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.
Claims 1, and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KR 20020084470 A (Lee et al.).
Regarding claim 1:
Lee discloses an aerial image display device (Abstract), comprising:
a display (Fig. 8, display [1]) configured to display an image with traveling image light (Display [1] is a display such as an LCD which displays an image.);
an imaging optical system including one or more optical elements (Fig. [8] lens array [3]), the imaging optical system being configured to receive the traveling image light as incident light (Fig. 8, light from display [1] is received by imaging optical system [5]), the imaging optical system having a first object focal point and a second object focal point with a shorter focal length than the first object focal point (Fig. 8, imaging optical system [3] has a focal point behind (left side of the figure) and a focal point in front of (right side) of display [1]); and
a drive (Fig. 8, drive [5]) configured to change positional relationship between the first object focal point and the display relative to each other or between the second object focal point and the display relative to each other, the drive being configured to switch between a first positioning and a second positioning, the first positioning being positioning with the display located closer to the imaging optical system than the first object focal point of the imaging optical system to display a virtual image in air, the second positioning being positioning with the display located farther from the imaging optical system than the second object focal point of the imaging optical system to display a real image in air. (Fig. 8 shows that drive [5] changes the position such between two positions such that one the positions has the object focal points at focal length [f] between the display [1] and the imaging optical system [3] and the other position has the object focal points behind the display. This forms two images one a real image and one a virtual image. See section describing Fig. 8 provided below for reference. Fig. 2 additionally shows the focal points of the first and second positionings.)
Section for Fig. 8:
“Next, a driving method of the stereoscopic image display device according to the second embodiment for implementing both the real IP method and the virtual IP method will be described.
If the real IP scheme and the virtual IP scheme are to be implemented together, the image processing unit 2 also produces basic images of two aggregated images having different depths (the aggregated image for the actual IP and the aggregated image for the virtual IP). It transmits to the display element 1 in synchronization with the movement of the space | interval between the corresponding lens array 3 and the LCD panel which is the display element 1. As shown in FIG. However, a difference from the first embodiment is that the distance between the lens array 3 and the display element 1 is regularly reciprocated in two states (either larger or smaller than the focal length of the base lens) as shown in FIG. 8. It is a point of change. At this time, if the speed of the lens array drive unit 5 is increased by using a high speed linear motor or the like, and the image to be seen is used as the image for IP and the image to be seen as the image for the virtual image are used, Two images are simultaneously viewed before and after the lens array 3. For example, if a person is used as a real IP image and a background is a virtual IP image, and the distance between the lens array 3 and the display element 1 is reciprocated at high speed in synchronization with the change of the base images, This background looks like it exists in space.
When real IP and virtual IP are implemented together, it is advantageous in the sense of depth compared to using them independently. This means that the aggregated image by the actual IP is placed on the front of the lens array 3 and the aggregated image by the virtual IP is the lens array ( This is because the depth difference between the two aggregated images is increased because it is located at the back of 3).”
Regarding claim 4:
Lee discloses the aerial image display device according to claim 1, further comprising:
a controller configured to change an image to be displayed on the display. (Image processor [2] and the interval controller may be used to change the image. “In this case, the interval controller may change the interval between the lens array and the display unit in synchronization with the base image generated by the image processor.”)
Regarding claim 5:
Lee discloses the aerial image display device according to claim 4, wherein
the controller switches an up-down orientation of an image to be displayed on the display between an up-down orientation for the first positioning and an up-down orientation for the second positioning. (Lee does not explicitly disclose the orientation changing between the first and second positionings, however this change is implicit in the first and second positionings depicted in fig. 2. In should be noted that the orientation of the image should be inverted for the real image however fig. 2 shows that the images at the focal points are oriented in the same direction which would be performed by flipping the image on the display. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the image would need to be flipped to show the correct orientation to a stationary viewer.)
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 2, and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 20020084470 A (Lee et al.) in view of JP 2008287190 A (Satoshi).
Regarding claim 2:
Lee discloses the aerial image display device according to claim 1,
Lee fails to teach or suggest
wherein the imaging optical system is a reflective optical system or a catadioptric optical system. (Lee teaches only a refractive system.)
Satoshi teaches an aerial image display device wherein
the imaging optical system is a catadioptric optical system. (Fig. 2, Satoshi shows an optical system with lens elements [5] and a reflector [6] forming a catadioptric optical system.)
Accordingly, 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 imaging optical system be a catadioptric optical system as taught by Satoshi in the aerial image display device of Lee for the purpose of forming an imaging optical system..
Regarding claim 6:
Lee discloses the aerial image display device according to claim 4,
Lee fails to teach or suggest
wherein the controller switches a distortion correction table for an image to be displayed on the display between a distortion correction table for the first positioning and a distortion correction table for the second positioning. (Lee is silent on the correction of distortion.)
Satoshi teaches an aerial image display device wherein
the controller switches a distortion correction table for an image to be displayed on the display between a distortion correction table for the first positioning and a distortion correction table for the second positioning. (Image control unit [91] corrects the distortion of the images with respect to changes in positioning. See quote from Satoshi below.)
“In the above example, the lens 5 is configured by combining two convex lenses, but it may be a single convex lens. With one convex lens, distortion of each of the real images 5A, 50A, 51A and the virtual image 5B due to lens aberration increases, but the image control unit 91 corrects distortion of each image with respect to increase / decrease of the lens distance L1. This is because the form of the information image 41A can be controlled. Thereby, the above-described effects can be obtained with a simple configuration using a single convex lens.”
Accordingly, 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 controller switch a distortion correction table for an image to be displayed on the display between a distortion correction table for the first positioning and a distortion correction table for the second positioning as taught by Satori in the aerial image display device of Lee for the purpose of correcting distortion at varying positions.
Regarding claim 7:
Lee discloses the aerial image display device according to claim 4,
Lee fails to teach or suggest
wherein the controller performs control to enlarge an image to be displayed on the display for displaying a virtual image in air relative to an image to be displayed on the display for displaying a real image in air. (Lee is silent on the size of the images.)
Satoshi teaches an aerial image display device wherein
the controller performs control to enlarge an image to be displayed on the display for displaying a virtual image in air relative to an image to be displayed on the display for displaying a real image in air. (Satoshi teaches the use of an image controller [91] to change the size of the images on the display [41] to maintain relative sizes at different positionings.)
Accordingly, 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 controller performs control to enlarge an image to be displayed on the display for displaying a virtual image in air relative to an image to be displayed on the display for displaying a real image in air as taught by Satoshi in the aerial display device of Lee for the purpose of adjusting the sizes of the real image and virtual image relative to each other by adjusting the size of the image on the display.
Claims 11, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 20020084470 A (Lee et al.) in view of JP 2011093413 A (Hisami).
Regarding claim 11:
Lee discloses the aerial image display device according to claim 1,
Lee fails to teach or suggest the aerial image display device further comprising:
a camera configured to capture an image of a user, wherein the controller changes an image to be displayed on the display based on a position of an eye of the user.
Hisami teaches an aerial image display device comprising
a camera configured to capture an image of a user (Infrared camera [B] captures an image of the user for pupil measuring. See text “B is an infrared camera (pupil measuring means), and this infrared camera B includes an infrared irradiation unit 28 and an infrared light receiving unit 29. The infrared camera B measures the state of the pupil of the vehicle driver 3 during the operation of the display unit A, and the image data acquired by the infrared camera B is input to the control means 20.”), wherein the controller changes an image to be displayed on the display based on a position of an eye of the user. (The image control changes the image based on data from the pupil measurement including if the user is looking away or facing front. See text “After determining whether the time t1 has elapsed, the pupil of the vehicle driver 3 is photographed by the infrared camera B, and the pupil area a1 and the pupil aspect ratio n are measured (steps S4, S5, S6, S7). At this time, the pupil area a1 may be calculated based on the pupil diameter, or the pupil area a1 may be obtained from the number of pixels of the pupil. This pupil area a1 is taken as the size of the pupil. Next, looking away is detected from the pupil aspect ratio n (step S8). When the pupil aspect ratio n is equal to or greater than the threshold value α, it is assumed that the user is looking away, and the process returns to the first process. When the pupil aspect ratio n is less than the threshold value α, it is assumed that the pupil is facing the front, and the next processing is performed. A difference da between the past pupil area a0 and the current pupil area a1 is obtained (step S9).”)
Accordingly, 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 camera configured to capture an image of a user, wherein the controller changes an image to be displayed on the display based on a position of an eye of the user as taught by Hisami in the aerial image display device of Lee for the purpose of adjusting the image based on the eye position of the user.
Regarding claim 13:
Lee in combination with Hisami teaches the aerial image display device according to claim 11,
Hisami additionally teaches
wherein the camera captures an image of the user to obtain an image of a pupil of the eye of the user, and the controller increases luminance of an image to be displayed on the display when the pupil enlarges. (The controller [20] adjust the luminance of the image based on pupil data. See text “The present invention includes a light emitting display 27, a light detection means 18 that measures ambient brightness and outputs illuminance data, a pupil measurement means B that measures the pupil of the vehicle driver 3 and outputs pupil data, And control means 20 for adjusting the luminance of the light emitting display 27 based on illuminance data and the pupil data.”)
Regarding claim 14:
Lee in combination with Hisami teaches the aerial image display device according to claim 11,
Hisami additionally teaches
wherein the camera captures an image of the user to obtain an image of a pupil of the eye of the user, and the controller increases a contrast of an image to be displayed on the display when the pupil enlarges. (As the controller [20] increases the brightness one of ordinary skill in the art would adjust the contrast along with it, particularly in the liquid crystal display [6] of Hisami. See text “In the present invention, the light emitting display 27 includes the liquid crystal display element 6 and the light source 5 that transmits and illuminates the liquid crystal display element 6.”)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 8-10, 12, and 15 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 3:
Although Lee in combination with Satoshi teaches the aerial image display device according to claim 2,
Neither Lee nor Satoshi teach or suggest
wherein the optical element is a freeform mirror, and the imaging optical system switches between the first object focal point and the second object focal point in response to a position of the freeform mirror on which the traveling image light is incident. (The mirror in Satoshi is a regular flat mirror and does not have two object focal points.)
The examiner notes that claim 3 does not require the limitations of claim 2 to be allowable subject matter.
Regarding claim 8:
Although Lee teaches the aerial image display device according to claim 4,
Lee fails to teach or suggest
wherein the controller performs control to cause luminance of an image to be displayed on the display for displaying a virtual image in air to be higher than luminance of an image to be displayed on the display for displaying a real image in air. (Lee does not teach that the luminance of the image should be different for the virtual image than for the real image.)
Regarding claim 9:
Although Lee teaches the aerial image display device according to claim 4,
Lee fails to teach or suggest
wherein the controller performs control to cause a contrast of an image to be displayed on the display for displaying a virtual image in air to be higher than a contrast of an image to be displayed on the display for displaying a real image in air. (Lee does not teach that the contrast of the displayed image should be different for the virtual image and the real image.)
Regarding claim 10:
Although Lee teaches the aerial image display device according to claim 4,
Lee fails to teach or suggest
wherein the controller performs control to cause a frame frequency of an image to be displayed on the display for displaying a virtual image in air to be higher than a frame frequency of an image to be displayed on the display for displaying a real image in air. (Lee does not teach that the frame frequency should vary between the virtual image and the real image.)
Regarding claim 12:
Although Lee in combination with Hisami teaches the aerial image display device according to claim 11,
Neither Lee nor Hisami teaches or suggests
wherein the camera captures an image of the user to obtain an image of a pupil of the eye of the user, and the controller enlarges an image to be displayed on the display when the pupil enlarges. (Neither teach that the images should be enlarged in response to a change in pupil diameter.)
Regarding claim 15:
Although Lee in combination with Hisami teaches the aerial image display device according to claim 11,
Neither Lee nor Hisami teaches or suggests
wherein the camera captures an image of the user to obtain an image of a pupil of the eye of the user, and the controller increases a frame frequency of an image to be displayed on the display when the pupil enlarges. (Neither teach that the frame frequency of the image should be changed.)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SETH D MOSER whose telephone number is (703)756-5803. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571)270-1782. 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.
/SETH D MOSER/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/BUMSUK WON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872