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 –
Claim(s) 1-13 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kimmel et al. (U.S. 2020/0103657).
Regarding claim 1, Kimmel discloses an apparatus (3, Fig. 3B; page 4, para [0047]), comprising:
a first light waveguide (3A, Fig. 3A; page 4, para [0047]) comprising at least: a first in-coupling diffraction grating (30a, Fig. 3A; page 4, para [0047]) configured to in-couple one or more first input beams of light (30a in-couples light, Fig. 3A; page 4, para [0047]) into the first light waveguide (3A, Fig. 3A) from a first light engine (such as a first light engine, Fig. 3A; page 5, para [0053]), a first expander (51, Fig. 3A; page 4, para [0047]) configured to expand the one or more first input beams of light from the first light engine to form one or more first expanded beams of light (expansion of light from 30a to 12a via the first expander 51, Fig. 3A; page 4, para [0047]), and a first out-coupling diffraction grating (10, Fig. 3A; page 4, para [0047]) configured to out-couple the one or more first expanded beams of light from the first light waveguide (3A, Fig. 3A; page 4, para [0047]); and
a second light waveguide (3B, Fig. 3A; page 4, para [0048]) comprising at least: a second in-coupling diffraction grating (40a, Fig. 3A; page 4, para [0048]) configured to in-couple one or more second input beams of light into the second light (40a in-couples light, Fig. 3A; page 4, para [0048]) into the second light waveguide (3B, Fig. 3A) from a second light engine (such as a second light engine, Fig. 3A; page 5, para [0053]), a second expander (54, Fig. 3A; page 4, para [0048]) configured to expand the one or more second input beams of light from the second light engine to form one or more second expanded beams of light from the second light engine
to form one or more second expanded beams of light (expansion of light from 40a to 22a via the second expander 54, Fig. 3A; page 5, para [0048]), and a second out-coupling diffraction grating (20, Fig. 3A; page 5, para [0048]) configured to out-couple the one or more second expanded beams of light from the second light waveguide (3B, Fig. 3A; page 5, para [0048]);
wherein the first out-coupling diffraction grating (10, Fig. 3A) and the second out-coupling diffraction grating (20, Fig. 3A) are positioned to form a combined and continuous out-coupling projected area (combination of: 10 and 20, Figs. 3A and 3B) which is greater in size than either of the individual projected areas of the first out-coupling diffraction grating (area of combination of: 10 and 20 is greater in size than the area of the first out-coupling diffraction grating 10, Figs. 3A-3B) and the second out-coupling diffraction grating (area of combination of: 10 and 20 is greater in size than the area of the second out-coupling diffraction grating 20, Figs. 3A-3B).
Regarding claim 2, Kimmel discloses an apparatus with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the first out-coupling diffraction grating (10, Fig. 3A) and the second out-coupling diffraction grating (20, Fig. 3A) are positioned so that an edge of the first out-coupling diffraction grating is aligned with an edge of the second out-coupling diffraction grating (edge of 12a of the first out-coupling diffraction grating 10 is aligned with edge of 22b of the second out-coupling diffraction grating 20, Figs. 3A-3B; page 5, para [0050]).
Regarding claim 3, Kimmel discloses an apparatus with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the first light waveguide (3A, Fig. 3A) is configured to provide a first image (first pattern image of 3A, Fig. 3A; page 5, para [0050]), and the second light waveguide (3B, Fig. 3A) is configured to provide a second image (second pattern image of 3B, Fig. 3A; page 5, para [0051]), wherein the first image and the second image comprise the same image content (Figs. 3A-3B; page 5, para [0052]), wherein the first light waveguide (3A, Fig. 3A) and the second light waveguide (3B, Fig. 3A) form a combined exit pupil (Fig. 3B; page 5, para [0052]), wherein in at least a part of the combined exit pupil the image viewed is a combination of a portion of the first image and a portion of the second (combination of portion of the first image and a portion of the second image, Fig. 3B; page 5, para [0052]), wherein the portion of the first image and the portion of the second image that combine to form the viewed image vary depending on viewing position (such as fading in and out of the first and second images depending on viewing position, Fig. 3B; page 5, para [0052]).
Regarding claim 4, Kimmel discloses an apparatus with all the limitations of claim 1 above and further discloses wherein the first out-coupling diffraction grating (10, Fig. 3A) and the second out-coupling diffraction grating (20, Fig. 3A) are positioned so that a portion of the first out-coupling diffraction grating (such as portion 12a of 10, Figs. 3A-3B; page 5, para [0050]) is superposed over a portion of the second out-coupling diffraction grating (such as portion 22b of 20, Figs. 3A-3B; page 5, para [0050]) to form a combined and continuous out-coupling projected area (area combination of: 10 and 20, Figs. 3A and 3B).
Regarding claim 5, Kimmel discloses an apparatus with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the first light waveguide (3A, Fig. 3A) is configured to provide a first image (first pattern image of 3A, Fig. 3A; page 5, para [0050]), the second light waveguide (3B, Fig. 3A) is configured to provide a second image (second pattern image of 3B, Fig. 3A; page 5, para [0051]), wherein the first light waveguide and the second light waveguide form a combined field-of-view exit pupil (first pattern image of 3A is combined with second pattern image of 3B, Fig. 3B; page 5, para [0052]), wherein in the combined field-of-view exit pupil, the image viewed is a third image (such as the combined image as the third image, Fig. 3B; page 5, para [0052]), wherein the third image is a combination of the first image and the second image (third image as the combination of the first image and the second image, Fig. 3B; page 5, para [0052]), wherein the third image has a larger field-of-view than the field-of-view of the first image or the field-of-view of the second image (since the individual field-of-view of the first image fades out from left to right and the individual field-of-view of the second image faces out from right to left, Fig. 3B; page 5, para [0052]).
Regarding claim 6, Kimmel discloses an apparatus with all the limitations of claim 5 above and further discloses wherein the first image and the second image comprise different image content (since the image content on a side nearer region 12a has a less faded first image pattern from 10 that fades from left to right than the second image pattern from 20 that fades from left to right, Figs. 3A-3B; page 5, para [0052]). Examiner notes that the recitation of “image content” for claim 6 is being broadly interpreted as image content that is perceived at a particular viewing area and not as image content that is originally received by either the first or second light waveguide. The image content of the first and second light waveguide as perceived at a particular viewing area differs since the respective image content from the first light waveguide fades out from left to right and image content from the second light waveguide fades out from right to left (Fig. 3B; page 5, para [0052]).
Regarding claim 7, Kimmel discloses an apparatus with all the limitations of claim 5 above and further discloses wherein the first light waveguide (3A, Fig. 3A) and the second light waveguide (3B, Fig. 3A) are arranged so that in the combined field-of-view exit pupil a portion of the first image and a portion of the second image overlap (portion of the first image of 10 overlaps with a portion of the second image of 20 at the combined field-of-view exit pupil, Figs. 3A-3B; page 5, para [0052]), wherein the portion of the first image and the portion of the second image that overlap and align vary across the combined field-of-view exit pupil (since the first image from 10 fades out from left to right and the second image from 20 fades out from right to left, Figs. 3A-3B; page 5, para [0052]).
Regarding claim 8, Kimmel discloses an apparatus with all the limitations of claim 7 above and further discloses wherein the portion of the first image and the portion of the second image are identical image content portions (portion of the first image and the portion of the second image are identical image content portions since they the portion of the first image and the portion of the second image combine to form a single uniform image pattern, Figs. 3A-3B; page 5, para [0052]).
Regarding claim 9, Kimmel discloses an apparatus with all the limitations of claim 8 above and further discloses wherein the portion of the third image where the portion of the first image and the portion of the second image overlap and align is brighter than the rest of the third image (since the portion of the third image where the portion of the first image of 10 and the portion of the second image of 20 overlap and align would necessarily be brighter than the rest of the third image since the first image and the second image having respective brightness are combined, Fig. 3B; page 5, para [0052]).
Regarding claim 10, Kimmel discloses an apparatus with all the limitations of claim 1 above and further discloses wherein the center of the field-of-view of the first image is not perpendicular to the first outcoupling diffraction grating (such as the center of the field-of-view of the first image from 61 is not perpendicular to the first out-coupling diffraction grating 10, Fig. 6B), and wherein the center of the field-of-view of the second image is not perpendicular to the second out-coupling diffraction grating (such as the center of the field-of-view of the second image from 62 is not perpendicular to the second out-coupling diffraction grating 20, Fig. 6B).
Regarding claim 11, Kimmel discloses an apparatus with all the limitations of claim 2 above and further discloses wherein the first out-coupling diffraction grating (10, Fig. 3A) comprises a first part (12a, Fig. 3A; page 5, para [0050]) and a second part (12b, Fig. 3A; page 5, para [0050]) wherein the first out-coupling diffraction grating (10, Fig. 3A) and the second out-coupling diffraction grating (20, Fig. 3A) are positioned so that an edge of the first part (such as right edge of 12a, Fig. 3A) is aligned with a first edge of the second out-coupling diffraction grating (right edge of portion of 22b of 20, Fig. 3A), and an edge of the second part (left edge of 12b, Fig. 3A) is aligned with a second edge of the second out-coupling diffraction grating (such as left edge of 22a of 20, Fig. 3A).
Regarding claim 12, Kimmel discloses an apparatus with all the limitations of claim 1 above and further discloses wherein the first light waveguide (3A, Fig. 3A) comprises a first substrate (such as substrate structure of 3A, Fig. 3A), wherein the first substrate comprises the first in-coupling diffraction grating (30a, Fig. 3A), the first expander (51, Fig. 3A), and the first out-coupling diffraction grating (10, Fig. 3A), wherein the second light waveguide (3B, Fig. 3A) comprises a second substrate (such as substrate structure of 3B, Fig. 3A), wherein the second substrate comprises the second in-coupling diffraction grating (40a, Fig. 3A), the second expander (54, Fig. 3A), and the second out-coupling diffraction grating (20, Fig. 3A).
Regarding claim 13, Kimmel discloses an apparatus with all the limitations of claim 12 above and further discloses wherein the first substrate (substrate structure of 3A, Fig. 3A) and the second substrate (substrate structure of 3B, Fig. 3A) are stacked (substrate structure of 3A and substrate structure of 3B are stacked, Figs. 3A-3B).
Regarding claim 15, Kimmel discloses a head-up-display device (9A, Fig. 6; page 7, para [0063]) comprising the apparatus of claim 1 (3, Figs. 3B and 6A).
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimmel et al. (U.S. 2020/0103657) in view of Saarikko (U.S. 2010/0296163) and Meyer Timmerman Thijssen et al. (U.S. 2020/0144109).
Regarding claim 14, Kimmel discloses an apparatus with all the limitations of claim 2 above and further discloses where the first out-coupling diffraction grating (10, Fig. 3A) comprises a plurality of first diffraction gratings (such as gratings of d1 of 10, Fig. 3A; page 5, para [0049]), wherein the second out-coupling diffraction grating (20, Fig. 3A) comprises a plurality of second diffraction gratings (such as gratings of d2 of 20, Fig. 3A; page 5, para [0049]).
Kimmel does not expressly disclose wherein the first diffraction gratings are angled away from the edge of the first out-coupling diffraction grating (such as left edge of 12a of 10, Fig. 3A) with a first angle, wherein the second diffraction gratings of the second out-coupling diffraction gratings (such as left edge of 22b of 20, Fig. 3A) are angled away from the edge of the second out-coupling diffraction grating with a second angle, wherein the first angle and the second angle are the same and are acute. However, Saarikko discloses a pair of stacked diffraction coupling gratings (12 and 14, Fig. 3; page 8, para [0064]) each respectively having a plurality of diffraction gratings (12-1 and 14-1, Fig. 3; page 8, para [0067]) having acute angles with respect to a side of the stacked diffraction coupling gratings (such as vertical sides of 12 and 14, Fig. 3; page 8, para [0068]), the plurality of first and second diffraction gratings (12-1 and 14-1, Fig. 3) corresponding to a first region (I, Fig. 3; page 8, para [0067]) have a same angle relative to a left vertical side edge and those corresponding to a second region (II, Fig. 3; page 8, para [0067]) have a same angle relative to a left vertical side edge in order to improve illumination uniformity and light usage efficiency (page 8, para [0070]). Furthermore, Meyer Timmerman Thijssen discloses that a diffraction coupling grating (Fig. 2A; page 3, para [0034]) can be configured to have a plurality of diffraction gratings having an acute slant angle with respect to a vertical side edge (such as vertical side edge of 212, Fig. 2A) in order to control and facilitate the in-coupling and out-coupling of light through a waveguide (page 3, para [0034]).
Therefore, before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the plurality of first diffraction gratings (Kimmel: such as gratings of d1 of 10, Fig. 3A; page 5, para [0049]) and the plurality of second diffraction gratings (Kimmel: such as gratings of d2 of 20, Fig. 3A; page 5, para [0049]) of Kimmel such that the first diffraction gratings (Kimmel: such as gratings of d1 of 10 in region 12a, Fig. 3A; Saarikko: gratings of 14 in region I, Fig. 3) are angled away from the edge of the first out-coupling diffraction grating (Kimmel: such as left edge of 12a of 10, Fig. 3A) with a first acute angle, wherein the second diffraction gratings (Kimmel: such as gratings of d2 of 20 in region 22b, Fig. 3A); Saarikko: gratings of 12 in region I, Fig. 3) of the second out-coupling diffraction gratings (Kimmel: such as left edge of 22b of 20, Fig. 3A) are angled away from the edge of the second out-coupling diffraction grating (Kimmel: such as left edge of 22b of 20, Fig. 3A) with a second acute angle, wherein the first angle and the second angle are the same and are acute (Saarikko: Fig. 3; page 8, para [0068]) in order to obtain the benefits of improving illumination uniformity and light usage efficiency as taught by Saarikko (page 8, para [0070]) and controlling and facilitating the in-coupling and out-coupling of light through a waveguide as taught by Meyer Timmerman Thijssen (page 3, para [0034]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL CHANG LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7923. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am-6pm.
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, Michael H Caley can be reached at 571-272-2286. 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.
/PAUL C LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871