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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s argument that “1A-optical-pate mismatch: in Balan, the ambient light impinges on the user’s eye, not the optical element 125, and the optical element 125 receives only eye-reflected light, which is fundamentally different”. Balan does disclose a coupling feature (125) configured to direct ambient light impinging on the coupling feature onto the sensor, because the reflected light includes the ambient light, so that the optical element receives the ambient light as well and direct it onto the sensor.
Regarding applicant’s argument that “1B-Sensor function mismatch: Balan discloses the sensor 134r is an image sensor or visible-light camera, its purpose is to capture images of the eye or detection area. Therefore, the sensor is not configured to detect ambient light as require by claim 1”. However, Balan (para.106) discloses the sensor can be a combination of RGB/IR camera as well, so that it can be configured to detect ambient light as well.
Regarding applicant’s argument of claim 2, Balan does disclose the ambient light directed onto said sensor is guided in the display element (see at least fig.3A and para.105 and 106 discloses “An optical element 125 embodies the detection area 139r by capturing reflected light from the user's eye received along the optical axis 142 and directs the captured light to the sensor 134r… the optical element 125 includes an optical element which reflects visible light reflected from the user's eye, for example a partially reflective mirror”. Note: mentioned above the reflected light includes the ambient light).
Regarding applicant’s argument of claim 8, Balan does disclose said coupling feature is comprised in said lateral surface (see at least figs.3A, said coupling feature is comprised in said lateral surface as well and other portions of the display element).
Regarding applicant’s argument of claim 20, Balan does disclose the ambient light directed onto said sensor is guided in the display element due to internal reflection (see at least fig.3A and para.105 and 106 discloses “An optical element 125 embodies the detection area 139r by capturing reflected light from the user's eye received along the optical axis 142 and directs the captured light to the sensor 134r… the optical element 125 includes an optical element which reflects visible light reflected from the user's eye, for example a partially reflective mirror”. Note: mentioned above the reflected light includes the ambient light).
In response to applicant's argument of claim 11 that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
In response to applicant’s argument of claim 11 that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Balan does not explicitly disclose said fixation component has a bright surface.
Zhang discloses an analogous art, in at least figs.5 and 9, said fixation component has a bright surface (see figs.5 and 9) for the purpose of forming a white fixation component.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have said fixation component has a bright surface as taught by Zhang in the head-mounted display of Balan for the purpose of forming a white fixation component.
In response to applicant’s argument of claim 12 that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Balan does not explicitly disclose said detection opening includes a light guiding structure configured for guiding light from said lateral surface to said sensor.
Moore discloses a head-mounted display, in at least figs.12-17, said detection opening (1262-1762) includes a light guiding structure (1263-1763) in front of said sensor (1230-1730) and the light guiding structure configured for guiding light (1680) to said sensor for the purpose of guiding ambient light between the opening to the sensor (para.85).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have said detection opening includes a light guiding structure in front of said sensor and the light guiding structure configured for guiding light to said sensor as taught by Moore in the head-mounted display of Balan in order to have said detection opening includes a light guiding structure configured for guiding light from said lateral surface to said sensor because Balan teaches the sensor facing said lateral surface directly in at least fig.3 for the purpose of guiding ambient light between the opening to the sensor.
In response to applicant's argument of claim 19 that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
In response to applicant’s argument of claim 19 that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Balan does not explicitly disclose said fixation component has a bright surface at a region of said contact surface with said lateral surface of said display element.
Zhang discloses an analogous art, in at least figs.5 and 9, said fixation component formed with a white color (see figs.5 and 9) for the purpose of forming a white fixation component.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have said fixation component formed with a white color as taught by Zhang in the head-mounted display of Balan in order to have said fixation component has a bright surface at a region of said contact surface with said lateral surface of said display element for the purpose of forming a white fixation component.
Therefore, The Examiner maintains the rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 8, 10, 15-17 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Balan US 2013/0114043.
Regarding claim 1, Balan discloses a head-mounted display, in at least figs.1-1E and 3A comprising:
a fixation component (115) configured to at least temporarily fix the head-mounted display to a head of a user (see figs.1A and 1B);
a generally transparent display element (14r) configured to overlay a visual data output with an environment in a field of view of the user (see figs.1A-1E);
a sensor (134r) comprised in the fixation component (see figs.1E and 3A) and configured to detect ambient light (para.105 and 106); and,
said generally transparent display element including a coupling feature (125) configured to direct ambient light impinging on the coupling feature onto the sensor (see fig.3A and para.105 and 106, the coupling feature 125 reflects the ambient light (such as the natural or actual direct view) to the sensor, after the ambient light passes through the lens 118 along the optical axis 142 and reflected from the user’s eye).
Regarding claim 2, Balan discloses the ambient light directed onto said sensor is guided in the display element (see at least fig.3A and para.105 and 106).
Regarding claim 3, Balan discloses said coupling feature is configured to direct ambient light impinging on said coupling feature onto said sensor by at least one of diffusion, reflection, specular reflection, refraction, and diffraction (see at least fig.3A and para.105 and 106).
Regarding claim 4, Balan discloses said display element is an areal display element having a lateral surface (see at least figs.1E and 3A).
Regarding claim 8, Balan discloses said coupling feature is comprised in said lateral surface (see at least figs.3A, said coupling feature is comprised in said lateral surface as well).
Regarding claim 10, Balan discloses said fixation component defines a detection opening (see at least figs.1E and 3A) at a contact surface (see at least figs.1E and 3A) of said fixation component with said lateral surface of said display element configured to enable an optical connection between said coupling feature and said sensor (see at least figs.1E and 3A).
Regarding claim 15, Balan discloses the head-mounted-display is at least one of data glasses, augmented reality glasses, and smart glasses (see at least fig.1A and 1B).
Regarding claim 16, Balan discloses said fixation component includes a spectacle frame (see at least figs.1A and 1B).
Regarding claim 17, Balan discloses said display element is an areal display element having a lateral surface (see at least figs.1A and 1B and 3A); and said display element includes at least one lens (118), wherein said lateral surface includes a lens edge (see figs.1A, 1B and 3A).
Regarding claim 20, Balan discloses the ambient light directed onto said sensor is guided in the display element due to internal reflection (see at least fig.3A and para.105 and 106).
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.
Claim(s) 11 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balan US 2013/0114043 as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Zhang CN 106846348A (see machine translation of 17752632_2025-09-05_CN_106846348_A_M.pdf).
Regarding claims 11 and 18, Balan does not explicitly disclose said fixation component has a bright surface, and said bright surface is a white surface.
Zhang discloses an analogous art, in at least figs.5 and 9, said fixation component has a bright surface, and said bright surface is a white surface (see figs.5 and 9) for the purpose of forming a white fixation component.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have said fixation component has a bright surface, and said bright surface is a white surface as taught by Zhang in the head-mounted display of Balan for the purpose of forming a white fixation component.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balan US 2013/0114043 as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Moore US 20200082790.
Regarding claim 12, Balan does not explicitly disclose said detection opening includes a light guiding structure configured for guiding light from said lateral surface to said sensor.
Moore discloses a head-mounted display, in at least figs.12-17, said detection opening (1262-1762) includes a light guiding structure (1263-1763) in front of said sensor (1230-1730) and the light guiding structure configured for guiding light (1680) to said sensor for the purpose of guiding ambient light between the opening to the sensor (para.85).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have said detection opening includes a light guiding structure in front of said sensor and the light guiding structure configured for guiding light to said sensor as taught by Moore in the head-mounted display of Balan in order to have said detection opening includes a light guiding structure configured for guiding light from said lateral surface to said sensor because Balan teaches the sensor facing said lateral surface directly in at least fig.3 for the purpose of guiding ambient light between the opening to the sensor.
Claim(s) 13 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balan US 2013/0114043 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tuli US 2018/0180883.
Regarding claims 13 and 14, Balan discloses said coupling feature includes a partially reflective mirror configured to direct ambient light impinging on said microstructure onto said sensor (para.106).
Balan does not explicitly disclose said coupling feature includes a microstructure and said microstructure includes at least one micromirror.
Tuli discloses a head-mounted display, said coupling feature can be a partially reflective mirror or micromirrors (para.26) for the purpose of reflecting light (para.26).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have said coupling feature can be a partially reflective mirror or micromirrors as taught by Tuli in the head-mounted display of Balan in order to have said coupling feature includes a microstructure and said microstructure includes at least one micromirror for the purpose of reflecting light to the sensor.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balan US 2013/0114043 as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Zhang CN 106846348A (see machine translation of 17752632_2025-09-05_CN_106846348_A_M.pdf).
Regarding claim 19, Balan does not explicitly disclose said fixation component has a bright surface at a region of said contact surface with said lateral surface of said display element.
Zhang discloses an analogous art, in at least figs.5 and 9, said fixation component formed with a white color (see figs.5 and 9) for the purpose of forming a white fixation component.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have said fixation component formed with a white color as taught by Zhang in the head-mounted display of Balan in order to have said fixation component has a bright surface at a region of said contact surface with said lateral surface of said display element for the purpose of forming a white fixation component.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 9, the prior art of record does not disclose or suggest the claim limitation of “said lateral surface features a matt surface”, along with other claim limitations.
Balan US 2013/0114043, Moore US 20200082790, Tuli US 2018/0180883, Zhang CN 106846348A, either singularly or in combination, does not disclose or suggest the claim limitation of “said lateral surface features a matt surface”, along with other claim limitations.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JIA X PAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7574. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 11:00AM - 5:00PM.
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, Michael H Caley can be reached at (571)272-2286. 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.
/JIA X PAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871