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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 9/22/2025 is/are being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 1-15 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhan (CN 114063798) (refer to IDS filed 9/22/2025) in view of BYD (CN 102478676) (refer to IDS filed 9/22/2025).
Claim 1: Zhan teaches a light guide structure comprising: a light guide plate (33, fig. 3) having at least two backlight regions (regions of 33, fig. 3) arranged at intervals in a longitudinal direction (see fig. 3) of the light guide plate (33); at least two light-shield components (32, 40, 41, fig. 2) corresponding in one-to-one way to the at least two backlight regions (regions of 33) and each surrounding one of the at least two backlight regions (see figs. 2-3).
However, Zhan fails to teach at least two light concentrators corresponding in one-to-one way to the at least two backlight regions and each located in one of the at least two backlight regions.
BYD teaches at least two light concentrators (152, 153, fig. 4_ corresponding in one-to-one way to the at least two backlight regions (see fig. 9) and each located in one of the at least two backlight regions (see fig. 9).
Therefore, in view of BYD, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add at least two light concentrators corresponding in one-to-one way to the at least two backlight regions and each located in one of the at least two backlight regions of Zhan, in order to improve the brightness of the light guide in desired areas.
Claim 2: Zhan teaches each of the at least two backlight regions (regions of 33, fig. 3) has a first operation surface (upper surface of 30, fig. 2) and a second operation surface (bottom surface of 30, fig. 2) opposite to the first operation surface.
However, Zhan fails to teach each of the at least two light concentrators is arranged on the first operation surface and/or the second operation surface of one of the at least two backlight regions.
BYD teaches each of the at least two light concentrators (152, 153, fig. 9) is arranged on the first operation surface (top surface of 12, fig. 9) and/or the second operation surface of one of the at least two backlight regions.
Therefore, in view of BYD, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add at least two light concentrators where each of the at least two light concentrators is arranged on the first operation surface, in order to improve the brightness of the light guide in desired areas.
Claim 3: Zhan fails to teach each of the at least two light concentrators includes a plurality of light concentration units sequentially arranged in a longitudinal direction of the light guide plate.
BYD teaches each of the at least two light concentrators (152, 153, fig. 4) includes a plurality of light concentration units (152, 153) sequentially arranged in a longitudinal direction of the light guide plate (see figs. 4 and 9).
Therefore, in view of BYD, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add at least two light concentrators where each of the at least two light concentrators includes a plurality of light concentration units sequentially arranged in a longitudinal direction of the light guide plate, in order to improve the brightness of the light guide in desired areas.
Claim 4: Zhan fails to teach a longitudinal direction of each of the plurality of light concentration units is approximately perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the light guide plate.
BYD teaches a longitudinal direction of each of the plurality of light concentration units (152, 153, fig. 4) is approximately perpendicular to the longitudinal direction (see figs. 4 and 9) of the light guide plate (12, fig. 9).
Therefore, in view of BYD, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add at least two light concentrators where a longitudinal direction of each of the plurality of light concentration units is approximately perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the light guide plate, in order to improve the brightness of the light guide in desired areas.
Claim 5: Zhan fails to teach a width of each of the plurality of light concentration units in the longitudinal direction of the light guide plate ranges from 0.2 mm to 0.5 mm.
BYD teaches a width of each of the plurality of light concentration units (width of 152, 153, fig. 4) in the longitudinal direction of the light guide plate (see figs. 4 and 9).
Therefore, in view of BYD, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add at least two light concentrators where a width of each of the plurality of light concentration units in the longitudinal direction of the light guide plate, in order to improve the brightness of the light guide in desired areas.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to change the width of the plurality of light concentration units in the longitudinal direction of the light guide plate ranges from 0.2 mm to 0.5 mm to adjust the light output size, since it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Claim 6: Zhan fails to teach the plurality of light concentration units are stacked on the light guide plate in a stacking direction; and a thickness of each of the plurality of light concentration units in the stacking direction ranges from 50 m to 100 m.
BYD teaches the plurality of light concentration units (151, 152, 153, fig. 9) are stacked on the light guide plate (12, fig. 9) in a stacking direction (vertical direction); and a thickness of each of the plurality of light concentration units in the stacking direction (see thickness of 151 in fig. 9).
Therefore, in view of BYD, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add at least two light concentrators where the plurality of light concentration units are stacked on the light guide plate in a stacking direction and there is a a thickness of each of the plurality of light concentration units in the stacking direction, in order to improve the brightness of the light guide in desired areas.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to adjust the size of the thickness of the plurality of light concentration units in the stacking direction to range from 50 m to 100 m to adjust the light output of the display, since it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Claim 7: Zhan teaches a thickness of the light guide plate in the stacking direction (see fig. 3)
However, Zhan fails to teach the plurality of light concentration units are stacked on the light guide plate in a stacking direction; and the thickness of the light guide plate in the stacking direction ranges from 0.5 mm to 1 mm.
BYD teaches the plurality of light concentration units (151, 152, 153, fig. 9) are stacked on the light guide plate (12, fig. 9) in a stacking direction (vertical direction); and a thickness of the plurality of light concentration units in the stacking direction (see thickness of 151 in fig. 9).
