www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and TrademarkOffice
`Address; COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`16/780,002
`
`02/03/2020
`
`Tomoharu NOTOSHI
`
`20295 .0065US01
`
`5482
`
`HAY
`
`M
`
`TLER
`
`HAMRE, SCHUMANN, MUELLER & LARSON P.C.
`45 South Seventh Street
`Suite 2700
`MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-1683
`
`QURESHI, MARIAM
`
`2871
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`05/04/2021
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or 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)
`
`

`

`
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`1-19 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) 6-12 and 14-16 is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`() Claim(s)__ is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 1-5,13 and 17-19 is/are rejected.
`1 Claim(s)__ is/are objected to.
`C] Claim(s)
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you maybeeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http:/Awww.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.gov.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`Application Papers
`10) The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)() The drawing(s) filedon__ is/are: a)C) accepted or b)C) 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). Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)or (f).
`Certified copies:
`cc) None ofthe:
`b)L) Some**
`a)D) All
`1.1) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.1) Certified copies of the priority documents have beenreceived in Application No.
`3.2.) Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been receivedin 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)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`2) (J Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) (J Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`(Qj Other:
`
`4)
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20210429
`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`16/780,002
`NOTOSHIetal.
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF) StatusExaminer
`MARIAM QURESHI
`2871
`Yes
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEofthis communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available underthe provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply betimely filed after SIX (6) MONTHSfrom 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) MONTHSfrom 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, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1) Responsive to communication(s) filed on 4/12/21.
`C} A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`2a)¥) This action is FINAL.
`2b) (J This action is non-final.
`3)02 An election was madeby the applicant in responseto a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4\0) 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 Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/780,002
`Art Unit: 2871
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA or AIA Status
`
`The presentapplication, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first
`
`inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`Applicant’s arguments are moot in view of the amendments to the claims and the new grounds of
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`rejection below.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousnessrejections
`
`setforth 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 1-3, 13, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Sumitani (US Publication No.: US 2012/0218752 A1 of record) in view of Park (US Publication No.:
`
`US 2019/0171066 A1 of record) and Yamazaki (US Publication No.: US 2012/0099049 At1,
`
`“Yamazaki”).
`
`Regarding Claim 1, Sumitani disclosesa lighting device (Figures 1-7} comprising:
`
`A light source module having a plurality of light-emitting elements arranged two-dimensionally
`
`(Figure 3, light-emitting elements 20);
`
`A uniform luminance layer disposed onalight emission side of the light source module (Figure 3,
`
`uniform luminance layer 50),
`
`A first diffusion layer (Figure 3, first diffusion layer 70),
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/780,002
`Art Unit: 2871
`
`Page 3
`
`Wherein the uniform luminance layer has a higher light transmittance as a distance from a point
`
`intersecting with an optical axis of each of the plurality oflight-emitting elements increases (Figures 6-7;
`
`Paragraphs 0107-0109).
`
`Sumitani fails to disclose that the first diffusion layer is disposed between the light source module
`
`and the uniform luminance layer.
`
`However, Park discloses a similar device wherethe first diffusion layer is disposed between the
`
`light source module and the uniform luminance layer (Park, Figure 2, first diffusion layer 250 is disposed
`
`between uniform luminance layer 260 and light source module 220).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effectivefiling date of the
`
`invention to modify the device as disclosed by Sumitani to have the diffusion layer disposed between the
`
`light source module and the uniform luminancelayer as disclosed by Park. One would have been
`
`motivated to do so for the purpose of reducing a hot-spot phenomenon thereby improving light
`
`transmittance quality (Park, Paragraph 0079).
`
`Sumitani also fails to disclose thatthe first diffusion layer and the uniform luminance layer are
`
`bonded withafirst adhesive layer without gaps.
`
`However, Yamazaki discloses a similar device wherethe first diffusion layer and the uniform
`
`luminance layer are bonded withafirst adhesive layer without gaps (Yamazaki, Paragraph 0188).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the
`
`invention to modify the device as disclosed by Sumitani to include an adhesive layer as disclosed by
`
`Yamazaki. One would have been motivated to do so for the purpose of bonding the diffusion layer and
`
`the uniform luminance layer without losing the luminance enhancementproperties of the uniform
`
`luminance layer (Yamazaki, Paragraph 0188).
`
`Regarding Claim 2, Sumitani in view of Park and Yamazaki disclosesthe lighting device
`
`according to claim 1, further comprising a reflective layer disposed on a light source module side of the
`
`uniform luminance layer and having a reflective surface that reflects light emitted from the plurality of light-
`
`emitting elements (Sumitani, Figure 2, reflective layer 60; Paragraph 0114), wherein
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/780,002
`Art Unit: 2871
`
`Page 4
`
`The uniform luminance layer haslight reflectivity at least on a surface on the light source module
`
`side (Sumitani, Figure 2, uniform luminance layer haslight reflectivity at least at portions where reflective
`
`layer 60 is disposed; Paragraph 0106),
`
`The uniform luminance layer is provided with a plurality of pores wherelight emitted from the
`
`plurality of light-emitting elements passes respectively (Sumitani, Figure 2, pores 52), and
`
`The plurality of pores are configured to increase the light transmittance as the distance from the
`
`point intersecting with the optical axis of the plurality of light-emitting elements increases (Sumitani,
`
`Figure 6 discloses that the area of the pores 52 increases with distance, thereby increasing light
`
`transmittance; Paragraph 0107-0109).
`
`Regarding Claim 3, Sumitani in view of Park and Yamazaki disclosesthe lighting device
`
`according to claim 2, wherein the reflective surface of the reflective layer is located closer to the uniform
`
`luminance layer than the light emitting surface of the plurality of light-emitting elements (Sumitani, Figure
`
`2, reflective layer 60 is disposed closer to the uniform luminance layer 50 than the plurality oflight-
`
`emitting elements 20), and
`
`The first diffusion layer is support by the reflective layer (Sumitani, Figure 2, first diffusion layer 70
`
`is disposed on the reflective layer 60).
`
`Regarding Claim 13, Sumitani in view of Park and Yamazaki disclosesthe lighting device
`
`according to claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of light-emitting elements emit white light (Sumitani,
`
`Paragraph 0101).
`
`Regarding Claim 17, Sumitani in view of Park and Yamazaki disclosesa liquid crystal display
`
`apparatus (Sumitani, Figure 3), comprising:
`
`The lighting device according to claim 1 (Sumitani, Figures 1-7); and
`
`A liquid crystal display panel disposed onalight emission side of the lighting device (Sumitani,
`
`Figure 3, liquid crystal display panel 200; Paragraph 0143).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/780,002
`Art Unit: 2871
`
`Page 5
`
`Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sumitani in view of
`
`Park and Yamazakiin further view of Chen et al (US Publication No.: US 2019/0265549 A1 of
`
`record, “Chen”).
`
`Regarding Claim 4, Sumitani in view of Park and Yamazaki disclosesthe light device according to
`
`claim 2.
`
`Sumitani fails to disclose a second diffusion layer disposed on an opposite side of the uniform
`
`luminance layer from the first diffusion layer side.
`
`However, Chen discloses a similar device comprising a second diffusion layer disposed on an
`
`opposite side of the uniform luminance layer from the first diffusion layer side (Chen, Figure4, first
`
`diffusion layer 140, uniform luminance layer 130, second diffusion layer 150).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effectivefiling of the
`
`invention to modify the device as disclosed by Sumitani to include a seconddiffusion layer as disclosed
`
`by Chen. One would have been motivated to do so for the purposeoffurther improving uniformity oflight
`
`(Chen, Paragraph 0047).
`
`Regarding Claim 5, Sumitani in view of Park and Yamazaki and Chen disclosesthe lighting
`
`device according to claim 4.
`
`Sumitani fails to disclose that the reflective layer and the first diffusion layer are bonded with a
`
`second achesivelayer, and the uniform luminance layer and the seconddiffusion layer are bonded with a
`
`third adhesive.
`
`However, Chendiscloses a similar device where the reflective layer and the first diffusion layer
`
`are bondedwith a first adhesive layer, the first diffusion layer and the uniform luminance layer are bonded
`
`with a second adhesive layer, and the uniform luminance layer and the seconddiffusion layer are bonded
`
`with a third adhesive (Chen, Figure 4, the reflective layer 120 is bondedto the first diffusion layer 140 via
`
`adhesive 168, and the uniform luminance layer 130 is bonded to the second diffusion layer 150 via
`
`adhesive layer 166).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effectivefiling date of the
`
`invention to modify the device as disclosed by Sumitani to include adhesives as disclosed by Chen. One
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/780,002
`Art Unit: 2871
`
`Page 6
`
`would have been motivated to do so for the purpose of reducing gaps between elements thereby thinning
`
`the backlight module (Chen, Paragraph 0048).
`
`Claims 4 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sumitani in
`
`view of Park and Yamazakiin further view of Chen et al (US Publication No.: US 2019/0285949 A1,
`
`“Chen’949”).
`
`Regarding Claim 4, Sumitani in view of Park and Yamazaki disclosesthe light device according to
`
`claim 2.
`
`Sumitani fails to disclose a second diffusion layer disposed on an opposite side of the uniform
`
`luminance layer from the first diffusion layer side.
`
`However, Chen’949 discloses a similar device comprising a seconddiffusion layer disposed on
`
`an opposite side of the uniform luminancelayer from the first diffusion layer side (Chen’949, Figure 7, first
`
`diffusion layer 560, uniform luminance layer 170, second diffusion layer 580).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effectivefiling of the
`
`invention to modify the device as disclosed by Sumitani to include a seconddiffusion layer as disclosed
`
`by Chen’949. One would have been motivated to do so for the purpose of reducing light leakage and the
`
`decreasing the generation of moire pattern (Chen’949’949, Paragraph 0050).
`
`Regarding Claim 18, Sumitani in view of Park and Yamazaki and Chen’949 disclosesthe lighting
`
`device according to claim 4.
`
`Sumitani fails to disclose that a haze value ofthe first diffusion layer is less than a haze value of
`
`the second diffusion layer.
`
`However, Chen’949 discloses a similar device where a hazevalue of the first diffusion layer is
`
`less than a haze value of the seconddiffusion layer (Chen’949, Figure 7, first diffusion layer 560, uniform
`
`luminance layer 170, second diffusion layer 580; Paragraphs 0049-0050).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effectivefiling of the
`
`invention to modify the device as disclosed by Sumitani to have different haze values of the diffusion
`
`layers as disclosed by Chen’949. One would have been motivated to do so for the purpose of reducing
`
`light leakage and the decreasing the generation of moire pattern (Chen’949’949, Paragraph 0050).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/780,002
`Art Unit: 2871
`
`Page 7
`
`Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sumitani in view of
`
`Chen’949.
`
`Regarding Claim 19, Sumitani disclosesalighting device (Figures 1-7) comprising:
`
`A light source module having a plurality of light-emitting elements arranged two-dimensionally
`
`(Figure 3, light-emitting elements 20);
`
`A uniform luminance layer disposed onalight emission side of the light source module (Figure 3,
`
`uniform luminance layer 50),
`
`A first diffusion layer (Figure 3, first diffusion layer 70),
`
`Wherein the uniform luminance layer has a higher light transmittance as a distance from a point
`
`intersecting with an optical axis of each of the plurality oflight-emitting elements increases (Figures 6-7;
`
`Paragraphs 0107-0109).
`
`Sumitani fails to disclose that the first diffusion layer is disposed between the light source module
`
`and the uniform luminancelayer; and a seconddiffusion layer is disposed on an opposite side of the
`
`uniform luminance layer from the first diffusion layer side, wherein a haze value of the first diffusion layer
`
`is smaller than a haze value of the second diffusion layer.
`
`However, Chen’949 discloses a similar device wherethe first diffusion layer is disposed between
`
`the light source module and the uniform luminance layer; and a second diffusion layer is disposed on an
`
`opposite side of the uniform luminance layer from the first diffusion layer side, wherein a haze value of the
`
`first diffusion layer is smaller than a haze value of the seconddiffusion layer (Chen’949, first diffusion
`
`layer 560, uniform luminancelayer 170, second diffusion layer 580; Paragraphs 0049-0050).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effectivefiling of the
`
`invention to modify the device as disclosed by Sumitani to have different haze valuesof the diffusion
`
`layers as disclosed by Chen’949. One would have been motivated to do so for the purpose of reducing
`
`light leakage and the decreasing the generation of moire pattern (Chen’949’949, Paragraph 0050).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/780,002
`Art Unit: 2871
`
`Page 8
`
`Conclusion
`
`Applicant's amendmentnecessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office
`
`action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of
`
`the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
`
`A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from
`
`the mailing date of this action.
`
`In the eventa first replyis filed within TWO MONTHS ofthe mailing date
`
`of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH
`
`shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action
`
`is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of
`
`the advisory action.
`
`In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX
`
`MONTHS from the date ofthis final action.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should
`
`be directed to MARIAM QURESHI whosetelephone number is (571)272-4434. The examiner can
`
`normally be reached on 9AM-5PM EST M-F.
`
`Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a
`
`USPTO supplied web-basedcollaboration 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,
`
`Michael Caley can be reached on 571-272-2286. The fax phone number for the organization wherethis
`
`application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
`
`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 https://ppair-
`
`my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR 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.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/780,002
`Art Unit: 2871
`
`Page 9
`
`/MARIAM QURESHI/
`Examiner, Art Unit 2871
`
`