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
`
`16/139,270
`
`09/24/2018
`
`Atsushi Fukui
`
`PIPMB-59817
`
`8001
`
`reams
`
`ORI
`PEA
`PEARNE & GORDON LLP
`1801 EAST 9TH STREET
`SUITE 1200
`CLEVELAND,OH 44114-3108
`
`ZIMMERMAN, GLENN D
`
`2875
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`10/19/2020
`
`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):
`
`patdocket@ pearne.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`1-18 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) ___ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`CC) Claim(s)
`is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 1-18 is/are rejected.
`S)
`) O Claim(s)___is/are objected to.
`C) Claim(s
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`)
`S)
`* 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://www.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)0) The drawing(s) filedon__ is/are: a)) accepted or b)() 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)0) Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)or (f).
`Certified copies:
`c)X None ofthe:
`b)L) Some**
`a)L) All
`1... Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.1.) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.1.) 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)
`
`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 20201009
`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`16/139,270
`Fukui etal.
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF) StatusExaminer
`GLENN ZIMMERMAN
`2875
`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 10/05/2020.
`LC} A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`
`2a)(J This action is FINAL. 2b))This action is non-final.
`3) 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\(Z 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: 16/139,270
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA 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 10/05/2020 has been entered and
`
`acknowledged by the Examiner.
`
`In the instant applications, claims 1-18 have been considered and
`
`examined. No claims have been canceled.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all
`
`obviousnessrejections 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 effectivefiling 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 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
`
`over Stiqwall (US Pub.2017/0123218) in view of and Ookawaet al. (US Pub.
`
`2004/0075897).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/139,270
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`Page 3
`
`Stigwall discloses a laser projection device (fig. 10 and 5) comprising: a laser
`
`light source (replace 2 with 10”light emitting unit; [0131]; [0098] Fig. 5b is a triangulation
`
`light emitting unit so can be used in fig. 10); a diffusion plate (84 micro-lens array) that
`
`includes an incidence surface and a emission surface(fig. 5 surface on right and left
`
`respectively) and, on which emitted light from the laser light source (11”) is incident (fig.
`
`5), a plurality of second linear grooves (grooves of 34) formed in a second direction (in
`
`and out of the page) on the emission surface (emission surface of 34) of the diffusion
`
`plate (34), and a housing (The housing is shownin fig. 10) that has an opening
`
`(opening that 2 fits into.) through whichlight diffused by the plurality of second linear
`
`grooves (34) is emitted in an emitting direction (Fig. 5) of the laser light source (11’)
`
`exceptfor (b) a/the convex emission surface;
`
`(a) a plurality offirst linear grooves
`
`formedin a first direction on the incidence surface and a plurality of second linear
`
`grooves formed in a second direction on the emission surface of the collimating lens,
`
`wherein the first direction and the second direction are perpendicular to each other.
`
`(a) Ookawa teachesa plurality offirst linear grooves formedin a first direction
`
`(Fig. 2 and 11; 21 both-sided prism 4 prism lens portion; [0045] may be wavy) on the
`
`incidence surface (bottom surface 1’) and a plurality of second linear grooves (3 prisms
`
`of lens portion; [0045] may be wavy) formed in a second direction on the emission
`
`surface (top surface of 1) of the diffusion plate (Fig. 2; Fig. 11; 21), wherein the first
`
`direction and the seconddirection are perpendicular to each other ([0067] control in
`
`both directions means X and Y directions i.e. horizontal plane and vertical plane. [0046]
`
`substantially perpendicular).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/139,270
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`Page 4
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art, before
`
`the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use lens sheet (diffuser) as taught by
`
`Ookawafor diffusion plate as disclosed by Stigwaill to utilize simple substitution of one
`
`knowndiffusing sheet/plate for another to obtain predictable results and/or enhancing
`
`luminance ([0001]) and/or a lens sheet having no optical defect such as spot pattern,
`
`glare or the like ([0001]) and/or enhancing the balance of the luminance ([0067]).
`
`(b) Stigwall discloses a planar emission surface with grooves(Fig. 5b left surface
`
`of 34) and Ookawadiscloses a planar emission surface with grooves(Fig. 2 top
`
`surface).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art, before the
`
`effectivefiling date of the claimed invention, to contemplate the emission surface of
`
`Stigwall as modified by Ookawawith the limitation “a/the convex emission surface”
`
`through the rationale of approaching ranges, since it has been held that a case of
`
`obviousnessexists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior
`
`art but are merely close (See MPEP 2144.05 I) and a prima facie case of obviousness
`
`exists where the claimed ranges and prior art ranges do not overlap but are close
`
`enough that one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same
`
`properties (See MPEP 2144.05 |). Using the equation p=1/K where p equals the radius
`
`of curvature and k is the curvature.
`
`Imagine the convex emission surface to be an arc
`
`region of a cylinder circle or a portion of a sphere. For a flat plane emission surface p =
`
`ce andk =0. k for acircle is 1/a of radius a. A convex curvature emission surface will
`
`have k >0 andp < ©. Letting the radius of curvature of each point of a concave
`
`emission surface be ( - 10 meters) whichis still a very large number. So the claimed
`
`ranges or amounts for the curved emission surface do not overlap with the prior art but
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/139,270
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`Page 5
`
`are merely close and thusa prima facie case of obviousness exists because they are
`
`close enough that one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same
`
`properties.
`
`Claim 2-16 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
`
`over Stiqwall in view of Hiroyuki (JP2000-206411A) and Ookawaet al. (US Pub.
`
`2004/0075897)..
`
`Regarding claim 2, Stigwall discloses a laser projection device (Fig. 10)
`
`comprising: a laser light source (Fig. 56; [0131]; [0098] Fig. 5b is a triangulation light
`
`emitting unit so can be usedin fig. 10); a collimating lens (36 collimation lens)
`
`comprising: a first surface on which light emitted from the laser light source (11” laser
`
`source) is incident (see fig. 5b); a second surface opposite to the first surface (seefig.
`
`5b); a side surface (see fig. 5b) disposed between the first surface and the second
`
`surface (see fig. 5); a diffusion plate (84 micro-lens array) which includes an incidence
`
`surface and a emission surface (see fig. 5), and on whichthe parallel light from the
`
`collimating lens (36) is incident (see fig. 5), a plurality of linear grooves (grooves in 34)
`
`are arrangedin of the incidence surface and the emission surface (emission surface
`
`here); wherein the diffusion plate (34) includes a plurality of second linear grooves
`
`(grooves of 34 on the emission surface) formed in a second direction on the emission
`
`surface (emission surface); and a housing (In fig. 10 let 2 be replaced by 10) that
`
`includes an opening (10 has an opening wherethe light is emitted and becomes 4 a
`
`beam.) through which light diffused by the plurality of linear grooves (see fig. 5b and 10;
`
`groovesof 34) in the diffusion plate (34) is emitted in an emitting direction (right to left)
`
`

`

`Page 6
`
`fe
`Pet
`YWoOOVE8SSO
`
`Application/Control Number: 16/139,270
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`of the laser light source (11”) (
`
`Secay ai
`
`) except for (c) a/the convex emission surface; (a) a first total reflection surface which is
`
`disposed at a location of the second surface opposite to the first surface and reflects
`
`incident light from the first surface; and a second total reflection surface which is
`
`disposed on the side surface, reflects light reflected by the first total reflection surface,
`
`and makesthe reflected light into parallel light, the collimating lens emitting the parallel
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/139,270
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`Page 7
`
`light made by the second total reflection surface from the second surface; (b) wherein
`
`the diffusion plate includes a plurality of first linear grooves formedin a first direction on
`
`the incidence surface and a plurality of second linear grooves formed in a second
`
`direction on (c) the convex (b) emission surface, wherein the first direction and the
`
`second direction are perpendicular to each other;.
`
`(a) Hiroyuki teaches a first total reflection surface (Fig. 3B; 1Aafirst mirror
`
`surface) which is disposed at a location of the second surface (bottom surface of 6
`
`collimating lens in Fig. 3(6)) opposite to the first surface (light incidence surface of 6
`
`collimating lens; [0065]) and reflects incidentlight from the first surface (light incident
`
`surface of 6); and a second total reflection surface (1Ab; [0068]) which is disposed on
`
`the side surface (see fig. 3B), reflects light reflected by the first total reflection surface
`
`(1Aa), and makesthe reflected light into parallel light (L’ annular beam which are shown
`
`to be collimating. L’ is collimating), the collimating lens (6 collimating lens) emitting the
`
`parallel light made by the second total reflection surface from the second surface.
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art, before
`
`the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use collimator as taught by Hiroyuki
`
`for the collimator as disclosed by Stigwall to utilize simple substitution of one known
`
`collimator for another to obtain predictable results (Fig. 3B; [0065] and [0068)).
`
`(b) Ookawateachesthe diffusion plate (Fig. 2 and 11;) includes a plurality of first
`
`linear grooves (4 prisms;) formed in a first direction (right to left) on the incidence
`
`surface (bottom surface of 1’) and a plurality of second linear grooves (3 prisms;)
`
`formed in a second direction (forward to back) on the emission surface (top surface of
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/139,270
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`Page 8
`
`1), wherein the first direction and the second direction are perpendicular ([0046]) to
`
`each other (see Fig. 23).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art, before
`
`the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the prism sheet as taught by
`
`Ookawafor the diffusion plate as disclosed by Stigwall to utilize simple substitution of
`
`one diffusion plate with grooves for another to obtain predictable results (Fig. 11; [0020])
`
`and/or for enhancing luminance ([0001]).
`
`(c) Stigwall discloses a planar emission surface with grooves (Fig. 5b left surface
`
`of 34) and Ookawadiscloses a planar emission surface with grooves(Fig. 2 top
`
`surface).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art, before the
`
`effectivefiling date of the claimed invention, to contemplate the emission surface of
`
`Stigwall as modified by Hiroyuki and Ookawawith the limitation “a/the convex emission
`
`surface” through the rationale of approaching ranges, since it has been held that a case
`
`of obviousnessexists where the claimed ranges or amounts do notoverlap with the
`
`prior art but are merely close (See MPEP 2144.05 I) and a primafacie case of
`
`obviousness exists where the claimed ranges and prior art ranges do not overlap but
`
`are close enough that one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same
`
`properties (See MPEP 2144.05 Il). Using the equation p=1/K where p equals the radius
`
`of curvature and k is the curvature.
`
`Imagine the convex emission surface to be an arc
`
`region of a cylindercircle or a portion of a sphere. For a flat plane emission surface p =
`
`ce andk =0. k for a circle is 1/a of radius a. A convex curvature emission surfacewill
`
`have K >0 and p < ~. Letting the radius of curvature of each point of a concave
`
`emission surface be ( - 10 meters) whichis still a very large number. So the claimed
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/139,270
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`Page 9
`
`ranges or amounts for the curved emission surface do not overlap with the prior art but
`
`are merely close and thusa prima facie case of obviousness exists because they are
`
`close enough that one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same
`
`properties.
`
`Regarding claim 3, Stigwall discloses the invention as disclosed above exceptfor
`
`the laser light source is configured by arranging a plurality of semiconductor lasers
`
`close to each other.
`
`Stigwall teachesthe laser light source (11”) is from a single semiconductor laser
`
`(11”). Additionally, the applicant’s disclosure does not establish any new and
`
`unexpected result for the limitation “the laser light source is configured by arranging a
`
`plurality of semiconductor lasers close to each other’.
`
`It would have been obvious to
`
`one of ordinary skill, in the art, before the effectivefiling date of the claimed invention, to
`
`contemplate the laser light source of Stigwall as modified by Hiroyuki with the limitation
`
`“the laser light source is configured by arranging a plurality of semiconductor lasers
`
`close to each other’ through Duplication of Parts, since it has been held that where the
`
`general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, mere duplication of parts has
`
`no patentable significance and involvesonly routine skill in the art. (See MPEP 2144.04
`
`VIB).
`
`As to claim 4, Stigwall discloses wherein sections of some of the plurality of
`
`grooves (34) in the diffusion plate is configured of four curved groove slopes including a
`
`first groove slope (see drawing above), a second groove slope (see drawing above), a
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/139,270
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`Page 10
`
`third groove slope (see drawing above), and a fourth groove slope (see drawing above),
`
`and the adjacent groove slopes are connectedto each other at a connection point (see
`
`drawing above) such thatinclination angles are approximately equal to each other (This
`
`can all be seen in fig. 5B. see drawing above.) except for each of the sections.
`
`Stigwall discloses manyofthe limitations above in claim 4 except each of the
`
`sections. It is well-known in the art to sections of the plurality of grooves in the diffusion
`
`plate is configured of four curved groove slopes includingafirst groove slope, a second
`
`groove slope, a third groove slope, and a fourth groove slope, and the adjacent groove
`
`slopes are connected to each other at a connection point such that inclination angles
`
`are approximately equal to each other
`
`As evidenced by Stigwall of record which teaches wherein sections of some of
`
`the plurality of grooves in the diffusion plate is configured of four curved groove slopes
`
`including a first groove slope, a second grooveslope, a third groove slope, and a fourth
`
`groove slope, and the adjacent groove slopes are connected to each other at a
`
`connection point such that inclination angles are approximately equal to each other
`
`(See Fig. above).
`
`It would have been obvious to one ofordinary skill, in the art, before the effective
`
`filing date of the claimed invention, to contemplate the sections of the plurality of
`
`grooves of Stigwall as modified by Ookawawith the limitation “wherein each of sections
`
`of the plurality of groovesin the diffusion plate is configured of four curved groove
`
`slopesincludingafirst groove slope, a second groove slope, a third groove slope, and a
`
`fourth groove slope, and the adjacent groove slopes are connected to each other ata
`
`connection point such that inclination angles are approximately equal to each other’,
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/139,270
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`Page 11
`
`since it has been held that the selection of a known material based on its suitability for
`
`its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination. See MPEP
`
`2144.07. The plurality of grooves of Ookawa may be wavy ([0045]) and the grooves of
`
`Stigwall already meetthe limitation above (see rejection above).
`
`It would be obvious to
`
`use the Stigwall type wavy groovesforall of the grooves of Ookawa such that the
`
`limitation “wherein each of the sections” is met.
`
`As to claim 5, Stigwall discloses wherein a groove, among the plurality of
`
`grooves(see fig. 34) in the diffusion plate (34), has a recessed shape configured of the
`
`second groove slope and the third groove slope connected to the second groove slope
`
`at a third connection point (see drawing above), a first projecting shape formed by the
`
`first groove slope connectedto the second groove slope at a second connection point
`
`(see drawing above), a second projecting shape formed bythe fourth groove slope
`
`connected to the third groove slope at a fourth connection point (see drawing above),
`
`and a height of at least one ofthe first projecting shape or the second projecting shape
`
`is larger than or equal (equal since this is a sine-wave; [0026]) to a height of the
`
`recessed shape formed by the second groove slope and the third groove slope (The
`
`groove pattern is a sine-wavesoit will meetall the limitations of claim 5 with the height
`
`limitation; See drawing above; [0038]; Sine-wave so heights will be the same.).
`
`Regarding claim 6, Stigwall discloses wherein a groove, among the plurality of
`
`groovesin the diffusion plate, has a recessed shape configured of the second groove
`
`slope and the third groove slope connected to the second groove slope at a third
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/139,270
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`Page 12
`
`connection point, a first projecting shape formedbythe first groove slope connected to
`
`the second groove slope at a second connection point, and a second projecting shape
`
`formed by the fourth groove slope connectedto the third groove slope at a fourth
`
`connection point (see drawing above), exceptfor a height of the first groove slope from
`
`the second groove slope connected at the second connection point is larger than a
`
`height of the fourth groove slope from the third groove slope connectedat the fourth
`
`connection point, and a height of a groove slope close to a middle of the diffusion plate
`
`is larger than a height of a groove slope close to a periphery of the diffusion plate.
`
`Stigwall teachesthe plurality of groovesin the diffusion plate, a recessed shape,
`
`a first projecting shape, a second projecting shape (see above) ([0039] varying
`
`amplitude; claim 7 and 8). Additionally, the applicant’s disclosure does not establish
`
`any new and unexpected result for the limitation “a height of the first groove slope from
`
`the second groove slope connected at the second connection point is larger than a
`
`height of the fourth groove slope from the third groove slope connectedat the fourth
`
`connection point, and a height of a groove slope close to a middle of the diffusion plate
`
`is larger than a height of a groove slope close to a periphery of the diffusion plate’.
`
`It
`
`would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art, before the effectivefiling
`
`date of the claimed invention, to contemplate the plurality of groovesin the diffusion
`
`plate of Stigwall as modified by Hiroyuki with the limitation “a height of the first groove
`
`slope from the second groove slope connected at the second connection pointis larger
`
`than a height of the fourth groove slope from the third groove slope connected at the
`
`fourth connection point, and a height of a groove slope close to a middle of the diffusion
`
`plate is larger than a height of a groove slope close to a periphery of the diffusion plate”
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/139,270
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`Page 13
`
`through design choice, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a
`
`claim are disclosed in the prior art, choosing aesthetic design choices involves only
`
`routine skill in the art. (See MPEP 2144.04 1).
`
`As to claim 7, Stigwall discloses wherein a groove, among the plurality of
`
`grooves (see grooves in 34) in the diffusion plate (34), has a recessed shape
`
`configured of the second groove slope andthe third groove slope connected to the
`
`second groove slopeat a third connection point (see drawings above), a first projecting
`
`shape formedbythe first groove slope connected to the second groove slope at a
`
`second connection point (see drawings above), and a second projecting shape formed
`
`by the fourth groove slope connectedto the third groove slope at a fourth connection
`
`point (see drawings above), an inclination angle at the second connection point
`
`between the second groove slope and the first groove slope is equal (The limitation is
`
`met as equal.) to or smaller than an inclination angle at the fourth connection point
`
`between the third groove slope and the fourth groove slope (see drawing above), and
`
`an inclination angle close to a middle of the diffusion plate is equal to (The limitation is
`
`met as equal. See fig. 5B) or smaller than an inclination angle close to a periphery of
`
`the diffusion plate (see drawing above).
`
`Asto claim 8, Stigwall discloses wherein a shape of each of the groove slopesis
`
`aspheric in a section of each of the plurality of groovesin the diffusion plate ([0025] and
`
`[0026] sine-wave; a-cylindrical).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/139,270
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`Page 14
`
`Regarding claim 9, Stigwall discloses the invention as disclosed above exceptfor
`
`the plurality of grooves in the diffusion plate are arranged such that a groovepitch is 0.1
`
`mm or more without a clearance.
`
`Ookawateachesthe plurality of groovesin the diffusion plate are arranged such
`
`that a groove pitch is 0.1 mm or more ([0045] 150 microns or 100 microns) without a
`
`clearance (Fig. 2).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art, before
`
`the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use Pitch as taught by Ookawa for
`
`the Pitch as disclosed by Stigwall, Hiroyuki and Ookawato utilize for the same reasons
`
`as found in claim 2.
`
`Regarding claim 10, Stigwall discloses the invention as disclosed above except
`
`for wherein a thicknessof the diffusion plate is 0.2 mm or more.
`
`Ookawateaches wherein a thicknessof the diffusion plate is 0.2 mm or more
`
`([0051] transparent substrate to is 500um so add in thickness 1 and 1’ and 3 and 4 and
`
`one is still in the range of thickness).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art, before
`
`the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use diffusion plate thickness as
`
`taught by Ookawafor the diffusion plate thickness as disclosed by Stigwall to utilize
`
`simple substitution of one diffusion plate thickness for another to obtain predictable
`
`results.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/139,270
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`Page 15
`
`As to claim 11, Stigwall wherein each of shapesof the plurality of grooves in the
`
`diffusion plate is an extrusion shape which has a uniform section (see fig. 5a; The
`
`shapeis certainly capable of be extruded. Each groove has a uniform section)
`
`(Limitation “extrusion” has been considered but not given any patentable weight. "Even
`
`though product-by-processclaims are limited by and defined by the process,
`
`determination of patentability is based on the productitself. The patentability of a
`
`product does not depend on its method of production.
`
`If the product in the product-by-
`
`processclaim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is
`
`unpatentable even though the prior product was made bya different process." /n re
`
`Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985).).
`
`Regarding claim 12, Stigwall discloses the invention as disclosed above except
`
`for wherein the plurality of grooves are disposed in each of the incidence surface and
`
`(b) the convex emission surface of the diffusion plate, and a groove direction of the
`
`plurality of grooves in the incidence surface and a groovedirection of the plurality of
`
`groovesin (b) the convex emission surface are orthogonal to each other.
`
`(a) Ookawa teaches wherein the plurality of grooves (Fig. 2 and 11; see grooves
`
`top and bottom;) are disposed in each of the incidence surface and the emission
`
`surface of the diffusion plate (Fig. 2 and 11; both-sided prism sheet; [0046]), and a
`
`groove direction of the plurality of groovesin the incidence surface and a groove
`
`direction of the plurality of grooves in the emission surface are orthogonal to ([0046];
`
`[0069]) each other (21).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/139,270
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`Page 16
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art, before
`
`the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the prism sheet as taught by
`
`Ookawafor the diffusion plate as disclosed by Stigwall to utilize simple substitution of
`
`one diffusion plate with grooves for another to obtain predictable results (Fig. 11; [0020])
`
`and/or for enhancing luminance ([0001]).
`
`(6) Stigwall discloses a planar emission surface with grooves(Fig. 5b left surface
`
`of 34) and Ookawadiscloses a planar emission surface with grooves(Fig. 2 top
`
`surface).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art, before the
`
`effectivefiling date of the claimed invention, to contemplate the emission surface of
`
`Stigwall as modified by Hiroyuki and Ookawawith the limitation “the convex emission
`
`surface” through the rationale of approaching ranges, since it has been held that a case
`
`of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the
`
`prior art but are merely close (See MPEP 2144.05 I) and a prima facie case of
`
`obviousness exists where the claimed ranges and prior art ranges do not overlap but
`
`are close enough that one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same
`
`properties (See MPEP 2144.05 Il). Using the equation p=1/K where p equals the radius
`
`of curvature and k is the curvature.
`
`Imagine the convex emission surface to be an arc
`
`region of a cylindercircle or a portion of a sphere. For a flat plane emission surface p =
`
`ce andk =0. k for a circle is 1/a of radius a. A convex curvature emission surfacewill
`
`have K >0 and p < ~. Letting the radius of curvature of each point of a concave
`
`emission surface be ( - 10 meters) whichis still a very large number. So the claimed
`
`ranges or amounts for the curved emission surface do not overlap with the prior art but
`
`are merely close and thusa prima facie case of obviousness exists because they are
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/139,270
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`Page 17
`
`close enough that one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same
`
`properties.
`
`Regarding claim 13, Stigwall discloses the invention as disclosed above except
`
`for (a) the incident surfaceis larger than or equal to (b) the convex emission surface in a
`
`ratio of a groove depth to a groove pitch for the grooves in the diffusion plate.
`
`(a) Ookawateachesthe incident surface is larger than or equal (equal) to the
`
`emission surface in a ratio of a groove depth to a groovepitch for the grooves in the
`
`diffusion plate (see fig. 2 and 11; 21;
`
`the ratios are equal. [0045] pitch; [0045]).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art, before
`
`the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use diffusion plate as taught by
`
`Ookawafor the diffusion plate as disclosed by Stigwall for the same reasonsthat are
`
`found in claim 12.
`
`(6) Stigwall discloses a planar emission surface with grooves(Fig. 5b left surface
`
`of 34) and Ookawadiscloses a planar emission surface with grooves (Fig. 2 top
`
`surface).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art, before the
`
`effectivefiling date of the claimed invention, to contemplate the emission surface of
`
`Stigwall as modified by Hiroyuki and Ookawawith the limitation “the convex emission
`
`surface” through the rationale of approaching ranges, since it has been held that a case
`
`of obviousnessexists where the claimed ranges or amounts do notoverlap with the
`
`prior art but are merely close (See MPEP 2144.05 I) and a primafacie case of
`
`obviousness exists where the claimed ranges and prior art ranges do not overlap but
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/139,270
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`Page 18
`
`are close enough that one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same
`
`properties (See MPEP 2144.05 |). Using the equation p=1/k where p equals the radius
`
`of curvature and k is the curvature.
`
`Imagine the convex emission surface to be an arc
`
`region of a cylindercircle or a portion of a sphere. For a flat plane emission surface p =
`
`ce andk =0. k fora circle is 1/a of radius a. A convex curvature emission surfacewill
`
`have K >0 and p < ~. Letting the radius of curvature of each point of a concave
`
`emis