or suggest wherein R of Equation 1 below is in a range of 5% to 40%:
[Equation 1]
R = (100xLBxcosӨB)/(LAxcosӨA+LBxcosӨB)
wherein, LA is a length of the side A, LB is a length of the side B, ӨA is the angle A, and ӨB is the angle B; along with the other limiting elements of claims 1 and 7-9
As for claim 12, the prior art does not teach or suggest wherein the main body comprises an acrylic polymer containing one or more bonds selected from the group consisting of a bond of Formula 1 from claim 12 and a bond of Formula 2 from claim 12; along with the other limiting elements of claims 1 and 12.
Claims 13-20 depend from claim 12, and therefore contain the same allowable subject matter as claim 12.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Ouderkirk et al. (9,740,018); see: Abstract and Figs. 1-7
Gaides et al. (8,012,567); see: Abstract and Figs. 1-3
Chiu et al. (6,398,370); see: Abstract and Figs. 2a-2b
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM JOSEPH CARTER whose telephone number is (571)272-0959. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, ABDULMAJEED AZIZ can be reached at 571-270-5046. 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 J CARTER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875 6/18/2026
Prosecution Insights