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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed on 5/01/2024, 6/24/2024, 1/05/2026 have been acknowledged and considered by the examiner. Initialed copies of supplied IDS(s) forms are included in this correspondence.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 21, claim states the limitation “the waveguide has a main portion and has a cover layer that is attached to the main portion and is separated from the main portion by an air gap” in lines 9-11 of the claim. This limitation is unclear because the cover layer is described as being attached to the main portion but also separated from it by an air gap. How can the cover layer be both separated and attached to the main portion at the same time? Due to this discrepancy, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be apprised as to the scope of the invention (MPEP §2173.05(b)). For purposes of compact prosecution, examiner will assume that so long as the cover layer contacts the main portion with some gap between the two, this limitation will be considered met.
Also, claim 22 is rejected by virtue of its dependency.
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.
Claims 1-5, 8-9, 11-12, 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Machida et. al US 20170322420 (hereinafter “Machida”).
Regarding claim 1, Machida teaches a head-mounted device (Machida fig. 1-17), comprising:
a head-mounted support structure (Machida fig. 2 - 113, 10, see also para. 0221);
a projector (Machida fig. 1-17 - 111) that is supported in the head-mounted support structure (113) and that is configured to produce an image (Machida fig. 1-17, see also para. 0220);
a waveguide (Machida fig. 1-17 - 120, 121) that is supported in the head-mounted support structure (10), that has a first transparent layer (Machida fig. 1-17 - 123, see also para. 0212 and 0219) configured to guide the image to an output coupler (Machida fig. 1-17 – 140 and 340, see also para. 0216) that directs the image toward an eye box (Machida fig. 1-17 - light directed toward pupil 21, see also para. 0217), and that has a second transparent layer (Machida fig. 1-17 - 126) attached to the first transparent layer with a peripheral seal (Machida fig. 1-17 - 127), wherein the first and second transparent layers (123 and 126 respectively) are separated by an air gap (Machida fig. 1-17 - gap created by 127); and
an electrically adjustable light modulator (Machida fig. 1-17 - 700) that is supported in the head-mounted support structure (10), that has a third transparent layer (Machida fig. 1-17 - 703), and that has a layer of adjustable tint material (Machida fig. 7-5 - 705) between the second transparent layer (126) and the third transparent layer (703).
Regarding claim 2, Machida teaches the head-mounted device defined in claim 1 and Machida further teaches further comprising a first transparent conductive electrode (Machida fig. 1-7 – 702, see also para. 0223) on the second transparent layer (126) and a second transparent conductive electrode (Machida fig. 1-7 – 704, see also para. 0223) on the third transparent layer (Machida fig. 1-7), wherein the first and second transparent conductive electrodes (702 and 704 respectively) are configured to apply an electric field to the layer of adjustable tint material (705) to control an amount of light transmission associated with the electrically adjustable light modulator (Machida para. 0223).
Regarding claim 3, Machida teaches the head-mounted device defined in claim 2 and Machida further teaches wherein the output coupler (140, 340) comprises a grating on a surface of the first transparent layer facing the air gap (Machida fig. 11 – 340 is disposed on 322 facing the air gap).
Regarding claim 4, Machida teaches the head-mounted device defined in claim 3 and Machida further teaches wherein the first transparent layer (123) is configured to guide light associated with the image in accordance with the principal of total internal reflection (Machida para. 0214).
Regarding claim 5, Machida teaches the head-mounted device defined in claim 4 and Machida further teaches further comprising a peripheral ring of adhesive (Machida fig. 1-17 - 707) that attaches the third transparent layer (702) to the second transparent layer (Machida fig. 1-17 – 707 attaches 702 disposed on 701 to 126).
Regarding claim 8, Machida teaches the head-mounted device defined in claim 4 and Machida further teaches wherein the first transparent layer (123) comprises a first glass layer (Machida para. 0219) and wherein the second transparent layer (126) comprises a second glass layer (Machida para. 0117).
Regarding claim 9, Machida teaches the head-mounted device defined in claim 8 and Machida further teaches wherein the third transparent layer (703) comprises a third glass layer (Machida para. 0117 and 0223).
Regarding claim 11, Machida teaches the head-mounted device defined in claim 4 and Machdia further teaches wherein the first transparent layer (123) comprises a first polymer layer (Machida para. 0117) and wherein the second transparent layer (126) comprises a second polymer layer (Machida para. 0117).
Regarding claim 12, Machida teaches the head-mounted device defined in claim 11 and Machida further teaches wherein the third transparent layer (703) comprises a third polymer layer (Machida para. 0117 and 0223).
Regarding claim 14, Machida teaches the head-mounted device defined in claim 2 and Machida further teaches wherein the output coupler (140, 340) comprises a hologram (Machida para. 0136).
Regarding claim 15, Machida teaches the head-mounted device defined in claim 14 and Machida further teaches wherein the waveguide (320, 321) comprises a fourth transparent layer (Machida fig. 11 - 340) and comprises a polymer layer (Machida para. 0117) that contains the hologram (Machida para. 0136), wherein the polymer layer is between the first transparent layer and the fourth transparent layer (Machida fig. 11).
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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Machida as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Alton et. al US 20150309312 (hereinafter “Alton”).
Regarding claim 6, Machida teaches the head-mounted device defined in claim 4 and Machida further teaches the adjustable tint material (705) comprises a liquid crystal material (Machida para. 0223).
Machida does not specify a guest-host liquid crystal material.
In the same field of endeavor, Alton teaches a guest-host liquid crystal material (Alton para. 0041) for the purpose of enabling electronic control of light transmission (Alton para. 0041). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a guest-host liquid crystal material as taught by Alton in the head-mounted device of Machida in order to enable electronic control of light transmission (Alton para. 0041).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Machida as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Katano et. al US 20170315357 (hereinafter “Katano”).
Regarding claim 7, Machida teaches the head-mounted device defined in claim 4 and Machida further teaches the electrically adjustable light modulator (700).
Machida does not specify an electrically adjustable electrochromic light modulator layer.
In the same field of endeavor, Katano teaches an electrically adjustable electrochromic light modulator layer (Katano para. 0054-0056) for the purpose of adjusting the amount of light in a broader range of optical transmittance (Katano para. 0056). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have an electrically adjustable electrochromic light modulator layer as taught by Katano in the head-mounted device of Machida in order to adjust the amount of light in a broader range of optical transmittance (Katano para. 0056).
Claims 10, 13, 16, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Machida as applied to claims 9 and 12 above, and further in view of Yan et. al US 20200049996 (hereinafter “Yan”).
Regarding claims 10, 13, Machida teaches the head-mounted device defined in claims 9, 12 and Machida further teaches the waveguide (121) and the electrically adjustable light modulator (700).
Machida does not specify further comprising first and second lens elements, wherein the waveguide and the electrically adjustable light modulator are between the first and second lens elements, however Machida does teach that the head-mounted device may be eyeglasses (Machida abstract).
In the same field of endeavor, Yan teaches first and second lens elements (Yan fig. 3 – 72 and 74), wherein the waveguide (Yan fig. 3 - 62) and the electrically adjustable light modulator (Yan fig. 3 – 66 and 68, see also para. 0035) are between the first and second lens elements (Yan fig. 3) for the purpose of biasing the optical power of a liquid crystal lens (Yan para. 0036). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have first and second lens elements as taught by Yan in the head-mounted device of Machida in order to bias the optical power of the liquid crystal lens (Yan para. 0036).
Regarding claim 16, Machida teaches the head-mounted device defined in claim 1 and Machdia further teaches wherein the third transparent layer (703) is a polymer lens element (Machida para. 0117, 0223).
Machida does not specify that the third transparent layer has a positive lens power.
In the same field of endeavor, Yan teaches that the third transparent layer (Yan fig. 3 - 66) has a positive lens power (Yan para. 0033 – 66 is an adjustable lens component) for the purpose of dynamically adjusting the index of refraction profile of components (Yan para. 0033). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the third transparent layer has a positive lens power as taught by Yan in the head-mounted device of Machida in order to dynamically adjust the index of refraction profile of components (Yan para. 0033).
Regarding claim 20, Machida teaches the head-mounted device defined in claim 1 and Machida further teaches the third transparent layer (703).
Machida does not specify the third transparent layer has first and second opposing curved surfaces.
In the same field of endeavor, Yan teaches the third transparent layer (Machida fig. 3 - 66) has first and second opposing curved surfaces (Yan para. 0033 – 66 is an adjustable lens component) for the purpose of dynamically adjusting the index of refraction profile of components (Yan para. 0033). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the third transparent layer has a positive lens power as taught by Yan in the head-mounted device of Machida in order to dynamically adjust the index of refraction profile of components (Yan para. 0033).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Machida as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chan et. al US 20200225477 (hereinafter “Chan”).
Regarding claim 17, Machida teaches the head-mounted device defined in claim 1 and Machida further teaches the third transparent layer (703) comprises a second lens element (Machida para. 0117 and 0223 – 703 comprises clear glass) and the waveguide (120, 121).
Machida does not teach a first lens element, wherein the waveguide is between the first lens element and the second lens element.
In the same field of endeavor, Chan teaches further comprising a first lens element (Chan fig. 2 - 82), a second lens element and wherein the waveguide is between the first lens element and the second lens element (Chan fig. 2 – waveguide 86 is between 82 and 80) for the purpose of allowing real-world image light from real-world objects and virtual images associated with computer-generated content to be viewed by the user (Chan para. 0032). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have to have a first lens element as taught by Chan in the head-mounted device of Machida in order to allow real-world image light from real-world objects and virtual images associated with computer-generated content to be viewed by the user (Chan para. 0032).
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Machida as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Alton et. al US 20150355521 (hereinafter “US 521”).
Regarding claim 18, Machida teaches the head-mounted device defined in claim 1 and Machida further teaches the electrically adjustable light modulator (700).
Machida does not teach wherein the electrically adjustable light modulator is configured to exhibit a maximum light transmission value of at least 90%.
In the same field of endeavor, US 521 teaches wherein the electrically adjustable light modulator (US 521 fig. 1a-b - 112) is configured to exhibit a maximum light transmission value of at least 90% (US 521 para. 0035) for the purpose of providing for the highest transmittance dynamic range as possible (US 521 para. 0035). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a maximum light transmission value of at least 90% as taught by US 521 in the head-mounted device of Machida in order to provide for the highest transmittance dynamic range as possible (US 521 para. 0035).
Regarding claim 19, Machida and US 521 teach the head-mounted device defined in claim 18 and they further teach wherein the electrically adjustable light modulator (Machida 700; 521 fig. 1a-b - 112) is configured to exhibit a minimum light transmission value of less than 25% (Machida para. 0126 and 0226; US 521 para. 0034).
Claims 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yan et. al US 20200049996 (hereinafter “Yan”) in view of Machida et. al US 20170322420 (hereinafter “Machida”).
Regarding claim 21, Yan teaches an optical system for a head-mounted device having a projector that produces an image (Yan fig. 3 - 18), the optical system comprising:
an inner lens element (Yan fig. 3 - 72) facing an eye box (Yan fig. 3 - 78);
an outer lens element (Yan fig. 3 - 74);
a waveguide (Yan fig. 3 – 48) that is between the inner lens element (72) and the outer lens element (Yan fig. 3), the waveguide (48) having an output coupler (Yan fig. 3 - 52) that directs the image towards the eye box (78) through the inner lens element (Yan fig. 3); and
an electrically adjustable light modulator (Yan fig. 3 – 66, 68) that is between the waveguide (48) and the outer lens element (Yan fig. 3 – 66 is between 48 and 74, see also para. 0035).
Yan does not specify an electrically adjustable light modulator having an adjustable tint layer, wherein the waveguide has a main portion and has a cover layer that is attached to the main portion and is separated from the main portion by an air gap and wherein the electrically adjustable light modulator has a transparent conductive coating on the cover layer.
In the same field of endeavor, Machida teaches an electrically adjustable light modulator (Machida fig. 1 - 700) having an adjustable tint layer (Machida fig. 1 - 705), wherein the waveguide (Machida fig. 1 – 120) has a main portion (Machida fig. 1 - 120) and has a cover layer (Machida fig. 1 - 126) that is attached to the main portion (120) and is separated from the main portion by an air gap (Machida fig. 1 – adhesive 127 attaches 126 to 120 while separating them by an air gap) and wherein the electrically adjustable light modulator (700) has a transparent conductive coating (Machida fig. 1 - 702) on the cover layer (Machida fig. 3).
Regarding claim 22, Yan and Machida teach the optical system defined in claim 21 and they further teach wherein the cover layer (Machida 126) comprises a cover glass layer, wherein the electrically adjustable light modulator (Machida 700) has a glass substrate layer (Machida fig. 1 – 703) with an additional transparent conductive coating (Machida fig. 1 - 704), wherein the adjustable tint layer (Machida 705) is between the transparent conductive coating on the cover glass layer (Machida 702) and the additional transparent conductive coating on the glass substrate layer (Machida fig. 1 – 705 is between 704 and 702), and wherein the glass substrate layer (Machida 704) is between the outer lens element (Yan 74) and the waveguide (Yan fig. 3 – 66 is between 74 and 78).
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Machida et. al US 20170322420 (hereinafter “Machida”) in view of Chan et. al US 20200225477 (hereinafter “Chan”).
Regarding claim 23, Machida teaches a head-mounted device optical system operable in a head-mounted device with a projector (Machida fig. 13 – 211) that produces an image (Machida para. 0207), comprising:
a waveguide (Machida fig. 13 – 320, 321) that is configured to guide the image, wherein the waveguide (320, 321) has a waveguide glass layer (Machida fig. 13 - 323) with a surface relief grating (Machida fig. 13 – 330, 340) and has a cover glass layer (Machida fig. 13 - 126) configured to protect the surface relief grating (Machida fig. 13), wherein the cover glass layer (126) is attached to the waveguide glass layer (323) with adhesive (Machida fig. 13 - 127) so that the surface relief grating (330, 340) is separated by an air gap from the cover glass layer (Machida fig. 13); and
an adjustable light modulator (Machida fig. 13 - 700) having a transparent conductive electrode (Machida fig. 13 - 702) on the cover glass layer (Machida fig. 13).
Machida does not specify a first lens element; a second lens element; a waveguide that is between the first and second lens elements.
In the same field of endeavor, Chan teaches a first lens element (Chan fig. 2 - 82); a second lens element (Chan fig. 2 - 80); a waveguide (Chan fig. 2 – 86, 88) that is between the first and second lens elements (Chan fig. 2) for the purpose of allowing real-world image light from real-world objects and virtual images associated with computer-generated content to be viewed by the user (Chan para. 0032). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have to have a first and second lens element as taught by Chan in the head-mounted device of Machida in order to allow real-world image light from real-world objects and virtual images associated with computer-generated content to be viewed by the user (Chan para. 0032).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yan et. al US Patent 11,822,079, patent of Yan et. al US 20200049996;
Alton et. al US Patent 9,766,459, patent of Alton et. al US 20150309312.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH M HALL whose telephone number is (703)756-5795. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-5:30 pm PST.
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, Ricky Mack can be reached at (571)272-2333. 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.
/ELIZABETH M HALL/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/ZACHARY W WILKES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872