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 Amendment
The amendment filed on 03/26/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 14 and 17 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 14 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ashkenazi (2009/0147331, of record) in view of Cheng et al. (2012/0081800).
Regarding claim 14, Ashkenazi discloses a prismatic collimating device to collimate image bearing light (at least Figures 3 and 5), the prismatic collimating device comprising: a first prism (Figure 5, 142, first prism) and a second prism arranged to receive and collimate a light beam (152, second prism; [0061] teaches 158, surface, allows the light beam to exit at a substantially perpendicular direction to 156, surface, thus interpreted as collimated light), wherein the first prism comprises an output surface (148, surface) adjacent to an input surface of the second prism (158, surface), and the first prism and second prism are arranged such that the light beam undergoes total internal reflection and refraction at both the output surface of the first prism and the input surface of the second prism ([0061]).
Ashkenazi fails to teach each of the first prism and second prism comprises at least three surfaces each shaped to have non-zero optical power. Ashkenazi and Cheng are related because both teach a prismatic collimating device.
Cheng teaches a prismatic collimating device (at least Figure 1) wherein each of the first prism (110, prism-lens) and second prism (120, auxiliary free-form lens) comprises at least three surfaces each shaped to have non-zero optical power ([0027] teaches 110, prism-lens, and 120, auxiliary free-form lens, are both free-form lenses, thus interpreted to have non-zero optical power).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Ashkenazi to incorporate the teachings of Cheng and provide each of the first prism and second prism comprises at least three surfaces each shaped to have non-zero optical power. Doing so would allow for a more compact design as well as reduction of wavefront errors and distortion.
Regarding claim 16, the modified Ashkenazi discloses the prismatic collimating device according to claim 14, wherein at least one of the at least three surfaces have a surface form defined by at least one of: a spherical surface definition, an aspheric surface definition, a biconical surface definition, or a high order polynomial definition having an order of ten or more ([0034-0035]).
Regarding claim 17, Ashkenazi discloses a prismatic collimating device to collimate image bearing light (at least Figures 3 and 5), the prismatic collimating device comprising: a first prism (Figure 5, 142, first prism) and a second prism arranged to receive and collimate a light beam (152, second prism; [0061] teaches 158, surface, allows the light beam to exit at a substantially perpendicular direction to 156, surface, thus interpreted as collimated light), wherein the first prism comprises an output surface (148, surface) adjacent to an input surface of the second prism (158, surface), and an air gap is provided between the output surface and the input surface (160, gap), and the first prism and second prism are arranged such that the light beam undergoes total internal reflection and refraction at both the output surface of the first prism and the input surface of the second prism ([0061]).
Ashkenazi fails to teach each of the first prism and second prism comprises at least three surfaces each shaped to have non-zero optical power. Ashkenazi and Cheng are related because both teach a prismatic collimating device.
Cheng teaches a prismatic collimating device (at least Figure 1) wherein each of the first prism (110, prism-lens) and second prism (120, auxiliary free-form lens) comprises at least three surfaces each shaped to have non-zero optical power ([0027] teaches 110, prism-lens, and 120, auxiliary free-form lens, are both free-form lenses, thus interpreted to have non-zero optical power).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Ashkenazi to incorporate the teachings of Cheng and provide each of the first prism and second prism comprises at least three surfaces each shaped to have non-zero optical power. Doing so would allow for a more compact design as well as reduction of wavefront errors and distortion.
Regarding claim 18, the modified Ashkenazi discloses the prismatic collimating device according to claim 17, wherein the first prism and the second prism have a substantially triangular cross-section (Figure 5), and the air gap size is less than 1 mm ([0061] teaches 160, gap, is infinitesimal, and furthermore must be larger than the size of the smallest wavelength in the display image; since visible light is in the range of 380-750 nm, Examiner interprets the gap to be less than 1 mm).
Regarding claim 19, the modified Ashkenazi discloses the prismatic collimating device according to claim 17, wherein: the output surface is configured to reflect light received from a first range of angles (Figure 5 depicts 148, surface, reflects light on 150A, path), and transmit light received from a second range of angles (Figure 5 depicts 148, surface, transmits light on 150D, path); and the input surface is configured to reflect light received from a third range of angles (Figure 5 depicts 158, surface, reflects light on 150F, path), and transmit light received from a fourth range of angles (Figure 5 depicts 158, surface, transmits light on 150D, path).
Regarding claim 20, the modified Ashkenazi discloses the prismatic collimating device according to claim 19, wherein the first range of angles and the second range of angles have zero overlap (Figure 5 depicts 150A, path, and 150D, path, do not overlap in angle), and wherein the third range of angles and the fourth range of angles have zero overlap (Figure 5 depicts 150F, path, and 150D, path, do not overlap in angle).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-13 are allowed.
Claim 15 is 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: the prior art fails to teach or suggest the third surface configured to reflect light received, from the second surface, towards the second surface; and the fifth surface configured to receive light, from the fourth surface, and reflect towards the fourth surface, along with the structural limitations positively recited in claims 1 and 15. Claims 2-13 are dependent on claim 1, and are therefore allowable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Zhou (2022/0397750), Kohler (2022/0026174), Gao (2021/0302746), Saiga (2021/0096338), and Wheelwright (2021/0072542) disclose relevant prismatic devices.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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