DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This office action is in response to the amendment filed 3/6/2026.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 8/6/2025 and 2/23/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
In the response from applicant on the restriction requirement on 1/12/2026, applicant agrees to elects group 1 (claims 1-19, 21-23 and 33-34), and cancel group 2 (claims 20 and 24-28). Hence Claims 20 and 24-28 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention and species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Newly submitted claims 29-32 directed to an invention that is independent from the invention originally claimed as indicated. Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claims 29-32 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
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 1-19, 21-23 and 33-34 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, cited term of “calculating a correction factor for the canonical pixel” (line 12) is vague and renders the claims indefinite. It is unclear that the cited correction factor is for canonical pixel body itself or for optical parameters related to the canonical pixel. It is unclear that cited correction factor is for what parameters of the canonical pixel body, pixel shapes or positions? Or the cited correction factor is for an optical parameter of the canonical pixel, for example, light intensity correction factor, luminance correction factor of the canonical pixel.
Further, cited term of “generating a luminance profile for the canonical pixel based on the light received by the light sensor at the canonical pixel” (line 10-11) is vague and renders the claims indefinite. Claim cites two lights: (1) “measuring a light intensity value at a canonical pixel in the hogel with the light sensor” (line 5) (--illumination pattern centered at a first pixel); (2) “measuring the light intensity value at the canonical pixel when the pixel illumination pattern is at the offset position” (line 8-9). It is unclear that “…based on the light received…” (line 10-11), “the light” corresponds to which one of the two lights.
Claims 2-19, 21-23 and 33-34 are rejected as containing the deficiencies of claim 1 through their dependency from claim 1.
Therefore proper amendments are required in order to clarify the scopes of the claims and overcome the rejections.
Examiner’s Note
Regarding the references, the Examiner cites particular figures, paragraphs, columns and line numbers in the reference(s), as applied to the claims above. Although the particular citations are representative teachings and are applied to specific limitations within the claims, other passages, internally cited references, and figures may also apply. In preparing a response, it is respectfully requested that the Applicant fully consider the references, in their entirety, as potentially disclosing or teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as fully consider the context of the passage as taught by the reference(s) or as disclosed by the Examiner.
Conclusion
The prior arts made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
(a) Meacham (US 20180309981) teaches a pre-conditioning method for an input light field (abstract; figs. 1-2) comprising:
positioning a light sensor to receive light from a hogel in a light field display plane (fig. 1, 100, 101; ¶[0034], line 1-30, one or more digital cameras may be focused on the screen 101 while test patterns are displayed by the projectors 201 to automatically measure misalignment and color and bright ness differences between projectors).
displaying a pixel illumination pattern centered at a first pixel location in the hogel on the light field display plane (figs. 1-2, 100, 202), ; measuring a light intensity value at a canonical pixel in the hogel with the light sensor (see above, ¶[0034], line 1-30);
displaying the pixel illumination pattern at an offset position relative to the first pixel location on the light field display plane (figs. 7-8, 706, 100, 201); measuring the light intensity value at the canonical pixel when the pixel illumination pattern is at the offset position (see above, ¶[0034], line 1-30);
generating a luminance profile for the canonical pixel (fig. 2, 207).
(b) Hamilton et al (US 20200120328) teaches a pre-conditioning method for an input light field (abstract; fig. 1) comprising:
positioning a light sensor to receive light from a hogel in a light field display plane (¶[0017] - ¶[0018]; ¶[0023] -¶[0024]);
displaying a pixel illumination pattern centered at a first pixel location in the hogel on the light field display plane (¶[0020]);
measuring a light intensity value at a canonical pixel in the hogel with the light sensor (¶[0023] -¶[0024]);
displaying the pixel illumination pattern at an offset position relative to the first pixel location on the light field display plane ¶[0026]);
generating a luminance profile for the canonical pixel (¶[0028] -¶[0029]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to Jie Lei whose telephone number is (571) 272 7231. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon.-Thurs. 8:00 am to 5:30 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by the telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Thomas Pham can be reached on (571) 272 3689.The Fax number for the organization where this application is assigned is (571) 273 8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published application may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Services Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199(In USA or Canada) or 571-272-1000.
/JIE LEI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights