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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/28/2024, 12/06/2024, 02/26/2025 was filed and is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 7-12, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rochford (US 2017/0068500).
Regarding claim 1, Rochford discloses a head-mountable device (HMD) (see Fig 1) comprising: a housing (see Fig 1; Para [0015]; an element 106c); a securement band coupled to the housing and configured to retain the HMD on a user's head (see Fig 1; Para [0013]; a band 106b coupled to element 106c retains HMD 100 on a user); an external display coupled to the housing (see Fig 1; Para [0016]; an external display 110 is mounted to element 106c); an external sensor coupled to the housing (see Fig 1; Para [0017]; an external sensor 114 is mounted to element 106c); and an optical module coupled to the housing (see Fig 1; Para [0015]; examiner interprets optical module to comprise an internal display 108 and sensor 112), the optical module comprising: an internal display configured to present external characteristics to the user based on a signal from the external sensor (see Fig 1; Para [0015 and 0020]; an internal display 108 displays signals based on external sensor); and an internal sensor, the external display being configured to present user characteristics based on a signal from the internal sensor (see Fig 1; Para [0026]; an internal sensor 112 may be configured to be used with external display 110 to display image of users based on feed from said sensor).
Regarding claim 2, Rochford discloses the HMD of claim 1 (see Fig 1), wherein: the external sensor comprises a camera; and the internal sensor comprise cameras (see Fig 1; Para [0019]; external and internal sensors 112 and 114 both may comprise cameras).
Regarding claim 3, Rochford discloses the HMD of claim 1 (see Fig 1), wherein the external sensor is configured to detect a user gesture (see Fig 1; Para [0028-0029]; external sensor configured to detect external gestures).
Regarding claim 4, Rochford discloses the HMD of claim 1 (see Fig 1), wherein the internal sensor is configured to detect a gaze of the user (see Fig 1; Para [0026]; an internal sensor 114 may be configured to received video feed of a user’s face; examiner is interpreting this too include a user’s gaze).
Regarding claim 5, Rochford discloses the HMD of claim 1 (see Fig 1), wherein: the securement band extends rearward from the housing (see Fig 1; Para [0013]; band 106b extends from element 106c); the internal display and the internal sensor are oriented rearward relative to the housing; and the external display and the external sensor are oriented forward relative to the housing (see Fig 1; Para [0012-0017]; internal sensor 112 and internal display 108 and external sensor 114 and external display 110 are disposed in a rearward and forward orientation respective, as seen in Fig 1).
Regarding claim 7, Rochford discloses the HMD of claim 1 (see Fig 1), wherein the external display is configured to display a representation of the user based on the signal from the internal sensor (see Fig 1; Para [0026]; external display 110 is configured to display a video feed of a face of the user based on the input from internal sensor 112).
Regarding claim 8, Rochford discloses a wearable electronic device (see Fig 1) comprising: a forward-facing display (see Fig 1; Para [0016]; an external display 110); a housing coupled to the forward-facing display (see Fig 1; Para [0015]; an element 106c); an optical module coupled to the housing (see Fig 1; Para [0015]; examiner interprets optical module to comprise an internal display 108 and sensor 112 which is coupled to element 106c), the optical module comprising: a rearward-facing display; and a rearward-facing camera (see Fig 1; Para [0015]; an internal display 108 and an internal sensor 112), wherein the forward-facing display is configured to generate a user image based on a signal from the rearward-facing camera (see Fig 1; Para [0026]; an internal sensor 112 may be configured to be used with external display 110 to display image of users based on feed from said sensor); and a band configured to retain the housing on a user (see Fig 1; Para [0013]; a band 106b coupled to element 106c retains HMD 100 on a user 104).
Regarding claim 9, Rochford discloses the wearable electronic device of claim 8 (see Fig 1), further comprising a forward-facing sensor coupled to the housing, wherein the rearward-facing display is configured to generate an image of an environment based on a signal from the forward-facing sensor (see Fig 1; Para [0020]; internal information displayed to the user, by display 108, is a 2D image of captured by the external sensor 114).
Regarding claim 10, Rochford discloses the wearable electronic device of claim 9 (see Fig 1), wherein the rearward-facing display is configured to project mixed reality content including a first amount of video passthrough content captured by the forward-facing sensor and a second amount of virtual reality content (see Fig 1; Para [0020]; display 108 configured to display augmented reality images which comprise combined sensor images and computer-generated images).
Regarding claim 11, Rochford discloses the wearable electronic device of claim 8 (see Fig 1), further comprising a forward-facing sensor coupled to the housing (see Fig 1; Para [0027]; an external sensor 114 coupled to housing element 106c), wherein the forward-facing sensor is configured to: detect a user gesture; and generate a signal based on the detected gesture (see Fig 1; Para [0028-0029]; external sensor configured to detect external gestures and create a signal).
Regarding claim 12, Rochford discloses the wearable electronic device of claim 8 (see Fig 1), wherein the rearward-facing camera is configured to: detect a user gaze; and generate a signal based on the detected gaze (see Fig 1; Para [0026]; an internal sensor 114 may be configured to received video feed of a user’s face; examiner is interpreting this too include a user’s gaze).
Regarding claim 14, Rochford discloses a display system (see Fig 1) comprising: an optical module (see Fig 1; Para [0015]; optical module interpreted as internal display 108 and internal sensor 112) comprising: an internal display (see Fig 1; Para [0015]; an internal display 108); and an internal sensor configured to generate a first signal (see Fig 1; Para [0015]; an internal sensor 112); an external display configured to display a user characteristic based on the first signal (see Fig 1; Para [0026]; an external display 110 is mounted on headpiece 102 and displays video feed of internal sensor 112); and a housing coupled to the optical module and the external display (see Fig 1; Para [0015]; element 106c acts as housing coupling optical module and external display 110).
Regarding claim 15, Rochford discloses the display system of claim 14 (see Fig 1), wherein the external display is configured to present representation of a user comprising the user characteristics (see Fig 1; Para [0026]; examiner is interpreting this as equivalent to the external display 110 displaying video feed of the face of the user).
Regarding claim 16, Rochford discloses the display system of claim 15 (see Fig 1), wherein the internal sensor comprises a camera (see Fig 1; Para [0019]; internal sensor 112 may be a camera).
Regarding claim 17, Rochford discloses the display system of claim 14 (see Fig 1), wherein the first signal comprises user gaze tracking data (see Fig 1; Para [0026]; an internal sensor 114 may be configured to received video feed of a user’s face; examiner is interpreting this too include a user’s gaze).
Regarding claim 18, Rochford discloses the display system of claim 14 (see Fig 1), further comprising an external sensor coupled to the housing (see Fig 1; Para [0017]; an external sensor 114 is mounted on the housing element 106c), wherein: the external sensor is configured to generate a second signal (see Fig 1; Para [0017-0019]; an external sensor 114 is mounted on the housing element 106c generates video information data); and the internal display is configured to display environmental characteristics based on the second signal (see Fig 1; Para [0020]; internal display 108 configured to display images acquired by external sensor 114).
Regarding claim 19, Rochford discloses the display system of claim 18 (see Fig 1), wherein the external sensor comprises a camera (see Fig 1; Para [0019]; external sensor 114 may be a camera).
Regarding claim 20, Rochford discloses the display system of claim 18 (see Fig 1), wherein the second signal comprises user gesture tracking data (see Fig 1; Para [0028-0029]; external sensor configured to detect external gestures).
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 Rochford (US 2017/0068500) in view of Han (US 2019/0026871, of record).
Regarding claim 6, Rochford discloses the HMD of claim 1 (see Fig 1). Rochford does not disclose wherein: the external display comprises a cover glass; and the cover glass is curved relative to a longitudinal axis of the housing. Rochford and Han are related because both disclose head mounted displays.
Han discloses a head mounted display (see Fig 1A) wherein: the external display comprises a cover glass (see Fig 2A; Para [0053]; a display 201 has a cover member 204); and the cover glass is curved relative to a longitudinal axis of the housing (see Fig 2A; Para [0053]; the cover member is curved relative to the longitudinal axis of the frame 202 as seen in Fig 2A)
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Rochford with wherein: the external display comprises a cover glass; and the cover glass is curved relative to a longitudinal axis of the housing of Han for the purpose of improving a user’s visual field (Para [0012])
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rochford (US 2017/0068500) in view of Sako (US 2015/0253573).
Regarding claim 13, Rochford discloses the wearable electronic device of claim 8 (see Fig 1). Rochford does not disclose wherein a position of the optical module relative to the housing is adjustable. Rochford and Sako are related because both disclose wearable electronic devices.
Sako discloses a wearable electronic device (see Fig 2) wherein a position of the optical module relative to the housing is adjustable (see Fig 2; Para [0073]; the head mounted display device has an interpupillary adjustment mechanism that adjusts interpupillary width between right and left eye display units in the display device 1)
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Rochford with wherein a position of the optical module relative to the housing is adjustable of Sako for the purpose of fixing the device onto a user’s head in order to align vison with display (Para [0073])
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Nakata (US 2022/0343471) discloses a head mounted display with external display and external sensors.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GABRIEL ANDRES SANZ whose telephone number is (571)272-3844. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 am -5:30 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, Pinping Sun can be reached at (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 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.
/G.A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/WILLIAM R ALEXANDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872