Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
SUMMARY
2. The application filed on October 02, 2025, has been received and made of record. There were initially 1-14 claims in the application of which claims 1, and 7 are independent claims. A preliminary amendment was made on January 30, 2026, where applicant amended claims 1-2, 4-7, 9-14 and maintained claims 3, and 8. Claims 15-18 have been added as new dependent claims in the preliminary amendment. Therefore, claims 1-18 are pending for consideration.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statement(IDS) submitted was filed along with the mailing date of the application on October 02, 2025. The IDS submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. 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.
5. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by NAKAYAMA(US 2013/0208502 A1).
Regarding claim 1, NAKAYAMA teaches a packaged light emitting diode(point light source 14, figs.1A, 2)-, comprising:
a light emitting diode die(figs.2&10 and related texts); and
a cylindrical lens(control lens 16, figs.1A-2) mounted directly over a light emitting surface of the light emitting diode die (point light source 14, fig.2, Para-63), whereby light emitted through the cylindrical lens(16) has a narrow angular distribution along a first axis(fig.4) and a broad angular distribution along a second axis orthogonal to the first axis (fig.5).
6. Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by SPARF(US 2013/0234991 A1).
Regarding claim 1, SPARF teaches a packaged light emitting diode(Para-4)-, comprising:
a light emitting diode die(light emitting semiconductor 105, figs.2-4 and related texts); and
a cylindrical lens(cylindrical or hemispherical plastic cells 260, figs.3-4) mounted directly over a light emitting surface of the light emitting diode die(figs.2-4), whereby light emitted through the cylindrical lens(260) has a narrow angular distribution along a first axis(figs.3-4&6) and a broad angular distribution along a second axis orthogonal to the first axis(figs.3-4&6)(Para-26: the present invention generate a narrow angular emission in the height dimension of an emitter(FIG. 3); i.e., perpendicular to the screen surface, and maintain a wide lateral angular emission, parallel to the screen surface(FIG.4)).
Regarding claim 2, SPARF teaches the packaged light emitting diode of claim 1, wherein:
the cylindrical lens is formed as a truncated substantially oblate ellipsoidal lens in a body having two first truncations and one second truncation(partially semi-eclipse; figs.2&6-7, Para-28),
wherein the two first truncations are normal to the axis of the oblate ellipsoid and equidistant from a longest semidiameter of the oblate ellipsoid(figs.2&6-7), and are parallel to two axes of the oblate ellipsoid and to each other, and wherein the second truncation is parallel to the other axis of the oblate ellipsoid and normal to the two first truncations(figs.2&6-7); and
wherein the light emitting diode die is proximate to the second truncation(figs.2-3, 6-9, Para 29-33).
Regarding claim 3, SPARF teaches the packaged light emitting diode of claim 2, wherein the lens is an oblate spheroid (figs.2-3, 6-9, Para 29-33)(an oblate spheroid is an ellipsoid).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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.
8. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
9. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
10. Claims 4-5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SPARF(US 2013/0234991 A1) in view of PARK et al. (US 2012/0014115 A1)(herein after PARK).
Regarding claim 4, SPARF teaches the packaged light emitting diode of claim 1, wherein the cylindrical lens is formed as an aspherical lens in a modified ellipsoidal body(aspherical LED lens), the modified ellipsoidal body having two first truncations and one second truncation, wherein the two first truncations are normal to the axis of the modified ellipsoid and equidistant from a longest semidiameter of the modified ellipsoid, and are parallel to two axes of the modified ellipsoid and to each other, and wherein the second truncation is parallel to the other axis of the modified ellipsoid and normal to the two first truncations(figs.2-3, 6-9, Para 29-33); and
wherein the light emitting diode die is proximate to the second truncation(figs.2, 6-7), and
But, SPARF fails to teach expressly wherein the ellipsoid is modified to have greater curvature than an ellipsoid in a direction normal to the light emitting surface of the light emitting diode die and to have lesser curvature than an ellipsoid in a direction parallel to the light emitting surface of the light emitting diode die.
However, PARK teaches an aspherical LED lens and light emitting device, wherein the ellipsoid is modified to have greater curvature than an ellipsoid in a direction normal to the light emitting surface of the light emitting diode die and to have lesser curvature than an ellipsoid in a direction parallel to the light emitting surface of the light emitting diode die(figs.13-16 and related texts).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application, to have modified SPARF with the teaching of PARK to include the features in order to provide a light emitting device having aspherical LED lens, which might provide a double peak type pattern of orientation angles of light emitted from an LED chip while minimizing chromatic aberration.
Regarding claim 5, SPARF is not found to teach expressly the packaged light emitting diode of claim 2, wherein a length of the two first truncations normal to the light emitting surface of the light emitting diode die is more than half a length of the lens body normal to the light emitting surface of the light emitting diode die.
However, PARK teaches a light emitting device, wherein an aspherical LED lens having a plurality of side protrusions with dimension on both sides of the LED chip(fig.8). Figs.13-16 shows symmetric truncation from the axis of the LED Chip.
It is therefore obvious to a person ordinary skill in the art to use the teaching of PARK into SPARF’s disclosure in order to get claimed invention. Such combination is desirable as it provides uniform brightness of a panel and reduces color aberration.
Claim 15 is rejected for the same reason as mentioned in the rejection of claim 5, since claim 15 recites the same limitations as in claim 5 except difference in dependency of the respective claims.
11. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SPARF(US 2013/0234991 A1).
Regarding claim 6, SPARF teaches the packaged light emitting diode of claim 1, wherein the light emitting diode is a near infrared light emitting diode(invisible infrared light, Para-20).
12. Claims 7, 9-14, 16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dearn et al.(US 2019/0107922 A1)(herein after Dearn) in view of SPARF(US 2013/0234991 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Dearn teaches a touch sensitive apparatus (Para-2: an optical touch sensitive screen for an electronic device), comprising:
a top plate(optically transparent top plate 10, fig.1, Para-30) having one or more light sources(one or more light sources 12, fig.1) associated therewith, such that light from the one or more light sources is transmitted within the top plate with total internal reflection(Para-33: the top plate 10 is illuminated by the light source(s) 12 so as to cause total internal reflection of the light within the top plate 10); and
a base plate(optically dispersive and lossy bottom plate 18, fig.1, Para-35) having one or more detectors(photo detector 20, fig.1, Para-35) associated therewith for detecting light transmitted within the base plate(Para-35),
wherein the top plate(10) and the base plate(18) are configured such that if an external body(pointer 22, fig.1, Para-36) touches a first surface of the top plate(10), then light(light 23) is coupled from a second surface of the top plate into the base plate(18) through a first surface of the base plate(18, Para-35);
wherein each of the one or more light sources(12) is disposed within the top plate such that light from a light source is coupled into the body of the top plate through an input face of the top plate(fig.1, Para-30); and
Nevertheless, Dearn is not found to teach expressly the touch sensitive apparatus, wherein each of the one or more light sources is a packaged light emitting diode comprising: a light emitting diode die; and a cylindrical lens mounted directly over a light emitting surface of the light emitting diode die, whereby light emitted through the cylindrical lens has a narrow angular distribution along a first axis and a broad angular distribution along a second axis orthogonal to the first axis.
However, SPARF teaches an optimized hemi-ellipsoidal LED shell(Para-8)- comprising:
a light emitting diode die(light emitting semiconductor 105, figs.2-4 and related texts); and
a cylindrical lens(cylindrical or hemispherical plastic cells 260, figs.3-4) mounted directly over a light emitting surface of the light emitting diode die(figs.2-4), whereby light emitted through the cylindrical lens(260) has a narrow angular distribution along a first axis(figs.3-4&6)and a broad angular distribution along a second axis orthogonal to the first axis (figs.3-4&6)(Para-26: the present invention generate a narrow angular emission in the height dimension of an emitter(FIG. 3); i.e., perpendicular to the screen surface, and maintain a wide lateral angular emission, parallel to the screen surface(FIG.4)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application, to have modified Dearn with the teaching of SPARF in order to teach the claim limitations. Such modification is desirable, as it provides a touch sensitive electronic having novel shell design for light emitters, optimized to provide more radiant intensity in the forward direction than conventional cylindrical or hemispherical lenses.
Regarding claim 9, Dearn as modified by SPARF teaches the touch sensitive apparatus of claim 7, wherein the mounting of each of the one or more light sources with respect to the input face is such that a combination of the lens of the light source and shaping of the input face is adapted to spread light substantially evenly in a plane of the top plate(Para-30, Dearn: A lens (not shown) may be provided between the light source 12 and the edge of the top plate 10, if required, in order to focus and/or laterally spread the illumination light). Regarding claim 10, Dearn as modified by SPARF teaches the touch sensitive apparatus of claim 7, wherein in the combination of the light source(12, fig.1, Dearn) and the input face(left edge of top plate 10, fig.1), the input face has no optical power(Para-30, Dearn)(when not required, no lens is provided to modulate the light from light source).
Regarding claim 11, Dearn as modified by SPARF teaches the touch sensitive apparatus of claim 7, wherein in the combination of the light source and the input face, the input face has a lensing effect(Para-30, Dearn)(when required, lens is provided to modulate the light from light source).
Regarding claim 12, Dearn as modified by SPARF teaches the touch sensitive apparatus of claim 7, wherein a wall of a refracting input face forms an angle to a plane of the top plate such that the refracting input face and the second surface of the top plate form an obtuse angle within the top plate(figs.1&2, Dearn)(it is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art and well-known that make the input face an obtuse angle within the top plate to make total internal reflection within the transparent top plate).
PNG
media_image1.png
364
648
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, Dearn as modified by SPARF teaches the touch sensitive apparatus of claim 7, wherein each of the light sources(12) is mounted at an angle to a plane of the top plate(10) such that light emitted(23) from the or each light source(12) is predominantly directed obliquely towards the first surface(fig.1, Dearn).
Regarding claim 14, Dearn as modified by SPARF teaches the touch sensitive apparatus of claim 12, wherein each of the light sources is mounted such that light emitted from the light source is directed obliquely towards the refracting input face(fig.1, Dearn).
Regarding claim 16, Dearn as modified by SPARF teaches the packaged light emitting diode of claim 7, wherein:
the cylindrical lens is formed as a truncated substantially oblate ellipsoidal lens in a body having two first truncations and one second truncation(figs.2&6-7, Para-5, 13, SPARF),
wherein the two first truncations are normal to the axis of the oblate ellipsoid and equidistant from a longest semidiameter of the oblate ellipsoid(figs.2&6-7, SPARF), and are parallel to two axes of the oblate ellipsoid and to each other, and wherein the second truncation is parallel to the other axis of the oblate ellipsoid and normal to the two first truncations(figs.2&6-7, SPARF); and
wherein the light emitting diode die is proximate to the second truncation(figs.2-3, 6-9, Para 29-33, SPARF) (for motivation see the rejection of claim 7 above).
Regarding claim 18, Dearn as modified by SPARF teaches the touch sensitive apparatus of claim 7, wherein the light emitting diode is a near infrared light emitting diode(Para-30, Dearn; Para-20, SPARF).
13. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dearn et al.(US 2019/0107922 A1) in view of SPARF(US 2013/0234 991 A1) and further in view of McCollum et al.(US 2017/0343720 A1) (herein after McCollum).
Regarding claim 8, Dearn as modified by SPARF is not found to teach expressly the touch sensitive apparatus of claim 7, wherein each light source is disposed within a recess, and wherein the input face is a face of the recess.
However, McCollum teaches light emitting panel assemblies, wherein each light source(light source 3, fig.15, Para-79) is disposed within a recess(slot 93, fig.15, Para-79), and wherein the input face is a face of the recess(fig.15).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application, to have modified Dearn further with the teaching of McCollum to include the feature in order to provide better control of light and to obtain uniform intensity by varying the optical deformations.
14. Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dearn et al.(US 2019/0107922 A1) in view of SPARF(US 2013/0234 991 A1) and further in view of PARK et al.(US 2012/0014115 A1) (herein after PARK).
For mapping and motivation, see the rejection of Claim 4, since claim 17 recites the same limitations as in claim 4 except difference in preamble and dependency of the respective claims.
Examiner Note
15. The Examiner cites particular figures, paragraphs, columns and line numbers in the references, as applied to the claims above. Although the particular citations are representative teachings and are applied to specific limitations within the claims, other passages, internally cited references, and figures may also apply. In preparing a response, it is respectfully requested that the Applicant fully consider the references, in their entirety, as potentially disclosing or teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as fully consider the context of the passage as taught by the references or as disclosed by the Examiner.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MD SAIFUL A SIDDIQUI whose telephone number is (571)270-1530. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 9:00AM - 5:30PM.
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, Temesghen Ghebretinsae, can be reached on (571)272-3017. 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.
/MD SAIFUL A SIDDIQUI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2626
Prosecution Insights