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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I including claims 1-11 in the reply filed on 03/05/2026 is acknowledged.
Drawings
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 "one or more openings" of claims 3 and 6 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tai et al. [US 20190324324 A1].
Regarding claim 1, Tai et al. discloses a light-emitting module [a backlight module 100] comprising: a substrate [a transparent substrate 120] formed of a transparent material; at least one light source [a plurality of light sources 110] installed on a rear surface of the substrate to emit light in a first direction; a deflection part [a reflective sheet 130] disposed at a rear of the substrate to cause the light emitted in the first direction to be deflected in a second direction, which is different from the first direction; a holder [supporting members 150] disposed at the rear of the substrate to support the substrate; and a transmissive material [air therein] disposed between the substrate [120] and the holder [150] (figure 1, paragraphs 0011-0015).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim [20160284674 A1] in view of Shin et al. [US 20200241197 A1].
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a light-emitting module [title, figure 3] comprising: a substrate [a transparent electrode film layer 250] formed of a transparent material; at least one light source [light-emitting units 235] installed on a rear surface of the substrate to emit light in a first direction; a deflection part [a reflective element layer 210] disposed at a rear of the substrate to cause the light emitted in the first direction to be deflected in a second direction [see figure 3], which is different from the first direction; and a transmissive material [a resin layer 230] disposed between the substrate [250] and the deflection part [210] (figure 3, paragraph 0041).
However, Kim does not clearly show the holder disposed at the rear of the substrate to support the substrate.
Shin et al. teaches a holder [a shielding module 200, which has a bracket structure for supporting the substrate 230] disposed at the rear of the substrate to support the substrate (figure 1, paragraph 0021).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine the light-emitting module of Kim with the holder as taught by Shin et al. for purpose of providing an advantageous way so that a mechanism fastening structure is simplified, and an exit angle of a light beam may be controlled to remove a hot spot phenomenon generated in a transmissive material (a light guide member).
Regarding claim 2, Kim discloses the deflection part [210] includes a reflective surface formed on at least a portion of a rear surface of the transmissive material [230] (figure 3).
Regarding claim 4, Kim discloses the deflection part [210] includes at least one diffusion element [pieces 131 or 231, paragraph 0051] formed on a rear surface of the transmissive material [230] to be recessed toward a front surface of the transmissive material to diffuse [scatter or disperse] at least a portion of the light emitted in the first direction and deflect it in the second direction by reflection and/or refraction depending on an angle of incidence of the light, and wherein the at least one diffusion element is formed in a substantially conical shape [paragraph 0052].
Regarding claim 5, Kim discloses the deflection part includes a reflective layer formed on at least a portion of a surface of the holder that faces the substrate (figure 3).
Regarding claim 8, Kim discloses at least one light diffusion layer [second reflective patterns 245, diffuse light] disposed to overlap the at least one light source so as to diffuse light that passes near the at least one light source (paragraphs 0080, 0082).
Regarding claim 9, Kim discloses the at least one light diffusion layer [245, including three-layer structure] transmits a portion of the light [between each of the three-layer, see figure 3] deflected in the second direction while reflecting another portion of the light deflected in the second direction (paragraph 0082).
Regarding claim 11, Kim discloses the substrate [250] includes a reinforcing member [a conductive transparent electrode layer 253] formed on at least some edges of the substrate to increase rigidity (figure 4).
Claim(s) 3 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim [20160284674 A1] and Shin et al. [US 20200241197 A1] in view of Hsueh et al. [US 20160076738 A1].
Regarding claims 3 and 6, Kim discloses the light-emitting module (figure 3) having the reflective surface. However, Kim does not show the reflective surface includes one or more openings to allow an emission image by the light deflected in the second direction to include a plurality of regions having different brightnesses.
Hseh et al. teaches the reflective surface [an optical modulation film 300 having a first reflective surface 302] includes one or more openings [a plurality of first light exiting holes 304] to allow an emission image by the light deflected in the second direction to include a plurality of regions having different brightnesses (figures 2-3, paragraphs 0023-0024).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine the light-emitting module of Kim with the reflective surface including openings as taught by Hseh et al. for purpose of providing an advantageous way of effect of distributing light.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 10 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: claims 7 and 10, each recites further details of the light-emitting module, which are not disclosed or suggested by the prior art of record.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Negley et al. US 20100102199 A1 discloses a lighting device 10, a light emitter 11, a reflector 12, a bridge 17 and a circuit board 18 (figure 1).
Zhang US 20020136025 A1 discloses a light source arrangement which can enhance brightness of the emitting light and increase the cooling effect of the light
source arrangement.
Park et al. US 20060146530 A1 discloses a housing 110, LEDs 220 and the PCBs 230, and a reflective sheet 212, side walls 214 being a reflective sheet, and projections 216 (figure 9).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAO Q TRUONG whose telephone number is (571)272-2383. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7 am - 3 pm.
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 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.
BAO Q. TRUONG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2875
/BAO Q TRUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875