DETAILED ACTION
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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 .
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 1-9, 14-16, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sears et al. (US 10,839,609).
Regarding claim 1, Sears teaches a system (fig. 8) comprising, a support structure (frame 230); and a lens mounted to the support structure (lens 210 mounted to the frame 230), the lens comprising a conductive layer with a metal mesh (col. 11, lines 34-39, wherein the pixel trace may include an electrically conducting track, and may include, for example copper, silver, gold, alloys thereof, or other metal) formed into a non-periodic grid (col. 13, lines 3-5, wherein the device may include first and second dimmers in the lenses 210. See additionally fig. 5 and col. 11, lines 14-26, wherein an irregular grid-like pixel layout is employed in the dimmers in order to reduce perception of the dimmer pixel edges).
Regarding claim 2, Sears teaches the system (fig. 5) of claim 1, wherein, the non-periodic grid represents a modified version of a periodic grid (col. 11, lines 20-30, a grid-like pixel layout may be used for dimming region control. However, in some embodiments, irregularities in pixel edge shape may reduce perception of pixel edges and may become invisible or substantially unnoticeable to a wearer of a head-mounted device. Note: discloses starting from a regular grid and modifying it to support a modified version of a periodic grid with irregularities); the periodic grid comprises a plurality of regularly spaced cells (col. 11, lines 40-45, irregular pixels may be used to reduce the “screen door effect”, the enhanced visibility of regular visual elements such as graphic shapes, grids, and the like, for the user. note: the reference discuss the visible “grids” and the screen door effect, it means the pixels are arranged evenly and in repeating rows, which is the same as having regularly spaced cells.), each cell delineated by a plurality of edges and vertices that form a symmetric shape (col. 11, lines 40-45, note: discusses the grid-based pixels with sharply defined rectangular regions (such as in fig. 4A) shows that each cell is formed by straight edges meeting at corners, creating symmetric shapes like squares or rectangles); and the periodic grid is modified to create the non-periodic grid by altering, for at least one of the cells, a length of one or more edges of the cell such that a resulting shape formed by the edges and vertices of the cell is non-symmetric (this is shown in fig. 5 and col. 11, lines 40-45, note: discusses making the pixel boundaries non-linear and irregular, which changes the lengths and shapes of the edges and results in cells that are no longer symmetric).
Regarding claim 3, Sears teaches the system (fig. 5) of claim 2, wherein altering the length of one or more edges of the cell (fig. 5 shows cell boundaries formed by non-linear, displaced mesh lines, including irregular edges labeled 52 and 54, indicating that edges of each cell are modified from a regular periodic grid) comprises altering the length of each of the edges of the cell (fig. 5 shows each cell is bounded on all sides by distorted, non-uniform edges, such that top, bottom, left, and right boundaries each cell are altered relative to a periodic grid).
Regarding claim 4, Sears teaches the system (annotated fig. 5) of claim 2, wherein altering, for at least one of the cells, the length of one or more the edges of the cell comprises, locating a first subset of the vertices, within the plurality of cells, to a first area within one sigma circle of a normal distributed circle area corresponding to a single cell within the plurality of cells (shown below in annotated fig. 5, 1 sigma circle); and locating a second subset of the vertices, within the plurality of cells, to a second area within two sigma circles of the normal distributed circle area (shown below in annotated fig. 5, 2 sigma circle).
PNG
media_image1.png
589
831
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Sears teaches the system (fig. 5) of claim 4, wherein altering, for at least one of the cells, the length of one or more of the edges further comprises locating a third subset of the vertices, within the plurality of cells, to a third area within three sigma circles of the normal distributed circle area (shown above in annotated fig. 5, 3 sigma circle).
Regarding claim 6, Sears teaches the system (fig. 5) of claim 2, wherein a measure of overall pitch for the periodic grid (fig. 5, shows that although vertices are displaced to form a non-periodic pattern, the spacing between opposing edges remains generally uniforms across the grid; the periodic structure is visually preserved on average) is equivalent to a measure of overall pitch for the non-periodic grid (fig. 5, despite local distortions of cell boundaries, the global spacing of mesh lines remains substantially constant throughout the illustrated region, indicating preserved overall pitch).
Regarding claim 7, Sears teaches the system (fig. 5) of claim 2, wherein the periodic grid comprises a repeating shape (fig. 5, illustrates an initial periodic pattern of uniformly sized, repeating polygonal cells arranged in a regular grid then modification, showing repetition of the same cell geometry across the pattern).
Regarding claim 8, Sears teaches the system (fig. 5) of claim 7, wherein the repeating shape comprises at least one of a square or a hexagon (fig. 5, illustrates modification of a periodic pattern of repeating square cells into a non-periodic pattern; the underlying repeating shape is a square).
Regarding claim 9, Sears teaches the system (fig. 5) of claim 1, wherein the conductive layer comprises an active dimming layer configured to actively dim incoming light (col. 11, lines 10-30, fig. 5 shows an embodiment using irregularly shaped pixels, which may be used to reduce perception of pixel edges. Fig. 5 shows a portion 50 of a dimmer element having irregularly shaped pixels such as 52 and 54. The boundaries between pixels (e.g., between pixels 52 and 54) may be non-linear, such as the irregularly shaped boundary illustrated. Irregular pixel shapes may be used to make features less noticeable. A grid-like pixel layout may be used for dimming region control. However, in some embodiments, irregularities in pixel edge shape may reduce perception of pixel edges and may become invisible or substantially unnoticeable to a wearer of a head-mounted device; col. 11, lines 34-39, wherein the pixel trace may include an electrically conducting track, and may include, for example, copper, silver, gold, alloys thereof, or other metal).
Regarding claim 14, Sears teaches an electronic display (fig. 8) comprising, a transparent substrate (col. 9, lines 14-15, wherein the dimmer may include a pixelated liquid crystal shutter and col. 21, lines 44-47, wherein the liquid crystal shutter may have transparent substrates); and a conductive layer, coupled to the transparent substrate comprising a metal mesh (col. 11, lines 34-39, wherein the pixel trace may include an electrically conducting track, and may include, for example, copper, silver, gold, alloys thereof, or other metal) in the form of a non-periodic grid (col. 13, lines 3-5, wherein the device may include first and second dimmers in the lenses 210. fig. 5 and col. 11, lines 14-26, wherein an irregular grid-like pixel layout is employed in the dimmers in order to reduce perception of the dimmer pixel edges).
Regarding claim 15, Sears teaches the electronic display (fig. 5) of claim 14, wherein, the non-periodic grid represents a modified version of a periodic grid (col. 11, lines 20-30, a grid-like pixel layout may be used for dimming region control. However, in some embodiments, irregularities in pixel edge shape may reduce perception of pixel edges and may become invisible or substantially unnoticeable to a wearer of a head-mounted device. Note: reference discloses starting from a regular grid and modifying it to support a modified version of a periodic grid with irregularities); the periodic grid comprises a plurality of regularly spaced cells (col. 11, lines 40-45, irregular pixels may be used to reduce the “screen door effect”, the enhanced visibility of regular visual elements such as graphic shapes, grids, and the like, for the user. note: the reference discuss the visible “grids” and the screen door effect, it means the pixels are arranged evenly and in repeating rows, which is the same as having regularly spaced cells.), each cell comprising a plurality of edges and vertices that form a symmetric shape (col. 11, lines 40-45, note: discusses the grid-based pixels with sharply defined rectangular regions (such as in fig. 4A) shows that each cell is formed by straight edges meeting at corners, creating symmetric shapes like squares or rectangles); and the periodic grid is modified to create the non-periodic grid by altering, for at least one of the cells, a length of one or more edges of the cell such that a resulting shape formed by the edges of the cell is non-symmetric (this is shown in fig. 5 and col. 11, lines 40-45, note: the reference discusses making the pixel boundaries non-linear and irregular, which changes the lengths and shapes of the edges and results in cells that are no longer symmetric).
Regarding claim 16, Sears teaches the electronic display (fig. 5) of claim 14, wherein the conductive layer comprises an active dimming layer configured to actively dim incoming light (col. 11, lines 10-30, fig. 5 shows an embodiment using irregularly shaped pixels, which may be used to reduce perception of pixel edges. Fig. 5 shows a portion 50 of a dimmer element having irregularly shaped pixels such as 52 and 54. The boundaries between pixels (e.g., between pixels 52 and 54) may be non-linear, such as the irregularly shaped boundary illustrated. Irregular pixel shapes may be used to make features less noticeable. A grid-like pixel layout may be used for dimming region control. However, in some embodiments, irregularities in pixel edge shape may reduce perception of pixel edges and may become invisible or substantially unnoticeable to a wearer of a head-mounted device.).
Regarding claim 19, Sears teaches a method of manufacturing comprising, dimensioning one or more cells of a metal mesh (col. 11, lines 34-39, wherein the pixel trace may include an electrically conducting track, and may include, for example copper, silver, gold, alloys thereof, or other metal) to form a non-periodic grid (col. 13, lines 3-5, wherein the device may include first and second dimmers in the lenses 210. See additionally fig. 5 and col. 11, lines 14-26, wherein an irregular grid-like pixel layout is employed in the dimmers in order to reduce perception of the dimmer pixel edges); and coupling the metal mesh (col. 11, lines 34-39, wherein the pixel trace may include an electrically conducting track, and may include, for example, copper, silver, gold, alloys thereof, or other metal) to a transparent substrate (col. 9, lines 14-15, wherein the dimmer may include a pixelated liquid crystal shutter and col. 21, lines 44-47, wherein the liquid crystal shutter may have transparent substrates).
Regarding claim 20, Sears teaches the method of claim 19, wherein, the non-periodic grid represents a modified version of a periodic grid (col. 11, lines 20-30, a grid-like pixel layout may be used for dimming region control. However, in some embodiments, irregularities in pixel edge shape may reduce perception of pixel edges and may become invisible or substantially unnoticeable to a wearer of a head-mounted device. Note: reference discloses starting from a regular grid and modifying it to support a modified version of a periodic grid with irregularities); the periodic grid comprises a plurality of regularly spaced cells (col. 11, lines 40-45, irregular pixels may be used to reduce the “screen door effect”, the enhanced visibility of regular visual elements such as graphic shapes, grids, and the like, for the user. note: the reference discuss the visible “grids” and the screen door effect, it means the pixels are arranged evenly and in repeating rows, which is the same as having regularly spaced cells.), each cell comprising a plurality of edges and vertices that form a symmetric shape (col. 11, lines 40-45, note: the discusses the grid-based pixels with sharply defined rectangular regions (such as in fig. 4A) shows that each cell is formed by straight edges meeting at corners, creating symmetric shapes like squares or rectangles); and dimensioning the one or more cells of the metal mesh comprises altering one or more cells of the periodic grid by altering, for at least one of the cells of the periodic grid, a length of one or more edges of the cell such that a resulting shape formed by the edges of the cell is non- symmetric (this is shown in fig. 5 and col. 11, lines 40-45, note: the reference discusses making the pixel boundaries non-linear and irregular, which changes the lengths and shapes of the edges and results in cells that are no longer symmetric).
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.
Claims 12, 13, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sears et al. (US 10,839,609) as applied to claims 1 and 15 above, and further in view of Zhang et al. (US 20200067343).
Regarding claim 12, Sears teaches the invention as set forth above but does not specifically teach the system further comprises an antenna integrated with the lens. However, in a similar field of endeavor, Zhang teaches the system, wherein the system further comprises an antenna integrated with the lens (¶26, AR device 100 may include and/or represent an RF antenna incorporated in and/or applied to lens stack 104). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the system of Sears with the system further comprises an antenna integrated with the lens of Zhang, for the purpose of placing the RF antenna along a perimeter to have a see-through area of the lens (¶26).
Regarding claim 13, Sears teaches the invention as set forth above but does not specifically teach the antenna is integrated with the lens via at least one of lamination, casting, or three-dimensional printing. However, in a similar field of endeavor, Zhang teaches the system, wherein the antenna is integrated with the lens (¶26, AR device 100 may include and/or represent an RF antenna incorporated in and/or applied to lens stack 104). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the system of Sears with the antenna is integrated with the lens via at least one of lamination, casting, or three-dimensional printing of Zhang, for the purpose of placing the RF antenna along a perimeter to have a see-through area of the lens (¶26). Also, the examiner notes that claim limitation of “integrated … via at least one of lamination, casting, or three-dimensional printing” can be considered as product by process claim. “[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” See MPEP 2113. (Sears in view of Zhang teaches the claimed product.)
Regarding claim 18, Sears teaches the invention as set forth above but does not specifically teach an antenna integrated with the transparent substrate. However, in a similar field of endeavor, Zhang teaches the electronic display, further comprising an antenna (RF antenna 108) integrated with the transparent substrate (lens; ¶26, RF antenna 108 may be positioned and/or placed along perimeter of a see-through area of the lens via a transparent thin film.). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the system of Sears with an antenna integrated with the transparent substrate of Zhang, for the purpose of placing the RF antenna along a perimeter to have a see-through area of the lens (¶26).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10, 11 and 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art does not disclose the claimed combination of limitations to warrant a rejection under 35 USC 102 or 103.
Regarding claim 10, the prior art does not disclose the claimed system specifically including as the distinguishing features in combination with the other limitations the claimed “wherein the conductive layer comprises a plurality of sublayers, the plurality of sublayers comprising a metal mesh sublayer comprising the metal mesh, an electrochromic sublayer, and a protective conductive sublayer positioned between the metal mesh sublayer and the electrochromic sublayer.”
Specifically, with respect to claim 11, is objected to for the same reason as claim 10.
Regarding claim 17, the prior art does not disclose the claimed system specifically including as the distinguishing features in combination with the other limitations the claimed “wherein the conductive layer comprises a plurality of sublayers, the plurality of sublayers comprising a metal mesh sublayer comprising the metal mesh, an electrochromic sublayer, and a protective conductive sublayer positioned between the metal mesh sublayer and the electrochromic sublayer.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HENRY DUONG whose telephone number is (571)270-0534. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 9:00 AM to 5:00 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, Pinping Sun can be reached at (571)270-1284. 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.
/HENRY DUONG/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872 01/23/26