DETAILED ACTION
1. This Office Action is responsive to amendments filed for No. 18/598,807 on April 20, 2026. Please note Claims 1-24 and 26-28 are pending and have been examined.
America Invents Act
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
3. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on April 20, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. Claims 1, 5-9, 11, 15-19 and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. ( US 2014/0375947 A1 ) in view of Bailey et al. ( US 2016/0274365 A1 ) and Samec et al. ( US 2016/0270656 A1 ).
Park teaches in Claim 1:
A computing system configured to be worn on a head of a user ( Figure 24B, [0002] discloses a head mounted display. Figure 21, etc, disclose a display optical system 101 ), comprising:
a frame comprising a first template portion and a second temple portion ( Figure 2, [0034] disclose a top view with temple arms 102a and 102b (read as first and second temple portions) ); and
a see-through display panel extending between the first and second temple portions of the frame so that the see-through display is positioned directly in front of an eye of the user to allow the user to look directly through the see-through display when the computing system is worn on the head of the user ( Figure 23+, [0066] disclose an optical see-through, augmented reality display device used as an HMD ), the see-through display comprising:
a first see-through display panel region ( With regards to the first region having a first visible light at a first image resolution, please note the reasoning below, though Park shows a region for which the user can see the image (read as a first region). To clarify, “display panel region” is a broad term and needs to be better defined ), the first see-through display panel region comprising:
a first plurality of visible light emitters [in the first see-through display panel region], the first plurality of visible light emitters being configured to project the first visible image light in a first direction towards the eye of the user ( Figure 24B shows a temple arm, i.e. one side, of the pair of temple arms. [0069] discloses details on the image generation unit 1620 is included on each temple arm 1513, so there are two generation units, i.e. a plurality of visible light emitters. [0078] discloses the generation of visible light representing images. [0082] discloses a representative reflecting element 1634E which directs visible light representing an image towards the user’s eye 1640. Please note this path 1634E and/or the path shown by optical axis 1542. To clarify, 1634E constitute a path/axis for the visible light to be directed to reach the user’s eye ),
a first plurality of infrared emitters [in the first see-through display panel region], the first plurality of infrared receivers being configured to project infrared light in a second direction toward the eye of the user ( Figure 24B, [0083] discloses eye tracking IR illumination source 1634A in one temple arm (of two) which uses bidirectional filtering to direct infrared light towards the eye 1640. Furthermore, please note the optical path/axis 1542 on which the infrared light is transmitted to the user’s eye; this is a common path/same path as the visible light and this is then further directed through 1634E back to the IR receiver ), and
a first plurality of infrared receivers [in the first see-through display region], the first plurality of infrared receivers being configured to receive a reflection of the infrared light from the eye of the user ( Figure 24B, [0083] discloses eye tracking IR sensor 1634B in one temple arm (of two) which, again, uses bidirectional filtering to receive infrared light from the user’s eye 1640. As noted above, it uses the same optical axis 1542 and/or representative element 1634E to direct this infrared light. To clarify, the IR tracks the eye and directs the infrared back along the same path, from the lower optics to the upper optics and on to the sensor ); but
Park does not explicitly teach “a first see-through display region configured to present a first visible image light at a first image resolution” and “the second see-through display panel region being configured to present a second visible image light at a second image resolution greater than the first resolution of the first see-through display panel region”.
However, in the same field of endeavor, wearable display devices, Bailey teaches of different foveal regions, ( Bailey, Figure 2, [0056]+ ). In particular, Bailey teaches to determine a region of interest in the user’s field of view and in accordance with that determination, content is projected with a high/higher quality to that particular region of interest. This is done by focusing the projector 120 in particular, [0037]. Figure 2, [0056] discloses of a non-foveal region(s) (read as the claimed first display region with a first resolution) and a foveal region (read as the claimed second display region with a second resolution greater than the first resolution). Park teaches in [0065] of having relatively fewer/more/concentration of pixels in the different regions, i.e. different densities which require different amounts of light emitters, etc. Park teaches of emitters/receivers and Richards teaches of locators which can be arranged accordingly to implement Bailey’s region of interest teachings. To clarify, each display region of Bailey has visible light emitters, etc to render it at the specific location with the specific resolution; Park teaches of these emitters, etc, “in” the first and second see-through display panel regions.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the effective filed date of the invention, to implement the determination of a region of interest and adjusted resolution/quality to that particular region, as taught by Bailey, with the motivation that by determining the user’s focus, reducing processing can be done for the regions of non-interest, reducing power consumption while still maintaining a quality display, ( Bailey, [0032] ).
Park and Bailey do not explicitly teach “wherein the first plurality of infrared emitters is interwoven among the first plurality of visible light emitters in the first see-through display region.”
However, in the same field of endeavor, head mounted displays, Samec teaches of a display system, ( Samec, Figures 20A, 22A, [1911] ). Notably, Samec teaches in these figures (as well as other similar figures) of an optical source 2268 which can generate a range of wavelengths in a visible spectral region, [1911]. Furthermore, Samec teaches in [1866] of additional optical sources, such as 2026 (labeled as 2226 in Figure 22A, for reference), which can be used as infrared or visible lasers. Furthermore, please note 2224 and 2274 which are imaging devices. As such, given 2268 (visible light emitters) and 2206/2226 (infrared light emitters), an interwoven nature is shown, given the plurality of such emitters arranged on the periphery, as shown in Figures 20A, 22A, etc. Furthermore, in light of Samec’s other figures which show differing layouts, as well as various modifications to the optical source aspects, such as [2008], etc, it is clear one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to design the layout of the plurality of visible light emitters and infrared emitters in various ways, essentially rendering this a design choice issue.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the effective filed date of the invention, to implement the arrangement of emitters, as taught by Samec, with the motivation that an effective arrangement can allow for the emission and subsequent detection of light, namely for glint detection, etc. Furthermore, given Samec teaches of various configurations, this is also a design choice issue as well.
Park and Bailey teach in Claim 5:
The computing system of claim 1, wherein: the first plurality of visible light emitters in the first see-through display region has a first density associated with the first image resolution, the second plurality of visible light emitters in the second see-through display region has a second density associated with the second image resolution, and the second density is greater than the first density. ( Bailey teaches in Figure 2, [0065] of different concentration of pixels and/or sizing of pixels between the foveal and non-foveal regions, i.e. first and second densities. Since the foveal region, i.e. the interpreted second region, has a higher resolution, it has more pixels/greater concentration of pixels than the non-foveal regions )
Bailey teach in Claim 6:
The computing system of claim 1, wherein the main field of view region of the second see-through display panel region comprises a central region of the see-through display panel. ( Bailey, Figure 2 shows the foveal region being in a central region of the display )
Park teaches in Claim 7:
The computing system of claim 1, wherein:
the first visible image light and the infrared light are projected toward the eye via a partially-reflective partially-transmissive surface, and the reflection of the infrared light is received from the eye via the partially-reflective partially-transmissive surface. ( Figure 24B, [0082] discloses that from 1654E, etc (the interpreted first optical axis), the light is directed to an optical axis 1542 (read as a second axis), allowing the user to have an actual direct view. Please note 1634E is a reflecting element, like mirrors, gratings which can direct visible light. At some point, it is able to transmit through (transmissive is natural given a see-through optical system) to the user’s eye. To clarify, the IR tracks the eye and directs the infrared back along the same path, from the lower optics to the upper optics and on to the sensor )
Park and Bailey teach in Claim 8:
The computing system of claim 1, wherein the second see-through display region further comprises a second plurality of infrared emitters in the second see-through display panel region. ( Bailey, [0021] teaches of a first resolution associated with the region of interest which is relatively high (meaning a first density of resources, such as projectors/emitters/receivers/etc, to be able to determine eye aspects and deliver content) and other regions which are outside the region of interest which can have a second, lower level of resolution (meaning a second density of resources). Due to the different regions, there are also a different density of infrared aspects as well )
Bailey teaches in Claim 9:
The computing system of claim 8, wherein:
the first plurality of infrared emitters in the first see-through display region has a first density associated with the first image resolution, the second plurality of infrared emitters in the second see-through display region has a second density associated with the second image resolution, and the second density is less than the first density. ( Please note the reasoning above for Claim 8 is also applicable here as well with regards to Bailey’s Figure 2 of two different region types and different densities of element as well )
Park teaches in Claim 11:
