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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) filed on 8/31/2023 has been acknowledged and considered by the examiner. Initialed copies of supplied IDS(s) forms are included in this correspondence.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 6, claim states the limitation “other micro-structures” in the second line of the claim. This limitation is indefinite because the scope of “other micro-structures” appears subjective as to what a person of ordinary skill in the art constitutes as a micro-structure – a person of ordinary skill might determine a wider definition of a micro-structure than another, which would render the claim indefinite. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be apprised as to the scope of the invention (MPEP §2173.05(b)). For purposes of compact prosecution, so long as there are shown grating vectors for a grating, it will encompass some “other micro-structure”.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the two-dimensional array of grating elements" in both lines of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This rejection could be overcome if either “the two-dimensional array of grating elements” is amended to say “a two-dimensional array of grating elements” or claim 8 is amended to depend on claim 5.
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.
Claims 1-12, 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Valera US 20220179212 (hereinafter “Valera”) in view of Borisov et. al US 20230081473 (hereinafter “Borisov”).
Regarding claim 1, Valera teaches a waveguide display (Valera fig. 1-9B) comprising:
a substrate (Valera fig. 1 – 4, 14, 24) transparent to visible light (Valera para. 0002);
a first projector (Valera fig. 1 - 2) configured to generate display light for a first field of view (FOV) of the waveguide display (Valera fig. 2A, see also para. 0049);
a first input grating (Valera fig. 1 - 6) configured to couple the display light for the first FOV into the substrate (Valera para. 0048);
a second projector (Valera fig. 1 - 12) configured to generate display light for a second FOV of the waveguide display that is different from the first FOV (Valera fig. 2B, see also para. 0051);
a second input grating (Valera fig. 1 - 16) configured to couple the display light for the FOV into the substrate (Valera para. 0050); and
a two-dimensional grating (Valera fig. 1 – 8, 18, 28 each having diffractive elements).
Valera does not specify that the diffractive structures of the first, second, and two-dimensional gratings have grating vectors.
In the same field of endeavor, Borisov teaches a first input grating with a first grating vector, a second input grating with a second grating vector, a two-dimensional grating (Borisov fig. 2D – out-coupling zone) having the first grating vector (Borisov fig. 2D – DOE3, see also para. 0110), the second grating vector (Borisov fig. 2D – DOE4, see also para. 0110), and a third grating vector (Borisov fig. 2D – DOE5, see also para. 0110 – DOE5, where the waveguide out-coupling zone has three diffractive optical elements (DOE3, DOE4, DOE5) each uniquely described by a diffraction grating vector), wherein:
the first grating vector (DOE3), the second grating vector (DOE4), and the third grating vector (DOE5) form a closed triangle (Borisov fig. 7B);
the two-dimensional grating (out-coupling zone) is configured to couple the display light for the first FOV out of the substrate at a first two-dimensional array of locations of the substrate (Borisov fig. 7A and para. 0143 and 0154-0161 – teaches that different sets of diffractive elements in the out-coupling zone and in-coupling zone are responsible for displaying specific parts of the field of view, SET 3 of the out-coupling zone as shown in fig. 7B displays an edge part of the field of view); and
the two-dimensional grating (out-coupling zone) is further configured to couple the display light for the second FOV out of the substrate at a second two-dimensional array of locations of the substrate (Borisov fig. 7A and para. 0143 and 0154-0161 – teaches that different sets of diffractive elements in the out-coupling zone and in-coupling zone are responsible for displaying specific parts of the field of view, SET 4 of the out-coupling zone as shown in fig. 7B displays an edge part of the field of view) for the purpose of increasing the width of the field of view (Borisov para. 0164). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a two-dimensional grating with three vectors configured to couple the display light of the first and second FOV out of the substrate in order to increase the width of the field of view (Borisov para. 0164).
Regarding claim 2, Valera and Borisov teach the waveguide display of claim 1 (Valera fig. 1-9B), and Valera further teaches wherein the first FOV and the second FOV in combination include a full field of view of the waveguide display (Valera fig. 2A-2C – the range of angles provided form a complete field of view, see also para. 0049-0053).
Regarding claim 3, Valera and Borisov teach the waveguide display of claim 1 (Valera fig. 1-9B), and Valera further teaches wherein:
the first FOV includes a left FOV of the waveguide display (Valera fig. 2A – angles include a left FOV, see also para. 0049); and
the second FOV includes a right FOV of the waveguide display (Valera fig. 2B – angles include a right FOV, see also para. 0051).
Regarding claim 4, Valera and Borisov teach the waveguide display of claim 1 (Valera fig. 1-9B), and Borisov further teaches wherein:
the first FOV includes a top FOV of the waveguide display (Borisov fig. 7A-B – SET 4 includes a top edge part of the FOV); and
the second FOV includes a bottom FOV of the waveguide display (Borisov fig. 7A-B – SET 3 includes a bottom edge part of the FOV).
Regarding claim 5, Valera and Borisov teach the waveguide display of claim 1 (Valera fig. 1-9B), and Borisov further teaches wherein the two-dimensional grating (out-coupling zone) includes a two-dimensional array of grating elements aligned along a plurality of directions (Borisov fig. 2D – DOE3, DOE4, and DOE5 are all aligned along different directions).
Regarding claim 6, Valera and Borisov teach the waveguide display of claim 5 (Valera fig. 1-9B), and Borisov further teaches wherein the grating elements include micro-pillars, micro-bars, micro-rods, micro-cavities, or other micro-structures (Borisov fig. 2D – the out-coupling zone contains three vectors aligned in different directions, which would constitute gratings having micro-structures).
Regarding claim 7, Valera, Borisov, and Malhotra teach the waveguide display of claim 5 (Valera fig. 1-9B), and Borisov further teaches wherein the two-dimensional array of grating elements forms a lattice structure (Borisov fig. 2D – the three grating vectors form a lattice structure).
Regarding claim 8, Valera and Borisov teach the waveguide display of claim 1 (Valera fig. 1-9B), and Borisov further teaches wherein the two-dimensional array of grating elements (out-coupling zone) includes a plurality of layers of one-dimensional gratings (Borisov fig. 2D – the out-coupling zone includes three gratings with three vectors layered as one zone, see also para. 0110).
Regarding claim 9, Valera and Borisov teach the waveguide display of claim 1 (Valera fig. 1-9B), and Valera further teaches wherein the first FOV and the second FOV at least partially overlap (Valera para. 0051 – the second range of angles 17 at least partially overlaps the first range of angles 7, see also fig. 2A-B).
Regarding claim 10, Valera and Borisov teach the waveguide display of claim 1 (Valera fig. 1-9B), and they further teach further comprising:
a third projector (Valera fig. 1 – 22) configured to generate display light for a third FOV of the waveguide display (Valera fig. 2C, see also para. 0052); and
a third input grating (Valera fig. 1 - 26) characterized by the third grating vector (Borisov fig. 2D – DOE5, see also para. 0110) and configured to couple the display light for the third FOV into the substrate (Valera para. 0052),
wherein the two-dimensional grating is configured to couple the display light for the third FOV out of the substrate at a third two-dimensional array of locations of the substrate (Borisov fig. 7A and para. 0143 and 0154-0161 – teaches that different sets of diffractive elements in the out-coupling zone and in-coupling zone are responsible for displaying specific parts of the field of view).
Regarding claim 11, Valera and Borisov teach the waveguide display of claim 1 (Valera fig. 1-9B), and Valera further teaches wherein the first projector (2) is configured to generate red, green, and blue display light for the first FOV of the waveguide display (Valera para. 0009 and 0055 – 2 directs polychromatic light toward 4).
Regarding claim 12, Valera and Borisov teach the waveguide display of claim 11 (Valera fig. 1-9B), and Valera further teaches wherein the first input grating (6) includes three input gratings (6, 16, 26) for couple the red, green, and blue display light, respectively (Valera para. 0009 and 0054-0055 – 6 couples red light, 16 couples blue light, and 26 couples green light).
Valera does not specify one grating that has three input gratings.
In the same field of endeavor, Borisov teaches an input grating having three vectors which each direct red, green, and blue light (Borisov para. 0170-0178 – discusses DOE1, DOE2, DOE3 coupling red, green, and blue light through one waveguide in a stack) for the purpose of transmitting different segments of a field of view (Borisov para. 0036). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a first input grating including three input gratings for coupling red, green, and blue display light in order to transmit different segments of a field of view (Borisov para. 0036).
Regarding claim 14, Valera and Borisov teach the waveguide display of claim 1 (Valera fig. 1-9B), and both further teach wherein the first input grating (6), the second input grating (16), and the two-dimensional grating (8, 18, 108) are formed on one side or two opposing sides of the substrate (Valera fig. 1 – each grating is on a side of substrate 4, 14, 24).
Regarding claim 15, Valera teaches a waveguide display (Valera fig. 1-9b) comprising:
a substrate (Valera fig. 1 – 4, 14, 24) transparent to visible light (Valera para. 0002);
a first input grating (Valera fig. 1 - 6) configured to couple the display light for a first field of view (FOV) of the waveguide display (Valera fig. 2A, see also para. 0049) into the substrate (Valera para. 0048);
a second input grating (Valera fig. 1 - 16) configured to couple the display light for a second FOV of the waveguide display that is different from the first FOV (Valera fig. 2B, see also para. 0051) into the substrate (Valera para. 0050); and
a two-dimensional grating (Valera fig. 1 – 8, 18, 28 each having diffractive elements),
wherein the first input grating (6), the second input grating (16), and the two-dimensional grating (8, 18, 28) are on or in the substrate (Valera fig. 1 – since the substrate is the stack of 4, 14, and 24, gratings 6 and 16 and two-dimensional grating 8, 18, 28 are each either in or on the substrate).
Valera does not specify that the diffractive structures of the first, second, and two-dimensional gratings have grating vectors.
In the same field of endeavor, Borisov teaches a first input grating with a first grating vector, a second input grating with a second grating vector, a two-dimensional grating (Borisov fig. 2D – out-coupling zone) having the first grating vector (Borisov fig. 2D – DOE3, see also para. 0110), the second grating vector (Borisov fig. 2D – DOE4, see also para. 0110), and a third grating vector (Borisov fig. 2D – DOE5, see also para. 0110 – DOE5, where the waveguide out-coupling zone has three diffractive optical elements (DOE3, DOE4, DOE5) each uniquely described by a diffraction grating vector), wherein:
the first grating vector (DOE3), the second grating vector (DOE4), and the third grating vector (DOE5) form a closed triangle (Borisov fig. 7B);
the two-dimensional grating (out-coupling zone) is configured to couple the display light for the first FOV out of the substrate at a first two-dimensional array of locations of the substrate (Borisov fig. 7A and para. 0143 and 0154-0161 – teaches that different sets of diffractive elements in the out-coupling zone and in-coupling zone are responsible for displaying specific parts of the field of view, SET 3 of the out-coupling zone as shown in fig. 7B displays an edge part of the field of view); and
the two-dimensional grating (out-coupling zone) is further configured to couple the display light for the second FOV out of the substrate at a second two-dimensional array of locations of the substrate (Borisov fig. 7A and para. 0143 and 0154-0161 – teaches that different sets of diffractive elements in the out-coupling zone and in-coupling zone are responsible for displaying specific parts of the field of view, SET 4 of the out-coupling zone as shown in fig. 7B displays an edge part of the field of view) for the purpose of increasing the width of the field of view (Borisov para. 0164). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a two-dimensional grating with three vectors configured to couple the display light of the first and second FOV out of the substrate in order to increase the width of the field of view (Borisov para. 0164).
Regarding claim 16, Valera and Borisov teach the waveguide display of claim 15 (Valera fig. 1-9B), and Valera further teaches wherein the first FOV and the second FOV in combination include a full field of view of the waveguide display (Valera fig. 2A-2C – the range of angles provided form a complete field of view, see also para. 0049-0053).
Regarding claim 17, Valera and Borisov teach the waveguide display of claim 15 (Valera fig. 1-9B), and Borisov further teaches wherein the two-dimensional grating includes:
a two-dimensional array of grating elements, the two dimensional array of grating elements including grating elements aligned along a plurality of directions to form a plurality of gratings characterized by different grating vectors (Borisov fig. 2D – the outcoupling zone includes three grating vectors aligned along different directions, DOE3, DOE4, DOE5); or
a plurality of layers of one-dimensional gratings characterized by different grating vectors.
Regarding claim 18, Valera and Borisov teach the waveguide display of claim 15 (Valera fig. 1-9B), and Valera further teaches wherein the first FOV and the second FOV at least partially overlap (Valera para. 0051 – the second range of angles 17 at least partially overlaps the first range of angles 7, see also fig. 2A-B).
Regarding claim 19, Valera and Borisov teach the waveguide display of claim 15 (Valera fig. 1-9B), and Valera further teaches wherein the first input grating (6) includes three input gratings (6, 16, 26) for couple the red, green, and blue display light, respectively (Valera para. 0009 and 0054-0055 – 6 couples red light, 16 couples blue light, and 26 couples green light).
Valera does not specify one grating that has three input gratings.
In the same field of endeavor, Borisov teaches an input grating having three vectors which each direct red, green, and blue light (Borisov para. 0170-0178 – discusses DOE1, DOE2, DOE3 coupling red, green, and blue light through one waveguide in a stack) for the purpose of transmitting different segments of a field of view (Borisov para. 0036). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a first input grating including three input gratings for coupling red, green, and blue display light in order to transmit different segments of a field of view (Borisov para. 0036).
Regarding claim 20, Valera and Borisov teach the waveguide display of claim 15 (Valera fig. 1-9B), and they further teach further comprising:
a third input grating (Valera fig. 1 - 26) characterized by the third grating vector (Borisov fig. 2D – DOE5, see also para. 0110) and configured to couple the display light for a third FOV of the waveguide display (Valera fig. 2C, see also para. 0052) into the substrate (Valera para. 0052),
wherein the two-dimensional grating is configured to couple the display light for the third FOV out of the substrate at a third two-dimensional array of locations of the substrate (Borisov fig. 7A and para. 0143 and 0154-0161 – teaches that different sets of diffractive elements in the out-coupling zone and in-coupling zone are responsible for displaying specific parts of the field of view).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee and Borisov as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Malhotra et. al US 20210191180 (hereinafter “Malhotra”).
Regarding claim 13, Valera and Borisov teach the waveguide display of claim 1 (Valera fig. 1-9B).
Valera and Borisov do not specify wherein the first input grating, the second input grating, and the two-dimensional grating include surface-relief gratings (SRGs), polarization volume holograms (PVHs), volume Bragg gratings (VBGs), polymer dispersed liquid crystal (PDLC) gratings, or a combination thereof.
In the same field of endeavor, Malhotra teaches surface relief gratings (SRGs) (Malhotra fig. 7a-8d, see also para. 0070-0071 which explains that input couplers and output couplers may use the claimed surface relief gratings, and 0092-0099 which describes the surface relief gratings) for the purpose of preferentially diffract incident light of a first polarization state over incident light of a different polarization state (Malhotra para. 0031). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have surface relief gratings in order to preferentially diffract incident light of a first polarization state over incident light of a different polarization state (Malhotra para. 0031).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Borisov et. al US 20230221570, teaches waveguide architecture and vector details;
Borisov et. al US Patent 12,332,459, patent of Borisov et. al US 20230081473;
Valera US Patent 11,906,743, patent of Valera US 20220179212;
Lee US 20210124108, teaches waveguide architecture having vectors which form a closed triangle;
Malhotra et. al US Patent 11,474,395, patent of Malhotra et. al US 20210191180.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH M HALL whose telephone number is (703)756-5795. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-5:30 pm PST.
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, Ricky Mack can be reached at (571)272-2333. 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.
/ELIZABETH M HALL/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/RICKY L MACK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872