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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election with traverse of Group IA (figures 2B, claims 1-10) in the reply filed on 07/28/2007 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the office points at figures that describe hologram calculation, which is not explicitly recited in the claims. This is not found persuasive because figures 2B and 2C are directed to multiple species (different hologram calculations). Therefore, search and examination of both species could not be carried out by the PTO without posing an undue burden on the Examiner. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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.
Claim 27 is 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. The specific limitation “wherein in the picture generating unit on which the method is performed, the first lens is movable but components of the picture generating unit other than the first lens are permanently fixed in place” as presented in claim 27 appears to be unclear. As presented in paragraph 0013 of the instant application, the components of the picture generating unit may be permanently fixed in place only after calibration has been achieved (and the components of the picture generating unit adjusted to removed pointing error). Thus, calibration is effectively part of the manufacturing process in current methods and so calibration may generally need to take place on the manufacturing line. Given the slow nature of the calibration, a limit is placed on the rate of production of picture generating units. The examiner is not sure how the components of the picture generating unit and not the first lens may be permanently fixed in place only after calibration has been achieved. For examining purposes, the examiner assumes any part of the picture generating unit can be permanently fixed and / or movable. Appropriate correction is 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)(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 1-11, 22-24, 26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Matsumoto et al. (US 2006/0077853).
Regarding claim 1, Matsumoto et al. (figures 1-2) discloses a method of calibrating a picture generating unit to compensate for a misalignment of the picture generating unit (see at least claim 10), the method comprising:
displaying a pattern corresponding to a picture on a spatial light modulator (the recording/reproducing beam emitted from the recording/reproducing beam source 21 is irradiated onto the spatial light modulator 40 as at the recording; see at least paragraph 0056);
propagating light along a propagation axis wherein the light illuminates the spatial light modulator so as to spatially modulate the light (the spatial light modulator arranged in an optical path of the recording/reproducing optical system and spatially modulates a beam guided via the recording/reproducing optical system to generate the information beam; see at least claim 10), a first portion of the propagation axis passing through a first lens of the picture generating unit (The reproducing beam, after the reflection by the reflective layer 7, passes through the objective lens 30 shown in FIG. 2; see at least paragraph 0057); and
changing the position of the first portion of the propagation axis with respect to an optical axis of the first lens to introduce or change an offset between the first portion and the optical axis, wherein the offset compensates for the misalignment (the first correction circuit 59 drives the voice coil motor 60 of FIG. 2 and drives the imaging lens 24 in two directions perpendicular to the optical axis direction of the imaging lens 24 and the optical axis direction so that the focus error signal FE1 and the tracking error signals TE1 and TE2 all attain zero, thereby correcting the misalignment; see at least paragraph 0062);
wherein the first portion of the propagation axis is substantially parallel to the optical axis of the first lens (30; figure 2).
Regarding claim 2, Matsumoto et al. (figures 1-2) discloses the step of determining a misalignment between a second portion of the propagation axis and a target, the second portion of the propagation axis being at or adjacent to the target (any intended location after the lens 30).
Regarding claim 3, Matsumoto et al. (figures 1-2) discloses wherein the step of determining a misalignment is performed prior to changing the position of the first portion of the propagation axis with respect to the optical axis of the first lens (the first correction circuit 59 is a control circuit for the first correction that receives the misalignment signal output from the quarter dividing photodetector 58 to calculate an amount of movement of the spatial light modulator 40 and the imaging lens 24 necessary for the first correction; see at least paragraph 0064).
Regarding claim 4, Matsumoto et al. (figures 1-2) discloses wherein changing the position of the first portion of propagation axis with respect to the optical axis of the first lens comprises changing the position to reduce the misalignment (the voice coil motor 60 is a moving unit that moves the imaging lens 24 in three directions, i.e. two directions perpendicular to the optical axis direction of the imaging lens 24 (X direction and Y direction in FIG. 2) and the direction of the optical axis (a direction perpendicular to X and Y directions in FIG. 2) for the first correction; see at least paragraph 0047).
Regarding claim 5, Matsumoto et al. (figures 1-2) discloses wherein the step of determining the misalignment comprises determining a position of the second portion of the propagation axis at or adjacent to the target (the first correction circuit 59 drives the voice coil motor 60 of FIG. 2 and drives the imaging lens 24 in two directions perpendicular to the optical axis direction of the imaging lens 24 and the optical axis direction so that the focus error signal FE1 and the tracking error signals TE1 and TE2 all attain zero, thereby correcting the misalignment; see at least paragraph 0062).
Regarding claim 6, Matsumoto et al. (figures 1-2) discloses wherein the step of determining the misalignment comprises measuring a DC spot of the propagated light (zero order noise, or unwanted, bright, undiffracted light; when a rapid misalignment component is generated due to the vibration or the like at the recording/reproduction, the first correction circuit 59 drives the voice coil motor 60 of FIG. 2 and drives the imaging lens 24 in two directions perpendicular to the optical axis direction of the imaging lens 24 and the optical axis direction so that the focus error signal FE1 and the tracking error signals TE1 and TE2 all attain zero, thereby correcting the misalignment ; see at least paragraph 0062).
Regarding claim 7, Matsumoto et al. (figures 1-2) discloses wherein the step of measuring a DC spot of the propagated light comprises measuring at least one of a position of the DC spot, a misalignment of the DC spot with respect to the target, and an intensity of the DC spot (at the information recording, the fluctuation in the hologram 8 caused according to the fluctuation in the arrangement of respective optical elements can be suppressed, while at the information reproduction, the fluctuation in the intensity of reproducting beam caused according to the fluctuation in arrangement of respective optical elements can be suppressed; see at least paragraph 0067).
Regarding claim 8, Matsumoto et al. (figures 1-2) discloses wherein changing the position of the first portion of the propagation axis with respect to the optical axis of the first lens comprises changing the position to move the DC spot (the second correction circuit 78 drives the voice coil motor 79 of FIG. 2 and moves the objective lens 30 so that the focus error signal FE2 and the tracking error signal TE3 obtained from the quarter dividing photodetector 77 each attain zero, thereby correcting the misalignment; see at least paragraph 0066).
Regarding claim 9, Matsumoto et al. (figures 1-2) discloses wherein the step of changing the position of the first portion of the propagation axis with respect to the optical axis of the first lens comprises moving the first lens.
Regarding claim 10, Matsumoto et al. (figures 1-2) discloses wherein the step of moving the first lens comprises moving the first lens in a first plane, the first plane having a normal that is parallel to the first portion of the propagation axis (the second correction circuit 78 drives the voice coil motor 79 of FIG. 2 and moves the objective lens 30 so that the focus error signal FE2 and the tracking error signal TE3 obtained from the quarter dividing photodetector 77 each attain zero, thereby correcting the misalignment; see at least paragraph 0066).
Regarding claim 22, Matsumoto et al. (figures 1-2) discloses receiving a holographic reconstruction of the spatially-modulated light at a light receiving surface downstream of the spatial light modulator (first / second correction unit).
Regarding claim 23, Matsumoto et al. (figures 1-2) discloses wherein the first lens is a Fourier lens or a collimating lens (The second correcting beam modulated and reflected by the optical recording medium 1 is collimated by the objective lens 30, passes through the waveplate 29, is reflected by the dichroic prism 28 and further passes through the waveplate 74; see at least paragraph 0066).
Regarding claim 24, Matsumoto et al. (figures 1-2) discloses wherein the first lens is downstream of the spatial light modulator (30 and SLM).
Regarding claim 26, Matsumoto et al. (figures 1-2) discloses wherein the method further comprises refraining from aligning elements of the picture generating unit other than the optical axis of the first lens with respect to the first portion of the propagation axis (the transparent window 45 with the alignment mark M is fixed to the housing 44 so that the center of the DMD 46 on the plane corresponds with the center of the alignment mark M (a point where tracks T1 and T2 cross), and the directions of arrangement of the pixels 41 in DMD 46 correspond with the directions of tracks T1 and T2; see at least paragraph 0042).
Regarding claim 27, Matsumoto et al. (figures 1-2) discloses wherein in the picture generating unit on which the method is performed, the first lens is movable but components of the picture generating unit other than the first lens are permanently fixed in place (the examiner assumes any part of the picture generating unit can be permanently fixed and / or movable)
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 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.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto et al. (US 2006/0077853) in view of Christmas et al. (US 2021/0041834).
Regarding claim 25, Matsumoto et al. discloses the limitations as shown in the rejection of claim 8 above. However, Matsumoto et al. is silent regarding wherein the method further comprises removing the DC spot using a block or mask downstream of the spatial light modulator. Christmas et al. (figures 1-4) teaches wherein the method further comprises removing the DC spot using a block or mask downstream of the spatial light modulator (400; The transparent material of the continuous block 400 may have a refractive index greater than 1.4. The transparent material may be glass or fused silica. The refractive index of the block is greater than that of air which means that total internal reflection can be achieved by exceeding the critical angle; see at least paragraphs 0107-0110). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method as taught by Christmas et al. in order to provide flexibility for a holographic projector comprising a plurality of SLMs with corresponding wavelengths.
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto et al. (US 2006/0077853) in view of Bayer (JP 2010-518539).
Regarding claim 28, Matsumoto et al. discloses the limitations as shown in the rejection of claim 1 above. However, Matsumoto et al. is silent regarding wherein the light is provided by a light source, and wherein the step of changing the position of the first portion of the propagation axis with respect to the optical axis of the first lens comprises moving the light source. Bayer (figures 1-2) teaches wherein the light is provided by a light source, and wherein the step of changing the position of the first portion of the propagation axis with respect to the optical axis of the first lens comprises moving the light source (he servo control unit 14 comprises one or more components of the system 1 (each of the storage medium 6, SLM 4 and light source 2) moving means 20, 21 for mechanically moving with respect to each other. 22 (FIG. 1a). The moving means 20, 21, 22 can include microactuators or other devices for physically moving the components of the system 1. Similar to the embodiment described above, the servo control unit 14 analyzes the image detected by the detector 5 and calculates a servo signal. This is used to control the moving means 20, 21, 22 for moving and arranging the storage medium 6, SLM 4, and light source 2, respectively; page 4, the last paragraph). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method as taught by Bayer in order to reduce crosstalk between holograms in hologram reconstruction.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAUREN NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1428. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday, 8:00 AM -6:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jennifer Carruth, can be reached at 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.
/LAUREN NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871