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 .
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) 1-6 and 8-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Saito (U.S. 2011/0090389).
Regarding claim 1, Saito discloses an optical element (Fig. 1; page 1, para [0022]) comprising:
a first prism (10, Fig. 1; page 2, para [0023]) that includes an incident surface (5, Fig. 1; page 2, para [0023]), a semi-reflecting surface (12 of 7, Figs. 1-2; page 2, para [0032]), and an emitting surface (6, Fig. 1; page 2, para [0023]) each configured of a free-form surface (5, 6, and 7 of 12 are free-form surfaces, Figs. 1-2), and in which light of a display element (1, Fig. 1; page 2, para [0023]) is incident from the incident surface (5, Fig. 1), is internally reflected between the emitting surface (6, Fig. 1) and the semi-reflecting surface (12 of 7, Figs. 1-2; page 2, para [0024]), and is emitted from the emitting surface (6, Fig. 1) to an observation portion (3, Fig. 1; page 2, para [0025]) of the light; and
a second prism (13, Fig. 2; page 2, para [0032]) including an external light incident surface (outer incident surface of 13 for incident light 11, Fig. 2; page 3, para [0037]) configured in a shape in which a free-form surface is divided by at least one stepped surface (outer incident surface of 13 is a free-form surface divided by at least one stepped surface portion of 13, Fig. 2; page 3, para [0034]) and on which external light is incident (external light 11 is incident on the stepped surface portion of 13, Fig. 2), and an external light emitting surface (surface of 13 facing 12, Fig. 2) from which the incident external light (11, Fig. 2) is emitted to the semi-reflecting surface (external light 11 is emitted to the semi-reflecting surface of 12 through the light emitting surface of 13 facing 12, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 2, Saito discloses an optical element with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the second prism (13, Fig. 2) is disposed adjacent to the first prism (10, Figs. 1-2; page 2, para [0032]).
Regarding claim 3, Saito discloses an optical element with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the second prism (13, Fig. 2) includes the external light emitting surface (surface of 13 facing 12, Fig. 2) configured in the same shape as the semi-reflecting surface (12, Fig. 2) and joined to the semi-reflecting surface (surface of 13 facing 12 is joined to the semi-reflecting surface 12, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 4, Saito discloses an optical element with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the second prism (13, Fig. 2) emits the incident external light (11, Fig. 2) to the observation portion (3, Figs. 1-2; page 2, para [0033]) via the first prism (10, Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 5, Saito discloses an optical element with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the second prism (13, Fig. 2) includes the external light incident surface (incident surface of 13 facing incident light 11, Fig. 2) configured in a shape in which the free-form surface (outer incident free-form surface of 13, Fig. 2) having the same shape as the emitting surface (surface of 13 facing 12, Fig. 2) is divided by the at least one stepped surface (stepped surface of 13 facing 11, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 6, Saito discloses an optical element with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the second prism (13, Fig. 2) includes the external light incident surface (incident surface of 13 facing incident light 11, Fig. 2) configured in a shape divided by a plurality of the stepped surfaces (plurality of stepped surfaces of 13 facing 11, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 8, Saito discloses an optical element with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the second prism (13, Fig. 2) includes a plurality of the stepped surfaces whose end portions are aligned with a vertical plane (such as each stepped surface portion of 13 is aligned with a vertical plane along an extending direction of each stepped surface portion of 13, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 9, Saito discloses an optical element with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the second prism (13, Fig. 2) includes the stepped surface incline along an optical path from the observation portion (such as the stepped surface portion being inclined along an optical path 9 from the observation portion 3, Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 10, Saito discloses an optical element with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the second prism (13, Fig. 2) emits the external light (11, Fig. 2) with an eyeball of a user as the observation portion (eyeball of user as the observation portion 3, Figs. 1-2; page 2, para [0023]).
Regarding claim 11, Saito discloses an optical element with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the second prism (13, Fig. 2) includes the stepped surface inclined along the optical path according to a movement of the eyeball (such as the stepped surface portions of 13 being inclined along the optical path 9 according to a position movement of the eyeball of 3, Figs. 1-2; page 4, para [0060]).
Regarding claim 12, Saito discloses an optical element with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein
the second prism (13, Fig. 2) emits the external light (11, Fig. 2) with an eyeball of a user as the observation portion (such as eyeball of user as the observation portion 3, Figs. 1-2; page 2, para [0023]), and
light of the display element (1, Fig. 1) disposed on a side of the eyeball of the user (1 disposed on an upper side of the eyeball of the user 3, Fig. 1) is incident on the incident surface (5, Fig. 1) of the first prism (10, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 13, Saito discloses an optical element with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein
the second prism (13, Fig. 2) emits the external light (11, Fig. 2) with an eyeball of a user as the observation portion (such as eyeball of user as the observation portion 3, Figs. 1-2; page 2, para [0023]), and
light of the display element (1, Fig. 1) disposed above the eyeball of the user (1 is disposed above the eyeball of the user 3, Fig. 1) is incident on the incident surface (5, Fig. 1) of the first prism (10, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 14, Saito discloses an image display device (such as a head-mounted display device, Fig. 1; page 1, para [0022]) comprising:
a display element (1, Fig. 1; page 1, para [0023]);
a first prism (10, Fig. 1; page 2, para [0023]) that includes an incident surface (5, Fig. 1; page 2, para [0023]), a semi-reflecting surface (12 of 7, Figs. 1-2; page 2, para [0032]), and an emitting surface (6, Fig. 1; page 2, para [0023]) each configured of a free-form surface (5, 6, and 7 of 12 are free-form surfaces, Figs. 1-2), and in which light of the display element (1, Fig. 1) is incident from the incident surface (5, Fig. 1), is internally reflected between the emitting surface (6, Fig. 1) and the semi-reflecting surface (12 of 7, Figs. 1-2; page 2, para [0024]), and is emitted from the emitting surface (6, Fig. 1) to an observation portion (3, Fig. 1; page 2, para [0025]) of the light; and
a second prism (13, Fig. 2; page 2, para [0032]) including an external light incident surface (outer incident surface of 13 for incident light 11, Fig. 2; page 3, para [0037]) configured in a shape in which a free-form surface is divided by at least one stepped surface (outer incident surface of 13 is a free-form surface divided by at least one stepped surface portion of 13, Fig. 2; page 3, para [0034]) and on which external light is incident (external light 11 is incident on the stepped surface portion of 13, Fig. 2), and an external light emitting surface (surface of 13 facing 12, Fig. 2) from which the incident external light (11, Fig. 2) is emitted to the semi-reflecting surface (external light 11 is emitted to the semi-reflecting surface of 12 through the light emitting surface of 13 facing 12, Fig. 2).
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.
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) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saito (U.S. 2011/0090389) in view of McRuer (U.S. 6,671,100).
Regarding claim 7, Saito discloses an optical element with all the limitations of claim 6 above but does not expressly disclose wherein the second prism (13, Fig. 2) includes a plurality of the stepped surfaces (plurality of stepped surfaces of 13, Fig. 2) having parallel inclinations. However, McRuer discloses an optical element (Fig. 9; col 4, lines 22-25) comprising a first prism (42, Fig. 9; col 9, line 33) and a second prism (28, Fig. 9; col 9, line 32) having a plurality of stepped surfaces having parallel inclinations (29, Fig. 9; col 9, lines 31-32) in order to improve the quality of the transmission of an image to a user’s eye (col 1, lines 62-67; col 8, lines 17-29).
Therefore, before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the plurality of the stepped surfaces (Saito: plurality of stepped surfaces of 13, Fig. 2) of Saito with the plurality of stepped surfaces having parallel inclinations (McRuer: 29, Fig. 9; col 9, lines 31-32) of McRuer in order to improve the quality of the transmission of an image to a user’s eye as taught by McRuer (col 1, lines 62-67; col 8, lines 17-29).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL CHANG LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7923. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am-6pm.
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, Michael H Caley can be reached at 571-272-2286. 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.
/PAUL C LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871