vs! “111%
`\.\_:
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMIVHSSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria1 Virginia 22313-1450
`wwwusptogov
`
`
`
`
`
`15/473,057
`
`03/29/2017
`
`Naoki SATO
`
`20326.0099Us01
`
`6180
`
`07’05’2018 —HAMRE, SCHUMANN,MUELLER&LARSONP.C. m
`7590
`53148
`45 South Seventh Street
`CATTANACH’ COLINJ
`Suite 2700
`MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402- 1683
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`ART UNIT
`2875
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`07/05/2018
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/0r attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e—mail address(es):
`PTOMail @hsml.com
`
`PTOL—90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Applicant(s)
`Application No.
` 15/473,057 SATO ET AL.
`
`
`AIA (First Inventor to File)
`Art Unit
`Examiner
`Office Action Summary
`
`
`COLIN CATTANACH $2215 2875
`-- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING DATE OF
`THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR1. 136( a).
`after SIX () MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1 .704(b).
`
`In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`
`Status
`
`1)IZI Responsive to communication(s) filed on 29 March 2017.
`El A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2b)|ZI This action is non-final.
`2a)|:l This action is FINAL.
`3)I:I An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)|:| Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)IZI Claim(s) 149 is/are pending in the application.
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`is/are allowed.
`6)I:I Claim(s)
`7)|Z| CIaim(s)_1-9is/are rejected.
`8)|:I Claim(s)_ is/are objected to.
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`9)I:I Claim((s)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`hit
`I/'/\WIIW.USOI.O. ovI’ atentS/init events/
`
`
`
`iindex.‘s or send an inquiry to PPI-iieedback{®usgtc.00v.
`
`Application Papers
`
`10)I:l The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)|Xl The drawing(s) filed on 29 March 2017is/are: a)IZI accepted or b)I:I objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`
`12)IXI Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a)IZl All
`
`b)|:l Some” c)I:l None of the:
`
`1.IXI Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.|:l Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.|:| Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`
`
`3) D Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`1) E Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date.
`.
`.
`4) I:I Other'
`2) E InformatIon DIsclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date 03/29/2017.
`US. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL—326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20180623
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/473,057
`
`Page 2
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`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.
`
`Information Disclosure Statement
`
`2.
`
`The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 29 March 2017 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 § 112
`
`3.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 USC. 112(b):
`
`(b) CONCLUSION.7The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing
`out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the
`invention.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 USC. 112 (pre—AIA), second paragraph:
`
`The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly
`claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
`
`4.
`
`Claim 6 is rejected under 35 USC. 112(b) or 35 USC. 112 (pre—AIA), second
`
`paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject
`
`matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre—AIA the applicant regards as the
`
`invention.
`
`a.
`
`In claim 6, line 2, the limitation recites “. . .in the first direction. . .,” which renders
`
`the claim indefinite. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims,
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/473,057
`
`Page 3
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`as no first direction has been previously introduced. For purposes of examination, the
`
`Examiner will interpret the limitation as follows: ——. .. in the a first direction. . .—-.
`
`Clarification from the Applicant is requested and appropriate correction is required.
`
`5.
`
`In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C.
`
`102 and 103 (or as subject to pre—AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the
`
`statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art
`
`relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
`
`6.
`
`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.
`
`7.
`
`Claims 1—2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hatanaka et al.
`
`(US 7,344,291 B2, herein referred to as: Hatanaka).
`
`8.
`
`Regarding claim 1, Hatanaka discloses (Figs. 1—6) a light source (22) that emits light
`
`having a predetermined color; a lens (23) that concentrates the light emitted from the light
`
`source and causes the light to exit (i.e. the light passing through 23 exits towards 24—26); a band—
`
`pass filter (26) that transmits specific—band light having a specific—band wavelength in the light
`
`exiting from the lens (col. 4, lines 37—56); and a light guide plate (10) disposed on a rear surface
`
`side of a display panel (an LCD, col. 12., lines 1—4), wherein the specific—band light transmitted
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/473,057
`
`Page 4
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`through the band—pass filter is incident on a lateral surface of the light guide plate (as shown in
`
`Fig. 6).
`
`9.
`
`Regarding claim 2, Hatanaka discloses (Figs. 1—6) the light source (22), the lens (23), and
`
`the band—pass filter (26) are disposed on a lateral surface side of the light guide plate (as shown
`
`in Figs. 1—6), the liquid crystal display device further comprises a sub—light guide plate (31)
`
`disposed between the band—pass filter (26) and the light guide plate (10; as shown in Figs. 5A—6),
`
`and in the sub—light guide plate (31), a height in a first direction, which is a thickness direction of
`
`the light guide plate (i.e. a direction from top to bottom, with respect to Figs. 5B and 6), at a light
`
`exiting port through which the light eXits to the light guide plate (i.e. 31b) is smaller than a
`
`height in the first direction at a light incident port (31a) through which the light is incident from
`
`the band—pass filter (as show in Figs. 5B and 6).
`
`10.
`
`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)(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.
`
`11.
`
`Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wyatt (US
`
`2017/0269279 A1).
`
`12.
`
`Regarding claim 9, Wyatt discloses (Fig. 4, paragraphs [0014], [0023], and [0074]) a
`
`light source (50) that emits light having a predetermined color (i.e. as indicated by the plot in
`
`Fig. 4 adjacent to 50); a band—pass filter (54, 56, 60) that transmits specific—band light having
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/473,057
`
`Page 5
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`a specific—band wavelength in the light emitted from the light source (as indicated by the
`
`bandwidth plots adjacent to 56 in Fig. 4); a light guide plate (see paragraphs [0023] and [0074])
`
`disposed on a rear surface side of a display panel (i.e. paragraph [0014], the light source can be
`
`placed at the edge of a light guide plate, and used to provide backlight for an LCD), and a
`
`wavelength converter (52) that receives the light reflected by the band—pass filter in the light
`
`emitted from the light source and converts a wavelength of the received reflected light into the
`
`specific—band wavelength (i.e. i.e. as recited in paragraph [0055]).
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`13.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 USC. 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.
`
`14.
`
`Claim 3 is rejected under 35 USC. 103 as being unpatentable over Hatanaka.
`
`15.
`
`Regarding claim 3, Hatanaka does not explicitly teach or suggest that the light source,
`
`the lens, and the band—pass filter are disposed on a rear surface side of the light guide plate, the
`
`liquid crystal display device further comprises a sub—light guide plate that guides the specific—
`
`band light transmitted through the band—pass filter to the light guide plate, and the sub—light guide
`
`plate includes a first portion located on a lateral surface side of the light guide plate and a second
`
`portion that is connected to the first portion and located on the rear surface side of the light
`
`guide plate.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/473,057
`
`Page 6
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`16.
`
`Hatanaka teaches (Figs. 19—20) a lighting device (i.e. 111) disposed on a rear surface side
`
`of the light guide plate (as shown in Figs. 19—20), the liquid crystal display device further
`
`comprises a sub—light guide plate (116, 117) that guides the light transmitted by the lighting
`
`device (111) to the light guide plate (as shown in Fig. 20), and the sub—light guide plate includes
`
`a first portion (117) located on a lateral surface side of the light guide plate (as shown in Figs.
`
`19—20) and a second portion (116) that is connected to the first portion and located on the rear
`
`surface side of the light guide plate (as shown in Figs. 19—20).
`
`17.
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the
`
`effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device of Hatanaka and
`
`incorporated the teachings of the light source, the lens, and the band—pass filter (i.e. collectively
`
`the lighting device) are disposed on a rear surface side of the light guide plate, the liquid crystal
`
`display device further comprises a sub—light guide plate that guides the specific—band light
`
`transmitted through the band—pass filter to the light guide plate, and the sub—light guide plate
`
`includes a first portion located on a lateral surface side of the light guide plate and a second
`
`portion that is connected to the first portion and located on the rear surface side of the light
`
`guide plate, since it has been held by the courts that combining prior art elements according to
`
`known methods to yield predictable results, simple substitution of one known element for
`
`another to obtain predictable results, or choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable
`
`solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success, is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior
`
`art, as it requires only ordinary skill in the art. KSR International Co. v. TelefleX Inc., 82
`
`USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007). In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been
`
`motivated to yield the predictable result of reducing the width of the display device (i.e. in a
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/473,057
`
`Page 7
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`direction parallel to the emitting plane of 120, by configuring the optical elements behind the
`
`light guide plate, as desired for the suited application).
`
`18.
`
`Claims 4—5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hatanaka, in
`
`View of Nishitani et al. (US 2014/0340931 Al, herein referred to as: Nishitani).
`
`19.
`
`Regarding claim 4, Hatanaka does not teach or suggest in the sub—light guide plate, a
`
`height in a first direction, which is a thickness direction of the light guide plate, at a light exiting
`
`port through which the light exits to the light guide plate is smaller than a height in the first
`
`direction at a light incident port through which the light is incident from the band—pass filter.
`
`20.
