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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The instant application having Application No. 18540914 filed on 12/15/2023 is presented for examination by the examiner.
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Priority
As required by e M.P.E.P. 210, 214.03, acknowledgement is made of applicant’s claim for priority based on application JP 2022-200453, filed 12/15/2022, and claims foreign priority to application JP 2023-186818, filed 10/31/2023 (Japan).
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
However, to overcome a prior art rejection, applicant(s) must submit a translation of the foreign priority papers in order to perfect the claimed foreign priority because said papers has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. See MPEP § 213.04
Drawings
The applicant’s drawings submitted are acceptable for examination purposes.
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 10-11 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.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the optical element" in line 2 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Specifically it is unclear as to what optical element or component does the above, limitation refer to? It is suggested to amend the claim and/or define the limitation earlier in the claims.
Claim 11 depend on claim 10 and therefore inherits the same deficiency.
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.
Claims 1-10 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ohsugi et al. (hereafter Ohsugi, of record, see IDS dated 12/15/2023) US 20170090094 A1.
In regard to independent claim 1, Ohsugi teaches (see Figs. 1-31) a head-mounted display (i.e. virtual optical image device and display VD having guide 50, 100 for spectacles/glasses as head mounted display (HMD), abstract, paragraphs [3-10, 58-68, 71-82, 84-90, 98-107, 114-124, 158-167, 174-185], e.g. Figs. 3-5,9,12, 23-28,31), comprising:
a light source to emit image light (i.e. as light source LS, display 10 of virtual image optical system VO, e.g. paragraphs [58-68, 71-82], Figs. 3, 12); and
an optical component disposed opposite to a head (light guide 50 with member 100 having extraction portion 103 and optical member 200, opposite to head/eyes of a user as observer of the virtual image, paragraphs [58-68, 71-82], Figs. 1-6, 12), the optical component has multiple reflective surfaces arrayed in a first direction to reflect the image light to an eye in the head (as 100, 103 has reflective first planes 103a disposed in lateral/width x-line direction along exit portion 104, and reflects the image light to be output to exit portion toward the eyes of the user/observer, see paragraphs [71-82, 84-90, 98-110], Figs. 1-6, 12),
wherein at least two of the multiple reflective surfaces are disposed in a second direction tilted with respective to the first direction (i.e. as each 103a is angled e.g. at angle qa to first direction along width of 104, as depicted in Figs. 3-7, 23-26, paragraphs [71-82, 84-90, 98-110]).
Regarding claim 2, Ohsugi teaches (see Figs. 1-31) that said at least two of the multiple reflective surfaces are parallel to each other in the second direction (i.e. as first planes 103a are angled as same angle to first direction along width of 104, as depicted in Figs. 3-7, 23-26, paragraphs [71-82, 84-90, 98-110]).
Regarding claim 3, Ohsugi teaches (see Figs. 1-31) that the optical component (100,103) further has a transmissive surface (surface(s) 103b that serves as a transparent surface to allow light externally coming through the front face FF and the rear face RF of the light guide 50 to pass through the light guide 50 to secure the see-through characteristics, see Figs. 3-7, 23-26, paragraphs [84-90, 98-110]), the transmissive surface is between adjacent reflective surfaces of the multiple reflective surfaces (i.e. as second planes 103b as 103a and the second plane 103b alternate to form a stepwise shape, see Figs. 3-7, 23-26, paragraphs [84-90, 98-110]), , and a first angle of incidence of the image light on the transmissive surface is greater than a second angle of incidence of the image light on one of the multiple reflective surfaces (i.e. as depicted in Figs. 3-7, 23-26, as image light passing 100, makes larger incident angle with 103b which are at angle qb (e.g. zero) to width/exit 104, than the incident angle of image light on 103a as they are angled more to width direction along 104, see, paragraphs [84-90, 98-110]).
Regarding claim 4, Ohsugi teaches (see Figs. 1-31) that the transmissive surface (103b) is tilted with respect to the second direction to allow the first angle to be greater than the second angle (i.e. as depicted in Figs. 3-7, 23-26, as 103b are at angle qb (e.g. zero) to width/exit 104, and thus tilted to second direction of the tilt of 103a as they are angled at angle qa to first direction along width of 104, making the incident angle of image light on 103b larger than on 103a, see also paragraphs [84-90, 98-110]).
Regarding claim 5, Ohsugi teaches (see Figs. 1-31) that the optical component is in a longitudinal direction orthogonal to a line of sight of the eye and parallel to the first direction (i.e. as 100, 103 is in lateral/width x-line direction along exit portion 104 perpendicular to a line of sight of eye(s) of the user and parallel to 1st direction which is the lateral/width x-line direction along exit portion 104, e.g. paragraphs [71-82, 84-90, 98-110], Figs. 1-6, 12).
Regarding claim 6, Ohsugi teaches (see Figs. 1-31) that the optical component is mounted on eyeglasses (as VD with 50, 100,103 mounted on for spectacles/glasses as head mounted display (HMD), abstract, paragraphs [3-10, 58-68, 71-82, 84-90, 174-185], e.g. Figs. 9A-C, 3-5,12), the optical component is in the longitudinal direction orthogonal to the line of sight of the eye at a position where the eye faces the eyeglasses (as 100, 103 is in lateral/width x-line direction exit portion 104 perpendicular to a line of sight of eye(s) of the user at position where eye faces the spectacles HMD, e.g. paragraphs [71-82, 84-90, 174-185], e.g. Figs. 9A-C, 3-5,12).
Regarding claim 7, Ohsugi teaches (see Figs. 1-31) further comprising: a projection lens system to project the image light (i.e. virtual image optical system VO has collimating system 300 and optical member 200, projecting image light from display 10 with source LS, paragraphs [58-63,72-81,117-121,170]); and an adjuster to adjust a position of the projection lens system (i.e. as adjuster to adjust a space between the light-guide member 100 and the optical member 200, paragraphs [72-81,117-121,170], Figs. 6A-B).
Regarding claim 8, Ohsugi teaches (see Figs. 1-31) further comprising: a projection lens system to project the image (i.e. virtual image optical system VO has collimating system 300 and optical member 200, projecting image light from display 10 with source LS, paragraphs [58-63,72-81,117-121,170]); a display element in series with the projection lens system (display 10 in series i.e. optical path series with 100,200, paragraphs [58-63,72-81,117-121,170]); and an adjuster that adjusts the position of the display element (due to relative motion between 10 and 200, adjuster to adjust a space between the light-guide member 100 and 10 of VO and the optical member 200, paragraphs [72-81,117-121,170], Figs. 6A-B).
Regarding claim 9, Ohsugi teaches (see Figs. 1-31) that the optical component (100,103) is between the eye and a lens of glasses mounting the head-mounted display (as VD with 50, with optical element 200, where 100,103 mounted between spectacles/glasses e.g. element 200, and eye(s) of the user (observer), abstract, paragraphs [3-10, 58-68, 71-82, 84-90, 174-185], e.g. Figs. 9A-C, 3-5,12).
Regarding claim 10, Ohsugi teaches (see Figs. 1-31) that further comprising a control board mounted on a temple of the glasses, wherein the control board controls the optical element (i.e. as light source LS and display 10 include parts for controlling the operation and displaying of virtual optical image to the user of HMD VO on spectacles/glasses, as LS, 10, 300 are at least on the temple(s) 400 of spectacle/glasses e.g. see paragraphs [9-10,58-63, 173-189, e.g. Figs. 9A-C, 3-5,12).
Regarding claim 12, Ohsugi teaches (see Figs. 1-31) glasses comprising the head-mounted display according to claim 1 (as spectacles/glasses with head mounted display (HMD) i.e. VD with 50, 100,103 see claim 1 above, abstract, paragraphs [3-10, 58-68, 71-82, 84-90, 174-185], e.g. Figs. 9A-C, 3-5,12).
Regarding claim 13, Ohsugi teaches (see Figs. 1-31) further comprising: a first rim; a second rim adjacent to the first rim (i.e. as rims of spectacles/glasses with 50, paragraphs [3-10, 58-68, 71-82, 84-90, 174-185], e.g. Figs. 9A-C, 3-5,12); and a shield adjacent to the second rim, wherein the optical component is adjacent to the first rim (i.e. as top part of spectacles on one of the rims of spectacles HMD, with 100,103 on first rim e.g. as depicted in Figs. 9A-C, e.g. paragraphs [3-10, 58-68, 71-82, 84-90, 174-185]).
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.
Claim 11 s rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohsugi et al. (hereafter Ohsugi, of record, see IDS dated 12/15/2023) US 20170090094 A1 in view of Gotoh et al. (hereafter Gotoh) US 20170328733 A1.
Regarding claim 11, Ohsugi teaches (see Figs. 1-31) the control board (i.e. as light source LS and display 10 include parts for controlling the operation and displaying of virtual optical image to the user of HMD VO on spectacles/glasses, paragraphs [9-10,58-63, 173-189, e.g. Figs. 9A-C, 3-5,12), but is silent that includes a speaker.
However, Gotoh teaches in the same field of invention of a head mounted terminal device (see Figs. 2-7, 17, abstract, paragraphs [02-08, 68-84, 96,197-203]), and further teaches that control board includes a speaker (i.e. as head mounted terminal device has control information/processing unit 20A,B with audio I/F 2008,3010 and earphone e.g. 2041 providing the user with audio signal and operation, e.g. paragraphs [96,197-203,282]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt and modify the HMD VO on spectacles/glasses controlling VO, LS,10 of Ohsugi to include controls and speaker/earphone according to teachings of Gotoh in order to provide the user with audio signal and operation, e.g. paragraphs [96,197-203,282]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Akutsu et al. US 20130128611 A1 (see Figs. 1-7,16), Ronen US 20220334399 A1 (e.g. Figs. 4-8), Pan et al. US 20180059306 A1 (e.g. Figs. 1-6) and McRuer US 6671100 B1(see Figs. 3-20) also disclose features of instant invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIN PICHLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4015. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am -5:00pm.
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, Thomas K Pham can be reached at (571)272-3689. 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.
/MARIN PICHLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872