Ex Parte Kitamura et alDownload PDFPatent Trial and Appeal BoardAug 18, 201611480470 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 18, 2016) Copy Citation UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE 111480,470 0710512006 23373 7590 08/22/2016 SUGHRUE MION, PLLC 2100 PENNSYLVANIA A VENUE, N.W. SUITE 800 WASHINGTON, DC 20037 FIRST NAMED INVENTOR Mitsuru Kitamura 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 ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. Q95811 2865 EXAMINER CHANG, AUDREY Y ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2872 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 08/22/2016 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): PPROCESSING@SUGHRUE.COM sughrue@sughrue.com USPTO@sughrue.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte MITSURU KITAMURA, KEN JI UEDA, and KOJI ET01 Appeal2015-002759 Application 11/480,4 70 Technology Center 2800 Before BRADLEY R. GARRIS, JAMES C. HOUSEL, and LILAN REN, Administrative Patent Judges. GARRIS, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the Examiner's decision rejecting claims 1--4, 10, 12-17, and 19-21. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6. We AFFIRM. 1 DAI NIPPON PRINTING CO., LTD. is identified as the real party in interest. App. Br. 2. Appeal2015-002759 Application 11/480,4 70 Appellants claim a holographic viewing device comprising a transparent substrate 41 and a hologram-formation layer 42 on a first side of the transparent substrate and constructed of a transmission Fourier transform hologram area (area a of 112) functioning as a Fourier transform lens and a non-hologram area (area b of 112) not functioning as the Fourier transform lens (independent claim 1, Figs. 1-2; see also independent claims 12 and 15). A copy of representative claim 1, taken from the Claims Appendix of the Appeal Brief filed September 17, 2014, appears below. 1. A holographic viewing device comprising: a transparent substrate; a hologram-formation layer formed on a first side of the transparent substrate and constructed of a transmission Fourier transform hologram area functioning as a Fourier transform lens and a non-hologram area not functioning as the Fourier transform lens; and a printing layer formed on a second side of the transparent substrate opposite to the first side, the holographic viewing device being structured such that a holographic image or message is visible at each of a plurality of point light sources when the plurality of light sources are viewed through the holographic viewing device. The Examiner rejects claim 21under35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by van der Gracht et al. (US 5,546,198, issued Aug. 13, 1996) ("van der Gracht"). We summarily sustain this rejection because Appellants expressly state that they do not contest it (App. Br. (filed September 17, 2014) 4, 10). Under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a), the Examiner rejects as unpatentable: claims 1--4, 10, 15, and 20 over van der Gracht in view of Takeuchi et al. (US 4,856,857, issued Aug. 15, 1989) ("Takeuchi") and Chatwin et al. (US 5,492,370, issued Feb. 20, 1996) ("Chatwin"); 2 Appeal2015-002759 Application 11/480,4 70 claims 12-14 over Takeuchi in view of van der Gracht and Chatwin; and claims 16, 17, and 19 over Takeuchi, van der Gracht, Chatwin, and Mastie (US 6,480,866 B2, issued Nov. 12, 2002). Appellants do not present separate arguments specifically directed to the dependent claims under rejection (App. Br. 7-10). Accordingly, these dependent claims will stand or fall with their parent independent claims of which claim 1 is representative. We sustain the§ 103 rejections for the reasons well stated by the Examiner in the Final Action and the Answer with the following comments added for emphasis. In rejecting claim 1, the Examiner finds that Chatwin discloses a "hologram forming layer ... (18A, Figure 3, or 22, Figure 4) [having] both hologram forming area (embossing pattern 18 or holographic pattern 23) and non-hologram area (areas other than the embossing pattern 18 or holographic pattern 23)" (Final Action 6). Based on this finding, the Examiner concludes that it would have been obvious to provide the hologram forming layer of van der Gracht with both hologram and non- hologram areas in view of Chatwin (id.). Appellants argue "[t]here is no suggestion anywhere in Chatwin that a single hologram-formation layer includes both the Fourier transform and non-Fourier transform areas [i.e., the hologram and non-hologram areas of claim 1]" (App. Br. 8). According to Appellants, the layers shown in Figures 3 and 4 of Chatwin do not include both a hologram area and a non- hologram area as required by independent claims 1, 12, and 15 (id. at 8-10). Appellants' argument is unpersuasive because it does not address with any reasonable specificity the Examiner's above quoted finding regarding 3 Appeal2015-002759 Application 11/480,4 70 Chatwin. In particular, Appellants do not address, and therefore do not show error in, the finding that Chatwin's layer 18A of Figure 3 includes both an embossed hologram area 18 and a non-hologram area (i.e., the non- embossed areas) or the finding that Chatwin's layer 22 similarly includes both a hologram area/pattern 23 and a non-hologram area (i.e., the non- pattemed areas). In response to Appellants' argument, the Examiner reiterates these findings (Ans. 4). However, notwithstanding the submission of a Reply Brief, Appellants again do not address the Examiner's specific findings that each of Chatwin's Figures 3 and 4 shows hologram and non-hologram areas as claimed (see Reply Br 4--5). The decision of the Examiner is affirmed. No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). AFFIRMED 4 Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation