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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s Amendment filed December 27, 2025 has been fully considered and entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 27, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant has amendment independent claims 1 and 32, and has written new independent claim 52, to require that the horizontal fields of view are in a plane that is oriented along the second direction and the third direction. As discussed in detail in the Office action below, the Field of View is the plane that is viewed by a viewer or detector. The field of view is parallel to the front or rear sides of the waveguide that the viewer or detector face. The input coupling gratings diffract light through a range of angles in planes that are perpendicular to the field of view. A wider range of deflection angles will allow for an expanded field of view. Because the amended and new claims appear to be referring to a plane that is not the field of view as the horizontal field of view plane, the amendment has introduced unclear subject matter into the claims and the claims are presently rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) below, where a more detailed explanation regarding field of view is provided.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 25, 27-30, 32-39, and 46-52 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Applicant’s Figure 1, which is reproduced below, illustrates:
A plate / base body – 6
A front side – 7
A rear side – 8
An input coupling region – 4
An output coupling region – 5
An object – 9
A detector – 11
PNG
media_image1.png
471
541
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The y direction, labeled in Figure 1, extends between the in-coupling and out-coupling regions along a length of the plate 6.
An x direction is not labelled in Figure 1, but extends into and out of the plane of the paper that Figure 1 is on, such that the x-direction is parallel to the front surface 7 and perpendicular to the y-direction.
The z direction, labeled in Figure 1, is perpendicular to both the x and the y direction.
A field of view plane for the detector 11 is parallel to the front surface 7 of the plate 7 because the detector faces the front surface, which is to say that the field of view is an x-y plane, not an x-z plane. The wavelengths of light are deflected through angles in either a y-z plane or an x-z plane, wherein the angular ranges allow the beams to spread over a vertical and horizontal field of view in the x-y plane. The plane that the light rays are angled in is not the same as the field of view, which is defined by the view of the detector.
Regarding independent claims 1 and 32; Applicant has amended claim 1 and claim 32 to require that the Horizontal field of view (FOV) is in the x-z plane (see lines 16-21 of claim 1 and lines 16-21 of claim 3), but that is not accurate based on Applicant’s own coordinate system as defined in Figure 1. The field of view is the field or plane viewed by the detector 11 (see paragraph 30 of the publication of the present application, US 2022/0120982 A1), which is in the x-y plane using the coordinate system defined with respect to Figure 1. The examiner here notes that the diffractive input coupling structure also has a field of view that corresponds to a front and/or rear surface plane of the waveguide 6, wherein the light is then reflected by the surfaces and guided within the waveguide, therefore it’s also inaccurate to say that the diffractive in-coupling optics have a field of view within the x-z plane.
Figures 2 and 16 show plan views of the waveguide plate 6 viewed from either the front or rear sides, 7 or 8, which extend in the x-y plane.
Figures 3 and 17 show a view of a side edge of the waveguide with the detector facing the front side 7. The light is spread over a range of angles illustrated by the rays in Figures 3 and 17, but the field of view is the plane observed by the detector 11, which is parallel to the front surface 7 and the rear surface 8.
Therefore, it’s unclear how the horizontal field of view could be in the x-z plane as required by amended claims 1 and 32.
Regarding dependent claims 27-30, 33-43, and 46-51; the claims inherently contain the deficiencies of any base and/or intervening claims from which they depend.
Regarding claim 52; claim 52 also requires that the Horizonal field of view (FOV) is in the x-z plane (see lines 16-20 of claim 52), rendering the claim unclear.
Examiner’s Note: As best understood by the examiner, the in-coupling elements diffract light through different angular ranges in the x-z plane which correspond to different horizontal fields of view an x-y plane, as viewed by the detector. This is how the claims will be interpreted for the application of prior art in view of Applicant’s amendments.
Inventorship
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claims 25, 27-30, 32, 34-35, and 46-49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vallius et al. (US 2017/0153460 A1) in view of Akutsu et al. (US 9,383,722 B2).
