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 .
Election/Restrictions
Restriction has been cancelled. Examiner will examine ALL claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Claim(s) 1,15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi (US 20050207003) in view of Taylor et al (US 10133168)
Regarding Claim 1,
Kobayashi discloses one or more liquid crystal (LC) lenses (130) that are refractive optical elements, the one or more liquid crystal lenses (130) having a first chromatic aberration [0049].
Kobayashi does not disclose a Pancharatnam-Berry (PB) phase lens that is a diffractive optical element, the PB phase lens having a second chromatic aberration that is complementary to the first chromatic aberration, wherein a chromatic aberration of the optical system is less than the first chromatic aberration.
Taylor et al discloses Pancharatnam-Berry (PB) phase lens that is a diffractive optical element, the PB phase lens having a second chromatic aberration that is complementary to the first chromatic aberration, wherein a chromatic aberration of the optical system is less than the first chromatic aberration (“…Note that in cases where the anamorphic reflector assembly 140 is a monolithic optical element, substantial dispersion may occur as the image light travels through the material of the monolithic optical element. The dispersion causes chromatic aberration. In alternate embodiments (not shown), the correction element 150 is a Pancharatnam Berry Phase (PBP) lens that is configured to correct for at least chromatic aberration. As an Abbe number of a PBP lens has a reverse sign of the monolithic optical element, a PBP lens acts to mitigate chromatic aberration. Moreover, since the Abbe number (e.g., Zeonex E48R has an Abbe number of ˜60) of a PBP lens is ˜one order of magnitude higher than potential materials of the monolithic optical element (e.g., a typical diffractive has an Abbe number of ˜3), a PBP lens with very little optical power can correct color aberration caused by the monolithic optical element that has a lot of optical power relative to the PBP lens. Additionally, in embodiments, where the color correction element 150 is a flat PBP lens, it can actually be placed in other locations in other locations in the light projection system 100. For example, the PBP lens could be placed between the light source 120 and the reflector assembly 140, such that light from the light source 120 passes through the PBP lens prior to being incident on the first reflective surface 160 of the reflector assembly 140. Additionally, as a PBP lens may be formed as a flat structure that takes minimal space, relative to, e.g., a multi-element lens (e.g., a doublet). Accordingly, use of a PBP lens as the correction element 150 may help reduce a form factor of the light projection system 100…”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kobayashi to include Taylor et al’s Pancharatnam-Berry (PB) phase lens that is a diffractive optical element, the PB phase lens having a second chromatic aberration that is complementary to the first chromatic aberration, wherein a chromatic aberration of the optical system is less than the first chromatic aberration motivated by the desire to reduce a form factor of the light projection system.
Regarding Claim 15,
Kobayashi discloses a display device, a pixel array in the display device [0049] being configured to generate light beams; and an optical system including: one or more liquid crystal (LC) lenses [0049] that are refractive optical elements, the one or more liquid crystal lenses having a first chromatic aberration.
Taylor et al discloses Pancharatnam-Berry (PB) phase lens that is a diffractive optical element, the PB phase lens having a second chromatic aberration that is complementary to the first chromatic aberration, wherein a chromatic aberration of the optical system is less than the first chromatic aberration (“…Note that in cases where the anamorphic reflector assembly 140 is a monolithic optical element, substantial dispersion may occur as the image light travels through the material of the monolithic optical element. The dispersion causes chromatic aberration. In alternate embodiments (not shown), the correction element 150 is a Pancharatnam Berry Phase (PBP) lens that is configured to correct for at least chromatic aberration. As an Abbe number of a PBP lens has a reverse sign of the monolithic optical element, a PBP lens acts to mitigate chromatic aberration. Moreover, since the Abbe number (e.g., Zeonex E48R has an Abbe number of ˜60) of a PBP lens is ˜one order of magnitude higher than potential materials of the monolithic optical element (e.g., a typical diffractive has an Abbe number of ˜3), a PBP lens with very little optical power can correct color aberration caused by the monolithic optical element that has a lot of optical power relative to the PBP lens. Additionally, in embodiments, where the color correction element 150 is a flat PBP lens, it can actually be placed in other locations in other locations in the light projection system 100. For example, the PBP lens could be placed between the light source 120 and the reflector assembly 140, such that light from the light source 120 passes through the PBP lens prior to being incident on the first reflective surface 160 of the reflector assembly 140. Additionally, as a PBP lens may be formed as a flat structure that takes minimal space, relative to, e.g., a multi-element lens (e.g., a doublet). Accordingly, use of a PBP lens as the correction element 150 may help reduce a form factor of the light projection system 100…”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kobayashi to include Taylor et al’s Pancharatnam-Berry (PB) phase lens that is a diffractive optical element, the PB phase lens having a second chromatic aberration that is complementary to the first chromatic aberration, wherein a chromatic aberration of the optical system is less than the first chromatic aberration motivated by the desire to reduce a form factor of the light projection system.
Regarding Claim 16,
In addition to Kobayashi and Taylor et al, Taylor et al discloses a virtual reality (VR) viewing optical system disposed between the display device and the optical system. (background/summary)
Regarding Claim 17,
In addition to Kobayashi and Taylor et al, Taylor et al discloses wherein the one or more LC lenses include a stack of LC lenses that are electrically tunable, and the optical system includes a stack of cylindrical LC lenses with first dimensions forming different angles with an X axis, respectively, the stack of cylindrical LC lenses being electrically tunable, an electrically tunable lens system including the stack of LC lenses and the stack of cylindrical LC lenses [0006], and an LC spatial light modulator (SLM) disposed between the electrically tunable lens system and the PB phase lens.
Regarding Claim 18,
In addition to Kobayashi and Taylor et al, Taylor et al discloses an augmented reality (AR) viewing optical system disposed between the display device and the optical system, the AR viewing optical system directing the light beams from the display device and light beams from a real object to the optical system.(known in the art o have an AR optical system)
Regarding Claim 19,
Kobayashi discloses obtaining vision correction information for at least one of nearsightedness or farsightedness; determining a respective optical power of each liquid crystal (LC) lens in a stack of LC lenses and an optical power.
Kobayashi does not disclose of a Pancharatnam-Berry (PB) phase lens based on the vision correction information; determining respective voltages to be applied to the stack of LC lenses based on the respective optical powers of the LC lenses; determining a polarization state of light incident onto the PB phase lens based on the optical power of the PB phase lens; applying the determined respective voltages to the stack of LC lenses and controlling the polarization state of light incident onto the PB phase lens to correct for the at least one of the nearsightedness or the farsightedness.
Taylor et al discloses Pancharatnam-Berry (PB) phase lens that is a diffractive optical element, the PB phase lens having a second chromatic aberration that is complementary to the first chromatic aberration, wherein a chromatic aberration of the optical system is less than the first chromatic aberration (“…Note that in cases where the anamorphic reflector assembly 140 is a monolithic optical element, substantial dispersion may occur as the image light travels through the material of the monolithic optical element. The dispersion causes chromatic aberration. In alternate embodiments (not shown), the correction element 150 is a Pancharatnam Berry Phase (PBP) lens that is configured to correct for at least chromatic aberration. As an Abbe number of a PBP lens has a reverse sign of the monolithic optical element, a PBP lens acts to mitigate chromatic aberration. Moreover, since the Abbe number (e.g., Zeonex E48R has an Abbe number of ˜60) of a PBP lens is ˜one order of magnitude higher than potential materials of the monolithic optical element (e.g., a typical diffractive has an Abbe number of ˜3), a PBP lens with very little optical power can correct color aberration caused by the monolithic optical element that has a lot of optical power relative to the PBP lens. Additionally, in embodiments, where the color correction element 150 is a flat PBP lens, it can actually be placed in other locations in other locations in the light projection system 100. For example, the PBP lens could be placed between the light source 120 and the reflector assembly 140, such that light from the light source 120 passes through the PBP lens prior to being incident on the first reflective surface 160 of the reflector assembly 140. Additionally, as a PBP lens may be formed as a flat structure that takes minimal space, relative to, e.g., a multi-element lens (e.g., a doublet). Accordingly, use of a PBP lens as the correction element 150 may help reduce a form factor of the light projection system 100…”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kobayashi to include Taylor et al’s Pancharatnam-Berry (PB) phase lens that is a diffractive optical element, the PB phase lens having a second chromatic aberration that is complementary to the first chromatic aberration, wherein a chromatic aberration of the optical system is less than the first chromatic aberration motivated by the desire to reduce a form factor of the light projection system.
Regarding Claim 20,
In addition to Kobayashi and Taylor et al, Taylor et al discloses adjusting at least one of the respective voltages applied to the stack of LC lenses incrementally (Fig. 1).
Claim(s) 2-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi (US 20050207003) and of Taylor et al (US 10133168) in view of Lu et al (US 10948801)
Regarding Claim 2,
Kobayashi and Taylor et al discloses everything as disclosed above.
Kobayashi and Taylor et al do not disclose a first optical power of the one or more LC lenses is electrically tunable, an optical power of the optical system is based at least on a sum of the first optical power of the one or more LC lenses and a second optical power of the PB phase lens, and the first optical power, the second optical power, and the optical power of the optical system correspond to respective focal lengths of the one or more LC lenses, the PB phase lens, and the optical system.
Lu et al discloses a first optical power of the one or more LC lenses is electrically tunable, an optical power of the optical system is based at least on a sum of the first optical power of the one or more LC lenses and a second optical power of the PB phase lens, and the first optical power, the second optical power, and the optical power of the optical system correspond to respective focal lengths of the one or more LC lenses, the PB phase lens, and the optical system. (paragraph (30)”… The adaptive lens 102 may include, for example, a Pancharatnam-Berry phase (PBP) lens having optical power due to PBP, or geometrical phase effect due to a spatially varying birefringence…”)(paragraph 44 “…The selection of ratios of optical powers of the varifocal 101 and adaptive 102 lenses may depend on a technology-dependent switchable or tunable optical power range, specific optical configurations in which the hybrid lens 100 is used, etc. More than one solution for the optical power ratios of the varifocal 101 and adaptive 102 lenses may exist, and the preferable one may or may not depend on a particular application or configuration…”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kobayashi and Taylor et al to include Lu et al’s a first optical power of the one or more LC lenses is electrically tunable, an optical power of the optical system is based at least on a sum of the first optical power of the one or more LC lenses and a second optical power of the PB phase lens, and the first optical power, the second optical power, and the optical power of the optical system correspond to respective focal lengths of the one or more LC lenses, the PB phase lens, and the optical system motivated by the desire to lessen a vergence accommodation conflict (ABSTRACT).
Regarding Claim 3,
In addition to Kobayashi, Taylor et al, and Lu et al, Lu et al discloses wherein the one or more LC lenses include a plurality of LC lenses, each of the LC lenses is electrically tunable, and the first optical power is a sum of respective optical powers of the plurality of LC lenses. (paragraph (30)”… The adaptive lens 102 may include, for example, a Pancharatnam-Berry phase (PBP) lens having optical power due to PBP, or geometrical phase effect due to a spatially varying birefringence…”)(paragraph 44 “…The selection of ratios of optical powers of the varifocal 101 and adaptive 102 lenses may depend on a technology-dependent switchable or tunable optical power range, specific optical configurations in which the hybrid lens 100 is used, etc. More than one solution for the optical power ratios of the varifocal 101 and adaptive 102 lenses may exist, and the preferable one may or may not depend on a particular application or configuration…”)
Regarding Claim 4,
In addition to Kobayashi, Taylor et al, and Lu et al, Kobayashi discloses wherein a number of the plurality of LC lenses is 3 (110,111,112) (See Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 5,
In addition to Kobayashi, Taylor et al, and Lu et al, Kobayashi discloses wherein one of the one or more LC lenses includes a plurality of transparent ring electrodes [0030] disposed on a first substrate (231) and a transparent electrode (232) disposed on a second substrate, the first substrate and the second substrate being parallel to a plane, and a refractive index [0049] of the one of the one or more LC lenses varies with a radial distance from a center of the plurality of transparent ring electrodes on the first substrate, the refractive index being controlled by respective voltages of the plurality of transparent ring electrodes [0030], the refractive index and the first optical power being circularly symmetric in the plane.
Regarding Claim 6,
In addition to Kobayashi, Taylor et al, and Lu et al, Kobayashi discloses wherein the PB phase lens includes a center grating and a plurality of ring gratings [0046] formed by a liquid crystal material over a substrate, each of the plurality of ring gratings surrounds the center grating, the PB phase lens is configured to generate an output light beam from an input light beam that is incident onto the substrate perpendicularly, a center [0047] diffracted portion of the output light beam has first diffraction angle 01, the center diffracted portion corresponding to a center portion of the input light beam that is incident onto the center grating, and peripheral diffracted portions of the output light beam have diffraction angles varying from the first diffraction angle 01 to a second diffraction angle 02 corresponding to an outermost ring grating in the plurality of ring gratings, the peripherical diffracted portions corresponding to peripheral portions of the input light beam that are incident onto the plurality of ring gratings, respectively, the second diffraction angle 02 being greater than the first diffraction angle 01.
Claim(s) 7-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi (US 20050207003) and of Taylor et al (US 10133168) and of Lu et al (US 10948801) in view of (WO 2020183107 A2)
Regarding Claim 7,
Kobayashi, Taylor et al, and Lu et al discloses everything as disclosed above.
Kobayashi, Taylor et al, and Lu et al do not discloses wherein the PB phase lens functions as a converging lens based on a first polarization state of the input light beam; and the PB phase lens functions as a diverging lens based on a second polarization state of the input light beam.
(WO 2020183107 A2) discloses wherein the PB phase lens functions as a converging lens based on a first polarization state of the input light beam; and the PB phase lens functions as a diverging lens based on a second polarization state of the input light beam. (“… In practice, considering for example the right circular polarization component of the incident light beam 100, by virtue of its operation and its orientation, the first geometric phase lens Li behaves for example like a converging lens of focal length F. The second geometric phase lens L 2 is oriented so as for its part to behave like a divergent lens of focal length -F for a left circular incident polarization. In other words, the first geometric phase lens Li and the second geometric phase lens L2 are arranged so as to present an optical power of the same sign for a first state of circular polarization and an optical power of the opposite sign for the other state of. circular polarization orthogonal to the first state of circular polarization…”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kobayashi, Taylor et al, and Lu et al to include (WO 2020183107 A2)’s discloses PB phase lens functions as a converging lens based on a first polarization state of the input light beam; and the PB phase lens functions as a diverging lens based on a second polarization state of the input light beam motivated by the desire to
Regarding Claim 8,
In addition to Kobayashi, Taylor et al, and Lu et al, (WO 2020183107 A2)’s discloses wherein the input light beam is left circularly polarized, the output light beam is right circularly polarized, and the PB phase lens functions as the converging lens with the second optical power being positive. (“… In practice, considering for example the right circular polarization component of the incident light beam 100, by virtue of its operation and its orientation, the first geometric phase lens Li behaves for example like a converging lens of focal length F. The second geometric phase lens L 2 is oriented so as for its part to behave like a divergent lens of focal length -F for a left circular incident polarization. In other words, the first geometric phase lens Li and the second geometric phase lens L2 are arranged so as to present an optical power of the same sign for a first state of circular polarization and an optical power of the opposite sign for the other state of. circular polarization orthogonal to the first state of circular polarization…”)
Regarding Claim 9,
In addition to Kobayashi, Taylor et al, and Lu et al, (WO 2020183107 A2)’s discloses wherein the input light beam is right circularly polarized , the output light beam is left circularly polarized, and the PB phase lens functions as the diverging lens with the second optical power being negative. (“… In practice, considering for example the right circular polarization component of the incident light beam 100, by virtue of its operation and its orientation, the first geometric phase lens Li behaves for example like a converging lens of focal length F. The second geometric phase lens L 2 is oriented so as for its part to behave like a divergent lens of focal length -F for a left circular incident polarization. In other words, the first geometric phase lens Li and the second geometric phase lens L2 are arranged so as to present an optical power of the same sign for a first state of circular polarization and an optical power of the opposite sign for the other state of. circular polarization orthogonal to the first state of circular polarization…”)
Regarding Claim 10,
In addition to Kobayashi, Taylor et al, and Lu et al, (WO 2020183107 A2)’s discloses wherein the optical system includes one or more cylindrical LC lenses configured to correct for astigmatism of an eye of a user using the optical system, for each of the one or more cylindrical LC lenses, the respective cylindrical LC lens includes a plurality of transparent electrodes disposed on a first substrate and a transparent electrode disposed on a second substrate, the first substrate and the second substrate being parallel to an XZ plane including an X axis and a Z axis that are perpendicular to each other, the plurality of transparent electrodes being parallel, and a refractive index that is electrically tunable varies along a respective first dimension in the XZ plane. (“… In practice, considering for example the right circular polarization component of the incident light beam 100, by virtue of its operation and its orientation, the first geometric phase lens Li behaves for example like a converging lens of focal length F. The second geometric phase lens L 2 is oriented so as for its part to behave like a divergent lens of focal length -F for a left circular incident polarization. In other words, the first geometric phase lens Li and the second geometric phase lens L2 are arranged so as to present an optical power of the same sign for a first state of circular polarization and an optical power of the opposite sign for the other state of. circular polarization orthogonal to the first state of circular polarization…”)
Regarding Claim 11,
In addition to Kobayashi, Taylor et al, and Lu et al, (WO 2020183107 A2)’s discloses the one or more cylindrical LC lenses include a first cylindrical LC lens, a second cylindrical LC lens, and a third cylindrical LC lens with the first dimensions forming 0, 450, and 900 with the X axis, respectively. (“… In practice, considering for example the right circular polarization component of the incident light beam 100, by virtue of its operation and its orientation, the first geometric phase lens Li behaves for example like a converging lens of focal length F. The second geometric phase lens L 2 is oriented so as for its part to behave like a divergent lens of focal length -F for a left circular incident polarization. In other words, the first geometric phase lens Li and the second geometric phase lens L2 are arranged so as to present an optical power of the same sign for a first state of circular polarization and an optical power of the opposite sign for the other state of. circular polarization orthogonal to the first state of circular polarization…”)
Regarding Claim 12,
In addition to Kobayashi, Taylor et al, and Lu et al, (WO 2020183107 A2)’s discloses LC spatial light modulator (SLM) that is configured to manipulate a polarization state of an input light beam to the LC SLM by varying a voltage input to the LC SLM, an output light beam from the LC SLM being the input light beam to the PB phase lens, the LC SLM being electrically tunable.
Regarding Claim 13,
In addition to Kobayashi, Taylor et al, and Lu et al, (WO 2020183107 A2)’s discloses wherein the one or more LC lenses include a stack of LC lenses that are electrically tunable, the one or more cylindrical LC lenses include a stack of cylindrical LC lenses with the first dimensions forming different angles with the X axis, respectively, the stack of cylindrical LC lenses being electrically tunable, an electrically tunable lens system includes the stack of LC lenses and the stack of cylindrical LC lenses, and the LC SLM is disposed between the electrically tunable lens system and the PB phase lens. (“… In practice, considering for example the right circular polarization component of the incident light beam 100, by virtue of its operation and its orientation, the first geometric phase lens Li behaves for example like a converging lens of focal length F. The second geometric phase lens L 2 is oriented so as for its part to behave like a divergent lens of focal length -F for a left circular incident polarization. In other words, the first geometric phase lens Li and the second geometric phase lens L2 are arranged so as to present an optical power of the same sign for a first state of circular polarization and an optical power of the opposite sign for the other state of. circular polarization orthogonal to the first state of circular polarization…”)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding Claim 14,
The prior art does not disclose nor would it be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include another reference to disclose wherein an input light beam that is incident onto the electrically tunable lens system is linearly polarized, an output light beam from the electrically tunable lens system incident onto the LC SLM is linearly polarized, in response to the voltage of the LC SLM being a first voltage, the LC SLM is configured to convert the linearly polarized input light beam to the LC SLM to a left circularly polarized output light beam from the SLM, and the PB phase lens is configured to convert the left circularly polarized input light beam to the PB phase lens to a right circularly polarized output light beam from the PB phase lens, and in response to the voltage of the LC SLM being a second voltage, the LC SLM is configured to convert the linearly polarized input light beam to the LC SLM to a right circularly polarized output light beam from the LC SLM, and the PB phase lens is configured to convert the right circularly polarized input light beam to the PB phase lens to a left circularly polarized output light beam from the PB phase lens.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUCY P CHIEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8579. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM PST Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday.
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, Michael Caley can be reached at 571-272-2286. 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.
/LUCY P CHIEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871