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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 12/29/2023 and 07/26/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species A, corresponding to claims 2, 5, 6, 10, 11, 13, and 14 in the reply filed on 07/23/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 3, 7, 12, and 15 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 07/23/2026.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5, 8-9, 18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Amirsolaimani et al. (U.S. PG-Pub No. 2022/0397763; hereinafter – “Amirsolaimani”).
Regarding claim 1, Amirsolaimani teaches an optical system through which a light beam from a display surface is guided to a pupil surface, the optical system comprising, in order from a pupil surface side to a display surface side:
a first optical system (242) having at least one lens (See e.g. Fig. 2; Paragraphs 0027-0031);
a first transmissive reflective member (112) having a first transmissive reflective surface that is a curved surface (See e.g. Fig. 2; Paragraphs 0027-0031);
a second optical system (102) having at least one lens (231, 232) (See e.g. Fig. 2; Paragraphs 0027-0031);
a second transmissive reflective member (111) having a second transmissive reflective surface that is a curved surface (See e.g. Fig. 2; Paragraphs 0027-0031); and
a third optical system (241) having at least one lens (See e.g. Fig. 2; Paragraphs 0027-0031),
wherein a lens (242) disposed closest to the display surface in the first optical system and a lens (232) disposed closest to the pupil surface in the second optical system are cemented with each other via the first transmissive reflective member (See e.g. Fig. 2; Paragraphs 0027-0031 and 0037), and
wherein a lens (231) disposed closest to the display surface in the second optical system and a lens (241) disposed closest to the pupil surface in the third optical system are cemented with each other via the second transmissive reflective member (See e.g. Fig. 2; Paragraphs 0027-0031 and 0037).
Regarding claim 2, Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Amirsolaimani further teaches that the first optical system includes a first lens (242), wherein the second optical system includes, in order from the pupil surface side to the display surface side, a second lens (232) and a third lens (231), wherein the third optical system includes a fourth lens (241), wherein the first lens and the second lens are cemented with each other via the first transmissive reflective member, and wherein the third lens and the fourth lens are cemented with each other via the second transmissive reflective member (See e.g. Fig. 2; Paragraphs 0027-0031 and 0037).
Regarding claim 5, Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 2, as above.
Amirsolaimani further teaches that the second lens (232) and the third lens (231) are spaced apart from each other (See e.g. Fig. 2; Paragraphs 0027-0031).
Regarding claim 8, Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Amirsolaimani further teaches that the optical system satisfies at least one of the following inequalities: Φ1a×Φ1b ≤ 0; |Φ1a| > |Φ1b| where Φ1a is a curvature (1/mm) of the first transmissive reflective surface, and Φ1b (1/mm) is a curvature of a lens surface of at least one of the lens disposed closest to the display surface in the first optical system and the lens disposed closest to the pupil surface in the second optical system (See e.g. Fig. 2; Paragraph 0028 – Amirsolaimani’s teaching of plano-convex lenses 231, 232 reads on the claimed inequalities as the lenses will have one surface with zero curvature, by definition).
Regarding claim 9, Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Amirsolaimani further teaches that the optical system satisfies at least one of the following inequalities: Φ2a×Φ2b ≤ 0, |Φ2a| > |Φ2b| where Φ2a is a curvature (1/mm) of the second transmissive reflective surface, and Φ2b (1/mm) is a curvature of a lens surface of at least one of the lens disposed closest to the display surface in the second optical system and the lens disposed closest to the pupil surface in the third optical system (See e.g. Fig. 2; Paragraph 0028 – Amirsolaimani’s teaching of plano-convex lenses 231, 232 reads on the claimed inequalities as the lenses will have one surface with zero curvature, by definition).
Regarding claim 18, Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Amirsolaimani further teaches that at least one of the first transmissive reflective member (112) and the second transmissive reflective member (111) does not contact air (See e.g. Fig. 2; Paragraphs 0027-0031).
Regarding claim 20, Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Amirsolaimani further teaches a display apparatus comprising: a display element (108); and the optical system according to claim 1 through which a light beam from a display surface of the display element is guided to a pupil surface (See e.g. Figs. 1-2; Paragraphs 0024 and 0027-0031).
Claim(s) 1, 4, 8-9, and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Togino (U.S. Patent No. 5,801,885).
Regarding claim 1, Togino teaches an optical system through which a light beam from a display surface is guided to a pupil surface, the optical system comprising, in order from a pupil surface side to a display surface side:
a first optical system (11) having at least one lens (See e.g. Figs. 16-17; C. 13, L. 26-37; C. 14, L. 24-44);
a first transmissive reflective member (121) having a first transmissive reflective surface that is a curved surface (See e.g. Figs. 16-17; C. 13, L. 26-37; C. 14, L. 24-44);
a second optical system (12) having at least one lens (See e.g. Figs. 16-17; C. 13, L. 26-37; C. 14, L. 24-44);
a second transmissive reflective member (122) having a second transmissive reflective surface that is a curved surface (See e.g. Figs. 16-17; C. 13, L. 26-37; C. 14, L. 24-44); and
a third optical system (13) having at least one lens (See e.g. Figs. 16-17; C. 13, L. 26-37; C. 14, L. 24-44),
wherein a lens (11) disposed closest to the display surface in the first optical system and a lens (12) disposed closest to the pupil surface in the second optical system are cemented with each other via the first transmissive reflective member (See e.g. Figs. 16-17; C. 13, L. 26-37; C. 14, L. 24-44), and
wherein a lens (12) disposed closest to the display surface in the second optical system and a lens (13) disposed closest to the pupil surface in the third optical system are cemented with each other via the second transmissive reflective member (See e.g. Figs. 16-17; C. 13, L. 26-37; C. 14, L. 24-44).
Regarding claim 4, Togino teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Togino further teaches that the first transmissive reflective surface (121) and the second transmissive reflective surface (122) each have a shape that is concave on the pupil surface side (See e.g. Figs. 16-17; C. 13, L. 26-37; C. 14, L. 24-44).
Regarding claim 8, Togino teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Togino further teaches that the optical system satisfies at least one of the following inequalities: Φ1a×Φ1b ≤ 0; |Φ1a| > |Φ1b| where Φ1a is a curvature (1/mm) of the first transmissive reflective surface, and Φ1b (1/mm) is a curvature of a lens surface of at least one of the lens disposed closest to the display surface in the first optical system and the lens disposed closest to the pupil surface in the second optical system (See e.g. Figs. 16-17; C. 13, L. 26-37; C. 14, L. 24-44; See also Tables for Ex. 7 and 8).
Regarding claim 9, Togino teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Togino further teaches that the optical system satisfies at least one of the following inequalities: Φ2a×Φ2b ≤ 0, |Φ2a| > |Φ2b| where Φ2a is a curvature (1/mm) of the second transmissive reflective surface, and Φ2b (1/mm) is a curvature of a lens surface of at least one of the lens disposed closest to the display surface in the second optical system and the lens disposed closest to the pupil surface in the third optical system (See e.g. Figs. 16-17; C. 13, L. 26-37; C. 14, L. 24-44; See also Tables for Ex. 7 and 8).
Regarding claim 16, Togino teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Togino further teaches that the lens disposed closest to the display surface in the first optical system and the lens disposed closest to the pupil surface in the second optical system are made of a same material (See e.g. Figs. 16-17; C. 13, L. 26-37; C. 14, L. 24-44; See also Tables for Ex. 7 and 8).
Regarding claim 17, Togino teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Togino further teaches that the lens disposed closest to the display surface in the second optical system and the lens disposed closest to the pupil surface in the third optical system are made of a same material (See e.g. Figs. 16-17; C. 13, L. 26-37; C. 14, L. 24-44; See also Tables for Ex. 7 and 8).
Regarding claim 18, Togino teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Togino further teaches that at least one of the first transmissive reflective member (121) and the second transmissive reflective member (122) does not contact air (See e.g. Figs. 16-17; C. 13, L. 26-37; C. 14, L. 24-44; See also Tables for Ex. 7 and 8).
Regarding claim 19, Togino teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Togino further teaches that an optical element disposed closest to the pupil surface in the first optical system is made of an acrylic resin (See e.g. Figs. 16-17; C. 9, L. 55 – C. 10, L. 18; C. 13, L. 26-37; C. 14, L. 24-44; See also Tables for Ex. 7 and 8).
Regarding claim 20, Togino teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Togino further teaches a display apparatus comprising: a display element (I, LCD); and the optical system according to claim 1 through which a light beam from a display surface of the display element is guided to a pupil surface (See e.g. Figs. 16-17 and 21; C. 13, L. 26-37; C. 14, L. 24-44; C. 18, L. 4-28).
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(s) 1-2, 4-6, 8-11, 13-14, and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (U.S. PG-Pub No. 2024/0004202) in view of Amirsolaimani.
Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches an optical system through which a light beam from a display surface is guided to a pupil surface, the optical system comprising, in order from a pupil surface side to a display surface side:
a first optical system (L1) having at least one lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074);
a first transmissive reflective member (102, S3) having a first transmissive reflective surface that is a curved surface (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074);
a second optical system (L2, L3) having at least one lens (L2, L3) (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074);
a second transmissive reflective member (104, S5) having a second transmissive reflective surface that is a curved surface (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); and
a third optical system (L4) having at least one lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074).
Kim fails to explicitly disclose that a lens disposed closest to the display surface in the first optical system and a lens disposed closest to the pupil surface in the second optical system are cemented with each other via the first transmissive reflective member, and wherein a lens disposed closest to the display surface in the second optical system and a lens disposed closest to the pupil surface in the third optical system are cemented with each other via the second transmissive reflective member.
However, Amirsolaimani teaches a dual-reflector optical component comprising a first optical system (242) having at least one lens (See e.g. Fig. 2; Paragraphs 0027-0031); a first transmissive reflective member (112) having a first transmissive reflective surface that is a curved surface (See e.g. Fig. 2; Paragraphs 0027-0031); a second optical system (102) having at least one lens (231, 232) (See e.g. Fig. 2; Paragraphs 0027-0031); a second transmissive reflective member (111) having a second transmissive reflective surface that is a curved surface (See e.g. Fig. 2; Paragraphs 0027-0031); and a third optical system (241) having at least one lens (See e.g. Fig. 2; Paragraphs 0027-0031), wherein a lens (242) disposed closest to the display surface in the first optical system and a lens (232) disposed closest to the pupil surface in the second optical system are cemented with each other via the first transmissive reflective member (See e.g. Fig. 2; Paragraphs 0027-0031 and 0037), and wherein a lens (231) disposed closest to the display surface in the second optical system and a lens (241) disposed closest to the pupil surface in the third optical system are cemented with each other via the second transmissive reflective member (See e.g. Fig. 2; Paragraphs 0027-0031 and 0037).
Amirsolaimani teaches these cemented lenses “to avoid doubling of the image in angular domain due to misalignment” (Paragraph 0037) in order “a very compact overall configuration” in order to provide “a very compact overall configuration” (Paragraph 0016).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical system of Kim with the cemented lenses of Amirsolaimani “to avoid doubling of the image in angular domain due to misalignment” in order “a very compact overall configuration” in order to provide “a very compact overall configuration,” as in Amirsolaimani (Paragraphs 0016 and 0037), and since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed into two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art, In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965).
Regarding claim 2, Kim in view of Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Kim further teaches that the first optical system includes a first lens (L1), wherein the second optical system includes, in order from the pupil surface side to the display surface side, a second lens (L2) and a third lens (L3), wherein the third optical system includes a fourth lens (L4) (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074).
Kim fails to explicitly disclose that the first lens and the second lens are cemented with each other via the first transmissive reflective member, and wherein the third lens and the fourth lens are cemented with each other via the second transmissive reflective member.
However, Amirsolaimani further teaches that the first optical system includes a first lens (242), wherein the second optical system includes, in order from the pupil surface side to the display surface side, a second lens (232) and a third lens (231), wherein the third optical system includes a fourth lens (241), wherein the first lens and the second lens are cemented with each other via the first transmissive reflective member, and wherein the third lens and the fourth lens are cemented with each other via the second transmissive reflective member (See e.g. Fig. 2; Paragraphs 0027-0031 and 0037).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical system of Kim with the cemented lenses of Amirsolaimani “to avoid doubling of the image in angular domain due to misalignment” in order “a very compact overall configuration” in order to provide “a very compact overall configuration,” as in Amirsolaimani (Paragraphs 0016 and 0037), and since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed into two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art, In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965).
Regarding claim 4, Kim in view of Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Kim further teaches that the first transmissive reflective surface (102, S3) and the second transmissive reflective surface (104, S5) each have a shape that is concave on the pupil surface side (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074).
Regarding claim 5, Kim in view of Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 2, as above.
Kim further teaches that the second lens (L2) and the third lens (L3) are spaced apart from each other (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074).
Regarding claim 6, Kim in view of Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 2, as above.
Kim further teaches that a distance between the second lens and the third lens is variable during diopter adjustment (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0052, 0056-0064, and 0068-0074).
Regarding claim 8, Kim in view of Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Kim further teaches that the optical system satisfies at least one of the following inequalities: Φ1a×Φ1b ≤ 0; |Φ1a| > |Φ1b| where Φ1a is a curvature (1/mm) of the first transmissive reflective surface, and Φ1b (1/mm) is a curvature of a lens surface of at least one of the lens disposed closest to the display surface in the first optical system and the lens disposed closest to the pupil surface in the second optical system (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074; See also Tables 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 9, Kim in view of Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Kim further teaches that the optical system satisfies at least one of the following inequalities: Φ2a×Φ2b ≤ 0, |Φ2a| > |Φ2b| where Φ2a is a curvature (1/mm) of the second transmissive reflective surface, and Φ2b (1/mm) is a curvature of a lens surface of at least one of the lens disposed closest to the display surface in the second optical system and the lens disposed closest to the pupil surface in the third optical system (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074; See also Tables 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 10, Kim in view of Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 2, as above.
Kim further teaches that the optical system satisfies the following inequality: 7 ≤ |ν1b - ν2a| where ν1b is an Abbe number of the second lens based on d-line, and ν2a is an Abbe number of the third lens based on the d-line (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074; See also Tables 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 11, Kim in view of Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 2, as above.
Kim further teaches that the optical system satisfies at least one of the following inequalities: 20 ≤ |ν1a - ν1b|, 20 ≤ |ν2a - ν2b| where ν1a is an Abbe number of the first lens based on d-line, ν1b is an Abbe number of the second lens based on the d-line, ν2a is an Abbe number of the third lens based on the d-line, and ν2b is an Abbe number of the fourth lens based on the d-line (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074; See also Tables 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 13, Kim in view of Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 2, as above.
Kim further teaches that the optical system satisfies the following inequality: |n1a - n1b| ≤ 0.20 where n1a is a refractive index of the first lens, and n1b is a refractive index of the second lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074; See also Tables 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 14, Kim in view of Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 2, as above.
Kim further teaches that the optical system satisfies the following inequality: |n2a - n2b| ≤ 0.20 where n2a is a refractive index of the third lens, and n2b is a refractive index of the fourth lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074; See also Tables 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 16, Kim in view of Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Kim further teaches that the lens disposed closest to the display surface in the first optical system and the lens disposed closest to the pupil surface in the second optical system are made of a same material (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074; See also Tables 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 17, Kim in view of Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Kim further teaches that the lens disposed closest to the display surface in the second optical system and the lens disposed closest to the pupil surface in the third optical system are made of a same material (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074; See also Tables 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 18, Kim in view of Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Kim further teaches that at least one of the first transmissive reflective member and the second transmissive reflective member does not contact air (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074; See also Tables 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 19, Kim in view of Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Kim further teaches that an optical element disposed closest to the pupil surface in the first optical system is made of an acrylic resin (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074; See also Tables 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 20, Kim in view of Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Kim further teaches a display apparatus comprising: a display element (D); and the optical system according to claim 1 through which a light beam from a display surface of the display element is guided to a pupil surface (See e.g. Figs. 1-5; Paragraphs 0039-0040, 0056-0064, and 0068-0074).
Claim(s) 6, 10-11, 13-14, and 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amirsolaimani in view of Kim.
Regarding claim 6, Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 2, as above.
Amirsolaimani fails to explicitly disclose that a distance between the second lens and the third lens is variable during diopter adjustment.
However, Kim teaches a wearable electronic device including a lens assembly comprising a first optical system (L1) having a first lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); a first transmissive reflective member (102, S3) having a first transmissive reflective surface that is a curved surface (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); a second optical system (L2, L3) having a second and a third lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); a second transmissive reflective member (104, S5) having a second transmissive reflective surface that is a curved surface (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); and a third optical system (L4) having a fourth lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074), wherein a distance between the second lens and the third lens is variable during diopter adjustment (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0052, 0056-0064, and 0068-0074).
Kim teaches this variable distance to provide “vision correction by adjusting the diopter” (Paragraph 0074).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical system of Amirsolaimani with the variable distance of Kim to provide “vision correction by adjusting the diopter,” as taught by Kim (Paragraph 0074), and since it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art. In re Stevens, 212 F.2d 197, 101 USPQ 284 (CCPA 1954).
Regarding claim 10, Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 2, as above.
Amirsolaimani fails to explicitly disclose that the optical system satisfies the following inequality: 7 ≤ |ν1b - ν2a| where ν1b is an Abbe number of the second lens based on d-line, and ν2a is an Abbe number of the third lens based on the d-line.
However, Kim teaches a wearable electronic device including a lens assembly comprising a first optical system (L1) having a first lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); a first transmissive reflective member (102, S3) having a first transmissive reflective surface that is a curved surface (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); a second optical system (L2, L3) having a second and a third lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); a second transmissive reflective member (104, S5) having a second transmissive reflective surface that is a curved surface (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); and a third optical system (L4) having a fourth lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074), wherein the optical system satisfies the following inequality: 7 ≤ |ν1b - ν2a| where ν1b is an Abbe number of the second lens based on d-line, and ν2a is an Abbe number of the third lens based on the d-line (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074; See also Tables 1 and 4).
Kim teaches these materials for the optical system such that “the lens assembly 100 is mounted may be advantageously made light and small” (Paragraph 0064) and “to effectively correct the axial chromatic aberration and the marginal portion chromatic aberration of magnification” (Paragraph 0074).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical system of Amirsolaimani with the materials of the lenses having the Abbe numbers of Kim such that “the lens assembly 100 is mounted may be advantageously made light and small” and “to effectively correct the axial chromatic aberration and the marginal portion chromatic aberration of magnification,” as taught by Kim (Paragraphs 0064 and 0074), and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of design choice. In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (See MPEP 2144.07).
Regarding claim 11, Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 2, as above.
Amirsolaimani fails to explicitly disclose that the optical system satisfies at least one of the following inequalities: 20 ≤ |ν1a - ν1b|, 20 ≤ |ν2a - ν2b| where ν1a is an Abbe number of the first lens based on d-line, ν1b is an Abbe number of the second lens based on the d-line, ν2a is an Abbe number of the third lens based on the d-line, and ν2b is an Abbe number of the fourth lens based on the d-line.
However, Kim teaches a wearable electronic device including a lens assembly comprising a first optical system (L1) having a first lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); a first transmissive reflective member (102, S3) having a first transmissive reflective surface that is a curved surface (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); a second optical system (L2, L3) having a second and a third lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); a second transmissive reflective member (104, S5) having a second transmissive reflective surface that is a curved surface (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); and a third optical system (L4) having a fourth lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074), wherein the optical system satisfies at least one of the following inequalities: 20 ≤ |ν1a - ν1b|, 20 ≤ |ν2a - ν2b| where ν1a is an Abbe number of the first lens based on d-line, ν1b is an Abbe number of the second lens based on the d-line, ν2a is an Abbe number of the third lens based on the d-line, and ν2b is an Abbe number of the fourth lens based on the d-line (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074; See also Tables 1 and 4).
Kim teaches these materials for the optical system such that “the lens assembly 100 is mounted may be advantageously made light and small” (Paragraph 0064) and “to effectively correct the axial chromatic aberration and the marginal portion chromatic aberration of magnification” (Paragraph 0074).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical system of Amirsolaimani with the materials of the lenses having the Abbe numbers of Kim such that “the lens assembly 100 is mounted may be advantageously made light and small” and “to effectively correct the axial chromatic aberration and the marginal portion chromatic aberration of magnification,” as taught by Kim (Paragraphs 0064 and 0074), and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of design choice. In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (See MPEP 2144.07).
Regarding claim 13, Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 2, as above.
Amirsolaimani fails to explicitly disclose that the optical system satisfies the following inequality: |n1a - n1b| ≤ 0.20 where n1a is a refractive index of the first lens, and n1b is a refractive index of the second lens.
However, Kim teaches a wearable electronic device including a lens assembly comprising a first optical system (L1) having a first lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); a first transmissive reflective member (102, S3) having a first transmissive reflective surface that is a curved surface (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); a second optical system (L2, L3) having a second and a third lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); a second transmissive reflective member (104, S5) having a second transmissive reflective surface that is a curved surface (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); and a third optical system (L4) having a fourth lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074), wherein the optical system satisfies the following inequality: |n1a - n1b| ≤ 0.20 where n1a is a refractive index of the first lens, and n1b is a refractive index of the second lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074; See also Tables 1 and 4).
Kim teaches these materials for the optical system such that “the lens assembly 100 is mounted may be advantageously made light and small” (Paragraph 0064) and “to effectively correct the axial chromatic aberration and the marginal portion chromatic aberration of magnification” (Paragraph 0074).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical system of Amirsolaimani with the materials of the lenses having the refractive indices of Kim such that “the lens assembly 100 is mounted may be advantageously made light and small” and “to effectively correct the axial chromatic aberration and the marginal portion chromatic aberration of magnification,” as taught by Kim (Paragraphs 0064 and 0074), and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of design choice. In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (See MPEP 2144.07).
Regarding claim 14, Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 2, as above.
Amirsolaimani fails to explicitly disclose that the optical system satisfies the following inequality: |n2a - n2b| ≤ 0.20 where n2a is a refractive index of the third lens, and n2b is a refractive index of the fourth lens.
However, Kim teaches a wearable electronic device including a lens assembly comprising a first optical system (L1) having a first lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); a first transmissive reflective member (102, S3) having a first transmissive reflective surface that is a curved surface (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); a second optical system (L2, L3) having a second and a third lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); a second transmissive reflective member (104, S5) having a second transmissive reflective surface that is a curved surface (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); and a third optical system (L4) having a fourth lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074), wherein the optical system satisfies the following inequality: |n2a - n2b| ≤ 0.20 where n2a is a refractive index of the third lens, and n2b is a refractive index of the fourth lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074; See also Tables 1 and 4).
Kim teaches these materials for the optical system such that “the lens assembly 100 is mounted may be advantageously made light and small” (Paragraph 0064) and “to effectively correct the axial chromatic aberration and the marginal portion chromatic aberration of magnification” (Paragraph 0074).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical system of Amirsolaimani with the materials of the lenses having the refractive indices of Kim such that “the lens assembly 100 is mounted may be advantageously made light and small” and “to effectively correct the axial chromatic aberration and the marginal portion chromatic aberration of magnification,” as taught by Kim (Paragraphs 0064 and 0074), and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of design choice. In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (See MPEP 2144.07).
Regarding claim 16, Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Amirsolaimani fails to explicitly disclose that the lens disposed closest to the display surface in the first optical system and the lens disposed closest to the pupil surface in the second optical system are made of a same material.
However, Kim teaches a wearable electronic device including a lens assembly comprising a first optical system (L1) having a first lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); a first transmissive reflective member (102, S3) having a first transmissive reflective surface that is a curved surface (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); a second optical system (L2, L3) having a second and a third lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); a second transmissive reflective member (104, S5) having a second transmissive reflective surface that is a curved surface (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); and a third optical system (L4) having a fourth lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074), wherein the lens disposed closest to the display surface in the first optical system and the lens disposed closest to the pupil surface in the second optical system are made of a same material (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074; See also Tables 1 and 4).
Kim teaches these materials for the optical system such that “the lens assembly 100 is mounted may be advantageously made light and small” (Paragraph 0064) and “to effectively correct the axial chromatic aberration and the marginal portion chromatic aberration of magnification” (Paragraph 0074).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical system of Amirsolaimani with the materials of the lenses of Kim such that “the lens assembly 100 is mounted may be advantageously made light and small” and “to effectively correct the axial chromatic aberration and the marginal portion chromatic aberration of magnification,” as taught by Kim (Paragraphs 0064 and 0074), and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of design choice. In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (See MPEP 2144.07).
Regarding claim 17, Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Amirsolaimani fails to explicitly disclose that the lens disposed closest to the display surface in the second optical system and the lens disposed closest to the pupil surface in the third optical system are made of a same material.
However, Kim teaches a wearable electronic device including a lens assembly comprising a first optical system (L1) having a first lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); a first transmissive reflective member (102, S3) having a first transmissive reflective surface that is a curved surface (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); a second optical system (L2, L3) having a second and a third lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); a second transmissive reflective member (104, S5) having a second transmissive reflective surface that is a curved surface (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074); and a third optical system (L4) having a fourth lens (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074), wherein the lens disposed closest to the display surface in the second optical system and the lens disposed closest to the pupil surface in the third optical system are made of a same material (See e.g. Figs. 3-5; Paragraphs 0056-0064 and 0068-0074; See also Tables 1 and 4).
Kim teaches these materials for the optical system such that “the lens assembly 100 is mounted may be advantageously made light and small” (Paragraph 0064) and “to effectively correct the axial chromatic aberration and the marginal portion chromatic aberration of magnification” (Paragraph 0074).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical system of Amirsolaimani with the materials of the lenses of Kim such that “the lens assembly 100 is mounted may be advantageously made light and small” and “to effectively correct the axial chromatic aberration and the marginal portion chromatic aberration of magnification,” as taught by Kim (Paragraphs 0064 and 0074), and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of design choice. In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (See MPEP 2144.07).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amirsolaimani in view of Etter et al. (U.S. PG-Pub No. 2020/0081234; hereinafter – “Etter”).
Regarding claim 19, Amirsolaimani teaches the optical system according to claim 1, as above.
Amirsolaimani fails to explicitly disclose that an optical element disposed closest to the pupil surface in the first optical system is made of an acrylic resin.
However, Etter teaches an optical system comprising a first optical element within an optical system wherein the optical element disposed closest to the pupil surface in the first optical system is made of an acrylic resin (See e.g. Fig. 1; Paragraphs 0003-0004, 0052-0053, and 0062).
Etter teaches this acrylic resin lens as a suitable material to provide “a compact optical system for virtual reality applications to have high resolution (small spot size), and a wide field of view (FOV)” (Paragraph 0030).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical system of Amirsolaimani with the acrylic resin lens of Etter to provide “a compact optical system for virtual reality applications to have high resolution (small spot size), and a wide field of view (FOV),” as taught by Etter (Paragraph 0030), and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of design choice. In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (See MPEP 2144.07).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Chen et al. (U.S. PG-Pub No. 2024/0176116) teaches an optical lens assembly and head-mounted electronic device.
Chen et al. (U.S. PG-Pub No. 2024/0027731) teaches an optical lens assembly and head-mounted electronic device with a similar lens arrangement.
Takagi et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11,204,500) teaches a virtual image display device with a similar lens configuration.
Yun et al. (U.S. PG-Pub No. 2020/0284963) teaches optical retarder segments in a similar arrangement of an optical system of lenses.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nicholas R Pasko whose telephone number is (571)270-1876. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 AM - 5 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, William Kraig can be reached at 571-272-8660. 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.
Nicholas R. Pasko
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2896
/Nicholas R. Pasko/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896
Prosecution Insights