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 § 112
Claims 10, 11, 18 & 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The specification does not describe an embodiment wherein a surface rotates relative to a second surface to create a viewing area separation as is recited in claims 10, 11, 18 & 19.
Claims 10, 11, 18 & 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
The specification does not describe or enable an embodiment wherein a surface rotates relative to a second surface to create a viewing area separation as is recited in claims 10, 11, 18 & 19.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 6-9 & 12-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticiapted by Kim et al. (US patent application publication 2022/0308525) (hereinafter Kim).
Regarding claim 6, Kim discloses an apparatus comprising: a furniture subsystem comprising a surface (3); a volumetric light display subsystem (15, 20) that is mounted to the furniture subsystem, that is disposed adjacent the surface, and that is operable to produce a hologram ([0062]); and an actuation subsystem (50) that is operable to transform the apparatus between a furniture mode and a volumetric light display system mode (Fig. 2 shows both configurations), wherein in the volumetric light display mode, the volumetric light display subsystem produces the hologram for viewing by a person looking at the apparatus ([0052]), and wherein in the furniture mode, the volumetric light display subsystem is hidden ([0052]).
Regarding claim 7, Kim discloses an apparatus wherein the actuation subsystem is further operable to transform the apparatus between the furniture mode and the volumetric light display mode by physically moving the surface relative to a second surface (10) of the apparatus ([0051]).
Regarding claim 8, Kim discloses an apparatus wherein when the actuation subsystem moves the surface relative to the second surface in a direction normal to the surface (Fig. 2), the actuation subsystem increases or decreases distance between the surface and the second surface, creating a space (the space is the area filled by 40).
Regarding claim 9, Kim discloses an apparatus wherein the hologram is observable in the space between the surface and the second surface (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 12, Kim discloses an apparatus an apparatus comprising: a first member (3), defining a first surface (3a); a second member (10), defining a second surface (10); an actuator (50), that is operable to move the first surface relative to the second surface in a direction approximately normal to a point on the first surface or the second surface (Fig. 2), producing a separation (the separation is the space filled by 40) between the surface and the second surface; and a generator (15) that is operable to produce a volumetric image or volumetric images for viewing by an observer looking into the separation.
Regarding claim 13, Kim discloses an apparatus wherein the separation surrounds a volumetric display (40) or volumetric displays, which generate the volumetric image or volumetric images such that the volumetric image or volumetric images is observable from multiple directions about the apparatus simultaneously.
Regarding claim 14, Kim discloses an apparatus comprising: a furniture subsystem comprising a surface (3); a volumetric light display subsystem that is mounted to the furniture subsystem, that is disposed adjacent the surface, and that is operable to produce a hologram; and an actuation subsystem (50) that is operable to transform the apparatus between a furniture mode and a plurality of volumetric light display modes (Fig. 2), wherein in each volumetric light display mode, the volumetric light display subsystem produces a hologram for viewing by a person looking at the apparatus, and wherein in the furniture mode, the volumetric light display subsystem is recessed ([0052 & 0062]).
Regarding claim 15, Kim discloses an apparatus wherein the actuation subsystem is further operable to transform the apparatus between the furniture mode and said each volumetric light display mode by physically moving the surface relative to another surface or other surfaces of the apparatus (Fig. 2 & [0052]).
Regarding claim 16, Kim discloses an apparatus wherein when the actuation subsystem moves the surface relative to another surface the actuation subsystem changes distance between the surface and the another surface, creating a space (the space is filled by 40).
Regarding claim 17, Kim discloses an apparatus wherein the hologram is observable in the space ([0052 & 0062]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments/comments/remarks filed 11/22/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments/comments/remarks with respect to claim(s) 6-19 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
The examiner would like to clarify a point from the “substance of the 7/1/2025 interview” when applicants states “the time has expired to amend in a methods claim”. Since applicant received an action on the originally presented apparatus claims any further submitted new claims drawn to “a method” would be subject to “restriction by original presentation” (see MPEP 818.02(a)). Method claims may be pursued in a subsequential divisional or continuing application.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure because it gives a general state of the art.
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 DANIEL J ROHRHOFF whose telephone number is (571)270-7624. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:00.
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, Dan Troy can be reached at 571-270-3742. 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.
/DANIEL J ROHRHOFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637