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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 10/15/2025 has been entered. Claims 10-18 are pending in the Application. Claims 1-9 have been canceled by the Applicant. New claims 10-18 have been added by the Applicant.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: CURVED DISPLAY DEVICE AND TRANSPORT MEANS
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 10-12, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wu et al., CN 111681578 A, (all citations will be made to the English language translation provided by Espacenet).
Regarding claim 10, Wu discloses “A display device comprising: a curved display panel (202, Fig. 5-6); and
a backlight for the display panel, wherein the backlight has: at least one flat circuit board (sub-circuit boards on top of 204, Fig. 6; it has flat portions) with a plurality of light sources (203, Fig. 5-6) ; and a reflector (201, Fig. 5-6) with a plurality of reflective cavities (206, Fig. 5-6) in each of which at least one of the light sources is arranged (seen in Fig. 5), wherein an underside of the reflector is flat (the bottom portion of 201 that is matched with flat portion of 211, Fig. 5-6), while an upper side of the reflector is adapted to a curvature of the display panel (seen in Fig. 5-6).”
Regarding claim 11, Wu discloses the invention of claim 10, as cited above, and further discloses “the upper side of the reflector follows the curvature of the display panel or approximates the curvature of the display panel (seen in Fig. 5-6).
Regarding claim 12, Wu discloses the invention of claim 10, as cited above, and further discloses “the upper side of the reflector is designed to be convex, concave, regionally convex and concave or partially flat (seen in Fig. 5-6, convex).”
Regarding claim 15, Wu discloses the invention of claim 10, as cited above, and further discloses “the display device has a plurality of flat circuit boards in a spatial arrangement (seen in Fig. 5, plurality of sub-circuit boards), each with a plurality of light sources (¶ [0011] “the number of light-emitting devices in any one of the plurality of reflective cavities is at least one”).”
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) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Roberts, US 2022/0252940 A1.
Regarding claim 13, Wu discloses the invention of claim 10, as cited above, except “a density of the light sources varies over a surface of the at least one flat circuit board.”.
Roberts discloses a backlighting panel for a display, and the backlighting panel can have a varying density of solid state lighting devices across the panel (¶ [0020]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to modify the density of light sources, as taught by Wu, to vary in density across the panel, such as taught by Roberts. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to vary the density of light sources for addressing image variances, gradients in zone density and solid state lighting, including brightness/darkness variances, color bleeding, and/or other chromaticity issues (Roberts, ¶ [0020]).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Boyd, US 2022/0269136 A1.
Regarding claim 14, Wu discloses the invention of claim 10, as cited above, except “the light sources are controlled or designed such that a light intensity of the light sources varies over a surface of the at least one flat circuit board.”
Boyd discloses a display panel with an arrange of LEDs, and the LEDs can have brightness control over each or groups of LEDs (¶ [0016-0017]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to have the light sources, as taught by Wu, be able to be controlled such that the brightness can be varied over the light sources, such as taught by Boyd. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to have the light sources be able to be controlled to have varying brightness for dynamically varying the illumination in coordination with the panel image (Boyd, ¶ [0017]).”
Additionally, It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have the reflector cavities be separable, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlicnman, 168 USPQ 177, 179. See MPEP 2144.04 (V-C)
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Wong et al., US 2013/0215611 A1.
Regarding claim 16, Wu discloses the invention of claim 10, as cited above, except “the reflector has a modular construction.”
Wong discloses a lighting system with a reflector arrangement that is modular (¶ [0025] “ reflector cup clusters 324 may be interchangeable and modular, which means that a reflector cup cluster 324 of one type may be replaced with a reflector cup cluster 324 of another type”).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to have the reflector, as taught by Wu, be a modular construction, such as taught by Wong. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to have the reflector be a modular construction, for allowing for achieving a particular desired optimal lighting design for a particular application (Wong, ¶ [0035]).
Claim(s) 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Joseph et al., US 2023/0393327 A1.
Regarding claim 17, Wu discloses the invention of claim 10, as cited above, except “walls of the cavities are parabolically or at least partially rounded and the cavities are designed to reflect the light emitted by the light sources in a direction of the display panel.
Joseph discloses a display apparatus with a plurality of reflective cavities that are rounded (30, Fig. 2-3; ¶ [0016]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to modify the reflector walls, as taught by Wu, to have rounded walls, such as taught by Joseph. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to have the walls be rounded for directing the light towards the display panel in a more targeted manner (Joseph, ¶ [0016]).
Regarding claim 18, Wu discloses “A display device comprising: a curved display panel (202, Fig. 5-6); and
a backlight for the display panel, wherein the backlight has: at least one flat circuit board (sub-circuit boards on top of 204, Fig. 6; it has flat portions) with a plurality of light sources (203, Fig. 5-6) ; and a reflector (201, Fig. 5-6) with a plurality of reflective cavities (206, Fig. 5-6) in each of which at least one of the light sources is arranged (seen in Fig. 5), wherein an underside of the reflector is flat (the bottom portion of 201 that is matched with flat portion of 211, Fig. 5-6), while an upper side of the reflector is adapted to a curvature of the display panel (seen in Fig. 5-6).”
However, Wu does not explicitly disclose that the display device is part of a transport (vehicle),.
Joseph discloses a display apparatus that can be part of a vehicle (¶ [0002-0003]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to have the display apparatus, as taught by Wu, be a part of a vehicle transport, such as taught by Joseph. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to have display apparatus be in a vehicle for acting as instrument cluster for the driver, as a central display, or also as a front-seat passenger display (Joseph, ¶ [0003]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kang et al., US 2016/0057850 A1 discloses a curved display device
Kim, US 2015/0219324 A1 discloses a curved display device
Jang et al., US 9898975 B2 discloses a curved display device
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL CHIANG whose telephone number is (571)270-3811. The examiner can normally be reached M to F, 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, James R Greece can be reached at 571-272-3711. 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.
/MICHAEL CHIANG/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2875
/KEITH G. DELAHOUSSAYE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights