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 § 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, 18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2023/0161160 to Moon et al.
Moon discloses in figures 1 and 7, an optical waveguide system comprising:
an optical waveguide (140);
an in-coupling grating (130; paragraph 60), the in-coupling grating is arranged on one side surface of the optical waveguide, the in-coupling grating is a one-dimensional grating (paragraph 60), and the in-coupling grating is configured for coupling light emitted by a micro-projector located externally into the optical waveguide (input source 110);
a turning grating (131; figure 7), the turning grating is arranged on the optical waveguide and is located on the same side surface or a different side surface of the in-coupling grating, the turning grating is a two-dimensional grating, and the turning grating is configured for receiving and expanding light of the in-coupling grating; and
an out-coupling grating (151), the out-coupling grating is arranged on the other side surface of the optical waveguide, projections of the turning grating and the out-coupling grating on the optical waveguide at least partially coincide, the out-coupling grating is a one-dimensional grating (outputs only in the Y-direction), and the out-coupling grating is configured for receiving lights from the turning grating and the in-coupling grating and coupling the lights out from the optical waveguide (see arrows to “E”; figure 1).
As to claim 18, the waveguide is glass.
As to claim 20, the invention is directed to project an image to be viewed by human eyes.
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) 2-17 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moon in view of US 2023/0008461 to Ha et al.
Moon discloses the invention as claimed except for additional gratings, functional areas, shapes, ratios, and other characteristics with adjustable variables. It is noted that the selection of a optimal variable is within the level of ordinary skill in the art to optimize a device.
Ha discloses such multiple one-dimensional pupil expansion gratings and grating periods (figure 3) to optimize and emit light to human eyes.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to add gratings, set duty ratios, refractive indicies and set periods as claimed to optimize the light and image output to a device user.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Eric K Wong whose telephone number is (571)272-2363. The examiner can normally be reached M-Tu, Th-F 8A-6P.
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, Thomas Hollweg can be reached on 571-270-1739. 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.
ERIC K. WONG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2874
/Eric Wong/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights