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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 recites “the projection,” it is believed that this is a typographical error, and Applicant intended to recite “the projection unit”. Appropriate correction is required.
Response to Amendment
Claims 9-16 are currently pending. Applicant submitted preliminary amendments canceling claims 1-8 and newly entering claims 9-16.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 9-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20060120247 A1 to Noda et al.
Regarding Claim 9. Noda discloses a projection device, comprising: an image module (Fig. 4 display element 11), which generates a multicolored image (para 69) by generating a first color sub-image having a first wavelength (para 163-164, "B image data") and a second color sub-image having a second wavelength (para 163-164, "G image data"), a projection unit (Fig. 4 eyepiece optical system 21), to which the multicolored image is fed (See Fig. 4) and which images the image into an exit pupil (Fig. 4 optical pupil E) such that an observer can perceive the image as a virtual image when an eye of the observer is positioned in the exit pupil and the observer looks at the projection unit at a predetermined viewing angle (para 78, "At the position of the optical pupil E, the observer observes an enlarged virtual image of the image displayed on the LCD 15"), wherein the projection comprises a volume hologram (See Fig. 4 and para 91, "composed of a plurality of layers that are each sensitive to a different wavelength"), which deflects the multicolored image into the exit pupil for imaging purposes, wherein the volume hologram comprises a volume grating for each wavelength of the color sub-images (Fig. 4 optical element 24 para 75 and para 91, "composed of a plurality of layers that are each sensitive to a different wavelength"), the volume grating having a respective deflection efficiency profile which is dependent on the viewing angle (Fig. 9D) and which is maximal for the predetermined viewing angle (See Fig. 9D) such that a first efficiency ratio of the first deflection efficiency profile for the first wavelength to the deflection efficiency profile of the second wavelength is present (para 139, "the ratio of the diffraction efficiency for the different colors"), wherein the deflection efficiency profiles for a predetermined angular range around the predetermined viewing angle are set such that the first efficiency ratio for the predetermined angular range is constant (para 139, "the ratio of the diffraction efficiency for the different colors is approximately constant"), and wherein the image module is controlled such that the multicolored image is generated, a first brightness ratio of the brightness of the first color sub-image to the brightness of the second color sub-image (See at least Fig. 11B).
Noda does not specifically disclose that the image module is controlled such that when the multicolored image is generated, a first brightness ratio of the brightness of the first color sub-image to the brightness of the second color sub-image is inversely proportional to the first efficiency ratio such that the different deflection efficiency profiles are compensated for and the observer can perceive the multicolored image as a true-color virtual image for viewing angles from the predetermined angular range.
However, Noda discloses adjusting the brightness of the first color sub-image and the brightness of the second color sub-image in such a manner that would achieve reproduction of white light or color balance (See para 155 “possible to adjust those amounts of current and thereby adjust the R, G, and B light intensity so that, for example, the reproduction light is white”). Controlling the first brightness ratio relative to the first efficiency ratio are result-effective variables. In that, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify the brightness of each color image to achieve the desired color balance.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to include that the image module is controlled such that when the multicolored image is generated, a first brightness ratio of the brightness of the first color sub-image to the brightness of the second color sub-image is inversely proportional to the first efficiency ratio such that the different deflection efficiency profiles are compensated for and the observer can perceive the multicolored image as a true-color virtual image for viewing angles from the predetermined angular range, to provide a desired color balance is based on a result effective variable and would require routine skill in the art. Furthermore, it has been held that that determining the optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.05 (II (A) and (B)).
Regarding Claim 10. Noda further discloses all the volume gratings are formed in a common layer (para 91, "a single layer that is sensitive to a plurality of wavelengths).
Regarding Claim 11. Noda further discloses the volume gratings are configured as reflective volume gratings (See Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 12. Noda further discloses the volume hologram is embedded in a transparent carrier (para 87 "transparent base member 22").
Regarding Claim 13. Noda further discloses the projection unit comprises an image waveguide (See Fig. 4 optical system 21 with member 22), in which the multicolored image is coupled and guided via reflection as far as the volume hologram, which causes the deflection of the multicolored image and hence the output coupling from the image waveguide (See Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 14. Noda further discloses the image module further generates a third color sub-image having a third wavelength (para 163 “R image data”), wherein on the basis of the deflection efficiency profile of the volume grating for the third wavelength, a second efficiency ratio of the first deflection efficiency profile for the first wavelength to the deflection efficiency profile of the third wavelength is present and the deflection efficiency profiles for the predetermined angular range around the predetermined viewing angle are set such that the second efficiency ratio for the predetermined angular range is constant (para 139 "the ratio of the diffraction efficiency for the different colors is approximately constant"”), and wherein the image module is controlled such that when the multicolored image is generated, a second brightness ratio of the brightness of the first color sub-image to the brightness of the third color sub-image is inversely proportional to the second efficiency ratio (para 155 “possible to adjust those amounts of current and thereby adjust the R, G, and B light intensity so that, for example, the reproduction light is white”).
Regarding Claim 15. Noda further discloses the first wavelength lies in a blue wavelength range, the second wavelength lies in a green wavelength range, and the third wavelength lies in a red wavelength range (See para 163).
Regarding Claim 16. Noda discloses a projection method, comprising:) generating a multicolored image (See Fig. 4 display element 11 and para 69) by generation of a first color sub-image having a first wavelength (para 163-164, "B image data") and a second color sub-image having a second wavelength (para 163-164, "G image data"); feeding the multicolored image (See Fig. 4) to a projection unit (Fig. 4 eyepiece optical system 21), which images said image into an exit pupil (Fig. 4 optical pupil E) such that an observer can perceive the image as a virtual image when an eye of the observer is positioned in the exit pupil and the observer looks at the projection unit at a predetermined viewing angle (para 78, "At the position of the optical pupil E, the observer observes an enlarged virtual image of the image displayed on the LCD 15"); providing a volume hologram (See Fig. 4 and para 91, "composed of a plurality of layers that are each sensitive to a different wavelength") to the projection unit to deflect the multicolored image into the exit pupil for imaging purposes, wherein the volume hologram has a volume grating for each wavelength of the color sub-images (Fig. 4 optical element 24 para 75 and para 91, "composed of a plurality of layers that are each sensitive to a different wavelength"), said volume grating having a respective deflection efficiency profile which is dependent on the viewing angle (Fig. 9D) and which is maximal for the predetermined viewing angle (See Fig. 9D) such that a first efficiency ratio of the first deflection efficiency profile for the first wavelength to the deflection efficiency profile of the second wavelength is present (para 139, "the ratio of the diffraction efficiency for the different colors"), wherein the deflection efficiency profiles for a predetermined angular range around the predetermined viewing angle are set such that the first efficiency ratio for the predetermined angular range is constant (para 139, "the ratio of the diffraction efficiency for the different colors is approximately constant"), and generating the multicolored image wherein, a first brightness ratio of the brightness of the first color sub-image to the brightness of the second color sub-image (See at least Fig. 11B).
Noda does not specifically disclose generating the multicolored image, wherein a first brightness ratio of the brightness of the first color sub-image to the brightness of the second color sub-image is inversely proportional to the first efficiency ratio such that the different deflection efficiency profiles are compensated for and the observer can perceive the multicolored image as a true-color virtual image for viewing angles from the predetermined angular range.
However, Noda discloses adjusting the brightness of the first color sub-image and the brightness of the second color sub-image in such a manner that would achieve reproduction of white light or color balance (See para 155 “possible to adjust those amounts of current and thereby adjust the R, G, and B light intensity so that, for example, the reproduction light is white”). Controlling the first brightness ratio relative to the first efficiency ratio are result-effective variables. In that, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify the brightness of each color image to achieve the desired color balance.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to include generating the multicolored image, wherein a first brightness ratio of the brightness of the first color sub-image to the brightness of the second color sub-image is inversely proportional to the first efficiency ratio such that the different deflection efficiency profiles are compensated for and the observer can perceive the multicolored image as a true-color virtual image for viewing angles from the predetermined angular range, to provide a desired color balance is based on a result effective variable and would require routine skill in the art. Furthermore, it has been held that that determining the optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.05 (II (A) and (B)).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDMOND C LAU whose telephone number is (571)272-5859. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8am-6pm EST.
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.
/EDMOND C LAU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871