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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendments to Claims 1,13, in the submission filed 3/31/2026 are acknowledged and accepted.
The amendments to the Abstract are acknowledged and accepted. In vie of the amendments to the Abstract, objection to Abstract is withdrawn.
Pending Claims are 1-25. Claims 7,8,19,20, were objected to previously.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments (Remarks, filed 3/31/2026) have been considered, but, respectfully, are not found persuasive.
Re: Claims 1,13:
a) Christmas is directed to a computer-generated hologram, including "a Fourier hologram or Fourier-based hologram." And Gerchberg-Saxton algorithms in the Fourier domain. Applicant's own Specification states that "in conventional Gerchberg-Saxton algorithms, mapping does not occur between two complex planes but rather, for the same definition of the Fourier transform, between a complex plane and infinity, i.e., the far field." while in the claimed system, the "reconstruction plane (or field) R(x', y') is located at an optical distance in the near field relative to the modulation plane (or field) M(x, y)." Mapping between the modulation plane and the reconstruction plane is more efficient in terms of amount of energy being steered into the right locations of the reconstruction plane compared to mapping between a complex plane and infinity." (Remarks, page 9)
Christmas teaches (para 11,28) that the computer-generated hologram is either a Fourier hologram or a Fresnel hologram or a Fourier transformation or a Fresnel transformation of the holographic reconstruction. Christmas teaches (para 88) that embodiments discussed discuss Fourier holography and Gerchberg-Saxton algorithms by example only. However, its disclosure is applicable to Fresnel and Fourier holography. It is known that Fresnel holography concerns near-field diffractive field while Fourier holography relates to the Fourier field in far-field holography (para 62). Hence, as Christmas teaches Fresnel holograms also, it indicates that the reconstruction plane is located at an optical distance in the near field relative to the display or modulation plane.
In addition, Christmas teaches a holographic projector and teaches that the holographic projector has application in head mounted and head-up devices including near-eye devices (para 7). This also indicates that the reconstruction plane is located at an optical distance in the near field relative to the display or modulation plane.
In view of the above arguments, rejection of claims is upheld.
b) Dependent claims are allowable for at least the same reasons as base claims.
Dependent claims are not patentable for at least the same reasons as the base claims.
Claims 1-6, 9-18,21-25, are rejected as follows:
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.
Claim(s) 1,2,6,9-14,18,21-25, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Christmas et al (US 2020/0292990 A1, of record).
Regarding Claim 1, Christmas teaches (fig 2A, B, 4) a projection system (holographic projector, para 94), comprising:
a light source (laser diode 417, “The laser driver 415 controls a laser diode 417 of a laser in accordance with the signal to synchronize the light emitted from the laser with the holographic data displayed on the SLM”, para 97) configured to emit a light in response to an image data (holographic data displayed on the SLM, para 97);
a phase light modulator (SLM 413, “The signal representative of the holograms is received by a video input 409 of the projection system 450 and sent to a driver 411 of the spatial light modulator, or SLM, 413”, para 95) configured to receive the light from the light source (laser diode 417, “The laser driver 415 controls a laser diode 417 of a laser in accordance with the signal to synchronize the light emitted from the laser with the holographic data displayed on the SLM”, para 97) and to apply a spatially-varying phase modulation on the light (“the driver 411 sets the pixels of the SLM 413 in accordance with the holographic data for that frame”, para 96 “holographic data displayed on the SLM”, para 97, holographic data gives spatially varying phase modulation), thereby generating a projection light and steering the light on a reconstruction field (“The holographic reconstruction, once formed, can be projected by optical system 407”, para 96), wherein the reconstruction field is a complex plane on which a reconstruction image is formed (“When the SLM 413 is illuminated by the laser, the hologram displayed on the SLM 413 causes interference in the light and a holographic reconstruction of the hologram is formed at a replay field spatially separate from the SLM”, para 110); and
a controller (“The hologram calculation engine 403, video driver 405, video input 409 and SLM driver 411 may all be implemented on a field programmable gate array (FPGA)”, para 95) configured to control the light source (laser diode 417, para 97), control the phase light modulator (SLM 413, para 95), initialize the reconstruction field to an initial value (“The input to the algorithm is an input image 210 comprising a 2D array of pixels or data values”, para 68) and iteratively for each of a plurality of subframes (“ The laser gating signal 530 controls the laser driver 415 to then emit light for the next four subframes of frame 0 (subframes 2 to 5) in order to illuminate the SLM 413 and form a holographic reconstruction of the original video frame”, para 99) within a frame of the image data (“The Gerchberg-Saxton algorithm finds solutions to this problem by following an iterative process”, para 64):
set the reconstruction field to the initial value for the first iteration (“The first iteration of the algorithm starts with a data forming step 202A comprising assigning a random phase value to each pixel of the input image”, para 68, fig 2A) or
set the reconstruction field to a subsequent-iteration reconstruction field value for any subsequent- iteration, map the reconstruction field to a modulation field (“in the second and subsequent iterations, the data forming step 202B comprises forming a complex data set by combining (i) the distribution of phase values 213A from the previous iteration of the algorithm with (ii) the distribution of magnitude values of the input image 210”, para 74), wherein the modulation field is a complex plane of the phase light modulator (SLM 413, para 95) which modulates a phase of the light, and wherein the modulation field (modulation field of SLM 413, para 95) is located at an optical distance in the near field relative to the reconstruction field (Christmas teaches (para 11,28) that the computer-generated hologram is either a Fourier hologram or a Fresnel hologram or a Fourier transformation or a Fresnel transformation of the holographic reconstruction. Christmas also teaches (para 88) that its disclosure is applicable to Fresnel and Fourier holography. It is known that Fresnel holography concerns near-field diffractive field while Fourier holography relates to the Fourier field in far-field holography (para 62). Christmas also teaches (para 7) the holographic projector has application in head mounted and head-up devices including near-eye devices. Hence, Christmas teaches modulation field is located in near-field relative to the reconstruction field.)
set an amplitude of the modulation field to a predetermined value (“If the algorithm continues, second processing block 253 additionally replaces the magnitude values of the Fourier transformed complex data set with new magnitude values”, para 70), and
map the modulation field with the amplitude set to the predetermined value, to a subsequent-iteration reconstruction field (“Third processing block 256 receives the complex data set output by the second processing block 253 and performs an inverse Fourier transform to form an inverse Fourier transformed complex data set”, para 71);
wherein the controller (“The hologram calculation engine 403, video driver 405, video input 409 and SLM driver 411 may all be implemented on a field programmable gate array (FPGA)”, para 95) is further configured to provide a phase control signal (“If the difference between the distribution of magnitude values 211A and the input image 210 is sufficiently small, the fourth processing block 259 determines that the hologram 280A is acceptable”, para 72) based on the modulation field mapped with the last iteration to the phase light modulator (SLM 413, para 95).
Regarding Claim 2, Christmas teaches the projection system according to claim 1,
wherein the controller (“The hologram calculation engine 403, video driver 405, video input 409 and SLM driver 411 may all be implemented on a field programmable gate array (FPGA)”, para 95) is configured to iteratively:
set the reconstruction field to an initial value (“The first iteration of the algorithm starts with a data forming step 202A comprising assigning a random phase value to each pixel of the input image”, para 68, fig 2A),
map the reconstruction field to the modulation field (“in the second and subsequent iterations, the data forming step 202B comprises forming a complex data set by combining (i) the distribution of phase values 213A from the previous iteration of the algorithm with (ii) the distribution of magnitude values of the input image 210”, para 74),
set the amplitude of the modulation field to a predetermined value “If the algorithm continues, second processing block 253 additionally replaces the magnitude values of the Fourier transformed complex data set with new magnitude values”, para 70), and
map the modulation field having the amplitude set to the predetermined value to a subsequent-iteration reconstruction field (“Third processing block 256 receives the complex data set output by the second processing block 253 and performs an inverse Fourier transform to form an inverse Fourier transformed complex data set”, para 71), until the subsequent-iteration reconstruction field reaches a target image quality (“If the difference between the distribution of magnitude values 211A and the input image 210 is sufficiently small, the fourth processing block 259 determines that the hologram 280A is acceptable”, para 72) based on the modulation field mapped with the last iteration to the phase light modulator (SLM 413, para 95).
Regarding Claim 6, Christmas teaches the projection system according to claim 1,
wherein the controller (“The hologram calculation engine 403, video driver 405, video input 409 and SLM driver 411 may all be implemented on a field programmable gate array (FPGA)”, para 95) is configured to set an amplitude component of the modulation field (“If the algorithm continues, second processing block 253 additionally replaces the magnitude values of the Fourier transformed complex data set with new magnitude values”, para 70) to claim 1.
Regarding Claim 9, Christmas teaches the projection system according to claim 1,
wherein the controller (“The hologram calculation engine 403, video driver 405, video input 409 and SLM driver 411 may all be implemented on a field programmable gate array (FPGA)”, para 95) is configured to, iteratively for each of plurality of iterations within a subframe except a first iteration, generate an error signal (“difference between the distribution of magnitude values 211A and the input image 210) by comparing an integrated light field simulation of a current iteration to target image (the input image 210 ) (“Fourth processing block 259 receives the inverse Fourier transformed complex data set and assesses the distribution of magnitude values 211A. Specifically, the fourth processing block 259 compares the distribution of magnitude values 211A of the inverse Fourier transformed complex data set with the input image 510 which is itself, of course, a distribution of magnitude values. If the difference between the distribution of magnitude values 211A and the input image 210 is sufficiently small, the fourth processing block 259 determines that the hologram 280A is acceptable”, para 72).
Regarding Claim 10, Christmas teaches the projection system according to claim 9,
wherein the controller (“The hologram calculation engine 403, video driver 405, video input 409 and SLM driver 411 may all be implemented on a field programmable gate array (FPGA)”, para 95) is configured to, iteratively for each of the plurality of iterations except the first iteration, generate an updated target intensity based on a current target intensity and the error signal (“The output hologram 280B generally gets better with each iteration”, para 75).
Regarding Claim 11, Christmas teaches the projection system according to claim 1,
further comprising a secondary modulator (“If the hologram is a fully-complex hologram, a spatial light modulator which modulates phase and amplitude may be used or a first spatial light modulator which modulates phase and a second spatial light modulator which modulates amplitude may be used”, para 89) configured to receive and modulate the projection light.
Regarding Claim 12, Christmas teaches the projection system of claim 11,
wherein the phase light modulator (SLM 413, “The signal representative of the holograms is received by a video input 409 of the projection system 450 and sent to a driver 411 of the spatial light modulator, or SLM, 413”, para 95) (includes a plurality of pixel elements arranged in an array (“A LCOS device provides a dense array of light modulating elements, or pixels”, para 91), and circuitry configured to modify respective states of the plurality of pixel elements in response to the phase control signal (“a controllable phase-modulating element 308, often referred to as a pixel”, para 92).
Regarding Claim 13, Christmas teaches (fig 2A,B, 4) a method of driving a projection system (holographic projector, para 94), comprising:
emitting a light by a light source (laser diode 417, “The laser driver 415 controls a laser diode 417 of a laser in accordance with the signal to synchronize the light emitted from the laser with the holographic data displayed on the SLM”, para 97), in response to an image data (holographic data displayed on the SLM, para 97);
receiving the light by a phase light modulator (SLM 413, “The signal representative of the holograms is received by a video input 409 of the projection system 450 and sent to a driver 411 of the spatial light modulator, or SLM, 413”, para 95);
applying a spatially-varying phase modulation (“the driver 411 sets the pixels of the SLM 413 in accordance with the holographic data for that frame”, para 96 “holographic data displayed on the SLM”, para 97, holographic data gives spatially varying phase modulation) on the light by the phase light modulator (SLM 413), thereby generating a projection light and steering the light on a reconstruction field (“The holographic reconstruction, once formed, can be projected by optical system 407”, para 96), wherein the reconstruction field is a complex plane on which a reconstruction image is formed (“When the SLM 413 is illuminated by the laser, the hologram displayed on the SLM 413 causes interference in the light and a holographic reconstruction of the hologram is formed at a replay field spatially separate from the SLM”, para 110);;
initializing the reconstruction field to an initial value (“The input to the algorithm is an input image 210 comprising a 2D array of pixels or data values”, para 68); and
iteratively, with a controller (“The hologram calculation engine 403, video driver 405, video input 409 and SLM driver 411 may all be implemented on a field programmable gate array (FPGA)”, para 95) configured to control the light source (laser diode 417, para 97), and the phase light modulator (SLM 413, para 95), for each of a plurality of subframes (“ The laser gating signal 530 controls the laser driver 415 to then emit light for the next four subframes of frame 0 (subframes 2 to 5) within a frame of the image data:
setting the reconstruction field to the initial value for the first iteration (“The first iteration of the algorithm starts with a data forming step 202A comprising assigning a random phase value to each pixel of the input image”, para 68, fig 2A) or
setting the reconstruction field to a subsequent-iteration reconstruction field value for any subsequent-iteration, mapping the reconstruction field to a modulation field (“in the second and subsequent iterations, the data forming step 202B comprises forming a complex data set by combining (i) the distribution of phase values 213A from the previous iteration of the algorithm with (ii) the distribution of magnitude values of the input image 210”, para 74), wherein the modulation field is a complex plane of the phase light modulator (SLM 413, para 95) which modulates a phase of the light, which modulates a phase of the light, and
wherein the modulation field (modulation field of SLM 413, para 95) is located at an optical distance in the near field relative to the reconstruction field (Christmas teaches (para 11,28) that the computer-generated hologram is either a Fourier hologram or a Fresnel hologram or a Fourier transformation or a Fresnel transformation of the holographic reconstruction. Christmas also teaches (para 88) that its disclosure is applicable to Fresnel and Fourier holography. It is known that Fresnel holography concerns near-field diffractive field while Fourier holography relates to the Fourier field in far-field holography (para 62). Christmas also teaches (para 7) the holographic projector has application in head mounted and head-up devices including near-eye devices. Hence, Christmas teaches modulation field is located in near-field relative to the reconstruction field.)
setting an amplitude of the modulation field to a predetermined value (“If the algorithm continues, second processing block 253 additionally replaces the magnitude values of the Fourier transformed complex data set with new magnitude values”, para 70),
mapping the modulation field with the amplitude set to the predetermined value, to a subsequent-iteration reconstruction field (“Third processing block 256 receives the complex data set output by the second processing block 253 and performs an inverse Fourier transform to form an inverse Fourier transformed complex data set”, para 71); and
providing a phase control signal (“If the difference between the distribution of magnitude values 211A and the input image 210 is sufficiently small, the fourth processing block 259 determines that the hologram 280A is acceptable”, para 72) based on the modulation field mapped with the last iteration to the phase light modulator (SLM 413, para 95).
Regarding Claim 14, Christmas teaches the method according to claim 13,
wherein setting the reconstruction field to an initial value, mapping the reconstruction field to the modulation field(“in the second and subsequent iterations, the data forming step 202B comprises forming a complex data set by combining (i) the distribution of phase values 213A from the previous iteration of the algorithm with (ii) the distribution of magnitude values of the input image 210”, para 74), wherein the modulation field is a complex plane of the phase light modulator (SLM 413, para 95) which modulates a phase of the light, which modulates a phase of the light,
setting an amplitude of the modulation field to a predetermined value (“If the algorithm continues, second processing block 253 additionally replaces the magnitude values of the Fourier transformed complex data set with new magnitude values”, para 70),
mapping the modulation field with the amplitude set to the predetermined value, to a subsequent-iteration reconstruction field (“Third processing block 256 receives the complex data set output by the second processing block 253 and performs an inverse Fourier transform to form an inverse Fourier transformed complex data set”, para 71), are iteratively performed until the subsequent-iteration reconstruction field reaches a target image quality (“If the difference between the distribution of magnitude values 211A and the input image 210 is sufficiently small, the fourth processing block 259 determines that the hologram 280A is acceptable”, para 72).
Regarding Claim 18, Christmas teaches the method according to claim 13,
wherein scaling the amplitude of the modulation field includes setting an amplitude component of the modulation field to 1. (“If the algorithm continues, second processing block 253 additionally replaces the magnitude values of the Fourier transformed complex data set with new magnitude values”, para 70).
Regarding Claim 21, Christmas teaches the method according to claim 13,
further comprising, iteratively for each of a plurality of iterations within a subframe except a first iteration, generating an error signal (“difference between the distribution of magnitude values 211A and the input image 210) by comparing an integrated light field simulation of a current iteration to target image (the input image 210 ) (“Fourth processing block 259 receives the inverse Fourier transformed complex data set and assesses the distribution of magnitude values 211A. Specifically, the fourth processing block 259 compares the distribution of magnitude values 211A of the inverse Fourier transformed complex data set with the input image 510 which is itself, of course, a distribution of magnitude values. If the difference between the distribution of magnitude values 211A and the input image 210 is sufficiently small, the fourth processing block 259 determines that the hologram 280A is acceptable”, para 72).
Regarding Claim 22, Christmas teaches the method according to claim 21,
further comprising, iteratively for each of the plurality of iterations except the first iteration, generating an updated target intensity based on a current target intensity and the error signal (“difference between the distribution of magnitude values 211A and the input image 210) (“The output hologram 280B generally gets better with each iteration”, para 75).
Regarding Claim 23, Christmas teaches the method according to claim 13,
further comprising receiving and modulating the projection light by a secondary modulator (“If the hologram is a fully-complex hologram, a spatial light modulator which modulates phase and amplitude may be used or a first spatial light modulator which modulates phase and a second spatial light modulator which modulates amplitude may be used”, para 89).
Regarding Claim 24, Christmas teaches the method according to claim 23,
wherein the phase light modulator (SLM 413, “The signal representative of the holograms is received by a video input 409 of the projection system 450 and sent to a driver 411 of the spatial light modulator, or SLM, 413”, para 95) (includes a plurality of pixel elements arranged in an array (“A LCOS device provides a dense array of light modulating elements, or pixels”, para 91), and circuitry configured to modify respective states of the plurality of pixel elements in response to the phase control signal (“a controllable phase-modulating element 308, often referred to as a pixel”, para 92).
Regarding Claim 25, Christmas teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium (“A computer system 400 is arranged to comprise a memory or input for storing or receiving a video 401 comprising frames. The video 401 may alternatively comprise rendered graphics from a graphics processing unit (GPU),”, para 94) storing instructions that, when executed by a processor of a projection device (holographic projector, para 94), cause the projection device to perform operations comprising the method according to claim 13.
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(s) 3-5,15-17, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Christmas et al (US 2020/0292990 A1, of record) in view of Damberg et al (US 2017/0085846 A1, of record).
Regarding Claim 3, Christmas teaches the projection system according to claim 1.
However, Christmas does not teach
wherein the controller is configured to, iteratively for each of the plurality of subframes within the frame of the image data, apply a regularization factor to the subsequent- iteration reconstruction field.
Christmas and Damberg are related as phase only modulators.
Damberg teaches
wherein the controller is configured to, iteratively (“This optimization problem can be solved by iterating between updates to the phase function and updates to the warped image, as illustrated by the following example Algorithm”, para 65) for each frame of the image data, (“From this image formation model one can construct the following optimization problem for determining the phase function p(x) for a given target image”, para 64) apply a regularization factor (“For an arbitrary convex function, F(z), the proximal operator”, para 72, “Since proximal operators contain a strictly convex regularization term”, para 74) to the subsequent- iteration.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the iterations of Christmas to include the regularization factor of Damberg for the purpose of designing algorithms with rapid convergence (para 74).
Regarding Claim 4, Christmas-Damberg teaches the projection system according to claim 3.