`
`Nishitani teaches or suggests (Fig. 12) in the sub—light guide plate (9), a height in a first
`
`direction, which is a thickness direction of the light guide plate (4, i.e. in a thickness direction
`
`extending orthogonal to the emission surface of 4 in Fig. 12), at a light exiting port (70) through
`
`which the light exits to the light guide plate (as shown in Fig. 12) is smaller than a height in the
`
`first direction at a light incident port (9a) through which the light is incident (as shown in Fig.
`
`12).
`
`21.
`
`Therefore, it would have been obVious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the
`
`effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the deVice of Hatanaka and
`
`incorporated the teachings of in the sub—light guide plate, a height in a first direction, which is a
`
`thickness direction of the light guide plate, at a light exiting port through which the light exits to
`
`the light guide plate is smaller than a height in the first direction at a light incident port through
`
`which the light is incident from the band—pass filter, such as taught or suggested by Nishitani,
`
`since it has been held by the courts that combining prior art elements according to known
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/473,057
`
`Page 8
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`methods to yield predictable results, simple substitution of one known element for another to
`
`obtain predictable results, or choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions,
`
`with a reasonable expectation of success, is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art, as it
`
`requires only ordinary skill in the art. KSR International Co. V. TelefleX Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385,
`
`1397 (2007). In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to further
`
`homogenize the light entering the light guide plate.
`
`22.
`
`Regarding claim 5, Hatanaka teaches or suggests (Figs. 1—6 and 19—20, as modified in
`
`claim 3 above) a bent portion (i.e. the bent outer wall of 117) is formed in the first portion (117)
`
`of the sub—light guide plate to guide the specific—band light transmitted through the band—pass
`
`filter from the second portion to the lateral surface of the light guide plate (i.e. incorporating the
`
`sub—light guide plate 116, 117, in lieu of, or in addition to, the sub—light guide plate of Figs. 1—6
`
`results in the light the sub—light guide plate guiding the specific—band light transmitted through
`
`the band—pass filter from the second portion to the lateral surface of the light guide plate).
`
`23.
`
`Hatanaka does not explicitly teach or suggest that a reflecting tape is provided in the bent
`
`portion, the reflecting tape configured to reflect the light radiated to an outside of the sub—light
`
`guide plate in the bent portion so as to guide the light to the lateral surface of the light guide
`
`plate.
`
`24.
`
`Nishitani teaches or suggests (Fig. 12, paragraph [0117]) a reflecting member (i.e. a
`
`mirror formed by deposited metal, as recited in paragraph [0117]) is provided in the bent portion
`
`(9e), the reflecting member configured to reflect the light radiated to an outside of the sub—light
`
`guide plate in the bent portion so as to guide the light to the lateral surface of the light guide plate
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/473,057
`
`Page 9
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`(i.e. the mirror will increase light reflection out of the sub—light guide plate 9 at surface 9b and
`
`elements 70 so as to guide the light to the lateral surface 4a of the light guide plate 4).
`
`25.
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the
`
`effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device of Hatanaka and
`
`incorporated the teachings of a reflecting member is provided in the bent portion, the reflecting
`
`member configured to reflect the light radiated to an outside of the sub—light guide plate in the
`
`bent portion so as to guide the light to the lateral surface of the light guide plate, such as taught
`
`or suggested by Nishitani, in order to increase the efficiency of the device.
`
`26.
`
`The combined teachings of Hatanaka and Nishitani teach or suggest all of the elements of
`
`the claimed invention, except for said reflecting member is a reflecting tape.
`
`27.
`
`However, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the
`
`effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device of Hatanaka and
`
`incorporated the teachings of a reflective tape for the bent portion, since it has been held by the
`
`courts that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results,
`
`simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results, or choosing
`
`from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of
`
`success, is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art, as it requires only ordinary skill in the
`
`art. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007). In this case, one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to yield the predictable result of increasing
`
`the light reflection at the bent portion of the sub—light guide plate, and/or reduce the complexity
`
`and time of manufacturing the device.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/473,057
`
`Page 10
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`28.
`
`Claims 6—7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hatanaka, in
`
`view of Kawata (US 2016/0209582 Al).
`
`29.
`
`Regarding claims 6—7, Hatanaka does not teach or suggest in the second portion, the
`
`height in the first direction, which is the thickness direction of the light guide plate, of a
`
`connection portion between the second portion and the first portion is smaller than the height in
`
`the first direction at the light incident port through which the light is incident from the band—pass
`
`filter (as recited in claim 6), and a circuit board on which a driving circuit that drives the display
`
`panel is mounted, wherein the second portion of the sub—light guide plate includes a higher
`
`portion which is high in the first direction and a lower portion in which a height in the first
`
`direction is smaller than that of the higher portion, and the circuit board is disposed on a rear
`
`surface side of the lower portion of the sub—light guide plate (as recited in claim 7).
