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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Species A2 and B2 (claims 1, 2, 5-10, 12, 13, and 16-21) in the reply filed on 2/18/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 3-4, 11, 14-15, and 22 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 2/18/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 8, 10, 12-13, 19, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lam et al. (U.S. 2022/0137411).
Regarding claim 1, Lam discloses a device (1000, Fig. 10; page 11, para [0134]) comprising:
one or more light sources (such as LEDs of 910, Figs. 9-10; page 11, para [0132]; page 12, para [0134]) providing two or more input beams along two or more incidence paths (such as incident paths of red, green, and blue light, Fig. 10); and
one or more rotated volume Bragg gratings (r-VBGs) (1020, 1030, 1040, Fig. 10; page 12, para [0134-0135]), wherein each of the r-VBGs is formed as planes of refractive index variation with periodicity along a respective grating vector at a respective non-zero angle relative to a respective one of the incidence paths of a respective one of the input beams (r-VBGs have planes of refractive index variation with periodicity along a respective grating vector at a respective non-zero angle relative to a respective one of the incidence paths of a respective one of the input beams, Fig. 19. ; page 13, para [0145]; page 17, para [0177-0179]), wherein the r-VBGs direct the two or more input beams along a common output path (such as from 1030 to 1040, Fig. 10; page 12, para [0137]) through at least one transmission or reflection via Bragg reflection (transmission or reflection under Bragg conditions, Fig. 10; page 12, para [0137-0138]), wherein at least one of the r-VBGs reflects a portion of at least one of the input beams satisfying a Bragg condition (such as r-VBG 1030 reflecting incident light, Fig. 10; page 12, para [0135, 0137]) and having a polarization normal to a diffraction plane formed by a respective incidence path and the respective grating vector (such as p-polarized light 1240 having a polarization normal to the diffraction plane 1242 formed by the grating vector of 1210, Fig. 12B; page 13, para [0143-0144]).
Regarding claim 2, Lam discloses a device with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein one of the input beams (such as one of red, green, or blue input beams, Fig. 10; page 11, para [0132]; page 12, para [0134]) has a respective incidence path (path from 1020 to 1030, Fig. 10; page 12, para [0134-0135]) aligned with the common output path (such as from 1030 to 1040, Fig. 10; page 12, para [0137]) and is transmitted by the r-VBGs (such as transmitted by r-VBG 1030, Fig. 10; page 12, para [0135]).
Regarding claim 8, Lam discloses a device with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the one or more r-VBGs (such as 1020, 1030, 1040, Fig. 10) include two or more r-VBGs formed in a common volume of material (such as 1030 and 1040 included in volume of material as shown by r-VBG 1922 and 1924 included within a volume of material of 1910, Figs. 10 and 19A; page 17, para [0177]).
Regarding claim 10, Lam discloses a device with all the limitations of claim 8 above and further discloses wherein the two or more r-VBGs (such as 1922 and 1924, Fig. 19A) formed in the common volume of material (such as 1910, Fig. 19A) have different grating vectors (grating vector of 1922 is different than the grating vector of 1924, Fig. 19A).
Regarding claim 12, Lam discloses a method comprising:
generating two or more input beams with one or more light sources (such as red, green, and blue input beams from respective red, green, and blue LEDs of 910, Figs. 9-10; page 11, para [0132]; page 12, para [0134]), wherein the two or more input beams propagate along two or more incidence paths (such as incident paths of red, green, and blue light, Fig. 10); and
combining, with one or more rotated volume Bragg gratings (r-VBGs) (1020, 1030, 1040, Fig. 10; page 12, para [0134-0135]) through at least one of transmission or reflection via Bragg reflection (transmission or reflection under Bragg conditions, Fig. 10; page 12, para [0137-0138]), the two or more input beams to propagate along a common output path (such as from 1030 to 1040, Fig. 10; page 12, para [0137]), wherein each of the r-VBGs is formed as planes of refractive index variation with periodicity along a respective grating vector at a respective non-zero angle relative to a respective one of the incidence paths of a respective one of the input beams (r-VBGs have planes of refractive index variation with periodicity along a respective grating vector at a respective non-zero angle relative to a respective one of the incidence paths of a respective one of the input beams, Fig. 19. ; page 13, para [0145]; page 17, para [0177-0179]), wherein at least one of the r-VBGs reflects a portion of at least one of the input beams satisfying a Bragg condition (such as r-VBG 1030 reflecting incident light, Fig. 10; page 12, para [0135, 0137]) and having a polarization normal to a diffraction plane formed by a respective incidence path and the respective grating vector (such as p-polarized light 1240 having a polarization normal to the diffraction plane 1242 formed by the grating vector of 1210, Fig. 12B; page 13, para [0143-0144]).
Regarding claim 13, Lam discloses a method with all the limitations of claim 12 above and further discloses wherein one of the input beams (such as one of red, green, or blue input beams, Fig. 10; page 11, para [0132]; page 12, para [0134]) has a respective incidence path (path from 1020 to 1030, Fig. 10; page 12, para [0134-0135]) aligned with the common output path (such as from 1030 to 1040, Fig. 10; page 12, para [0137]) and is transmitted by the r-VBGs (such as transmitted by r-VBG 1030, Fig. 10; page 12, para [0135]).
Regarding claim 19, Lam discloses a method with all the limitations of claim 12 above and further discloses wherein the one or more r-VBGs (such as 1020, 1030, 1040, Fig. 10) include two or more r-VBGs formed in a common volume of material (such as 1030 and 1040 included in volume of material as shown by r-VBG 1922 and 1924 included within a volume of material of 1910, Figs. 10 and 19A; page 17, para [0177]).
Regarding claim 21, Lam discloses a method with all the limitations of claim 19 above and further discloses wherein the two or more r-VBGs (such as 1922 and 1924, Fig. 19A) formed in the common volume of the material (such as 1910, Fig. 19A) have different grating vectors (grating vector of 1922 is different than the grating vector of 1924, Fig. 19A).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 5, 7, 16, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lam et al. (U.S. 2022/0137411) in view of Chi et al. (U.S. 2020/0116995).
Regarding claim 5, Lam discloses a device with all the limitations of claim 1 above but does not expressly disclose wherein the one or more r-VBGs (1020, 1030, 1040, Fig. 10) includes one or more chirped r-VBGs with periods chirped to vary along the respective grating vectors. However, Chi discloses a waveguide device (202, Fig. 2A; page 4, para [0050]) comprising a plurality of rotated volume Bragg gratings (r-VBGs) (241 and 242, Fig. 2A; page 4, para [0050]) wherein the plurality of r-VBGs can be configured as chirped r-VBGs with periods chirped to vary along a respective grating vector (page 4, para [0050-0051]) in order to improve image quality (page 1, para [0002]; page 4, para [0055]).
Therefore, before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the one or more r-VBGs (Lam: 1020, 1030, 1040, Fig. 10) of Lam as one or more chirped r-VBGs with periods chirped to vary along the respective grating vectors (Chi: such as 241 and 242 with periods chirped to vary along a respective grating vector, Fig. 2A; page 4, para [0050-0051]) in order to obtain the benefits of improving image quality as evidenced by Chi (Fig. 2A; page 1, para [0002]; page 4, para [0055]).
Regarding claim 7, Lam discloses a device with all the limitations of claim 1 above but does not expressly disclose wherein the one or more r-VBGs (1020, 1030, 1040, Fig. 10) includes one or more chirped r-VBGs with periods chirped to vary along the respective grating vectors. However, Chi discloses a waveguide device (202, Fig. 2A; page 4, para [0050]) comprising a plurality of rotated volume Bragg gratings (r-VBGs) (241 and 242, Fig. 2A; page 4, para [0050]) wherein the plurality of r-VBGs can be configured as chirped r-VBGs with periods chirped to vary along a respective grating vector (page 4, para [0050-0051]) in order to improve image quality (page 1, para [0002]; page 4, para [0055]).
Therefore, before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the one or more r-VBGs (Lam: 1020, 1030, 1040, Fig. 10) of Lam as one or more chirped r-VBGs with periods chirped to vary along the respective grating vectors (Chi: such as 241 and 242 with periods chirped to vary along a respective grating vector, Fig. 2A; page 4, para [0050-0051]) in order to obtain the benefits of improving image quality as evidenced by Chi (Fig. 2A; page 1, para [0002]; page 4, para [0055]).
Regarding claim 16, Lam discloses a method with all the limitations of claim 12 above but does not expressly disclose wherein the one or more r-VBGs (1020, 1030, 1040, Fig. 10) includes one or more chirped r-VBGs with periods chirped to vary along the respective grating vectors. However, Chi discloses a waveguide device (202, Fig. 2A; page 4, para [0050]) comprising a plurality of rotated volume Bragg gratings (r-VBGs) (241 and 242, Fig. 2A; page 4, para [0050]) wherein the plurality of r-VBGs can be configured as chirped r-VBGs with periods chirped to vary along a respective grating vector (page 4, para [0050-0051]) in order to improve image quality (page 1, para [0002]; page 4, para [0055]).
Therefore, before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the one or more r-VBGs (Lam: 1020, 1030, 1040, Fig. 10) of Lam as one or more chirped r-VBGs with periods chirped to vary along the respective grating vectors (Chi: such as 241 and 242 with periods chirped to vary along a respective grating vector, Fig. 2A; page 4, para [0050-0051]) in order to obtain the benefits of improving image quality as evidenced by Chi (Fig. 2A; page 1, para [0002]; page 4, para [0055]).
Regarding claim 18, Lam discloses a method with all the limitations of claim 12 above but does not expressly disclose wherein the one or more r-VBGs (1020, 1030, 1040, Fig. 10) includes one or more chirped r-VBGs with periods chirped to vary along the respective grating vectors. However, Chi discloses a waveguide device (202, Fig. 2A; page 4, para [0050]) comprising a plurality of rotated volume Bragg gratings (r-VBGs) (241 and 242, Fig. 2A; page 4, para [0050]) wherein the plurality of r-VBGs can be configured as chirped r-VBGs with periods chirped to vary along a respective grating vector (page 4, para [0050-0051]) in order to improve image quality (page 1, para [0002]; page 4, para [0055]).
Therefore, before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the one or more r-VBGs (Lam: 1020, 1030, 1040, Fig. 10) of Lam as one or more chirped r-VBGs with periods chirped to vary along the respective grating vectors (Chi: such as 241 and 242 with periods chirped to vary along a respective grating vector, Fig. 2A; page 4, para [0050-0051]) in order to obtain the benefits of improving image quality as evidenced by Chi (Fig. 2A; page 1, para [0002]; page 4, para [0055]).
Claim(s) 6 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lam et al. (U.S. 2022/0137411) in view of Chi et al. (U.S. 2020/0116995) as applied to claims 5 and 16, respectively above, and further in view of Volodin et al. (U.S. 2005/0018743).
Regarding claim 6, Lam as modified by Chi discloses a device with all the limitations above but does not expressly disclose wherein the Bragg condition is satisfied for different wavelengths at different locations for a particular one of the chirped r-VBGs (Lam: 1020, 1030, 1040, Fig. 10), wherein the particular one of the chirped r-VBGs reflects one or more of the input beams with wavelengths and respective incidence paths oriented to satisfy the Bragg condition for reflection along the common output path (Lam: such as from 1030 to 1040, Fig. 10; page 12, para [0137]). However, Volodin discloses a chirped volume Bragg grating element (178, Fig. 9; page 7, para [0089]) having a varying grating period wherein the chirped volume Bragg grating reflects a plurality of input beams of different wavelengths at different locations along the chirped volume Bragg grating element (page 7, para [0089]) in order to maintain the Bragg condition for each of the plurality of different wavelengths of light.
Therefore, before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the chirped r-VBGs (Lam: 1020, 1030, 1040, Fig. 10) of Lam as modified by Chi such that the Bragg condition is satisfied for different wavelengths at different locations for a particular one of the chirped r-VBGs (Volodin: page 7, para [0089]), wherein the particular one of the chirped r-VBGs reflects one or more of the input beams with wavelengths and respective incidence paths oriented to satisfy the Bragg condition for reflection along the common output path (Lam: such as from 1030 to 1040, Fig. 10; page 12, para [0137]) in order to obtain the benefits of maintaining the Bragg condition for each of the plurality of different wavelengths of light as evidenced by Volodin (page 7, para [0089]).
Regarding claim 17, Lam as modified by Chi discloses a method with all the limitations of claim 16 above but does not expressly disclose wherein the Bragg condition is satisfied for different wavelengths at different locations for a particular one of the chirped r-VBGs (Lam: 1020, 1030, 1040, Fig. 10), wherein the particular one of the chirped r-VBGs reflects one or more of the input beams with wavelengths and respective incidence paths oriented to satisfy the Bragg condition for reflection along the common output path (Lam: such as from 1030 to 1040, Fig. 10; page 12, para [0137]). However, Volodin discloses a chirped volume Bragg grating element (178, Fig. 9; page 7, para [0089]) having a varying grating period wherein the chirped volume Bragg grating reflects a plurality of input beams of different wavelengths at different locations along the chirped volume Bragg grating element (page 7, para [0089]) in order to maintain the Bragg condition for each of the plurality of different wavelengths of light.
Therefore, before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the chirped r-VBGs (Lam: 1020, 1030, 1040, Fig. 10) of Lam as modified by Chi such that the Bragg condition is satisfied for different wavelengths at different locations for a particular one of the chirped r-VBGs (Volodin: page 7, para [0089]), wherein the particular one of the chirped r-VBGs reflects one or more of the input beams with wavelengths and respective incidence paths oriented to satisfy the Bragg condition for reflection along the common output path (Lam: such as from 1030 to 1040, Fig. 10; page 12, para [0137]) in order to obtain the benefits of maintaining the Bragg condition for each of the plurality of different wavelengths of light as evidenced by Volodin (page 7, para [0089]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 and 20 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 as presently searched does not disclose the device of claim 9 (having all the combination of features including wherein the two or more r-VBGs formed in the common volume of the material have common grating vectors but different distributions of a respective period of the refractive index variation) and does not disclose the method of claim 20 (having all the combination of features including wherein the two or more r-VBGs formed in the common volume of the material have common grating vectors but different distributions of a respective period of the refractive index variation).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL CHANG LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7923. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am-6pm.
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, Michael H Caley can be reached at 571-272-2286. 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.
/PAUL C LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights