DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-3 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (11,719,875) in view of Lee et al. (2008/0007970).
With respect to claims 1, 8, and 9, Liu teaches a display device (10), comprising: a light source (201); and a light guide (100) which is transparent and flat, and into which light emitted from the light source is incident from a first lateral surface (Figs. 1-3), wherein: the light guide includes reflective parts (110r and 120b) at positions corresponding to respective symbols (IM11, IM12, IM13, IM21, IM22, and/or IM23), the reflective parts each including a plurality of reflective surfaces inclined relative to a bottom surface of the light guide (Fig. 3); each of the reflective parts reflects the light incident from the first lateral surface from the plurality of reflective surfaces, which results in displaying a corresponding one of the symbols on a display surface of the light guide (Figs. 1-3) [claim 1].
Liu does not explicitly teach each of the plurality of reflective surface is inclined toward the light source, and an inclination angle of each reflective surface relative to the bottom surface decreases as a distance from the light source decreases (claim 1); wherein the light source is provided only at a single end surface of the light guide (claim 8); wherein an inclination angle of each reflective surface relative to the bottom surface monotonically decreases as a distance from the light source decreases (claim 9).
As for claim 1, Lee also drawn to display devices, teaches each of the plurality of reflective surface is inclined toward the light source, and an inclination angle of each reflective surface relative to the bottom surface decreases as a distance from the light source decreases (Fig. 2C and paragraph 67).
As for claim 8, Lee teaches wherein the light source (132a) is provided only at a single end surface of the light guide (Fig. 2C).
As for claim 9, Lee teaches wherein an inclination angle of each reflective surface relative to the bottom surface monotonically decreases as a distance from the light source decreases (paragraph 67 and Fig. 2C).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to use the angular arrangement of Lee with the reflective surfaces of Liu, in order to promote uniformity (paragraph 67 of Lee).
As for claim 2, Liu teaches wherein one of the reflective parts (120b) farthest from the light source has inclination angles of the plurality of reflective surfaces set to obtain maximum luminance when a symbol corresponding to the one of the reflective parts is viewed from a side where the display surface is (Fig. 3 and column 8, lines 19-50).
As for claim 3, Liu teaches wherein the inclination angles of the plurality of reflective surfaces are set for each of the reflective parts, so that the symbols displayed on the display surface have equal luminance (column 6, lines 8-32).
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu and Lee, as is applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Numata et al. (2019/0079324).
With respect to claim 5, Liu and Lee teach all of the claimed elements, as is discussed above, as well as Liu teaches each of the reflective parts has a second reflective surface (110b and 120r) that is oriented toward the lateral surface and that is integrally formed with a corresponding one of the plurality of reflective surfaces (110r and 120b); and the closer the reflective parts are to the lateral surface, the smaller the inclination angles of the second reflective surfaces relative to the bottom surface (Fig. 3).
Liu does not explicitly teach wherein: the light guide has a lateral reflective part on a second lateral surface opposite to the first lateral surface (claim 5).
As for claim 5, Numata also drawn to display devices, teaches a light guide has a lateral reflective part (100) on a second lateral surface opposite to the first lateral surface (Fig. 11).
As for claim 6, Numata teaches wherein the lateral reflective part includes: an upper extended part extending from an upper end to the first lateral surface so as to cover a portion of the display surface; and a lower extended part extending from a lower end to the first lateral surface so as to cover a portion of the bottom surface (Fig. 11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to use the lateral reflective part of Numata in the display device of Liu, in order to increase efficiency by reflecting stray light back into the display device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 is allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-3, 5-6, and 8-9 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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 571-272-2399. 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 1/10/2026