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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in China on 27 September 2022. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the CHINA 2022 202211183113.0 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, lines 16-17, it is suggested that “along the second direction the first direction” be changed to “along the second direction; the first direction”.
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.
Claims 1-7 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yao (2021/0373225).
With respect to claim 1, Yao teaches a front light source module (10), comprising: a side light source (18); a light guide layer (20) comprising a light incident side (203) opposite to the side light source in a first direction (Fig. 1); and a first light adjusting layer (201), wherein the first light adjusting layer and the light guide layer are stacked in a third direction (vertical direction in Fig. 1), a side of the first light adjusting layer away from the light guide layer is provided with a plurality of micro-groove structures (22), each micro-groove structure comprises: a first inclined surface (221) and a second inclined surface (opposite 221) opposite to each other in the first direction (Figs. 1 and 2C), the first inclined surface is configured to face the light incident side and is closer to the light incident side than the second inclined surface (Figs. 1 and 2C), and the first inclined surface and the second inclined surface are opposite to each other in a light incident direction (Fig. 1), the first inclined surface and the second inclined surface each is rectangular (Fig. 2C), a pair of opposite sides of the rectangular first inclined surface extend along a second direction (Figs. 1 and 2C), and a pair of opposite sides of the rectangular second inclined surface extend along the second direction (Figs. 1 and 2C); the first direction, the second direction and the third direction are perpendicular to each other (Figs. 1 and 2C); and the first inclined surface is shaped a first rectangle, the second inclined surface is shaped a second rectangle (Fig. 2C), a first side of the first rectangle overlaps with a second side of the second rectangle (Fig. 2C), and a third side of the first rectangle opposite to the first side and a fourth side of the second rectangle opposite to the second side are in a same plane (Fig. 2C).
As for claim 2, Yao teaches wherein an angle a between the first inclined surface and a plane where a surface of the first light adjusting layer away from the light guide layer (Fig. 1) is located is in a range from 26° to 42° (paragraph 34), and a depth H (D1) of each micro-groove structure is in a range from 4µm to 15µm (paragraph 39); wherein a refractive index of the first light adjusting layer is greater than or equal to that of the light guide layer (Fig. 1 shows the first light adjusting is the same material as the light guide layer, which would provide an equal refractive index).
As for claim 3, Yao teaches wherein a length of an opening of each micro-groove structure in the surface of the first light adjusting layer away from the light guide layer in the first direction is Li (W1); and a ratio of L1 to H is L1/H, which satisfies: L1/H<4 (paragraph 39).
As for claim 4, Yao teaches wherein Li satisfies L1≤80µm (paragraph 39).
As for claim 5, Yao teaches wherein a length L2 of a side of the rectangular first inclined surface extending in the second direction satisfies: L2≤80µm (paragraph 39 and Fig. 2A-2B).
As for claim 6, Yao teaches wherein a distribution density of the plurality of micro-groove structures increases gradually in a direction away from the light incident side along the first direction (Fig. 1).
As for claim 7, Yao teaches wherein the surface of the first light adjusting layer away from the light guide layer is divided into a plurality of groove structure arrangement regions arranged along the first direction (Fig. 1); a distance between every two adjacent groove structure arrangement regions gradually decreases in the direction away from the light incident side along the first direction (Fig. 1); each groove structure arrangement region is divided into a plurality of rectangular periodic regions arranged in the second direction (Figs. 1 and 2C); a length of each rectangular periodic region in the first direction is R (figs. 1 and 2C), and a length of each rectangular periodic region in the second direction is Q (Figs. 1 and 2C); M micro-groove structures are uniformly arranged in each rectangular periodic region (Fig. 1); and the M micro-groove structures are arranged as a plurality of rows and a plurality of columns of micro-groove structures along the first direction and the second direction (Figs. 1 and 2C).
As for claim 17, Yao teaches wherein the first light adjusting layer is attached to the light guide layer by a first attaching adhesive layer, and a refractive index of the first attaching adhesive layer is greater than or equal to the refractive index of the light guide layer and is less than or equal to a refractive index of the first light adjusting layer (paragraphs 41-43).
As for claim 18, Yao teaches wherein the first light adjusting layer is made of a nano-imprint material (paragraph 41; polycarbonate is a known nano-imprint material).
As for claim 19, Yao teaches a display apparatus, comprising: a reflective display panel and the front light source module of claim 1, wherein the front light source module is on a light outgoing surface of the reflective display panel (Fig. 1).
As for claim 20, Yao teaches wherein the front light source module and the reflective display panel are attached to each other by a second attaching adhesive layer; and a refractive index of a portion of the front light source module in contact with the second attaching adhesive layer is greater than a refractive index of the second attaching adhesive layer (paragraphs 41-43).
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 8 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao in view of Meng et al. (2020/0348461).
With respect to claims 8 and 12, Yao teaches all of the claimed elements, as is discussed above, as well as teaching wherein the converging structure comprises a condenser lens (paragraph 40); wherein the light source comprises: a driving board (see substrate at 18) and a light emitting element (181) fixed onto the driving board, and the condenser lens is arranged on the driving board and covers the light emitting element (paragraph 40) [claim 12].
Yao does not explicitly teach wherein the side light source comprises: a light source; and a converging structure between the light source and the light incident side and configured to converge the light emitted from the light source, wherein an angle Ө1 between light emitted from the converging structure and a first reference plane satisfies: Ө1≤52.4°, and the first reference plane is a plane perpendicular to the third direction (claim 8); wherein a shape of a cross section, taken along a plane perpendicular to the second direction, of a surface of the condenser lens away from the light source is a circular arc; or a shape of a cross section, taken along a plane perpendicular to the second direction, of a surface of the condenser lens away from the light source is a curve formed by connecting circular arcs and line segments sequentially and alternately, and wherein the light source comprises: a driving board and a light emitting element fixed onto the driving board, and the condenser lens is arranged on the driving board and covers the light emitting element (claim 12).
As for claim 8, Meng also drawn to font light source modules, teaches wherein the side light source comprises: a light source (201); and a converging structure (large converging lens in item 70) between the light source and the light incident side and configured to converge the light emitted from the light source (Fig. 5), wherein an angle Ө1 between light emitted from the converging structure and a first reference plane satisfies: Ө1≤52.4°, and the first reference plane is a plane perpendicular to the third direction (Fig. 5).
As for claim 12, Meng teaches wherein the converging structure (large converging lens in item 70) comprises a condenser lens (Fig. 5), wherein a shape of a cross section, taken along a plane perpendicular to the second direction, of a surface of the condenser lens away from the light source is a circular arc (Fig. 5); or a shape of a cross section, taken along a plane perpendicular to the second direction, of a surface of the condenser lens away from the light source is a curve formed by connecting circular arcs (Fig. 5) and line segments sequentially and alternately (Fig. 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to use converging structure of Meng in the front light source module of Yao, in order to reduce the beam angle to provide a stronger beam (paragraph 90 of Meng).
Claims 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao in view of Agemizu et al. (2022/0043262).
With respect to claims 13-15, Yao teaches all of the claimed elements, as is discussed above, except for explicitly teaching a plurality of light converging micro-structures on a surface of the light guide layer away from the first light adjusting layer, and configured to converge light passing through the plurality of light converging micro-structures from the light guide layer, wherein each light converging micro-structure is a light converging groove on the surface of the light guide layer away from the first light adjusting layer, and the light converging groove extends along the second direction; and a cross section of a surface of the light converging groove taken along a plane perpendicular to the second direction Y is V-shaped or arc-shaped (claim 13); further comprising at least one second light adjusting layer on a side of the light guide layer away from the first light adjusting layer, wherein the at least one second light adjusting layer and the light guide layer are stacked in the third direction, and the at least one second light adjusting layer comprises light adjusting micro-structures thereon and configured to adjust an exit angle of light emitted from the surface of the light guide layer away from the first light adjusting layer and passing through the light adjusting micro-structures (claim 14); wherein a refractive index of a second light adjusting layer of the at least one second light adjusting layer closest to the light guide layer is greater than or equal to a refractive index of the light guide layer (claim 15).
As for claim 13, Agemizu also drawn to front light source modules, teaches further comprising a plurality of light converging micro-structures (3) on a surface of the light guide layer away from the first light adjusting layer (12), and configured to converge light passing through the plurality of light converging micro-structures (Fig. 3B) from the light guide layer (1), wherein each light converging micro-structure is a light converging groove on the surface of the light guide layer away from the first light adjusting layer, and the light converging groove extends along the second direction; and a cross section of a surface of the light converging groove taken along a plane perpendicular to the second direction Y is V-shaped (Fig. 3B) or arc-shaped.
As for claim 14, Agemizu teaches further comprising at least one second light adjusting layer (3) on a side of the light guide layer away from the first light adjusting layer, wherein the at least one second light adjusting layer and the light guide layer are stacked in the third direction, and the at least one second light adjusting layer comprises light adjusting micro-structures thereon and configured to adjust an exit angle of light emitted from the surface of the light guide layer away from the first light adjusting layer and passing through the light adjusting micro-structures (Fig. 3B).
As for claim 15, Agemizu teaches wherein a refractive index of a second light adjusting layer of the at least one second light adjusting layer closest to the light guide layer is greater than or equal to a refractive index of the light guide layer (paragraph 70).
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 light converging micro-structure of Agemizu in the front light source modules of Yao, in order to improve light extraction efficiency (paragraph 72 of Agemizu).
Claim 16 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao and Agemizu, further in view of Meng et al. (2020/0348461).
With respect to claim 16, Yao teaches all of the claimed elements, as is discussed above, except for explicitly wherein the at least one second light adjusting layer comprises two or more second light adjusting layers; and a refractive index of one of any two adjacent second light adjusting layers closer to the light guide layer is less than or equal to a refractive index of the other second light adjusting layer (claim 16).
As for claim 16, Meng teaches wherein the at least one second light adjusting layer comprises two or more second light adjusting layers; and a refractive index of one of any two adjacent second light adjusting layers closer to the light guide layer is less than or equal to a refractive index of the other second light adjusting layer (Fig. 9 and paragraphs 70-73).
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 light adjusting layers of Meng in the front light source module of Yao, in order to improve backlight uniformity (paragraph 72 of Meng).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-11 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 to claim 9, the prior art does not teach or suggest wherein the converging structure comprises: a wedge-shaped light guiding structure; the wedge-shaped light guiding structure comprises: a first light incident surface, a first light outgoing surface, a first light adjusting surface and a second light adjusting surface; the first light incident surface and the first light outgoing surface are opposite to each other in the first direction, the first light incident surface and the first light outgoing surface are perpendicular to the first direction, a length of the first light incident surface in the third direction is T1, a length of the first light outgoing surface in the third direction is T2, T2>T1, and an orthographic projection of the first light outgoing surface on a plane where the first light incident surface is located covers the first light incident surface; the first light adjusting surface and the second light adjusting surface are opposite to each other in the third direction, and a distance between the first light adjusting surface and the second light adjusting surface in the third direction is gradually increased in a direction from the first light incident surface to the first light outgoing surface along the first direction; and the light source is opposite to the first light incident surface, and the light incident side is opposite to the first light outgoing surface; along with the other limiting elements of claims 1, 8, and 9.
Claims 10-11 are allowable as they depend from allowable claim 9.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 4 of U.S. Patent No. 12,405,415. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all of the elements of clams 1 and 2 of the present application are present in claims 1 and 4 of U.S. Patent No. 12,405,415.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Moon et al. (2023/0161160); see: Fig. 1
Fattal (2022/0236596); see: Figs. 1-3A
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 6/16/2026
Prosecution Insights