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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
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.
Election/Restrictions
Regarding the discussion of sub-species 1-3 of the Requirement for Restriction/Election Office Action mailed on 10/22/2025, the examiner apologizes for any confusion resulting from the typographical errors. The applicant’s understanding is appreciated, and the applicant is encouraged to contact the examiner for clarification regarding such issues. The species should be corrected as follows:
A. The ear-eye image projection system as shown in figure 1a.
B. The ear-eye image projection system as shown in figure 1b.
C. The ear-eye image projection system as shown in figure 1c.
D. The ear-eye image projection system as shown in figure 1d.
E. The ear-eye image projection system as shown in figure 1e.
F. The ear-eye image projection system as shown in figure 1f.
Also, choose one of:
1. The ear-eye image projection system as shown in figure 2a.
2. The ear-eye image projection system as shown in figure 2b.
3. The ear-eye image projection system as shown in figure 2c.
Applicant’s election with traverse of species A1 (figures 1a and 2a; claims 1-7 and 26-27) in the reply filed on 10/22/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the claim set filed in the US is considered unitary by the PCT standards. This is not found persuasive because the species listed above do not relate to a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1 because, under PCT Rule 13.2, the species lack the same or corresponding special technical features for the following reasons: They are drawn to patentably distinct embodiments of the inventions, such as the different arrangements of the viewpoints and the pin lights. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Miyazaki (US 2010/0073594).
Regarding claim 1, Miyazaki (figure 7) discloses
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 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 1-3, 7 and 26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeshi (JP 2016-33867) in view of Hollands et al. (US 2020/0174255).
Regarding claim 1, Takeshi (figures 1-8) discloses a near-eye image projection system, comprising:
a pin-light source generating a plurality of incident light beams (111; see at least page 3, 7th paragraph);
a spatial light modulator (SLM; 120-122; see at least page 3, last paragraph) configured to modulate said plurality of incident light beams and generate a plurality of modulated light beams such as to form pin-light images at a first plane (horizontal plane; figure 3; illumination light (for example, S polarization component) from the illumination unit 110 is selectively reflected and enters the light modulation element 122, and the image light L (for example, P polarization component) emitted from the light modulation element 122 is It can be selectively transmitted and can be incident on the collimating optical system 131 of the virtual image optical unit 130; see at least page 3, 1st paragraph);
illumination optics and imaging optics (illumination unit 110 and image display unit 120) configured to deliver the incident light beams from the pin-light source to the SLM (figure 1); and
the imaging optics being further configured to deliver sequentially the modulated light beams from the SLM along a projection axis to an eye-box in a second plane substantially parallel to the first plane (the horizontal plane in front of the eye and the image display unit 120; figure 2);
wherein
the illumination optics is in a third plane and the projection axis is in a fourth plane (vertical planes, figure 2), the third and fourth planes being substantially perpendicular to the first plane;
the illumination optics defines a first optical path followed by the incident light beams in a direction from the first plane to the second plane and a second optical path followed by the incident light beams in a direction from the third plane to the fourth plane (the second light beam L2 is incident on the collimating optical system 131 as a non-parallel light beam and is incident on the light guide plate 133. As described above, the second light flux L2 is guided so as to converge in the light guide plate 133 toward the exit port 133d according to the angle of view (see FIG. 5), and exits from the exit port 133d; see at least page 7, 4th paragraph); and
the imaging optics defines a third optical path followed by the modulated light beams in a direction from the second plane to the first plane and a fourth optical path followed by the modulated light beams in a direction from the first plane to the second plane (the second light beam L2 is incident on the collimating optical system 131 as a non-parallel light beam and is incident on the light guide plate 133. As described above, the second light flux L2 is guided so as to converge in the light guide plate 133 toward the exit port 133d according to the angle of view (see FIG. 5), and exits from the exit port 133d; see at least page 7, 4th paragraph).
Takeshi discloses the limitations as shown in the rejection of claim 1 above. However, Takeshi is silent regarding the optical combiner comprises a foveal combiner. Hollands et al. (figures 1-2) teaches wherein the imaging optics comprises an optical combiner to project image light beams from the modulated light beams and to transmit natural light from the real world towards the eye-box; wherein the modulated light beams comprise foveal modulated light beams forming foveal pin-light images at the first plane and peripheral modulated light beams forming peripheral pin-light images at the first plane; and wherein the optical combiner comprises a foveal combiner configured to reflect the foveal modulated light beams and project foveal image light beams towards a foveal eye-box (40; multi-layer holographic combiner 40 need not be an optical combiner and may, in general, be any desired optical system for redirecting input light 56 using at least one layer of hologram structures (e.g., reflection hologram structures 42 and transmission hologram structures 44) as described herein; see at least paragraph 0106). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify projection system as taught by Hollands et al. in order to allow a viewer to view both computer-generated images and real-world objects in the viewer's surrounding environment.
The limitation, “the illumination optics defines a first optical path followed by the incident light beams in a direction from the first plane to the second plane and a second optical path followed by the incident light beams in a direction from the third plane to the fourth plane; and the imaging optics defines a third optical path followed by the modulated light beams in a direction from the second plane to the first plane and a fourth optical path followed by the modulated light beams in a direction from the first plane to the second plane; the imaging optics comprises an optical combiner to project image light beams from the modulated light beams and to transmit natural light from the real world towards the eye-box; wherein the modulated light beams comprise foveal modulated light beams forming foveal pin-light images at the first plane and peripheral modulated light beams forming peripheral pin-light images at the first plane; and wherein the optical combiner comprises a foveal combiner configured to reflect the foveal modulated light beams and project foveal image light beams towards a foveal eye-box” is functional in nature. Such a functional limitation is only given patentable weight insofar as it imparts a structural limitation. Here, Takeshi discloses the structural limitations required to perform the function as claimed. It is further noted that apparatus claims must be structurally distinguishable from the prior art and that the manner of operating the device does not differentiate the apparatus claim from the prior art (see e.g. MPEP 2114). In other words, the prior art need not perform the function, but must merely be capable of doing so.
Regarding claim 2, Takeshi (figures 1-8) discloses wherein the illumination optics comprises an illumination pupil expansion device configured to expand the incident light beams from an entrance of the illumination pupil expansion device to an exit pupil (15; The light source enlargement unit 15 has, for example, an entrance port 15a in which the entrance surface 14 is formed, an exit port 15b connected to the main body section 19, and a light guide section 15c which connects these; see at least page 4, last paragraph).
Regarding claim 3, Takeshi (figures 1-8) discloses wherein the illumination pupil expansion device comprises a illumination waveguide including an illumination in-coupling element configured to input the incident light beams The light source expansion unit 15 is configured to internally reflect the light flux incident from the entrance port 15a on the inner circumferential surface of the light guide section 15c and to emit the light flux to the exit port 15b. That is, the light source expansion unit 15 has a function such as a light pipe, a light tunnel, or a rod. The light source expanding portion 15 may have a film made of a metal (for example, silver, aluminum or the like) having a high reflectance on the circumferential surface of the light guiding portion 15c; see at least page 4, last paragraph).
Regarding claim 7, Takeshi (figures 1-8) discloses wherein the SLM (20) is reflective (As the light modulation element 122, for example, a light reflection type liquid crystal display element is used, and more specifically, a liquid crystal element such as LCOS (Liquid Crystal On Silicon) is used; see at least page 4, 3rd paragraph).
Regarding claim 26, Takeshi (figures 1-8) discloses wearable device comprising a projection system comprising:
a pin-light source generating a plurality of incident light beams (111; see at least page 3, 7th paragraph);
a spatial light modulator (SLM; 120-122; see at least page 3, last paragraph) configured to modulate said plurality of incident light beams and generate a plurality of modulated light beams such as to form pin-light images at a first plane (horizontal plane; figure 3; illumination light (for example, S polarization component) from the illumination unit 110 is selectively reflected and enters the light modulation element 122, and the image light L (for example, P polarization component) emitted from the light modulation element 122 is It can be selectively transmitted and can be incident on the collimating optical system 131 of the virtual image optical unit 130; see at least page 3, 1st paragraph);
illumination optics and imaging optics (illumination unit 110 and image display unit 120) configured to deliver the incident light beams from the pin-light source to the SLM (figure 1); and
the imaging optics being further configured to deliver sequentially the modulated light beams from the SLM along a projection axis to an eye-box in a second plane substantially parallel to the first plane (the horizontal plane in front of the eye and the image display unit 120; figure 2);
wherein
the illumination optics is in a third plane and the projection axis is in a fourth plane (vertical planes, figure 2), the third and fourth planes being substantially perpendicular to the first plane;
the illumination optics defines a first optical path followed by the incident light beams in a direction from the first plane to the second plane and a second optical path followed by the incident light beams in a direction from the third plane to the fourth plane (the second light beam L2 is incident on the collimating optical system 131 as a non-parallel light beam and is incident on the light guide plate 133. As described above, the second light flux L2 is guided so as to converge in the light guide plate 133 toward the exit port 133d according to the angle of view (see FIG. 5), and exits from the exit port 133d; see at least page 7, 4th paragraph); and
the imaging optics defines a third optical path followed by the modulated light beams in a direction from the second plane to the first plane and a fourth optical path followed by the modulated light beams in a direction from the first plane to the second plane (the second light beam L2 is incident on the collimating optical system 131 as a non-parallel light beam and is incident on the light guide plate 133. As described above, the second light flux L2 is guided so as to converge in the light guide plate 133 toward the exit port 133d according to the angle of view (see FIG. 5), and exits from the exit port 133d; see at least page 7, 4th paragraph).
Takeshi discloses the limitations as shown in the rejection of claim 26 above. However, Takeshi is silent regarding the optical combiner comprises a foveal combiner. Hollands et al. (figures 1-2) teaches wherein the imaging optics comprises an optical combiner to project image light beams from the modulated light beams and to transmit natural light from the real world towards the eye-box; wherein the modulated light beams comprise foveal modulated light beams forming foveal pin-light images at the first plane and peripheral modulated light beams forming peripheral pin-light images at the first plane; and wherein the optical combiner comprises a foveal combiner configured to reflect the foveal modulated light beams and project foveal image light beams towards a foveal eye-box (40; multi-layer holographic combiner 40 need not be an optical combiner and may, in general, be any desired optical system for redirecting input light 56 using at least one layer of hologram structures (e.g., reflection hologram structures 42 and transmission hologram structures 44) as described herein; see at least paragraph 0106). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify projection system as taught by Hollands et al. in order to allow a viewer to view both computer-generated images and real-world objects in the viewer's surrounding environment.
The limitation, “the illumination optics defines a first optical path followed by the incident light beams in a direction from the first plane to the second plane and a second optical path followed by the incident light beams in a direction from the third plane to the fourth plane; and the imaging optics defines a third optical path followed by the modulated light beams in a direction from the second plane to the first plane and a fourth optical path followed by the modulated light beams in a direction from the first plane to the second plane; the imaging optics comprises an optical combiner to project image light beams from the modulated light beams and to transmit natural light from the real world towards the eye-box; wherein the modulated light beams comprise foveal modulated light beams forming foveal pin-light images at the first plane and peripheral modulated light beams forming peripheral pin-light images at the first plane; and wherein the optical combiner comprises a foveal combiner configured to reflect the foveal modulated light beams and project foveal image light beams towards a foveal eye-box” is functional in nature. Such a functional limitation is only given patentable weight insofar as it imparts a structural limitation. Here, Takeshi discloses the structural limitations required to perform the function as claimed. It is further noted that apparatus claims must be structurally distinguishable from the prior art and that the manner of operating the device does not differentiate the apparatus claim from the prior art (see e.g. MPEP 2114). In other words, the prior art need not perform the function, but must merely be capable of doing so.
Regarding claim 27, Hollands et al. (figures 1-2) teaches comprising mixed reality glasses, wherein the optical combiner (40) is comprised in at least one of the lenses of the glasses, the illumination optics and the imaging optics are comprised in the hinges or another portion of the temples (housing portion 8B may form a temple of a frame for the head mounted device whereas housing portion 8A forms a bridge or other portion of the frame for the head mounted device. In this example, the arrangement of FIG. 18 illustrates only one side of the head mounted device (e.g., housing portion 8B may form a left or right temple of the head mounted device). Similar structures may be used to project light to the user's other eye; see at least paragraph 0088; figure 18).
Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeshi in view of Hollands et al.; further in view of Popovich et al. (WO 2016/020630).
Regarding claim 4, Takeshi discloses the limitations as shown in the rejection of claim 3 above. However, Takeshi is silent regarding wherein the illumination waveguide comprises an illumination deflecting element configured to redirect the incident light beams along the first optical path and an illumination out-coupling element configured to output the incident light beams along the second optical path. Popovich et al. (figures 1-2) teaches wherein the illumination waveguide comprises an illumination deflecting element configured to redirect the incident light beams along the first optical path and an illumination out-coupling element configured to output the incident light beams along the second optical path (a laser 20 for illuminating a microdisplay 30; a waveguide 10 comprising transparent lamina 11-15; a first grating device 41 for coupling light from the laser into a TIR path in the waveguide; a second grating device 45 for coupling light from the TIR path out of the waveguide; and a third grating device 42 for applying a variation of at least one of beam deflection or phase retardation across the waveironts of the TIR light ; see at least page 6, 4th paragraph). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify projection system as taught by Popovich et al. in order to achieve illumination via waveguide optics can result in 50% reduction in size compared with conventional lens combiner splitter schemes.
Regarding claim 5, Popovich et al. (figures 1-2) teaches wherein the illumination waveguide further comprises collimating element configured to collimate said plurality of incident light beams (a laser 20 for illuminating a microdisplay 30; a waveguide 10 comprising transparent lamina 11-15; a first grating device 41 for coupling light from the laser into a TIR path in the waveguide; a second grating device 45 for coupling light from the TIR path out of the waveguide; and a third grating device 42 for applying a variation of at least one of beam deflection or phase retardation across the waveironts of the TIR light ; see at least page 6, 4th paragraph).
Regarding claim 6, Popovich et al. (figures 1-2) teaches wherein the illumination waveguide comprises 1D or 2D fold gratings configured to interact with said plurality of incident light beams (a laser 20 for illuminating a microdisplay 30; a waveguide 10 comprising transparent lamina 11-15; a first grating device 41 for coupling light from the laser into a TIR path in the waveguide; a second grating device 45 for coupling light from the TIR path out of the waveguide; and a third grating device 42 for applying a variation of at least one of beam deflection or phase retardation across the waveironts of the TIR light ; see at least page 6, 4th paragraph).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAUREN NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1428. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday, 8:00 AM -6:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jennifer Carruth, can be reached at 571-272-9791. 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.
/LAUREN NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871