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 8/28/2026.
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-2, 5-6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Amirsolaimani et al. (US20200341268) in view of Etter et al. (US20200081234).
Regarding claim 1, Amirsolaimani teaches a display device (fig. 6A, optical system 600 corresponding to the display device, see paragraphs [0059]-[0060]), comprising, in the following order toward a viewer (fig. 6A, electronic display 150, mirror 113, first optical element 111, PBP lens 130, waveplate 114 and reflective polarizer 115 corresponding to the recited order toward the viewer, see paragraphs [0059]-[0061]):
a display panel (fig. 6A, electronic display 150 corresponding to the display panel, see paragraphs [0059]-[0060]);
a semi-transparent mirror (fig. 6A, mirror 113 corresponding to the semi-transparent mirror, see paragraphs [0045], [0059]);
a lens (fig. 6A, first optical element 111 corresponding to the lens, see paragraphs [0059]-[0060]);
a Pancharatnam-Berry lens (fig. 6A, PBP lens 130 corresponding to the Pancharatnam-Berry lens, see paragraphs [0059]-[0060]) configured to cause one-handed circularly polarized light incident thereon to converge while causing opposite-handed circularly polarized light incident thereon to diverge, the one-handed circularly polarized light being left-handed circularly polarized light or right-handed circularly polarized light (see figs. 2A-2B, PBP lens 200 corresponding to PBP lens 130 and illustrating the optical operation thereof, see paragraph [0036]; paragraph [0041], PBP lens 200 operates in a focusing or converging state in response to one handedness of circularly polarized light and in a defocusing or diverging state in response to the opposite handedness of circularly polarized light); and
a circularly polarized light-selective reflector (fig. 6A, waveplate 114 and reflective polarizer 115 corresponding to the circularly polarized light-selective reflector, see paragraphs [0046]-[0047], [0061]-[0063]).
Amirsolaimani does not explicitly disclose wherein a surface of the lens on a circularly polarized light-selective reflector side has a radius of curvature R of
150 mm or greater.
However, Etter teaches the analogous reflector-side lens structure (see Etter fig. 1A, a reflective polarizer 40 is disposed on and conforms to a curved first major surface 21 of a second optical lens 20), and further teaches
wherein a circularly polarized light-selective reflector side surface (see fig. 1A, reflective polarizer 40 disposed on and conforming to first major surface 21 of second optical lens 20 corresponding to the circularly polarized light-selective reflector side surface, see paragraph [0045]) of the lens (fig. 1A, second optical lens 20 corresponding to the lens, see paragraphs [0033]-[0034]) has a radius of curvature R of 150 mm or greater (fig. 1A, curved first major surface 21 of second optical lens 20 having a best-fit spherical first radius of curvature in a range from about 14 mm to about 250 mm, thereby overlapping the claimed range of 150 mm or greater, see paragraph [0036]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the circularly polarized light-selective reflector side surface of the lens of Amirsolaimani to have a radius of curvature within the range taught by Etter, including a radius of curvature R of 150 mm or greater, for the purpose of providing a curved optical surface suitable for supporting a reflective polarizer in a compact folded optical system (Etter, see paragraphs [0029], [0030], [0036], [0045]).
Regarding claim 2, combination Amirsolaimani-Etter discloses the invention as described in Claim 1, Amirsolaimani further teaches wherein the lens comprises a first lens part (fig. 6A, first optical element 111 corresponding to the first lens part of pancake lens 610, see paragraph [0060]) and a second lens part (fig. 6A, second optical element 112 corresponding to the second lens part of pancake lens 610, see paragraph [0060]).
Regarding claim 5, combination Amirsolaimani-Etter discloses the invention as described in Claim 1, Amirsolaimani further teaches wherein a head-mounted display (Amirsolaimani, as described in paragraph [0167] “The NED 705 may be a head-mounted display”) comprising: the display device according to claim 1; and a wearable part to be worn on a head of the viewer (see Amirsolaimani, fig. 8A, as described in paragraph [0085], the wearable part to be worn on a head of the user).
Regarding claim 6, combination Amirsolaimani-Etter discloses the invention as described in Claim 1, Amirsolaimani further teaches wherein the lens (Amirsolaimani, fig. 6A, optical element 111) is a refractive lens or a diffractive lens (see paragraphs [0052]-[0053], [0059]-[0060], optical element 111 is a lens having a refractive index n111 and a radius of curvature used in determining the optical power of the pancake lens, thereby teaching optical element 111 as a refractive lens).
Regarding claim 8, combination Amirsolaimani-Etter discloses the invention as described in Claim 1, the embodiment of Amirsolaimani relied upon in Claim 1 does not explicitly disclose wherein the lens enlarges or reduces an image on the display panel.
However, Amirsolaimani of fig. 7 further teaches wherein the lens enlarges or reduces an image on the display panel (see fig. 7, pancake lens assembly 717; paragraph [0071], the pancake lens assembly 717 is configured to magnify image light received from the electronic display; paragraph [0070], the optics block may be configured to have an effective focal length larger than the spacing to the electronic display, thereby magnifying the image light projected by the electronic display).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the lens of the Amirsolaimani optical system to enlarge or reduce an image on the display panel, as taught by Amirsolaimani in fig. 7, for the purpose of increasing the field of view of the displayed media content and permitting the electronic display to be made physically smaller, lighter, and lower in power consumption (Amirsolaimani, paragraph [0070]).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Amirsolaimani et al. (US20200341268) in view of Etter et al. (US20200081234), and further in view of Zhan et al. (WO2022174405, corresponding to US20240118547).
Regarding claim 7, combination Amirsolaimani-Etter discloses the invention as described in Claim 1, Amirsolaimani does not explicitly disclose wherein a combination of the lens and the Pancharatnam-Berry lens defines an aspherical lens designed to concentrate light, that has passed through the combination of the lens and the Pancharatnam-Berry lens, to eyes of the viewer.
However, Zhan teaches the analogous optical display system (see Zhan, fig. 1, abstract, paragraphs [0029]-[0030], the optical display system comprises a display, a partial reflector 3, a first optic unit 4 and a reflection-type Pancharatnam-Berry lens 5), and further teaches
wherein a combination of the lens (fig. 1, first optic unit 4 including at least one refractive lens corresponding to the lens, see paragraph [0033]) and the Pancharatnam-Berry lens (fig. 1, reflection-type Pancharatnam-Berry lens 5 corresponding to the Pancharatnam-Berry lens, see paragraph [0034]) defines an aspherical lens (fig. 1, first optic unit 4 in combination with reflection-type Pancharatnam-Berry lens 5, wherein one or more surfaces of the refractive lenses may be rotationally symmetric aspheric, corresponding to the aspherical lens, see paragraphs [0035], [0037]) designed to concentrate light, that has passed through the combination of the lens (fig. 1, image light passing through first optic unit 4 corresponding to light that has passed through the lens, see paragraphs [0033], [0038]) and the Pancharatnam-Berry lens (fig. 1, image light passing through reflection-type Pancharatnam-Berry lens 5 corresponding to light that has passed through the Pancharatnam-Berry lens, see paragraphs [0034]-[0035], [0038]), to eyes of the viewer (fig. 1, eye 7 corresponding to the eyes of the viewer, wherein the image light ultimately enters eye 7, see paragraph [0038]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Amirsolaimani to have the combination of the lens and the Pancharatnam-Berry lens provide an aspherical optical configuration as taught by Zhan, for the purpose of reducing chromatic dispersion and improving image quality of the optical display system (Zhan, paragraphs [0035] and [0037]).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Amirsolaimani et al. (US20200341268) in view of Zhan et al. (WO2022174405, corresponding to US20240118547).
Regarding claim 9, Amirsolaimani teaches a display device (figs. 6A-6B, optical system 600 corresponding to the display device, see paragraphs [0059]-[0063]), comprising, in the following order toward a viewer (fig. 6A, electronic display 150, mirror 113, pancake lens 610 including optical elements 111 and 112, PBP lens 130, waveplate 114, reflective polarizer 115, and eye 170 corresponding to the recited order toward the viewer, see paragraphs [0059]-[0063]):
a display panel (fig. 6A, electronic display 150 corresponding to the display panel, see paragraphs [0059]-[0060]);
a semi-transparent mirror (fig. 6A, mirror 113 corresponding to the semi-transparent mirror, see paragraphs [0045], [0059]);
a lens (fig. 6A, pancake lens 610 including first optical element 111 and second optical element 112 corresponding to the lens, see paragraph [0060]);
a Pancharatnam-Berry lens (fig. 6A, PBP lens 130 corresponding to the Pancharatnam-Berry lens, see paragraphs [0059]-[0060]) configured to cause one-handed circularly polarized light incident thereon (figs. 2A-2B, circularly polarized light incident on PBP lens 200 corresponding to the one-handed circularly polarized light incident thereon, see paragraph [0041]), which is left-handed circularly polarized light or right-handed circularly polarized light (figs. 2A-2B, LHCP light and RHCP light corresponding to the left-handed circularly polarized light and right-handed circularly polarized light, see paragraph [0041]) to converge while causing opposite-handed circularly polarized light incident thereon to diverge (figs. 2A-2B, focusing and defocusing states of PBP lens 200 corresponding to convergence and divergence of opposite-handed circularly polarized light, see paragraph [0041]); and
a circularly polarized light-selective reflector (figs. 6A-6B, waveplate 114 and reflective polarizer 115 corresponding to the circularly polarized light-selective reflector, see paragraphs [0061]-[0063]), wherein:
a circularly polarized light-selective reflector side surface (fig. 6A, second surface 112-2 having reflective polarizer 115 disposed thereon corresponding to the circularly polarized light-selective reflector side surface, see paragraph [0061]) of the lens (fig. 6A, second optical element 112 forming part of pancake lens 610 corresponding to the lens, see paragraph [0060]) has a planar shape (fig. 6A, flat surface of second optical element 112 corresponding to the planar shape, see paragraphs [0050], [0060]).
However, Amirsolaimani does not explicitly disclose a combination of the lens and the Pancharatnam-Berry lens defines an aspherical lens designed to concentrate light, that has passed through the combination of the lens and the Pancharatnam-Berry lens, to eyes of the viewer.
However, Zhan teaches the analogous optical display system (see fig. 1, display including image-generating element 1 and polarizer 2, partial reflector 3, first optic unit 4, reflection-type Pancharatnam-Berry lens 5, and eye 7 corresponding to the optical display system, see paragraphs [0029]-[0030]), and further teaches wherein a combination of the lens (fig. 1, first optic unit 4 including at least one refractive lens corresponding to the lens, see paragraph [0033]) and the Pancharatnam-Berry lens (fig. 1, reflection-type Pancharatnam-Berry lens 5 corresponding to the Pancharatnam-Berry lens, see paragraph [0034]) defines an aspherical lens (fig. 1, first optic unit 4 in combination with reflection-type Pancharatnam-Berry lens 5, wherein one or more surfaces of the refractive lenses may be rotationally symmetric aspheric, corresponding to the aspherical lens, see paragraphs [0035], [0037]) designed to concentrate light, that has passed through the combination of the lens (fig. 1, image light passing through first optic unit 4 corresponding to light that has passed through the lens, see paragraphs [0033], [0038]) and the Pancharatnam-Berry lens (fig. 1, image light passing through reflection-type Pancharatnam-Berry lens 5 corresponding to light that has passed through the Pancharatnam-Berry lens, see paragraphs [0034]-[0035], [0038]), to eyes of the viewer (fig. 1, eye 7 corresponding to the eyes of the viewer, wherein the image light ultimately enters eye 7, see paragraph [0038]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Amirsolaimani optical system to have the combination of the lens and the Pancharatnam-Berry lens define an aspherical lens as taught by Zhan, for the purpose of reducing chromatic dispersion and improving image quality of the optical display system (Zhan, see paragraphs [0035], [0037]).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Amirsolaimani et al. (US20200341268).
Regarding claim 10, Amirsolaimani teaches a display device (fig. 6A, optical system 600 corresponding to the display device, see paragraphs [0059]-[0060]), comprising, in the following order toward a viewer (fig. 6A, electronic display 150, mirror 113, first optical element 111, PBP lens 130, waveplate 114 and reflective polarizer 115 corresponding to the recited order toward the viewer, see paragraphs [0059]-[0061]):
a display panel (fig. 6A, electronic display 150 corresponding to the display panel, see paragraphs [0059]-[0060]);
a semi-transparent mirror (fig. 6A, mirror 113 corresponding to the semi-transparent mirror, see paragraphs [0045], [0059]);
a lens (fig. 6A, first optical element 111 corresponding to the lens, see paragraphs [0059]-[0060]);
a Pancharatnam-Berry lens (fig. 6A, PBP lens 130 corresponding to the Pancharatnam-Berry lens, see paragraphs [0059]-[0060]) configured to cause one-handed circularly polarized light incident thereon, which is left-handed circularly polarized light or right-handed circularly polarized light, to converge while causing opposite-handed circularly polarized light incident thereon to diverge (fig. 6A, PBP lens 130 corresponding to the Pancharatnam-Berry lens, see paragraphs [0059]-[0060]; figs. 2A-2B, PBP lens 200 corresponding to PBP lens 130 and illustrating the optical operation thereof, see paragraph [0036]; paragraph [0041], PBP lens 200 operates in a focusing or converging state in response to one handedness of circularly polarized light and in a defocusing or diverging state in response to the opposite handedness of circularly polarized light); and
a circularly polarized light-selective reflector (fig. 6A, waveplate 114 and reflective polarizer 115 corresponding to the circularly polarized light-selective reflector, see paragraphs [0046]-[0047], [0061]-[0063]), wherein
a circularly polarized light-selective reflector side surface of the lens has a planar shape (fig. 6A, surface 111-2 of first optical element 111 facing toward the PBP lens 130 and the circularly polarized light-selective reflector corresponding to the circularly polarized light-selective reflector side surface of the lens, wherein one or both surfaces 111-1 and 111-2 of first optical element 111 may have a flat surface corresponding to the planar shape, see paragraphs [0043], [0050], [0060]).
However, the embodiment of Amirsolaimani shown in fig. 6A does not explicitly disclose a lens that enlarges or reduces an image on the display panel.
However, Amirsolaimani further teaches a lens that enlarges or reduces an image on the display panel (fig. 7, pancake lens assembly 717 corresponding to the lens and electronic display block 715 corresponding to the display panel, wherein pancake lens assembly 717 is configured to magnify image light received from the electronic display, corresponding to enlarging an image on the display panel, see paragraphs [0070]-[0071]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the lens of the Amirsolaimani fig. 6A optical system to enlarge or reduce an image on the display panel, as taught by Amirsolaimani in fig. 7, for the purpose of increasing the field of view of the displayed media content and permitting the electronic display to be made physically smaller, lighter, and lower in power consumption (Amirsolaimani, see paragraph [0070]).
Response to argument/amendment
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot because the arguments are directed to the references or portions of the references relied upon in the previous rejection and do not address the references or portions of the references being relied upon in the current 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
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 KUEI-JEN LEE EDENFIELD whose telephone number is (571)272-3005. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. -Thurs 8:00 am - 5:30 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Pinping Sun can be reached on (571) 270-1284.The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding 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.
/KUEI-JEN L EDENFIELD/
Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/WILLIAM R ALEXANDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
