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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 11/26/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Note that Applicant has amended the claims with the language that invokes section 112(f). See corresponding treatment of the amended language below.
Regarding the newly amended language of Claim 1, Applicant argues: “The Applicant submits that the combination of Aiki and Ouchi does not teach, suggest, or render obvious at least, for example, the feature of "the first hologram has an intensity distribution of different diffraction efficiency with respect to a wavelength of the light emitted from the light source based on a first position in a plane of the first hologram," as recited in amended independent claim 1.”
Examiner notes that prior art appear to teach this feature as noted in Aiki, Paragraphs 149, and 150, Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Fig. 1. See updated reasons for rejection below.
Applicant argues: “Ouchi further describes that the reflective type hologram optical element selectively diffracts and reflects only light in an extremely limited wavelength region. Ouchi further describes that the light is diffracted by the reflective type hologram optical element shows a maximum value in the respective wavelength regions. However, Ouchi does not describe that an intensity distribution of different diffraction efficiency of a hologram is based on a position in a plane of the hologram.”
Examiner disagrees. Ouchi specifically teaches: “in a case where the light passes through a specified position after being emitted from the center of the display part of the image display means and diffracted by the reflective type hologram optical element shows a maximum value in the respective wavelength regions described above” Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Fig. 1. See reasons for rejection below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
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.
Use of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is invoked is rebutted when the function is recited with sufficient structure, material, or acts within the claim itself to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is not invoked is rebutted when the claim element recites function but fails to recite sufficiently definite structure, material or acts to perform that function. M.P.E.P. 2181(I), Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC, 792 F.3d 1339, 1348, 115 USPQ2d 1105, 1111 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (en banc, quoting Watts v. XL Systems, Inc., 232 F.3d 877, 880 (Fed. Cir. 2000); Personalized Media Communications, LLC v. International Trade Commission, 161 F. 3d 696, 704 (Fed. Cir. 1998). A substitute term acts as a generic placeholder for the term "means" and would not be recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art as being sufficiently definite structure for performing the claimed function. "The standard is whether the words of the claim are understood by persons of ordinary skill in the art to have a sufficiently definite meaning as the name for structure." Williamson at 1349; see also Greenberg v. Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Inc., 91 F.3d 1580, 1583 (Fed. Cir. 1996). Specification must disclose adequate structure for each of the claimed functions, and the structure for special purpose functions must be more than simply a general purpose computer or microprocessor, specification must also disclose an algorithm for performing these claimed functions. Williamson at 1351.
Claims 1-16 recite “the first hologram is configured to: compensate for dispersion of light emitted from the light source. diffract and emits the compensated light, and emit the diffracted light, … the second hologram configured to: diffract the light diffracted with the compensated dispersion, and emit the light, diffracted by the second hologram, in a direction of an eye of a user …” a generic term [hologram] modified by functional language but not modified by structure or a structural term and not naming a structure readily recognized by persons of skill in the art to perform the claimed function. The limitation invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph, and shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Specification supports the structure of the hologram as a diffraction grating. See Specification Paragraphs 3 and 9.
Claims 1-16 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.
Claims 1-16 are similarly rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-16 recite “a light source configured to emit light … a light guide plate, wherein the light guide plate is configured to receive the light … the received light is propagated through the light guide plate by total reflection, the received light is emitted outside of the light guide plate … a light intensity detector configured to detect that detects light intensity … a light spectral sensitivity detector configured to detect spectral sensitivity of the light … a temperature detector configured to detect a temperature …” a generic term [source, plate, detector, ] modified by functional language [configured to …] but not modified by structure or a structural term and not naming a structure readily recognized by persons of skill in the art to perform the claimed function. The limitation invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph, and shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification and equivalents thereof. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding differentiated structure, material, or act for each claimed function.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph; or
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2, 6-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable US 20110019250 to Aiki (“Aiki”) in view of US 20050141066 to Ouchi (“Ouchi”).
Regarding Claim 1: “A display device, comprising:
a light source configured to emit light; a first hologram; and a second hologram, wherein (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification and ordinary skill in the art, a hologram structure can be a diffraction grating. See Specification Paragraphs 3 and 9. Prior art teaches: “The light conduction section 1030 includes a light conduction plate 1031, and a first [hologram] diffraction grating member 1040 and a second [hologram] diffraction grating member 1050 provided on the light conduction plate 1031 and individually formed from a reflection type volume hologram diffraction grating.” Aiki, Paragraph 7, Figs. 26-27.)
the first hologram is configured to: compensate for dispersion of light emitted from the light source; diffract the compensated light, and emit the diffracted light, (“Light emitted from pixels of the image formation apparatus 1011 is inputted to the collimate optical system 1012,” which is then “is inputted to the first diffraction grating member 1040 formed from a reflection type volume hologram diffraction grating” which diffracts, reflects, and emits the light which makes “a dispersion is less likely to occur.” Aiki, Paragraphs 7, 11-12, 78 Figs. 26-27.)
the second hologram configured to: diffract the light diffracted with the compensated dispersion; and emit the light diffracted by the second hologram, in a direction of an eye of a user, and (“Then, the parallel [compensated] light of angles of view inputted to the second diffraction grating member 1050 goes beside from the total reflection condition by the diffraction reflection, and is emitted from the light, conduction plate 1031 and then inputted to the pupil 41 of the observer.” Aiki, Paragraph 12, Figs. 26-27.)
Aiki does not explicitly teach that “the first hologram has an intensity distribution of different diffraction efficiency with respect to a wavelength of the light emitted from the light source based on a first position in a plane of the first hologram.” Aiki does indicate that the holographic diffraction grating has an intensity distribution of different diffraction efficiency with respect to a wavelength of the light and orientation of light with respect to the diffraction grating. See Aiki, Paragraphs 149, and 150.
Aiki does not mention different diffraction efficiency depending on a position in a plane of the hologram, however, this appears to be an ordinary property of these types of elements.
Ouchi teaches the above claim feature in the context of such head mounted image display devices: “the wavelength at which the diffraction efficiency in a case where the light passes through a specified position after being emitted from the center of the display part of the image display means and diffracted by the reflective type hologram optical element shows a maximum value in the respective wavelength regions described above” Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Fig. 1.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to supplement the teachings of Aiki to use holographic diffraction grating that has different diffraction efficiency depending on a position in a plane of the hologram as claimed above and described in Ouchi, because it is an ordinary property of the holographic diffraction gratings available in the art. See Ouchi, Paragraphs 5 and 36.
Finally, in reviewing the present application, there does not seem to be objective evidence that the claim limitations are particularly directed to: addressing a particular problem which was recognized but unsolved in the art, producing unexpected results at the level of the ordinary skill in the art, or any other objective indicators of non-obviousness.
Regarding Claim 2: “The display device according to claim 1, further comprising:
a light guide plate, wherein (“the light conduction plate 1031” Aiki, Paragraph 12, Figs. 26-27.)
the light guide plate is configured to receive the light diffracted with the compensated dispersion emitted from the first hologram, … the received light is propagated through the light guide plate by total reflection, … the received light is emitted outside of the light guide plate, and … the light emitted from the light guide plate is incident on the second hologram.” (“the light diffraction reflected by the first diffraction grating member 1040 in the light conduction plate 1031 are conducted as parallel light fluxes while repetitively totally reflecting between the first face 1032 and the second face 1033, and advances in a Y direction toward the second diffraction grating member 1050.” Aiki, Paragraph 12, Figs. 26-27.)
Regarding Claim 6: “The display device according t o claim 1 , wherein the first hologram has the intensity distribution of different diffraction efficiency accompanying a change in wavelength of the light emitted from the light source on the first position in the plane of the first hologram.” (“the wavelength at which the diffraction efficiency in a case where the light passes through a specified position after being emitted from the center of the display part of the image display means and diffracted by the reflective type hologram optical element shows a maximum value in the respective wavelength regions described above” Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 12-13, 17-19, 25-27. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
Regarding Claim 7: “The display device according to claim 1, wherein the first hologram has maximum intensity of different diffraction efficiency with respect to a first wavelength of the light emitted from the light source based on the first position in the plane of the first hologram.” (“the wavelength at which the diffraction efficiency in a case where the light passes through a specified position after being emitted from the center of the display part of the image display means and diffracted by the reflective type hologram optical element shows a maximum value in the respective wavelength regions described above” Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 12-15, 25-27. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
Regarding Claim 8: “The display device according to claim 1, wherein the first hologram has the intensity distribution of different diffraction efficiency accompanying a change in wavelength of the light emitted from the light source based on the position in the plane of the first hologram, and the first hologram has maximum intensity of different diffraction efficiency with respect to a first wavelength of the light emitted from the light source based on a second position in the plane of the first hologram.” (“the wavelength at which the diffraction efficiency in a case where the light passes through a specified position after being emitted from the center of the display part of the image display means and diffracted by the reflective type hologram optical element shows a maximum value in the respective wavelength regions described above” Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 12-15, 25-27. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
Regarding Claim 9: “The display device according to claim 1, wherein
the first hologram has, in the plane, a first direction and a second direction, the second direction is perpendicular to the first direction, … a start point in the first direction and a start point in the second direction are same, (“shown in FIG. 26 … The parallel light flux group is converted into a light flux group wherein the angles of view are different from each other on an XZ plane orthogonal to the XY plane and is introduced to the light conduction plate 1031,” with a relative origin point in the coordinate system Aiki, Paragraph 8 and Figs. 25-27, and similarly in Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 16, 25. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
an area included in the first hologram along the first direction comprises a first set of regions in which a wavelength at which diffraction efficiency becomes maximum intensity changes, and (“reflective type hologram optical element shows a maximum value in the respective wavelength regions is designated as λ and [iii] the wavelength at which the diffraction efficiency of the light that is propagated at a different position from the specified position after being emitted …” note that the first set of regions would be an area in the XZ plane described above, thus having coordinates in the first and in the second direction. Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 12-15, 21-25. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
an area included in the first hologram along the second direction, comprises a second set of regions in which the maximum intensity of the diffraction efficiency changes.” (“reflective type hologram optical element shows a maximum value in the respective wavelength regions is designated as λ and [iii] the wavelength at which the diffraction efficiency of the light that is propagated at a different position from the specified position after being emitted …” note that the set of regions would be an area in the XZ plane described above, thus having coordinates in the first and in the second direction. Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 12-15, 21-25. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
Regarding Claim 10: “The display device according to claim 1, wherein
the first hologram has, in the plane, a first direction and a second direction, the second direction is perpendicular to the first direction, … a start point in the first direction and a start point in the second direction are same, (“shown in FIG. 26 … The parallel light flux group is converted into a light flux group wherein the angles of view are different from each other on an XZ plane orthogonal to the XY plane and is introduced to the light conduction plate 1031,” with a relative origin point in the coordinate system Aiki, Paragraph 8 and Figs. 25-27, and similarly in Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 16, 25. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
an area included in the first hologram along the first direction, comprises a first set of regions in which a wavelength at which diffraction efficiency becomes maximum intensity changes in a long wavelength direction in order from a side of the start point, and (“reflective type hologram optical element shows a maximum value in the respective wavelength regions is designated as λ and [iii] the wavelength at which the diffraction efficiency of the light that is propagated at a different position from the specified position after being emitted,” where deviating in wavelength changes maximum intensity. Note that the region would be an area in the XZ plane described above, thus having coordinates in the first and in the second direction based on a relative origin. Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 12-13, 19-20. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
an area, included in the first hologram along the second direction, comprises a second set of regions in which maximum intensity of the diffraction efficiency changes in a direction in which the maximum intensity of the diffraction efficiency is small in order from the side of the start point in the second direction.” (“reflective type hologram optical element shows a maximum value in the respective wavelength regions is designated as λ and [iii] the wavelength at which the diffraction efficiency of the light that is propagated at a different position from the specified position after being emitted,” where deviating in a direction away from the maximum region results in the diffraction efficiency becoming small. Note that the region would be an area in the XZ plane described above, thus having coordinates in the first and in the second direction based on a relative origin. Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 12-15, 21-25. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
Regarding Claim 11: “The display device according to claim 1, wherein
the first hologram has, in the plane, a first direction and a second direction, the second direction perpendicular to the first direction, … a start point in the first direction and a start point in the second direction are same, (“shown in FIG. 26 … The parallel light flux group is converted into a light flux group wherein the angles of view are different from each other on an XZ plane orthogonal to the XY plane and is introduced to the light conduction plate 1031,” with a relative origin point in the coordinate system Aiki, Paragraph 8 and Figs. 25-27, and similarly in Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 16, 25. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
an area included in the first hologram along the first direction, comprises a first set of regions in which maximum intensity of diffraction efficiency changes, (“reflective type hologram optical element shows a maximum value in the respective wavelength regions is designated as λ and [iii] the wavelength at which the diffraction efficiency of the light that is propagated at a different position from the specified position after being emitted …” note that the region would be an area in the XZ plane described above, thus having coordinates in the first and in the second direction. Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 12-15, 21-25. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
an area, included in the first hologram along the second direction, comprises a second set of regions in which the maximum intensity of the diffraction efficiency changes.” (“reflective type hologram optical element shows a maximum value in the respective wavelength regions is designated as λ and [iii] the wavelength at which the diffraction efficiency of the light that is propagated at a different position from the specified position after being emitted …” note that the region would be an area in the XZ plane described above, thus having coordinates in the first and in the second direction. Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 12-15, 21-25. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
Regarding Claim 12: “The display device according to claim 1, wherein
the first hologram has, in the plane, a first direction and a second direction, the second direction is perpendicular to the first direction, … a start point in the first direction and a start point in the second direction are same, (“shown in FIG. 26 … The parallel light flux group is converted into a light flux group wherein the angles of view are different from each other on an XZ plane orthogonal to the XY plane and is introduced to the light conduction plate 1031,” with a relative origin point in the coordinate system Aiki, Paragraph 8 and Figs. 25-27, and similarly in Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 16, 25. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
an area, included in the first hologram along the first direction, comprises a first set of regions in which a wavelength at which diffraction efficiency becomes maximum intensity changes, and (“reflective type hologram optical element shows a maximum value in the respective wavelength regions is designated as λ and [iii] the wavelength at which the diffraction efficiency of the light that is propagated at a different position from the specified position after being emitted …” note that the region would be an area in the XZ plane described above, thus having coordinates in the first and in the second direction. Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 12-15, 21-25. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
an area, included in the first hologram along the second direction, comprises a second set of regions in which the wavelength at which the diffraction efficiency becomes the maximum intensity changes.” (“reflective type hologram optical element shows a maximum value in the respective wavelength regions is designated as λ and [iii] the wavelength at which the diffraction efficiency of the light that is propagated at a different position from the specified position after being emitted …” note that the region would be an area in the XZ plane described above, thus having coordinates in the first and in the second direction. Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 12-15, 21-25. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
Regarding Claim 13: “The display device according to claim 1, wherein
the first hologram has, in the plane, a first direction and a second direction, the second direction is perpendicular to the first direction, … a start point in the first direction and a start point in the second direction are same, (“shown in FIG. 26 … The parallel light flux group is converted into a light flux group wherein the angles of view are different from each other on an XZ plane orthogonal to the XY plane and is introduced to the light conduction plate 1031,” with a relative origin point in the coordinate system Aiki, Paragraph 8 and Figs. 25-27, and similarly in Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 16, 25. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
an area, included in the first hologram along the first direction, comprises a first set of regions in which a wavelength at which diffraction efficiency becomes maximum intensity changes and a region in which maximum intensity of diffraction efficiency changes are in random (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification and ordinary skill in the art, the exact regions of diffraction efficiency are not known exactly because they are functions of the random differences in the manufacturing of the diffraction grating. Prior art diffraction gratings are subject to the usual random manufacturing differences in forming the “reflective type hologram optical element shows a maximum value in the respective wavelength regions is designated as λ and [iii] the wavelength at which the diffraction efficiency of the light that is propagated at a different position from the specified position after being emitted …” the regions of the hologram thus having random manufacturing variations. Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 12-15, 21-25. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
an area, included in the first hologram along the second direction, comprises a second set of regions in which the maximum intensity of the diffraction efficiency changes are in random.” (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification and ordinary skill in the art, the exact regions of diffraction efficiency are not known exactly because they are functions of the random differences in the manufacturing of the diffraction grating. Prior art diffraction gratings are subject to the usual random manufacturing differences in forming the “reflective type hologram optical element shows a maximum value in the respective wavelength regions is designated as λ and [iii] the wavelength at which the diffraction efficiency of the light that is propagated at a different position from the specified position after being emitted …” the regions of the hologram thus having random manufacturing variations. Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 12-15, 21-25. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
Regarding Claim 14: “The display device according to claim 1, wherein
the first hologram has, in the plane, a first direction and a second direction, the second direction is perpendicular to the first direction, … a start point in the first direction and a start point in the second direction are same, (“shown in FIG. 26 … The parallel light flux group is converted into a light flux group wherein the angles of view are different from each other on an XZ plane orthogonal to the XY plane and is introduced to the light conduction plate 1031,” with a relative origin point in the coordinate system Aiki, Paragraph 8 and Figs. 25-27, and similarly in Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 16, 25. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
an area, included in the first hologram along the first direction, comprises a first set of regions in which maximum intensity of diffraction efficiency continuously changes, and (“reflective type hologram optical element shows a maximum value in the respective wavelength regions is designated as λ and [iii] the wavelength at which the diffraction efficiency of the light that is propagated at a different position from the specified position after being emitted …” note that the region would be an area in the XZ plane described above, thus having coordinates in the first and in the second direction. Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 12-15, 21-27. The Figures 10-13, 17-20, 27-27 indicate a continuity of change based on position, wavelength and angle of view. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
an area, included in the first hologram along the second direction, comprises a second set of regions in which the wavelength at which the diffraction efficiency becomes the maximum intensity continuously changes.” (“reflective type hologram optical element shows a maximum value in the respective wavelength regions is designated as λ and [iii] the wavelength at which the diffraction efficiency of the light that is propagated at a different position from the specified position after being emitted …” note that the region would be an area in the XZ plane described above, thus having coordinates in the first and in the second direction. Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 10-13, 17-20, 27-27. The Figures 10-13, 17-20, 27-27 indicate a continuity of change based on position, wavelength and angle of view. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
Regarding Claim 15: “The display device according to claim 1, wherein
the first hologram has, in the plane, a first direction and a second direction, the second direction is perpendicular to the first direction, … a start point in the first direction and a start point in the second direction are same, (“shown in FIG. 26 … The parallel light flux group is converted into a light flux group wherein the angles of view are different from each other on an XZ plane orthogonal to the XY plane and is introduced to the light conduction plate 1031,” with a relative origin point in the coordinate system Aiki, Paragraph 8 and Figs. 25-27, and similarly in Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 16, 25. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
an area, included in the first hologram along the first direction, comprises a first set of regions in which maximum intensity of diffraction efficiency discontinuously changes, and (“reflective type hologram optical element shows a maximum value in the respective wavelength regions is designated as λ and [iii] the wavelength at which the diffraction efficiency of the light that is propagated at a different position from the specified position after being emitted …” note that the region would be an area in the XZ plane described above, thus having coordinates in the first and in the second direction. Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 12-15, 21-27. The figures 1, 9, 16 indicate discrete beams that represent discrete and thus discontinuous changes based on position and angle of view. Further, Figs. 7-8, 14-15, 21-22, and 26 indicate discrete (piecewise linear) transitions. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
an area, included in the first hologram along the second direction, comprises a second set of regions in which a wavelength at which the diffraction efficiency becomes the maximum intensity discontinuously changes.” (“reflective type hologram optical element shows a maximum value in the respective wavelength regions is designated as λ and [iii] the wavelength at which the diffraction efficiency of the light that is propagated at a different position from the specified position after being emitted …” note that the region would be an area in the XZ plane described above, thus having coordinates in the first and in the second direction. Ouchi, Paragraph 36 and Figs. 12-15, 21-27. The figures 1, 9, 16 indicate discrete beams that represent discrete and thus discontinuous changes based on position and angle of view. Further, Figs. 7-8, 14-15, 21-22, and 26 indicate discrete (piecewise linear) transitions. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
Claim 16 is rejected for reasons stated for Claim 1, and because prior art teaches:
“for each of a left eye of a user and right eye of the user … emit the light, diffracted by the second hologram, in respective direction of the respective eye of the user” (Each “light conduction section 1030 which receives light displayed by the image formation apparatus 1011 and conducts the inputted light to the pupil 41 of an observer. The light conduction section 1030 includes a light conduction plate 1031, and a first diffraction grating member 1040 and a second diffraction grating member 1050” Aiki, Paragraph 7. Note that duplication of this for each eye or pupil is obvious: “the two image displaying apparatus are coupled to each other … each image production apparatus is preferably positioned on the outer side with respect to the pupils of the observer … ” See Aiki, Paragraph 168 and Figs. 6-12.)
Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable US 20110019250 to Aiki (“Aiki”) in view of US 20050141066 to Ouchi (“Ouchi”), in view of US 20210057887 to Kyoto (“Kyoto”).
Regarding Claim 3: “The display device according to claim 1, further comprising
Aiki and Ouchi do not teach: “a light intensity detector configured to detect light intensity of the light emitted from the light source.”
Kyoto teaches the above claim feature in the context of monitoring the performance of a laser or a laser diode light source: “The output measurement sensors 71 detect the intensities of the second laser light beams 20 having their respective wavelengths, and output detection signals indicating the detected intensities, respectively.” Kyoto, Paragraph 19.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to supplement the teachings of Aiki and Ouchi to use “a light intensity detector that detects light intensity of the light emitted from the light source” in the manner taught in Kyoto, in order to control the light source “such that the intensity of the laser light beam outputted by each of the laser diodes 40 is made close to a target value”. Kyoto, Paragraph 20.
Finally, in reviewing the present application, there does not seem to be objective evidence that the claim limitations are particularly directed to: addressing a particular problem which was recognized but unsolved in the art, producing unexpected results at the level of the ordinary skill in the art, or any other objective indicators of non-obviousness.
Regarding Claim 4: “The display device according to claim 1, further comprising a light spectral sensitivity detector configured to detect spectral sensitivity of the light emitted from the light source.” (“The two or more output measurement sensors 71a, 71b, and 71c have their respective sensitivity characteristics different from each other, the sensitivity characteristics each exhibiting a light-receiving sensitivity with respect to a wavelength of a laser light beam. The sensitivity characteristics indicate the light-receiving sensitivities with respect to the wavelengths of the laser light beams, respectively.” Thus, each sensor is sensitive to a different spectrum of light. See Kyoto, Paragraph 19.)
Regarding Claim 5: “The display device according to claim 1, further comprising a temperature detector configured to detect a temperature of the light source.” (“The thermal sensor 75 is a sensor for detecting the intensity of a laser output based on temperature change.” Kyoto, Paragraph 43. See statement of motivation in Claim 3.)
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 MIKHAIL ITSKOVICH whose telephone number is (571)270-7940. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Thu. 9am - 8pm.
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, Joseph Ustaris can be reached at (571)272-7383. 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.
/MIKHAIL ITSKOVICH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2483