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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgement is made of receipt of Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO-1449) filed 06/14/2023 (2). An initialed copy is attached to this Office Action.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In lines 2 and 3, 30 degree should be 30 degrees.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1- 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1-16, 20 and 21 recite the limitation "said" followed by a limitation. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes:
In line 12 of Claim 1, “said optically transparent member” will be taken as “the first optically transparent member or the second optically transparent member”.
In line 15 of Claim 1, “the surfaces” will be taken as “the first surface, the second surface, the third surface, or the fourth surface”.
In line 16 of Claim 1, “said surfaces” will be taken as “the first surface, the second surface, the third surface, or the fourth surface”.
In line 1 of Claim 2, “said viewing region” will be taken as “the first viewing region or the second viewing region”.
In line 4 of Claim 2, “said viewing angle” will be taken as “the first viewing angle or the second viewing angle”.
In line 2 of Claim 8, said surface selected from the said surfaces” will be taken as “a surface selected from the first surface, the second surface, the third surface, or the fourth surface”.
In line 2 of Claim 9, “said surface selected from the said surfaces” will be taken as “a surface selected from the first surface, the second surface, the third surface, or the fourth surface”.
In line 1 of Claim 11, “said optically transparent member selected from the said optically transparent member” will be taken as “an optically transparent member selected from the first optically transparent member or the second optically transparent member”.
In line 2 of Claim 13, said surface selected from the said surfaces” will be taken as “a surface selected from the first surface, the second surface, the third surface, or the fourth surface”.
In line 2 of Claim 14, “said surface selected from the said surfaces” will be taken as “a surface selected from the first surface, the second surface, the third surface, or the fourth surface”.
In lines 2-3 of Claim 21, “said lenses selected from the said lenses” will be taken as “a lens selected from the first lens or the second lens”.
Claims not specifically mention inherit the indefiniteness of the claim(s) from which they depend.
Correction and specificity are required.
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)(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.
The applied reference has a common inventor with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
Based upon the earlier effective filing date of the copending application, it would constitute prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2), if published under 35 U.S.C. 122(b) or patented under 35 U.S.C. 151. This provisional rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) is based upon a presumption of future publication or patenting of the copending application.
This provisional rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the copending application was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the copending application and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
This rejection may not be overcome by the filing of a terminal disclaimer. See In re Bartfeld, 925 F.2d 1450, 17 USPQ2d 1885 (Fed. Cir. 1991).
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, and 8-21 are provisionally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Le et al., (hereafter Le) (US PGPub 2024/0369835 A1), as best understood, which has a common inventor with the instant application.
With respect to Claim 1, Le discloses, as best understood, a lens system (Figure 1), comprising: a first lens (131, Figure 1) including a first optically transparent member (145, Figure 1) having a first surface (135, Figure 1), a second surface (136, Figure 1), a viewing region (151, Figure 1), a second viewing region (¶[0050]), a first viewing angle (¶[0050]), a second viewing angle (¶[0050]), a first focal length (¶[0042]-[0043]), and a second focal length (¶[0042]-[0043]), wherein the said first viewing region (151, Figure 1) has the said first focal length (¶[0042]-[0043]) and the said first viewing angle (¶[0050]), wherein the said second viewing region (¶[0050]) has the said second focal length (¶[0042]-[0043]) and the said second viewing angle (¶[0050]), wherein the said first focal length (¶[0042]-[0043]) is positive (¶[0042]) and the said second focal length (¶[0042]-[0043]) is negative (see where 121-123 diverge in Figure 1); a second lens (132, Figure 1) including a second optically transparent member (146, Figure 1) having a third surface (137, Figure 1) and a fourth surface (138, Figure 1); an optical cavity (133, Figure 1) comprising a beam splitter (141, Figure 1), a reflective polarizer (139, Figure 1), a waveplate (142, Figure 1), and at least one optically transparent member (145 or 146, Figure 1) selected from the said optically transparent members (145 and 146, Figure 1), wherein the said waveplate (142, Figure 1) and the said optically transparent member (145 or 146, Figure 1) are positioned between the said beam splitter (141, Figure 1) and the said reflective polarizer (139, Figure 1), wherein the said beam splitter (141, Figure 1), the reflective polarizer (139, Figure 1), and waveplate (142, Figure 1) are disposed on and substantially conforming to the surfaces (135-138, Figure 1) selected from the said surfaces (135-138, Figure 1).
With respect to Claim 2, Le further discloses, as best understood, wherein the said viewing region (151, Figure 1 or ¶[0050]) is configured as an area along a radial direction (see from 151 to 131 in Figure 1) from a center to an edge (see from 151 to 131 in Figure 1) of the said first lens (131, Figure 1); the said viewing angle (¶[0050]) is configured as an angle between an optical axis (160, Figure 1) of the said first lens (131, Figure 1) and a beam direction (see Figure 1) of a collimated beam (131 is modified into a Fresnel lens, ¶[0039]) passed through and confined by (inherent of a Fresnel lens) the said viewing region (151, Figure 1 or ¶[0050]), wherein the said optical axis (160, Figure 1) intersects the said beam direction (see Figure 1) at a viewing distance (¶[0074]); the said focal length (¶[0042]-[0043]) is configured as a focal distance (¶[0073]) from the said center of the first lens (131, Figure 1) to a focal plane (the ray (122) is focused by the lens (63) of the eye (60) onto the retina (65), ¶[0067]) of the said collimated beam (¶[0039]).
With respect to Claim 4, Le further discloses, as best understood, wherein the said beam splitter (141, Figure 1) is configured to partially transmit and partially reflect light beams (¶[0062]) from a display device (120, Figure 1) in a predetermined wavelength range (¶[0084]); the said reflective polarizer (139, Figure 1) is configured to pass through light having a first polarization state (¶[0044]) and reflect light having a second polarization state (¶[0044]) in a predetermined wavelength range (¶[0084]); the said waveplate (142, Figure 1) is configured to modify the polarization state (¶[0044]) of transmitted light in a predetermined wavelength range (¶[0084]).
With respect to Claim 8, Le further discloses, as best understood, wherein the said surface (any one of 135-138, Figure 1) selected from the said surfaces (135-138, Figure 1) is a aspheric surface (the surfaces (135)-(138), can have any suitable shapes or surface curvatures, aspheric shape(s), or other shape(s), ¶[0043]).
With respect to Claim 9, Le further discloses, as best understood, wherein the said surface (any one of 135-138, Figure 1) selected from the said surfaces (135-138, Figure 1) includes a Fresnel structure (131 which includes surfaces 135 and 136, is modified into a Fresnel lens, ¶[0039]).
With respect to Claim 10, Le further discloses, as best understood, wherein the said Fresnel structure (131 is modified into a Fresnel lens, ¶[0039]) is in the viewing region (151, Figure 1 or ¶[0050]) having a viewing angle of more than 20 degree.
With respect to Claim 11, Le further discloses, as best understood, wherein the said optical transparent member (¶[0042]) selected from the said transparent member (¶[0042]) is made of a plastic material (plastic lenses, ¶[0046]).
With respect to Claim 12, Le further discloses, as best understood, wherein the said plastic material (plastic lenses, ¶[0046]) is selected from a plastic material group including polycarbonate (polycarbonate, ¶[0046]), polymethyl methacrylate, polystyrene, cyclic olefin copolymer, cycloolefin polymer material.
With respect to Claim 13, Le further discloses, as best understood, wherein the said surface selected from the said surfaces (any one of 135-138, Figure 1) include a nano-structures or a micro- structures (microstructure, ¶[0038]).
With respect to Claim 14, Le further discloses, as best understood, wherein the said surface selected from the said surfaces (any one of 135-138, Figure 1) includes a center region that is smooth (¶[0038]) and a peripheral region having a Fresnel structure (131 is modified into a Fresnel lens, ¶[0039]) that surrounds the center region (¶[0039]).
With respect to Claim 15, Le further discloses, as best understood, wherein the said first lens (131, Figure 1) has a ratio of a lens thickness of a thinnest viewing region to a lens thickness of a thickest viewing region is more than 1/3 (¶[0045]).
With respect to Claim 16, Le further discloses, as best understood, wherein the said reflective polarizer (139, Figure 1) is on the surface of the first lens (131, Figure 1) or the second lens (132, Figure 1); the said beam splitter (141, Figure 1) is on the surface of the first lens (131, Figure 1) or the second lens (132, Figure 1), and the said waveplate (142, Figure 1) is on the surface of the first lens (131, Figure 1) or the second lens (132, Figure 1).
With respect to Claim 17, Le further discloses, as best understood, wherein the optical system includes a display device (120, Figure 1), wherein a pixel array (display device can include a pixel array, ¶[0050]) in the display device (120, Figure 1) is configured to generate a light beam (generate a light beam, ¶[0050]), wherein a polarization state of the light beams is a first circular polarization state (light beam can be circularly polarized, ¶[0051]), the second lens (132, Figure 1) is positioned between the display device (120, Figure 1) and the first lens (131, Figure 1).
With respect to Claim 18, Le further discloses, as best understood, wherein the fourth surface (138, Figure 1) of the second lens (132, Figure 1) is configured to face the display device (120, Figure 1), the second surface of the first lens (131, Figure 1) is configured to face the second lens (132, Figure 1).
With respect to Claim 19, Le further discloses, as best understood, wherein the second surface of the first lens (131, Figure 1) is configured to face the display device (120, Figure 1), the fourth surface (138, Figure 1) of the second lens (132, Figure 1) is configured to face the second lens (132, Figure 1).
With respect to Claim 20, Le further discloses, as best understood, wherein the said reflective polarizer (139, Figure 1) has higher transmittance for the wavelength range 800-1000 nm (¶[0058]) than transmittance for the wavelength range 400-800 nm (¶[0058]).
With respect to Claim 21, Le further discloses, as best understood, wherein the lens system (Figure 1) is configured to face a human eye (65, Figure 1), wherein the said lens (any of 131-132, Figure 1) selected from the said lenses (any of 131-132, Figure 1) can be replaced by a prescription lens to correct vision problems or a prescription lens (¶[0076]) can be attached to the said lens system (Figure 1) to correct vision problems (¶[0076]).
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.
The applied reference has a common inventor with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Claims 3, 5 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Le (US PGPub 2024/0369835 A1), as best understood, which has a common inventor with the instant application.
With respect to Claim 3, Le teaches the lens system according to claim 2, wherein the said viewing region (151, Figure 1 or ¶[0050]) is configured as a circular area (see Figure 1) with a radius of 5 mm (¶[0084]); the said viewing distance ranges 12-30mm (18.5 mm, ¶[0084]) from the center of the said first lens (131, Figure 1); the said focal plane (¶[0067]) is configured at a minimum spot size (¶[0074]) in a direction parallel (see Figure 1) to the said radial direction (see from 151 to 131 in Figure 1) of the first lens (131, Figure 1).
Le disclose the claimed invention except for the viewing region configured as a circular area with a radius of 1 mm. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made have to the viewing region configured as a circular area with a radius of 1mm, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involved only routine skill in the art. One would have been motivated to have the viewing region configured as a circular area with a radius of 1mm for the purposes of a better focused image. In re Antoinie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977).
With respect to Claim 5, Le further teaches wherein the said first viewing angle (¶[0050]) is less than 30 degrees (less than 20 degrees, ¶[0081]) and the said second viewing angle (¶[0050]) is more than 30 degrees (30°±2°, ¶[0081]).
With respect to Claim 6, Le further teaches wherein the said first viewing angle (¶[0050]) is less than 30 degrees (less than 20 degrees, ¶[0081]) and the said second viewing angle (¶[0050]) is less than 30 degrees (30°±2°, ¶[0081]).
Claim 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Le (US 2024/0369835 A1), as best understood, which has a common inventor with the instant application, in further view of Yang (US 10,928,634), as best understood.
With respect to Claim 7, Le teaches the lens system according to claim 1.
Le fails to teach wherein the said first focal length is less than positive 600mm and second focal length is less than negative 600 mm.
Le is a lens system and Yang is an eyepiece and a head-mounted display device in which a lens system could be used.
Yang teaches an eyepiece and a head-mounted display device (title and abstract) wherein the said first focal length is less than positive 600mm (F1=28.78 mm, column 4, lines 39-42) and second focal length is less than negative 600 mm (F2=-677.6 mm, column 4, lines 39-42).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Le having the lens system with the teachings of Yang having said first focal length is less than positive 600mm and second focal length is less than negative 600 mm for the purpose of to ensuring the user can see a better image, column 4, lines 15-20.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAMARA Y WASHINGTON whose telephone number is (571)270-3887. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur 730-530 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, Stephone Allen can be reached at 571-272-2434. 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.
/TYW/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/STEPHONE B ALLEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872