Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/215,265

VIRTUAL IMAGE DISPLAY DEVICE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jun 28, 2023
Examiner
LE, BAO-LUAN Q
Art Unit
2882
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Seiko Epson Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
52%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
70%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 52% of resolved cases
52%
Career Allow Rate
503 granted / 963 resolved
-15.8% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+17.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
62 currently pending
Career history
1025
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
52.1%
+12.1% vs TC avg
§102
30.4%
-9.6% vs TC avg
§112
13.0%
-27.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 963 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/28/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Objection/s to the Specification The title of the invention, “VIRTUAL IMAGE DISPLAY DEVICE,” is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Claim Rejections - AIA 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 1-10 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kessler (US 20220260840 A1) in view of Vasiliev (US 20180004013 A1). Regarding claims 1, 5, 8, and 18, Kessler teaches a virtual image display device (Fig. 1-13) comprising: an image forming unit (10); a projection optical system (L1-L5) on which image light formed by the image forming unit (10) is incident; a reflection member (30) configured to reflect the image light emitted from the projection optical system (L1-L5) and project a virtual image; and a dimming member (electrochromatic coating/s) disposed on an optical path between the image forming unit (10) and the virtual image or a pupil position, the dimming member (electrochromatic coating/s) having optical transparency and being configured to transition to a dimming state of dimming the image light under an influence of an external action. Kessler does not explicitly teach the dimming member (electrochromatic coating/s) formed of an environment-conscious material. Vasiliev teaches the electrochromatic coating/s formed of an environment-conscious material ([0044], [0046]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to combine Kessler with Vasiliev; because it allows increased service life as well as a high rate of light-transmittance ([0044]). Regarding claims 2 and 3, the combination of Kessler and Vasiliev consequently results in the environment-conscious material of the environment-conscious member being biomass plastic of amorphous polylactic acid, polyhydroxybutyrate, biopolyethylene, or biopolyethylene terephthalate ([0046] of Vasiliev). Regarding claim 4, Kessler further teaches the reflection member (30) includes a base formed of the environment-conscious member, and a half mirror is affixed to the base via a peelable film ([0059]). Regarding claim 6, Kessler further teaches a support member (frame holding 30; Fig. 7A, 7B, 7C, and 11C) configured to support the image forming unit (10), the projection optical system (L1-L5), and the reflection member (30), wherein the dimming member (electrochromatic coating/s) is disposed on an optical path between the projection optical system (L1-L5) and the reflection member (30) in the support member (Fig. 7A, 7B, 7C, and 11C). Regarding claim 7, the combination of Kessler and Vasiliev consequently results in the dimming member (electrochromatic coating/s) is peelably affixed to a base of the reflection member (30; [0059]). Regarding claim 9, the combination of Kessler and Vasiliev consequently results in the environment-conscious material of the dimming member (electrochromatic coating/s) is amorphous polylactic acid ([0046] of Vasiliev). Regarding claim 10, the combination of Kessler and Vasiliev consequently results in the dimming member (electrochromatic coating/s) has a thickness of 0.2 mm or less ([0057] of Vasiliev). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 11-17 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 claims 11, 12, and 15, the closest prior art references, Kessler and Vasiliev, do not teach, by themselves or in combination with one another: “the dimming member is clouded by a heating unit after an elapse of a lifetime of the image forming unit” (claim 11); “the dimming member is deformed by a heating unit after an elapse of a lifetime of the image forming unit” (claim 12); and “a life count unit configured to add up an operation time of the image forming unit; and a life determination unit configured to determine whether the operation time added up by the life count unit exceeds a lifetime predetermined” (claim 15). Furthermore, there is no teaching, suggestion or motivation in the prior art references to modify the references in such manner that results in the above claimed limitation/s; hence the invention as claimed by claim 11, 12, and 15 is not obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. Claims 13, 14, 16, and 17 depend, directly or indirectly on claim 11; hence they are also allowable. Conclusion The prior art references cited in PTO-892 are made of record and considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Patent documents, US 20220276494 A1, US 20210302742 A1, US 20210302743 A1, US 20210302754 A1, US 20210302741 A1, US 11137610 B1, US 20210103180 A1, US 20200111259 A1, US 20180217429 A1, US 20190121132 A1, disclose virtual image display device comprising: an image forming unit; a projection optical system on which image light formed by the image forming unit is incident; a reflection member configured to reflect the image light emitted from the projection optical system and project a virtual image; and a light control member disposed on an optical path between the image forming unit and the virtual image or a pupil position. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAO-LUAN Q LE whose telephone number is (571)270-5362. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday; 9:00AM-5:00PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Minh-Toan Ton can be reached on (571) 272 230303. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. Any response to this action should be mailed to: Commissioner for Patents P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 Or faxed to: (571) 273-8300, (for formal communications intended for entry) Or: (571) 273-7490, (for informal or draft communications, please label “PROPOSED” or “DRAFT”) Hand-delivered responses should be brought to: Customer Service Window Randolph Building 401 Dulany Street Alexandria, VA 22314 /BAO-LUAN Q LE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 28, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603977
PROJECTION IMAGE CORRECTION METHOD AND PROJECTION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601963
EXTERNAL ELECTRIC ADJUSTING MODULE AND LENS DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12591146
PROJECTOR AND PROJECTION METHOD FOR FORMING IMAGES ON AERIAL PROJECTION REGION AND REAL PROJECTION SURFACE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12574482
MULTI-HALF-TONE IMAGING AND DUAL MODULATION PROJECTION/DUAL MODULATION LASER PROJECTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12560749
COMMUNAL OPTICAL FILTER AND OTHER OPTICAL FILTERS ON SUBSTRATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
52%
Grant Probability
70%
With Interview (+17.3%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 963 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month