However, Christmas does not teach
wherein the regularization factor adjusts a target amplitude of the subsequent-iteration reconstruction field using a gain function based on a reconstruction error of a current iteration.
Christmas and Damberg are related as phase only modulators.
Damberg teaches
wherein the regularization factor (“For an arbitrary convex function, F(z), the proximal operator”, para 72, “Since proximal operators contain a strictly convex regularization term”, para 74) adjusts a target amplitude of the subsequent-iteration field using a gain function (convex function, para 72) based on an error of a current iteration.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the iterations of Christmas to include the regularization factor with a gain function of Damberg for the purpose of designing algorithms with rapid convergence (para 74).
Regarding Claim 5, Christmas-Damberg teaches the projection system of claim 4.
However, Christmas does not teach
wherein the gain includes a blurring filter.
Christmas and Damberg are related as phase only modulators.
Damberg teaches
wherein the gain includes a blurring filter (“modelling blur in an image at the image plane and generating control values for an amplitude modulator that tend to compensate at least in part for the blur”, para 190).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the iterations of Christmas to include the regularization factor with a gain function of Damberg for the purpose of designing algorithms with rapid convergence (para 74).
Regarding Claim 15, Christmas teaches the method according to claim 13.
However, Christmas does not teach
further comprising, iteratively for each of the plurality of subframes within the frame of the image data, applying a regularization factor to the reconstruction field.
Christmas and Damberg are related as phase only modulators.
Damberg teaches
further comprising, iteratively (“This optimization problem can be solved by iterating between updates to the phase function and updates to the warped image, as illustrated by the following example Algorithm”, para 65) for each frame of the image data, (“From this image formation model one can construct the following optimization problem for determining the phase function p(x) for a given target image”, para 64) apply a regularization factor (“For an arbitrary convex function, F(z), the proximal operator”, para 72, “Since proximal operators contain a strictly convex regularization term”, para 74) to the subsequent- iteration.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the iterations of Christmas to include the regularization factor of Damberg for the purpose of designing algorithms with rapid convergence (para 74).
Regarding Claim 16, Christmas-Damberg teaches the method of claim 15.
However, Christmas does not teach
wherein the regularization factor adjusts a target amplitude of the subsequent-iteration reconstruction field using a gain function based on a reconstruction error of a current iteration.
Christmas and Damberg are related as phase only modulators.
Damberg teaches
wherein the regularization factor (“For an arbitrary convex function, F(z), the proximal operator”, para 72, “Since proximal operators contain a strictly convex regularization term”, para 74) adjusts a target amplitude of the subsequent-iteration field using a gain function (convex function, para 72) based on an error of a current iteration.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the iterations of Christmas to include the regularization factor with a gain function of Damberg for the purpose of designing algorithms with rapid convergence (para 74).
Regarding Claim 17, Christmas-Damberg teaches the method of claim 16.
However, Christmas does not teach
wherein the gain includes a blurring filter.
Christmas and Damberg are related as phase only modulators.
Damberg teaches
wherein the gain includes a blurring filter (“modelling blur in an image at the image plane and generating control values for an amplitude modulator that tend to compensate at least in part for the blur”, para 190).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the iterations of Christmas to include the regularization factor with a gain function of Damberg for the purpose of designing algorithms with rapid convergence (para 74).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7,8,19,20 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.
Claim 7 is allowable for at least the reason:
“wherein the controller is configured to pad the reconstruction field with a dump region before mapping the reconstruction field to the modulation field.”
Claim 8 is dependent on claim 7 and allowable for at least the same reason as claim 7.
Claim 19 is allowable for at least the reason:
“further comprising padding the reconstruction field with a dump region before mapping the reconstruction field to the modulation field.”
Claim 20 is dependent on claim 19 and allowable for at least the same reason as claim 19.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JYOTSNA V DABBI whose telephone number is (571)270-3270. The examiner can normally be reached M-Fri: 9:00am-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, STEPHONE ALLEN can be reached at 571-272-2434. 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.
/JYOTSNA V DABBI/Examiner, Art Unit 2872 5/26/2026
Prosecution Insights