Therefore, in view of BYD, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add at least two light concentrators where the plurality of light concentration units are stacked on the light guide plate in a stacking direction and there is a a thickness of each of the plurality of light concentration units in the stacking direction, in order to improve the brightness of the light guide in desired areas.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to adjust the size of the thickness of the plurality of light concentration units in the stacking direction to range from 50 m to 100 m to adjust the light output of the display, since it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Claim 8: Zhan teaches each of the at least two light-shield components (32, 40, 41, fig. 2) includes: a first shield member (32, fig. 2) located between two adjacent backlight regions (33) of the at least two backlight regions; and second shield members (40, 41, fig. 2) arranged at two sides of a corresponding backlight region (33) of the at least two backlight regions in a longitudinal direction in the corresponding backlight region.
However, Zhan fails to teach the plurality of light concentration units.
BYD teaches a plurality of light concentrators (152, 153, fig. 4) corresponding in one-to-one way to the at least two backlight regions (see fig. 9) and each located in one of the at least two backlight regions (see fig. 9).
Therefore, in view of BYD, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a plurality of light concentrators, in order to improve the brightness of the light guide in desired areas.
Claim 9: Zhan teaches a width of the first shield member (width of 31, fig. 3) in the longitudinal direction of the light guide plate ranges from 1 mm to 5 mm.
However, Zhan is silent about the width ranges from 1 mm to 5 mm.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to change the width of the first shield member in the longitudinal direction of the light guide plate to range from 1 mm to 5 mm to adjust the light output distribution of the light guide to achieve a desired distribution, since it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Claim 10: Zhan teaches a width of each of the second shield members (width of 40, figs. 2 and 3) in the longitudinal direction.
However, Zhan is silent about the width ranges from 1 mm to 3 mm.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to change the width of the second shield members in the longitudinal direction of the plurality of light concentration units ranges from 1 mm to 3 mm to adjust the light output distribution of the light guide to achieve a desired distribution, since it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Claim 11: Zhan in view of BYD teaches a household appliance comprising: the light guide structure according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1).
Claim 12: Zhan teaches a backlight module comprising: a light guide structure (1, fig. 2) including: a light guide plate (30, fig. 2) having at least two backlight regions (33, figs. 2 and 3) arranged at intervals in a longitudinal direction of the light guide plate (see figs. 2 and 3); at least two light-shield components (32, 40, 41, fig. 2) corresponding in one-to-one way to the at least two backlight regions (33) and each surrounding one of the at least two backlight regions (see figs. 2 and 3).
However, Zhan fails to teach at least two light concentrators corresponding in one-to-one way to the at least two backlight regions and each located in one of the at least two backlight regions.
BYD teaches at least two light concentrators (152, 153, fig. 4_ corresponding in one-to-one way to the at least two backlight regions (see fig. 9) and each located in one of the at least two backlight regions (see fig. 9).
Therefore, in view of BYD, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add at least two light concentrators corresponding in one-to-one way to the at least two backlight regions and each located in one of the at least two backlight regions of Zhan, in order to improve the brightness of the light guide in desired areas.
Claim 13: Zhan teaches a light-emitting element (20, fig. 2) arranged facing the light guide plate (30).
Claim 14: Zhan teaches a household appliance comprising: the backlight module according to claim 12 (see rejection of claim 12).
Claim 15: Zhan teaches a display screen comprising: a backlight module (1, fig. 2) including a light guide structure (1), the light guide structure (1) including: a light guide plate (30, fig. 2) having at least two backlight regions (33, figs. 2 and 3) arranged at intervals in a longitudinal direction of the light guide plate (see figs. 2 and 3); at least two light-shield components (32, 40, 41, fig. 2) corresponding in one-to-one way to the at least two backlight regions (33) and each surrounding one of the at least two backlight regions (see figs. 2 and 3).
However, Zhan fails to teach at least two light concentrators corresponding in one-to-one way to the at least two backlight regions and each located in one of the at least two backlight regions.
BYD teaches at least two light concentrators (152, 153, fig. 4_ corresponding in one-to-one way to the at least two backlight regions (see fig. 9) and each located in one of the at least two backlight regions (see fig. 9).
Therefore, in view of BYD, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add at least two light concentrators corresponding in one-to-one way to the at least two backlight regions and each located in one of the at least two backlight regions of Zhan, in order to improve the brightness of the light guide in desired areas.
Claim 17: Zhan teaches at least two touch controls (10, fig. 3)corresponding in one-to-one way to the at least two backlight regions (33, fig. 3) (each section of 33 is a touch control corresponding to touch control circuit board 10).
Claim 18: Zhan in view of BYD teaches a household appliance comprising: the display screen (display area) according to claim 15 (see rejection of claim 15).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhan (CN 114063798) in view of BYD (CN 102478676) as applied to claim(s) 15 above, and further in view of Jung (KR 20110087106).
Claim 16: Zhan in view of BYD fails to teach a color filter stacked on the backlight module.
Jung teaches a color filter (212, fig. 2) stacked on a backlight module (200, fig. 2).
Therefore, in view of Jung, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a color filter stacked on the backlight module of Zhan, in order to adjust the color of the display to achieve a desired display color output.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Yoon et al. (US 2017/0097456), McCollum et al. (US 2018/0074257), Gourlay (GB 2597100) disclose a similar display.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZHENG B SONG whose telephone number is (571)272-9402. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 9AM - 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, Jong-Suk (James) Lee can be reached at 571-272-7044. 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.
/ZHENG SONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights