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
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.
Claims 1 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vallius et al. (US 20190072767).
Regarding claim 1, Vallius discloses (Figs. 1A-9) a micro-electro-mechanical system (MEMS) laser scanning display device, comprising: a display (402); a laser light source (310), including: an emitter array including a plurality of laser diode emitters (312), each laser diode emitter (312) being configured to emit a respective different wavelength of light (R, G, B) to thereby form a broadband light beam with a broadband emission spectrum, wherein the broadband emission spectrum includes a plurality of peaks (sections 0052-0053); and a MEMS scanning mirror (320) configured to guide the light beam via a wave guide (400, 500) with an in-coupling grating (412, 512) and out-coupling grating (416, 516) to achieve a scanning pattern across the display and thereby form a displayed image (section 0003).
Regarding claim 11, Vallius discloses (Figs. 1A-9) a method of forming a displayed image at a micro-electro-mechanical system (MEMS) laser scanning display device, the method comprising: at each of a plurality of laser diode emitters (312) included in an emitter array of a laser light source (310), emitting a respective different wavelength of light (R, G, B) to thereby form a broadband light beam with a broadband emission spectrum, wherein the broadband emission spectrum includes a plurality of peaks (sections 0052-0053); and using a MEMS scanning mirror (320), guiding the light beam via a wave guide (400, 500) with an in-coupling grating (412, 512) and out-coupling grating (416, 516) to achieve a scanning pattern across the display and thereby form the displayed image (section 0003).
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vallius in view of DeLapp et al. (US 20200166756).
Regarding claim 2, Vallius does not necessarily disclose as compared to a laser light source that emits a light beam with an emission spectrum having a single peak, the broadband light beam increases color uniformity in the displayed image by having a larger range of wavelengths in the laser light source, which results in a larger range of diffraction angles at the in-coupling grating and out-coupling grating, which in turn causes a smoother spatial variation of the grating efficiency as well as an increased spatial overlap of the out-coupled light.
DeLapp discloses (Figs. 1-13) as compared to a laser light source (104) that emits a light beam with an emission spectrum having a single peak, the broadband light beam increases color uniformity in the displayed image by having a larger range of wavelengths in the laser light source, which results in a larger range of diffraction angles at the in-coupling grating (114) and out-coupling grating (120), which in turn causes a smoother spatial variation of the grating efficiency as well as an increased spatial overlap of the out-coupled light (sections 0034-0035, 0057). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of DeLapp to obtain uniform diffraction efficiency and to avoid color shifts and brightness variations.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-10 and 12-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art does not disclose or suggest the micro-electro-mechanical system (MEMS) laser scanning display device of claims 3-7, in particular the limitations of the laser light source includes a substrate having a plurality of deposition regions on a top surface thereof; and each deposition region has a different surface normal formed orthogonally relative to a surface of the deposition region and at an angle relative to a planar bottom surface of the substrate. The prior art does not disclose or suggest the MEMS laser scanning display device of claims 8-10, in particular the limitations of the laser light source further includes a plurality of cavities filled with a gain material for each laser diode emitter; the cavities are resonant; and the cavities are each defined by a distributed Bragg reflection mirror on one end and an exit grating for each of the plurality of laser diode emitters on another end, such that when current is injected to the cavities, each laser diode emitter emits light of a different respective wavelength. The prior art does not disclose or suggest the method of forming a displayed image at a micro-mechanical system (MEMS) laser scanning display device of claims 12-16, in particular the limitations of the laser light source includes a substrate having a plurality of deposition regions on a top surface thereof; and each deposition region has a different surface normal formed orthogonally relative to a surface of the deposition region and at an angle relative to a planar bottom surface of the substrate. The prior art does not disclose or suggest the method of forming a displayed image at a micro-mechanical system (MEMS) laser scanning display device of claims 17-19, in particular the limitations of the laser light source further includes a plurality of cavities filled with a gain material for each laser diode emitter; the cavities are resonant; the cavities are each defined by a distributed Bragg reflection mirror on one end and an exit grating for each of the plurality of laser diode emitters on another end; and the method further comprises applying a current to the plurality of cavities to cause each of the laser diode emitters to emit light of a different respective wavelength.
Claim 20 is considered allowable subject matter.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art does not disclose or suggest the micro-electro-mechanical system (MEMS) laser scanning display device of claim 20, in particular the limitations of the laser light source includes a substrate having a plurality of deposition regions on a top surface thereof; each deposition region has a different surface normal formed orthogonally relative to a surface of the deposition region and at an angle relative to a planar bottom surface of the substrate; each of the laser diode emitters includes a semiconductor material deposited on each of the deposition regions with surface normals of different angles in respective semiconductor regions
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES S CHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5024. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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 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.
/CHARLES S CHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871