DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA 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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on January 16, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
3. In an amendment dated, January 16, 2026, claims 1-16 are presented for examination and are pending.
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 12 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
In regards to remarks regarding prior art Benishti et al:-
On the remarks filed on January 16, 2026, applicant argues prior art of record fails to disclose claimed limitation of independent claims. Applicant argues that prior art of record fails to disclose claim limitation wherein said device identify sensitive information. Newly discovered prior art of record discloses identifying sensitive information as shown below. Furthermore as presented in the previous response and reaerated here again; It is well known and obvious to an ordinary skill person in the art that sensitive information is very different from one user to another, thus any information that the user feels that should not be shared can be designated as sensitive information to that user. Applicant claim limitation recites identify sensitive information in the CG content; however fails to claim what information is designated to be sensitive or what type of criterial defines said information to be sensitive. Thus given prior art capability of masking displayed content by manipulating display surface to be non-transparent such that content displayed on the non-transparent region of display surface would be non-viewable to others making it private that can be viewed by the user of said device. Therefore as shown in prior art of record image that is displayed on occluding mask region can be designated as “sensitive information”. Thus given the term “sensitive information” broadest reasonable interpretation and the ability of prior art of record to display particular content on occluding mask region where it can be un-viewable to others; and the fact that content viewed by the user being medical information, the ability to designate particular content sensitive would be obvious design choice to an ordinary skill person in the art.
Furthermore, given prior art of record wherein particular region would be rendered unviewable by others such that content displayed on said region would be obscured from other viewers; displaying a particular content that is deemed to be sensitive information would be considered as intended use since prior art of record clearly disclose a capability of masking given content on a display screen wherein others cannot view displayed content due to masking of said region.
Prior art of record Benishti et al clearly discloses an area of HMD wherein portion of transparent region would be made to be opacity or non-transparent wherein an occluding mask 80A and 80B is formed preventing transparency of said region. Furthermore as shown in Fig 2C said opaque or non-transparent region where the occluding mask 80A and 80B is formed is used to display an image/content that is viewable by the user. Therefore when occluding mask 80A and 80B is formed that prevent the user from viewing outside content (i.e. portion 56 of the patient) it is obvious that occluding mask 80A and 80B area that is non-transparent would not allow displayed content to be viewed in any direction other than content display direction (i.e. users direction) since said region is non-transparent/opaque occluding mask. Furthermore as shown in figure 2C content is displayed on occluding mask area on the user side; thus when content that is displayed on top of non-transparent/opaque occluding mask said image would not be viewable to anyone that is not viewing said content on the display direction side (i.e. user side). In other words image that is displayed on occluding mask 80A and 80B that is non-transparent/opaque region would not be viewable to others around the user except to the user of said device where the image/content is rendered that is facing said user.
Furthermore, as to blocking particular portion/ information from surrounding people; Benishti et al discloses said image is displayed on the area of occlusion mask pattern, thus having said image/content rendered on the area of occlusion mask pattern would make it un-viewable to surrounding people since said mask in non-transparent. Therefore, said claim limitation claims an intended use thus a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. Prior art of record clearly discloses forming occlusion mask pattern that is non-transparent/opaque surrounding displayed/rendered image/content (Fig 2C) which would make it un-viewable from the side that is opposite from display direction.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 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.
6. Claim 1-5, and 9-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benishti et al (PG Pub NO 2017/0178375) in view of Osborne et al (PG Pub NO 2016/0170206) and in further view of Yim et al (PG Pub NO 2013/0147851).
As in claim 1, Benishti et al discloses an optical see-through head mount display (HMD) device for displaying a computer-generated (CG) content to a user to provide a type of augmented reality (AR) with private access of information, wherein the HMD comprises of:
a computer-generated (CG) content engine; (Fig 2D item 64A & 64B and Par 0109) discloses computer-generated content engine that generate an image(i.e. micro-projector)
a computing system coupled to the computer-generated (CG) content engine to generate spatially-registered CG content [(Fig 2D and Par 0109) discloses computing system (i.e. processor 26) activates computer-generated content engine to generate spatially-registered CG content (i.e. prerecorded ultrasound image 90A & 90B)],
and to identify sensitive information in the CG content; (Fig 2C and 2D) discloses identifying particular content/information in a CG content that would be displayed on occlusion mask pattern that is non-viewable to others around the user except to the user of said device due to being occlusion and not transparent.
an optical see-through display system for each of an user's eyes [(Fig 3A &3B) discloses optical see through display for each eyes of the user] comprising:
an optical combiner [(Fig 2 item 52A & 52B and Par 0095 line 11-13) discloses optical combiner];
and an optical means that changes from transparent to opaque for creating an occlusion mask pattern (Fig 2B item 80A & 80B and Par 0107-0108) discloses optical means that changes from transparent (Fig 2A) to opaque (Fig 2B) for creating an occlusion mask pattern (80A & 80B)
to prevent the surrounding people from viewing the sensitive information based on the user preference while leaving the remaining CG content exposed; (Fig 2B) discloses transparent portion of HMD is masked (i.e. made non-transparent/ opaque) making content displayed on said region/mask non-viewable to others around the user except to the user of said device as shown in (Fig 2c; content (90 A&B) displayed on said mask (80A & 80B) which is viewable by the user) and (Par 111) discloses the location of the image displayed on the mask is controlled by the user (i.e. professional 22) of said device; as well as the location of masks (80) can also be controlled by the user via gaze directions of the user (i.e. user preference) while leaving the remaining see-through display exposed. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. Therefore given prior art of record mask (i.e. made non-transparent/ opaque) that is controlled by the user wherein location of masks (80) can also be controlled. It would have been obvious to an ordinary skill person in the art to have said mask cover a particular portion of said image (i.e. information) while leaving the remaining display screen exposed.
and an image source for each of the user's eyes to display the spatially-registered CG content through the optical combiner. (Fig 2D item 64a & 64b and Par 0109) discloses image source each of the user's eyes to display the spatially-registered CG content (i.e. prerecorded ultrasound image 90A & 90B) to each of the user’s eyes (i.e. right and left eyes) through the optical combiner.
But Benishti et al fails to explicitly discloses identify sensitive information in the CG content and masking part of CG information while leaving the remaining CG content exposed
However Osborne et al (Par 0028, 0029) discloses a head mounted display device displays information to a user. The information could take the form of text, images, web pages, or the like and adjust the opacity of at least a part of the head mounted display device, based on the at least one predetermined characteristic. [0029] Once the information is displayed on the HMD, an embodiment may detect a characteristic of the content being displayed at 302 (e.g., an image is being displayed, text is being displayed, the information being displayed is confidential in nature, etc.). An embodiment may then utilize the detected characteristic to determine if a change the opacity is appropriate at 303. For example, an embodiment may change the opacity of the display (e.g., tint, blacken, or change the color of the display) based on the content being displayed. And (Par 0017, 0033-0034) discloses changing the wearable display's opacity for privacy from surrounding people (i.e. bystanders) looking at the user of wearable display. Therefore it would have been obvious to an ordinary skill person in the art at the time of the filing to modify Benishti et al with the teaching of Osborne et al such that CG content can be identified as sensitive information and masked to provide the user privacy of there information.
But Benishti et al in view of Osborne et al fails to explicitly discloses masking part of CG information while leaving the remaining CG content exposed.
However Yim et al, (Fig 11 and Par 0047-0049) discloses transparent display displaying CG content wherein part of displayed content can be masked making it non-viewable to surrounding people while the remaining CG content not masked are viewable. [0049] A user who is in the side opposite to the side where the image is displayed cannot also view an image displayed at the outer side of the first substrate 1 in the opaque region. Therefore it would have been obvious to an ordinary skill person in the art at the time of the filing to modify Benishti et al with the teaching of Yim et al such that only partial content would be masked on a display screen when content is displayed on whole display unit in order to allow the user to be able to view his/her surrounding while using HMD.
As in claim 2, Benishti et al in view of Osborne et al and in further view of Yim et al discloses the optical see-through HMD device as in claim 1, wherein the computing system further comprises: a processor to control the optical means in creating the occlusion mask pattern on the optical means, in which dimension and position of the occlusion mask pattern corresponds to dimension and position of the spatially-registered CG content being displayed on the optical combiner. (Benishti et al; Par 0092 line 8-9) discloses said computing system of HMD comprising a processor; (Fig 2B & 2C and Par 0107-0109) discloses said processor controls optical means wherein occlusion mask pattern (80A & 80B) is created, in which dimension and position of the occlusion mask pattern (80A & 80B) corresponds to dimension and position of the spatially-registered CG content (90A & 90B) being displayed on the optical combiner (52A & 52B).
As in claim 3, Benishti et al in view of Osborne et al and in further view of Yim et al discloses the optical see-through HMD device as in claim 1, wherein the computing system further comprises: a processor to control the optical means in creating an occlusion mask pattern on the optical means [Benishti et al; (Par 0092 line 8-9) discloses said computing system of HMD comprising a processor, (Benishti et al; Fig 2B & 2C and Par 0107-0109) discloses said processor controls optical means wherein occlusion mask pattern (80A & 80B) is create], (Par 0113) discloses the optical means creates an image having color and display on the optical combiner in real-time; but fails to explicitly disclose color of the occlusion mask is dynamically selected by the computing system. However, having a system that is capable of projecting color image on optical combiner in real-time would make it obvious to an ordinary skill person in the art at the time of the filing to be able to produce/create occlusion mask having color. Furthermore it would have been an obvious design choice to have occlusion mask wherein the color is dynamically selected by the on-board computing system.
As in claim 4, Benishti et al in view of Osborne et al and in further view of Yim et al discloses the optical see-through HMD device as in claim 3, wherein the computing system further comprises: a processor to control color of the spatially-registered CG content based on the color of the occlusion mask. (Benishti et al; Par 0113 line 13 & 0184 line 9) discloses that said device is capable of producing color image; thus it would have been an obvious design choice to have a processor to control color of the spatially-registered CG content (90) based on the color of the occlusion mask (80).As in claim 5, Benishti et al in view of Osborne et al and in further view of Yim et al discloses the optical see-through HMD device as in claim 1, wherein the computing system further comprises: a processor to identify the type of CG content being displayed on the optical combiner such that an occlusion mask pattern is created on the optical means that blocks off the spatially-registered CG content completely or partially from view of surrounding people. (Benishti et al; Fig 2C & 2D and Par 0092 line 8-9 and Par 0109) discloses computing system comprising a processor activates computer-generated content engine to generate spatially-registered CG content (i.e. prerecorded ultrasound image 90A & 90B) to overlay onto occlusion mask pattern of each of the user’s eyes (i.e. right and left eyes); wherein as shown in Fig 2B said mask where image (90) is being displayed on is non-transparent which would make an image displayed on it non-viewable to others except to the user of said device due to the effect of masking positioned at the position of displayed image (i.e. back of the image displayed toward surrounding people. But fails to explicitly disclose said occlusion mask pattern would block CG content completely or partially from view of surrounding people. However, prior art Benishti et al discloses displaying CG content onto occlusion mask pattern that is not transparent and would obviously block displayed contentment from being viewed by surrounding people since said displayed contentment is overlaid onto occlusion mask.
And Yim et al, (Fig 11 and Par 0047-0049) discloses transparent display displaying CG content wherein part of displayed content can be masked making it non-viewable to surrounding people while the remaining CG content not masked are viewable. [0049] A user who is in the side opposite to the side where the image is displayed cannot also view an image displayed at the outer side of the first substrate 1 in the opaque region.
As in claim 9, Benishti et al in view of Osborne et al and in further view of Yim et al discloses the optical see-through HMD device as in claim 1, wherein the occlusion mask pattern acts a background for enhancing readability of the spatially-registered CG content. (Benishti et al; Fig 2B and Par 0107-0108) discloses creating occluding mask (80A & 80B) on the combiner wherein it renders said portion of combiner non-transparent and (Fig 2C and Par 0109) discloses displayed image 90A & 90B overlaid on mask 80A & 80B; thus it is obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art that said occlusion mask pattern would obviously act as background for enhancing readability of the spatially-registered CG content by blocking light entering an area of displayed image. As in claim 10, Benishti et al in view of Osborne et al and in further view of Yim et al discloses the optical see-through HMD device as in claim 1, wherein color of the occlusion mask pattern can be fixed or dynamic. (Benishti et al; Fig 2B - 3B) discloses occlusion mask pattern displayed at a given color (i.e. fixed). Furthermore, it would have been an obvious design choice to have color of occlusion mask be dynamically selected or be fixed color by the on-board computing system.
As in claim 11, Benishti et al in view of Osborne et al and in further view of Yim et al discloses the optical see-through HMD device as in claim 1, wherein the computing system further comprises: a processor to create an occlusion mask pattern on the optical means based on a user preference [Benishti et al; (Par 111) discloses the location of the image displayed on the mask is controlled by the user (i.e. professional 22) of said device; as well as the location of masks (80) can also be controlled by the user via gaze directions of the user (i.e. user preference)]; and an image processor to render a composited scene by electronically combining an image of an augmented object in the real world and the spatially-registered CG content. (Fig 2C- 2E and Par 0114) discloses image processor to render a composited scene by electronically combining an image of an augmented object in the real world and the spatially-registered CG content wherein the real world (i.e. patent) and computer generated content displayed in an area 80 are merged to present to the user.
As in claim 12, Benishti et al discloses A method of displaying a computer-generated (CG) content to a user wearing a head mounted display (HMD) to provide a type of augmented reality (AR) with private access of information, the method comprising: generating a spatially-registered CG content by a computing system;
identify sensitive information in the CG content; (Fig 2C and 2D) discloses identifying particular content/information in a CG content that would be displayed on occlusion mask pattern that is non-viewable to others around the user except to the user of said device due to being occlusion and not transparent.
creating an occlusion mask pattern by changing optical property of an optical means present on the head mounted display (HMD) (Fig 2B items 80A & 80B and Par 0107-0108) discloses creating an occlusion mask pattern by changing optical property of an optical means.
to prevent the surrounding people from viewing the sensitive information based on the user preference while leaving the remaining CG content exposed; (Fig 2B) discloses transparent portion of HMD is masked (i.e. made non-transparent/ opaque) making content displayed on said region/mask non-viewable to others around the user except to the user of said device as shown in (Fig 2c; content (90 A&B) displayed on said mask (80A & 80B) which is viewable by the user) and (Par 111) discloses the location of the image displayed on the mask is controlled by the user (i.e. professional 22) of said device; as well as the location of masks (80) can also be controlled by the user via gaze directions of the user (i.e. user preference) while leaving the remaining see-through display exposed. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. Therefore given prior art of record mask (i.e. made non-transparent/ opaque) that is controlled by the user wherein location of masks (80) can also be controlled. It would have been obvious to an ordinary skill person in the art to have said mask cover a particular portion of said image (i.e. information) while leaving the remaining display screen exposed.
displaying the spatially-registered CG content to the user. (Fig 2D and Par 0109) discloses displaying the spatially-registered content (i.e. prerecorded ultrasound image 90A & 90B).
But Benishti et al fails to explicitly discloses identify sensitive information in the CG content and masking part of CG information while leaving the remaining CG content exposed
However Osborne et al (Par 0028, 0029) discloses a head mounted display device displays information to a user. The information could take the form of text, images, web pages, or the like and adjust the opacity of at least a part of the head mounted display device, based on the at least one predetermined characteristic. [0029] Once the information is displayed on the HMD, an embodiment may detect a characteristic of the content being displayed at 302 (e.g., an image is being displayed, text is being displayed, the information being displayed is confidential in nature, etc.). An embodiment may then utilize the detected characteristic to determine if a change the opacity is appropriate at 303. For example, an embodiment may change the opacity of the display (e.g., tint, blacken, or change the color of the display) based on the content being displayed. And (Par 0017, 0033-0034) discloses changing the wearable display's opacity for privacy from surrounding people (i.e. bystanders) looking at the user of wearable display. Therefore it would have been obvious to an ordinary skill person in the art at the time of the filing to modify Benishti et al with the teaching of Osborne et al such that CG content can be identified as sensitive information and masked to provide the user privacy of their information.
But Benishti et al in view of Osborne et al fails to explicitly discloses masking part of CG information while leaving the remaining CG content exposed.
However Yim et al, (Fig 11 and Par 0047-0049) discloses transparent display displaying CG content wherein part of displayed content can be masked making it non-viewable to surrounding people while the remaining CG content not masked are viewable. [0049] A user who is in the side opposite to the side where the image is displayed cannot also view an image displayed at the outer side of the first substrate 1 in the opaque region. Therefore it would have been obvious to an ordinary skill person in the art at the time of the filing to modify Benishti et al with the teaching of Yim et al such that only partial content would be masked on a display screen when content is displayed on whole display unit in order to allow the user to be able to view his/her surrounding while using HMD.
As in claim 13, Benishti et al in view of Osborne et al and in further view of Yim et al discloses the method of displaying a computer-generated (CG) content to a user wearing a head mounted display (HMD) as in claim 12, wherein color of the occlusion mask pattern can be fixed or dynamic. (Benishti et al; Fig 2B - 3B) discloses occlusion mask pattern displayed at a given color (i.e. fixed). Furthermore, it would have been an obvious design choice to have color of occlusion mask be dynamically selected or be fixed color by the on-board computing system.As in claim 14, Benishti et al in view of Osborne et al and in further view of Yim et al discloses the method of displaying a computer-generated (CG) content to a user wearing a head mounted display (HMD) as in claim 13, wherein color of the spatially registered (CG) content is based on the color of the occlusion mask pattern. (Benishti et al; Par 0113 line 13 & 0184 line 9) discloses that said device is capable of producing color image; thus it would have been an obvious design choice to have a processor to control color of the spatially-registered CG content (90) based on the color of the occlusion mask (80) in order to improve image visibility based on background color of occlusion mask pattern.
As in claim 15, Benishti et al in view of Osborne et al and in further view of Yim et al discloses the method of displaying a computer-generated (CG) content to a user wearing a head mounted display (HMD) as in claim 12, wherein the head mounted display (HMD) further comprises an optical combine with a layer of liquid crystal display (LCD) or with at least one layer of photochromic lens. (Benishti et al; Fig 2 item 52A & 52B and Par 0095 line 11-13) discloses the head mounted display (HMD) having optical combiner and (Par 0079) discloses optical combine with a layer of liquid crystal display (LCD).
7. Claim 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benishti et al (PG Pub NO 2017/0178375) in view of Osborne et al (PG Pub NO 2016/0170206) and in further view of Yim et al (PG Pub NO 2013/0147851) and further view of Traff (PG Pub NO 2015/0145992).
As in claim 6, Benishti et al in view of Osborne et al and in further view of Yim et al discloses the optical see-through HMD device as in claim 1, wherein the computing system further comprises: Benishti et al (Fig 2E) discloses identifying displayed content on the optical combiner overlay onto occlusion mask pattern; but Benishti et al in view of Osborne et al and in further view of Yim et al fails to disclose a processor to identify the type of CG content being displayed on the optical combiner such that an occlusion mask pattern is not created and the optical means remain transparent. However Traff (Fig 5 and Par 0033 and 0043-0044) disclose formation of occlusion mask pattern (i.e. privacy mask) based on parameter related to content of an image. Therefore it would have been obvious to an ordinary skill person in the art at the time of the filing to modify Benishti et al device with the teaching of Traff wherein the occlusion mask pattern can be created on the optical means based on identified the type of CG content such that transparency of optical combiner can be changed when image masking is not required giving the user a better view of his/her surrounding.
8. Claim 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benishti et al (PG Pub NO 2017/0178375) in view of Osborne et al (PG Pub NO 2016/0170206) and in further view of Yim et al (PG Pub NO 2013/0147851) and further view of Border et al (PG Pub NO 2012/0050143).
As in claim 7, Benishti et al in view of Osborne et al and in further view of Yim et al discloses the optical see-through HMD device as in claim 1, (Fig 2-3) discloses occlusion mask pattern created on the optical means and (Par 111) discloses the location of the image displayed on the mask is controlled by the user (i.e. professional 22) of said device; as well as the location of masks (80) can also be controlled by the user via gaze directions of the user (i.e. user preference), but Benishti et al in view of Osborne et al and in further view of Yim et al fails to disclose wherein the occlusion mask pattern created on the optical means can be switched on and off based on user preference. However Border et al (Fig 9-11 and Par 0051- 0053) discloses occlusion mask pattern area where an image is displayed is moved (i.e. switched on/off) based on user preference (i.e. user movement). Therefore it would have been obvious to an ordinary skill person in the art at the time of the filing to modify Benishti et al HMD with the teaching of Border et al HMD wherein the occlusion mask pattern created on the optical means can be moved (i.e. switched on or off) in order to give the user ability to determine his/her field of view through the HMD by removing (i.e. switching off) occlusion mask pattern as the user see fit for his/her use.
9. Claim 8 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benishti et al (PG Pub NO 2017/0178375) in view of Osborne et al (PG Pub NO 2016/0170206) and in further view of Yim et al (PG Pub NO 2013/0147851) and further view of Sugiyama et al (PG Pub NO 2013/0265623).
As in claim 8, Benishti et al in view of Osborne et al and in further view of Yim et al discloses the optical see-through HMD device as in claim 1, wherein the optical combiner has diffraction gratings. (Par 0098) discloses optical combiner being waveguide type. But Benishti et al in view of Osborne et al and in further view of Yim et al fails to disclose the optical combiner having diffraction gratings. However, Sugiyama et al (Par 0073) discloses optical combiner of optical see-through HMD device having diffraction gratings. Therefore it would have been obvious to an ordinary skill person in the art at the time of the filing to modify Benishti et al optical combiner with the teaching of Sugiyama et al optical combiner having diffraction gratings as an alternate and well known use of a variety of different optical combining technologies in to Benishti et al optical see-through HMD device to yield same predictable outcome (i.e. wherein virtual image can be combined with real world when viewed by the user of HMD)
As in claim 16, Benishti et al in view of Osborne et al and in further view of Yim et al discloses the method of displaying a computer-generated (CG) content to a user wearing a head mounted display (HMD) as in claim 15, wherein the optical combiner has diffraction gratings. (Par 0098) discloses optical combiner being waveguide type. But fails to disclose the optical combiner having diffraction gratings. But Benishti et al in view of Osborne et al and in further view of Yim et al fails to disclose the optical combiner having diffraction gratings. However, Sugiyama et al (Par 0073) discloses optical combiner of optical see-through HMD device having diffraction gratings. Therefore it would have been obvious to an ordinary skill person in the art at the time of the filing to modify Benishti et al optical combiner with the teaching of Sugiyama et al optical combiner having diffraction gratings as an alternate and well known use of a variety of different optical combining technologies in to Benishti et al optical see-through HMD device to yield same predictable outcome (i.e. wherein virtual image can be combined with real world when viewed by the user of HMD).
Conclusion
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENYAM KETEMA whose telephone number is (571)270-7224. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-5PM (M-F).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, GHEBRETINSAE TEMESGHEN can be reached on 571-272-30173017. The fax phone number for the organization where this 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/BENYAM KETEMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2626