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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2, 4-8, 10-11 and 13-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ruffin et al. (US 7300185 B1, hereinafter, “Ruffin”, previously cited by the Examiner) in view of Adeishvili et al (US 20190265469 A1, hereinafter, “Adeishvili”, previously cited by the Examiner) and Jager Maarten Johhannes (NL 2012030 C2, hereinafter, “Jager”, newly cited by the Examiner).
Regarding claim 1, Ruffin teaches an optical member (light array 216, see figure 9 and figures 1-5 to show common elements and features to all embodiments) comprising:
a plurality of light control units (see plurality of reflectors 24 in fig 9, and individually seen in fig 1), each comprising:
an upper surface (semi-cylindrical front surface 32, see fig 1) serving as an emitting surface (as seen in fig 5),
a first incident surface (57) located below the emitting surface (outer surface of 32),
a second incident surface (58, 60) located at an outer periphery (periphery of 57, see fig 4) of the first incident surface (57) in a top view (see fig 4), and extending downward (as seen in fig 5) from a first incident surface (57) side (side of 57), and
a reflective surface (38, 40) located at an outer periphery (periphery of 58, 60) of the second incident surface (58, 60) in the top view (see fig 3), and
inclined in a direction away (away from axis A, as annotated in fig 5 below) from a center (A) of the light control unit (24) so as to extend closer to the emitting surface (outer surface of 32) from a vicinity (at 58, 60) of the second incident surface (58, 60);
wherein:
the light control units (se plurality of 24s) are configured such that light incident (light from LED 12, see fig 5) on the first incident surface (57) and the second incident surface (58, 60), and light reflected by the reflective surface (38, 40) are emitted from the emitting surface (outer surface of 32);
the first incident surface (57) is a convex surface (as seen in fig 5) curved in a direction away (towards 12) from the emitting surface (outer surface of 32);
the emitting surface (outer surface of 32) is a convex surface curved (as seen in fig 1) in a direction away (away from 5) from the first incident surface (57); and
the emitting surfaces (outer surface of 32) of adjacent ones (as seen in fig 9) of the light control units (se plurality of 24s) are connected to each other (as seen in fig 9).
Annotated figures 4-5 of Riffun have been reproduced below:
PNG
media_image1.png
586
696
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
806
1062
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Ruffin does not explicitly teach a radius of curvature of the first incident surface is larger than a radius of curvature of the emitting surface in a cross-sectional view
However, Ruffin discloses first incident surface (57) may have either or a combination of the following surfaces: flat, convex, fresnel or concave (see col 4, lines 49-53), and one of ordinary skill would have considered making the radius of curvature of the first incident surface larger than the radius of curvature of the emitting surface.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filled date of the claimed invention to make the radius of curvature of the first incident surface larger than a radius of curvature of the emitting surface of Ruffin in order to expand light refraction onto the light emission surface. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification to help meet a beam distribution or lighting effect.
Ruffin does not explicitly teach the emitting surfaces of adjacent ones of the light control units are directly connected to each other.
Adeishvili teaches an optical member (lens array 50, see fig 2) formed by a plurality of light control units (plurality of TIR lenses 60);
the emitting surfaces (upper surfaces of 60) of adjacent ones of the light control units (60) are directly connected to each other (as seen in fig 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filled date of the claimed invention to provide direct contact between the light control units as taught by Adeislvili in to the teachings of Ruffin in order to reduce the distance between the outputs of each light emitting unit avoiding dark spots formation in between them. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification to a more uniform light.
Ruffin does not explicitly teach the emitting surface of each light control unit of the plurality of light control units is disposed above the first incident surface in an optical-axis direction of the light control unit, the optical-axis direction being defined by a vertical straight line connecting, in the top view, a center of the emitting surface and a center of the first incident surface.
However, one of ordinary skill would have recognized the optical member can be arranged in other orientations, including facing upwards where the light incident surface and light emitting surface are aligned vertically, as shown by:
Jager teaches an optical member (lens array 50, see fig 2) formed by a plurality of light control units (plurality of TIR lenses 60);
the emitting surface (first exit surface 6, second exit surface 7, third exit surface 8, reflecting surface 12c, reflective surface 13a, see fig 3a) of each light control unit (1) of the plurality of light control units (see plurality of 1s, better seen in fig 4b) is disposed above the first incident surface (entrance surface 5, see fig 3a) in an optical-axis direction (see Axis A, from bottom to top, as seen in the annotated figure below) of the light control unit (1), the optical-axis direction (along A) being defined by a vertical straight line (as seen in fig 3a) connecting, in the top view, a center (upper center of 1) of the emitting surface (6-8, 12c and 13a) and a center (lower center of 1) of the first incident surface (5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filled date of the claimed invention to provide a vertical alignment between the first incident surface and the emitting surface as taught by Jager into the teachings of Ruffin, since the applicant has not disclosed that the vertical alignment solves any problem or is for a particular reason. It appears that the claimed invention would perform equally well with a vertical alignment instead of a horizontal alignment. In this case, selecting a given orientation would have flown naturally to one of ordinary skill in the art as necessitated by the specific requirements of a given application.
Annotated figures 4-5 of Riffun have been reproduced below:
PNG
media_image3.png
495
555
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Ruffin teaches wherein the emitting surface (outer surface of 32) and the first incident surface (57) have a shape of a square or a rectangle (see rectangle shape as seen in fig 4) in the top view.
Regarding claim 4, Ruffin teaches wherein a center (along A) of the first incident surface (57) coincides with a center (along A) of the emitting surface (outer surface of 32) in the top view (as seen in fig 5 above).
Regarding claim 5, Ruffin teaches wherein:
the emitting surface (outer surface of 32) has a shape of a rectangle (as seen in fig 4) having short sides (see short sides S as annotated in fig 4 above) and long sides (see short sides L as annotated in fig 4 above) in the top view; and
when a vertical cross-section cut parallel to the short sides (S) and passing through a center (A) of the rectangle is defined as a third cross-section (see third cross section 3rd, as annotated in fig 4 above), and
a vertical cross-section cut parallel to the long sides (L) and passing through the center (A) of the rectangle is defined as a fourth cross-section (see fourth cross section 4th, as annotated in fig 4 above),
a height (see heights h1 and h2, in annotated fig 4) of a portion (portions of 32), at which the emitting surfaces (outer surface of 32) of the light control units (se plurality of 24s) adjacent (to another above and to a side adjacent, as seen in fig 9) to each other are in contact with each other (better seen in fig 9), from a lower end (bottom of 24) of the second incident surface (58, 60) is smaller (must occur because short sides of 24 are at a lower position with respect to long sides of 24, better seen in fig 9, thus, a height with another optical member at a long side is larger than a height at a short side of an adjacent 24) in the fourth cross-section (4th) than in the third cross-section (3rd).
Regarding claim 6, Ruffin teaches wherein:
the emitting surface (outer surface of 32) has a shape of a rectangle (as seen in fig 4) having short sides (see short sides S as annotated in fig 4 above) and long sides (see short sides L as annotated in fig 4 above) in the top view; and
when a vertical cross-section cut parallel to the short sides (S) and passing through a center (along A) of the rectangle is defined as a third cross-section (see third cross section 3rd, as annotated in fig 4 above), and
a vertical cross-section cut parallel to the long sides (L) and passing through the center (along A) of the rectangle is defined as a fourth cross-section (see fourth cross section 4th, as annotated in fig 4 above),
a radius of curvature (radius of curvatures at S and at L) of the emitting surface (outer surface of 32) is larger (as curvature along L is closer to a line and thus having the largest curvature) in the fourth cross-section (4th) than in the third cross-section (3rd).
Regarding claim 7, Ruffin teaches light source module (Light 200) comprising: a planar light source (front structure 214, holding substrates 18 with LEDs 12, see fig 10) comprising a substrate (214), and a plurality of light sources (see plurality of 12s) disposed on the substrate (214); and
the optical member (se plurality of 24s) according to claim 1 disposed above the plurality of light sources (see plurality of 12s).
Regarding claim 8, Ruffin teaches wherein a center (along A) of at least one of the light sources (5) coincides with a center (along A) of each corresponding one of the first incident surface (57) in the top view (better seen in fig 5).
Regarding claim 10, Ruffin teaches an optical member (light array 216, see figure 9 and figures 1-5 to show common elements and features to all embodiments) comprising:
a plurality of light control units (see plurality of reflectors 24 in fig 9, and individually seen in fig 1), each comprising:
an upper surface (semi-cylindrical front surface 32, see fig 1) serving as an emitting surface (as seen in fig 5),
a first incident surface (57) located below the emitting surface (outer surface of 32),
a second incident surface (58, 60) located at an outer periphery (periphery of 57, see fig 4) of the first incident surface (57) in a top view (see fig 4), and extending downward (as seen in fig 5) from a first incident surface (57) side (side of 57), and
a reflective surface (38, 40) located at an outer periphery (periphery of 58, 60) of the second incident surface (58, 60) in the top view (see fig 3), and
inclined in a direction away (away from axis A, as annotated in fig 5 below) from a center (A) of the light control unit (24) so as to extend closer to the emitting surface (outer surface of 32) from a vicinity (at 58, 60) of the second incident surface (58, 60);
wherein:
the light control units (se plurality of 24s) are configured such that light incident (light from LED 12, see fig 5) on the first incident surface (57) and the second incident surface (58, 60), and light reflected by the reflective surface (38, 40) are emitted from the emitting surface (outer surface of 32);
the first incident surface (57) 32 is a flat surface (flat, see col 4, lines 49-52);
the emitting surface (outer surface of 32) is a convex surface curved (as seen in fig 1) in a direction away (away from 5) from the first incident surface (57); and
the emitting surfaces (outer surface of 32) of adjacent ones (as seen in fig 9) of the light control units (se plurality of 24s) are connected to each other (see fig 9).
Ruffin does not explicitly teach the emitting surfaces of adjacent ones of the light control units are directly connected to each other.
Adeishvili teaches an optical member (lens array 50, see fig 2) formed by a plurality of light control units (plurality of TIR lenses 60);
the emitting surfaces (upper surfaces of 60) of adjacent ones of the light control units (60) are directly connected to each other (as seen in fig 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filled date of the claimed invention to provide direct contact between the light control units as taught by Adeislvili in to the teachings of Ruffin in order to reduce the distance between the outputs of each light emitting unit avoiding dark spots formation in between them. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification to a more uniform light.
Ruffin does not explicitly teach the emitting surface of each light control unit of the plurality of light control units is disposed above the first incident surface in an optical-axis direction of the light control unit, the optical-axis direction being defined by a vertical straight line connecting, in the top view, a center of the emitting surface and a center of the first incident surface.
However, one of ordinary skill would have recognized the optical member can be arranged in other orientations, including facing upwards where the light incident surface and light emitting surface are aligned vertically, as shown by:
Jager teaches an optical member (lens array 50, see fig 2) formed by a plurality of light control units (plurality of TIR lenses 60);
the emitting surface (first exit surface 6, second exit surface 7, third exit surface 8, reflecting surface 12c, reflective surface 13a, see fig 3a) of each light control unit (1) of the plurality of light control units (see plurality of 1s, better seen in fig 4b) is disposed above the first incident surface (entrance surface 5, see fig 3a) in an optical-axis direction (see Axis A, from bottom to top, as seen in the annotated figure below) of the light control unit (1), the optical-axis direction (along A) being defined by a vertical straight line (as seen in fig 3a) connecting, in the top view, a center (upper center of 1) of the emitting surface (6-8, 12c and 13a) and a center (lower center of 1) of the first incident surface (5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filled date of the claimed invention to provide a vertical alignment between the first incident surface and the emitting surface as taught by Jager into the teachings of Ruffin, since the applicant has not disclosed that the vertical alignment solves any problem or is for a particular reason. It appears that the claimed invention would perform equally well with a vertical alignment instead of a horizontal alignment. In this case, selecting a given orientation would have flown naturally to one of ordinary skill in the art as necessitated by the specific requirements of a given application.
Regarding claim 11, Ruffin teaches wherein the emitting surface (outer surface of 32) and the first incident surface (57) have a shape of a square or a rectangle (see rectangle shape as seen in fig 4) in the top view.
Regarding claim 13, Ruffin teaches wherein a center (along A) of the first incident surface (57) coincides with a center (along A) of the emitting surface (outer surface of 32) in the top view (as seen in fig 5 above).
Regarding claim 14, Ruffin teaches wherein:
the emitting surface (outer surface of 32) has a shape of a rectangle (as seen in fig 4) having short sides (see short sides S as annotated in fig 4 above) and long sides (see short sides L as annotated in fig 4 above) in the top view; and
when a vertical cross-section cut parallel to the short sides (S) and passing through a center (A) of the rectangle is defined as a third cross-section (see third cross section 3rd, as annotated in fig 4 above), and
a vertical cross-section cut parallel to the long sides (L) and passing through the center (A) of the rectangle is defined as a fourth cross-section (see fourth cross section 4th, as annotated in fig 4 above),
a height (see heights h1 and h2, in annotated fig 4) of a portion (portions of 32), at which the emitting surfaces (outer surface of 32) of the light control units (se plurality of 24s) adjacent (to another above and to a side adjacent, as seen in fig 9) to each other are in contact with each other (better seen in fig 9), from a lower end (bottom of 24) of the second incident surface (58, 60) is smaller (must occur because short sides of 24 are at a lower position with respect to long sides of 24, better seen in fig 9, thus, a height with another optical member at a long side is larger than a height at a short side of an adjacent 24) in the fourth cross-section (4th) than in the third cross-section (3rd).
Regarding claim 15, Ruffin teaches wherein:
the emitting surface (outer surface of 32) has a shape of a rectangle (as seen in fig 4) having short sides (see short sides S as annotated in fig 4 above) and long sides (see short sides L as annotated in fig 4 above) in the top view; and
when a vertical cross-section cut parallel to the short sides (S) and passing through a center (along A) of the rectangle is defined as a third cross-section (see third cross section 3rd, as annotated in fig 4 above), and
a vertical cross-section cut parallel to the long sides (L) and passing through the center (along A) of the rectangle is defined as a fourth cross-section (see fourth cross section 4th, as annotated in fig 4 above),
a radius of curvature (radius of curvatures at S and at L) of the emitting surface (outer surface of 32) is larger (as curvature along L is closer to a line and thus having the largest curvature) in the fourth cross-section (4th) than in the third cross-section (3rd).
Regarding claim 16, Ruffin teaches light source module (Light 200) comprising: a planar light source (front structure 214, holding substrates 18 with LEDs 12, see fig 10) comprising a substrate (214), and a plurality of light sources (see plurality of 12s) disposed on the substrate (214); and
the optical member (se plurality of 24s) according to claim 1 disposed above the plurality of light sources (see plurality of 12s).
Regarding claim 17, Ruffin teaches light source module (Light 200) comprising: a planar light source (front structure 214, holding substrates 18 with LEDs 12, see fig 10) comprising a substrate (214), and a plurality of light sources (see plurality of 12s) disposed on the substrate (214); and
the optical member (se plurality of 24s) according to claim 1 disposed above the plurality of light sources (see plurality of 12s).
Regarding claim 18, Ruffin teaches light source module (Light 200) comprising: a planar light source (front structure 214, holding substrates 18 with LEDs 12, see fig 10) comprising a substrate (214), and a plurality of light sources (see plurality of 12s) disposed on the substrate (214); and
the optical member (se plurality of 24s) according to claim 1 disposed above the plurality of light sources (see plurality of 12s).
Claims 9 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ruffin et al. (US 7300185 B1, hereinafter, “Ruffin”, previously cited by the Examiner) in view of Adeishvili et al (US 20190265469 A1, hereinafter, “Adeishvili”, previously cited by the Examiner) and Jager Maarten Johhannes (NL 2012030 C2, hereinafter, “Jager”, newly cited by the Examiner), as applied to claims 1,7 and 10,14-15,17-18 above and further in view of Sugiyama et al. (US 11422367 B2, hereinafter, “Sugiyama”).
Regarding claim 9, Ruffin teaches the light source module (200) according to claim 7; but
Ruffin does not explicitly teach a liquid crystal display device.
Sugiyama teaches a light source module (see plurality of LED collimators 15, see fig 3); and
a liquid crystal display device (liquid crystal display element 50) comprising the light source module (plurality of 15s).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filled date of the claimed invention to incorporate the liquid crystal device as taught by Sugiyama in to the teachings of Ruffin in order to provide enhance illumination to liquid display devices. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification to increase the usability and market of Ruffin’s the light source module.
Regarding claim 19, Ruffin teaches the light source module (200) according to claim 17; but
Ruffin does not explicitly teach a liquid crystal display device.
Sugiyama teaches a light source module (see plurality of LED collimators 15, see fig 3); and
a liquid crystal display device (liquid crystal display element 50) comprising the light source module (plurality of 15s).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filled date of the claimed invention to incorporate the liquid crystal device as taught by Sugiyama in to the teachings of Ruffin in order to provide enhance illumination to liquid display devices. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification to increase the usability and market of Ruffin’s the light source module.
Regarding claim 20, Ruffin teaches the light source module (200) according to claim 18; but
Ruffin does not explicitly teach a liquid crystal display device.
Sugiyama teaches a light source module (see plurality of LED collimators 15, see fig 3); and
a liquid crystal display device (liquid crystal display element 50) comprising the light source module (plurality of 15s).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filled date of the claimed invention to incorporate the liquid crystal device as taught by Sugiyama in to the teachings of Ruffin in order to provide enhance illumination to liquid display devices. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make this modification to increase the usability and market of Ruffin’s the light source module.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3 and 12 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.
Regarding claim 3, although Ruffin teaches the optical member, as described in claims 1-2 above, the prior art the prior art of the record fails to teach wherein, when a vertical cross-section cut parallel to one side of the emitting surface and passing through a center of the emitting surface is defined as a first cross-section, and a vertical cross-section cut along a diagonal line of the emitting surface is defined as a second cross-section, an angle formed by a center line of the light control unit and the reflective surface is larger.
Regarding claim 12, although Ruffin teaches the optical member, as described in claim 10 above, the prior art the prior art of the record fails to teach wherein, when a vertical cross-section cut parallel to one side of the emitting surface and passing through a center of the emitting surface is defined as a first cross-section, and a vertical cross-section cut along a diagonal line of the emitting surface is defined as a second cross-section, an angle formed by a center line of the light control unit and the reflective surface is larger.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any on the combinations of references of the current office action.
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 OMAR ROJAS CADIMA whose telephone number is (571)272-8007. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9am-6pm.
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.
/OMAR ROJAS CADIMA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights