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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 30-36 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 5/27/26.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 17-21, 26, 27, and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhao et al. (US 2021/0080720 A1).
Re. Claim 17, Zhao et al. discloses an illumination system, comprising:
a polarization hologram 312 configured to diffract an input light into a first output light and a second output light that interfere with one another to generate a polarization interference pattern (Figs. 12A-12B; [0061]);
a polarizer 322 coupled with the polarization hologram, and configured to convert the polarization interference pattern into an intensity interference pattern (Figs. 12A-12B; [0061]);
a polarization switch 311 configured to be switchable between operating at a non-switching state to maintain a polarization of the input light and operating at a switching state to change a polarization of the input light while transmitting the input light toward the polarization hologram, the polarization hologram being disposed between the polarization switch and the polarizer 322 (Figs. 12A-12B; [0061]-[0062]); and
a controller configured to switch the polarization switch 311 between operating at the non- switching state and operating at the switching state to switch the intensity interference pattern (Figs. 2, 12A-12B; [0047], [0062]).
Re. Claim 18, Zhao et al. discloses when the polarization switch 311 operates at the non-switching state, the intensity interference pattern is a first structured light pattern including a set of first fringes of varying intensities interposed according to a first predetermined pattern; and when the polarization switch 311 operates at the switching state, the intensity interference pattern is a second structured light pattern including a set of second fringes of varying intensities interposed according to a second predetermined pattern that is different from the first predetermined pattern ([0062]).
Re. Claim 19, Zhao et al. discloses the first fringes are parallel to, or form an angle with respect to, the second fringes (Figs. 12A-12B).
Re. Claim 20, Zhao et al. discloses the input light (e.g., from display 553) is a linearly polarized light, and the first output light and the second output light are circularly polarized lights with opposite handednesses (Figs. 12A-12B and 14; [0061] and [0064]).
Re. Claim 21, Zhao et al. discloses the controller is configured to switch the polarization hologram 312 between operating at a non-neutral state and operating at a neutral state; the polarization hologram 312 operating at the non-neutral state is configured to diffract the input light into the first output light and the second output light; and the polarization hologram 312 operating at the neutral state is configured to transmit the input light with negligible diffraction (Figs. 12A-12B; [0062]).
Re. Claim 26, Zhao et al. discloses the polarization hologram includes a Pancharatnam-Berry phase ("PBP") element (Figs. 3A-3B; [0048]).
Re. Claim 27, Zhao et al. discloses the PBP element includes at least one of a PBP grating configured to provide a grating phase profile, a PBP lens configured to provide a lens phase profile, or a PBP freeform plate configured to provide a freeform phase profile ([0048], [0061]).
Re. Claim 29, Zhao et al. discloses the polarization hologram is configured to correct an aberration in the input light ([0052], [0083]).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al. (US 2021/0080720 A1).
Re. Claim 28, Zhao et al. discloses the illumination system as discussed above. Zhao et al. also discloses the thickness of the PBP element impacts the polarization of the element ([0045]), but fails to explicitly disclose an arrangement wherein the PBP element is configured with a varying thickness.
The claimed arrangement would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of providing an element with varying polarization properties across the element. “A person of ordinary skill is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automaton” – ‘[w]hen there is a design need or market pressure to solve a problem and there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense.” KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 22-25 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art does not disclose or reasonably suggest the illumination system as required by the claims, specifically wherein the polarization hologram is a first polarization hologram configured to operate for a first wavelength range, the input light is a first input light having the first wavelength range, the polarization interference pattern is a first polarization interference pattern having the first wavelength range, and the intensity interference pattern is a first intensity interference pattern having the first wavelength range, the illumination system further includes a second polarization hologram stacked with the first polarization hologram and configured to operate for a second wavelength range that is different from the first wavelength range.
The most applicable prior art, Zhao et al. (US 2021/0080720 A1), discussed above, fails to disclose or reasonably suggest the claimed invention, specifically those portions highlighted above in combination with the remaining limitations of the claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See the attached PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to R. PEACE whose telephone number is (571)272-8580. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5 pm.
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, Uyen-Chau Le can be reached at (571) 272-2397. 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.
/RHONDA S PEACE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874 6/23/26
Prosecution Insights