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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/19/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendments to the claims, in the submission dated 11/19/2025, are acknowledged and accepted. Claims 11, 13, and 21 are amended. Claims 11-21 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 11-19 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sourani US PGPub 2019/0155018 A1 (of record, see Office action dated 03/27/2025, hereinafter, “Sourani”, and Sourani incorporates by reference Goren et al. US Patent 8,553,308 which is of record as US PGPub 2011/0109951 A1 and reference by the Examiner, see Office action dated 07/01/2024, hereinafter, “Goren”) in view of Warashina US PGPub 2016/0244320 A1 (hereinafter, “Warashina”).
Regarding amended independent claim 11, Sourani teaches a system to project images by spatially modulating light (Sourani discloses a control circuit for controlling a resonance MEMS mirror, such as used in projectors, refer to pars. [0003-06]), the system comprising:
an optical reflector to reflect the light, the optical reflector having an actuator comprising a stator and a rotor to move across a range of motion relative to the stator (Fig. 1, MEMS mirror 100 comprises tilting mirror 115, equivalent to a rotor, and MEMS structure 125, equivalent to a stator, par. [0038], and together the tilting mirror 115 and MEMS structure 125 comprise an actuator of MEMS mirror 100); and
a controller in communication with the optical reflector (refer to title and abstract disclosing a control system for a MEMS mirror, equivalent to a controller, and see Fig. 19 showing an example circuit diagram of the control system for a MEMS mirror as disclosed by Sourani, refer to pars. [0034],[0101]), the controller configured to:
drive the optical reflector by applying an excitation voltage between the rotor and the stator, the excitation voltage to cause the rotor to move relative to the stator (Fig. 1, voltage applied between stator 125 and rotor 115 creates electrostatic force that rotates rotor 115, par. [0047]), the excitation voltage being intermittent with a voltage-on period and a voltage-off period during which no excitation voltage is applied (the voltage applied between the stator 125 and the rotor 115 may be pulsed, par. [0047], see Fig. 4 showing timing diagram 400, showing pulses of voltage V applied to stators as a function of time, where voltage pulses 404A, 404B, and 404C have distinct on and off periods, therefore teaching intermittent excitation voltage);
apply a baseline voltage between the rotor and the stator, the baseline voltage being distinct from the excitation voltage and maintained during the voltage-off period (Sourani incorporates by reference Goren et al. US Patent 8,553,308, refer to pars. [0055-56] of Sourani, and Goren teaches providing voltage other than the driving voltage in addition to the driving voltage to the MEMS device, refer to Goren US PGPub 2011/0109951 A1 pars. [0018-19], refer also to Goren pars. [0037-38] disclosing a voltage supply to provide voltage to MEMS device in addition to the driving voltage, and Goren teaches an actuation pulse is omitted to enable a clean full cycle of measurement of capacitance, par. [0053], where capacitance is proportional to current as taught by Goren in at least par. [0020], therefore the prior art teaches the application of distinct baseline and excitation voltages, where a voltage that is not the driving, i.e., excitation, voltage is applied while the driving voltage is off);
detect, during the voltage-off period when the excitation voltage is zero, an induced current induced by the rotor moving relative to the stator (Goren in par. [0036] teaches current measuring means to measure current associated with capacitance change involved with movement of the mirror, and Goren teaches a driving pulse is omitted from time to time to enable measurement of the complete capacitance change curve cycle, par. [0081], thus teaching the equivalent of detection of induced current caused by rotor movement during a period where the excitation voltage is zero, i.e., the voltage-off period);
determine a current attribute of the induced current, the current attribute comprising the induced current (Goren in pars. [0017-20] teaches a method for monitoring movement of a MEMS mirror by measuring current that is proportional to change in capacitance associated with the movement of the mirror); and
determine a movement attribute of the optical reflector (refer to at least Sourani Figs. 4-7, showing the timing of pulses of voltage applied to stators in MEMS mirror 100 relative to waveforms 402, 502, and 702 representing the angle of the mirror on rotor 115 as rotor 115 rotates) based on the induced current (Goren pars. [0017-20] teaches measuring current that is proportional to change in capacitance associated with the movement of the mirror, thus teaching the determination of mirror movement attributes based on induced current).
Sourani does not explicitly and specifically disclose the determination of a movement attribute of the optical reflector based on the phase angle of the induced current relative to a reference signal.
In the same field of invention, Warashina discloses an optical module 1A, shown in Figs. 1 and 2 thereof, where the optical module is a MEMS device (par. [0026] thereof), with an electrostatic actuator 10 controlled by control unit 70 (par. [0025] thereof), and electrostatic actuator 10 includes fixed portion 11 and movable portion 12 (par. [0033] thereof), where variable power source 71 of control unit 70 applies a drive voltage between fixed portion 11 and movable portion 12 and an alternating current power source 72 is configured to output a detection signal for detecting capacitance between fixed portion 11 and movable portion 12 (par. [0045] thereof). Control unit 70 further includes a capacitance detection unit 74 which detects the detection signal output by the alternating current power source 72 and detects the capacitance by measuring a phase difference (par. [0046] thereof). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have applied the teachings of Warashina to the disclosure of Sourani and included an alternating current power source in MEMS mirror 100 to provide an optical module capable of stably operating an optical component with high precision using an electrostatic actuator (Warashina, pars. [0006], [0071-72], [0100], [0103]). Therefore the prior art combination of Sourani in view of Warashina teaches and renders obvious the limitation that the determination of a movement attribute of the optical reflector is based on the phase angle of the induced current relative to a reference signal, because the application of an alternating current to the MEMS mirror 100 will produce a phase difference between applied voltage and current, and the phase difference (i.e., phase angle) between voltage and current will indicate the movement attribute of the optical reflector, with the applied voltage as a reference signal.
Regarding dependent claim 12, Sourani in view of Warashina (hereinafter, “modified Sourani”) teaches the system of claim 11, wherein: the controller is configured to drive the optical reflector to oscillate at a frequency f; and the controller is configured to apply the excitation voltage at a frequency 2*f. As shown in Fig. 4 of Sourani, tilting mirror rotor 115 completes one full oscillation cycle while the voltage pulses 404 complete two oscillation cycles (i.e., on/off cycles) in the same time frame, thus teaching a controller configured to apply excitation voltage at 2×f while the optical reflector completes one oscillation at frequency f.
Regarding amended dependent claim 13, modified Sourani teaches the system of claim 11, and Warashina further discloses wherein: the controller is configured to determine the movement attribute as a direction of movement of the rotor relative to the stator based on the phase angle (Warashina control unit 70 includes a capacitance detection unit 74 which detects the detection signal output by the alternating current power source 72 and detects the capacitance by measuring a phase difference, par. [0046] thereof, and Goren, which Sourani incorporates by reference as noted above, recites in claim 8, "...a processor operative to monitor the movement of said at least one moveable mirror based on said current measurement...", equivalent to determining the movement of the rotor based on the current).
Regarding dependent claim 14, modified Sourani teaches the system of claim 13, and Sourani further discloses wherein the controller is further to modify projection of an image by the optical reflector based on the direction of the movement of the rotor relative to the stator (Sourani by reference to Goren teaches mirror mechanical oscillations cause capacitance change oscillations leading to current “ripples”, and the oscillations are dynamically controlled, i.e., eradicated, by introducing a measurement metric and then eradicating the ripples by applying counter signals, refer to Goren pars. [0092-93], equivalent to modification of the projection of an image based on rotor 115 movement direction relative to the stator 125).
Regarding dependent claim 15, modified Sourani teaches the system of claim 11, and Sourani further discloses wherein the controller is further to:
determine the current attribute as a magnitude of the induced current (Sourani teaches the detection of negative current on stator representing the corresponding moment of the rotor 115 and therefore the magnitude of the current, Sourani pars. [0086-87], and Goren, which Sourani incorporates by reference as noted above, recites in claim 8, "...a processor operative to monitor the movement of said at least one moveable mirror based on said current measurement..."); and
the controller is configured to determine the movement attribute as a displacement of the rotor relative to the stator based on the magnitude (Sourani teaches in Fig. 2 a graph 200 of capacitance versus mirror angle for the MEMS mirror 100, par. [0045], and Sourani teaches the voltage applied between the stator 125 and the rotor 115 creates an electrostatic force that operates to rotate the rotor 115 in a direction that increases the capacitance between the stator 125 and the rotor 115, par. [0047], therefore the prior art teaches the determination of the movement of the mirror rotor 115 based on the magnitude of displacement between rotor 115 and stator 125).
Regarding dependent claim 16, modified Sourani teaches the system of claim 11, and Sourani further discloses wherein the controller is configured to:
determine the current attribute by determining whether a magnitude of the induced current is below a given threshold (Sourani teaches controller 1900 with high voltage amplifier 1902 which converts activation signal 1906 to the high voltage level needed by MEMS mirror 1902 to apply the activation pulses to the stator of mirror 1901, pars. [0101-104], therefore teaching a threshold for the current supplied to the MEMS mirror 100); and
determine the movement attribute by determining a motion status of the rotor relative to the stator based on whether the magnitude of the induced current is below the given threshold (refer to Sourani Figs. 13A and 13B illustrating schematic timing diagrams for the activation pulse and moment of the rotor of the MEMS mirror, noting that at the start of the pulse 1302, the moment 1304 of rotor 115 is low due to the distance between the stator portion 125A/125B and the rotor fingers 110, which are located apart from each other, and as the rotor fingers 110 approach the respective stator portion 125A/125B, the moment 1304 increases and, at the point of maximum capacitance quickly switches from positive current 1304A to negative current 1304B, par. [0086], and Sourani teaches comparator 1903 detects the direction of the current 1909, par. [0105], therefore teaching the determination of the movement attribute of rotor 115 based on the magnitude of the current, e.g., positive or negative current, relative to a threshold value).
Regarding dependent claim 17, modified Sourani teaches the system of claim 11, and Sourani further discloses wherein:
the rotor comprises a comb-shaped rotor (Sourani Fig. 1, tilting mirror 115 is a rotor, and mirror 115 has rotor fingers 110, par. [0038], therefore Sourani teaches a comb-shaped rotor);
the stator comprises a comb-shaped stator (Sourani Fig. 1, MEMS structure 125 is a stator, and stator 125 has stator fingers 120, par. [0038], therefore Sourani teaches a comb-shaped stator); and
the actuator comprises a comb drive actuator (Sourani rotor 115 and stator 125 comprise a comb drive actuator for MEMS mirror 100).
Regarding dependent claim 18, modified Sourani teaches the system of claim 17, and Sourani further discloses wherein:
the comb-shaped rotor is configured to oscillate relative to the comb-shaped stator in the range of motion (Sourani Fig. 1, voltage applied between stator 125 and rotor 115 creates an electrostatic force that operates to rotate the rotor 115 relative to the stator 125, par. [0047]); and
at least one of the comb-shaped rotor and the comb-shaped stator is disposed asymmetrically relative to the oscillation of the comb-shaped rotor (Sourani by reference to Goren teaches breaking the symmetry of the resonator mirror in Fig. 7C by reducing one side of holding frame 780, refer to Goren par. [0085], where holding frame 780 is equivalent to a stator, therefore the prior art teaches asymmetry in the MEMS mirror 100).
Regarding dependent claim 19, modified Sourani teaches the system of claim 11, and Sourani further discloses the system further comprising: a trans-impedance amplifier in communication with the controller, the trans-impedance amplifier to convert the induced current into a corresponding induced voltage (Sourani, pars. [0104-105], high voltage amplifier 1902 of control circuit 1900 for controlling MEMS mirror 1901 converts activation signal 1906 to the high voltage level needed by MEMS mirror 1901 to apply activation pulses to stator of mirror 1901, and Sourani teaches comparator 1903 is coupled to mirror 1901 and detects the current direction, par. [0101], and Sourani teaches comparator 1903 can be a transimpedance amplifier).
Regarding amended dependent claim 21, modified Sourani teaches the system of claim 11, and Warashina further discloses wherein the controller is further configured to:
measure a phase of the induced current relative to the excitation voltage and the movement of the rotor, wherein the phase of the current attribute is the measured phase (Warashina teaches capacitance detection unit 74 detects the detection signal output by the alternating current power source 72 and detects the capacitance by measuring a phase difference, par. [0046])
wherein the movement attribute comprises a direction of movement of the rotor, the direction being determined based on a phase lead or phase lag of the measured induced current relative to the excitation voltage and rotor motion (Warashina control unit 70 includes capacitance detection unit 74 which detects the detection signal output by the alternating current power source 72 and detects the capacitance by measuring a phase difference, par. [0046] thereof).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sourani in view of Warashina as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Solomon US PGPub 2011/0007277 A1 (of record, see Office action dated 07/01/2024, hereinafter, “Solomon”).
Regarding dependent claim 20, modified Sourani teaches the system of claim 11 but the prior art combination does not teach the system further comprising: a light engine to generate the light; a lens to receive the light reflected by the optical reflector; and a support structure for the optical reflector, the light engine, and the lens, the support structure having an eyeglass form factor.
In the same field of invention, Solomon teaches a display system with a light source 10, see Fig. 45 and refer to par. [0179] thereof, equivalent to a light engine to generate light, a variable focal length element 12, equivalent to a lens to receive the light reflected by the optical projector, and an eyeglass or goggle-type frame 130 (refer to Fig. 2 thereof) to support the light source, lens, and optical reflector. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have applied the teachings of Solomon to the disclosure of Sourani and used goggles or eyeglasses as a support structure for MEMS mirror 100 for use in a screen display (Solomon, par. [0087]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-10 of Remarks, filed 11/19/2025, with respect to the rejections of claims 11-19 and 21 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in view of Sourani in view of Warashina, see rejection of claims 11-19 and 21 above under 35 U.S.C. § 103, and claim 20 is rejected with Sourani in view of Warashina and further in view of Solomon.
Applicant has argued that Solomon does not remedy the deficiencies of Sourani. However, Solomon is cited to teach the inclusion of lenses, lights, and support for the elements in the form of eyewear, and is not cited to teach any elements or limitations missing in the mapping of Sourani and Warashina to the elements and limitations recited in claim 11.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Justin W Hustoft whose telephone number is (571)272-4519. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 AM - 5:30 PM Eastern Time.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration 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, Thomas Pham can be reached at (571)272-3689. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JUSTIN W. HUSTOFT/ Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/THOMAS K PHAM/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872