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 .
rPriority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 08/10/2023 and 05/20/2025 were filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1-13, 15-16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a2) as being anticipated by Hirsch et. al. (US 2011/0019056 A1).
Regarding claim 1 Hirsch teaches (figs. 1, 2, 5A-5B) an optical module comprising:
a display comprising light emitting elements that emit visible light (4; para. 0046, 0049);
an image sensor layer comprising infra-red light sensitive elements (1; para. 0046);
and a mask layer configured to block infra-red light having a wavelength in one or more portions of the infra-red optical spectrum and pass visible light (para. 0124);
where the optical module is lensless (para. 0025).
Regarding claim 2 Hirsch teaches (figs. 1, 2, 5A-5B) an optical module, further comprising a substrate transparent to visible light and infra-red light in one or more further portions of the infra- red optical spectrum, the substrate supporting the mask layer (para. 0124).
Regarding claim 3 Hirsch teaches (figs. 1, 2, 5A-5B) an optical module, where the display is supported by an upper surface of the image sensor layer, and the mask layer is supported by an upper surface of the display (para. 0046, and 0073-0076).
Regarding claim 4 Hirsch teaches (figs. 1, 2, 5A-5B) an optical module, where the mask layer is supported by an upper surface of the image sensor layer, and the display is supported by an upper surface of the mask layer (para. 0046).
Regarding claim 5 Hirsch teaches (figs. 1, 2, 5A-5B) an optical module, where the display is supported by an upper surface of the image sensor layer, and the substrate is supported by an upper surface of the display (para. 0046).
Regarding claim 6 Hirsch teaches (figs. 1, 2, 5A-5B) an optical module, where the image sensor layer is integrated with the display to form an integrated optical layer and the substrate is supported by an upper surface of the integrated optical layer (para. 0046).
Regarding claim 7 Hirsch teaches (figs. 1, 2, 5A-5B) an optical module, where the image sensor layer is integrated with the display to form an integrated optical layer, and the mask layer is supported by an upper surface of the integrated optical layer (para.0046).
Regarding claim 8 Hirsch teaches (figs. 1, 2, 5A-5B) an optical module, where the mask layer comprises a dye- based polymer deposited in a predetermined pattern (para. 0073-0076).
Regarding claim 9 Hirsch teaches (figs. 1, 2, 5A-5B) an optical module, where the dye-based polymer is deposited as a set of pinholes (para. 0073-0074).
Regarding claim 10 Hirsch teaches (figs. 1, 2, 5A-5B) an optical module, where the dye-based polymer is deposited as a spatial filter defining a coded aperture (para. 0075-0076).
Regarding claim 11 Hirsch teaches (figs. 1, 2, 5A-5B) an optical module, where the dye-based polymer is deposited in a Moiré pattern (para. 0075-0076).
Regarding claim 12 Hirsch teaches (figs. 1, 2, 5A-5B) an optical module, where the dye-based polymer is deposited in a diffractive pattern (para. 0075-0076).
Regarding claim 13 Hirsch teaches (figs. 1, 2, 5A-5B) an optical module, where the mask layer comprises a plurality of components electronically controllable to block said light having a wavelength in one or more portions of the infra-red optical spectrum and pass said light having a wavelength in remaining portions of the infra-red optical spectrum (para. 0124).
Regarding claim 15 Hirsch teaches (figs. 1, 2, 5A-5B) an optical module, where the infra-red light sensitive elements are configured to capture an image of a scene disposed in front of the display, and the optical module further comprises a processor which is configured to determine depth information relating to each of one or more regions of the scene based at least in part on the captured image and knowledge of a configuration of the mask layer (5; para. 0046, and 0059).
Regarding claim 16 Hirsch teaches (figs. 1, 2, 5A-5B) an optical module, where the display comprises a light emitting diode, LED, display (para. 0046, 0049).
Regarding claim 18 Hirsch teaches (figs. 1, 2, 5A-5B) an optical module, where the infra-red light sensitive elements are coated with a coating which passes infra-red light and absorbs visible light (para. 0124).
Regarding claim 19 Hirsch teaches (figs. 1, 2, 5A-5B) a device comprising:
the optical module according claim 1; and an optical emitter configured to emit light having a wavelength in said one or more portions of the infra-red optical spectrum (para. 0124).
Regarding claim 20 Hirsch teaches (figs. 1, 2, 5A-5B) a device according to claim 19, where at least one of the optical emitter and the infra-red light sensitive elements are coated with a coating which passes infra-red light and absorbs visible light (para. 0124).
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.
Claims 14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirsch et. al. (US 2011/0019056 A1).
Regarding claim 14 Hirsch teaches (figs. 1, 2, 5A-5B) an optical module, except where the plurality of components are vanadium oxide transistors. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to utilize Vanadium oxide transistors for the benefit of a fast-switching transistor with high energy efficiency. Furthermore, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of design choice. that a mere reversal of the working parts of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 146.
Regarding claim 17 Hirsch teaches (figs. 1, 2, 5A-5B) an optical module, except where the LED display is as an organic light emitting diode display or a microLED display. However it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to utilize a microLED LCD display for he benefit of a greater energy efficiency. Furthermore, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of design choice. that a mere reversal of the working parts of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 146.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. further optical systems include Tivarus et. al. (US 2010/0148291 A1), Wood et. al. (US 2011/0134249 A1), Gill et. al. (US 2017/0060242 A1), Uedaira (US 11,563,131 B2), and Wng et. al. (US 2021/0216163 A1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT E TALLMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3958. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10 a.m. -6 p.m..
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, Ricky Mack can be reached at 571-272-2333. 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.
/Robert E. Tallman/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872