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 .
Response to Amendment and Arguments
The amendment filed 03/16/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-9 are currently pending in this application.
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 5-6, filed 03/16/2026 with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 7-9 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant states "…Independent claim 1 is amended to recite, inter alia, "the incident surface corresponds to only a use range of the display surface, the use range being a range of the display surface in which display is performed to form a virtual image." Support for the use range limitation in amended claim 1 can be found at least in FIG. 4 along with the related description including paragraph [0033] of the present application… ". Examiner respectfully disagrees. Even the paragraph [0033] of the present application explicitly states that “the incidence surface 41i is formed to correspond to only the use range 21u”, the Fig. 4 of instant application explicitly shows that the bottom surface of the prism 40, which is the incident surface 41i, is not only overlapping with the use range 21u but also overlapping some of the regions adjacent to and outside the use range 21u along the thickness direction. Therefore, the Fig. 4 of instant application shows that the incident surface 41i corresponds to (overlapping with along a thickness direction) both a use range 21u of the display surface and a region adjacent to and outside the use range 21u.
Regarding limitations of the instant case in view of the amended Claims and upon further considerations, a new ground(s) of rejection, necessitated by the amendments is made in view of different interpretation of the previously applied references and/or new prior art as presented in this Office action.
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 and 7-8 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
In regard to claim 1, the limitation, “the incident surface corresponds to only a use range of the display surface, the use range being a range of the display surface in which display is performed to form a virtual image” renders the scope of the claim unclear. Namely, it is not clear how to determine the metes and bounds of the "incident surface" relative to the "use range" since the term “corresponds to” is broad and susceptible to multiple interpretations (e.g., spatial alignment versus dimensional equality), and when modified by the restrictive adverb "only," it is unclear what degree of deviation, if any, is permitted. Furthermore, the Fig. 4 of instant application explicitly shows that the bottom surface of the prism 40, which is the incident surface 41i, is not only overlapping with the use range 21u but also overlapping some of the regions adjacent to and outside the use range 21u along the thickness direction. Therefore, the Fig. 4 of instant application shows that the incident surface 41i corresponds to (overlapping with along a thickness direction) both a use range 21u of the display surface and a region adjacent to and outside the use range 21u. So the scope of the claim is unclear. For the purpose of examination, the examiner will interpret the above limitation as - - the incident surface corresponds to a use range of the display surface, the use range being a range of the display surface in which display is performed to form a virtual image - -.
Dependent claims 7-8 are rejected by virtue of their dependency.
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 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.
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 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Murakami (WO2016136407A1).
Regarding claim 1, Murakami teaches a display device (Fig. 1-4 and 6A-16, Pages 2-7 of English translation of WO2016136407A1) comprising:
a display unit (the display unit 101 in Fig. 1) which includes a display surface (the display surface OP in Fig. 1) that emits display light (the light corresponding to R2 Fig. 1, page 2), and emits central display light (Fig. 1) in an emission direction (the direction D1 in Picture 1, which is corresponding to R2 in Fig. 1) that is non-perpendicular to the display surface (Fig. 1); and
a prism (the refractive optical element 103 in Fig. 1) which is provided on the display surface (Fig. 1, 3 and 7), includes an incidence surface (the lower surface of 103 facing 101 in Fig. 1) on which the display light (the light corresponding to R2 Fig. 1) is incident and an emitting surface (the upper surface of 103 facing 102 in Fig. 1) which emits the display light (Fig. 1), and has a thickness which is gradually increased (Fig. 1 and Fig. 7) in the emission direction (the direction D1 in Picture 1, which is corresponding to R2 in Fig. 1), wherein
in the prism (the refractive optical element 103 in Fig. 1 and Fig. 7), a vertex (V1 in picture 1, which is the upper left vertex of 103 in Fig. 1 and Fig. 7) of the emitting surface (the upper surface of 103 facing 102 in Fig. 1) is positioned to be deviated from an immediately above region (Fig. 1), which is located immediately above (Picture 1) the incidence surface (the lower surface of 103 facing 101 in Fig. 1), toward the emission direction side (the side of direction D1 in Picture 1), and
the incident surface (the lower surface of 103 facing 101 in Fig. 1) corresponds to (Fig. 1) a use range of the display surface (the image range of the display surface OP in Fig. 1), the use range (the image range of the display surface OP in Fig. 1) being a range of the display surface (the display surface OP in Fig. 1)) in which display is performed to form a virtual image (Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
496
414
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Picture 1, from Fig. 1 of Murakami (WO2016136407A1)
Regarding claims 7-8, Murakami also teaches the following elements:
(Claim 7) A virtual image display device (Fig. 1, Abs, Page 3, Paragraph 1, when the image display device 100 is applied as an in-vehicle head-up display, the reflection unit 102 is configured as a windshield, and displays an enlarged virtual image of the display surface OP superimposed on the driver's field of view) comprising the display device (Fig. 1, Abs, Page 3, Paragraph 1), wherein the virtual image display device (Fig. 1, Abs, Page 3, Paragraph 1) displays a virtual image by projecting the display light onto a projection target member (102 in Fig. 1, which is a windshield).
(Claim 8) A movable body comprising the virtual image display device (Fig. 1, Abs, Page 3, Paragraph 1), wherein the movable body further comprises a windshield (102 in Fig. 1, which is a windshield) or a combiner as the projection target member (102 in Fig. 1, which is a windshield).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-6 and 9 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding independent claim 1, none of the prior art discloses or suggests that a display device comprising: a display unit which includes a display surface that emits display light, and emits central display light in an emission direction that is non-perpendicular to the display surface; and a prism which is provided on the display surface, includes an incidence surface on which the display light is incident and an emitting surface which emits the display light, and has a thickness which is gradually increased in the emission direction, wherein in the prism, a vertex of the emitting surface is positioned to be deviated from an immediately above region, which is located immediately above the incidence surface, toward the emission direction side; wherein “the prism forms a protruding portion which is further expanded toward the emission direction side with respect to a virtual side surface, which connects an end portion of the incidence surface at the emission direction side and the vertex; the protruding portion is formed by surfaces and corners; and of the corners, a vertex angle formed at the vertex is more obtuse than an angle formed by the virtual side surface and the emitting surface” in combination with the other required elements of the claim.
The most relevant references, Murakami (WO2016136407A1), Murata (US 2023/0367120), and Kim (US 2017/0336628), taken along or in combination, only discloses a display device comprising: a display unit which includes a display surface that emits display light, and emits central display light in an emission direction that is non-perpendicular to the display surface; and a prism which is provided on the display surface, includes an incidence surface on which the display light is incident and an emitting surface which emits the display light, and has a thickness which is gradually increased in the emission direction, wherein in the prism, a vertex of the emitting surface is positioned to be deviated from an immediately above region, which is located immediately above the incidence surface, toward the emission direction side. However they do not teach or suggest that “the prism forms a protruding portion which is further expanded toward the emission direction side with respect to a virtual side surface, which connects an end portion of the incidence surface at the emission direction side and the vertex; the protruding portion is formed by surfaces and corners; and of the corners, a vertex angle formed at the vertex is more obtuse than an angle formed by the virtual side surface and the emitting surface” in combination with the other required elements of the claim.
Dependent claims 3-6 would be allowable by virtue of their dependency.
Regarding independent claim 9, none of the prior art discloses or suggests that a display device comprising: a display unit which includes a display surface that emits display light, emits central display light in an emission direction that is non-perpendicular to the display surface, and further includes a frame body which covers a periphery of the display surface; and a prism which is provided on the display surface, includes an incidence surface on which the display light is incident and an emitting surface which emits the display light, and has a thickness which is gradually increased in the emission direction, wherein in the prism, a vertex of the emitting surface is positioned to be deviated from an immediately above region, which is located immediately above the incidence surface, toward the emission direction side, wherein “the prism further includes a leg portion protruding from the incidence surface side toward the display surface, and the leg portion is in contact with the frame body so as to keep a distance between the incidence surface and the display surface constant” in combination with the other required elements of the claim.
The most relevant references, Murakami (WO2016136407A1), Murata (US 2023/0367120), Kim (US 2017/0336628) and Aoki (US 2002/0084950, at least Fig. 1 and Fig. 5 teaches a frame body (the frame of 5 in Fig. 5) which covers a periphery of the display surface (5a in Fig. 5)), taken along or in combination, only discloses a display device comprising: a display unit which includes a display surface that emits display light, emits central display light in an emission direction that is non-perpendicular to the display surface, and further includes a frame body which covers a periphery of the display surface; and a prism which is provided on the display surface, includes an incidence surface on which the display light is incident and an emitting surface which emits the display light, and has a thickness which is gradually increased in the emission direction, wherein in the prism, a vertex of the emitting surface is positioned to be deviated from an immediately above region, which is located immediately above the incidence surface, toward the emission direction side. However they do not teach or suggest that “the prism further includes a leg portion protruding from the incidence surface side toward the display surface, and the leg portion is in contact with the frame body so as to keep a distance between the incidence surface and the display surface constant” in combination with the other required elements of the claim.
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAN LIU whose telephone number is (571)270-0383. The examiner can normally be reached on 9am-5pm EST 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, Jennifer Carruth can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SHAN LIU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights