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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 February 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09 February 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Please see response to arguments in the present Office action below.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3-9, and 18-19 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the same reference(s) nor combination(s) applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the arguments.
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
Examiner reminds the applicant that the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). Furthermore, “A person of ordinary skill in the art is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automaton.” KSR, 550 U.S. at 421, 82 USPQ2d at 1397. “[I]n many cases a person of ordinary skill will be able to fit the teachings of multiple patents together like pieces of a puzzle.” Id. at 420, 82 USPQ2d at 1397. Office personnel may also take into account “the inferences and creative steps that a person of ordinary skill in the art would employ.” Id. at 418, 82 USPQ2d at 1396.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., "transmissive and reflective gratings," "a series of specifically structured, individual composite waveguides," etc.) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Examiner reminds the applicant that “It is not necessary that the prior art suggest the combination to achieve the same advantage or result discovered by applicant. See, e.g., In re Kahn, 441 F.3d 977, 987, 78 USPQ2d 1329, 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (motivation question arises in the context of the general problem confronting the inventor rather than the specific problem solved by the invention); Cross Med. Prods., Inc. v. Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Inc., 424 F.3d 1293, 1323, 76 USPQ2d 1662, 1685 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (“One of ordinary skill in the art need not see the identical problem addressed in a prior art reference to be motivated to apply its teachings.”); In re Lintner, 458 F.2d 1013, 173 USPQ 560 (CCPA 1972) (discussed below); In re Dillon, 919 F.2d 688, 16 USPQ2d 1897 (Fed. Cir. 1990), cert. denied, 500 U.S. 904 (1991).”
Applicant's arguments do not comply with 37 CFR 1.111(c) because they do not clearly point out the patentable novelty which they think the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Further, they do not show how the amendments avoid such references or objections.
Drawings
The applicant' s drawings submitted are acceptable for examination purposes.
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.
Claims 1, 3-9, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lin et al. US 20180231702 A1 (herein after "Lin").
With respect to Claim 1, Lin discloses a diffractive element (diffraction grating 1600, which utilizes 1300; [0304-307]; fig. 16a-16d) comprising:
a substrate (substrate 1304; [0304]);
a plurality of grating elements (metasurface 1608 comprising geometric phase optical elements; [0304]) on the substrate (substrate 1304; [0304]; as seen in fig. 16a), each grating element comprising:
a first ridge region (middle first lines 1312; [0304]; as seen in fig. 16a);
a second ridge region (right first lines 1312; [0304]; as seen in fig. 16a); and
a saddle region (surface 1304s; [0304]) contiguous with (materials for forming substrate 1304, inclusive of surface 1304s, include silica glass, silicon oxynitride, etc. [0291]; diffraction grating having first lines and second lines formed of silicon on a substrate; [0305]; first lines 1312 and/or second lines 1316 formed of silicon, when formed of silicon, readily fabricated or integrated using silicon-processing technologies; [0278]) and extending between the first and second ridge regions (middle and right first lines 1312; as seen in fig. 16a), the saddle region (surface 1304s; [0304]) having a first height (H1) lower than a second height (H3) (fig. 16a) of the first and second ridge regions (middle and right first lines 1312; as seen in fig. 16a),
wherein:
the first ridge region (middle first lines 1312; [0304]; as seen in fig. 16a) comprises a first ridge body region (masking layers 1604 of middle first lines 1312; [0304]) with a first refractive index (n2) ([0304]) and a first core element (second lines 1316 of middle first lines 1312; [0304]) inside the first ridge body region (masking layers 1604 of middle first lines 1312; [0304]; second lines 1316 of middle first lines 1312 inside masking layers 1604 of middle first lines 1312 as seen in fig. 16a), the first core element (second lines 1316 of middle first lines 1312; [0304]) having a second refractive index (n4) greater than the first refractive index (masking layers 1604 having a refractive index lower than the refractive index of the material of the one or more second lines 1316; [0304]), and
the second ridge region (right first lines 1312; [0304]; as seen in fig. 16a) comprises a second ridge body region (masking layers 1604 of right first lines 1312; [0304]) with the first refractive index (n2) ([0304]) and a second core element (second lines 1316 of right first lines 1312; [0304]) inside the second ridge body region (masking layers 1604 of right first lines 1312; [0304]; second lines 1316 of right first lines 1312 inside masking layers 1604 of right first lines 1312 as seen in fig. 16a), the second core element (second lines 1316 of right first lines 1312; [0304]) having the second refractive index (n4) ([0304]).
With respect to Claim 3, Lin discloses the diffractive element (diffraction grating 1600, which utilizes 1300; [0304-307]; fig. 16a-16d) of Claim 1, wherein the first and second core elements (second lines 1316 of middle and right first lines 1312; [0304]) are in contact with the substrate (all diffraction grating 1600 elements in contact with substrate 1304; [0304]; as seen in fig. 16a).
With respect to Claim 4, Lin discloses the diffractive element (diffraction grating 1600, which utilizes 1300; [0304-307]; fig. 16a-16d) of Claim 1, wherein the substrate (substrate 1304; [0304]) has a third refractive index (n3) (substrate 1304 can have refractive index of 1.7; [0291]) that is less than the first refractive index (n2) (e.g., substrate 1304 n ≈ 1.7 is less than masking layer 1604 n ≈ 1.8; [0291] & [0304]).
With respect to Claim 5, Lin discloses the diffractive element (diffraction grating 1600, which utilizes 1300; [0304-307]; fig. 16a-16d) of Claim 1, wherein the grating elements (metasurface 1608 comprising geometric phase optical elements; [0304]) are arranged periodically (as seen in fig. 16a) on the substrate (substrate 1304; [0304]) with a grating pitch (plurality of metasurface unit cells 1320 comprises first lines 1312 and second lines 1316 wherein the period of repeating unit cells 1320 are a unit cell pitch Λa; [0293-294]; fig. 13a-b & 16a).
With respect to Claim 6, Lin discloses the diffractive element (diffraction grating 1600, which utilizes 1300; [0304-307]; fig. 16a-16d) of Claim 5, wherein the saddle region (surface 1304s; [0304]) has a first width (W4) (surface 1304s between middle and right first lines 1312; fig. 16a; having width S1 as seen in fig. 13b), the ridge regions each have a second width (W3) (middle and right first lines 1312; [0304] having width Wnano and first lines 1312 pitch sum Wnano1 as seen in fig. 13a-b), and the sum of the first width (W4) and twice the second width (W3) is less than the grating pitch (sum of S1 and twice the width of Wnano/Wnano1 is less than grating pitch Λa; as seen in fig. 13b; [0264-283]).
With respect to Claim 7, Lin discloses the diffractive element (diffraction grating 1600, which utilizes 1300; [0304-307]; fig. 16a-16d) of Claim 1, wherein the first ridge region (middle first lines 1312; [0304]; as seen in fig. 16a), the second ridge region (right first lines 1312; [0304]; as seen in fig. 16a), and the saddle region (surface 1304s; [0304]) comprise titanium dioxide (TiO2) (first lines 1312 formed of titanium oxide; [0279] & substrate 1304 having surface 1304s formed of transition metal oxides e.g., titanium oxide [0279-291] or other optically transmissive material having refractive index ([0291]) e.g., 1.5 or higher, 2.0 or higher [0292]).
With respect to Claim 8, Lin discloses the diffractive element (diffraction grating 1600, which utilizes 1300; [0304-307]; fig. 16a-16d) of Claim 1, wherein, between consecutive grating elements (metasurface 1608 comprising geometric phase optical elements; [0304]) in the diffractive element (diffraction grating 1600, which utilizes 1300; [0304-307]; fig. 16a-16d), the substrate (substrate 1304; [0304]) is in contact with a host medium (substrate 1304 in contact with air between first lines 1312 as see in fig. 16a; for a fundamental mode of resonance, the first lines 1312 have an effective index of refraction which may vary from about 1, when the light is mostly in air to when the light is mostly in the lines and/or segments; [0292]).
With respect to Claim 9, Lin discloses the diffractive element (diffraction grating 1600, which utilizes 1300; [0304-307]; fig. 16a-16d) of Claim 1, wherein the substrate (substrate 1304; [0304]) is a waveguide (substrate 1304 configured as a waveguide; [0291-294]) of a waveguide display (display devices having geometric phase metasurface-based gratings within AR and VR technology; [0006] & [0300]).
With respect to Claim 18, Lin discloses the diffractive element (diffraction grating 1600, which utilizes 1300; [0304-307]; fig. 16a-16d) of Claim 1, wherein:
the substrate (substrate 1304; [0304]) has a third refractive index (n5) (substrate 1304 can have refractive index of 1.7; [0291]; e.g., substrate 1304 n = 1.77; [0305]), and
the grating elements (metasurface 1608 comprising geometric phase optical elements; [0304]) are arranged substantially periodically (as seen in fig. 16a) with a pitch (pitch Λa; [0293-297]; fig. 13a-b & 16a) between
M
2
n
5
λ
and
M
2
0.8
n
5
λ
(e.g., M2 = m = 2; [0295-297], n5 ≈ substrate 1304 n = 1.77; [0305], λ=520 nm; [0305], wherein
M
2
n
5
λ
= [2(520 nm)]/1.77 ≈ 587.6 nm and
M
2
0.8
n
5
λ
= [2(520 nm)]/[(0.8)1.77] ≈ 734.5 nm, Λa may be in the range of 10 nm to 1 μm; [0294] & Λa may be smaller than the wavelength the grating 1300/1600 is configured to diffract, and may be smaller than a wavelength, or any wavelength, in the range of about 435 nm-780 nm; [0294], and thus, Λa is between
M
2
n
5
λ
≈ 587.6 nm and
M
2
0.8
n
5
λ
≈ 734.5 nm; [0294-305]),
whereby the diffractive element (diffraction grating 1600, which utilizes 1300; [0304-307]; fig. 16a-16d) is configured to diffract light having a wavelength λ to a diffractive order of M2 (diffraction grating 1600 in which a metasurface 1608 configured to diffract light having a wavelength in the visible spectrum is formed; [0304], diffraction orders; [0305], & Λa having value less than a ratio mλ/(sin α+n2 sinθ), where n2 is refractive index for substrate 1304 and m is an integer e.g., 1, 2, 3 . . . [0295-297]).
With respect to Claim 19, Lin discloses the diffractive element (diffraction grating 1600, which utilizes 1300; [0304-307]; fig. 16a-16d) of Claim 18, wherein M2 = 2 (Λa having value wherein m is an integer e.g., 1, 2, 3 . . . , and thus M2 can be equal to 2; [0295-297]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Basset WO 2019068304 A1 discloses resonant waveguide grating and applications thereof substantially similar to that of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to K MUHAMMAD whose telephone number is (571)272-4210. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 1:00pm - 9:30pm EDT.
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, Ricky Mack can be reached at 571-272-2333. 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.
/K MUHAMMAD/Examiner, Art Unit 2872 06 April 2026
/SHARRIEF I BROOME/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights