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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 09/03/2026 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/17/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Claims 8-12 and 18-22 are currently pending in the present application. Claims 1-7 and 13-17 are canceled; claims 8 and 20 are currently amended; claims 9-10 and 12 are original; claims 11 and 18-19 are previously presented; and claims 21-22 are newly added. The amendment dated August 21, 2026 has been entered into the record.
Response to Arguments
Regarding the newly amended claims 8 and 20, the applicant generally describes the present specification (Remarks, Pages 9-10), summarizes the waveguide assembly as disclosed by the prior art of Born (Remarks, Pages 10-11), and argues that “However, Born does not suggest the use of "a fold hologram comprising at least two fold gratings multiplexed in a same volume and arranged to simultaneously fold and split light within the waveguide to change a direction of the at least two light waves received from the input coupler to redirect the at least two light waves at other angles within the waveguide that are greater than the critical angle whereby the at least two light waves remain trapped within the waveguide by total internal reflection" that is used with the recited input and output couplers as recited. Instead, Born suggests cross-coupling of two SRGs and that one or more of the SRGs may be a volume hologram” and Born does not describes the recited folded hologram (Remarks, Pages 12-13).
Regarding the applicant’s arguments, the examiner respectively disagrees by the following reasons:
Born teaches
the surface relief gratings (SRGs) perform a functionality of a cross-coupler that expands the image light in the +Z direction and -Z direction, folds and splits light (Fig. 4 and Para. [0040]);
the cross-coupler Born includes diffractive gratings, e.g., volume holograms and surface relief gratings (SRGs) (Para. [0028] “couplers 52, 54, and 56 may include diffractive gratings (e.g., volume holograms, surface relief gratings, etc.)”);
(c) if desired, the operation of SRG structure is performed by any desired type of diffractive grating structure, e.g., by one or more respective volume holograms (Para. [0062]).
Because the SRGs of Born perform a functionality of a cross-coupler that expands the image light in the +Z direction and -Z direction, folds and splits the light, wherein the cross-coupler may include volume holograms and the operation of the cross-couple may be performed by volume hologram, the examiner considers Born teaches a fold hologram, that expands the image light in the +Z direction and -Z direction, simultaneously folds and splits light into two light waves that are turned around the axis perpendicular to the plane including the waveguide.
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 8-12 and 18-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Born (WO 2022/235804; US 2024/0045147 as the equivalent translation document), of record.
Regarding claim 8, Born discloses a waveguide assembly (Figs. 1-5 and 8), comprising:
a waveguide (coupler 52, 54, 56 in a waveguide 50; Para. [0007]-[0011]) that propagates light at angles of incidence greater than a critical angle at which total internal reflection occurs (Fig. 2; Para. [0027]);
an input coupler (52) comprising at least two volume hologram gratings multiplexed within a first three-dimensional (3D) volume (Fig. 2 and Para. [0024] “waveguide 50 may include holographic phase gratings such as volume holograms … multiple multiplexed gratings (e.g., holograms) that at least partially overlap within the same volume” and Para. [0047] “The two-dimensional grating outline may be blazed in three dimensions”), each volume hologram grating within the first 3D volume operating independently of each other volume hologram grating within the first 3D volume in response to input light of different wavelengths (see Fig. 4 teaching the image light 38 propagating in two different directions, as gratings operate independently of each other, and see Para. [0062] teaching replacing the SRG structure with volume holograms, and see Para. [0037] teaching gratings in responsive to image light 38 having more than one wavelength) to reflect or transmit the input light into the waveguide as propagating light (Para. [0027] “When image light 48 strikes input coupler 52, input coupler 52 may redirect image light 38 so that the light propagates within waveguide 50 via total internal reflection towards output coupler 56”), each volume hologram grating within the first 3D volume having at least one of a (1) same periodicity but a different orientation (see Para. [0038] “Grating vector k2 has a second orientation that is different from the orientation of grating vector k1 and has a corresponding magnitude. The magnitude of grating vector k2 may be equal to the magnitude of grating vector k1” teaching a same periodicity and different orientations; the examiner notes that the magnitude of grating vector is inversely proportional to the grating spacing, given by: K = 2π/Λ, i.e., having the same magnitude is having the same grating period) or (2) a same orientation but a different periodicity as each other volume hologram grating within the first 3D volume, to provide a different refractive index relative to each other volume hologram grating within the first 3D volume to increase a field of view of the input coupler in at least one dimension (A claim term is functional when it recites a feature "by what it does rather than by what it is" (e.g., as evidenced by its specific structure or specific ingredients). In re Swinehart, 439 F.2d 210, 212, 169 USPQ 226, 229 (CCPA 1971). See MPEP 2173.05(g). In this case, Born teaches gratings which are capable of providing a different refractive index relative to each other volume hologram grating within the first 3D volume since the incoming light can propagate different directions as shown in Figs. 4-5 and increasing a field of view of the input couple in at least one dimension. The examiner notes the applicant also acknowledges in Para. [0056] of the specification that volume gratings multiplexed in the same volume increase the field of view), wherein the at least two volume hologram gratings of the input coupler comprise a volume holographic fold grating that simultaneously folds and splits the propagating light into at least two light waves that are turned around an axis perpendicular to a plane including the waveguide and are diffracted at different angles relative to the input light and propagated within and trapped by the waveguide (see Paras. [0028] teaching the input coupler includes volume holograms and see Fig. 4 and Paras. [0027]-[0028] teaching an incoming light is being simultaneously folded and split the propagating light into at least two light waves that are turned around an axis perpendicular to a plane including the waveguide and are propagated within and trapped by the waveguide); and
a fold hologram (54 in Fig. 2; see Para. [0028] teaching the coupler 54 being a volume hologram) comprising at least two fold gratings multiplexed in a same volume (see Fig. 4 and Para. [0024] teaching volume holograms being multiple multiplexed holograms that at least partially overlap within the same volume) and arranged to simultaneously fold and split light within the waveguide to change a direction of the at least two light waves received from the input coupler to redirect the at least two light waves at other angles within the waveguide that are greater than the critical angle whereby the at least two light waves remain trapped within the waveguide by total internal reflection (see Fig. 4 and Paras. [0027]-[0028] teaching an incoming light in a volume hologram is being simultaneously folded and split the propagating light into at least two light waves that are turned around an axis perpendicular to a plane including the waveguide and are propagated within and trapped by the waveguide); and
an output coupler (56) comprising at least two volume hologram gratings multiplexed within a second 3D volume (Fig. 2 and Para. [0024] “waveguide 50 may include holographic phase gratings such as volume holograms … multiple multiplexed gratings (e.g., holograms) that at least partially overlap within the same volume” and Para. [0047] “The two-dimensional grating outline may be blazed in three dimensions”), each volume hologram grating within the second 3D volume operating independently of each other volume hologram grating within the second 3D volume in response to propagating light of different wavelengths propagating in the waveguide within an angle of incidence of the output coupler at which the propagating light is reflected or transmitted out of the waveguide (see Figs. 2 and 4 teaching the image light 38 propagating in two different directions, as gratings operate independently of each other, and propagating in the waveguide within an angle of incidence of 56 at which the propagating light 38 is reflected or transmitted out of the waveguide and see Para. [0062] teaching replacing the SRG structure with volume holograms, and see Para. [0037] teaching gratings in responsive to image light 38 having more than one wavelength), each volume hologram grating within the second 3D volume having at least one of a (1) same periodicity but a different orientation (see Para. [0038] “Grating vector k2 has a second orientation that is different from the orientation of grating vector k1 and has a corresponding magnitude. The magnitude of grating vector k2 may be equal to the magnitude of grating vector k1” teaching a same periodicity and different orientations; the examiner notes that the magnitude of grating vector is inversely proportional to the grating spacing, given by: K = 2π/Λ, i.e., having the same magnitude is having the same grating period) or (2) a same orientation but a different periodicity as each other volume hologram grating within the second 3D volume, to provide a different refractive index relative to each other volume hologram grating within the second 3D volume to increase a field of view of the output coupler in at least one dimension (A claim term is functional when it recites a feature "by what it does rather than by what it is" (e.g., as evidenced by its specific structure or specific ingredients). In re Swinehart, 439 F.2d 210, 212, 169 USPQ 226, 229 (CCPA 1971). See MPEP 2173.05(g). In this case, Born teaches gratings which are capable of providing a different refractive index relative to each other volume hologram grating within the second 3D volume since the incoming light can propagate different directions as shown in Figs. 4-5 and increasing a field of view of the input couple in at least one dimension. The examiner notes the applicant also acknowledges in Para. [0056] of the specification that volume gratings multiplexed in the same volume increase the field of view), the output coupler outcoupling the folded and split light received from the fold hologram out of the waveguide in a direction of the axis perpendicular to the plane including the waveguide (Para. [0028] teaching 56 being volume holograms and see Figs. 4-5 and 8 teaching the output coupler that simultaneously folds and splits received propagating light into two light waves that are turned around an axis perpendicular to a plane and outcouple the light out of the waveguide) for each different propagation direction in the waveguide (see arrows 90 and 92 in Figs. 4-5, teaching each different propagation direction in the waveguide 50),
wherein incident light received by the fold hologram is matched to an output light wave of the input coupler and light waves output by the fold hologram are matched to an input of the output coupler (see Figs. 4-5 and 8; regarding the term “incident light is matched an output light wave”, the examiner considers Paragraphs [0048] and [0067] in the Specification, and Born teaches incident light from the fold hologram continues to propagate in a waveguide reflected via TIR, and an output coupler outcouples the light as an input).
Regarding claim 9, Born discloses the limitations of claim 8 above, and further discloses wherein the propagating light output by the input coupler is reflected or transmitted by the waveguide to the output coupler, whereby the reflected or transmitted propagating light output by the input coupler has an angle of incidence that is within an acceptance angle of the output coupler upon interaction with the output coupler (see Figs. 2 and 4 and Para. [0027] teaching total internal reflection and reflecting or transmitting of light in the waveguide).
Regarding claim 10, Born discloses the limitations of claim 8 above, and further discloses wherein the output coupler extends in a propagation direction of the propagating light within the waveguide so as to have at least two interactions with the propagating light as the propagating light propagates in the propagation direction within the waveguide (see Figs. 2-3 wherein gratings in the couplers extends along the x direction and have more than two interactions with the light 38 within the waveguide 50).
Regarding claim 11, Born discloses the limitations of claim 10 above, and further discloses wherein the refractive index of each volume hologram grating of the second 3D volume has a value whereby the propagating light at the different wavelengths may be reflected or transmitted by the output coupler to an angle less than the critical angle so as to escape the waveguide (see Figs. 2 and 4 and Para. [0027] teaching total internal reflection and light 38 is reflected or transmitted out of the waveguide) (the examiner also notes that grating structures inherently have a periodic modulation of refractive index that diffracts light wave; Para. [0042]).
Regarding claim 12, Born discloses the limitations of claim 11 above, and further discloses wherein the output coupler has a diffraction efficiency profile as a function of length that is adapted to control an intensity of the propagating light at each interaction with the output coupler whereby light output by the output coupler has a desired intensity profile along the length of the output coupler (see Fig. 7 and Paras. [0050]-[0052] teaching diffraction efficiency as a function of position along the length of 74 in the couplers).
Regarding claim 18, Born discloses the limitations of claim 8 above, and further discloses wherein the input coupler is disposed in a first layer of the waveguide and the output coupler is disposed in a second layer of the waveguide, wherein the second layer is different from the first layer (Figs. 9 and 11; Paras [0061], [0064]).
Regarding claim 19, Born discloses the limitations of claim 8 above, and further discloses wherein the input coupler comprises at least two volume holographic fold gratings oriented to receive an input light wave incident at an angle of incidence to the waveguide that is less than the critical angle of the waveguide and that transmits or reflects the input light wave to form an output light wave that propagates in the waveguide at an angle of incidence greater than the critical angle and different than the angle of incidence of the input light wave (see Fig. 4, in which 74 comprising 100 and 102 folds and splits 38 into two light waves around the y-axis; see Para. [0027] teaching the input coupler 52 further comprises a cross-coupler and Para. [0027] teaching total internal reflection in the waveguide), and the output coupler comprises at least two volume holographic fold gratings oriented to receive propagating light from the waveguide at an angle of incidence greater than the critical angle and that transmits or reflects the propagating light to form an output light wave that has an angle of incidence less than the critical angle so as to escape the waveguide (see Fig. 5, in which 74 folds and splits 38 into two light waves around the y-axis and outcouples the light out of the waveguide; Para. [0027]).
Regarding claim 20, Born discloses an eyewear device (Figs. 1-5 and 8; Para. [0016] “The displays in system 10 may include near-eye displays 20 mounted within support structure (housing) 8)”, comprising:
an image source (20A; Para. [0016]);
a display (20; Para. [0016]) comprising an eye box (24);
a waveguide (couplers 52, 54, 56 in a waveguide 50; Paras. [0007]-[0011]) that propagates light at angles of incidence greater than a critical angle at which total internal reflection occurs (Fig. 2; Para. [0027]);
an input coupler (52) comprising at least two volume hologram gratings multiplexed within a first three-dimensional (3D) volume (Fig. 2 and Para. [0024] “waveguide 50 may include holographic phase gratings such as volume holograms … multiple multiplexed gratings (e.g., holograms) that at least partially overlap within the same volume” and Para. [0047] “The two-dimensional grating outline may be blazed in three dimensions”), each volume hologram grating within the first 3D volume operating independently of each other volume hologram grating within the first 3D volume in response to input light of different wavelengths from the image source (see Fig. 4 teaching the image light 38 propagating in two different directions, as gratings operate independently of each other, and see Para. [0062] teaching replacing the SRG structure with volume holograms, and see Para. [0037] teaching gratings in responsive to image light 38 having more than one wavelength) to reflect or transmit the input light into the waveguide as propagating light (Para. [0027] “When image light 48 strikes input coupler 52, input coupler 52 may redirect image light 38 so that the light propagates within waveguide 50 via total internal reflection towards output coupler 56”), each volume hologram grating within the first 3D volume having at least one of a (1) same periodicity but a different orientation (see Para. [0038] “Grating vector k2 has a second orientation that is different from the orientation of grating vector k1 and has a corresponding magnitude. The magnitude of grating vector k2 may be equal to the magnitude of grating vector k1” teaching a same periodicity and different orientations; the examiner notes that the magnitude of grating vector is inversely proportional to the grating spacing, given by: K = 2π/Λ, i.e., having the same magnitude is having the same grating period) or (2) a same orientation but a different periodicity as each other volume hologram grating within the first 3D volume, to provide a different refractive index relative to each other volume hologram grating within the first 3D volume to increase a field of view of the input coupler in at least one dimension (A claim term is functional when it recites a feature "by what it does rather than by what it is" (e.g., as evidenced by its specific structure or specific ingredients). In re Swinehart, 439 F.2d 210, 212, 169 USPQ 226, 229 (CCPA 1971). See MPEP 2173.05(g). In this case, Born teaches gratings which are capable of providing a different refractive index relative to each other volume hologram grating within the first 3D volume since the incoming light can propagate different directions as shown in Figs. 4-5 and increasing a field of view of the input couple in at least one dimension. The examiner notes the applicant also acknowledges in Para. [0056] of the specification that volume gratings multiplexed in the same volume increase the field of view); wherein the at least two volume hologram gratings of the input coupler comprise a volume holographic fold grating that simultaneously folds and splits the propagating light into at least two light waves that are turned around an axis perpendicular to a plane including the waveguide and are diffracted at different angles relative to the input light and propagated within and trapped by the waveguide (see Paras. [0028] teaching the input coupler includes volume holograms and see Fig. 4 and Paras. [0027]-[0028] teaching an incoming light is being simultaneously folded and split the propagating light into at least two light waves that are turned around an axis perpendicular to a plane including the waveguide and are propagated within and trapped by the waveguide); and
an output coupler (56) comprising at least two volume hologram gratings multiplexed within a second 3D volume (Fig. 2 and Para. [0024] “waveguide 50 may include holographic phase gratings such as volume holograms … multiple multiplexed gratings (e.g., holograms) that at least partially overlap within the same volume” and Para. [0047] “The two-dimensional grating outline may be blazed in three dimensions”), each volume hologram grating within the second 3D volume operating independently of each other volume hologram grating within the second 3D volume in response to propagating light of different wavelengths propagating in the waveguide within an angle of incidence of the output coupler at which the propagating light is reflected or transmitted out of the waveguide to the eye box of the display (see Figs. 2 and 4 teaching the image light 38 propagating in two different directions, as gratings operate independently of each other, and propagating in the waveguide within an angle of incidence of 56 at which the propagating light 38 is reflected or transmitted out of the waveguide and see Para. [0062] teaching replacing the SRG structure with volume holograms, and see Para. [0037] teaching gratings in responsive to image light 38 having more than one wavelength), each volume hologram grating within the second 3D volume having at least one of a (1) same periodicity but a different orientation (see Para. [0038] “Grating vector k2 has a second orientation that is different from the orientation of grating vector k1 and has a corresponding magnitude. The magnitude of grating vector k2 may be equal to the magnitude of grating vector k1” teaching a same periodicity and different orientations; the examiner notes that the magnitude of grating vector is inversely proportional to the grating spacing, given by: K = 2π/Λ, i.e., having the same magnitude is having the same grating period) or (2) a same orientation but a different periodicity as each other volume hologram grating within the second 3D volume, to provide a different refractive index relative to each other volume hologram grating within the second 3D volume to increase a field of view of the output coupler in at least one dimension (A claim term is functional when it recites a feature "by what it does rather than by what it is" (e.g., as evidenced by its specific structure or specific ingredients). In re Swinehart, 439 F.2d 210, 212, 169 USPQ 226, 229 (CCPA 1971). See MPEP 2173.05(g). In this case, Born teaches gratings which are capable of providing a different refractive index relative to each other volume hologram grating within the second 3D volume since the incoming light can propagate different directions as shown in Figs. 4-5 and increasing a field of view of the input couple in at least one dimension. The examiner notes the applicant also acknowledges in Para. [0056] of the specification that volume gratings multiplexed in the same volume increase the field of view), the output coupler outcoupling the folded and split light received from the fold hologram out of the waveguide in a direction of the axis perpendicular to the plane including the waveguide (Para. [0028] teaching 56 being volume holograms and see Figs. 4-5 and 8 teaching the output coupler that simultaneously folds and splits received propagating light into two light waves that are turned around an axis perpendicular to a plane and outcouple the light out of the waveguide) for each different propagation direction in the waveguide (see arrows 90 and 92 in Figs. 4-5, teaching each different propagation direction in the waveguide 50),
wherein incident light received by the fold hologram is matched to an output light wave of the input coupler and light waves output by the fold hologram are matched to an input of the output coupler (see Figs. 4-5 and 8; regarding the term “incident light is matched an output light wave”, the examiner considers Paragraphs [0048] and [0067] in the Specification, and Born teaches incident light from the fold hologram continues to propagate in a waveguide reflected via TIR, and an output coupler outcouples the light as an input).
Regarding claim 21, Born discloses the limitations of claim 8 above.
Born does not explicitly disclose the fold hologram has a diffraction efficiency selected to control an intensity of each of the redirected at least two light waves output by the fold hologram.
However, Born teaches the fold hologram has a diffraction efficiency selected as a function of position along the propagation direction of the coupler (Fig. 7, diffraction efficiency DE changes along the x-axis in each coupler; Paras. [0050]-[0052]), wherein it is known changing diffraction efficiency DE changes the optical power of light redirected by the fold hologram (i.e., Predirected = DE x Pin where I = P / A, in which I is the light intensity and A is the area over which the optical power P is distributed).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the fold hologram as disclosed by Born, wherein the fold hologram has a diffraction efficiency selected to control an intensity of each of the redirected at least two light waves output by the fold hologram, for the purpose of obtaining maximum diffraction efficiency within a peripheral region (Born: Para. [0050]).
Regarding claim 22, Born discloses the limitations of claim 20 above.
Born does not explicitly disclose the fold hologram has a diffraction efficiency selected to control an intensity of each of the redirected at least two light waves output by the fold hologram.
However, Born teaches the fold hologram has a diffraction efficiency selected as a function of position along the propagation direction of the coupler (Fig. 7, diffraction efficiency DE changes along the x-axis in each coupler; Paras. [0050]-[0052]), wherein it is known changing diffraction efficiency DE changes the optical power of light redirected by the fold hologram (i.e., Predirected = DE x Pin where I = P / A, in which I is the light intensity and A is the area over which the optical power P is distributed).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the fold hologram as disclosed by Born, wherein the fold hologram has a diffraction efficiency selected to control an intensity of each of the redirected at least two light waves output by the fold hologram, for the purpose of obtaining maximum diffraction efficiency within a peripheral region (Born: Para. [0050]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN Y JUNG whose telephone number is (469)295-9076. The examiner can normally be reached on 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, Michael H Caley can be reached on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JONATHAN Y JUNG/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights