CTNF 18/608,474 CTNF 79728 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-05 Claims 1, 2, 3, 8, 9, and 10 recites the limitation "the light". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-9, 11, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by US 9,547,129 B1 Kato et al. (herein “Kato”, cited on the attached PTO-892) . Regarding claim 1, Kato discloses in Fig. 8, a lightguide for a head-worn display, comprising: a substrate having opposing surfaces (see Abstract, wherein device is a silicon substrate); a set of diffractive grating structures (grating shown to the left of waveguide taper) disposed on a surface of the substrate; and an optical material (darkest gray material on far left of figure) having a refractive index deposited on the surface of the substrate such that a first diffractive grating structure of the set of diffractive grating structures is at least partially encapsulated by the optical material, wherein the first diffractive grating structure is configured to direct a fraction of the light that is based on the refractive index of the optical material (col. 8, line 53 – col. 9, line 19). Regarding claim 2, Kato discloses in Fig. 8, a second optical material (second darkest gray box from left) having a second refractive index deposited on the surface of the substrate such that a second diffractive grating structure of the set of diffractive grating structures is at least partially encapsulated by the second optical material, wherein: the second refractive index is different from the refractive index, the second diffractive grating structure is different from the first diffractive grating structure, and the second diffractive grating structure is configured to direct a second fraction of the light that is based on the second refractive index of the second optical material (wherein Fig. 8 shows the First diffraction gratings on far left in darkest gray box are encapsulated by a material having a higher index of refraction than the second from left second darkest gray box has a diffraction grating spaced closer together, and therefore different from the first diffraction grating). Regarding claim 4, Kato discloses a protective material deposited on at least a portion of the first diffractive grating structure (col. 8, line 53 – col. 9, line 19; wherein Kato discloses, “the whole fiber coupler including the sectional index-graded cladding and a BOX support layer (not shown in this top view figure) is configured to be surrounded by a material”; wherein Examiner considers any additional material to be protective since it is surrounding the elements thus providing an additional shielding layer from external elements). Regarding claim 5, Kato discloses a planar surface formed by at least a portion of the optical material (the device is shown as planar in Fig. 8 and all of the figures). Regarding claim 6, Kato discloses the planar surface includes a pattern (wherein the different graded boxes form a pattern). Regarding claim 7, Kato discloses the first diffractive grating structure forms at least a portion of an incoupler (col. 8, line 53 – col. 9, line 19; wherein the device is a coupler used for incoupling and outcoupling light). Regarding claim 8, Kato discloses in Fig. 8, a method for manufacturing a lightguide for a head-worn display (HWD), comprising: forming a set of diffractive grating structures on a surface of a substrate (see Abstract, wherein device is a silicon substrate); and depositing an optical material having a refractive index on the surface of the substrate such that a first diffractive grating structure of the set of diffractive grating structures is at least partially encapsulated by the optical material, wherein the first diffractive grating structure is configured to direct a fraction of the light that is based on the refractive index of the optical material (col. 8, line 53 – col. 9, line 19). Regarding claim 9, Kato discloses in Fig. 8, depositing a second optical material (second darkest gray box from left) having a second refractive index on the surface of the substrate such that a second diffractive grating structure of the set of diffractive grating structures is at least partially encapsulated by the second optical material, wherein: the second refractive index is different from the refractive index, the second diffractive grating structure is different from the first diffractive grating structure, and the second diffractive grating structure is configured to direct a second fraction of the light that is based on the second refractive index of the second optical material (wherein Fig. 8 shows the First diffraction gratings on far left in darkest gray box are encapsulated by a material having a higher index of refraction than the second from left second darkest gray box has a diffraction grating spaced closer together, and therefore different from the first diffraction grating). Regarding claim 11, Kato discloses depositing a protective material on at least a portion of the first diffractive grating structure (col. 8, line 53 – col. 9, line 19; wherein Kato discloses, “the whole fiber coupler including the sectional index-graded cladding and a BOX support layer (not shown in this top view figure) is configured to be surrounded by a material”; wherein Examiner considers any additional material to be protective since it is surrounding the elements thus providing an additional shielding layer from external elements). Regarding claim 14, Kato discloses the first diffractive grating structure forms at least a portion of an outcoupler (col. 8, line 53 – col. 9, line 19; wherein the device is a coupler used for incoupling and outcoupling light) . 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by WO 2023/104914 Sol et al. (herein “Sol”, cited on the attached PTO-892) . Regarding claim 15, Sol discloses in Figs. 9a-f, a head-worn display (HWD) configured to display an extended reality (XR) image to a user (see Abstract), comprising: a light engine (904) configured to emit light representative of the XR image; and a lightguide (903) configured to receive the light representing of the XR from the light engine, the lightguide comprising: a substrate (905) having opposing surfaces; a set of diffractive grating structures (901, 902) disposed on a surface of the substrate; and an optical material having a refractive index deposited on the surface of the substrate such that a first diffractive grating structure of the set of diffractive grating structures is at least partially encapsulated by the optical material, wherein the first diffractive grating structure is configured to direct a fraction of the light representative of the XR image that is based on the refractive index of the optical material (p. 42, lines 19-27) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 3, 10, 12, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 9,547,129 B1 Kato et al. (herein “Kato”, cited on the attached PTO-892) . Regarding claims 3 and 10, Kato is silent as to specifically a third optical material having a third refractive index deposited on the surface of the substrate such that the third optical material is between the optical material and the second optical material and the third optical material at least partially encapsulates a third diffractive grating structure of the set of diffractive grating structures, wherein: the third refractive index is between the refractive index and the second refractive index, the third diffractive grating structure is different from the first diffractive grating structure and the second diffractive grating structure, and the third diffractive grating structure is configured to direct a third fraction of the light that is based on the third refractive index of the third optical material. However, Kato teaches that the use of a second material allows for a more gradual mode transition, further enhancing coupling efficiency, as well as reducing loss. Kato shows possession of the knowledge of additional materials, and therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to include a third material, to make the transition even more gradual. Regarding claims 12 and 13, Kato is silent as to a non-planar surface including a pattern. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention, to have a non-planar patterned shape, since the courts have held that configuration is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant. In re Dailey , 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). A person of ordinary skill in the art would understand how to adjust the shape as needed to fit into a desired location . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2023/104914 Sol et al. (herein “Sol”, cited on the attached PTO-892) in view of US 9,547,129 B1 Kato et al. (herein “Kato”, cited on the attached PTO-892) . Regarding claim 16, Sol is silent as to, but Kato discloses the lightguide further comprises: a second optical material having a second refractive index deposited on the surface of the substrate such that a second diffractive grating structure of the set of diffractive grating structures is at least partially encapsulated by the second optical material, wherein: the second refractive index is different from the refractive index, the second diffractive grating structure is different from the first diffractive grating structure, and the second diffractive grating structure is configured to direct a second fraction of the light representative of the XR image that is based on the second refractive index of the second optical material (wherein Fig. 8 shows the First diffraction gratings on far left in darkest gray box are encapsulated by a material having a higher index of refraction than the second from left second darkest gray box has a diffraction grating spaced closer together, and therefore different from the first diffraction grating). Kato teaches that the use of a second material allows for a more gradual mode transition, further enhancing coupling efficiency, as well as reducing loss. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to include the second material as taught by Kato in the device of Sol. Regarding claim 17, Sol in view of Kato are silent as to specifically a third optical material having a third refractive index deposited on the surface of the substrate such that the third optical material is between the optical material and the second optical material and the third optical material at least partially encapsulates a third diffractive grating structure of the set of diffractive grating structures, wherein: the third refractive index is between the refractive index and the second refractive index, the third diffractive grating structure is different from the first diffractive grating structure and the second diffractive grating structure, and the third diffractive grating structure is configured to direct a third fraction of the light that is based on the third refractive index of the third optical material. However, Kato teaches that the use of a second material allows for a more gradual mode transition, further enhancing coupling efficiency, as well as reducing loss. Kato shows possession of the knowledge of additional materials, and therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to include a third material, to make the transition even more gradual. Regarding claim 18, Sol is silent as to, but Kato discloses a protective material deposited on at least a portion of the first diffractive grating structure (col. 8, line 53 – col. 9, line 19; wherein Kato discloses, “the whole fiber coupler including the sectional index-graded cladding and a BOX support layer (not shown in this top view figure) is configured to be surrounded by a material”; wherein Examiner considers any additional material to be protective since it is surrounding the elements thus providing an additional shielding layer from external elements). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to include a protective material so as to protect the device. Regarding claim 19, Sol is silent as to, but Kato discloses a planar surface formed by at least a portion of the optical material (the device is shown as planar in Fig. 8 and all of the figures). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to adjust the shape as needed. Regarding claim 20, Sol is silent as to, but Kato disclose the first diffractive grating structure forms at least a portion of an incoupler (col. 8, line 53 – col. 9, line 19; wherein the device is a coupler used for incoupling and outcoupling light). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to couple light into and out of the waveguide as needed. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARY A EL-SHAMMAA whose telephone number is (571)272-2469. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 9am-6pm (flexible schedule). 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, Thomas Hollweg can be reached at 571-270-1739. 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. /MARY A EL-SHAMMAA/Examiner, Art Unit 2874 /THOMAS A HOLLWEG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874 Application/Control Number: 18/608,474 Page 2 Art Unit: 2874 Application/Control Number: 18/608,474 Page 3 Art Unit: 2874 Application/Control Number: 18/608,474 Page 4 Art Unit: 2874 Application/Control Number: 18/608,474 Page 5 Art Unit: 2874 Application/Control Number: 18/608,474 Page 6 Art Unit: 2874 Application/Control Number: 18/608,474 Page 7 Art Unit: 2874 Application/Control Number: 18/608,474 Page 8 Art Unit: 2874 Application/Control Number: 18/608,474 Page 9 Art Unit: 2874 Application/Control Number: 18/608,474 Page 10 Art Unit: 2874
Prosecution Insights