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 .
Remark
This Office Action is in response to applicant’s amendment filed on June 30, 2026, which has been entered into the file.
By this amendment, the applicant has amended claims 1 and 5 and has canceled claims 3 and 21.
Claims 1, 2, and 4-18 remain pending in this application.
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) 1-2, 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the US patent application by Laakkonen et al (US 2009/0224416 A1) in view of the US patent the US patent application publication by Lee et al (US 2017/0106690 A1), US patent application publication by Pedersen et al (US 002/0044285 A1) and US patent application publication by Pockett et al (US 2010/0277803 A1).
Claim 1 has been significantly amended to necessitate the new grounds of rejection.
Laakkonen et al teaches, with regard to claim 1, a waveguide master grating (50, please see Figure 15, waveguide Figure 14), serves as the waveguide master grating imprint tool, implicitly includes a method for fabricating the waveguide master grating imprint tool, wherein the waveguide master grating imprint tool is comprised of a first diffraction grating master profile (area A1) onto a first area and a second diffraction mater profile (area A2) onto a second area. Laakkonen et al teaches that each of the first diffraction grating master profile and the second diffraction grating master profile comprising an edge that delimits the respective grating profile and the adjacent edges of the first diffraction grating master profile and the second diffraction grating master profile spaced apart from each other (regard to amendment to claim) and define a gap, (area A3) between the first diffraction grating master profile and the second diffraction grating master profile.
Laakkonen et al teaches that the master grating imprint tool (50, Figure 15) may be utilized to fabricate grating (10) that has a first grating and a second grating for a waveguide (Figure 14).
This reference has met all the limitations of the claims. This reference does not teach explicitly that the method for forming the waveguide master grating imprint tool by coating a first surface of the substrate with at least one photoresist and selectively exposing the first diffraction grating master profile onto first area and selectively exposing the second diffraction grating master profile onto the second area.
Lee et al (‘690) in the same field of endeavor teaches a method for fabricating an originating master that serves as the grating imprinting tool, wherein the method comprises a step of coating a first surface of a substrate (2, Figures 1-3) with at least one photoresist layer (4), step of selectively exposing a first diffraction grating master profile (6) onto a first area or region (7) of the at least one photoresist layer, and step of selectively exposing a second diffraction grating master profile (8) onto a second area or region (9) of the at least one photoresist layer. The method further comprises step of processing the substrate to form the first diffraction grating master profile and the second diffraction grating master profile (6 and 8).
It would then have been obvious to one skilled in the art to apply the teachings of Lee et al to use a common exposure method to form the waveguide master grating imprint tool or the master grating.
Claim 1 has been amended to include the phrase “the first diffraction grating master profile comprises a first grating pattern that includes a first portion that extends from a surface of the first grating pattern that is coplanar with a lowest surface of the gap in a direction toward a second surface of the substrate that is opposite to the first surface” and has amended to include the phrase “the first grating pattern includes a third portion that is adjacent to the first portion and extends from the surface of the first grating pattern that is coplanar with the lowest surface of the gap in a direction away from the second surface of the substrate”.
Claim 1 has been amended to include the phrase “the second diffraction grating master profile comprises a second grating pattern that includes a second portion that extends from a surface of the second grating pattern that is coplanar with the lowest surface of the gap in a direction toward the second surface of the substrate such that at least one of the first portion and the second portion closer to the second surface of the substrate than the lowest surface of the gap” and the phrase “the second grating pattern includes a fourth portion that is adjacent to the second portion and extends from the surface of the second grating portion that is coplanar with the lowest surface of the gap in the direction away from the second surface of the substrate such that the third portion and the fourth portion are farther from the second surface of the substrate than the lowest surface of the gap”.
Laakkonen et al teaches that the first diffraction grating master profile (area A1) comprises a first grating pattern that includes a third portion that extends from a surface of the first grating pattern that is coplanar with lowest surface of the gap (A3, Figure 15) wherein in light of Lee et al, it is extended in a direction away from the second surface of the substrate and the second diffraction grating master profile (A2) comprises a second grating pattern that includes a fourth portion that extends from a surface of the second grating pattern that is coplanar with lowest surface of the gap (A3) that it is extended in a direct away from the second surface of the substrate. Laakkonen et al teaches that the third portion and the fourth portion are farther from the second surface of the substrate than the lowest surface of the gap.
Laakkonen et al also teaches that the first grating pattern also comprises a first portion that is adjacent to the third portion that extends toward the second surface of the substrate and the second grating pattern also comprises a second portion that is adjacent to the fourth portion and extends toward the second surface of the substrate. This reference however does not teach explicitly that the first and second portions are closer to the second surface of the substrate than the lowest surface of the gap, (please see the Figure below).
PNG
media_image1.png
473
750
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Pedersen et al in the same field of endeavor teaches a diffraction grating that has a first and second profiles wherein each profile comprises a first and second grating patterns respectively, (2 and 3, Figure 1(a)). Pedersen et al teaches that the first grating pattern (2) comprises a first portion and a third portion adjacent to each other wherein the first portion extends from a surface of the first grating pattern that is coplanar with a lowest surface of a gap toward to a second surface of a substrate below and it is closer to the second surface than the lowest surface of the gap and the third portion extends from the surface of the first grating pattern away from the second surface and it is father from the second surface than the lowest surface of the gap. Pedersen et al also teaches that the second grating pattern (3) comprises a second portion and a fourth portion adjacent to each other wherein the second portion extends from a surface of the second grating pattern that is coplanar with a lowest surface of a gap toward to a second surface of a substrate below and it is closer to the second surface than the lowest surface of the gap and the fourth portion extends from the surface of the first grating pattern away from the second surface and it is father from the second surface than the lowest surface of the gap.
PNG
media_image2.png
200
617
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would then have been obvious to one skilled in the art to apply the teachings of Pedersen et al to the make the diffraction grating mater profile to have the specific diffraction grating patterns for the benefit of making the grating imprint tool to have specific diffraction grating design.
Both Laakkonen et al and Pedersen et al teaches that the first diffraction grating master profile (A1, for Laakkonen et al Figure 15, and 2 for Pedersen et al Figure 1(c)) and the second diffraction grating master profile (A2 or 3) are different from each other. These references do not teach explicitly that the waveguide is of a head mounted or head up display. However, the feature concerning the waveguide being of a head mounted or head up display is an intended use for the waveguide and it is irrelevant for the method of fabricating a waveguide master grating imprint tool as claimed. Furthermore, Pockett et al in the same field of endeavor teaches a waveguide display that is comprised of an input grating (12, Figure 4, paragraph [0053]) and an output grating (16) that have different grating profile. Pockett et al teaches that the waveguide comprises a head mount display configured to propagate image-bearing light, from the micro display 22 of an optical engine 20, (Figure 3a and Figures 8 and 9) to a viewer. It is therefore obvious to one skilled in the art to apply the teachings of Pockett et al to utilize the waveguide master grating imprint tool to specifically modify and make the first diffraction grating master profile and the second diffraction grating master profile of Laakkonen et al in light of Pedersen et al to match to the shapes of input grating and output grating of Pockett et al for the benefit of utilizing the method to explicitly fabricate the waveguide of Pockett et al for the benefit of expanding the utilization of the imprint tool.
With regard to claim 2, Lee et al teaches that the method further comprises the step of etching the substrate to form the first diffraction grating master profile and the second diffraction grating master profile and removing unexposed photoresist layer (4, please see paragraph [0121]).
With regard to claim 4, Lee et al teaches that the edge of the first diffraction grating master profile and the edge of the second diffraction master profile are perpendicular to a surface of the substate coated with the at least one photoresist layer, (please see Figures 1-3 of Lee et al and Figure 5B of Dong et al).
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US patent application publication by Laakkonen et al (US 2009/0224416 A1) in view of the US patent application publication by Pedersen et al (US 20020044285 A1) and US patent application publication by Pockett et al (US 2010/0277803 A1).
Claim 5 has been significantly amended that necessitates the new grounds of rejection.
Laakkonen et al teaches, with respect to claim 5, a mold (50, Figure 15) serves as the master grating imprint tool for fabricating a waveguide having grating, (10, please see Figures 14-15), wherein the master grating imprint tool having a substrate (50), including a first surface and a second surface that is opposite the first surface with a first diffraction grating master profile etched (please see paragraph [0061]), into a first area of the first surface of the substrate (A1) and a second diffraction grating master profile etched into a second area of the first surface of the substrate (A2). Laakkonen et al teaches that each of the first diffraction grating master profile and the second diffraction grating master profile comprise an edge that delimits the respective grating profile wherein adjacent edges of the first diffraction grating master profile and the second diffraction grating master profile spaced apart from each other and defines a gap (A3) between the first diffraction master profile and the second diffraction grating master profile.
Laakkonen et al teaches that the master grating imprint tool (50, Figure 15) may be utilized to fabricate grating (10) that has a first grating and a second grating for a waveguide (Figure 14).
Claim 1 has been amended to include the phrase “the first diffraction grating master profile comprises a first grating pattern that includes a first portion that extends from a surface of the first grating pattern that is coplanar with a lowest surface of the gap in a direction toward a second surface of the substrate that is opposite to the first surface” and has amended to include the phrase “the first grating pattern includes a third portion that is adjacent to the first portion and extends from the surface of the first grating pattern that is coplanar with the lowest surface of the gap in a direction away from the second surface of the substrate”.
Claim 5 has been amended to include the phrase “the second diffraction grating master profile comprises a second grating pattern that includes a second portion that extends from a surface of the second grating pattern that is coplanar with the lowest surface of the gap in a direction toward the second surface of the substrate such that at least one of the first portion and the second portion closer to the second surface of the substrate than the lowest surface of the gap” and the phrase “the second grating pattern includes a fourth portion that is adjacent to the second portion and extends from the surface of the second grating portion that is coplanar with the lowest surface of the gap in the direction away from the second surface of the substrate such that the third portion and the fourth portion are farther from the second surface of the substrate than the lowest surface of the gap”.
Laakkonen et al teaches that the first diffraction grating master profile (area A1) comprises a first grating pattern that includes a third portion that extends from a surface of the first grating pattern that is coplanar with lowest surface of the gap (A3, Figure 15) wherein in light of Lee et al, it is extended in a direction away from the second surface of the substrate and the second diffraction grating master profile (A2) comprises a second grating pattern that includes a fourth portion that extends from a surface of the second grating pattern that is coplanar with lowest surface of the gap (A3) that it is extended in a direct away from the second surface of the substrate. Laakkonen et al teaches that the third portion and the fourth portion are farther from the second surface of the substrate than the lowest surface of the gap.
Laakkonen et al also teaches that the first grating pattern also comprises a first portion that is adjacent to the third portion that extends toward the second surface of the substrate and the second grating pattern also comprises a second portion that is adjacent to the fourth portion and extends toward the second surface of the substrate. This reference however does not teach explicitly that the first and second portions are closer to the second surface of the substrate than the lowest surface of the gap, (please see the Figure below).
PNG
media_image1.png
473
750
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Pedersen et al in the same field of endeavor teaches a diffraction grating that has a first and second profiles wherein each profile comprises a first and second grating patterns respectively, (2 and 3, Figure 1(a)). Pedersen et al teaches that the first grating pattern (2) comprises a first portion and a third portion adjacent to each other wherein the first portion extends from a surface of the first grating pattern that is coplanar with a lowest surface of a gap toward to a second surface of a substrate below and it is closer to the second surface than the lowest surface of the gap and the third portion extends from the surface of the first grating pattern away from the second surface and it is father from the second surface than the lowest surface of the gap. Pedersen et al also teaches that the second grating pattern (3) comprises a second portion and a fourth portion adjacent to each other wherein the second portion extends from a surface of the second grating pattern that is coplanar with a lowest surface of a gap toward to a second surface of a substrate below and it is closer to the second surface than the lowest surface of the gap and the fourth portion extends from the surface of the first grating pattern away from the second surface and it is father from the second surface than the lowest surface of the gap.
PNG
media_image2.png
200
617
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would then have been obvious to one skilled in the art to apply the teachings of Pedersen et al to the make the diffraction grating mater profile to have the specific diffraction grating patterns for the benefit of making the grating imprint tool to have specific diffraction grating design.
Both Laakkonen et al and Pedersen et al teaches that the first diffraction grating master profile (A1, for Laakkonen et al Figure 15, and 2 for Pedersen et al Figure 1(c)) and the second diffraction grating master profile (A2 or 3) are different from each other. These references do not teach explicitly that the waveguide is of a head mounted or head up display. However, the feature concerning the waveguide being of a head mounted or head up display is an intended use for the waveguide and it is irrelevant for the method of fabricating a waveguide master grating imprint tool as claimed. Furthermore, Pockett et al in the same field of endeavor teaches a waveguide display that is comprised of an input grating (12, Figure 4, paragraph [0053]) and an output grating (16) that have different grating profile. Pockett et al teaches that the waveguide comprises a head mount display configured to propagate image-bearing light, from the micro display 22 of an optical engine 20, (Figure 3a and Figures 8 and 9) to a viewer. It is therefore obvious to one skilled in the art to apply the teachings of Pockett et al to utilize the waveguide master grating imprint tool to specifically modify and make the first diffraction grating master profile and the second diffraction grating master profile of Laakkonen et al in light of Pedersen et al to match to the shapes of input grating and output grating of Pockett et al for the benefit of utilizing the method to explicitly fabricate the waveguide of Pockett et al for the benefit of expanding the utilization of the imprint tool.
Claim 5 also includes the phrase “the second grating master profile different from the first diffraction grating master profile”.
Claim 5 also includes the phrase “a waveguide to be produced by the master grating imprint tool is of a head-mounted display system or a head-up display system, and the waveguide is configured to propagate image-bearing light to a viewer”.
Both Laakkonen et al and Pedersen et al teach that the first diffraction grating master profile (A1, for Laakkonen et al Figure 15 and 2, for Pedersen et al, Figure 1(a)) and the second diffraction grating master profile (A2 or 3) are different from each other. These references do not teach explicitly that the waveguide is of a head mounted or head up display. However, the feature concerning the waveguide being of a head-mounted or head-up display is an intended use for the waveguide and it is irrelevant for the method of fabricating a waveguide master grating imprint tool as claimed. Furthermore, Pockett et al in the same field of endeavor teaches a waveguide display that is comprised of an input grating (12, Figure 4, paragraph [0053]) and an output grating (16) that have different grating profile. Pockett et al teaches that the waveguide comprises a head mount display configured to propagate image-bearing light, from a micro display 22 of an optical engine 20, (Figure 3a and Figures 8 and 9) to a viewer. It is therefore obvious to one skilled in the art to apply the teachings of Pockett et al to utilize the waveguide master grating imprint tool to specifically modify and make the first diffraction grating master profile and the second diffraction grating master profile of Laakkonen et al and Pedersen et al to match to the shapes of input grating and output grating of Pockett et al for the benefit of utilizing the method to explicitly fabricate the waveguide of Pockett et al for the benefit of expanding the utilization of the imprint tool.
With regard to claim 6, Laakkonen et al teaches that the height of the grating therefore the edge between the substrate and the respective diffraction grating master profile is about 261 nm, (please see paragraph [0085]) that is much less than 25 millimeters.
Claim(s) 7-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laakkonen et al, Pedersen et al and Pockett et al as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of the US patent application publication by Valera et al (US 2015/0086163 A1).
Laakkonen et al teaches a master grating imprint tool for fabricating a waveguide that in combination with the teachings of Pedersen et al and Pockett et al as described in claim 5 above.
With regard to claims 7 and 15, Laakkonen et al teaches that the imprint tool that implicitly includes a method for fabricating a waveguide comprising at least two diffraction grating profiles, (please see Figures 14-15), wherein the method comprises using the master grating imprint tool (50 of Laakkonen et al) to replicate the first diffraction grating profile (A1) and the second diffraction grating profile (A2) respectively wherein the first and second diffraction grating profiles are being imprinted in the same process step. Laakkonen et al however does not teach to apply at least one dielectric layer over the first diffraction grating profile and the second diffraction grating profile.
Valera et al teaches an imprint tool including a binary master relief grating (31, Figure 4F) to replicate the first diffraction master profile (32) and the second diffraction grating master profile (34) to form a first diffraction grating pattern (38, Figure 4H of Valera et al) and a second diffraction grating pattern (37), respectively. Valera et al further teaches the method to comprise a step of applying at least one dielectric layer (37 and 38, Valera et al, Figure 4H) over the first diffraction grating pattern and the second diffraction grating pattern, (please see paragraph [0084]. It would then have been obvious to one skilled in the art to apply the teachings of Valera et al to modify the imprint process to further include a dielectric layer (please see paragraph [0084]) for the benefit of providing reflection of the diffraction grating profiles.
With regard to claims 8 and 16, Valera et al teaches that the first diffraction grating pattern includes at least one of an input grating and an output grating and the second diffraction pattern includes at least one input grating and output grating, (please see Figures 1A and 1B).
With regard to claims 9-10 and 17-18, Laakkonen et al in light of the Valera et al teaches a waveguide fabricated using the method wherein the waveguide comprises a substrate (10, Figures 14-15 of Laakkonen et al) and a first diffraction grating pattern and a second diffraction grating pattern (A1 and A2) wherein each of the first diffraction grating pattern and the second diffraction grating pattern comprises an edge between the substrate and the respective diffraction grating pattern and wherein the edge is the same height as a maximum depth of the first diffraction grating master profile (A1 of 50) and the second diffraction grating profile (A2 of 50).
With regard to claim 11, Laakkonen et al teaches that the imprint tool that implicitly includes a method for fabricating a waveguide comprising at least two diffraction grating profiles, (please see Figures 14-15), wherein the method comprises using the master grating imprint tool (50 of Laakkonen et al) to replicate the first diffraction grating profile (A1) and the second diffraction grating profile (A2) respectively wherein the first and second diffraction grating profiles are being imprinted in the same process step. Laakkonen et al however does not teach to apply at least one dielectric layer over the first diffraction grating profile and the second diffraction grating profile.
Valera et al teaches an imprint tool including a binary master relief grating (31, Figure 4F) to replicate the first diffraction master profile (32) and the second diffraction grating master profile (34) to form a first diffraction grating pattern (38, Figure 4H of Valera et al) and a second diffraction grating pattern (37), respectively. Valera et al further teaches the method to comprise a step of applying at least one dielectric layer (37 and 38, Valera et al, Figure 4H) over the first diffraction grating pattern and the second diffraction grating pattern, (please see paragraph [0084]. It would then have been obvious to one skilled in the art to apply the teachings of Valera et al to modify the imprint process to further include a dielectric layer (please see paragraph [0084]) for the benefit of providing reflection of the diffraction grating profiles.
With regard to claim 12, Valera et al teaches that the first diffraction grating pattern includes at least one of an input grating and an output grating and the second diffraction pattern includes at least one of an input grating and an output grating, (please see Figures 1A and 1B).
With regard to claims 13 and 14, Laakkonen et al in light of Valera et al teaches a waveguide fabricated using the method wherein the waveguide comprises a substrate (10, Figures 14 and 15) and a first diffraction grating pattern and a second diffraction grating pattern (A1 and A2) wherein each of the first diffraction grating pattern and the second diffraction grating pattern comprises an edge between the substrate and the respective diffraction grating pattern and wherein the edge is the same height as a maximum depth of the first diffraction grating master profile (A1 of 50, Figure 15) and the second diffraction grating profile (A2 of 50).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 20, 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The newly amended claims have been fully considered and are rejected for the reasons set forth above.
Applicant’s arguments are mainly drawn to the amendment to the claims that have been fully addressed in the reasons for rejection set forth in reasons for rejections.
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 AUDREY Y CHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-2309. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 9:00AM-4:30PM.
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, Stephone B Allen can be reached on 571-272-2434. 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.
AUDREY Y. CHANG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2872
/AUDREY Y CHANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights