DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is responsive to Applicant’s response submitted 22 December 2025.
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species I, directed to claims 1-12, in the reply filed on 22 December 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that a search and examination of all the claims would place no undue burden on the Examiner. This is not found persuasive because the product as claimed can be made by a different process that would require further search and consideration.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 (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.
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) 1-4, 7-10 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0071539 to Gao.
In regards to claims 1 and 7, Gao recites a device (Figure 1), comprising: a waveguide configured to guide an image light (105) to propagate from a light inputting surface to a light outputting surface, wherein the waveguide includes a substrate (100) having a back surface (125) facing an eye-box region (150) of the device and a front surface (115) opposite to the back surface, a back reflective surface disposed at the back surface or at least partially inside or embedded the substrate, and a medium layer (195) having a refractive index (medium air gap layer has a lower refractive index than the substrate [0032]) that is lower than the substrate; and an optical lens (160) over the back surface of the substrate. Although Gao does not expressly recite a plurality of out-coupling structures, the back surface of the substrate is a surface that reflects the light back into the waveguide in order to provide the desired total internal reflection. [0025] Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the back surface of the substrate to function equivalently to the plurality of out-coupling structures. Furthermore, although Gao does not expressly recite a medium layer embedded inside the substrate between the out-coupling structures and the front surface, the position of the medium layer on one side of the out-coupling structures and the front surface allows for the same function, which allows the light from the waveguide to provide total internal reflection and allow light to pass through in the direction away from the eyebox. Since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have provided a medium layer embedded inside the substrate between the out-coupling structures and the front surface for the purpose of allowing the image light to provide total internal reflection and the light from the real world (198) to pass though. Lastly, although Gao does not expressly recite the optical lens printed over the back surface, the limitation is a method limitation in a device claim. Applicant is claiming a product, not a method of manufacturing the product. The patent being sought in the preceding claims is an end product that is met by the previously applied modified reference.
In regards to claim 2, Gao recites the medium layer has a first side facing the eye-box region and a second side opposite to the first side, the image light is totally internally reflected at the first side of the medium layer, and is not totally internally reflected at the back surface of the substrate. (Figure 1)
In regard to claim 2, Gao recites the optical lens (160) is a prescription lens.
In regards to claim 4, Gao recites the substrate [0032] and the optical lens ([0048] or [0057; liquid lens) includes different materials having substantially close refractive indices.
In regards to claim 8, Gao recites the waveguide and the optical lens are integrally formed as a single piece [0052], and the substate and the optical lens are different materials having substantially close refractive indices. Although Gao does not expressly recite three-dimensional (“3D”) printing, the limitation is a method limitation in a device claim. Applicant is claiming a product, not a method of manufacturing the product. The patent being sought in the preceding claims is an end product that is met by the previously applied modified reference.
In regards to claim 9, although Gao does not expressly recite a folding structure embedded inside the substrate, between the medium layer and the back surface, the inclusion of a folding structure embedded inside the substrate would be advantageous in order to prevent the loss of light and reflect any light loss back into the waveguide structure. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have provided a folding structure embedded inside the substrate, between the medium layer and the back surface to optimize efficiency.
In regards to claim 10, Gao recites the medium layer (195) has a first side facing the eye-box region (150) and a second side opposite to the first side, the medium layer is configured to totally internally reflect the image light entering the waveguide through the light inputting surface at the first side toward the folding structure [0025-0026], the medium layer is configured to totally internally reflect the image light received from the folding structure again at the first side toward the out-coupling structures, and the out-coupling structures are configured to couple the image light out of the waveguide as a plurality of output image lights toward the optical lens. Although Gao does not expressly recite the folding structure is configured to reflect the image light received from the first side of the medium layer back to the first side of the medium layer, it would be advantageous for the folding structure to be configured as claimed in order to prevent the loss of light and reflect any light loss back into the waveguide structure. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have provided the folding structure is configured to reflect the image light received from the first side of the medium layer back to the first side of the medium layer.
In regards to claim 12, Gao recites the medium layer is a cavity filled with air.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 6 and 11 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.
In regards to claims 5 and 6, the prior art of record fails to disclose or reasonably suggest the substrate includes a plurality of supporting structures that are protrusions from the back surface of the substrate, and the out-coupling structures are formed at predetermined surfaces of the supporting structures in addition to the accompanying features of the independent claim and any intervening claims.
In regards to claim 11, the prior art of record fails to disclose or reasonably suggest the out-coupling structures are flat reflectors, and the folding structure is a curved reflector in addition to the accompanying features of the independent claim and any intervening claims.
References Cited
The references cited made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Inventorship
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TINA M WONG whose telephone number is (571)272-2352. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:30.
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, Uyen-Chau Le can be reached at (571) 272-2397. 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.
/TINA WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874