DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 of this title, 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20190011699 A1 (Moore), in view of US 20230213771 A1 (Choe).
Regarding Claims 1, 11 and 20:
A head-mounted device comprising: a housing having a first portion, a second portion coupled to a first end of the first portion, and a third portion coupled to a second end of the first portion, the second portion being configured to rotate relative to the first portion and the third portion being configured to rotate relative to the first portion; a waveguide having an edge mounted to the first portion of the housing, wherein the waveguide has a first lateral surface and a second lateral surface opposite the first lateral surface; a transparent layer mounted to the frame and overlapping the waveguide; a projector configured to emit light into the waveguide, wherein the waveguide is configured to output the light through the second lateral surface; and an antenna arm that extends along the first lateral surface between the transparent layer and the waveguide (Moore: Fig. 16, an eyeglass implementation that has light projectors 1411a-b on both left and right temper; the eyeglass also has multiple antenna elements, 1602a-d and 1606a-b on temples and frame structures; Fig. 1 and par. 68-69, optical combiner 131 (terms for “optical combiner” as used herein can include transparent combiner, holographic optical element, holographic combiner, or any other appropriate terminology) could also include an optical waveguide, e.g., first and 2nd waveguide in left and right frames; Figs. 18-19 and par. 131-143, antenna elements can be multiple elements as in Fig. 14 or a ring-like structure as in Fig. 18 of 1803 feed through 1840, where temples 1481 and 1482 can rotate respect eyeglass frame 1483, i.e., 1st segment, 2nd segment, and 3rd segment; furthermore, antenna is imposed between projector optics 1411a-b and waveguides on the frames as in e.g., Fig. 16-19).
Moore teaches a ring type structure but does not teach explicitly on antennas with multi-feeds. However, Choe teaches (Choe: e.g., Figs. 7, 9 and among others,).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Moore with antennas with multi-feeds as further taught by Choe. The advantage of doing so is to provide a mechanism to mounting antenna in a wearable device with limited space (Choe: [0005]-[0007]).
Regarding Claim 2, Moore as modified further teaches:
The head-mounted device of claim 1, wherein the first segment comprises a monopole antenna resonating element for the antenna and the second segment comprises an antenna ground for the antenna (Choe: Figs. 6-7, monopole antenna).
Regarding Claim 3, Moore as modified further teaches:
The head-mounted device of claim 1, wherein the second segment comprises a monopole antenna resonating element arm for the antenna and the first segment comprises an antenna ground for the antenna . (Choe: Figs. 6-7, monopole antenna, where Moore: Fig. 16 illustrates multiple antennas at both temples).
Regarding Claim 4, Moore as modified further teaches:
The head-mounted device of claim 1, wherein the first segment comprises a first dipole antenna resonating element arm for the antenna and the second segment comprises a second dipole antenna resonating element arm for the antenna (Choe: e.g., Fig.9, a dipole antenna on an eyeglass frame).
Regarding Claim 5, Moore as modified further teaches:
The head-mounted device of claim 1, wherein the conductive frame comprises a third segment separated from the first segment by an additional gap, further comprising: an additional antenna having a third antenna feed terminal coupled to the first segment and having a fourth antenna feed terminal coupled to the third segment (Moore: Figs. 16-19, antennas can be on both temples and extends into the left and right frames respectively).
Regarding Claim 6, Moore as modified further teaches:
The head-mounted device of claim 1, wherein the conductive frame comprises a third segment separated from the second segment by an additional gap, further comprising: an additional antenna having a third antenna feed terminal coupled to the second segment and having a fourth antenna feed terminal coupled to the third segment, wherein the third segment comprises a nose bridge for the head-mounted device (Moore: Figs. 16-19, antennas can be on both temples and extends into the left and right frames respectively, where implies that antenna feeds would be in both temples and frame areas).
Regarding Claim 7, Moore as modified further teaches:
The head-mounted device of claim 1, wherein the waveguide is configured to transmit world light to the eye box (Choe: par. 40, a light waveguide, and one region of the light waveguide may correspond to a see-through display).
Regarding Claim 8, Moore as modified further teaches:
The head-mounted device of claim 1, further comprising: a housing having a left temple that includes the first segment of the conductive frame and having a right temple opposite the left temple (Moore: Figs. 18-19).
Regarding Claim 9, Moore as modified further teaches:
The head-mounted device of claim 8, wherein the left temple comprises dielectric overlapping the first segment and the projector (Moore: Figs. 14-16).
Regarding Claim 10, Moore as modified further teaches:
The head-mounted device of claim 1, further comprising: a conductive ring that extends along a lateral periphery of the waveguide; an additional gap in the conductive ring; and an additional antenna having a third antenna feed terminal coupled to the conductive ring at a first side of the gap and having a fourth antenna feed terminal coupled to the conductive ring at a second side of the gap (Moore: Figs. 16-19, antennas can be on both temples and extends into the left and right frames respectively, where implies that antenna feeds would be in both temples and frame areas).
Regarding Claim 12, Moore as modified further teaches:
The pair of glasses of claim 11, wherein the conductive ring extends along a lateral periphery of the waveguide and has a gap, the antenna having a first antenna feed terminal coupled to the conductive ring at a first side of the gap and a second antenna feed terminal coupled to the conductive ring at a second side of the gap (Moore: Figs. 16-19, antennas can be on both temples and extends into the left and right frames respectively, where implies that antenna feeds would be in both temples and frame areas, and ring antenna is on both side of the gap of the eyeglass frame).
Regarding Claim 13, Moore as modified further teaches:
The pair of glasses of claim 11, wherein the conductive ring extends along a lateral periphery of the waveguide and has first and second gaps that divide the conductive ring into at least first and second segments, the antenna having an antenna feed terminal coupled to the first segment of the conductive ring (Moore: Figs. 18-19).
Regarding Claim 14, Moore as modified further teaches:
The pair of glasses of claim 13, wherein the first segment comprises a monopole antenna resonating element for the antenna (Choe: Figs. 6-7).
Regarding Claim 15, Moore as modified further teaches:
The pair of glasses of claim 13, wherein the antenna has an additional antenna feed terminal coupled to the second segment of the conductive ring, the first segment comprises a first dipole antenna resonating element for the antenna, and the second segment comprises a second dipole antenna resonating element for the antenna (Choe: e.g., Fig. 9, dipole type antenna in an eyeglass).
Regarding Claim 16, Moore as modified further teaches:
The pair of glasses of claim 11, wherein the waveguide is configured to direct the light to the eye box through the second optics (Moore: e.g., Fig. 14).
Regarding Claim 17, Moore as modified further teaches:
The pair of glasses of claim 11, waveguide is configured to direct the light to the eye box through the first optics (Moore: e.g., Fig. 14).
Regarding Claim 18, Moore as modified further teaches:
The pair of glasses of claim 11, wherein the first optics comprise a first bias lens and the second optics comprise a second bias lens (Moore: e.g., Figs. 14-16 and par. 116-117, projector 1411 may output laser light that is powered by either power sources 1846a or 1846b, i.e., bias lens illustrated in Figs. 18-19).
Regarding Claim 19, Moore as modified further teaches:
The pair of glasses of claim 11, wherein the first optics comprise a first transparent cover layer for the waveguide and the second optics comprise a second transparent cover layer for the waveguide (Choe: par. 40, one region of the light waveguide may correspond to a see-through display).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZHITONG CHEN whose telephone number is (571) 270-1936. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:30am - 5pm.
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, Yuwen Pan can be reached on 571-272-7855. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ZHITONG CHEN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2649