A method executed by a computing system configured to be worn on a head of a user ( Figure 24B, [0002] discloses a head mounted display. Figure 21, etc, disclose a display optical system 101 ), the computing system including a frame comprising a first temple portion and a second temple portion ( Figure 2, [0034] disclose a top view with temple arms 102a and 102b (read as first and second temple portions) ) and a see-through display panel extending between the first an second temple portions of the frame so that the see-through display panel is positioned directly in front of an eye of the user to allow the user to look directly through the see-through display panel when the computing system is worn on the head of the user ( Figure 23+, [0066] disclose an optical see-through, augmented reality display device used as an HMD ), the method comprising:
presenting, via a first see-through display panel region of the see-through display panel ( With regards to the first region having a first visible light at a first image resolution, please note the reasoning below, though Park shows a region for which the user can see the image (read as a first region). To clarify, “display panel region” is a broad term and needs to be better defined ), wherein the first see-through display panel region comprises:
a first plurality of visible light emitters [in the first see-through display panel region], the first plurality of visible light emitters being configured to project the first visible image light in a first direction towards the eye of the user ( Figure 24B shows a temple arm, i.e. one side, of the pair of temple arms. [0069] discloses details on the image generation unit 1620 is included on each temple arm 1513, so there are two generation units, i.e. a plurality of visible light emitters. [0078] discloses the generation of visible light representing images. [0082] discloses a representative reflecting element 1634E which directs visible light representing an image towards the user’s eye 1640. Please note this path 1634E and/or the path shown by optical axis 1542. To clarify, 1634E constitute a path/axis for the visible light to be directed to reach the user’s eye ),
a first plurality of infrared emitters [in the first see-through display panel region], the first plurality of infrared emitters being configured to project infrared light in a second direction towards the eye of the user ( Figure 24B, [0083] discloses eye tracking IR illumination source 1634A in one temple arm (of two) which uses bidirectional filtering to direct infrared light towards the eye 1640. Furthermore, please note the optical path/axis 1542 on which the infrared light is transmitted to the user’s eye; this is a common path/same path as the visible light and this is then further directed through 1634E back to the IR receiver ), and
a first plurality of infrared receivers [in the first see-through display panel region], the first plurality of infrared receivers being configured to receive a reflection of infrared light from the eye of the user ( Figure 24B, [0083] discloses eye tracking IR sensor 1634B in one temple arm (of two) which, again, uses bidirectional filtering to receive infrared light from the user’s eye 1640. As noted above, it uses the same optical axis 1542 and/or representative element 1634E to direct this infrared light. To clarify, the IR tracks the eye and directs the infrared back along the same path, from the lower optics to the upper optics and on to the sensor ); but
Park does not explicitly teach “a first visible image light at a first resolution” and “presenting, via a second see-through display panel region of the see-through display panel comprising a main field of view region of the see-through display panel and a second plurality of visible light emitters in the second see-through display panel region, a second visible image light at a second resolution greater than the first resolution”.
However, in the same field of endeavor, wearable display devices, Bailey teaches of different foveal regions, ( Bailey, Figure 2, [0056]+ ). In particular, Bailey teaches to determine a region of interest in the user’s field of view and in accordance with that determination, content is projected with a high/higher quality to that particular region of interest. This is done by focusing the projector 120 in particular, [0037]. Figure 2, [0056] discloses of a non-foveal region(s) (read as the claimed first display region with a first resolution) and a foveal region (read as the claimed second display region with a second resolution greater than the first resolution). Park teaches in [0065] of having relatively fewer/more/concentration of pixels in the different regions, i.e. different densities which require different amounts of light emitters, etc. Park teaches of emitters/receivers and Richards teaches of locators which can be arranged accordingly to implement Bailey’s region of interest teachings. To clarify, each display region of Bailey has visible light emitters, etc to render it at the specific location with the specific resolution; Park teaches of these emitters, etc, “in” the first and second see-through display panel regions.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the effective filed date of the invention, to implement the determination of a region of interest and adjusted resolution/quality to that particular region, as taught by Bailey, with the motivation that by determining the user’s focus, reducing processing can be done for the regions of non-interest, reducing power consumption while still maintaining a quality display, ( Bailey, [0032] ).
Park and Bailey do not explicitly teach “wherein the first plurality of infrared emitters is interwoven among the first plurality of visible light emitters in the first see-through display panel region.”
However, in the same field of endeavor, head mounted displays, Samec teaches of a display system, ( Samec, Figures 20A, 22A, [1911] ). Notably, Samec teaches in these figures (as well as other similar figures) of an optical source 2268 which can generate a range of wavelengths in a visible spectral region, [1911]. Furthermore, Samec teaches in [1866] of additional optical sources, such as 2026 (labeled as 2226 in Figure 22A, for reference), which can be used as infrared or visible lasers. Furthermore, please note 2224 and 2274 which are imaging devices. As such, given 2268 (visible light emitters) and 2206/2226 (infrared light emitters), an interwoven nature is shown, given the plurality of such emitters arranged on the periphery, as shown in Figures 20A, 22A, etc. Furthermore, in light of Samec’s other figures which show differing layouts, as well as various modifications to the optical source aspects, such as [2008], etc, it is clear one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to design the layout of the plurality of visible light emitters and infrared emitters in various ways, essentially rendering this a design choice issue.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the effective filed date of the invention, to implement the arrangement of emitters, as taught by Samec, with the motivation that an effective arrangement can allow for the emission and subsequent detection of light, namely for glint detection, etc. Furthermore, given Samec teaches of various configurations, this is also a design choice issue as well.
Park and Bailey teach in Claim 15:
The method of claim 11, wherein
the first plurality of visible light emitters in the first see-through display region has a first density associated with the first image resolution, the second plurality of visible light emitters in the second see-through display region has a second density associated with the second image resolution, and the second density is greater than the first density. ( Bailey teaches in Figure 2, [0065] of different concentration of pixels and/or sizing of pixels between the foveal and non-foveal regions, i.e. first and second densities. Since the foveal region, i.e. the interpreted second region, has a higher resolution, it has more pixels/greater concentration of pixels than the non-foveal regions )
Park and Bailey teach in Claim 16:
The method of claim 11, wherein the second see-through display region further comprises a second plurality of infrared emitters. ( Bailey, [0021] teaches of a first resolution associated with the region of interest which is relatively high (meaning a first density of resources, such as projectors/emitters/receivers/etc, to be able to determine eye aspects and deliver content) and other regions which are outside the region of interest which can have a second, lower level of resolution (meaning a second density of resources). Due to the different regions, there are also a different density of infrared aspects as well )
Bailey teaches in Claim 17:
The method of claim 16, wherein:
the first plurality of infrared emitters in the first see-through display region has a first density associated with the first image resolution, the second plurality of infrared emitters in the second see-through display region has a second density associated with the second image resolution, and the second density is less than the first density. ( Please note the reasoning above for Claim 8 is also applicable here as well with regards to Bailey’s Figure 2 of two different region types and different densities of element as well )
Park teaches in Claim 18:
The method of claim 11, wherein the main field of view region of the second see-through display panel region comprises a central region of the see-through display panel. ( Bailey, Figure 2 shows the foveal region being in a central region of the display )
Park teaches in Claim 19:
The method of claim 11, wherein the method comprises:
the first visible image light and the infrared light are projected toward the eye via a partially-reflective partially-transmissive surface, and the reflection of the infrared light is received from the eye via the partially-reflective partially-transmissive surface. ( Figure 24B, [0082] discloses that from 1654E, etc (the interpreted first optical axis), the light is directed to an optical axis 1542 (read as a second axis), allowing the user to have an actual direct view. Please note 1634E is a reflecting element, like mirrors, gratings which can direct visible light. At some point, it is able to transmit through (transmissive is natural given a see-through optical system) to the user’s eye. To clarify, the IR tracks the eye and directs the infrared back along the same path, from the lower optics to the upper optics and on to the sensor )
Park and Bailey teach in Claim 21:
The computing system of claim 1, wherein the first see-through display region comprises a region of one or more of an OLED panel, an LED panel, an LCoS panel, and a DLP panel. ( Respectfully, these are well known types of display technologies and are often used in head mounted displays. Examiner asserts Official Notice to this being well known )
Park and Bailey teach in Claim 22:
The method of claim 11, wherein the first see-through display region of the see-through display panel comprises a region of one or more of an OLED panel, an LED panel, an LCoS panel, and a DLP panel. ( Respectfully, these are well known types of display technologies and are often used in head mounted displays. Examiner asserts Official Notice to this being well known )
Park, Bailey and Samec teach in Claim 23:
The computing system of claim 1, wherein the first plurality of infrared emitters and the first plurality of visible light emitters are interwoven with pixels in the first see-through display panel region. ( Please note the combination with Samec who teaches in Figures 20A, 22A, [01866], [1911] of various additional optical sources. Furthermore, the arrangement on the periphery is also shown )
Park and Bailey teach in Claim 24:
The computing system of claim 7, wherein the first plurality of infrared emitters in the first see-through display panel region and the first plurality of infrared receivers in the first see-through display panel region are configured to be positioned in front of the eye of the user wearing the computing system, comprising the see-through display panel and to image the eye from the front of the user’s eye perspective. ( Park teaches of a head mounted display for an AR or VR experience, as detailed in [0005]+. Figure 24B discloses the head mounted display outputs to a user’s eye )
7. Claims 2-4, 12-14 and 26-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. ( US 2014/0375947 A1 ) in view of Bailey et al. ( US 2016/0274365 A1 ) and Samec et al. ( US 2016/0270656 A1 ), as applied to Claims 1 and 11, further in view of Osterhout et al. ( US 2016/0116745 A1 ).
As per Claim 2:
Park does not explicitly teach “wherein the first plurality of visible light emitters of the first see-through display region comprises micro-LEDs.”
However, in the same field of endeavor, head worn systems with eye tracking, Osterhout teaches of a head worn computing device, ( Osterhout, [0220] ). In particular, there are a number of see-through optical designs which can be used, such as a reflective display, an OLED, LED, etc. In particular, [0707] notes the emissive source may be a micro-sized LED array as well.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the effective filed date of the invention, to implement the various types of display types, as taught by Osterhout, with the motivation that these are well known types of display sources and can reduce the size of the optics, useful in a head worn setting, ( Osterhout, [0707] ).
As per Claim 3:
Park does not explicitly teach “wherein the first plurality of visible light emitters of the first see-through display region comprises OLEDs.”
However, in the same field of endeavor, head worn systems with eye tracking, Osterhout teaches of a head worn computing device, ( Osterhout, [0220] ). In particular, there are a number of see-through optical designs which can be used, such as a reflective display, an OLED, LED, etc. In particular, [0707] notes details on the OLED.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the effective filed date of the invention, to implement the various types of display types, as taught by Osterhout, with the motivation that these are well known types of display sources and can reduce the size of the optics, useful in a head worn setting, ( Osterhout, [0707] ).
As per Claim 4:
Park does not explicitly teach “wherein the first plurality of visible light emitters of the first see-through display region comprises reflective pixels.”
However, in the same field of endeavor, head worn systems with eye tracking, Osterhout teaches of a head worn computing device, ( Osterhout, [0220] ). In particular, there are a number of see-through optical designs which can be used, such as a reflective display, an OLED, LED, etc. In particular, Figure 3B, [0227], [0234] disclose a reflective polarizer as part of the display/DLP which can reflect light using the pixels as part of the scanning process to deliver image content.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the effective filed date of the invention, to implement the various types of display types, as taught by Osterhout, with the motivation that these are well known types of display sources and can reduce the among of stray light, producing images with high contrast, ( Osterhout, [0232] ).
As per Claim 12:
Park does not explicitly teach “wherein the first plurality of visible light emitters of the first see-through display panel region comprises micro-LEDs.”
However, in the same field of endeavor, head worn systems with eye tracking, Osterhout teaches of a head worn computing device, ( Osterhout, [0220] ). In particular, there are a number of see-through optical designs which can be used, such as a reflective display, an OLED, LED, etc. In particular, [0707] notes the emissive source may be a micro-sized LED array as well.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the effective filed date of the invention, to implement the various types of display types, as taught by Osterhout, with the motivation that these are well known types of display sources and can reduce the size of the optics, useful in a head worn setting, ( Osterhout, [0707] ).
As per Claim 13:
Park does not explicitly teach “wherein the first plurality of visible light emitters of the first see-through display panel region comprises OLEDs.”
However, in the same field of endeavor, head worn systems with eye tracking, Osterhout teaches of a head worn computing device, ( Osterhout, [0220] ). In particular, there are a number of see-through optical designs which can be used, such as a reflective display, an OLED, LED, etc. In particular, [0707] notes details on the OLED.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the effective filed date of the invention, to implement the various types of display types, as taught by Osterhout, with the motivation that these are well known types of display sources and can reduce the size of the optics, useful in a head worn setting, ( Osterhout, [0707] ).
As per Claim 14:
Park does not explicitly teach “wherein the first plurality of visible light emitters of the first see-through display panel comprises reflective pixels.”
However, in the same field of endeavor, head worn systems with eye tracking, Osterhout teaches of a head worn computing device, ( Osterhout, [0220] ). In particular, there are a number of see-through optical designs which can be used, such as a reflective display, an OLED, LED, etc. In particular, Figure 3B, [0227], [0234] disclose a reflective polarizer as part of the display/DLP which can reflect light using the pixels as part of the scanning process to deliver image content.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the effective filed date of the invention, to implement the various types of display types, as taught by Osterhout, with the motivation that these are well known types of display sources and can reduce the among of stray light, producing images with high contrast, ( Osterhout, [0232] ).
Park teaches in Claim 26:
A computing system configured to be worn on a head of a user ( Figure 24B, [0002] discloses a head mounted display. Figure 21, etc, disclose a display optical system 101 ), comprising:
a frame comprising a first template portion and a second temple portion ( Figure 2, [0034] disclose a top view with temple arms 102a and 102b (read as first and second temple portions) ); and
an organic light emitting diode (OLED) ( Please see the combination below for aspects of the OLED ) see-through display panel extending between the first and second temple portions of the frame so that the OLED see-through display panel is positioned directly in front of an eye of the user to allow the user to look directly through the OLED see-through display panel when the computing system is worn on the head of the user ( Figure 23+, [0066] disclose an optical see-through, augmented reality display device used as an HMD ), the OLED see-through display panel comprising:
a first OLED see-through display panel region ( With regards to the first region having a first visible light at a first image resolution, please note the reasoning below, though Park shows a region for which the user can see the image (read as a first region). To clarify, “display panel region” is a broad term and needs to be better defined ), the first see-through OLED display panel region comprising:
a first plurality of visible light emitters [in the first OLED see-through display panel region], the first plurality of visible light emitters being configured to project the first visible image light in a first direction towards the eye of the user ( Figure 24B shows a temple arm, i.e. one side, of the pair of temple arms. [0069] discloses details on the image generation unit 1620 is included on each temple arm 1513, so there are two generation units, i.e. a plurality of visible light emitters. [0078] discloses the generation of visible light representing images. [0082] discloses a representative reflecting element 1634E which directs visible light representing an image towards the user’s eye 1640. Please note this path 1634E and/or the path shown by optical axis 1542. To clarify, 1634E constitute a path/axis for the visible light to be directed to reach the user’s eye ),
a first plurality of infrared (IR) emitters [in the first OLED see-through display panel region], the first plurality of IR emitters being configured to project IR light in a second direction toward the eye of the user ( Figure 24B, [0083] discloses eye tracking IR illumination source 1634A in one temple arm (of two) which uses bidirectional filtering to direct infrared light towards the eye 1640. Furthermore, please note the optical path/axis 1542 on which the infrared light is transmitted to the user’s eye; this is a common path/same path as the visible light and this is then further directed through 1634E back to the IR receiver ), and
a first plurality of IR receivers [in the first OLED see-through display panel region], the first plurality of IR receivers being configured to receive a reflection of the IR light from the eye of the user ( Figure 24B, [0083] discloses eye tracking IR sensor 1634B in one temple arm (of two) which, again, uses bidirectional filtering to receive infrared light from the user’s eye 1640. As noted above, it uses the same optical axis 1542 and/or representative element 1634E to direct this infrared light. To clarify, the IR tracks the eye and directs the infrared back along the same path, from the lower optics to the upper optics and on to the sensor ); but
Park does not explicitly teach the first display region “configured to present a first visible image light at a first image resolution” and “a second OLED see-through display panel region comprising a main field of view region of the OLED see-through display panel, the second OLED see-through display panel region comprising a second plurality of visible light emitters in the second OLED see-through display panel region, and a second plurality of infrared emitters in the second OLED see-through display panel region and being configured to present a second visible image light at a second image resolution greater than the first resolute of the first OLED see-through display panel region”.
However, in the same field of endeavor, wearable display devices, Bailey teaches of different foveal regions, ( Bailey, Figure 2, [0056]+ ). In particular, Bailey teaches to determine a region of interest in the user’s field of view and in accordance with that determination, content is projected with a high/higher quality to that particular region of interest. This is done by focusing the projector 120 in particular, [0037]. Figure 2, [0056] discloses of a non-foveal region(s) (read as the claimed first display region with a first resolution) and a foveal region (read as the claimed second display region with a second resolution greater than the first resolution). Park teaches in [0065] of having relatively fewer/more/concentration of pixels in the different regions, i.e. different densities which require different amounts of light emitters, etc. Park teaches of emitters/receivers and Richards teaches of locators which can be arranged accordingly to implement Bailey’s region of interest teachings. To clarify, each display region of Bailey has visible light emitters, etc to render it at the specific location with the specific resolution; Park teaches of these emitters, etc, “in” the first and second see-through display panel regions.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the effective filed date of the invention, to implement the determination of a region of interest and adjusted resolution/quality to that particular region, as taught by Bailey, with the motivation that by determining the user’s focus, reducing processing can be done for the regions of non-interest, reducing power consumption while still maintaining a quality display, ( Bailey, [0032] ).
Park and Bailey do not explicitly teach “wherein the first plurality of IR emitters is interwoven among the first plurality of visible light emitters in the first OLED display panel region”.
However, in the same field of endeavor, head mounted displays, Samec teaches of a display system, ( Samec, Figures 20A, 22A, [1911] ). Notably, Samec teaches in these figures (as well as other similar figures) of an optical source 2268 which can generate a range of wavelengths in a visible spectral region, [1911]. Furthermore, Samec teaches in [1866] of additional optical sources, such as 2026 (labeled as 2226 in Figure 22A, for reference), which can be used as infrared or visible lasers. Furthermore, please note 2224 and 2274 which are imaging devices. As such, given 2268 (visible light emitters) and 2206/2226 (infrared light emitters), an interwoven nature is shown, given the plurality of such emitters arranged on the periphery, as shown in Figures 20A, 22A, etc. Furthermore, in light of Samec’s other figures which show differing layouts, as well as various modifications to the optical source aspects, such as [2008], etc, it is clear one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to design the layout of the plurality of visible light emitters and infrared emitters in various ways, essentially rendering this a design choice issue.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the effective filed date of the invention, to implement the arrangement of emitters, as taught by Samec, with the motivation that an effective arrangement can allow for the emission and subsequent detection of light, namely for glint detection, etc. Furthermore, given Samec teaches of various configurations, this is also a design choice issue as well.
Park and Bailey do not explicitly teach of the display panel comprising light emitting diode (OLED), that type of display technology.
Initially, OLED technology is well known in the art. However, in the same field of endeavor, head worn systems with eye tracking, Osterhout teaches of a head worn computing device, ( Osterhout, [0220] ). In particular, there are a number of see-through optical designs which can be used, such as a reflective display, an OLED, LED, etc. In particular, [0707] notes the emissive source may be a micro-sized LED array as well.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the effective filed date of the invention, to implement the various types of display types, as taught by Osterhout, with the motivation that these are well known types of display sources and can reduce the size of the optics, useful in a head worn setting, ( Osterhout, [0707] ).
Park , Bailey, Samec and Osterhout teach in Claim 27:
The computing system of claim 26, wherein the first plurality of visible light emitters and the first plurality of infrared emitters are interwoven with pixels in the first OLED display panel region of the OLED see-through display panel. ( Please note the combination with Samec who teaches in Figures 20A, 22A, [01866], [1911] of various additional optical sources. Furthermore, the arrangement on the periphery is also shown )
Park, Bailey, Samec and Osterhout teach in Claim 28:
The computing system of claim 26, wherein the first plurality of visible light emitters, the first plurality of infrared emitters, and the first plurality of infrared receivers are interwoven in the first OLED display panel region of the OLED see-through display panel. ( Please note the combination with Samec who teaches in Figures 20A, 22A, [01866], [1911] of various additional optical sources. Furthermore, the arrangement on the periphery is also shown )
8. Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. ( US 2014/0375947 A1 ) in view of Bailey et al. ( US 2016/0274365 A1 ) and Samec et al. ( US 2016/0270656 A1 ), as applied to Claims 1 and 11, further in view of Perez et al. ( US 2013/0083003 A1 ).
As per Claim 10:
Park does not explicitly teach “wherein the first plurality of visible light emitters, the first plurality of infrared emitters and the first plurality of infrared receivers are interwoven in the first see-through display panel region.”
Initially, Samec teaches in Figure 20A, 22A, etc, of various configurations, such as the position and what the optical sources can entail, whether that is visible emission, infrared emission, detectors combined in, separated, etc, essentially rendering this a design choice issue. Samec teaches of an optical source 2268, an imaging camera 2274 and 2224 (infrared receivers), additional emitters in 2206/2226, resulting in the receivers being between/interwoven among the emitters 2268 and 2226.
Furthermore, in the same field of endeavor, wearable displays, Perez teaches of various layouts of emitters/sensors, ( Perez, Figure 4A-4C, [0110] ). Perez teaches of IR emitter 153, photodetector 152 for sensing infrared, RGB/visible light sensors 134, etc. As shown, there is a interwoven layout of these elements along the rim of the wearable. Even still, in light of the arrangement, it is a design choice issue as to the specific arrangement of the elements relative to each other.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the effective filed date of the invention, to implement the arrangement of emitters and sensors, as taught by Perez, with the motivation that it is a design choice as to the layout of these elements, considering Park, Perez, etc, teach of these elements.
As per Claim 20:
Park does not explicitly teach “wherein the first plurality of infrared emitters, the first plurality of visible light emitters, and the first plurality of infrared receivers are interwoven amongst the first plurality of visible light emitters in the first see-through region.”
Initially, Samec teaches in Figure 20A, 22A, etc, of various configurations, such as the position and what the optical sources can entail, whether that is visible emission, infrared emission, detectors combined in, separated, etc, essentially rendering this a design choice issue. Samec teaches of an optical source 2268, an imaging camera 2274 and 2224 (infrared receivers), additional emitters in 2206/2226, resulting in the receivers being between/interwoven among the emitters 2268 and 2226.
Furthermore, in the same field of endeavor, wearable displays, Perez teaches of various layouts of emitters/sensors, ( Perez, Figure 4A-4C, [0110] ). Perez teaches of IR emitter 153, photodetector 152 for sensing infrared, RGB/visible light sensors 134, etc. As shown, there is a interwoven layout of these elements along the rim of the wearable. Even still, in light of the arrangement, it is a design choice issue as to the specific arrangement of the elements relative to each other.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the effective filed date of the invention, to implement the arrangement of emitters and sensors, as taught by Perez, with the motivation that it is a design choice as to the layout of these elements, considering Park, Perez, etc, teach of these elements.
Response to Arguments
9. Applicant’s arguments considered, but are respectfully not persuasive.
Please note the updated rejection in light of the claim amendments.
While Examiner appreciates the focus on the display panel region, such as by claiming a first and second see-through display regions, this is addressed by the combination with Bailey, who teaches of having a foveated and non-foveated region, essentially creating two different display panel regions.
As for physical aspects of the first and second temple portions, Park teaches of this in Figure 2, as well as the concept of an optical see-through display region, which allows for augmented reality to be presented to the user.
Conclusion
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DENNIS P JOSEPH whose telephone number is (571)270-1459. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 5:30 - 3:30 EST.
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, Amr Awad can be reached on 571-272-7764. 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.
/DENNIS P JOSEPH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2621
Prosecution Insights