CTFR 17/889,479 CTFR 96920 DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. This office action is in response to the amendment filed 4/3/2026. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1, 3-4, 6-7, 10 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Richards (US20190212482) in view of Obata et al. (JP2016120891, English translation attached) . Regarding claim 1 , Richards teaches an optical device (figs.1-8, abstract, a near eye display, NED 100) including a finder (figs.1-8, body 105) having an eyepiece lens system (fig.5, Fresnel lens 205), comprising: an angle selection type transmission element (fig.5, angle selective filter 310) that is disposed in an optical path of the finder (paragraph [0036], As shown in FIG. 3A, when the optical axis 320 of the eye 140 is aligned with the optical axis 345 of the NED 100, light beams corresponding to light 325 emitted from the electronic display 105 pass through the angle selective filter 310) and has a plurality of opening portions limiting a passage direction of a light flux (paragraph [0043], FIG. 4 is an illustration of a perspective view of the angle selective filter 310 having a curved surface 405, according to an embodiment. In some embodiments, the angle selective filter 310 can include a thin film multilayer filter. For example, the angle selective filter 310 can be a thin film or laminated filter configured to pass light beams with an angle of incidence less than a cut-off angle. In some embodiments, the angle selective filter 310 can include a set of louvers arranged concentrically. For example, a set of louvers could be used in concentric fashion to create the same effect of reducing light beams with an angle of incidence larger than the cut-off angle--- which mean that has a plurality of opening portions limiting a passage direction of a light flux); and a detector-configured (fig.5, camera 510) to perform line-of-sight detection by light passing through the angle selection type transmission element (fig.5, the filter 310; paragraph [0045], The illumination source 505 is configured to emit infrared light beams or near infrared light beams. The camera 510 is configured to receive or detect reflected light beams from the eye 140), wherein the angle selection type transmission element (fig.5, the 310) is positioned between an eye point (fig.5, exit pupil 145) which is a position of an eye of a user (fig.5, eye 140) and the eyepiece lens system (fig.5, the lens 205), and wherein the angle selection type transmission element does not change the passage direction of the light flux passing through the angle selection type transmission element (in paragraph [0042] Light beams corresponding to stray light 380 are blocked by the angle selective filter 310. In the illustration of FIG. 3C, the angle of incidence of the light beams exiting the optics block 135 and corresponding to the stray light 380 is the angle 385 between the normal to the tangent plane 370 and the angle of the light beams. In the illustration, the angle of incidence of the light beams corresponding to the stray light 380 is larger than the cut-off angle of the angle selective filter 310, and, therefore, the light beams corresponding to the stray light 380 are blocked by the angle selective filter 310. [0043] FIG. 4 is an illustration of a perspective view of the angle selective filter 310 having a curved surface 405, according to an embodiment. In some embodiments, the angle selective filter 310 can include a thin film multilayer filter. For example, the angle selective filter 310 can be a thin film or laminated filter configured to pass light beams with an angle of incidence less than a cut-off angle. In some embodiments, the angle selective filter 310 can include a set of louvers arranged concentrically. For example, a set of louvers could be used in concentric fashion to create the same effect of reducing light beams with an angle of incidence larger than the cut-off angle. [0046] Further, in the case of eye tracking, the angle selective filter 310 can be configured to pass infrared light beams or near infrared light beams for all or a much wider group of angles than visible light beams. As discussed above, the angle selective filter 310 is configured to filter out light beams of the image light in the visible light wavelength range with an angle of incidence on the curved surface larger than a first cut-off angle of incidence. The angle selective filter 310 can further be configured to allow light beams of the image light in the infrared or near infrared light wavelength range with an angle of incidence on the curved surface smaller than a second cut-off angle of incidence and larger than the first cut-off angle of incidence---which mean that wherein the angle selection filter 310 does not change the passage direction of the light flux passing through the angle selection filter 310). Richards does not explicitly disclose wherein at least one surface of the angle selection type transmission element has a flat surface. However, Obata teaches the analogous angle selection type transmission element (Obata, figs.4-7, louvers 122a to 122f has been referred to as angle selection type transmission element), and further teaches wherein at least one surface of the angle selection type transmission element has a flat surface (see Obata, fig.7, louvers 122a to 122f have a flat surface on the surface of semi-transparent planar mirror 111). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Richards to have the specific surface as taught by Obata for the purpose to serve the function of blocking stray light and the effect of improved visibility can still be obtained (Obata, as described in paragraph [0027]). Regarding claim 3 , combination Richards-Obata discloses the invention as described in Claim 1 and Richards further teaches wherein the detector (Richards, camera 510) has a light projecting unit (Richards, paragraph [0077], A projection assembly integrated into a near-eye-display, NED) and a light receiving unit (Richards, camera 510; paragraph [0045]The illumination source 505 is configured to emit infrared light beams or near infrared light beams. The camera 510 is configured to receive or detect reflected light beams from the eye 140. The reflected light beams are received or detected by the camera 510 and analyzed to extract information about eye rotation, for example, from changes in the infrared light beams reflected by the eye 140. In one embodiment, the center of the curved surface of the angle selective filter 310 is adjustable and is determined based on one or more measurements performed by the eye tracking system), and a first opening portion, among the plurality of opening portions, has a first angle that limits the passage direction of the light flux in a first region, a second opening portion has a second angle that limits the passage direction of the light flux in a second region, and a third opening portion has a third angle that is defined by a line connecting the eye point (Richards, is capable of having a first opening portion, among the plurality of opening portions, has a first angle that limits the passage direction of the light flux in a first region, a second opening portion has a second angle that limits the passage direction of the light flux in a second region, and a third opening portion has a third angle that is defined by a line connecting the eye point; paragraph [0038], The eye 140 rotates roughly around the center of rotation 340. When the eye 140 rotates to view a content scene off-axis of the optical axis 345 of NED 100, the optical axis 320 of eye changes orientation. In some embodiments, the angle selective filter 310 can include a spherical surface, where a center of the spherical surface corresponds to a center of rotation 340 of the eye 140. In this way, for each point on the surface of the angle selective filter 310, a tangent plane of the point is configured to be normal to an optical axis 320 of the eye 140 when the eye 140 rotates such that the optical axis 320 of the eye 140 aligns with the point. Consequently, for each point on the surface of the angle selective filter 310, when the optical axis 320 of the eye 140 is aligned with the point, the angle selective filter 310 is configured such that the angle of incidence of light beams incident on the curved surface at that point is equal to an angle between the light beams and the optical axis 320 of the eye. Therefore, the angle selective filter 310 is configured to have substantially the same cut-off angle at each point) in the finder (Richards, the 105) and the light receiving unit (Richards the camera 510) with respect to an optical axis (Richards, optical axis of NED 345) of the finder (Richards the 105).(also, see annotated image, Obata, fig.6, teaches wherein a first opening portion, among the plurality of opening portions, has a first angle that limits the passage direction of the light flux in a first region, a second opening portion has a second angle that limits the passage direction of the light flux in a second region, and a third opening portion has a third angle that is defined by a line connecting the eye point. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to adjust the angles of the opening portions according to the positional relationship among the eye point, optical axis, and detector because doing so merely involves applying known optical geometry principles to obtain predictable results, including improved directional selectivity and enhanced line-of-sight detection sensitivity. The modification represents no more than the predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., MPEP 2143 and MPEP 2144.03.) PNG media_image1.png 682 1018 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 4 , combination Richards-Obata discloses the invention as described in Claim 3, and Richards further teaches wherein the third opening (see annotated image, Richards, fig.4, the third opening portion) larger has an opening larger than the first or second opening portion (see annotated image, Richards, fig.4, the second opening portion). (note: also see annotated image, Obata, fig.6, the third opening larger has an opening larger than the first or second opening portion) PNG media_image2.png 714 1189 media_image2.png Greyscale Regarding claim 6 , combination Richards-Obata discloses the invention as described in Claim 3, and Obata further teaches wherein a thickness of a portion in which the third opening portion is formed in the angle selection type transmission element (see annotated image, Obata, fig.7, having a thickness T1 of a portion in which the third opening portion is formed in the angle selection type transmission element) is larger than a thickness of a peripheral portion of the portion (see annotated image, Obata, fig.7, a thickness T2 of a peripheral portion of the portion; as described in paragraph [0035] “T1 > T2”). The motivation to combine Richards and Obata as provided in claim 1 is incorporated herein. PNG media_image3.png 648 834 media_image3.png Greyscale Regarding claim 7 , combination Richards-Obata discloses the invention as described in Claim 6 and Richards further teaches wherein the portion in which the third opening portion (see annotated image, Richards, fig.4, third opening portion) is formed in the angle selection type transmission element (annotated image, Richards,fig.4, the 310) is formed along a curved surface (see annotated image,fig.4, curved surface 405) facing the eyepiece lens system (Richards, fig.5, lens 205). Regarding claim 10 , combination Richards-Obata discloses the invention as described in Claim 1 and Richards further teaches wherein the angle selection type transmission element (Richards, the 310) is formed of an infrared transmissive material (paragraph [0046], Further, in the case of eye tracking, the angle selective filter 310 can be configured to pass infrared light beams or near infrared light beams for all or a much wider group of angles than visible light beam --- so the 310 is having an infrared transmissive material). Regarding claim 16 , Richards teaches an optical device including a finder having an eyepiece lens system, comprising: an angle selection type transmission element that is disposed in an optical path of the finder and has a plurality of opening portions limiting a passage direction of a light flux; and a detector configured to perform line-of-sight detection by light passing through the angle selection type transmission element, the detector having a light projecting unit and a light receiving unit, wherein the angle selection type transmission element is positioned between an eye point which is a position of an eye of a user and the eyepiece lens system, wherein the angle selection type transmission element does not change the passage direction of the light flux passing through the angle selection type transmission element (see Richards, this claim recites similar limitations as those in corresponding the claim 1 and is rejected based on the same teachings and rationale), wherein a first opening portion, among the plurality of opening portions, has a first angle that limits the passage direction of the light flux in a first region, a second opening portion has a second angle that limits the passage direction of the light flux in a second region, and a third opening portion has a third angle that is defined by a line connecting the eye point in the finder and the light receiving unit with respect to an optical axis of the finder (see Richards, this claim recites similar limitations as those in corresponding the claim 3 and is rejected based on the same teachings and rationale), and wherein the third opening portion has an opening larger than the first or second opening portion (see Border, this claim recites similar limitations as those in corresponding dependent claim 2 and is rejected based on the same teachings and rationale). Regarding claim 17 , Richards teaches an optical device including a finder having an eyepiece lens system, comprising: an angle selection type transmission element that is disposed in an optical path of the finder and has a plurality of opening portions limiting a passage direction of a light flux; and a detector configured to perform line-of-sight detection by light passing through the angle selection type transmission element (see Richards, this claim recites similar limitations as those in corresponding the claim 1 and is rejected based on the same teachings and rationale), the detector having a light projecting unit and a light receiving unit (see Richards, this claim recites similar limitations as those in corresponding the claim 3 and is rejected based on the same teachings and rationale), wherein the angle selection type transmission element is positioned between an eye point which is a position of an eye of a user and the eyepiece lens system, wherein the angle selection type transmission element does not change the passage direction of the light flux passing through the angle selection type transmission element (see Richards, this claim recites similar limitations as those in corresponding the claim 1 and is rejected based on the same teachings and rationale), wherein a first opening portion, among the plurality of opening portions, has a first angle that limits the passage direction of the light flux in a first region, a second opening portion has a second angle that limits the passage direction of the light flux in a second region, and a third opening portion has a third angle that is defined by a line connecting the eye point in the finder and the light receiving unit with respect to an optical axis of the finder (see Richards, this claim recites similar limitations as those in corresponding the claim 3 and is rejected based on the same teachings and rationale), and wherein a thickness of a portion in which the third opening portion is formed in the angle selection type transmission element is larger than a thickness of a peripheral portion of the portion (see Richards, this claim recites similar limitations as those in corresponding the claim 6 and is rejected based on the same teachings and rationale) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 2 is are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Richards (US20190212482) in view of Obata et al.(JP2016120891, English translation attached), and further in view of Yasuda et al. (US20220129080) . Regarding claim 2 , combination Richards-Obata discloses the invention as described in Claim 1, Richards does not explicitly teaches wherein a position controller that is capable of adjusting an angle of a rotation direction of the finder based on a line-of-sight direction detected by the detector. However, Yasuda teaches the analogous optical device (Yasuda, figs.1-23, abstract, an information processing device includes an eyeball information acquisition section, a sightline estimation section, a display control section; paragraph [0061], The display 15 is installed on the base part 10 in such a manner that the display 15 covers at least a portion of a field of view of the user. For example, the two displays 15 are positioned in the field of view of the user in such a manner that the two displays 15 display a left eye image and a right eye image. Alternatively, the single display 15 may be adopted in such a manner that the single display 15 displays the left eye image and the right eye image. In addition, a lens or the like may be installed between the left eye and the right eye of the user in such a manner that the lens or the like adjusts a focus, for example), and further teaches wherein a position controller (Yasuda fig.2, the display control section 23) that is capable of adjusting an angle of a rotation direction (Yasuda fig.2,fig.4, The display control section 23, sightline direction adjustment section 25, sets the rotation angle of the sightline vector 51) of the finder (fig.1, paragraph [0052], the HMD 100 is worn on a head of a use) based on a line-of-sight direction (Yasuda fig.4, sightline vector 51) detected by the detector (Yasuda, fig.2, sightline detection section 21; paragraph [0106], In addition, FIG. 4A schematically illustrates a solid arrow that indicates a sightline vector 51 detected by the HMD 100 (sightline detection section 21; paragraph [0144] The display control section 23, sightline direction adjustment section 25, sets the rotation angle of the sightline vector 51 according to the rotation angle of the head 2, within the maximum rotation range 56. As described above, the display control section 23 sets the rotation angle of the sightline vector 51 according to the rotation angle of the head 2 of the user 1, in such a manner that the rotation angle of the sightline vector 51 falls within the maximum rotation range 56. According to the present embodiment, the maximum rotation range 56 corresponds to a first range). Yasuda also teaches (in paragraphs [0006]-[0010]: [0006] In view of the circumstances as described above, a purpose of the present technology is to provide an information processing device, an information processing method, and a computer-readable recording medium for improving operability of performing a selection operation through gaze. Solution to Problem: [0007] To achieve the above-described purpose, an information processing device according to an embodiment of the present technology includes an eyeball information acquisition section, a sightline estimation section, a display control section, a gesture information acquisition section, and a mode switching section. [0008] The eyeball information acquisition section acquires position and posture information of eyeballs of a user from a first sensor. [0009] The sightline estimation section estimates a sightline vector of the user on the basis of the position and posture information of the eyeballs. [0010] The display control section controls a display device in such a manner that the display device displays a guide image for showing a gaze state based on the estimated sightline vector). Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Richards to have the position controller capable of adjusting an angle of a rotation direction of the finder based on a line-of-sight direction detected by the detector as taught by Yasuda for the purpose of improving operability of performing a selection operation through gaze (Yasuda, paragraph [0006]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 5, 8 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Richards (US20190212482) in view of Obata et al. (JP2016120891, English translation attached), and further in view of in view of Kuramochi et al. (US6552854) . Regarding claim 5 , combination Richards-Obata discloses the invention as described in Claim 3, but Richards is silent on wherein the third opening portion is formed closer to an optical axis side of the finder than the first or second opening portion. However, Kuramochi teaches the analogous head-mounted display (Kuramochi, fig.1 and fig. 8, the head-mounted display), and further teaches wherein the third opening portion (see annotated image, Kuramochi, fig.1, the third opening portion) is formed closer to an optical axis side of the finder (see annotated image, Kuramochi, fig.1, the finder has been referred as Kuramochi, fig.1) than the first or second opening portion (see annotated image, Kuramochi, fig.1, the second opening portion). Kuramochi also teaches (in col.1, lines 35-40, In those times when these image display apparatuses were proposed, transmission type liquid crystal displays were generally used as liquid crystal displays. However, a trans mission type liquid crystal display has a low pixel aperture ratio, and hence it is difficult to achieve an increase in the resolution of an image display element and a reduction in size, which have recently been required, while maintaining high image quality. Under the circumstances, techniques of using a reflection type liquid crystal display having a high pixel aperture ratio for an image display apparatus required to display high resolution images have been proposed. Col.2, lines 10-30, It is an object of the present invention to provide an image display apparatus using a reflection type display element suited to high-resolution images such as PC outputs, in which various aberrations can be properly corrected with a very simple, compact arrangement. In order to achieve the above object, an image display apparatus according to an embodiment of the present invention is characterized by comprising a light source for supplying illumination light, a reflection type display element for modulating the illumination light into image light by reflecting the light, an illumination optical system for guiding the illumination light to the reflection type display element, and a projection optical system for guiding the image light to an observer, wherein the apparatus includes a member (correcting member) for correcting an optical path length difference between light beams of the image light which is caused when the image light is incident on the projection optical system via at least a portion of the illumination optical system.). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical device of Richards to have the specific optical element to have the third opening portion is formed closer to an optical axis side of the finder than the first or second opening portion as taught by Kuramochi for a purpose of effectively to reduce the size as well as better image sensing function (Kuramochi,col.1, lines 35-40). PNG media_image4.png 702 1238 media_image4.png Greyscale Regarding claim 8 , combination Richards-Obata discloses the invention as described in Claim 3, but Richards is silent on wherein the third opening portion is formed at a position farther from the optical axis of the finder than the first or second opening portion. However, Kuramochi teaches the analogous head-mounted display (Kuramochi , fig.1 and fig8, the head-mounted display), and further teaches wherein the third opening portion (see annotated image, Kuramochi, fig.1, the third opening portion) is formed at a position farther from the optical axis of the finder position (see annotated image, Kuramochi, fig.1, the finder has been referred as Kuramochi, fig.1) than the first or second opening portion (see annotated image, Kuramochi, fig.1, the second opening portion). Kuramochi also teaches (in col.1, lines 35-40, In those times when these image display apparatuses were proposed, transmission type liquid crystal displays were generally used as liquid crystal displays. However, a trans mission type liquid crystal display has a low pixel aperture ratio, and hence it is difficult to achieve an increase in the resolution of an image display element and a reduction in size, which have recently been required, while maintaining high image quality. Under the circumstances, techniques of using a reflection type liquid crystal display having a high pixel aperture ratio for an image display apparatus required to display high resolution images have been proposed. Col.2, lines 10-30, It is an object of the present invention to provide an image display apparatus using a reflection type display element suited to high-resolution images such as PC outputs, in which various aberrations can be properly corrected with a very simple, compact arrangement. In order to achieve the above object, an image display apparatus according to an embodiment of the present invention is characterized by comprising a light source for supplying illumination light, a reflection type display element for modulating the illumination light into image light by reflecting the light, an illumination optical system for guiding the illumination light to the reflection type display element, and a projection optical system for guiding the image light to an observer, wherein the apparatus includes a member (correcting member) for correcting an optical path length difference between light beams of the image light which is caused when the image light is incident on the projection optical system via at least a portion of the illumination optical system.). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical device of Richards to have the specific optical element to have the third opening portion is formed closer to an optical axis side of the finder than the first or second opening portion as taught by Kuramochi for a purpose of effectively to reduce the size as well as better image sensing function (Kuramochi,col.1, lines 35-40). Regarding claim 15 , combination Richards-Obata discloses the invention as described in Claim 3, Richards is silent on wherein a wall portion of the third opening portion in the angle selection type transmission element is subjected to anti-reflection processing. However, Kuramochi teaches the analogous head-mounted display (Kuramochi , fig.1 and fig8, the head-mounted display), and further teaches wherein a wall portion of the third opening portion (see annotated image, Kuramochi, fig.1, has a wall portion of the third opening portion) in the angle selection type transmission element (see annotated image, Kuramochi, fig.1, the auxiliary lens 20) is subjected to anti-reflection processing (Kuramochi, col.8, lines 50-54, forming antireflection films on the two transmitting surfaces A21 and A22 of the auxiliary lens 20 will prevent a decrease in the contrast of a displayed image due to reflection of light from the observer side by the transmitting surfaces A21 and B22). Kuramochi also teaches (in col.1, lines 35-40, In those times when these image display apparatuses were proposed, transmission type liquid crystal displays were generally used as liquid crystal displays. However, a trans mission type liquid crystal display has a low pixel aperture ratio, and hence it is difficult to achieve an increase in the resolution of an image display element and a reduction in size, which have recently been required, while maintaining high image quality. Under the circumstances, techniques of using a reflection type liquid crystal display having a high pixel aperture ratio for an image display apparatus required to display high resolution images have been proposed. Col.2, lines 10-30, It is an object of the present invention to provide an image display apparatus using a reflection type display element suited to high-resolution images such as PC outputs, in which various aberrations can be properly corrected with a very simple, compact arrangement. In order to achieve the above object, an image display apparatus according to an embodiment of the present invention is characterized by comprising a light source for supplying illumination light, a reflection type display element for modulating the illumination light into image light by reflecting the light, an illumination optical system for guiding the illumination light to the reflection type display element, and a projection optical system for guiding the image light to an observer, wherein the apparatus includes a member (correcting member) for correcting an optical path length difference between light beams of the image light which is caused when the image light is incident on the projection optical system via at least a portion of the illumination optical system.). Moreover, the further limitations of claim "a wall portion of the third opening portion in the angle selection type transmission element is subjected to anti-reflection processing " are directed to method steps of making the device, and it could have been made using an alternative method such as "a wall portion of the third opening portion in the angle selection type transmission element is subjected to anti-reflection processing ". The method limitations are not germane to patentability pursuant to MPEP §2112.02, since it has been held that “'[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.' In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citations omitted).”. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the optical device of Richards with the specific optical element as taught by Kuramochi to modify have the wall portion of the third opening portion in the angle selection type transmission element is subjected to anti-reflection processing for a purpose of effectively to reduce the size as well as better image sensing function (Kuramochi,col.1, lines 35-40) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Richards (US20190212482) in view of Obata et al. (JP2016120891, English translation attached), and further in view of Yoshida (US20120182407) . Regarding claim 14 , Richards discloses the invention as described in Claim 1, Richards does not explicitly teaches wherein the angle selection type transmission element is formed of material that absorbs visible light. However, Yoshida teaches the analogous angle selection type transmission element (Yoshida,figs.1-70, abstract, The interval between visible light transmitting sections that are abutting in the horizontal direction of a parallax barrier is determined using: the average number of subpixels constituting one pixel for three-dimensional display in one row in the horizontal direction; the width of a subpixel, which forms a display; the distance from a predetermined diagonal moiré canceling position to the parallax barrier; the number of viewpoints of a video image used for displaying an autostereoscopic video image; and the distance (Z) from the image display surface of the display to the parallax barrier), and further teaches wherein the angle selection type transmission element (Yoshida, the angle selection type transmission element has been referred as the parallax barrier; [0033] “a visible light transmitting section” is a part that comprises a parallax barrier; is provided on a side of the parallax barrier that does not transmit visible light) is formed of material that absorbs visible light (Yoshida, paragraph [0153] The parallax barrier for an autostereoscopic display of the invention is preferably a plate type transparent medium… forming the visible light impermeable sections with material that absorbs visible light). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the apparatus of Richards with the specific material as taught by Yoshida for the purpose to cancel moire generated depending on the viewing position of a subject person of video image presentation (Yoshida, paragraph [0007]). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered, see Remarks Page. 8-13 with respect to the 35 U.S.C.&&102 and 103 rejection have been fully considered and are not persuasive. In the remarks, applicant argues that: Richards expressly describes and suggests to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use the "micro louver" structure, it does not describe or suggest the recited claim limitation that at least one surface of the angle selection type transmission element has a flat surface. In response to applicant's argument(s) of 1 Claim 1 requires “an angle selection type transmission element” which could be anything that type transmission elements that is disposed in an optical path of the finder and has a plurality of opening portions limiting a passage direction of a light flux. , also the terms of “type” See MPEP § 2173.05(b). In this case, see described in claim 1, although Richards does not explicitly disclose wherein at least one surface of the angle selection type transmission element has a flat surface. However, Obata teaches the analogous angle selection type transmission element (Obata, figs.4-7, louvers 122a to 122f has been referred to as angle selection type transmission element), and further teaches wherein at least one surface of the angle selection type transmission element has a flat surface (see Obata, fig.7, louvers 122a to 122f have a flat surface on the surface of semi-transparent planar mirror 111). Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Richards to have the specific surface as taught by Obata for the purpose to serve the function of blocking stray light and the effect of improved visibility can still be obtained (Obata, as described in paragraph [0027]). In the remarks, applicant argues that: Richards does not describe or suggest the recited claim limitation that wherein a thickness of a portion in which the third opening portion is formed in the angle selection type transmission element is larger than a thickness of a peripheral portion of the portion, as recited in amended claim 6. In response to applicant's argument(s) of 2 As described in claim 6, Obata further teaches Obata further teaches wherein a thickness of a portion in which the third opening portion is formed in the angle selection type transmission element (see annotated image, Obata, fig.7, having a thickness T1 of a portion in which the third opening portion is formed in the angle selection type transmission element) is larger than a thickness of a peripheral portion of the portion (see annotated image, Obata, fig.7, a thickness T2 of a peripheral portion of the portion; as described in paragraph [0035] “T1 > T2”). The motivation to combine Richards and Obata as provided in claim 1 is incorporated herein. Examiner's Note Regarding the references , the Examiner cites particular figures, paragraphs, columns and line numbers in the reference(s), as applied to the claims above. Although the particular citations are representative teachings and are applied to specific limitations within the claims, other passages, internally cited references, and figures may also apply. In preparing a response, it is respectfully requested that the Applicant fully consider the references, in their entirety, as potentially disclosing or teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as fully consider the context of the passage as taught by the reference(s) or as disclosed by the Examiner. Conclusion 07-40 AIA 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 extension fee 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 KUEI-JEN LEE EDENFIELD whose telephone number is (571)272-3005. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. -Thurs 8:00 am - 5:30 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Pinping Sun can be reached on (571) 270-1284. 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 application 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 Services Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199(In USA or Canada) or 571-272-1000. /KUEI-JEN L EDENFIELD/ Examiner, Art Unit 2872 /WILLIAM R ALEXANDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 Application/Control Number: 17/889,479 Page 2 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 17/889,479 Page 3 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 17/889,479 Page 4 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 17/889,479 Page 5 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 17/889,479 Page 6 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 17/889,479 Page 7 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 17/889,479 Page 8 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 17/889,479 Page 9 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 17/889,479 Page 10 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 17/889,479 Page 11 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 17/889,479 Page 12 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 17/889,479 Page 13 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 17/889,479 Page 14 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 17/889,479 Page 15 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 17/889,479 Page 16 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 17/889,479 Page 17 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 17/889,479 Page 18 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 17/889,479 Page 19 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 17/889,479 Page 20 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 17/889,479 Page 21 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 17/889,479 Page 22 Art Unit: 2872
Prosecution Insights