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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 26 February 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1,16,25,29, and 33 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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-3,15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IZUMIHARA; Atsushi et al. (US 20160054565 A1) in view of Brubaker; Curtis M. (US 20190213931 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Izumihara teaches,
A head-mounted device, (¶26,145-149, and Fig. 8A-8B, “HMD device according to a second embodiment” as depicted in fig. 8A) comprising:
a head-mounted support structure; (¶146 and Fig. 8A-8B, HMD device 20 has “a main body part 210 and the band part 320” as depicted in fig. 8A)
rear-facing displays (¶146 and Fig. 8A-8B, “inner display units 313a and 313b” depicted in fig. 8A) supported by the head-mounted support structure (¶146 and Fig. 8A-8B, inner display units 313a and 313b included in “main body part 210” as depicted in fig. 8A) that are configured to provide visual content to eye boxes (¶146,59, and Fig. 8A-8B, inner display units 313a and 313b “provided at positions corresponding to the left and right eyes of the user” wearing the HMD device 20 to “provide three-dimensional images (3D images) to the user”) at a rear side of the head-mounted support structure; (¶146,59, and Fig. 8A-8B, inner display units 313a and 313b “on the inner side of the main body part” depicted in Fig. 8A)
a publicly viewable forward-facing display panel (¶146-147 and Fig. 8A-8B, HMD device 20 “in which an outer display unit 315 is added to an outside of a goggle-like portion” depicted in fig. 8A) that has pixels configured to display an image; (¶146-147 and Fig. 8A-8B, outer display unit 315 has a “display screen facing the outside” to display various types of information on the display screen such as “images, text, graphs, tables, and the like”)
But does not explicitly teach,
a display cover layer overlapping the publicly viewable forward-facing display panel, wherein the display cover layer has a compound curve overlapping the pixels.
However, Brubaker teaches additionally,
a display cover layer (¶220-221 and fig. 28A-28B, formed outer “cover 2802” depicted in fig. 28A-28B) overlapping the publicly viewable forward-facing display panel, (¶220-221 and fig. 28A-28B, “OLED/TFT matrix 2804” depicted in fig. 28A-28B) wherein the display cover layer has a compound curve overlapping the pixels. (¶220-221,150, and fig. 28A-28B, cover 2802 formed to “match the compound curved surfaces of a target vehicle” which forms an “outer protective surface of compound curvatureed tempered glass” as depicted in fig. 28A-28B)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the sealed display of Brubaker which has a compound curvature. This allows for creating a surface that can match the compound curve of a motor vehicle.
Regarding claim 2, Izumihara with Brubaker teaches the limitations of claim 1,
Izumihara teaches additionally,
wherein the head-mounted support structure (¶57 and fig. 1A, “main body part 310”) has a curved rear surface configured to conform to a curved face surface. (¶57 and fig. 1A, main body part 310 is “shaped like goggles, is positioned in front of the eyes of the user” wearing the device which conforms and wraps around the user as depicted in fig. 1A)
Brubaker teaches additionally,
publicly viewable forward-facing display panel (¶220-221 and fig. 28A-28B, “OLED/TFT matrix 2804” depicted in fig. 28A-28B) comprises a flexible display panel (¶220-221 and fig. 28A-28B, OLED/TFT matrix associated with encapsulated “flexible, clear OLED/TFT matrix 2804”) on which the pixels are located, (¶220-221 and fig. 28A-28B, OLED/TFT matrix 2804 which has “heat-producing elements of the OLED display matrix”) wherein the flexible display panel is bent about a bend axis, (¶220-221,92, and fig. 28A-28B, flexible, clear OLED/TFT matrix with “curvature from one of many standard curvatures” for a given display area “through its horizontal section”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the sealed display of Brubaker which has a compound curvature. This allows for creating a surface that can match the compound curve of a motor vehicle.
Regarding claim 3, Izumihara with Brubaker teaches the limitations of claim 2,
Brubaker teaches additionally,
display cover layer (¶220-221 and fig. 28A-28B, formed outer “cover 2802”) comprises a glass layer. (¶220-221 and fig. 28A-28B, formed outer cover 2802 designed consisting of “sealed glass”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the sealed display of Brubaker which has a compound curvature. This allows for creating a surface that can match the compound curve of a motor vehicle.
Regarding claim 15, Izumihara with Brubaker teaches the limitations of claim 1,
Izumihara teaches additionally,
forward-facing display panel (¶177 and Fig. 10A, “display screen 610 facing the outside” of the HMD device 20 depicted in fig. 10A) has a nose bridge recess. (¶177 and Fig. 10A, display screen 610 of the HMD device 20 having a geometric shape with a cutout in the geometric shape where the nose would be positioned as depicted in fig. 10A)
Claim(s) 4 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IZUMIHARA; Atsushi et al. (US 20160054565 A1) in view of Brubaker; Curtis M. (US 20190213931 A1) in view of Prest; Christopher D. et al. (US 20180292864 A1)
Regarding claim 4, Izumihara with Brubaker teaches the limitations of claim 3,
Brubaker teaches additionally,
flexible display panel (¶220-221 and fig. 28A-28B, OLED/TFT matrix associated with encapsulated “flexible, clear OLED/TFT matrix 2804”)
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 4,
However, Prest teaches additionally,
a polymer layer (¶93,73, and Fig. 19, “optical structures 134T”, formed from a sheet of “polymer”, positioned between display cover layer 140 and display structures 46A depicted in fig. 19) between the glass layer (¶92-93 and Fig. 19, “display cover layer 140” may be “a planar sheet of glass” depicted in fig. 19) and the display panel, (¶93 and Fig. 19, “display structures 46A” depicted in fig. 19) wherein a first air gap (¶93 and Fig. 19, “Air gaps” that separates “display cover layer 140, optical structures 134T” depicted in fig. 19) separates the polymer layer from the glass layer, (¶93 and Fig. 19, “display cover layer 140, optical structures 134T” depicted in fig. 19) and wherein a second air gaps (¶93 and Fig. 19, “Air gaps” that separates “optical structures 134T” and “display structures 46A” depicted in fig. 19) separates the display panel from the polymer layer. (¶93 and Fig. 19, “optical structures 134T” and “display structures 46A” depicted in fig. 19)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the sealed display of Brubaker with the structure of Prest which provides air gaps and has a polymer between the display cover and display structure. This allows for an arrangement of a display that can increase the effective size of the display.
Claim(s) 5 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IZUMIHARA; Atsushi et al. (US 20160054565 A1) in view of Brubaker; Curtis M. (US 20190213931 A1) in view of Goergen; Patrick John et al. (US 20200226838 A1)
Regarding claim 5, Izumihara with Brubaker teaches the limitations of claim 3,
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 5,
However, Goergen teaches additionally,
display cover layer (¶46 and fig. 4, “lens portion 16” depicted in Fig. 4) comprises an antireflection coating on the glass layer. (¶46 and fig. 4, lens portion 16 coated with “layers of anti-reflective coating 106” depicted in Fig. 4)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the sealed display of Brubaker with the coating of Goergen which layers an anti-reflective resistant coating to the lens. This allows for a layer of coating that can permit ambient light to pass without creating reflections in the lens portion.
Claim(s) 6 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IZUMIHARA; Atsushi et al. (US 20160054565 A1) in view of Brubaker; Curtis M. (US 20190213931 A1) in view of CRISLER; Matthew Calbraith et al. (US 20190208190 A1)
Regarding claim 6, Izumihara with Brubaker teaches the limitations of claim 1,
Brubaker teaches additionally,
the compound curve. (¶220-221,150, and fig. 28A-28B, cover 2802 formed to “match the compound curved surfaces of a target vehicle” which forms an “outer protective surface of compound curvatureed tempered glass” as depicted in fig. 28A-28B)
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 6,
However, Crisler teaches additionally,
optical components (¶36 and Fig. 9, display device 900 includes “front-facing two-dimensional image camera 910 (e.g. a visible light camera and/or infrared camera), a front-facing depth camera 912” and “an ambient light sensor 916” as depicted in fig. 9) overlapped by a portion of the display cover layer with the compound curve. (¶35-36 and Fig. 9, front-facing two-dimensional image camera 910, a front-facing depth camera 912, and an ambient light sensor 916 positioned in frame 902 covered by “see-through optical component 906” as depicted in fig. 9)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the sealed display of Brubaker with the see-through optical component of Crisler which positioned cameras and the frame behind an optical component. This allows for a see-through veil that can veil for the display system and the user’s view from the real world environment.
Claim(s) 7-8,10,12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IZUMIHARA; Atsushi et al. (US 20160054565 A1) in view of Brubaker; Curtis M. (US 20190213931 A1) in view of CRISLER; Matthew Calbraith et al. (US 20190208190 A1) in view of TSAI; Jason Victor et al. (US 20210018657 A1)
Regarding claim 7, Izumihara with Brubaker with Crisler teaches the limitations of claim 6,
Izumihara teaches additionally,
optical components comprise cameras, (¶146 and Fig. 8A, HMD device 20 including “camera 311” as depicted in fig. 8A)
but does not explicitly teach,
the head-mounted device further comprising a ring-shaped polymer member forming a cosmetic covering structure that overlaps the cameras and that surrounds the pixels.
However, Tsai teaches additionally,
the head-mounted device (¶67 and Fig. 1C, “near-eye display 100” depicted in fig. 1C) further comprising a ring-shaped polymer member (¶67,109, Fig. 1C and 9A, near-eye display 100 including “sensor module 120a” with a circular shape as depicted in fig. 1C further described as including “lens assembly 902 and image sensor 604” that includes layers 908 fabricated from “polymer materials” in circular shapes as depicted in fig. 9A) forming a cosmetic covering structure (¶109 and Fig. 9A, “lens assembly 902” including circular polymer “layers 908” depicted in fig. 9A) that overlaps the cameras (¶109 and Fig. 9A, “Image sensor 604” positioned below and bonded to lens assembly 902) and that surrounds the pixels. (¶109,96, and Fig. 9A and 6A, “Image sensor 604” includes an “array of pixel cells 605” depicted in fig. 6A positioned such that “Different pixel cells may receive different intensities of light via lens 602”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the sealed display of Brubaker with the see-through optical component of Crisler with the optical components of Tsai which are positioned in a near-eye display. This allows for a design with a reduced footprint and improved optical properties.
Regarding claim 8, Izumihara with Brubaker with Crisler teaches the limitations of claim 6,
But does not teach the additional limitations of claim 8,
However, Tsai teaches additionally,
display cover layer comprises a polymer layer (¶67,109, Fig. 1C and 9A, near-eye display 100 including “sensor module 120a” as depicted in fig. 1C further described as including “lens assembly 902 and image sensor 604” that includes spacer 910 made from “polymer materials” in circular shapes as depicted in fig. 9A) with a recess that overlaps a given one of the optical components. (¶109-110 and Fig. 9A, “Image sensor 604” positioned below and bonded to lens assembly 902 that includes “spacers 910” with included “opening 920” positioned to direct light towards image sensor 604 depicted in fig. 9A)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the sealed display of Brubaker with the see-through optical component of Crisler with the optical components of Tsai which are positioned in a near-eye display. This allows for a design with a reduced footprint and improved optical properties.
Regarding claim 10, Izumihara with Brubaker with Crisler teaches the limitations of claim 6,
Izumihara teaches additionally,
scene cameras (¶58 and Fig. 8A, “camera 311” depicted in fig. 8A) configured to capture real-time pass-through video (¶58 and Fig. 8A, camera 311 “captures states external to the user in the form of dynamic images or still images”) that is displayed on the rear-facing displays. (¶58-59, Fig. 8B and 8A, “inner display units 313a and 313b” depicted in fig. 8B provide three-dimensional images (3D images) to the user of the “states external to the user in the form of dynamic images or still images” from camera 311 depicted in fig. 8A)
But does not teach the additional limitations of claim 10,
However, Tsai teaches additionally,
optical components comprises pose cameras (¶60, “sensor modules 120a-120d can generate physical image data”) configured to measure device motion (¶60, physical image data used to provide “location tracking system to track a location and/or a path of movement of the user in the physical environment”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the sealed display of Brubaker with the see-through optical component of Crisler with the optical components of Tsai which are positioned in a near-eye display. This allows for a design with a reduced footprint and improved optical properties.
Regarding claim 12, Izumihara with Brubaker with Crisler teaches the limitations of claim 6,
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 12,
However, Tsai teaches additionally,
display cover layer comprises a polymer layer (¶67,122,124, Fig. 1C and 11A, near-eye display 100 housing “sensor module 120a” as depicted in fig. 1C further exemplified as image sensor module 1100 including “holder structure 1120 to hold and physically support one or more lenses 602 and filter 1103” includes “housing 1122” made of “a polymer material” depicted in fig. 11A) having a through-hole opening (¶122,124 and Fig. 11A, holder structure 1120 with “housing 1122” includes “top opening 1132”) containing an infrared-transparent window member (¶122,124, “filter 1103” for select “infrared frequency range” of light to be detected by image sensor 604) that overlaps one of the optical components. (¶122,124, and Fig. 11A, light can be filtered by filter 1103 selects “light to be detected by image sensor 604” as depicted in fig. 11A)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the sealed display of Brubaker with the see-through optical component of Crisler with the optical components of Tsai which are positioned in a near-eye display. This allows for a design with a reduced footprint and improved optical properties.
Claim(s) 9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IZUMIHARA; Atsushi et al. (US 20160054565 A1) in view of Brubaker; Curtis M. (US 20190213931 A1) in view of CRISLER; Matthew Calbraith et al. (US 20190208190 A1) in view of Tarifa; Mariano Jos Jaimez (US 10798298 B1)
Regarding claim 9, Izumihara with Brubaker with Crisler teaches the limitations of claim 6,
Crisler teaches additionally,
optical components comprise an ambient light sensor. (¶36 and Fig. 9, display device 900 includes “an ambient light sensor 916” as depicted in fig. 9)
but does not explicitly teach,
optical components comprise a flicker sensor
However, Tarifa teaches additionally,
optical components comprise a flicker sensor (9:40-67 and 10:1-39 and Fig. 2, “one or more inside-out cameras” receive signals from light sources so that “virtual reality headset 132 may detect the flicker” present in the environment depicted in fig. 2)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the sealed display of Brubaker with the see-through optical component of Crisler with the flicker detection of Tarifa which uses the received signals from a plurality of light sources. This allows for the headset to notify a user of the detected flicker or can automatically adjust a frame rate to remove perceptible flicker.
Claim(s) 11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IZUMIHARA; Atsushi et al. (US 20160054565 A1) in view of Brubaker; Curtis M. (US 20190213931 A1) in view of CRISLER; Matthew Calbraith et al. (US 20190208190 A1) in view of Edmonds; Christopher Douglas et al. (US 11127148 B1)
Regarding claim 11, Izumihara with Brubaker with Crisler teaches the limitations of claim 6,
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 11,
However, Edmonds teaches additionally,
optical components (7:6-35 and Fig. 2, “scanning sensor(s) 205” depicted in fig. 2) comprise a pair of structured light cameras and a time-of-flight camera. (7:6-35 and Fig. 2, scanning sensor(s) 205 use to generate “stereo pair of images” performing one or more “image generation using structured light via use of one actual camera, one virtual camera, and one dot illuminator (e.g., dot illuminator 230)” and “image generation using a time of flight (TOF) sensor in which a baseline is present between a depth laser and a corresponding camera and in which a field of view (FOV) of the corresponding camera is offset relative to a field of illumination of the depth laser”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the sealed display of Brubaker with the see-through optical component of Crisler with the multiple stereo pair generation of Edmonds which uses a combination of image generation techniques. This allows for the use of various different scanning sensor arrangements included in a head mounted device.
Claim(s) 13 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IZUMIHARA; Atsushi et al. (US 20160054565 A1) in view of Brubaker; Curtis M. (US 20190213931 A1) in view of CRISLER; Matthew Calbraith et al. (US 20190208190 A1) in view of Goergen; Patrick John et al. (US 20200226838 A1)
Regarding claim 13, Izumihara with Brubaker with Crisler teaches the limitations of claim 6,
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 13,
However, Goergen teaches additionally,
a scratch-resistant hard coat (¶46 and Fig. 4, “scratch resistant coating 108” depicted in fig. 4) on the display cover layer. (¶46 and Fig. 4, “exterior surface 104” of lens portion 16 “may be coated with” scratch resistant coating 108 depicted in fig. 4)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the sealed display of Brubaker with the see-through optical component of Crisler with the coating of Goergen which layers a scratch resistant coating to the lens. This allows for a layer of coating that can protect the surface from blemishes during repetitive use.
Claim(s) 14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IZUMIHARA; Atsushi et al. (US 20160054565 A1) in view of Brubaker; Curtis M. (US 20190213931 A1) in view of SOMANATH; GOWRI et al. (US 20180288387 A1)
Regarding claim 14, Izumihara with Brubaker teaches the limitations of claim 1,
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 14,
However, Somanath teaches additionally,
forward-facing display panel (¶63 and Fig. 3A, “integral display 301” depicted in fig. 3A) comprises lenticular lenses. (¶63 and Fig. 3A, integral display 301 integrated with “lens array 305 (such as lenticular 1D array)”) depicted in fig. 3A)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the sealed display of Brubaker with the display of Somanath which includes a lenticular lens array in a display panel. This allows for the display to recreate a light field, offering perception of a full 3D scene.
Claim(s) 16,18-19,25-31,33 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IZUMIHARA; Atsushi et al. (US 20160054565 A1) in view of Pollard; Andrew et al. (US 20190235623 A1) in view of Brubaker; Curtis M. (US 20190213931 A1)
Regarding claim 16, Izumihara teaches,
A head-mounted device, (¶26,145-149, and Fig. 8A-8B, “HMD device according to a second embodiment” as depicted in fig. 8A) comprising:
a head-mounted support structure; (¶146 and Fig. 8A-8B, HMD device 20 has “a main body part 210 and the band part 320” as depicted in fig. 8A)
left and right displays (¶146 and Fig. 8A-8B, “inner display units 313a and 313b” depicted in fig. 8A) configured to provide respective left and right rear images (¶59, “three-dimensional images (3D images) to the user”) viewable from left and right eye boxes (¶146,59, and Fig. 8A-8B, inner display units 313a and 313b “provided at positions corresponding to the left and right eyes of the user” wearing the HMD device 20 to “provide three-dimensional images (3D images) to the user”)
a publicly viewable display panel (¶146-147 and Fig. 8A-8B, HMD device 20 “in which an outer display unit 315 is added to an outside of a goggle-like portion” depicted in fig. 8A) facing away from the left and right displays, (¶146-147, Fig. 8A and 8B, “outer display unit 315 is added to an outside of a goggle-like portion of the main body part 310” opposite the “inner display units 313a and 313b” of the HMD device 20 depicted in fig. 8A and 8B) wherein the publicly viewable display panel has pixels configured to display a publicly viewable image; (¶146-147 and Fig. 8A-8B, outer display unit 315 has a “display screen facing the outside” to display various types of information on the display screen such as “images, text, graphs, tables, and the like”)
But does not explicitly teach,
a left lens on a left side of the head-mounted support structure;
a right lens on the right side of the head-mounted support structure;
left and right rear images viewable from left and right eye boxes through the left and right lenses;
a display cover layer, wherein a first portion of the display cover layer overlaps the pixels, wherein a second portion of the display cover layer surrounds the first portion of the display cover layer in a ring shape without overlapping the pixels, and wherein the second portion of the display cover layer has a compound curve.
However, Pollard teaches additionally,
a left lens on a left side of the head-mounted support structure; (¶59,65-66, and Fig. 5, head-mountable display apparatus with “optical elements 20” for the left eye of the individual user associated with “display screen” 30a depicted in fig. 5)
a right lens on a right side of the head-mounted support structure; (¶59,65-66, and Fig. 5, head-mountable display apparatus with “optical elements 20” for the right eye of the individual user associated with “display screen” 30b depicted in fig. 5)
left and right rear images (¶72,65-66, and Fig. 5, “image data to be displayed” on the pair of display screens 30a, 30b of fig. 5) viewable from left and right eye boxes through the left and right lenses; (¶65 and Fig. 5, “pair of display screens 30a, 30b, each positioned opposite a respective aperture/optical element pair” depicted in fig. 5)
a display cover layer, (¶62 and Fig. 1A, head-mountable display apparatus comprises a “mask 10” depicted in fig. 1A) wherein a first portion of the display cover layer (¶62,65, and Fig. 1A, mask 10 forms a housing having a “front wall 12” depicted in fig. 1A) overlaps the pixels, (¶62,65, and Fig. 1A, mask 10 forms a housing having a “front wall 12” that is generally rectangular with rounded edges over a user’s eyes, where the “display screen 30 may generally match the profile of the front wall 12”) wherein a second portion of the display cover layer (¶62,65, and Fig. 1A, mask 10 forms a housing having “peripheral side walls 14” depicted in fig. 1A) surrounds the first portion of the display cover layer (¶62,65, and Fig. 1A, “front wall 12”) in a ring shape without overlapping the pixels, (¶62,65, and Fig. 1A, housing’s “peripheral side walls 14” at the periphery of “front wall 12” which matches the profile of display screen 30 depicted in fig. 1A)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the optical element of Pollard which provides an optic for respective eyes of the user. This allows for a system which can maximize the image space available within the user’s peripheral vision.
But does not explicitly teach,
a display cover layer, wherein the second portion of the display cover layer has a compound curve.
However, Brubaker teaches additionally,
a display cover layer, (¶220-221 and fig. 28A-28B, formed outer “cover 2802” depicted in fig. 28A-28B) wherein the second portion of the display cover layer has a compound curve. (¶220-221,150, and fig. 28A-28B, cover 2802 formed to “match the compound curved surfaces of a target vehicle” which forms an “outer protective surface of compound curvatureed tempered glass” as depicted in fig. 28A-28B)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the optical element of Pollard with the sealed display of Brubaker which has a compound curvature. This allows for creating a surface that can match the compound curve of a motor vehicle.
Regarding claim 18, Izumihara with Pollard with Brubaker teaches the limitations of claim 16,
Brubaker teaches additionally,
publicly viewable display panel is bent about a bend axis. (¶220-221,92, and fig. 28A-28B, flexible, clear OLED/TFT matrix with “curvature from one of many standard curvatures” for a given display area “through its horizontal section”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the optical element of Pollard with the sealed display of Brubaker which has a compound curvature. This allows for creating a surface that can match the compound curve of a motor vehicle.
Regarding claim 19, Izumihara with Pollard with Brubaker teaches the limitations of claim 16,
Brubaker teaches additionally,
second portion of the display cover layer (¶220-221 and fig. 28A-28B, “formed outer cover 2802” depicted in fig. 28A-28B) has a curved peripheral edge. (¶220-221,77, fig. 28A-28B and 4A, formed outer cover 2802 with shape such as “primary HDS display case designed” to house the display with “curvatures” to best match such as depicted in fig. 4A-402 and 404 which curves more sharply at the edges of the “display case”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the optical element of Pollard with the sealed display of Brubaker which has a compound curvature. This allows for creating a surface that can match the compound curve of a motor vehicle.
Regarding claim 25, Izumihara teaches,
A head-mounted device, (¶26,145-149, and Fig. 8A-8B, “HMD device according to a second embodiment” as depicted in fig. 8A) comprising:
a head-mounted support structure; (¶146 and Fig. 8A-8B, HMD device 20 has “a main body part 210 and the band part 320” as depicted in fig. 8A)
a first display (¶146 and Fig. 8A-8B, “inner display units 313a” depicted in fig. 8A) that are supported by the head-mounted support structure (¶146 and Fig. 8A-8B, inner display units 313a included in “main body part 210” as depicted in fig. 8A) and that are configured to provide a first image to a first eye box; (¶146,59, and Fig. 8A-8B, inner display units 313a provided at positions corresponding to the left “eye of the user” wearing the HMD device 20 to “provide three-dimensional images (3D images) to the user”)
a second display (¶146 and Fig. 8A-8B, “inner display units” 313b depicted in fig. 8A) that are supported by the head-mounted support structure (¶146 and Fig. 8A-8B, inner display units 313b included in “main body part 210” as depicted in fig. 8A) and that are configured to provide a second image to a second eye box; (¶146,59, and Fig. 8A-8B, inner display units 313b provided at positions corresponding to the right eye “of the user” wearing the HMD device 20 to “provide three-dimensional images (3D images) to the user”)
a forward-facing display (¶146-147 and Fig. 8A-8B, HMD device 20 “in which an outer display unit 315 is added to an outside of a goggle-like portion” depicted in fig. 8A) that faces away from the first and second displays; (¶146-147, Fig. 8A and 8B, “outer display unit 315 is added to an outside of a goggle-like portion of the main body part 310” opposite the “inner display units 313a and 313b” of the HMD device 20 depicted in fig. 8A and 8B) and
But does not explicitly teach,
a first lens
a second lens
a display cover layer that overlaps the forward-facing display and that has a portion with
a compound curve.
However, Pollard teaches additionally,
a first display (¶65 and Fig. 5, display screen 30a of the “pair of display screens 30a, 30b, each positioned opposite a respective aperture/optical element pair” depicted in fig. 5) and a first lens that are supported by the head-mounted support structure (¶59,65-66, and Fig. 5, head-mountable display apparatus with “optical elements 20” for the left eye of the individual user associated with “display screen” 30a depicted in fig. 5) and that are configured to provide a first image to a first eye box; (¶72,65-66, and Fig. 5, “image data to be displayed” on the pair of display screens 30a, 30b of fig. 5)
a second display (¶65 and Fig. 5, display screen 30b of the “pair of display screens 30a, 30b, each positioned opposite a respective aperture/optical element pair” depicted in fig. 5) and a second lens that are supported by the head-mounted support structure (¶59,65-66, and Fig. 5, head-mountable display apparatus with “optical elements 20” for the right eye of the individual user associated with “display screen” 30b depicted in fig. 5) and that are configured to provide a second image to a second eye box; (¶72,65-66, and Fig. 5, “image data to be displayed” on the pair of display screens 30a, 30b of fig. 5)
a display cover layer (¶62 and Fig. 1A, head-mountable display apparatus comprises a “mask 10” depicted in fig. 1A) that overlaps the display (¶62,65, and Fig. 1A, mask 10 forms a housing having a “front wall 12” that is generally rectangular with rounded edges over a user’s eyes, where the “display screen 30 may generally match the profile of the front wall 12”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the optical element of Pollard which provides an optic for respective eyes of the user. This allows for a system which can maximize the image space available within the user’s peripheral vision.
but does not explicitly teach,
a display cover layer that overlaps the forward-facing display and that has a portion with
a compound curve.
However, Brubaker teaches additionally,
a display cover layer (¶220-221 and fig. 28A-28B, formed outer “cover 2802” as depicted in fig. 28A-28B) that overlaps the forward-facing display (¶220-221 and fig. 28A-28B, “flexible, clear OLED/TFT matrix 2804” sealed between “formed outer cover 2802” and a thermally-conductive substrate material 2808 as depicted in fig. 28A-28B) and that has a portion with a compound curve. (¶220-221,150, and fig. 28A-28B, cover 2802 formed to “match the compound curved surfaces of a target vehicle” which forms an “outer protective surface of compound curvatureed tempered glass” as depicted in fig. 28A-28B)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the optical element of Pollard with the sealed display of Brubaker which has a compound curvature. This allows for creating a surface that can match the compound curve of a motor vehicle.
Regarding claim 26, Izumihara with Pollard with Brubaker teaches the limitations of claim 25,
Brubaker teaches additionally,
forward-facing display (¶220-221,92, and fig. 28A-28B, “flexible, clear OLED/TFT matrix 2804” depicted in fig. 28A-28B) comprises a flexible display panel that is bent about a bend axis (¶220-221,92, and fig. 28A-28B, flexible, clear OLED/TFT matrix with “curvature from one of many standard curvatures” for a given display area “through its horizontal section”) and has a developable surface. (¶220-221,164, and fig. 36, “OLED/TFT flexible display” composite 3720 with “hard exterior and polarized film cover”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the optical element of Pollard with the sealed display of Brubaker which provides for a glass layer that has flat and curved surfaces. This allows for a display that can be bonded to a flexible panel module.
Regarding claim 27, Izumihara with Pollard with Brubaker teaches the limitations of claim 26,
Brubaker teaches additionally,
display cover layer (¶220-221 and fig. 28A-28B, formed outer “cover 2802” as depicted in fig. 28A-28B) has a portion that overlaps the flexible display panel (¶220-221 and fig. 28A-28B, “flexible, clear OLED/TFT matrix 2804” sealed between “formed outer cover 2802” and a thermally-conductive substrate material 2808 as depicted in fig. 28A-28B) and that has a developable surface. (¶220-221,162 and fig. 35, formed outer cover 2802 like “cover layer 3504” that includes “linear polarizer layer and/or quarter wave retarder films” such as depicted in fig. 35)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the optical element of Pollard with the sealed display of Brubaker which provides for a glass layer that has flat and curved surfaces. This allows for a display that can be bonded to a flexible panel module.
Regarding claim 28, Izumihara with Pollard with Brubaker teaches the limitations of claim 26,
Brubaker teaches additionally,
display cover layer is covered with surfaces of compound curvature. (¶220-221,150, and fig. 28A-28B, cover 2802 formed to “match the compound curved surfaces of a target vehicle” which forms an “outer protective surface of compound curvatureed tempered glass” as depicted in fig. 28A-28B)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the optical element of Pollard with the sealed display of Brubaker which provides for a glass layer that has flat and curved surfaces. This allows for a display that can be bonded to a flexible panel module.
Regarding claim 29, Izumihara teaches,
A head-mounted device (¶26,145-149, and Fig. 8A-8B, “HMD device according to a second embodiment” as depicted in fig. 8A) having a front and rear, (¶145-149, and Fig. 8A-8B, “HMD device according to a second embodiment”0having “inner display units 313a and 313b” and an “outer display unit 315” as depicted in fig. 8A and 8B) comprising:
a head-mounted housing (¶146 and Fig. 8A-8B, HMD device 20 has “a main body part 210 and the band part 320” as depicted in fig. 8A) having a front housing layer at the front; (¶146 and Fig. 8A, “an outside of a goggle-like portion” of the main body part 310 depicted in fig. 8A)
a first display (¶146 and Fig. 8A-8B, “inner display units 313a” depicted in fig. 8A) that are supported by the head-mounted housing (¶146 and Fig. 8A-8B, inner display units 313a included in “main body part 210” as depicted in fig. 8A) and that are configured to provide a first image to a first eye box at the rear; (¶146,59, and Fig. 8A-8B, inner display units 313a provided at positions corresponding to the left “eye of the user” wearing the HMD device 20 to “provide three-dimensional images (3D images) to the user”)
a second display (¶146 and Fig. 8A-8B, “inner display units” 313b depicted in fig. 8A) that are supported by the head-mounted housing (¶146 and Fig. 8A-8B, inner display units 313b included in “main body part 210” as depicted in fig. 8A) and that are configured to provide a second image to a second eye box at the rear; (¶146,59, and Fig. 8A-8B, inner display units 313b provided at positions corresponding to the left and right eye “of the user” wearing the HMD device 20 to “provide three-dimensional images (3D images) to the user”)
But does not explicitly teach,
a first lens
a second lens
an optical component that is overlapped by a portion of the front housing layer that has a compound curve.
However, Pollard teaches additionally,
a first display (¶65 and Fig. 5, display screen 30a of the “pair of display screens 30a, 30b, each positioned opposite a respective aperture/optical element pair” depicted in fig. 5) and a first lens that are supported by the head-mounted housing (¶59,65-66, and Fig. 5, head-mountable display apparatus with “optical elements 20” for the left eye of the individual user associated with “display screen” 30a depicted in fig. 5) and that are configured to provide a first image to a first eye box at the rear; (¶72,65-66, and Fig. 5, “image data to be displayed” on the pair of display screens 30a, 30b of fig. 5)
a second display (¶65 and Fig. 5, display screen 30b of the “pair of display screens 30a, 30b, each positioned opposite a respective aperture/optical element pair” depicted in fig. 5) and a second lens that are supported by the head-mounted housing (¶59,65-66, and Fig. 5, head-mountable display apparatus with “optical elements 20” for the right eye of the individual user associated with “display screen” 30b depicted in fig. 5) and that are configured to provide a second image to a second eye box at the rear; (¶72,65-66, and Fig. 5, “image data to be displayed” on the pair of display screens 30a, 30b of fig. 5)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the optical element of Pollard which provides an optic for respective eyes of the user. This allows for a system which can maximize the image space available within the user’s peripheral vision.
but does not explicitly teach,
an optical component that is overlapped by a portion of the front housing layer that has a compound curve.
However, Brubaker teaches additionally,
an optical component (¶220-221 and fig. 28A-28B, “clear OLED/TFT matrix 2804” depicted in fig. 28A-28B) that is overlapped by a portion of the front housing layer (¶220-221 and fig. 28A-28B, “flexible, clear OLED/TFT matrix 2804” sealed between “formed outer cover 2802” and a thermally-conductive substrate material 2808 as depicted in fig. 28A-28B) that has a compound curve. (¶220-221,150, and fig. 28A-28B, cover 2802 formed to “match the compound curved surfaces of a target vehicle” which forms an “outer protective surface of compound curvatureed tempered glass” as depicted in fig. 28A-28B)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the optical element of Pollard with the sealed display of Brubaker which has a compound curvature. This allows for creating a surface that can match the compound curve of a motor vehicle.
Regarding claim 30, Izumihara with Pollard with Brubaker teaches the limitations of claim 29,
Brubaker teaches additionally,
bent display panel (¶220-221 and fig. 28A-28B, “flexible, clear OLED/TFT matrix 2804”) configured to produce an image (¶220-221,121, and fig. 17, “flexible OLED” may wrap-around the left and right sides for “display of 3D illumination” presented on “center portion of the display”) viewable through a portion of the front housing layer. (¶220-221,120-121, and fig. 17, flexible, clear OLED/TFT matrix 2804 sealed between formed outer cover 2802 and thermally-conductive substrate material 2808 that is behind “outer cover 1704” as depicted in fig. 17)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the optical element of Pollard with the sealed display of Brubaker which has a compound curvature. This allows for creating a surface that can match the compound curve of a motor vehicle.
Regarding claim 31, Izumihara with Pollard with Brubaker teaches the limitations of claim 30,
Brubaker teaches additionally,
front housing layer comprises a display cover layer (¶220-221 and fig. 28A-28B, “flexible, clear OLED/TFT matrix 2804” sealed between “formed outer cover 2802” and a thermally-conductive substrate material 2808 as depicted in fig. 28A-28B) and wherein the compound curve comprises an outer surface of the display cover layer that covers all of the display cover layer (¶220-221,150, and fig. 28A-28B, cover 2802 formed to “match the compound curved surfaces of a target vehicle” which forms an “outer protective surface of compound curvatureed tempered glass” as depicted in fig. 28A-28B encapsulates “flexible, clear OLED/TFT matrix 2804”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the optical element of Pollard with the sealed display of Brubaker which has a compound curvature. This allows for creating a surface that can match the compound curve of a motor vehicle.
Regarding claim 33, Izumihara teaches,
A head-mounted device (¶26,145-149, and Fig. 8A-8B, “HMD device according to a second embodiment” as depicted in fig. 8A) having a front and rear, comprising:
a head-mounted housing; (¶146 and Fig. 8A-8B, HMD device 20 has “a main body part 210 and the band part 320” as depicted in fig. 8A)
a first display (¶146 and Fig. 8A-8B, “inner display units 313a” depicted in fig. 8A) in the head-mounted housing (¶146 and Fig. 8A-8B, inner display units 313a included in “main body part 210” as depicted in fig. 8A) that are configured to provide a first image to a first eye box at the rear; (¶146,59, and Fig. 8A-8B, inner display units 313a “provided at positions corresponding to the left and right eyes of the user” wearing the HMD device 20 to “provide three-dimensional images (3D images) to the user”)
a second display (¶146 and Fig. 8A-8B, “inner display units” 313b depicted in fig. 8A) in the head-mounted housing (¶146 and Fig. 8A-8B, inner display units 313b included in “main body part 210” as depicted in fig. 8A) that are configured to provide a second image to a second eye box at the rear; (¶146,59, and Fig. 8A-8B, inner display units 313b “provided at positions corresponding to the left and right eyes of the user” wearing the HMD device 20 to “provide three-dimensional images (3D images) to the user”)
a display panel (¶146-147 and Fig. 8A-8B, HMD device 20 “in which an outer display unit 315 is added to an outside of a goggle-like portion” depicted in fig. 8A) that has a curved cross-sectional profile (¶146-147 and Fig. 8A-8B, “outer display unit 315” which conforms to the “outside of a goggle-like portion” depicted in fig. 8A
But does not explicitly teach,
a first lens
a second lens
a display panel that has a developable surface;
a display cover layer at the front that overlaps the display panel, wherein the display cover layer has opposing inner and outer surfaces, wherein the outer surface has a compound curve, wherein the inner surface is a developable surface, and wherein the display panel is attached to the inner surface of the display cover layer.
However, Pollard teaches additionally,
a first display (¶65 and Fig. 5, display screen 30a of the “pair of display screens 30a, 30b, each positioned opposite a respective aperture/optical element pair” depicted in fig. 5) and a first lens in the head-mounted housing (¶59,65-66, and Fig. 5, head-mountable display apparatus with “optical elements 20” for the left eye of the individual user associated with “display screen” 30a depicted in fig. 5) that are configured to provide a first image to a first eye box at the rear; (¶72,65-66, and Fig. 5, “image data to be displayed” on the pair of display screens 30a, 30b of fig. 5)
a second display (¶65 and Fig. 5, display screen 30b of the “pair of display screens 30a, 30b, each positioned opposite a respective aperture/optical element pair” depicted in fig. 5) and a second lens in the head-mounted housing (¶59,65-66, and Fig. 5, head-mountable display apparatus with “optical elements 20” for the right eye of the individual user associated with “display screen” 30b depicted in fig. 5) that are configured to provide a second image to a second eye box at the rear; (¶72,65-66, and Fig. 5, “image data to be displayed” on the pair of display screens 30a, 30b of fig. 5)
a display cover layer (¶62 and Fig. 1A, head-mountable display apparatus comprises a “mask 10” depicted in fig. 1A) at the front that overlaps the display panel (¶62, 65, and Fig. 1A, mask 10 forms a housing having a “front wall 12” that is generally rectangular with rounded edges over a user’s eyes, where the “display screen 30 may generally match the profile of the front wall 12”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the optical element of Pollard which provides an optic for respective eyes of the user. This allows for a system which can maximize the image space available within the user’s peripheral vision.
but does not explicitly teach,
a display panel that has a developable surface;
a display cover layer, wherein the display cover layer has opposing inner and outer surfaces, wherein the outer surface has a compound curve, wherein the inner surface is a developable surface, and wherein the display panel is attached to the inner surface of the display cover layer.
However, Brubaker teaches additionally,
a display panel (¶220-221,92, and fig. 28A-28B, “flexible, clear OLED/TFT matrix 2804” depicted in fig. 28A-28B) that has a developable surface; (¶220-221,164, and fig. 36, “OLED/TFT flexible display” composite 3720 with “hard exterior and polarized film cover”)
a display cover layer, (¶220-221 and 28A-28B, “sealed glass or plastic” depicted in fig. 28A-28B) wherein the display cover layer has opposing inner and outer surfaces, (¶220-221,122, fig. 17 and 28A-28B, flexible, clear OLED/TFT matrix 2804 encapsulated between “formed outer cover 2802 and a thermally-conductive substrate material 2808” as depicted in fig. 28A-28B) wherein the outer surface has a compound curve, (¶220-221,150, and fig. 28A-28B, cover 2802 formed to “match the compound curved surfaces of a target vehicle” which forms an “outer protective surface of compound curvatureed tempered glass” as depicted in fig. 28A-28B) wherein the inner surface is a developable surface, (¶220-221,122 and fig. 17, formed outer cover 2802 like “outer cover 1704” that includes “film 1706” between outer cover 1704 and display panel 1702 as depicted in fig. 35) and wherein the display panel is attached to the inner surface of the display cover layer. (¶220-221,122, fig. 17 and 28A-28B, “clear OLED/TFT matrix 2804 suspended in an inert liquid 2806, sealed between a formed outer cover 2802 and a thermally-conductive substrate material 2808” depicted in fig. 28A-28B such that “display panel 1702” is behind “outer cover 1704” as depicted in fig. 17)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the optical element of Pollard with the sealed display of Brubaker which has a compound curvature. This allows for creating a surface that can match the compound curve of a motor vehicle.
Claim(s) 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IZUMIHARA; Atsushi et al. (US 20160054565 A1) in view of Pollard; Andrew et al. (US 20190235623 A1) in view of Brubaker; Curtis M. (US 20190213931 A1) in view of LONGBOTHAM; Brian C. et al. (US 20160050345 A1)
Regarding claim 17, Izumihara with Pollard with Brubaker teaches the limitations of claim 16,
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 17,
However, Longbotham teaches additionally,
an ambient light sensor (¶47 and Fig. 3, “light sensor 107”) overlapped by the second portion of the display cover layer, (¶47,35, Fig. 3, light sensor 107 included with “stereoscopic camera device 102” mounted in a center region of the video display glasses 101 depicted in Fig. 3) a light source (¶47 and Fig. 3, “infrared illumination LEDs 108” depicted in fig. 3) overlapped by the second portion of the display cover layer (¶47,37, and Fig. 3, infrared illumination LEDs 108 included with “stereoscopic camera device 102” mounted in a center region of the video display glasses 101 depicted in Fig. 3) that is configured to provide infrared illumination (¶47,33, and Fig. 3, infrared illumination LEDs 108 activated to “project an infrared illuminated image”) in response to an ambient light measurement with the ambient light sensor, (¶47, “light sensor 107 can be used to activate the infrared illumination LEDs 108 based on the light intensity of the environment”) and a pair of cameras (¶41,45, and Fig. 3, “high definition digital video camera sensor modules 104L, 104R” included in camera device 102 depicted in fig. 3) that are overlapped by the second portion of the display cover layer (¶41,45, and Fig. 3, “two interchangeable high definition digital video camera sensor modules 104L, 104R located symmetrically on opposite sides of a centerline of the camera device 102” depicted in fig. 3) and that are configured to capture infrared images while the infrared illumination is provided. (¶45, “video camera sensor modules 104L, 104R can take video images in different lighting conditions and can preferably detect infrared light”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the optical element of Pollard with the sealed display of Brubaker with the video display of Longbotham which includes an entire device which monitors ambient light detection. This allows for detection of night time environments to activate infrared imaging.
Claim(s) 20-21 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IZUMIHARA; Atsushi et al. (US 20160054565 A1) in view of Pollard; Andrew et al. (US 20190235623 A1) in view of Brubaker; Curtis M. (US 20190213931 A1) in view of Connor; Robert A. (US 20190004325 A1)
Regarding claim 20, Izumihara with Pollard with Brubaker teaches the limitations of claim 16,
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 17,
However, Connor teaches additionally,
display cover layer (¶734, “image-generating lens”) comprises laminated glass. (¶734, “image-generating lens” having a “two-layer or three-layer laminated structure” made from a material consisting of “glass”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the optical element of Pollard with the sealed display of Brubaker with the lens layer of Connor with a laminated structure. This allows for a lens arrangement which can position a generating portion on any of the layers in the laminated structure.
Regarding claim 21, Izumihara with Pollard with Brubaker with Connor teaches the limitations of claim 20,
Izumihara teaches additionally,
the pixels form an active display area (¶147 and fig. 8A, “outer display unit 315” with a “display screen the outside” depicted in fig. 8A) in which the publicly viewable image is displayed, (¶147 and fig. 8A, outer display unit 315 for “visually presenting various types of information to the outside” such as images, text, graphs, tables, and the like to visually present the information to the outside) and wherein the active display area (¶177 and Fig. 10A, “display screen 610 facing the outside” of the HMD device 20 depicted in fig. 10A) has a nose-bridge recess. (¶177 and Fig. 10A, display screen 610 of the HMD device 20 having a geometric shape with a cutout in the geometric shape where the nose would be positioned as depicted in fig. 10A)
Brubaker teaches additionally,
wherein the active display area has a curved peripheral edge, (¶220-221,92, and fig. 28A-28B, flexible, clear OLED/TFT matrix with “curvature from one of many standard curvatures” for a given display area “through its horizontal section”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the optical element of Pollard with the sealed display of Brubaker with the lens layer of Connor which has a compound curvature. This allows for creating a surface that can match the compound curve of a motor vehicle.
Claim(s) 22-23 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IZUMIHARA; Atsushi et al. (US 20160054565 A1) in view of Pollard; Andrew et al. (US 20190235623 A1 in view of Brubaker; Curtis M. (US 20190213931 A1) in view of Connor; Robert A. (US 20190004325 A1) in view of Goergen; Patrick John et al. (US 20200226838 A1) in view of Edmonds; Christopher Douglas et al. (US 11127148 B1)
Regarding claim 22, Izumihara with Pollard with Brubaker with Connor teaches the limitations of claim 21,
Connor teaches additionally,
laminated glass (¶734, “image-generating lens” having a “two-layer or three-layer laminated structure” made from a material consisting of “glass”)
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 17,
However, Goergen teaches additionally,
antireflection coating on the glass (¶46 and fig. 4, lens portion 16 coated with “layers of anti-reflective coating 106” depicted in Fig. 4)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the optical element of Pollard with the sealed display of Brubaker with the lens layer of Connor with the coating of Goergen which layers an anti-reflective resistant coating to the lens. This allows for a layer of coating that can permit ambient light to pass without creating reflections in the lens portion.
But does not explicitly teach,
optical component that emits infrared light through the display cover layer.
However, Edmonds teaches additionally,
optical component (7:6-35 and Fig. 2, “one dot illuminator (e.g., dot illuminator 230)”) that emits infrared light (7:6-35 and Fig. 2, dot illuminator 230 providing “structured light” when emitting dot illumination for “camera structured to detect mid-infrared wavelengths”) through the display cover layer. (7:6-35,6:12-20, and Fig. 2, HMD 200 using “scanning sensor(s) 205” including the “dot illuminator 230” depicted in fig. 2)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the optical element of Pollard with the sealed display of Brubaker with the lens layer of Connor with the coating of Goergen with the multiple stereo pair generation of Edmonds which uses various image generation techniques. This allows for the use of various different scanning sensor arrangements included in a head mounted device.
Regarding claim 23, Izumihara with Pollard with Brubaker with Connor with Goergen with Edmonds teaches the limitations of claim 22,
Edmonds teaches additionally,
optical component (7:6-35 and Fig. 2, “scanning sensor(s) 205 may be used to generate the stereo pair of images”) comprises a structured light three-dimensional camera. (7:6-35 and Fig. 2, generating stereo pair of images “using structured light via use of one actual camera, one virtual camera, and one dot illuminator (e.g., dot illuminator 230)”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the optical element of Pollard with the sealed display of Brubaker with the lens layer of Connor with the coating of Goergen with the multiple stereo pair generation of Edmonds which uses various image generation techniques. This allows for the use of various different scanning sensor arrangements included in a head mounted device.
Claim(s) 24 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IZUMIHARA; Atsushi et al. (US 20160054565 A1) in view of Pollard; Andrew et al. (US 20190235623 A1) in view of Brubaker; Curtis M. (US 20190213931 A1) in view of Connor; Robert A. (US 20190004325 A1) in view of Goergen; Patrick John et al. (US 20200226838 A1) in view of Edmonds; Christopher Douglas et al. (US 11127148 B1) in view of Chi; Ho-Hsun et al. (US 20210016718 A1)
Regarding claim 24, Izumihara with Pollard with Brubaker with Connor with Goergen with Edmonds teaches the limitations of claim 23,
Chi teaches additionally,
first portion of the display cover layer (¶38 and fig. 2, “cover lens 220” with complex planar shape depicted in fig. 2) has an additional compound curve. (¶38 and fig. 2, cover lens 220 with a first, convex portion 221, “second, concave portion 222”, and inflection portion 223 as depicted in fig. 2)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the optical element of Pollard with the sealed display of Brubaker with the lens layer of Connor with the coating of Goergen with the multiple stereo pair generation of Edmonds with the cover of Chi which has a complex shape. This allows for a cover surface that can be made from materials with the capability of impact-absorption.
Claim(s) 32 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IZUMIHARA; Atsushi et al. (US 20160054565 A1) in view of Pollard; Andrew et al. (US 20190235623 A1 in view of Brubaker; Curtis M. (US 20190213931 A1) in view of CRISLER; Matthew Calbraith et al. (US 20190208190 A1)
Regarding claim 32, Izumihara with Pollard with Brubaker teaches the limitations of claim 31,
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 32,
However, Crisler teaches additionally,
optical component comprises a camera (¶36 and Fig. 9, display device 900 includes “front-facing two-dimensional image camera 910 (e.g. a visible light camera and/or infrared camera), a front-facing depth camera 912” and “an ambient light sensor 916” as depicted in fig. 9) configured to operate through the display cover layer. (¶35-36 and Fig. 9, front-facing two-dimensional image camera 910, a front-facing depth camera 912, and an ambient light sensor 916 positioned in frame 902 covered by “see-through optical component 906” as depicted in fig. 9)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Izumihara with the optical element of Pollard with the sealed display of Brubaker with the see-through optical component of Crisler which positioned cameras and the frame behind an optical component. This allows for a see-through veil that can veil for the display system and the user’s view from the real world environment.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY S LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7322. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 10AM-8PM EST.
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, Joseph G. Ustaris can be reached at (571) 272-7383. 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.
JIMMY S. LEE
Examiner
Art Unit 2483
/JIMMY S LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2483
/AMIR SHAHNAMI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2483