90013374 (P.T.A.B. Jun. 22, 2016)

Ex Parte 8172401 et al

Patent Trial and Appeal BoardJun 22, 2016

90013374 (P.T.A.B. Jun. 22, 2016)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www.uspto.gov APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 90/013,374 10/15/2014 8172401 BST03US14 5770 68368 7590 06/22/2016 Barcelo, Harrison & Walker, LLP 2901 W. Coast Hwy Suite 200 Newport Beach, CA 92663 EXAMINER HUGHES, DEANDRA M ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 3992 MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE 06/22/2016 PAPER 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. PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) MOD PTOL-90A (Rev.06/08) APPLICATION NO./ CONTROL NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR / PATENT IN REEXAMINATION ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. EXAMINER ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER DELIVERY MODE 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. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Address : COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www.uspto.gov UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE _____________________________________________________________________________________ UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ____________ BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD ____________ Ex parte DOLBY LABORATORIES LICENSING CORPORATION Appellant ____________ Appeal 2016-003186 Reexamination Control 90/013,374 Patent 8,172,401 B2 Technology Center 3900 ____________ Before ERIC B. CHEN, JEREMY J. CURCURI, and IRVIN E. BRANCH, Administrative Patent Judges. CHEN, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appeal 2016-003186 Reexamination Control 90/013,374 Patent 8,172,401 B2 2 This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. §§ 134(b) and 306 from the final rejection of claims 1–44, all the claims pending in the application. We have jurisdiction under §§ 134(b) and 306. An oral hearing scheduled for May 25, 2016 was waived. We reverse. STATEMENT OF THE CASE Reexamination Proceedings A request for ex parte reexamination of U.S. Patent No. 8,172,401 B2 (the ’401 patent) was filed on October 15, 2014, and assigned Reexamination Control No. 90/013,374. The ’401 patent, entitled “Edge Lit Locally Dimmed Display,” issued May 8, 2012 to Lorne A. Whitehead, Gregory John Ward, Wolfgang Stuerzlinger, and Helge Seetzen, based on Application No. 13/097,823, filed April 29, 2011. The ’401 patent is said to be assigned to Dolby Laboratories Licensing Corporation, said to be the assignee and real party in interest. (App. Br. 2.) The Claims Independent claim 1 is exemplary, with disputed limitations in italics: 1. An edge lit locally dimmed display, comprising: a spatial light modulator; a light source configured to cause an illumination of the spatial light modulator; Appeal 2016-003186 Reexamination Control 90/013,374 Patent 8,172,401 B2 3 wherein: the light source is at an edge and behind a viewing side of the spatial light modulator; the illumination is based on image data defining a desired image, and the illumination comprises a series of lighting elements that vary smoothly from one element to another at the spatial light modulator. The Rejections Claims 1–44 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Nagai (US 2002/0135553 A1; Sept. 26, 2002). ANALYSIS We are persuaded by Appellant’s arguments (App. Br. 12; see also Reply Br. 9) that the Examiner has not demonstrated that Nagai would have rendered obvious independent claim 1, which includes the limitation “the illumination comprises a series of lighting elements that vary smoothly from one element to another at the spatial light modulator.” The Examiner acknowledged that the Figure 1 embodiment of Nagai does not disclose the limitation “the illumination comprises a series of lighting elements that vary smoothly from one element to another at the spatial light modulator” and therefore, relied upon modifying the output beams from the LED array of Nagai, in which beams can be partially overlapped to form an even luminance distribution. (Final Act. 8.) The Examiner found that “when lighting ‘varies smoothly from one lighting element to another,’ it is an ‘even distribution’ of light.” (Ans. 3.) The Appeal 2016-003186 Reexamination Control 90/013,374 Patent 8,172,401 B2 4 Examiner concluded that “it would have been obvious. . . to make the beams from the adjacent micro-lenses of the micro-lens array (#63) [of Figure 1] spread as radial beams, which are overlapped, for the advantage of making the light distribution even.” (Final Act. 8.) We do not agree. Independent claim 1 recites “the illumination comprises a series of lighting elements that vary smoothly from one element to another at the spatial light modulator” (emphasis added). One relevant plain meaning of “vary” is “make different in some attribute or characteristic.” MERRIMAN- WEBSTER’S COLLEGIATE DICTIONARY 1307 (10th ed. 1999). This definition of “vary” is consistent with the ’401 patent, which discloses that “[t]he pixels of the lower-resolution light modulator preferably emit light which is somewhat diffuse so that the light intensity varies reasonably smoothly as one traverses pixels of the lower-resolution light modulator” (col. 8, ll. 26– 29), as illustrated in Figure 7 (col. 8, ll. 29–31). Figure 7 of the ’401 patent, which illustrates “a smooth variation in light intensity with position” as a result of imaging light onto a higher-resolution light modulator from pixels of a lower resolution light modulator (col. 3, ll. 4–7 ), is reproduced below: Appeal 2016-003186 Reexamination Control 90/013,374 Patent 8,172,401 B2 5 Figure 7 of the ’401 patent illustrates that the light intensity differs (or varies) with pixel position. Accordingly, under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the ’401 patent, we interpret “vary” as differing in some attribute or characteristic. Nagai explains that “instead of making beams parallel by using the micro lens array 63, it is also acceptable to make beams from the adjacent lenses spread as radial beams, which are partly overlapped, in order to make the luminance distribution even.” (¶ 112.) Although the Examiner cited the embodiment of Nagai for “making the light distribution even” (Final Act. 8), the Examiner has provided insufficient evidence to support a finding that Nagai teaches the limitation “the illumination comprises a series of lighting elements that vary smoothly from one element to another at the spatial light modulator.” Thus, we are persuaded by Appellant’s arguments that “an even distribution is nearly Appeal 2016-003186 Reexamination Control 90/013,374 Patent 8,172,401 B2 6 opposite from one that varies” (App. Br. 12) and “there is nothing in Nagai that teaches or suggests the claimed series of lighting elements that ‘vary smoothly from one element to another at the spatial light modulator,’ and the same cannot be met by an ‘even distribution’ of light as described in Nagai” (Reply Br. 9). Accordingly, we do not sustain the rejection of independent claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). Claims 2–27 depend from independent claim 1. We do not sustain the rejection of claims 2–27 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) for the same reasons discussed with respect to independent claim 1. Independent claim 28 recites limitations similar to those discussed with respect to independent claim 1. We do not sustain the rejection of claim 28, as well as dependent claims 29–44, for the same reasons discussed with respect to claim 1. DECISION The Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1–44 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is reversed. REVERSED Appeal 2016-003186 Reexamination Control 90/013,374 Patent 8,172,401 B2 7 PATENT OWNER: BARCELO, HARRISON & WALKER, LLP 2901 W. COAST HWY SUITE 200 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 THIRD PARTY REQUESTER: LOWE HAUPTMAN & HAM, LLP 2318 MILL ROAD SUITE 1400 ALEXANDRIA, VA 22314