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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment, filed 04/02/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1 and 9 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Wakai et al. (5,659,420) as well as Parker et al. (2016/0370588, of record).
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.
Claims 1-3, 7-11, 15, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomono (2004/0085648, of record) in view of Wakai et al. (5,659,420).
Regarding claim 1, Tomono discloses an optical element (at least Figure 5) comprising a pinhole array (25, pinhole array), wherein the pinhole array comprises a plurality of pinhole grating sets (25a, pinholes), the pinhole grating sets are configured to diffract light incident on the optical element into a plurality of light beams respectively ([0024] teaches 25a, pinholes, diffracts and diverges light that passes through them), and each of the light beams has a field of view (Figures 4 and 5 depict each light through 25a, pinholes, has a field of view depicted by the arrows emitted from 25a, pinholes, to 17, eyeball).
Tomono fails to teach wherein the pinhole array is a holographic pinhole array, and consequently fails to teach wherein the pinhole grating sets are holographic pinhole grating sets. Tomono and Wakai are related because both teach an optical element.
Wakai teaches an optical element (at least Figure 1) wherein a pinhole array (14, pinhole array, and 4, reflection hologram) is a holographic pinhole array (14, pinhole array, and 4, reflection hologram , together, are viewed to be broadly considered a holographic pinhole array; col 7 lines 20-25) which comprises a plurality of holographic pinhole grating sets (Figure 1, each 14a, aperture, and the region of 4 reflection hologram, directly below each 14a, aperture, can be considered a holographic pinhole grating set; col 7 lines 20-25).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Tomono to incorporate Wakai and provide wherein the pinhole array is a holographic pinhole array, and consequently fails to teach wherein the pinhole grating sets are holographic pinhole grating sets. Doing so would allow for allow for miniaturization and weight reduction of an optical device which implements the optical element.
Regarding claim 2, the modified Tomono discloses the optical element of claim 1, wherein the optical element has a surface (Figure 5, right hand side of 27, microlens array), the light diffracted by the holographic pinhole grating sets is incident on the surface ([0024] teaches 25a, pinholes, diffracts and diverges light that passes through them, which then is condensed by 27, microlens array; Figure 5 depicts light from 25a, pinholes, is incident on the right hand side surface of 27, microlens array), and the light beams propagate and leave the optical element from the surface (Figure 5 depicts light propagates through 27, microlens array, and exits the right hand side of 27, microlens array).
Regarding claim 3, the modified Tomono discloses the optical element of claim 1, wherein the optical element has a first surface (left hand side of 27, microlens array) and a second surface opposite to each other (right hand side of 27, microlens array), the light diffracted by the holographic pinhole grating sets is incident on the first surface ([0024] teaches 25a, pinholes, diffracts and diverges light that passes through them, which then is condensed by 27, microlens array; Figure 5), and the light beams propagate and leave the optical element from the second surface (Figure 5 depicts light propagates through 27, microlens array, and exits the right hand side of 27, microlens array).
Regarding claim 7, the modified Tomono discloses the optical element of claim 1, wherein the light diffracted by the holographic pinhole grating sets is collimated light (Examiner interprets Figure 5 to depict the light that is incident on the left hand side of 25, pinhole array, is collimated light, which is then diffracted by 25a, pinholes).
Regarding claim 8, the modified Tomono discloses the optical element of claim 1, wherein the light diffracted by the holographic pinhole grating sets has another field of view (Figure 4 depicts light entering 25, pinhole array, has a field of view while light exiting 25, pinhole array, has a different field of view).
Regarding claim 9, Tomono discloses an optical device (Figure 4), comprising: an optical element (at least Figure 5) comprising a pinhole array (25, pinhole array), wherein the pinhole array comprises a plurality of pinhole grating sets (25a, pinholes); and a light-emitting element configured to emit light toward the optical element (11, planar backlight), wherein the pinhole grating sets are configured to diffract the light into a plurality of light beams respectively ([0024] teaches 25a, pinholes, diffracts and diverges light that passes through them), and each of the light beams has a field of view (Figures 4 and 5 depict each light through 25a, pinholes, has a field of view depicted by the arrows emitted from 25a, pinholes, to 17, eyeball).
Tomono fails to teach wherein the pinhole array is a holographic pinhole array, and consequently fails to teach wherein the pinhole grating sets are holographic pinhole grating sets. Tomono and Wakai are related because both teach an optical device.
Wakai teaches an optical device (Figure 1) comprising: an optical element (at least Figure 1) wherein a pinhole array (14, pinhole array, and 4, reflection hologram) is a holographic pinhole array (14, pinhole array, and 4, reflection hologram , together, are viewed to be broadly considered a holographic pinhole array; col 7 lines 20-25) which comprises a plurality of holographic pinhole grating sets (Figure 1, each 14a, aperture, and the region of 4 reflection hologram, directly below each 14a, aperture, can be considered a holographic pinhole grating set; col 7 lines 20-25).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Tomono to incorporate Wakai and provide wherein the pinhole array is a holographic pinhole array, and consequently fails to teach wherein the pinhole grating sets are holographic pinhole grating sets. Doing so would allow for allow for miniaturization and weight reduction of an optical device which implements the optical element.
Regarding claim 10, the modified Tomono discloses the optical device of claim 9, wherein the optical element has a surface (Figure 5, right hand side of 27, microlens array), the light diffracted by the holographic pinhole grating sets is incident on the surface ([0024] teaches 25a, pinholes, diffracts and diverges light that passes through them, which then is condensed by 27, microlens array; Figure 5 depicts light from 25a, pinholes, is incident on the right hand side surface of 27, microlens array), and the light beams propagate and leave the optical element from the surface (Figure 5 depicts light propagates through 27, microlens array, and exits the right hand side of 27, microlens array).
Regarding claim 11, the modified Tomono discloses the optical device of claim 9, wherein the optical element has a first surface (left hand side of 27, microlens array) and a second surface opposite to each other (right hand side of 27, microlens array), the light diffracted by the holographic pinhole grating sets is incident on the first surface ([0024] teaches 25a, pinholes, diffracts and diverges light that passes through them, which then is condensed by 27, microlens array; Figure 5), and the light beams propagate and leave the optical element from the second surface (Figure 5 depicts light propagates through 27, microlens array, and exits the right hand side of 27, microlens array).
Regarding claim 15, the modified Tomono discloses the optical device of claim 9, wherein the light diffracted by the holographic pinhole grating sets is collimated light (Examiner interprets Figure 5 to depict the light that is incident on the left hand side of 25, pinhole array, is collimated light, which is then diffracted by 25a, pinholes).
Regarding claim 17, the modified Tomono discloses the optical device of claim 16, wherein the light-emitting element is configured to sequentially emit the light toward the holographic pinhole grating sets (Figure 4 depicts light from 11, planar backlight, is emitted toward 25, pinhole array).
Regarding claim 18, the modified Tomono discloses the optical device of claim 15, wherein the light-emitting element comprises: a projector (15, Fresnel lens; Examiner considers 15, Fresnel lens, to be a projector as it projects an image onto 17, eyeball); and a lens module (13, image-forming element; [0022] teaches 13, image-forming element, may be a transmissive liquid crystal display, which is known in the art to include lenses) optically coupled between the projector and the optical element (Figure 4).
Regarding claim 19, the modified Tomono discloses the optical device of claim 9, wherein the light diffracted by the holographic pinhole grating sets has another field of view (Figure 4 depicts light entering 25, pinhole array, has a field of view while light exiting 25, pinhole array, has a different field of view).
Claims 4, 5, 12, 13, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomono (2004/0085648, of record) in view of Wakai et al. (5,659,420), as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Alexander et al. (2019/0113825, of record).
Regarding claim 4, the modified Tomono discloses the optical element of claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the holographic pinhole grating sets are volume holographic gratings. The modified Tomono and Alexander are related because both teach an optical device.
Alexander teaches an optical element wherein the holographic grating sets are volume holographic gratings ([0028] teaches the in-coupling or out-coupling element may be a volume diffraction grating).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was field to have further modified Tomono to incorporate the teachings of Alexander and provide wherein the holographic pinhole grating sets are volume holographic gratings. Doing so would allow for improved diffraction efficiency and low stray light production.
Regarding claim 5, the modified Tomono discloses the optical element of claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the holographic pinhole grating sets are surface relief diffraction gratings. The modified Tomono and Alexander are related because both teach an optical device.
Alexander teaches an optical element wherein the holographic grating sets are surface relief diffraction gratings ([0028] teaches the in-coupling or out-coupling element may be a surface relief grating).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was field to have further modified Tomono to incorporate the teachings of Alexander and provide wherein the holographic pinhole grating sets are surface relief diffraction gratings. Doing so would allow for high diffraction efficiency and improved spectral resolution.
Regarding claim 12, the modified Tomono discloses the optical device of claim 9, but fails to teach wherein the holographic pinhole grating sets are volume holographic gratings. The modified Tomono and Alexander are related because both teach an optical device.
Alexander teaches an optical device wherein the holographic grating sets are volume holographic gratings ([0028] teaches the in-coupling or out-coupling element may be a volume diffraction grating).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was field to have further modified Tomono to incorporate the teachings of Alexander and provide wherein the holographic pinhole grating sets are volume holographic gratings. Doing so would allow for improved diffraction efficiency and low stray light production.
Regarding claim 13, the modified Tomono discloses the optical device of claim 9, but fails to teach wherein the holographic pinhole grating sets are surface relief diffraction gratings. The modified Tomono and Alexander are related because both teach an optical device.
Alexander teaches an optical device wherein the holographic grating sets are surface relief diffraction gratings ([0028] teaches the in-coupling or out-coupling element may be a surface relief grating).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was field to have further modified Tomono to incorporate the teachings of Alexander and provide wherein the holographic pinhole grating sets are surface relief diffraction gratings. Doing so would allow for high diffraction efficiency and improved spectral resolution.
Regarding claim 16, the modified Tomono discloses the optical device of claim 15, but fails to teach further comprising a temple connected to an edge of the optical element, wherein the light-emitting element is disposed on a side of the temple adjacent to the optical element. The modified Tomono and Alexander are related because both teach an optical device.
Alexander teaches an optical device comprising a temple connected to an edge of the optical element (Figure 5, 590, support structure, viewed to be connected to an edge of 501, optical waveguide), wherein the light-emitting element is disposed on a side of the temple adjacent to the optical element (570, projector).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was field to further have modified Tomono to incorporate the teachings of Alexander and provide a temple connected to an edge of the optical element, wherein the light-emitting element is disposed on a side of the temple adjacent to the optical element. Doing so would allow for a compact and durable configuration for a head mounted display.
Claims 6 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomono (2004/0085648, of record) in view of Wakai et al. (5,659,420), as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Tang et al. (11,061,290, of record).
Regarding claim 6, the modified Tomono discloses the optical element of claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the holographic pinhole grating sets are liquid crystal gratings. The modified Tomono and Tang are related because both teach an optical device.
Tang teaches an optical element wherein the holographic grating sets are liquid crystal gratings (Figure 20, 35, liquid crystal grating).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was field to have further modified Tomono to incorporate the teachings of Tang and provide wherein the holographic pinhole grating sets are liquid crystal gratings. Doing so would allow for adaptive beam steering to precisely modulate the image wavefront.
Regarding claim 14, the modified Tomono discloses the optical device of claim 9, but fails to teach wherein the holographic pinhole grating sets are liquid crystal gratings. The modified Tomono and Tang are related because both teach an optical device.
Tang teaches an optical device wherein the holographic grating sets are liquid crystal gratings (Figure 20, 35, liquid crystal grating).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was field to have further modified Tomono to incorporate the teachings of Tang and provide wherein the holographic pinhole grating sets are liquid crystal gratings. Doing so would allow for adaptive beam steering to precisely modulate the image wavefront.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomono (2004/0085648, of record) in view of Wakai et al. (5,659,420) in view of Alexander et al. (2019/0113825, of record), as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Tang et al. (11,061,290, of record).
Regarding claim 20, the modified Tomono discloses the optical device of claim 19, but fails to teach further comprising a temple connected to an edge of the optical element, wherein the light-emitting element is disposed on a side of the temple adjacent to the optical element and comprises: a display; and a field lens optically coupled between the display and the optical element. the modified Tomono and Alexander are related because both teach an optical device.
Alexander teaches an optical device comprising a temple connected to an edge of the optical element (Figure 5, 590, support structure, viewed to be connected to an edge of 501, optical waveguide), wherein the light-emitting element is disposed on a side of the temple adjacent to the optical element (570, projector).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was field to have further modified Tomono to incorporate the teachings of Alexander and provide a temple connected to an edge of the optical element, wherein the light-emitting element is disposed on a side of the temple adjacent to the optical element. Doing so would allow for a compact and durable configuration for a head mounted display.
The modified Tomono fails to teach wherein the light-emitting element comprises: a display; and a field lens optically coupled between the display and the optical element. The modified Tomono and Tang are related because each teach an optical device.
Tang teaches an optical device wherein the light-emitting element comprises: a display (Figure 20, 31, spatial light modulator); and a field lens optically coupled between the display and the optical element (34, field lens, is optically coupled between 31, spatial light modulator, and 35, liquid crystal grating).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was field to have further modified Tomono to incorporate the teachings of Tang and provide wherein the light emitting element comprises: a display; and a field lens optically coupled between the display and the optical element. Doing so would allow for improved brightness and an expanded field of view.
Claims 1-3, 7-11, 15, and 17-19 are alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomono (2004/0085648, of record) in view of Parker et al. (2016/0370588, of record).
Regarding claim 1, Tomono discloses an optical element (at least Figure 5) comprising a pinhole array (25, pinhole array), wherein the pinhole array comprises a plurality of pinhole grating sets (25a, pinholes), the pinhole grating sets are configured to diffract light incident on the optical element into a plurality of light beams respectively ([0024] teaches 25a, pinholes, diffracts and diverges light that passes through them), and each of the light beams has a field of view (Figures 4 and 5 depict each light through 25a, pinholes, has a field of view depicted by the arrows emitted from 25a, pinholes, to 17, eyeball).
Tomono fails to teach wherein the pinhole array is a holographic pinhole array, and consequently fails to teach wherein the pinhole grating sets are holographic pinhole grating sets. Tomono and Parker are related because both teach an optical element.
Parker teaches an optical element (at least Figures 1 and 5b, 30a, 30b, light directing apertures) wherein a pinhole array (30a, 30b, light directing apertures; [0028]) is a holographic pinhole array ([0028]; claim 5 teaches the plurality of light direction apertures includes at least one from the group of pinholes, holograms, and others, thus interpreted as pinholes and holograms can both be utilized to make up the light direction apertures) which comprises a plurality of holographic pinhole grating sets (Figure 5a, each aperture can be considered a holographic pinhole grating set).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Tomono to incorporate Parker and provide wherein the pinhole array is a holographic pinhole array, and consequently fails to teach wherein the pinhole grating sets are holographic pinhole grating sets. Doing so would allow for allow for a more compact optical device which implements the optical element.
Regarding claim 9, Tomono discloses an optical device (Figure 4), comprising: an optical element (at least Figure 5) comprising a pinhole array (25, pinhole array), wherein the pinhole array comprises a plurality of pinhole grating sets (25a, pinholes); and a light-emitting element configured to emit light toward the optical element (11, planar backlight), wherein the pinhole grating sets are configured to diffract the light into a plurality of light beams respectively ([0024] teaches 25a, pinholes, diffracts and diverges light that passes through them), and each of the light beams has a field of view (Figures 4 and 5 depict each light through 25a, pinholes, has a field of view depicted by the arrows emitted from 25a, pinholes, to 17, eyeball).
Tomono fails to teach wherein the pinhole array is a holographic pinhole array, and consequently fails to teach wherein the pinhole grating sets are holographic pinhole grating sets. Tomono and Wakai are related because both teach an optical device.
Parker teaches an optical element (at least Figures 1 and 5b, 30a, 30b, light directing apertures) wherein a pinhole array (30a, 30b, light directing apertures; [0028]) is a holographic pinhole array ([0028]; claim 5 teaches the plurality of light direction apertures includes at least one from the group of pinholes, holograms, and others, thus interpreted as pinholes and holograms can both be utilized to make up the light direction apertures) which comprises a plurality of holographic pinhole grating sets (Figure 5a, each aperture can be considered a holographic pinhole grating set).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Tomono to incorporate Parker and provide wherein the pinhole array is a holographic pinhole array, and consequently fails to teach wherein the pinhole grating sets are holographic pinhole grating sets. Doing so would allow for allow for a more compact optical device which implements the optical element.
Claims 2, 3, 7, 8, 10, 11, 15, and 17-19 are rejected mutatis mutandis to the rejection made under Tomono in view of Wakai, highlighted under item “5.” above.
Claims 4, 5, 12, 13, and 16 are alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomono (2004/0085648, of record) in view of Parker et al. (2016/0370588, of record), as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Alexander et al. (2019/0113825, of record).
Claims 4, 5, 12, 13, and 16 are rejected mutatis mutandis to the rejection made under Tomono in view of Wakai, highlighted under item “6.” above.
Claims 6 and 14 are alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomono (2004/0085648, of record) in view of Parker et al. (2016/0370588, of record), as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Tang et al. (11,061,290, of record).
Claims 6 and 14 are rejected mutatis mutandis to the rejection made under Tomono in view of Wakai, highlighted under item “7.” above.
Claim 20 is alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomono (2004/0085648, of record) in view of Parker et al. (2016/0370588, of record) in view of Alexander et al. (2019/0113825, of record), as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Tang et al. (11,061,290, of record).
Claim 20 is rejected mutatis mutandis to the rejection made under Tomono in view of Wakai, highlighted under item “8.” above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BALRAM T PARBADIA whose telephone number is (571)270-0602. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday - Friday.
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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571) 272-2713. 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.
/BALRAM T PARBADIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights