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 .
Status
The filing on 03/27/2026 amended claims 24 and 45. Claims 24-45 are pending and rejected on new grounds of rejections necessitated by the amendments of claims 24 and 45.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 04/23/2026 has been entered.
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.
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.
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 24-33, 37-40, 42, 45, and 46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicholson (US 20200249483 A1) in view of Bailey ‘797 (US 20160327797 A1).
Regarding claim 24, Nicholson teaches an optical system (Fig. 1-4) for a virtual retinal scan display, comprising: an image source which provides an image content in the form of image data; an image-processing device (processor) for the image data; a projector unit (120; 220) having a light source (121-123; 221-223), able to be temporally modulated, configured to generate at least one light beam, and having a controllable deflecting device (125; 225) for the at least one light beam for a scanning projection of the image content; a diverting unit (112, 160 as an unit; 210, 260 as an unit) onto which the image content is able to be projected, and which is equipped to direct the projected image content onto an eye (280) of a user; an optical segmentation element (130, 140 and/or 150; 230, 240 and/or 250; 330, 335 and/or 340), positioned between the projector unit (120; 220) and the diverting unit (112, 160 as an unit; 210, 260 as an unit), using which the image content is projectable via different imaging paths onto at least one projection region of the diverting unit (112, 160 as an unit; 210, 260 as an unit), at least individual ones of the imaging paths being controllable individually; and an optical replication component (160; 260) disposed in the at least one projection region of the diverting unit (112, 160 as an unit; 210, 260 as an unit) and equipped to direct the projected image content, replicated and spatially offset, onto the eye (280) of the user, so that a plurality of mutually spatially offset exit pupils having the image content is produced ([0059]); wherein the optical replication component (160; 260) forms at least one part of the diverting unit (112, 160 as an unit; 210, 260 as an unit).
Nicholson does not explicitly teach the optical replication component is a layer structure having at least two holographically functionalized layers disposed one above another and configured to produce spatially offset replications of a set of exit pupils.
Bailey ‘797 teaches an optical replication component is a layer structure having at least two holographically functionalized layers (231, 232, 233) disposed one above another and configured to produce spatially offset replications of a set of exit pupils (281, 282, 283; [0049], [0053], [0061]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to combine Nicholson with Bailey ‘797; because it allows expanding the eye box ([0036] of Bailey ‘797).
Regarding claim 25, Nicholson further teaches the image-processing device (processor) is equipped to generate sub-image data (different portions of an image; [0059], [0086]) from the image data of the image source to control the projector unit (120; 220), the sub-image data permitting projection of the image content via at least two different imaging paths of the individually controllable imaging paths onto at least one projection region of the diverting unit (112, 160 as an unit; 210, 260 as an unit), and the image-processing device (processor) is equipped to generate different sub-image data for the at least two different imaging paths, so that a distortion (aberrations and artifacts) of the image content is compensated for at least to some extent via the respective imaging path ([0059], [0074]).
Regarding claim 26, Nicholson further teaches wherein the image-processing device (processor) is equipped to generate sub-image data from the image data of the image source, the sub-image data permitting a simultaneous projection of N×M sub-images (third state; Fig. 2B, 2C; [0013], [0064]-[0074]) having essentially identical image content ([0059], [0086]), and the optical segmentation element (130, 140 and/or 150; 230, 240 and/or 250; 330, 335 and/or 340) performs a spatial segmentation, so that the essentially identical image content of the N×M sub-images is projected via at least two different imaging paths of the individually controllable imaging paths onto the at least one projection region of the diverting unit (112, 160 as an unit; 210, 260 as an unit; [0059], [0085], [0086]).
Regarding claim 27, Nicholson further teaches the image-processing device (processor) is equipped to switch individual imaging paths to active by making the sub-image data for a corresponding sub-image available for controlling the projector unit (120; 220), and to deactivate individual imaging paths by blanking the sub-image data for the corresponding sub-images (Fig. 2B; [0064]-[0068], [0085]-[0086]).
Regarding claim 28, Nicholson further teaches the optical segmentation element (130, 140 and/or 150; 230, 240 and/or 250; 330, 335 and/or 340) is a segmenting lens, or a segmenting mirror, or a segmenting optical diffraction grating, or volume hologram, or a beam splitter (Fig. 2A-3B; [0076]).
Regarding claim 29, Nicholson further teaches the optical segmentation element (130, 140 and/or 150; 230, 240 and/or 250; 330, 335 and/or 340) is a beam-splitter assembly (330 and/or 335; Fig. 3A, 3B) that multiplies the projected image content N×M-fold, so that the image content is able to be projected on N×M different imaging paths onto at least one projection region of the diverting unit (112, 160 as an unit; 210, 260 as an unit), the beam-splitter assembly is assigned at least one optical switch element (330/335) with which at least a portion of the imaging paths is switchable either to active or inactive, and the image-processing device (processor) is equipped to generate sub-image data for controlling the projector unit (120; 220) from the image data of the image source, so that a distortion of the image content is compensated for at least to some extent via the at least one imaging path switched to active ([0059], [0074]).
Regarding claim 30, Nicholson further teaches the optical switch element (330/335) is a component of the beam-splitter assembly (330 and/or 335) or a separate filter element able to be positioned in an output-beam path of the beam-splitter assembly.
Regarding claim 31, Nicholson further teaches the optical switch element (330/335) is an electrically controllable polarization filter and/or an electro-optical modulator and/or an acousto-optical modulator and/or a photo-elastic modulator and/or an optical shutter and/or an electrically controllable liquid lens.
Regarding claim 32, Nicholson further teaches the optical replication component (160; 260) is a layer structure having at least one holographically functionalized layer ([0051]).
Regarding claim 33, Nicholson further teaches the optical replication component (160; 260) is a layer structure having at least two layers, disposed one above the other, having different holographic functions, whereby the plurality of mutually spatially offset exit pupils is produced ([0051]).
Regarding claim 37, Nicholson further teaches an eye (280)-tracker device ([0020], [0028], [0060], [0082]) configured to detect and/or determine a state of the eye (280) of the user, the state of the eye (280) including: an eye movement, and/or a speed of the eye movement, and/or a pupil position, and/or a pupil size, and/or a viewing direction, and/or a state of accommodation, and/or a fixation distance of the eye (280; [0020], [0028], [0060], [0082]).
Regarding claim 38, Nicholson further teaches individual imaging paths are controllable and are able to be activated and deactivated as a function of the detected state of the eye (280) of the user ([0020], [0028], [0060], [0082]).
Regarding claim 39, Nicholson further teaches the activation and deactivation of the individual imaging paths and a configuration of the at least one optical segmentation element (130, 140 and/or 150; 230, 240 and/or 250; 330, 335 and/or 340) and the optical replication component (160; 260) are matched to each other in such a way that only one exit pupil is ever produced in a region of the pupil of the user per activated imaging path, a largest likely pupil diameter being taken as a basis ([0042]).
Regarding claim 40, Nicholson further teaches the image-processing device (processor) is equipped to take into account the detected state of the eye (280) of the user when generating sub-image data and/or to consider which imaging paths are activated and which imaging paths are deactivated in order to compensate for variations in brightness caused as a result in an image impression, i.e., only one exit pupil is activated ([0020], [0028], [0060], [0061], [0082]).
Regarding claim 42, Nicholson further teaches a pair of smart glasses having a frame (Fig. 1) and lenses (112), wherein the at least one projector unit (120; 220) and the at least one optical segmentation element (130, 140 and/or 150; 230, 240 and/or 250; 330, 335 and/or 340) are mounted on the frame, and the at least one diverting unit (112, 160 as an unit; 210, 260 as an unit) together with the at least one optical replication component (160; 260) is integrated in at least one lens (112; Fig. 1, 2A-C).
Regarding claim 45, Nicholson teaches a method for projecting image contents onto a retina of a user using an optical system (Fig. 1-4) which includes: an image source which provides an image content in the form of image data, an image-processing device (processor) for the image data, a projector unit (120; 220) having a light source (121-123; 221-223), able to be modulated temporally, configured to generate at least one light beam, and having a controllable deflecting device (125; 225) for the at least one light beam for a scanning projection of the image content, a diverting unit (112, 160 as an unit; 210, 260 as an unit) onto which the image content is projected, and which directs the projected image content onto an eye (280) of a user, an optical segmentation element (130, 140 and/or 150; 230, 240 and/or 250; 330, 335 and/or 340) positioned between the projector unit (120; 220) and the diverting unit (112, 160 as an unit; 210, 260 as an unit), and an optical replication component (160; 260) disposed in a projection region of the diverting unit (112, 160 as an unit; 210, 260 as an unit), the method comprising the following steps: projecting the image content using the optical segmentation element (130, 140 and/or 150; 230, 240 and/or 250; 330, 335 and/or 340) via different imaging paths onto at least one projection region of the diverting unit (112, 160 as an unit; 210, 260 as an unit), at least individual imaging paths being controlled individually; and replicating the projected image content using the optical replication component (160; 260) and directing the replicated image content, spatially offset, onto the eye (280) of the user, so that a plurality of mutually spatially offset exit pupils having the image content is produced ([0059]); wherein the optical replication component (160; 260) forms at least one part of the diverting unit (112, 160 as an unit; 210, 260 as an unit).
Nicholson does not explicitly teach the optical replication component is a layer structure having at least two holographically functionalized layers disposed one above another and configured to produce spatially offset replications of a set of exit pupils.
Bailey ‘797 teaches an optical replication component is a layer structure having at least two holographically functionalized layers (231, 232, 233) disposed one above another and configured to produce spatially offset replications of a set of exit pupils (281, 282, 283; [0049], [0053], [0061]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to combine Nicholson with Bailey ‘797; because it allows expanding the eye box ([0036] of Bailey ‘797).
Regarding claim 46, Nicholson further teaches sub-image data for controlling the projector unit (120; 220) are generated from the image data of the image source, the sub-image data permitting projection of the image content via different imaging paths onto at least one projection region of the diverting unit (112, 160 as an unit; 210, 260 as an unit), and different sub-image data are generated for at least two different respective imaging paths, so that a distortion (aberrations and artifacts) of the image content is compensated for at least to some extent via the respective imaging path ([0059], [0074]).
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicholson in view Bailey ‘797 and in further view of Ha (US 20180292652 A1).
Regarding claim 34, Nicholson further teaches the optical replication component (160; 260) includes at least one layer in which at least two different holographic functions (reflect and converge; [0051]) are realized,
Neither Nicholson nor Bailey ‘797 explicitly teaches the different holographic functions are formed in one common plane but in different intermittent zones of the layer, using which the plurality of mutually spatially offset exit pupils is produced.
Ha teaches the different holographic functions are formed in one common plane but in different intermittent zones of the layer, using which the plurality of mutually spatially offset exit pupils is produced (Fig. 2A, 2B; [0050]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to combine Nicholson and Bailey ‘797 with Ha; because it allows the environment light to be transmitted without interference from the holographic reflectors.
Claims 35 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicholson in view of Bailey ‘797 and in further view Bailey ‘829 (US 20170219829 A1).
Regarding claim 35, Nicholson further teaches the at least one optical segmentation element (130, 140 and/or 150; 230, 240 and/or 250; 330, 335 and/or 340) and the optical replication component (160; 260) are configured in such a way that the exit pupils thus produced are disposed in a raster ([0046]),
Neither Nicholson nor Bailey ‘797 explicitly teaches a distance between each two directly and/or diagonally adjacent exit pupils being less than a smallest likely pupil diameter of the user.
Bailey ‘829 teaches a distance between each two directly and/or diagonally adjacent exit pupils being less than a smallest likely pupil diameter of the user ([0030]-[0040]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to combine Nicholson and Bailey ‘797 with Bailey ‘829; because it prevents the eye not seeing image/s from the exit pupils.
Regarding claim 36, Nicholson further teaches the at least one optical segmentation element (130, 140 and/or 150; 230, 240 and/or 250; 330, 335 and/or 340) and the optical replication component (160; 260) are configured in such a way that only one exit pupil for an entrance pupil of the eye.
Neither Nicholson nor Bailey ‘797 explicitly teaches the distance between the adjacent exit pupils.
Bailey ‘797 teaches a distance between each two directly and/or diagonally adjacent exit pupils being less than a smallest likely pupil diameter of the user ([0030]-[0040]).
The combination of Nicholson, Bailey ‘797 and Bailey ‘829 consequently results in any distance between two non-adjacent exit pupils produced on one common imaging path is greater than a greatest likely pupil diameter of the user.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to combine Nicholson and Bailey ‘797 with Bailey ‘829; because it prevents the eye not seeing image/s from the exit pupils.
Claim 41 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicholson in view of Bailey ‘797 and in further view Macnamara (US 20180136486 A1).
Regarding claim 41, neither Nicholson nor Bailey ‘797 explicitly teaches the image-processing device equipped to take into account and to compensate for a defective vision and/or defective accommodation of the user when generating the sub-image data.
Macnamara teaches the image-processing device equipped to take into account and to compensate for a defective vision and/or defective accommodation of the user when generating the sub-image data ([0016], [0082], [0089], [0095]-[0097], [0174]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to combine Nicholson and Bailey ‘797 with Macnamara; because it allows vision correction to improve the user’s viewing experience.
Claims 43 and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicholson in view of Bailey ‘797 and in further view Welch (US 20150346495 A1).
Regarding claim 43, neither Nicholson nor Bailey ‘797 teaches the image source disposed together with the image-processing device (processor) in an external unit, and the sub-image data are transmitted from the external unit to the projector unit (120; 220) of the smart glasses.
Welch teaches the image source disposed together with the image-processing device (70) in an external unit, and the sub-image data are transmitted from the external unit to the projector unit of the smart glasses (Fig. 4A-4D; [0046]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to combine Nicholson and Bailey ‘797 with Welch; because it allows weight reduction in the frame.
Regarding claim 44, neither Nicholson nor Bailey ‘797 explicitly teaches the image source is disposed in an external unit, the image-processing device (processor) is mounted together with the projector unit (120; 220) on the frame, and the image data are transmitted from the external unit to the image-processing device (processor) of the smart glasses.
Welch teaches the image source is disposed in an external unit (76, 78), the image-processing device (70) is mounted together with the projector unit (500) on the frame, and the image data are transmitted from the external unit to the image-processing device (70) of the smart glasses (Fig. 4A-4D; [0046]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the invention to combine Nicholson and Bailey ‘797 with Welch; because it improves portability.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claim 24 and 45 have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection necessitated by the amendment/s of claims 24 and 45.
Conclusion
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
Prosecution Insights