CTFR 18/383,642 CTFR 85132 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 12-151 AIA 26-51 12-51 Status of Claims Claim 1 is amended. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1, 2, 7, 9, 10, 15 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tinch (US PG Pub. 20160274362) in view of Rasch et al. (US Pat. 5802222) . Regarding claim 1, Tinch discloses a laser module (apparatus of fig. 4) comprising: a laser light source (lasers 404, 406 408 of fig. 4); a package (planar waveguide substrate 400 of fig. 4) in which the laser light source is housed and a light transmission window through which laser light output from the laser light source can be optically transmitted is provided on a wall portion (illustrated in fig. 4 and explicitly disclosed in para. 0037; The embedded planar waveguides may be similar in performance when compared to optical fibers but are fabricated on a flat substrate. Advantageously, the flat substrate on which the waveguides are fabricated is more durable then fiber-based combiners. The layout of the waveguide substrate may be designed such that three discrete inputs may be combined into a single output. It should be appreciated that the three discrete inputs may be any compatible light source, including laser diodes, LED's and/or optical fibers. The embodiments described herein include laser diodes); and an output light aperture (output channel 416 of fig. 4) provided inside or outside of the package and arranged in a traveling direction of the laser light to adjust an area of a passage port of the laser light (para. 0044; the embedded waveguide 402 and the single-mode output fiber 420 may be designed such that they both have substantially the same mode field diameter and numerical aperture (e.g., a few percent). Tinch fails to teach the output light aperture having an adjustable area of a passage port of the laser light and being configured to allow a user to adjust the area during operation. Rasch discloses output light aperture (modulation device 17 of fig. 8) having an adjustable area of a passage port (col. 17 lines 4-6; the modulation device 17 mounted on the common single-mode wideband optical fiber 9) of the laser light and being configured to allow a user to adjust the area during operation (cols. 9-10 discuss the use of beam shaping (i.e. electro-optical aperture that is controllable)). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the application to modify the laser module of Tinch with the intensity modulator of Rasch in order to provide intensity modulation and beam shaping (Rasch; col. 2 lines 33-36) Regarding claim 2, Tinch discloses wherein the laser light source is a plurality of visible laser light sources each having a wavelength of 380 nm to 800 nm (para. 0039; FIG. 4, separate laser light beams are emitted from a red laser 404, a green laser 406 and a blue laser 408). Regarding claim 7, Tinch discloses wherein an optical waveguide layer (embedded planar waveguide 402 of fig. 4) including an optical waveguide that guides laser light output from the laser light source is provided in the package (illustrated in fig. 4). Regarding claims 9 and 10, Tinch discloses a laser module (apparatus of fig. 4) comprising combining multiple optical channels (input 414a, 414b, 414c of fig. 4) that are output at a numerical aperture (416). Tinch fails to teach an optical scanning mirror configured to scan light output from the laser module. Rasch discloses color image generation device wherein an optical scanning mirror (beam deflection 4 by means of a movable reflector (scanner) of fig. 29) configured to scan light output from the laser module (illustrated in fig. 29). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the application to modify laser module of Tinch with the movable reflector of Rasch in order to generate a real image on a projection surface. Regarding claims 15 and 16, Tinch discloses XR glasses (augmented reality system 58 of figs. 2A and 2B) comprising the optical engine (illustrated in fig. 4; the optical engine apparatus of fig. 4 is within the AR system 58) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 3-5, 11-13 and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tinch (US PG Pub. 20160274362) and Rasch et al. (US Pat. 5802222) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wang et al. (US PG Pub. 20220196805) . Regarding claim 3, Tinch as modified by Rasch discloses a laser module (apparatus of fig. 4) comprising combining multiple optical channels (input 414a, 414b, 414c of fig. 4) that are output at a numerical aperture (416). Tinch as modified by Rasch fails to teach wherein the output light aperture has a plurality of aperture blades. Wang discloses an adjustable iris for a laser emitting device wherein the light aperture (iris 216 of fig. 3A and 3B) has a plurality of aperture blades (para. 0033; iris 216 includes four blades 310-1, 310-2, 310-3, and 310-4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the application to modify the numerical aperture of Tinch and Rasch with the iris of Wang in order to adjust the quantity of light the laser module emits. Regarding claim 4, Tinch as modified by Rasch discloses a laser module (apparatus of fig. 4) comprising combining multiple optical channels (input 414a, 414b, 414c of fig. 4) that are output at a numerical aperture (416). Tinch as modified by Rasch fails to teach wherein the output light aperture has an adjustment knob that moves the aperture blades to adjust an aperture size. Wang discloses an adjustable iris (216) for a laser emitting device wherein the output light aperture has an adjustment knob (pivot (e.g., pivots 332-339) of fig. 4) that moves the aperture blades to adjust an aperture size (illustrated in figs. 3A and 3B). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the application to modify the numerical aperture of Tinch and Rasch with the iris of Wang in order to adjust the quantity of light the laser module emits. Regarding claim 5, Tinch as modified by Rasch discloses a laser module (apparatus of fig. 4) comprising combining multiple optical channels (input 414a, 414b, 414c of fig. 4) that are output at a numerical aperture (416). Tinch as modified by Rasch fails to teach comprising a positioning mechanism configured to position the adjustment knob. Wang discloses an adjustable iris (216) for a laser emitting device wherein a positioning mechanism (para. 0038; the anchors 401, 402, 411, and 412 drive each individual blade illustrated in fig. 3A and 3B noted in paras. 0041-0042) configured to position the adjustment knob (pivot (e.g., pivots 332-339) of fig. 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the application to modify the numerical aperture of Tinch and Rasch with the iris of Wang in order to adjust the quantity of light the laser module emits. Regarding claims 11-13, Tinch as modified by Wang discloses a laser module (apparatus of fig. 4) comprising combining multiple optical channels (input 414a, 414b, 414c of fig. 4) that are output at a numerical aperture (416). Tinch as modified by and Wang fails to teach an optical scanning mirror configured to scan light output from the laser module. Rasch discloses color image generation device wherein an optical scanning mirror (beam deflection 4 by means of a movable reflector (scanner) of fig. 29) configured to scan light output from the laser module (illustrated in fig. 29). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the application to modify laser module of Tinch and Wang with the movable reflector of Rasch in order to generate a real image on a projection surface. Regarding claims 17-19, Tinch as modified by Rasch discloses XR glasses (augmented reality system 58 of figs. 2A and 2B) comprising the optical engine (illustrated in fig. 4; the optical engine apparatus of fig. 4 is within the AR system 58) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 6, 14 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tinch (US PG Pub. 20160274362), Rasch et al. (US Pat. 5802222) and Wang et al. (US PG Pub. 20220196805) as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Lee (KR 100826591 B) . Regarding claim 6, Tinch as modified by Rasch and Wang discloses a plurality of aperture blades (blades (para. 0033; iris 216 includes four blades 310-1, 310-2, 310-3, and 310-4). Tinch as modified by Rasch and Wang fails to teach wherein the plurality of aperture blades are made of paper or plastic. Lee discloses an apparatus for compensation of center axis alignment of a cylindrical waveguide in a laser beam wherein the plurality of aperture blades are made of paper or plastic (pg. 4 2 nd para.; the diaphragm blades may be manufactured of a plastic that contains a translucent plastic). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the application to modify the plurality of aperture blades of Tinch, Rasch and Wang making the blades of plastic as shown in Lee in order to reduce the manufacturing cost. Regarding claim 14, Tinch as modified by Wang and Lee discloses a laser module (apparatus of fig. 4) comprising combining multiple optical channels (input 414a, 414b, 414c of fig. 4) that are output at a numerical aperture (416). Tinch as modified by Wang and Lee fails to teach an optical scanning mirror configured to scan light output from the laser module. Rasch discloses color image generation device wherein an optical scanning mirror (beam deflection 4 by means of a movable reflector (scanner) of fig. 29) configured to scan light output from the laser module (illustrated in fig. 29). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the application to modify laser module of Tinch, Wang and Lee with the movable reflector of Rasch in order to generate a real image on a projection surface. Regarding claim 20, Tinch discloses XR glasses (augmented reality system 58 of figs. 2A and 2B) comprising the optical engine (illustrated in fig. 4; the optical engine apparatus of fig. 4 is within the AR system 58) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tinch (US PG Pub. 20160274362) and Rasch et al. (US Pat. 5802222) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Miyata (JP 2019165120 A) . Regarding claim 8, Tinch as modified by Rasch discloses a laser module (apparatus of fig. 4) comprising combining multiple optical channels (input 414a, 414b, 414c of fig. 4) that are output at a numerical aperture (416). Tinch as modified by Rasch fails to teach wherein a subcarrier on which the laser light source is placed and a substrate on which an optical waveguide layer is formed are metal- bonded, integrated, and housed in the package. Miyata discloses an optical module wherein a subcarrier on which the laser light source is placed and a substrate on which an optical waveguide layer is formed are metal- bonded, integrated, and housed in the package (pg. 6 4 th para. semiconductor laser element 4 and the submount 8 and the light source substrate 6 are connected by metal bonding layers 36 and 38 including solder.). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the application to modify optical waveguide and laser light source of Tinch and Rasch with the bonding technique of Miyata in order to increase heat dissipation. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Applicant argues on page 5 of the Remarks that Tinch and other references does not teach "an output light aperture provided inside or outside of the package and arranged in a traveling direction of the laser light, the output light aperture having an adjustable area of a passage port of the laser light and being configured to allow a user to adjust the area during operation." Examiner respectfully disagrees. Rasch discloses an intensity modulator that is adjustable for intensity and beam shaping (cols. 9-10 discuss the use of beam shaping (i.e. electro-optical aperture that is controllable)). Conclusion 07-40 AIA 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 DANELL L OWENS whose telephone number is (571)270-5365. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am-5:00pm M-F. 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, Minh-Toan Ton can be reached at 571-272-2303. 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. /DANELL L OWENS/Examiner, Art Unit 2882 1 June 2026 /TOAN TON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2882 Application/Control Number: 18/383,642 Page 2 Art Unit: 2882 Application/Control Number: 18/383,642 Page 3 Art Unit: 2882 Application/Control Number: 18/383,642 Page 4 Art Unit: 2882 Application/Control Number: 18/383,642 Page 5 Art Unit: 2882 Application/Control Number: 18/383,642 Page 6 Art Unit: 2882 Application/Control Number: 18/383,642 Page 7 Art Unit: 2882 Application/Control Number: 18/383,642 Page 8 Art Unit: 2882 Application/Control Number: 18/383,642 Page 9 Art Unit: 2882 Application/Control Number: 18/383,642 Page 10 Art Unit: 2882 Application/Control Number: 18/383,642 Page 11 Art Unit: 2882 Application/Control Number: 18/383,642 Page 12 Art Unit: 2882
Prosecution Insights