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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 3-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Widulle et al. (US 2016/0282621 A1) in view of Morino et al. (US 2006/0056185 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Widulle et al. teaches an optical guide comprising
a first piece (20; figure 3 and 4) made from a transparent material, the first piece comprising on a surface an array of extraction microstructures (23; figures 3 and 4) composed of a succession of extraction microstructures (24 and 25; see at least figure 4) arranged for projecting to a finite distance D a virtual image injected into the optical guide (see figures 3 and 4), each extraction microstructure having a prismatic shape (see shape of 23 in at least figure 4) with two faces, one face being referred to as an active surface and having a semi-reflective coating (see paragraph [0024] where reflective coating is disclosed) for extracting the virtual image from the optical guide (figure 4) and the other face being referred to as a passive surface and not having any semi-reflective coating (see figure 4), wherein each active surface is spherical (see paragraph [0065] where spherical surface is disclosed) and has an inclination smaller by a mean angle than any active surface immediately previous in the succession of microstructures (see at least figure 4) in a direction of propagation of the virtual image in the optical guide.
Widulle et al. does not explicitly teach wherein:
θ=arctan(P/D)/(2 *n) and each active surface has a radius of curvature R such that: R=2*n*D where P is a repetition period of the microstructures of the array of extraction microstructures and n is a refractive index of the transparent material.
PNG
media_image1.png
356
457
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Morino et al. teaches lens 1 having a curvature radius (see paragraph [0089]) comprising microstructures that satisfies the equation θ=arctan(P/D)/(2 *n) and each active surface has a radius of curvature R such that: R=2*n*D where P is a repetition period of the microstructures of the array of extraction microstructures and n is a refractive index of the transparent material (see paragraph [0083] where lens segments 12 have a pitch of 2mm to 10mm. And paragraph [0089] discloses a curvature radius of the arc of 0.05mm to 1mm).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the optical guide of Widulle et al. to satisfy the equation as taught by Morino et al. as an alternative design choice to achieve a desired illumination output.
Regarding claim 3, Widulle et al. teaches the optical guide according to claim 1, further comprising a second piece (22; see figure 4), referred to as a cover piece, made from the same transparent material as the first piece (20), the second piece comprising microstructures (29) arranged for fitting in spaces between the microstructures of the first piece (20), the second piece being glued (see paragraph [0057]) to the first piece (20) so as to form an optical guide with two parallel faces (see at least figure 4).
Regarding claim 4, Widulle et al. teaches the optical guide according to claim 3, wherein the second piece (22) has on surface microstructures with shapes complementary to those of the microstructures of the first piece (20), with a substantially constant thickness of glue (see paragraph [0057] where 22 and 20 are adhesively bonded; see figure 4).
Regarding claim 5, Widulle et al. teaches the optical guide according to claim 3, wherein the second piece (22; figure 4) has on surface microstructures forming another array of extraction microstructures (see at least figure 4) which comprises another succession of extraction microstructures having active surfaces having a semi-reflective coating (see paragraph [0044]) and arranged to project the virtual image to a distance D’ other than the distance D.
Regarding claim 6, Widulle et al. teaches the optical guide according to claim 5, wherein the distance D’ is finite and each active surface of the microstructures (see at least figure 4) of this other array of extraction microstructures is spherical (see at least figure 4) and has an inclination smaller by a mean angle θ than any active surface immediately preceding in the succession of microstructures in the direction of propagation of the virtual image in the optical guide (see at least figure 4).
Regarding claim 7, Widulle et al. teaches the optical guide according to claim 5, wherein the distance D’ is infinite (see at least figure 4)
Regarding claim 8, Widulle et al. teaches the optical guide according to claim 5, wherein: the semi-reflective coating (paragraph [0044]) on the active surfaces of the first piece is sensitive to a specific polarization and the semi-reflective coating (paragraph [0044]) of the active surfaces of the second piece is sensitive to another specific polarization; or
the semi-reflective coating on the active surfaces of the first piece is sensitive to a specific wavelength and the semi-reflective coating on the active surfaces of the second piece is sensitive to another specific wavelength; or
the semi-reflective coating on the active surfaces of the first piece is sensitive to a specific spectral band and the semi-reflective coating on the active surfaces of the second piece is sensitive to another specific spectral band.
Regarding claim 9, Widulle et al. teaches an image-projection device comprising an optical guide according to claim 1, and a collimation device (3; figure 3) providing a virtual image collimated to infinity, the collimation device and the optical guide (figure 3 and 4) being assembled so that the virtual image supplied by the collimation device is injected into the optical guide (see at least figure 3 and 4) and projected to the distance D by the array of extraction microstructures (23 and 29; see at least figure 4).
Regarding claim 10, Widulle et al. teaches an augmented reality system comprising at least one image- projection device according to claim 9 (see at least figure 3 and 4).
Regarding claim 11, Widulle et al. teaches a manufacturing method for manufacturing an optical guide, comprising:
- manufacturing a first piece (20; see at least figure 4) from a transparent material, the first piece comprising on a surface an array of extraction microstructures (23; see at least figure 4) composed of a succession of extraction microstructures (24 and 25; see at least figure 4) arranged for projecting to a finite distance D a virtual image injected into the optical guide (figure 4), each extraction microstructure having a prismatic shape with two faces (see at least figure 4), one face being referred to as an active surface for extracting the virtual image from the optical guide and the other face being referred to as a passive surface, each active surface being spherical (see paragraph [0065] where spherical surface is disclosed) and having an inclination smaller by a mean angle θ than any active surface immediately preceding in the succession of microstructures (see figure 4) in a direction of propagation of the virtual image in the optical guide (figure 4); and
- applying a semi-reflective treatment (see at least paragraph [0043]) to the active surfaces, excluding the passive surfaces (see at least figure 4).
Widulle et al. does not explicitly teach wherein the manufacturing method is such that:
θ=arctan(P/D)/(2 *n) and each active surface has a radius of curvature R such that: R=2*n*D where P is a repetition period of the microstructures of the array of extraction microstructures and n is a refractive index of the transparent material.
Morino et al. teaches lens 1 having a curvature radius (see paragraph [0089]) comprising microstructures that satisfies the equation θ=arctan(P/D)/(2 *n) and each active surface has a radius of curvature R such that: R=2*n*D where P is a repetition period of the microstructures of the array of extraction microstructures and n is a refractive index of the transparent material (see paragraph [0083] where lens segments 12 have a pitch of 2mm to 10mm. And paragraph [0089] discloses a curvature radius of the arc of 0.05mm to 1mm).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the optical guide of Widulle et al. to satisfy the equation as taught by Morino et al. as an alternative design choice to achieve a desired illumination output.
Regarding claim 12, Widulle et al. further teaches the manufacturing method according to claim 11, wherein the first piece (20; figure 4) further comprises on the surface an array of bidimensional pupil-multiplication microstructures (see at least figure 4) placed between an injection zone through which the virtual image to be projected is injected into the optical guide (figure 3 and 4) and the array of extraction microstructures, the bidimensional pupil-multiplication microstructures comprising active surfaces in the form of inclined planes and the other surfaces being passive surfaces (see at least figure 4), the bidimensional pupil- multiplication microstructures being placed obliquely with respect to the extraction microstructures so as to reflect a light ray of the transported virtual image that strikes one or more of its active surfaces towards the array of extraction microstructures; and the method further comprises:
- applying a semi-reflective treatment (see paragraph [0044]) to the active surfaces of the bidimensional pupil-multiplication microstructures (see at least figure 4), excluding the passive surfaces.
Regarding claim 13, Widulle et al. further teaches the manufacturing method according to claim 11, further comprising:
manufacturing a second piece (22; see at least figure 4), referred to as a cover piece, from the same transparent material as the first piece (20; see at least figure 4), the second piece (22; see at least figure 4) comprising microstructures (23; see at least figure 4) arranged for fitting in spaces between the microstructures of the first piece (20; see at least figure 4); and
gluing the first piece and the second piece together so as to form an optical guide with two parallel faces (see at least paragraph [0057 where 22 and 20 are adhesively bonded together).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 3-13 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection. After further consideration of applicant’s arguments/remarks and the prior art of record, a new reference, Morino et al. (US 2006/0056185 A1), has been found to teach the limitation added to independent claims 1 and 11. See rejection above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA MCMILLAN APENTENG whose telephone number is (571)272-5510. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am-5:00 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, ABDULMAJEED AZIZ can be reached on 571-270-5046. 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.
/JESSICA M APENTENG/Examiner, Art Unit 2875
/ABDULMAJEED AZIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2875