`
`30.
`
`Kawata teaches or suggests (Figs. l—9, and annotated Fig. 9 provided below for clarity) in
`
`the second portion (A), the height in the first direction, which is the thickness direction of the
`
`light guide plate (i.e. a direction normal to the light emission surface of BL), of a connection
`
`portion (C) between the second portion (A) and the first portion (B) is smaller than the height in
`
`the first direction at the light incident port through which the light is incident (as shown in Fig. 9,
`
`and in annotated Fig. 9 provided below), and a circuit board (30, L, 31, 32) on which a driving
`
`circuit (3l)that drives the display panel is mounted (as shown in Fig. 9, and in annotated Fig. 9
`
`provided below), wherein the second portion of the sub—light guide plate includes a higher
`
`portion (D) which is high in the first direction (as shown in Fig. 9, and in annotated Fig. 9
`
`provided below) and a lower portion (E) in which a height in the first direction is smaller than
`
`that of the higher portion (as shown in annotated Fig. 9), and the circuit board (30, L, 31, 32) is
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/473,057
`
`Page ll
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`disposed on a rear surface side of the lower portion of the sub—light guide plate (as shown in Fig.
`
`9, and in annotated Fig. 9 provided below).
`
`,-
`
`
`
` fl/f/f/f/Xri-f-.l,
`
`
`
`R m
`'\“““mv.........-v ‘
`.
`\-
`E
`
`'3&\\\\\\\~$§t
`LL:
`
`Y
`\xxxxxxxxvé:
`
`F i (.3 El
`
`31.
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the
`
`effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device of Hatanaka and
`
`incorporated the teachings of in the second portion, the height in the first direction, which is the
`
`thickness direction of the light guide plate, of a connection portion between the second portion
`
`and the first portion is smaller than the height in the first direction at the light incident port
`
`through which the light is incident from the band—pass filter (as recited in claim 6), and a circuit
`
`board on which a driving circuit that drives the display panel is mounted, wherein the second
`
`portion of the sub—light guide plate includes a higher portion which is high in the first direction
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/473,057
`
`Page 12
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`and a lower portion in which a height in the first direction is smaller than that of the higher
`
`portion, and the circuit board is disposed on a rear surface side of the lower portion of the sub—
`
`light guide plate (as recited in claim 7), such as taught or suggested by Kawata, since it has been
`
`held by the courts that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield
`
`predictable results, simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable
`
`results, or choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable
`
`expectation of success, is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art, as it requires only
`
`ordinary skill in the art. KSR International Co. V. TelefleX Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007).
`
`In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to yield the predictable
`
`result of improving the optical coupling between the first and second portions of the sub—light
`
`guide plate (i.e. by shaping a portion thereof to direct, or otherwise reflect, light in the desired
`
`manner toward the light guide plate).
`
`32.
`
`Claims 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hatanaka, in
`
`view of Kao et al. (US 2014/0126238 A1, herein referred to as: Kao) and Kawata.
`
`33.
`
`Regarding claims 6 and 8, Hatanaka teaches or suggests (Figs. 1—6, and 19—20, as
`
`modified in claim 3 above, and in reference to the annotated Fig. 20 provided below for clarity),
`
`in the second portion (C), the height in the first direction (i.e. as shown in annotated Fig. 20
`
`provided below), which is the thickness direction of the light guide plate (as defined in annotated
`
`Fig. 20 provided below), of a connection portion (B) between the second portion (C) and the first
`
`portion (A), wherein the height in the first direction at the light incident port (116) is a first
`
`height (said port has a first height), the second portion (B) of the sub—light guide plate includes a
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/473,057
`
`Page 13
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`flat plate (the outer surface of B) having the constant second height (as shown in Figs. 19—20, and
`
`in annotated Fig. 20 provided below).
`
`W“m
`
`
` I-?/A¢’///////////////Av"
`
`
`
`
`
`«:
`3 a
`-:
`'3
`'3 4
`
`_.. ' “-9? 3
`,3
`“W: i a :3
`9W
`."‘"“‘K\\‘L-l-n“\}{:*“\‘ E
`]- E. b
`
`.
`
`»
`
`5:9”
`*1
`
`'
`
`““““"“"'.'
`
`..
`
`34.
`
`Hatanaka does not teach or suggest that the height in the first direction said connection
`
`portion is smaller than the height in the first direction at the light incident port through which the
`
`light is incident, the second portion of the sub—light guide plate includes a slope in which the
`
`height in the first direction is inclined from the first height to a second height smaller than the
`
`first height.
`
`35.
`
`Kao teaches or suggests (Fig. l, and annotated Fig. 1 provided below for clarity) a light
`
`guide plate (120) comprising a first portion (A), a second portion (B), and a connecting portion
`
`(C), wherein said connection portion (C) is smaller than the height at the light incident port (131,
`
`as shown in Fig. l and in annotated Fig. 1 provided below) through which the light is incident,
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/473,057
`
`Page 14
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`the second portion (B) includes a slope in which the height is inclined from the first height (i.e.
`
`the height of 131) to a second height smaller than the first height (as shown in Fig. 1).
`
`-
`1.
`'E 3%
`~
`§
`.1.
`
`,
`
`.._..-.“v
`$1—
`,
`,_
`
`,
`
`-.
`.
`_
`:.
`TP
`.
`
`:
`__.
`
`.
`
`
`
`\:
`5
`S:
`:
`A"
`3.
`..\\\\\\\\~.\‘
`-,
`‘9‘
`ks
`
`
`
`
`
`36.
`
`Therefore it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the
`
`effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device of Hatanaka and
`
`incorporated the teachings of the height in the first direction said connection portion is smaller
`
`than the height in the first direction at the light incident port through which the light is incident,
`
`the second portion of the sub—light guide plate includes a slope in which the height in the first
`
`direction is inclined from the first height to a second height smaller than the first height (i.e. by
`
`simply forming the second portion of Hatanaka with a tapered surface extending from the inlet
`
`portion), such as taught or suggested by Kao, since it has been held by the courts that combining
`
`prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results or choosing from a
`
`finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success, is not
`
`sufficient to distinguish over the prior art, as it requires only ordinary skill in the art. KSR
`
`International Co. v. TelefleX Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007). In this case, one of ordinary
`
`skill in the art would have been motivated to yield the predictable result of providing an enlarged
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/473,057
`
`Page 15
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`inlet face to support larger, or more, light sources (i.e. and thus provide an interface by which
`
`one can increase the light input into the device).
`
`37.
`
`The combined teachings of Hatanaka and Kao teach or suggest all of the features of the
`
`claimed invention, except for a circuit board on which a driving circuit that drives the display
`
`panel is mounted, and the circuit board is disposed so as to overlap the flat plate of the sub—light
`
`guide plate in planar view.
`
`38.
`
`Kawata teaches or suggests (Figs. 1—9) a circuit board (30, L, 32) on which a driving
`
`circuit (31) that drives the display panel is mounted, and the circuit board (30, L, 32) is disposed
`
`so as to overlap a flat plate of the sub—light guide plate (i.e. a flat plate of surface F4) in planar
`
`view (i.e. circuit board 30, L, 32 wraps all of said surface F4, and thus overlaps said surface in
`
`plain view).
`
`39.
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the
`
`effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device of Hatanaka and
`
`incorporated the teachings of a circuit board on which a driving circuit that drives the display
`
`panel is mounted, and the circuit board is disposed so as to overlap the flat plate of the sub—light
`
`guide plate in planar view, such as taught or suggested by Kawata, since it has been held by the
`
`courts that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results
`
`or choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable
`
`expectation of success, is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art, as it requires only
`
`ordinary skill in the art. KSR International Co. v. TelefleX Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007).
`
`In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to yield the predictable
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/473,057
`
`Page 16
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`result of providing a feature to drive and control the display device, and reduce the size of the
`
`display (i.e. by arranging driving circuit board in close proximity with the backlighting unit).
`
`Conclusion
`
`40.
`
`The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
`
`disclosure: see PTO—892 for pertinent prior art not relied upon for rejection.
`
`41.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to COLIN CATTANACH whose telephone number is (571)270—
`
`5203. The examiner can normally be reached on MON — FRI: 7:30AM to 5PM ET.
`
`42.
`
`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.
`
`43.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
`
`supervisor, Jong—Suk (James) Lee can be reached on 5712727044. The fax phone number for the
`
`organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571—273—8300.
`
`44.
`
`Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent
`
`Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications
`
`may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished
`
`applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR
`
`system, see http://pair—direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/473,057
`
`Page 17
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866—217—9197 (toll—free). If you would
`
`like assistance from a USPTO Customer SerVice Representative or access to the automated
`
`information system, call 800—786—9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571—272—1000.
`
`/C. C./
`
`Examiner, Art Unit 2875
`
`/Alexander Garlen/
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
`
`