Regarding claims 25 and 32; Vallius et al. discloses a functionalized waveguide (waveguide 130; see Figures 1-10; see paragraphs 2 and 23-25), comprising:
a transparent base body (130) having a front side and a rear side (see Figure 10, annotated below), wherein the base body (130) comprises a partly transparent input coupling region (in-coupling grating 440 is located in the input coupling region) and an output coupling region (out-coupling gratings 410, 410L, 401R are located in the output coupling region(s)) spaced apart therefrom in a first direction (y-direction, first direction in annotated Figure 10 below; see Figures 8-10),
wherein
a second direction (x-direction, see annotated Figure 10 below, the x-direction is into and out of this page of paper) is defined within the based body (130) transverse to the first direction (y-direction) and parallel to the front side (front size),
a third direction (z-direction, see annotated Figure 10 below) is defined perpendicular to the front side (front side) and the third direction (z-direction) is transverse to both of the first direction (y-direction) and the second direction (x-direction);
wherein the input coupling region (440) deflects only a portion of radiation (see Figures 8 and 10) coming from an object to be detected and impinging on the front side (440 is located on the front side), such that the deflected portion propagates as coupled-in radiation in the base body (130) as far as the output coupling region (410) via reflections (total internal reflection, TIR) and impinges on the output coupling region (410),
wherein the output coupling region (410) deflects at least a portion of the coupled-in radiation impinging on it, such that the deflected portion emerges from the base body (130) via the front side or the rear side (rear side in Figures 8-10, although the examiner notes that directed output radiation through a front side is a well-known alternative) impinges on eyes of a viewer (eye(s) 115, 115L, 115R),
wherein the input coupling region (440) comprises a first diffractive input coupling structure and a second diffractive input coupling structure (multiple DOEs, which inherently include at least first and second DOEs; see paragraphs 1, 2, and 27), each of which differ in that they comprise different horizontal fields of view (Horizontal FOV) in a plane that is oriented along the second direction and the third direction (the field of view plane is parallel to the front side, since the FOV is the viewing field observed by the detector or viewers eyes, wherein the DOEs diffract the in-coupled light through a range of angles in the x-z and y-z planes to expand the vertical and horizontal fields of view; see Figures 6-10, Figure 6 is annotated below and reoriented to aid in understanding), such that the first and second diffractive input coupling structures (in-coupling DOEs of 440) deflect radiation from the different horizontal fields of view toward the output coupling region (the in-coupling DOEs 440 deflect the radiation through different angular ranges in the x-z plane to obtain different horizontal fields of view in the x-y plane),
wherein, as compared to the second diffractive input coupling structure (second DOE), the first diffractive input coupling structure (first DOE) comprises an additional one-dimensional deflection function (the different function being different spectral angular properties; see paragraph 32, wherein the in-coupling grating 440 in-couples shorter wavelengths at different angles compared to longer wavelengths) in the plane that is oriented along the second direction and the third direction (the light is diffracted/deflected through a range of angles in the x-z plane; see Figures 6 and 10 annotated below), and
wherein the first and second diffractive input coupling structures (in-coupling DOEs of 440) are configured or embodied such that they encode the radiation from the different horizontal fields (Horizontal FOVs) of view during the deflection via different deflected wavelengths (see Figure 7 and paragraph 30) or via different deflection angle ranges (see Figures 8-10), such that the output coupling (440) of each of the different deflected wavelengths is assignable for the different horizontal fields of view (different wavelengths propagate with different angles allowing different parts of the imaging light spectrum to be used for different regions of the field of view, FOV; see the abstract; see Figures 6 and 7).
PNG
media_image2.png
520
766
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
445
639
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Vallius does not illustrate a detector in the system of Figures 1-10, wherein the system is a detector system. The examiner notes that eyes (115L, 115R; Figure 4) do detect the image. Vallius further teaches that the display system may include additional and/or alternative sensors and/or cameras 9see paragraphs 48 and 49) including still cameras. Akutsu et al. teaches a display system including a waveguide (13) with input (14) and output (15) coupling regions that couples light to the eye (16) of a viewer (see Figure 1) may alternatively have a camera (17; see Figure 10) located adjacent to the output coupling region (15) to provide a measurement system for light intensity distribution, wherein the virtual image is observed by the CCD camera (17; see column 13, lines 3-4).
Thus, before the effective filing date of the present invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to form the a detector system comprising the functionalized waveguide of Vallius and a detector for the purpose of receiving the virtual image by a detector (CCD camera) to measure the light intensity distribution of the output image, since this was a known alternative arrangement of prior art, and one of ordinary skill could have combined the elements by known coupling methods with no change in their respective functions to yield predictable results. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding claims 27 and 34; Vallius and Akutsu et al. suggest the detector system of claims 25 and 34, wherein the output coupling region (410) comprises for each diffractive input coupling structure (DOEs of 440) an assigned diffractive output coupling structure (DOE of 410), which deflects selective radiation with wavelengths of the assigned diffractive input coupling structure (the in-coupling DOEs cause different wavelengths to propagate in different paths to associated out-coupling DOEs; see the abstract and paragraphs 2, 30, 37, 53, 56 and 57).
Regarding claim 28; Vallius and Akutsu et al. suggest the detector system of claim 27, wherein the diffractive output coupling structures (DOEs of 410) deflect the radiation of the assigned first and second input coupling structures (DOEs of 440) such that said radiation impinges on locally different regions of a detector of the detection system (see Figures 8-10).
Regarding claim 29; Vallius and Akutsu et al. suggest the detector system of claim 28, wherein a color filter is provided for at least one locally different region (DOEs forming regions of the out-coupling element 410 are wavelength dependent, and thus inherently provide color filtering, since color is also wavelength dependent) of the detector (CCD camera in location of eyes 115 in display of Vallius) such that, a wavelength range corresponding to the filter is permitted to reach the at least one locally different region of the detector (this is inherently true for red, green and blue color displays, as a color image may only be provided if color filters are provided corresponding to local areas of the detector that receive select colors of the color images; see paragraphs 21 and 27).
Regarding claim 30; Vallius and Akutsu et al. suggest the detector system of claim 27, wherein the first and second diffractive input coupling structures (DOEs of 440) are arranged adjacently in the first direction, or are arranged above one another transversely to the first direction and transversely to the second direction, or are embodied as a single diffractive input coupling structure, which provides the different horizontal fields of view (see Figure 1-12; see paragraphs 29-33), and wherein the diffractive output coupling structures (DOEs or 410) are arranged adjacently in the first direction, or are arranged above one another transversely to the first direction and transversely to the second direction, or are embodied as a single diffractive output coupling structure, which effects the assigned deflection of the radiation (see Figures 1-12; i.e. wavelength dependent deflection).
Regarding claim 35; Vallius and Akutsu et al. suggest the detector system of claim 34, wherein the diffractive output coupling structure are arranged adjacently (i.e. nearby) in the first direction.
Regarding claim 46; Vallius and Akutsu et al. suggest the detector system of claim 25, wherein the detector (CCD camera in place of eyes 115R, 115L of Vallius) is connected (i.e. optically connected) to the front or the rear side of the base body (130).
Regarding claim 47; Vallius and Akutsu et al. suggest the detector system of claim 25, wherein no separate imaging optical element is arranged between the detector (CCD camera in place of eyes 115R, 115L of Vallius) and the front and/or rear side (of the base body 130).
Regarding claim 48; before the effective filing date of the present invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to provide at least one optical imaging element (a focusing lens) arranged between the base body (130) and the detector (CCD camera in place of eyes 115R, 115L of Vallius) for the purpose of using the lens to focus light into the detector to minimize optical loss and improve coupling efficiency.
Regarding claim 49; Vallius and Akutsu et al. teach and/or suggest the detector system of claim 25 (see the rejection of claim 25 above), wherein the input coupling region further comprises a third diffractive input coupling structure (multiple DOEs, which suggested a third DOE; see paragraphs 1, 2, and 27; see Figure 10, which also suggested at least three in-coupling DOEs receiving light from 3 different angular directions) wherein the second diffractive input coupling structure lies between the first and third diffractive input coupling structures (at least one of the suggested multiple DOEs lies between two other DOEs thereby forming the claimed arrangement), and wherein, as compared to the second diffractive input coupling structure, the third diffractive input coupling structure comprises the additional one-dimensional deflection function (the different function being different spectral angular properties; see paragraph 32, wherein the in-coupling grating 440 in-couples shorter wavelengths at different angles compared to longer wavelengths) in the plane (plane; see Figure 10 annotated above) that is oriented perpendicular to the front side and that extends in the second direction (second direction in Figure 10, annotated above) transverse to the first direction (first direction; see Figure 10 annotated above).
Claims 25, 27-30, 32, 34-36, 38-39, and 46-48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. (US 10,598,938 B1) in view of Brown et al. (US 2014/0140654 A1) and Akutsu et al. (US 9,383,722 B2).
Regarding claims 25 and 32; Huang et al. discloses a functionalized waveguide (see Figures 1-15), comprising:
a transparent base body (420, 610, 710, 810, 910, 1010, 1110, 1210, 1310; see Figures 1-13) having a front side and a rear side, wherein the base body comprises a partly transparent input coupling region (430, 612, 712, 1320) and an output coupling region (440, 614, 714, 820, 920, 1020, 1120, 1220) spaced apart therefrom in a first direction (x direction),
wherein
a second direction (y direction) is defined within the base body transverse to the first direction (x direction) and parallel to the front side,
a third direction (z direction) is defined perpendicular to the front side, and the third direction is transverse to both the first direction and the second direction;
wherein the input coupling region deflects only a portion of radiation coming from an object (412, 620, 720, 1330; see column 1, lines 6-21; see column 11, lines 1-9; see column 17, lines 10-26) to be detected and impinging on the front side, such that the deflected portion propagates as coupled-in radiation in the base body (420, 610, 710, 810, 910, 1010, 1110, 1210, 1310) as far as the output coupling region (440, 614, 714, 820, 920, 1020, 1120, 1220) via reflections and impinges on the output coupling region,
wherein the output coupling region (440, 614, 714, 820, 920, 1020, 1120, 1220) deflects at least a portion of the coupled-in radiation impinging on it, such that the deflected portion emerges from the base body via the front side or the rear side and impinges on a viewer’s eye (490, 520, 690, 790, 1090, 1190) and
wherein the input coupling region (612, 712, 1320) comprises a first diffractive input coupling structure and a second diffractive input coupling structure (first region and second regions; see Figures 13 and column 24, lines 11-53; see column 6, line 33, through column 7, line 3; see Figures 6 and 7), each of which differ in that they comprise different horizontal fields of view in a plane that is oriented along the second direction and the third direction (the first and second regions diffract light through a range of angles in the x-z plane such that different horizontal fields of view results in the x-y field of view of the observer/detector 690), such that the first and second diffractive input coupling structures (first and second regions of 1320) deflect radiation from the different horizontal fields of view toward the output coupling region (614, 714, 820, 920, 1020, 1120, 1220),
wherein, as compared to the second diffractive input coupling structure (second region of 1320), the first diffractive input coupling structure (first region of 1320) comprises an additional one-dimensional deflection function (see Figure 13) in the plane (y-z plane) that is oriented along the second direction (y-direction) and the third direction (z-direction).
It is noted that it is considered to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art to combine features of different embodiments into one embodiment of a same invention, and therefore, before the effective filing date of the present invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use the input coupler (1320) of Figure 13 in the display of Figures 4, 6, or 7 for the purpose of more efficiently coupling light into the waveguides of the respective display devices.
Huang et al. discloses that the diffractive input coupling structures (first and second regions of in-coupling gratings 612, 712, 1320) are configured such that they encode the radiation from the different fields of view during the deflection, such that the output coupling is assignable for the different horizontal fields of view (see Figures 6A, 6B, 7A-7C, 8 and 10-12). Huang et al. does not specifically disclose that different deflective wavelengths are encoded, however, color displays include light of different wavelengths, commonly red, green and blue wavelengths, and Huang et al. suggests that color images are formed (see lines 43-67 of column 8; see lines 39-41 of claim 15; and see lines 57-67 of claim 16).
Huang et al. does not specifically disclose that the diffractive input coupling structures are configured or embodied such that they encode the radiation from the different horizontal fields of view during the deflection via different deflected wavelengths or different deflection angle ranges, such that the output coupling of each of the different deflected wavelengths is assignable for the different horizontal fields of view.
Brown et al. teaches that diffractive coupling structures (SBGs) may be configured or embodied to encode radiation from different horizontal fields of view (see paragraphs 134, 140 and 235-238) during deflection via different deflected wavelengths or different deflection angle ranges (see paragraph 185), wherein multiplexing is achieved by forming multiple Bragg gratings in a same layer to encode two distinct diffraction prescriptions which may be designed to project light into distinct field regions, and to diffract light of two different wavelengths into a given field of view region, which offers advantages of improved angular profiles, extended diffraction efficiency angular bandwidth, and improved luminance uniformity and color balance across the exit pupil and field of view.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the present invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use a diffractive input coupling structure in Huang et al. that is configured or embodied such that they encode the radiation from the different horizontal fields of view during the deflection via different deflected wavelengths or different deflection angle ranges, such that the output coupling of each of the different deflected wavelengths is assignable for the different horizontal fields of view for the purpose of providing improved angular profiles, extended diffraction efficiency angular bandwidth, and improved luminance uniformity and color balance across the exit pupil and field of view, since diffractive coupling structures that were configured to perform in this manner were known in the prior art and one of ordinary skill could have combined the elements by known coupling methods with no change in their respective functions to yield predictable results. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Huang et al. discloses that the out-coupled light is detected by a viewer’s eyes eye (490, 520, 690, 790, 1090, 1190), and thus Huang et al. and Brown et al. do not disclose the detector system comprising a detector. Akutsu et al. teaches a display system including a waveguide (13) with input (14) and output (15) coupling regions that couples light to the eye (16) of a viewer (see Figure 1) may alternatively have a camera (17; see Figure 10) located adjacent to the output coupling region (15) to provide a measurement system for light intensity distribution, wherein the virtual image is observed by the CCD camera (17; see column 13, lines 3-4).
Thus, before the effective filing date of the present invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to form a detector system comprising the functionalized waveguide of Huang et al. and a detector (CCD camera in place of the viewer’s eyes) for the purpose of receiving the virtual image by the detector (CCD camera) to measure the light intensity distribution of the output image, since this was a known alternative arrangement of prior art, and one of ordinary skill could have combined the elements by known coupling methods with no change in their respective functions to yield predictable results. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding claim 27; the teachings of Huang et al., Brown et al., and Akutsu et al. suggest the waveguide of claim 25, as discussed above, wherein the output coupling structure comprises a plurality of output coupling regions (see column 6, lines 32-37; see Figures 6-12 of Brown et al.), but does not explicitly state that the output coupling region comprises for each diffractive input coupling structure an assigned diffractive output coupling structure, which deflects selective radiation with wavelengths of the assigned diffractive input coupling structure. However, because the invention is used to display images, which may be color images formed of light having different wavelengths such that the image is encoded on the light, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, would have found it obvious to provide an output coupling region that comprises for each diffractive input coupling structure an assigned diffractive output coupling structure, which deflects selective radiation with wavelengths of the assigned diffractive input coupling structure for the purpose of accurately transmitting an encoded color image to the viewer of the display, since this is inherently require for same images to be input to the waveguide and output to a viewer of the display.
Regarding claim 28; Huang et al. teaches that the diffractive output coupling structures (output grating regions) deflect the radiation of the assigned first and second input coupling structures (input grating region) such that said radiation impinges on locally different regions of a detector of the detection system (CCD camera in place of eye; see Figures 6-12).
Regarding claim 29; Huang et al., Brown et al., and Akutsu et al. teach or suggest the waveguide of claim 28, as discussed above, and further teaches that the display optics (124; see Figure 1), which includes the optical waveguide and couplers, may further include filters to affect image light emitted from the display (see column 9, lines 1-18). Thus, before the effective filing date of the present invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to provide a color filter for at least one locally different region of the detector, such that only a wavelength range corresponding to the filter is permitted to reach the at least one locally different region of the detector for the purpose of providing an image of a desired color at that outcoupling location, since the use of filters are suggested by the teachings of Huang et al. and no novel or unexpected results would appear to occur.
Regarding claim 34; the teachings of Huang et al., Brown et al., and Akutsu et al. suggest the waveguide of claim 32, as discussed above, wherein the output coupling structure (440, 614, 714, 820, 920, 1020, 1120, 1220 of Huang et al. ) deflects selective radiation from the different deflection angles of the diffractive input coupling structure (input coupling region 612, 712, 1320 of Huang et al., comprising a plurality of diffractive input coupling structures; see Figures 13 and column 24, lines 11-53; see column 6, line 33, through column 7, line 3; see Figures 6 and 7), but does not disclose that the output coupling region comprises for each diffractive input coupling structure an assigned diffractive output coupling structure, which deflects selective radiation from the different deflection angle ranges of the assigned diffractive input coupling structure. However, because the invention is used to display images, which may be color images formed of light having different wavelengths such that the image is encoded on the light, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, would have found it obvious to provide an output coupling region that comprises for each diffractive input coupling structure an assigned diffractive output coupling structure, which deflects selective radiation with wavelengths of the assigned diffractive input coupling structure for the purpose of accurately transmitting an encoded color image to the viewer of the display, since this is inherently require for same images to be input to the waveguide and output to a viewer of the display.
Regarding claims 30 and 35; Huang et al., Brown et al., and Akutsu et al. teach or suggest the waveguide of claim 27, as discussed above,
wherein the diffractive input coupling structures
are arranged adjacently in the first direction (x-direction; see Figures 6, 7, and 13), or
are arranged above one another transversely to the first direction and transversely to the second direction, or
are embodied as a single diffractive input coupling structure (non-elected species),
which provides the different horizontal fields of view (see Figures 6, 7, and 13; see column 2, line 65, through column 3, line 5; see column 18, lines 52-57), and
wherein the diffractive output coupling structures
are arranged adjacently in the first direction (x-direction; see Figures 6-12), or
are arranged above one another transversely to the first direction and transversely to the second direction, or
are embodied as a single diffractive output coupling structure (non-elected species), which effects the assigned deflection of the radiation (see Figures 6-12; see column 18, lines 44-53; see column 19, lines 14-27).
Regarding claim 36; Huang et al., Brown et al., and Akutsu et al. teach that the diffractive output coupling structures (output couplers of Huang et al.) comprise in each case a reflective or transmissive volume hologram (see column 16, lines 21-23; see column 17, lines 61-63).
Regarding claim 38; Huang et al., Brown et al., and Akutsu et al. teach that the first and second diffractive input coupling structures (input couplers of Huang et al.) comprise in each case a reflective or transmissive volume hologram (see column 16, lines 56-59; see column 17, lines 61-63).
Regarding claim 39; Huang et al., Brown et al., and Akutsu et al. disclose that the input coupling region and/or the output coupling region also comprise(s) an imaging optical function in addition to the beam deflection (see Figures 6-11 of Huang et al.; the input couplers and output couplers provide imaging optical functions including focusing and magnification, since the couplers control the deflection beams and exit angles of the beams).
Regarding claim 46; Huang et al., Brown et al., and Akutsu et al. teach or suggest the detector (CCD camera in place of eye; and/or camera of eye-tracking unit 130; see column 10, lines 44-67) is connected to the front or the rear side of the base body (waveguide of the display, wherein the light is inherently transmitted via the waveguide to the eye-tracking unit 130 and/or to the CCD camera in place of the eye as discussed above with respect to claim 25).
Regarding claim 47; before the effective filing date of the present invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to not provide a separate imaging element between the detector (CCD camera in place of eye as discussed above with respect to claim 25 and/or camera that capture’s light from the user’s eye; see column 10, lines 44-67) and the front and/or rear side for the purpose of minimizing components and size of the display device, wherein no separate imaging optical element is arranged between the detector (CCD camera) and the front and/or rear side (front and/or rear side of the waveguide to which the camera is coupled).
Regarding claim 48; before the effective filing date of the present invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to provide a lens between the base body and the detector (CCD camera in place of eye and/or camera of eye-tracking unit 130) and the base body (waveguide) for the purpose of minimizing optical loss to improve accuracy of the eye-tracking unit, thereby providing at least one optically imaging element (lens) arranged between the base body and the detector.
Claim 37 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. (US 10,598,938 B1) in view of Brown et al. (US 2014/0140654 A1) and Akutsu et al. (US 9,383,722 B2), and in further view of Amirsolaimani et al. (US 2019/0353898 A1).
Regarding claim 37; the teachings of Huang et al., Brown et al., and Akutsu et al. suggest the detector system of claim 25 as applied above, but fails to disclose that an extent of the input coupling region in the second direction is greater than an extent of the output coupling region in the second direction. Amirsolaimani et al. teaches that in a display device, the diffractive coupler (554) nearest the eye (eye-box 553) may be used to couple light from the eye (eye-box 553) into the waveguide (552) such that the light is directed to a detector (558) of an eye-tracking system via a diffractive coupler (556). Since Huang et al. teaches that an eye-tracking system (130) may be provided, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to couple light from the eye (490) through the waveguide (420) to an eye-tracker system (130) by using the output coupling elements as an input coupler for the eye-tracking light and the input coupling element as an output coupler for the eye-tracking light in the system of Huang et al., wherein the extent of the input coupling region for the eye-tracking system (554 of Amirsolaimani et al.) in the second direction (x-direction of Amirsolaimani et al., which corresponds to y-direction of Huang et al.) is greater than an extend of the output coupling region (556 of Amirsolaimani et al.) in the second direction (see Figures 5C and 5D of Amirsolaimani et al.) for the purpose of efficiently providing light from the eye-box to the eye-tracking system camera.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 33, 50, 51 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 52 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record, which is the most relevant prior art known, does not disclose or reasonably suggest:
the detector system of claim 33, wherein the input coupling region comprises in front of each diffractive input coupling structure a shading stop with a lamellar structure, which defines for each diffractive input coupling structure a different vertical field of view in a plane that is oriented perpendicular to the front side and that extends in the first direction, in combination with all of the limitations of base claim 32;
the detector system defined by claim 50, wherein the first diffractive input coupling structure and the second diffractive input coupling structure are each elongated along the second direction and are spaced apart from one another in the first direction in combination with all of the limitations of base claim 25;
the detector system defined by claim 51, wherein the first diffractive input coupling structure and the second diffractive input coupling structure are each elongated along the second direction and are spaced apart from one another in the first direction in combination with all of the limitations of base claim 32; or
the detector system defined by claim 52, wherein the first diffractive input coupling structure and the second diffractive input coupling structure are each elongated along the second direction and are spaced apart from one another in the first direction in combination with all of the other limitations of claim 52.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHELLE R CONNELLY whose telephone number is (571)272-2345. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9 AM to 5 PM.
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, Uyen-Chau Le can be reached at 571-272-2397. 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.
/MICHELLE R CONNELLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874