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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 11, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO 2020150753 A1 (ISHII FUSAO et al.)
PNG
media_image1.png
468
406
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
564
496
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 14 and 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2020150753 A1 (ISHII FUSAO et al.) in view of US 9523852 B1 (Brown et al.)
PNG
media_image3.png
404
366
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
374
458
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Per claim 14, Ishii teaches a display system [see figure 6] comprising: illumination optics configured to produce illumination light [see figure 5]; a reflective display panel configured to produce image light by modulating illumination light using image data [1051,1008]; a waveguide configured to direct the image light [1086]. Ishii lacks, but Brown teaches, collimating optics [see figure 5] configured to direct the image light towards the waveguide [see Brown’s figure 1]; a first prism having a curved reflective surface configured to reflect the illumination light towards the reflective display panel [208]; and a second prism mounted to the first prism [204], wherein the second prism is configured to direct the illumination light from the illumination optics towards the first prism [see figure 5], wherein the second prism is configured to transmit the illumination light reflected by the curved reflective surface towards the reflective display panel, and wherein the second prism is configured to direct the image light produced by the reflective display panel towards the collimating optics [see figure 5]. Brown teaches a curved mirror 208 that “the corrector lens 206 is not necessary due to the power of the curved reflective surface 110 and the field lens 102 with the diffractive surface 114. The components associated with the collimating optics 32a can be cemented together similar to collimating optics 32 discussed with reference to FIG. 3-4. Mounting the field lens 202 and the curved mirror 208 directly to the polarizing beam splitter 204 or the film 218 provided on the polarizing beam splitter 204 provides mechanical alignment in very tight tolerances.” This is identical to Applicant’s powered prism 48. See Applicant’s figure 3. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Brown with Ishii.
Regarding a reflective coating on the curved reflective surface [110]. The reflective coating is inherent to the combination. See Brown’s column 6, paragraph starting at line 50: “The curved mirror 108 includes a curved reflective surface 110. The curved reflective surface 110 is a dichroic surface, a silvered, a metallic, or other reflecting surface and is curved to assist the collimation of light through the collimating optics 32.”
Per claim 16, Ishii et al. teaches the display system of claim 14, wherein the collimating optics comprise a diffractive optical element configured to diffract the image light [114].
Per claim 17, Ishii et al. teaches the display system of claim 14, wherein the collimating optics comprise a Fresnel lens configured to transmit the image light [306].
Per claim 18, Ishii et al. teaches the display system of claim 14, wherein the reflective display panel comprises a display panel selected from the group consisting of: a liquid crystal on silicon (LCOS) display panel, a ferroelectric liquid crystal on silicon (fLCOS) display panel, and a digital micromirror device (DMD) display panel [see paragraph 0022].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-13 and 19-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Per claim 1, the prior art teaches a display system comprising: a spatial light modulator configured to produce image light by modulating illumination light using image data; a partially reflective structure configured to direct the illumination light towards the spatial light modulator; a light source configured to emit a portion of the illumination light; a Fresnel lens optically interposed between the light source and the partially reflective structure; and a waveguide configured to direct the image light. In combination with the limitations above, the prior art does not teach wherein the Fresnel lens has a first surface facing the light source and a second surface opposite the first surface, the Fresnel lens being configured to transmit the illumination light through the first and second surfaces.
Per claim 19, the prior art teaches a display system comprising: a spatial light modulator configured to produce image light by modulating illumination light using image data; a waveguide configured to direct the image light; and illumination optics configured to produce the illumination light, wherein the illumination optics comprise: a first light source configured to emit a first portion of the illumination light, the first portion of the illumination light comprising light of a first wavelength range, a second light source configured to emit a second portion of the illumination light, the second portion of the illumination light comprising light of a second wavelength range that is different from the first wavelength range; a partially reflective structure configured to produce the illumination light by combining at least the first and second portions of the illumination light, a first Fresnel lens configured to transmit the first portion of the illumination light towards the partially reflective structure, a second Fresnel lens configured to transmit the second portion of the illumination light towards the partially reflective structure. In combination with the limitations above, the prior art does not teach a third light source configured to emit a third portion of the illumination light, the third portion of the illumination light comprising light of a third wavelength range that is different from the first and second wavelength ranges, and a spherical lens configured to transmit the third portion of the illumination light towards the partially reflective structure.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 12/23/25, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 14 and 16-18 under 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Brown.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES A DUDEK whose telephone number is (571)272-2290. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6:30-4:30 MT.
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, Jennifer Carruth can be reached at 571-272-9791. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of 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.
/JAMES A DUDEK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871