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 .
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.
Response to Amendment
Applicant's arguments filed 11/25/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., that the second mirror is fixed) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Since the limitation in amended claim 1 reads that a fixed angle of 45 degrees or less is being formed between a surface of the light incident side surface of the second mirror and the substrate with the MEMS and laser, Chaum’s mirror 154 in Figure 2 may be driven to and fixed at an angle of 45 degrees or less with respect to the substrate with the MEMS and laser for a period of time. Therefore, Chaum and Fletcher still read on amended claim 1.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) filed on 9/26/2025 and 11/14/2025 have been acknowledged and considered by the examiner. Initialed copies of supplied IDS(s) forms are included in this correspondence.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1, 5, 7-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chaum et. al US 20100149073 (hereinafter “Chaum”) of record in view of Fletcher et. al US 20190370450 (hereinafter “Fletcher”) of record.
Regarding claim 1, Chaum teaches an eyeglass-type video display device comprising:
an eyeglass body having a front frame (Chaum fig. 1 - 112), a lens attached to the front frame (Chaum fig. 1 – 114 attached to 112, see also para. 0559), and an arm extending backward from the end of the front frame (Chaum fig. 1 - 122); and
a image generation device attached to the arm (Chaum fig. 1 – 120 attached to 122),
wherein the image generation device (120) includes:
a substrate (Chaum fig. 1 – interior of 120);
a surface emitting laser element mounted on the substrate (Chaum fig. 2 – 36r, 36g, 36b) with an emission direction perpendicular to and facing up with respect to the substrate (Chaum fig. 2);
a MEMS optical deflector mounted on the substrate (Chaum fig. 2 - 156) with a revolving mirror facing up with respect to the substrate (Chaum fig. 2);
a first mirror (Chaum fig. 2 - 142 placed above 36r, 36g, 36b, see also para. 0567) placed above the surface emitting laser element (Chaum fig. 2), wherein with respect to an alignment direction between the MEMS optical deflector (Chaum fig. 2 - 156) and the surface emitting laser element (36r, 36g, 36b) on the substrate (interior of 120), with the MEMS optical deflector (156) being at one end side and the surface emitting laser element (36r, 36g, 36b) being at the other end side in the alignment direction, the first mirror (142) is configured to reflect light from the surface emitting laser element (36r, 36g, 36b) to the one end side in the alignment direction (Chaum fig. 2 – 142 deflects the beam toward 154); and
a second mirror (Chaum fig. 2 - 154) arranged above the revolving mirror of the MEMS optical deflector (156) and on the other end side in the alignment direction with respect to the revolving mirror (156), and the second mirror irradiating the revolving mirror (156) with incident light from the first mirror (Chaum fig. 2 – 154 directs the beam from 142 toward 156), and a fixed angle of less than 45 degrees being formed between (i) a surface of the second mirror (154) on which the incident light from the first mirror (142) is incident and (ii) an upper surface of the substrate (120) on which the surface emitting laser element (36r, 36g, 36b) and the MEMS optical deflector (156) are mounted (Chaum fig. 2 – 154 may be fixed at a specific angle for a certain period of time with regards to the light incident surface of 154 and the substrate that 36r, 36g, 36b and 156 are on), and
wherein the image generation device (120) is attached to an inner side surface of the arm (Chaum fig. 1) so that the alignment direction is the same as an extension direction of the arm, scanning light emitted from the revolving mirror of the MEMS optical deflector (156) irradiates the lens (106a), and a scan area (Chaum fig. 111B – 11101, see also para. 0869) is generated at a scan destination of the scanning light at an upper corner on an arm side of the lens (Chaum fig. 111B – the projector 11103 may project light onto the lens as shown in fig. 111A-111B, see also para. 0869-0870), and at a position where opposite sides facing each other in a left-right direction of the eyeglass body are parallel in the scan area (Chaum fig. 111B – 11101 is rectangular).
Chaum does not specify that laser diodes 36r, 36g, 36b are VCSEL lasers, that tiltable mirror 156 is a MEMS mirror, nor that the alignment direction is the same as the extension direction of the arm. However, Chaum does disclose the use of a VCSEL laser as a light source in Figure 160 (see Chaum para. 1050 – 16001 may be a VCSEL laser) and the use of a MEMS device in an eyeglass frame (Chaum para. 1267).
In the same field of endeavor, Fletcher teaches a VCSEL laser (Fletcher fig. 1A – 114, see also para. 0051), a tiltable mirror that is a MEMS device (Fletcher fig. 1A – 118, see also para. 0052), and that the alignment direction is the same as the extension direction of the arm (Fletcher fig. 1A – 114 and 118 are both mounted on 113, and the alignment of 114 and 118 extends along arm 103a, see also annotated Fletcher fig. 1A below) for the purpose of scanning at least a portion of a visible portion of an eye (Fletcher para. 0053). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a VCSEL laser, MEMS mirror, and an alignment direction extending in the same direction as an extension direction of an arm in order to scan at least a portion of a visible portion of an eye (Fletcher para. 0053).
PNG
media_image1.png
611
807
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Chaum and Fletcher teach the eyeglass-type video display device according to claim 1, and they further teach wherein:
the image generation device (Chaum 120; Fletcher 113) further includes a laser drive unit (Chaum fig. 2 – 138, see also para. 0695; Fletcher fig. 1E - 162) and a MEMS drive unit (Chaum fig. 2 – 158, see also para. 0600; Fletcher fig. 1E - 164) that drive the surface emitting laser element (Chaum 36r, 36b, 36g; Fletcher 114) and the MEMS optical deflector (Chaum 156; Fletcher 118), respectively;
the substrate has a rectangular shape with the alignment direction as a longitudinal direction (Chaum fig. 2 – interior of 120 has a rectangular shape, where the alignment direction extends between the controllers and the lenses of 120; Fletcher fig. 1A - interior of 113 has a rectangular shape and the alignment direction extends along 103a);
the MEMS optical deflector (Chaum 156; Fletcher 118) and the MEMS drive unit (Chaum 158; Fletcher fig. 1E - 165) are mounted on the substrate (Chaum fig. 2; Fletcher fig. 1A).
Chaum and Fletcher do not specifically disclose the MEMS optical deflector and the MEMS drive unit are mounted on the substrate on one side and the other side in a direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction at one end portion in the longitudinal direction.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to rearrange the MEMS optical deflector and the MEMS drive unit are mounted on the substrate on one side and the other side in a direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction at one end portion in the longitudinal direction, since it has been held that a mere rearrangement of elements without modification of the operation of the device only involves routine skill in the art. In re Japikse 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claim 7, Chaum and Fletcher teach the eyeglass-type video display device according to claim 1, and they further teach wherein:
the substrate has a rectangular shape with the alignment direction as a longitudinal direction (Chaum fig. 2 – interior of 120 has a rectangular shape, where the alignment direction extends between the controllers and the lenses of 120; Fletcher fig. 1A - interior of 113 has a rectangular shape and the alignment direction extends along 103a);
the image generation device (Chaum 120; Fletcher 113) further includes a laser drive unit (Chaum fig. 2 – 138; Fletcher fig. 1E - 162) that drives the surface emitting laser element (Chaum para. 0568; Fletcher para. 0060), with the MEMS optical deflector (Chaum 156; Fletcher 118), the surface emitting laser element (Chaum 36r, 36g, 36b; Fletcher 114), and the laser drive unit (Chaum 138; Fletcher 162) mounted on the substrate (Chaum fig. 2; Fletcher fig. 1A); and
the image generation device (Chaum 120; Fletcher 113) receives supply of drive voltage for driving the MEMS optical deflector (Chaum 138; Fletcher 164) and electric power from an external source via a cable (Chaum para. 0854, 0892, 1314).
Chaum and Fletcher do not specify that the MEMS optical deflector, the surface emitting laser element, and the laser drive unit are in order from one end side to the other end side in the longitudinal direction.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to rearrange the MEMS optical deflector, the surface emitting laser element, and the laser drive unit in order from one end side to the other end side in the longitudinal direction, since it has been held that a mere rearrangement of elements without modification of the operation of the device only involves routine skill in the art. In re Japikse 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claim 8, Chaum and Fletcher teach the eyeglass-type video display device according to claim 1, and they further teach wherein:
the substrate has a rectangular shape with the alignment direction as a longitudinal direction (Chaum fig. 2 – interior of 120 has a rectangular shape, where the alignment direction extends between the controllers and the lenses of 120; Fletcher fig. 1A - interior of 113 has a rectangular shape and the alignment direction extends along 103a);
the image generation device (Chaum 120; Fletcher 113) further includes a laser drive unit (Chaum fig. 2 – 138; Fletcher fig. 1E - 162) and a MEMS drive unit (Chaum fig. 2 – 158; Fletcher fig. 1E - 164) that drive the surface emitting laser element (Chaum para. 0568; Fletcher para. 0060) and the MEMS optical deflector (Chaum para. 0600; Fletcher para. 0059), respectively, and a video processing unit (Fletcher fig. 1E – 160) that controls a relationship between q luminance of the surface emitting laser element (Chaum 36r, 36g, 36b; Fletcher 114) and an emission direction of the scanning light emitted from the MEMS optical deflector (Chaum 156; Fletcher 118) based on video signals (Fletcher fig. 1E – 160 controls 162 and 164, see also para. 0060); and
the MEMS optical deflector (Chaum 156; Fletcher 118), the surface emitting laser element (Chaum 36r, 36g, 36b; Fletcher 114), the laser drive unit (Chaum 138; Fletcher 162), the video processing unit (Fletcher 160), and the MEMS drive unit (Chaum 158; Fletcher 164) are mounted on the substrate (Chaum fig. 2; Fletcher fig. 1A).
Chaum and Fletcher do not specify that the MEMS optical deflector, the surface emitting laser element, the laser drive unit, the video processing unit, and the MEMS drive unit are mounted on the substrate in order from one end side to the other end side in the longitudinal direction.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to rearrange the MEMS optical deflector, the surface emitting laser element, the laser drive unit, the video processing unit, and the MEMS drive unit are mounted on the substrate in order from one end side to the other end side in the longitudinal direction, since it has been held that a mere rearrangement of elements without modification of the operation of the device only involves routine skill in the art. In re Japikse 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claim 9, Chaum and Fletcher teach the eyeglass-type video display device according to claim 1, and they further teach wherein:
the substrate has a rectangular shape with the alignment direction as a longitudinal direction (Chaum fig. 2 – interior of 120 has a rectangular shape, where the alignment direction extends between the controllers and the lenses of 120; Fletcher fig. 1A - interior of 113 has a rectangular shape and the alignment direction extends along 103a);
the image generation device (Chaum 120; Fletcher 113) further includes further includes a laser drive unit (Chaum fig. 2 – 138; Fletcher fig. 1E - 162) and a MEMS drive unit (Chaum fig. 2 – 158; Fletcher fig. 1E - 164) that drive the surface emitting laser element (Chaum para. 0568; Fletcher para. 0060) and the MEMS optical deflector (Chaum para. 0600; Fletcher para. 0059), respectively, a video processing unit (Fletcher fig. 1E – 160) that controls a relationship between q luminance of the surface emitting laser element (Chaum 36r, 36g, 36b; Fletcher 114) and an emission direction of the scanning light emitted from the MEMS optical deflector (Chaum 156; Fletcher 118) based on video signals (Fletcher fig. 1E – 160 controls 162 and 164, see also para. 0060), and a communication unit (Fletcher fig. 1E – 126, see also para. 0059-0060) that wirelessly receives control signals that control the relationship between the luminance of the surface emitting laser element (Chaum 36r, 36g, 36b; Fletcher 114) and the emission direction of the scanning light emitted from the MEMS optical deflector (Chaum 156; Fletcher 118; Fletcher para. 0059-0060); and
the MEMS optical deflector (Chaum 156; Fletcher 118), the surface emitting laser element (Chaum 36r, 36g, 36b; Fletcher 114), the laser drive unit (Chaum 138; Fletcher 162), the MEMS drive unit (Chaum 158; Fletcher 164), and the communication unit (Fletcher 126) are mounted on the substrate (Chaum fig. 2; Fletcher fig. 1A and 1E).
Chaum and Fletcher do not specify that the MEMS optical deflector, the surface emitting laser element, the laser drive unit, the MEMS drive unit, and the communication unit are mounted on the substrate in order from one end side to the other end side in the longitudinal direction.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to rearrange the MEMS optical deflector, the surface emitting laser element, the laser drive unit, the MEMS drive unit, and the communication unit are mounted on the substrate in order from one end side to the other end side in the longitudinal direction, since it has been held that a mere rearrangement of elements without modification of the operation of the device only involves routine skill in the art. In re Japikse 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claim 10, Chaum and Fletcher teach the eyeglass-type video display device according to claim 1, and they further teach wherein a vertical deflection angle of the scanning light emitted from the revolving mirror is set so that upper and lower angles are equal to each other with respect to a horizontal line of the scan area (Chaum fig. 111b – scan area 11101 is rectangular, so the upper and lower angles are equivalent; Fletcher fig. 1A – scan area 108 is rectangular, so the upper and lower angles are equivalent).
Regarding claim 11, Chaum and Fletcher teach the eyeglass-type video display device according to claim 1, and Fletcher further teaches wherein a reflection mirror for projection (Fletcher fig. 1D – 123, see also para. 0055) is provided in the scan area for backward reflection by the reflection mirror for projection (Fletcher para. 0055).
Regarding claim 12, Chaum and Fletcher teach the eyeglass-type video display device according to claim 11, and Fletcher further teaches wherein the reflection mirror for projection (123) is either a separate projection reflection mirror (123) attached with adhesion to an inner surface of the lens (Fletcher fig. 1D, see also para. 0055), or a reflection mirror for projection formed into the lens itself.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chaum et. al US 20100149073 (hereinafter “Chaum”) of record and Fletcher et. al US 20190370450 (hereinafter “Fletcher”) of record as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Onishi US 20120300276 (hereinafter “Onishi”) of record.
Regarding claim 4, Chaum and Fletcher teach the eyeglass-type video display device according to claim 1, wherein the image generation device (120) includes a correction prism (Chaum fig. 2 – 42b, see also para. 0554 and 0573), at an emission part of the scanning light (Chaum fig. 2 – 42b sits above light emitted from 36b).
Chaum and Fletcher do not specifically teach that the prism corrects an emission direction of the scanning light incident from the MEMS optical deflector so that the scan area is rectangular in shape, however Chaum does teach using prisms as deflection elements in the projection device (Chaum para. 0554).
In the same field of endeavor, Onishi teaches the prism (Onishi fig. 8 - 12) corrects an emission direction of the scanning light incident from the MEMS optical deflector (Onishi fig. 8 - 9) so that the scan area is rectangular in shape (Onishi fig. 8) for the purpose of correcting image distortion (Onishi para. 0076). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a prism in order to correct image distortion (Onishi para. 0076).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH M HALL whose telephone number is (703)756-5795. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10-6:30 pm ET.
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.
/ELIZABETH M HALL/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/RICKY L MACK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872