DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 December 10, 1015 has been entered. Claims 1-4, 6-10, and 13 are under consideration.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-4 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amitai (WO 2020/157747 A1, herein “Amitai”) in view of Hudman et al. (US 2010/0060863 A1, herein “Hudman”).
Regarding claim 1, Amitai discloses a display system (head mounted display system) comprising:
an image projector generating a collimated projected image (source 4, lens 6 in Fig. 1) having an optical axis (Fig. 1);
a light-guide optical element (64 n Fig. 8A and similar in all the figures) having a pair of mutually-parallel major external surfaces, a coupling-in configuration (input aperture 86) for receiving the collimated projected image so as to propagate within said LOE by internal reflection at said major external surfaces (see ray traces), and a coupling-out configuration (output aperture 89) for coupling the collimated projected image out from said LOE towards a viewer (24) ; and
a compensatory optical element (intermediate prism 108 or 114) interposed in a light path between said image projector and said LOE so as to introduce a compensatory chromatic aberration into the collimated projected image transmitted through said optical element (page 10, line 22 to page 11, line 5), said optical element comprising:
a first wedge component (wedge component at reflecting surface 65 in Fig. 8A) formed from a first transparent material;
a second wedge component (component that is formed at the interface 111 and reflective surface 65) formed from a second transparent material
However, Amitai does not explicitly teach:
the first wedge component having a first refractive index, a first Abbe number, said first wedge component having a first outer surface deployed perpendicular to the optical axis and a first bonding surface; and
a second wedge component having a second refractive index and having a second Abbe number differing from said first Abbe number, said second wedge component having a second outer surface inclined at said wedge angle to a second bonding surface,
wherein said first bonding surface is bonded to said second bonding surface with said first and second wedge components oriented such that the first outer surface is parallel to said second outer surface and perpendicular to the optical axis thereby introducing a compensatory linear chromatic aberration into a collimated image passing through the optical element while presenting parallel outer surfaces.
Hudman teaches distortion altering optics for display systems. Hudman teaches a compensatory optical element comprises of wedge optics (210, 218). The first wedge component (210) formed from a first transparent material having a first refractive index and a first Abbe number, said first wedge component having a first outer surface inclined (at “212”) at a wedge angle to a first bonding surface (at “214”, Para [0018]). The second wedge component (218) formed from a second transparent material having a second refractive index differing from said first refractive index and a second Abbe number differing from said first Abbe number, said second wedge component having a second outer surface inclined (angle at reference label “218”) at said wedge angle to a second bonding surface (Para [0018]). Hudman further teaches, referencing Fig. 2 and 3, the wedge optic may comprise a first pane of glass or other optical material to embody the first surface (212) and a second pane of glass or other optical material to embody second surface (214, Para [0016]). Fig. 7 shows an embodiment wherein the first and second pane of glass are joined together such that the first and second outer surface are parallel and normal to the to the optical axis of interest in Fig. 7. Thus, the examiner considers Hudman implies the two glass panes are bonded to form the wedge optic body shown in Fig. 7.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to recognize both Amitai and Hudman are in the same field of endeavor and solving the same chromatic aberration distortion in display systems. Amitai employs bonding prisms (108 and 80) with bonding adhesives along the waveguide to compensate aberration distortions (page 10, line 22- page 11, line5, and page 18 to page 19). Hudman teaches the wedge optic can be used to eliminate distortion in an image generated by a scanning platform that may result inherently in scanned beam display or imaging systems as a result of trajectory of the scanned beam caused by the off axis input beam. Alternatively, the wedge optic 210 may be utilized to provide some alteration of distortion of the image generated or obtained by the scanning platform (Para [0016]). In other words, Hudman’s wedge optic can be utilized to compensate for distortion at the input end or at the output end of the display system. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the HUD display system of Amitai with the wedge optic in Hudman’s invention to receive input light from the intermediate prism (108) and before the input light enters the substrate (64) in the embodiment as shown in Fig. 9A. One motivation for correcting chromatic aberration at the input end of the display system prevents color fringing and blur leading to higher resolution and contrast. Since chromatic aberration is reduced or eliminated at the input end, the computational load for digital signal processing is reduced, thus saving power; in VR or AR system, this means longer battery life.
Claims 2-3. Amitai in view of Hudman (herein “Amitai / Hudman”) teach the wedge angle is about 8.5 degrees, which is less than 10 degrees (Hudman: Para [0019]).
Claim 4. Amitai / Hudman teach the first wedge component and second wedge component have edges defining a rectangular shape (the bonding surfaces have vertices and edges defining a rectangular shape), and a direction of variation of a thickness of the first and second wedge component is at an oblique angle to said edges (see vertices at reference numeral “212” and “218” in Hudman Fig. 2).
Claim 13. Amitai / Hudman teach the image projector projects the collimated image with primary image axes (ray 124, 216), and wherein a direction of variation of a thickness of said first and second wedge components is at an oblique angle (rays above and below primary ray 124, 216) to said primary image axes (Hudman: Fig. 2).
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amitai / Hudman as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Amitai (US 2019/0155035 A1, herein “Pg-pub ‘035”).
Amitai / Hudman teach the invention of claim 1, but Amitai / Hudman do not teach the first outer surface of the optical element is bonded to a surface of the image projector and the second outer surface of the optical element is bonded to a surface of the coupling-in configuration.
Pg-pub ‘035 teaches collimating module (40 in Fig. 3) can be attached to the substrate (20) resulting in minimizing the chromatic aberrations by coupling the central wave (14) normal to the slanted surface (50) (Para [0030], [0034, [0036]]). Fig. 10 shows the image projector (light source 94) is bonded to the modified optical component (90) that comprises of prisms for compensating aberration. The second outer surface of the modified optical component (90) is bonded to a surface of the coupling in configuration (Para [0030] and [0043], claim 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the placement of the optical element bonded to the image projector and the surface of the coupling-in configuration, as taught by Pg-pub ‘035, would be modifiable to the display system of Amitai / Hudman. The embodiment of Fig. 6 and 9 of Amitai would be suitable to bond the optical element to the coupling-in configuration. One motivation for correcting chromatic aberration at the input end of the display system prevents color fringing and blur leading to higher resolution and contrast. Since chromatic aberration is reduced or eliminated at the input end, the computational load for digital signal processing is reduced, thus saving power; in VR or AR system, this means longer battery life.
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amitai / Hudman as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Glasenapp (DE-102010039746-A1, herein “Glasenapp”)
Hudman in view of Mills teach the invention of claim 5, and further teach the LOE is mounted on a support structure (eyeglasses) configured for supporting the LOE on the head of the viewer (Mills, Figs. 1, 6a, 6b, and 6c), the support structure supporting the LOE with a face-curve angle between the normal to the major surfaces of the chief ray of the projected image coupled out towards the viewer. Hudman in view of Mills further anticipated the pantoscopic tilt, the inclination of the chief ray to the normal to the major surfaces (Para [0067], “[t]he collimator element 608 of Fig. 5 may be located relative to the arc or shape of the head 706. In Fig. 6A the support is horizontal and in Fig. 6B the frame is tilted for aesthetic reasons and to accommodate a different head shape and is viewed from above the top of the head.” Regardless, of the pantoscopic angle, the chief ray is projected perpendicular from the LOE into the user’s eye as shown in Figs. 6C and 6D).
However, Hudman in view of Mills do not explicitly teach the optical element at least partially compensate for a chromatic aberration introduced by said face-curve angle and by pantoscopic angle.
According to the Specification, “In order to correct the chromatic aberration generated by more than one waveguide inclination, for example a pantoscopic waveguide tilt in addition to a face curve waveguide tilt, the compensation plate should be oriented diagonally relative to the optical axis” (p. 15, lines 14-17).
Glasenapp teaches a microscope provided with aberration correction plates (9, 10), wherein, the two plates are formed complementary to the other plate surface. The plate surfaces are formed flat, and stay diagonal to the optical axis (Abstract).
Glasenapp aberration correction plate is provided in a microscope wherein Hudman and Mills teach the aberration correction optical element are provided in an image display system, but Glasernapp’s correction plate solves the same optical aberration that exists in both microscope and display system applications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to recognize the principle in the aberration correction plate of Glasenapp’s invention would be interchangeable with the aberration compensating optical element of Hudman in view of Mills to at least partially compensate for the linear chromatic output aberration introduced by said face-curve angle. One would be motivated to employ the complementary wedges having varying thickness because these bulk optical elements are readily available for integration following design specifications.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-4, and 6-10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. PTO-892:B-E teaches anamorphic prisms for correcting aberrations and HUD devices that employs various means for correcting aberration in compact eyeglasses format.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Erin D Chiem whose telephone number is (571)272-3102. The examiner can normally be reached 10 am - 6 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, Thomas A. Hollweg can be reached at (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.
/ERIN D CHIEM/Examiner, Art Unit 2874
/THOMAS A HOLLWEG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874