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 statement (IDS) submitted on 04/10/2024 and 06/30/2025 has been considered by the examiner.
Preliminary Amendment
Preliminary Amendment that was filed on 02/26/2024 is entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim 2 is rejected on the basis that it contains an improper Markush grouping of alternatives. See In re Harnisch, 631 F.2d 716, 721-22 (CCPA 1980) and Ex parte Hozumi, 3 USPQ2d 1059, 1060 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 1984). A Markush grouping is proper if the alternatives defined by the Markush group (i.e., alternatives from which a selection is to be made in the context of a combination or process, or alternative chemical compounds as a whole) share a “single structural similarity” and a common use. A Markush grouping meets these requirements in two situations. First, a Markush grouping is proper if the alternatives are all members of the same recognized physical or chemical class or the same art-recognized class, and are disclosed in the specification or known in the art to be functionally equivalent and have a common use. Second, where a Markush grouping describes alternative chemical compounds, whether by words or chemical formulas, and the alternatives do not belong to a recognized class as set forth above, the members of the Markush grouping may be considered to share a “single structural similarity” and common use where the alternatives share both a substantial structural feature and a common use that flows from the substantial structural feature. See MPEP § 2117.
The Markush grouping of claims 2 and 6 is improper because the alternatives defined by the Markush grouping do not share both a single structural similarity and a common use for the following reasons: “a segmented dimmer”, “an eye tracking”, or “one or more lenses” in claim 2 do not share both a single structural similarity and a common use.
To overcome this rejection, Applicant may set forth each alternative (or grouping of patentably indistinct alternatives) within an improper Markush grouping in a series of independent or dependent claims and/or present convincing arguments that the group members recited in the alternative within a single claim in fact share a single structural similarity as well as a common use.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, “an eyepiece” and “an integrated optical component” in claims 75 and 83 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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 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.
Claims 1, 2, 6 and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mack et al. (US PUB 2016/0231577; herein after “Mack”).
Regarding claim 1, Mack teaches a method of forming a viewing optics assembly (lens 200), (VOA) for a head mounted display (Augmented Reality Eyewear 100, see FIGS. 1, para. [0029]), the method (Methods for Manufacturing Lens 200 of augmented reality eyewear 100, as shown in FIGS. 8A-8M, para. [0057]-[0058]) comprising: providing a substrate (e.g., first body section 220 may be formed from an existing lens blank or other machinable substrate, as shown in FIG. 9A, para. [0065]) comprising a first optical element (230) for the VOA; depositing a prepolymer (39) onto the substrate (220); applying a mold (30) to the prepolymer (39) to conform the prepolymer to a curved surface of the mold (30) on a first side of the prepolymer and to conform the prepolymer to a surface of the substrate (220) on a second side of the prepolymer opposite the first side (as shown at least in FIG. 8J, see para. [0062]); while applying the mold (30) to the prepolymer (39/35), exposing the prepolymer to actinic radiation (UV curing, para. [0013]) sufficient to form a solid polymer from the prepolymer (i.e., material 39 may then be cured using any suitable method known in the art such as, without limitation, exposure to heat or ultraviolet light (e.g., actinic radiation) see para. [0063], also second body section (230), may form a solid medium (e.g., polymer), para. [0009]), the solid polymer forming an ophthalmic lens (230) having a curved surface corresponding to the curved surface of the mold (as shown in FIG. 8L, see para. [0034] and [0063]), the substrate (220) and the ophthalmic lens (230) forming an integrated optical component (200) (as shown at least in FIGS. 8L); releasing the mold (30) from the solid polymer (230) (the resulting lens 200 may be released from third mold 30, as shown in FIGS. 8L, para. [0063]); and assembling the VOA (200) using the integrated optical component (as shown in FIG. 8M, see para. [0063]).
Regarding claim 2, Mack according to claim 1 further teaches the first optical element comprises at least one of: a segmented dimmer configured to selectively modulate an intensity of light transmitted by the VOA (i.e., the electrochromic material (dimmer) may darken, thereby reducing the transparency of lens 200 (e.g., modulate an intensity), para. [0054] and [0055], FIGS. 7A-7B), an illumination layer (250) configured to emit light along an optical axis of the VOA (i.e., the optical elements (such as lens 230) completely contained within the ophthalmic lens and/or waveguide (as an illumination layer), see para. [0034]), at least one layer that is part of an eye tracking assembly configured to track a motion of a user's eye while the head mounted display is worn by the user, or one or more lenses (i.e., depicted in FIGS. 6A-7B are merely illustrative examples, and that reflector 250 may be provided in lens 200 in any number of suitable shapes, sizes, and positions for directing image light towards a wearer's eye (via eye tracking) for display as a virtual image, para. [0052]).
Regarding claim 6, Mack according to claim 1 further teaches prior to depositing the prepolymer onto the substrate, cleaning the surface of the substrate (i.e., Body section 220 may then be cleaned and de-flashed, para. [0059]), wherein cleaning the substrate comprises at least one of: applying an aqueous acidic solution and an aqueous basic solution to the surface of the substrate, applying an organic solvent to the surface of the substrate, sonicating the surface of the substrate, exposing the surface of the substrate to a plasma, or exposing the surface of the substrate to ultraviolet light and/or ozone (i.e., Curing, may include at least one of exposing the material to heat and exposing the material to ultraviolet or other wavelengths of light, para. [0059]).
Regarding claim 39, Mack teaches a method of forming a viewing optics assembly (lens 200), (VOA) for a head mounted display (Augmented Reality Eyewear 100, see FIGS. 1, para. [0029]), the method (Methods for Manufacturing Lens 200 of augmented reality eyewear 100, as shown in FIGS. 8A-8M, para. [0057]-[0058]) comprising: providing a substrate (e.g., first body section 220 may be formed from an existing lens blank or other machinable substrate, as shown in FIG. 9A, para. [0065]); depositing a prepolymer (39) onto the substrate (220); applying a mold (30) to the prepolymer (39) to conform the prepolymer to a curved surface of the mold (30) on a first side of the prepolymer and to conform the prepolymer to a surface of the substrate (220) on a second side of the prepolymer opposite the first side (as shown at least in FIG. 8J, see para. [0062]); while applying the mold (30) to the prepolymer (39/35), exposing the prepolymer to actinic radiation (UV curing, para. [0013]) sufficient to form a solid polymer from the prepolymer (i.e., material 39 may then be cured using any suitable method known in the art such as, without limitation, exposure to heat or ultraviolet light (e.g., actinic radiation) see para. [0063], also second body section (230), may form a solid medium (e.g., polymer), para. [0009]), the solid polymer forming an ophthalmic lens (230) having a curved surface corresponding to the curved surface of the mold (as shown in FIG. 8L, see para. [0034] and [0063]); releasing solid polymer (230) from the mold (30) and the substrate (the resulting lens 200 may be released from third mold 30, as shown in FIGS. 8L, para. [0063]); securing the solid polymer to an optical element (230) to form an integrated optical component (200) (as shown at least in FIGS. 8L); and assembling the VOA (200) using the integrated optical component (as shown in FIG. 8M, see para. [0063]).
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 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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 8, 10, 13, 16-17, 19-20 and 36-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mack in view of Soane et al. (US 6099283; herein after “Soane”).
Regarding claim 8, Mack fails to teach prior to depositing the prepolymer onto the substrate, depositing a material onto the surface of the substrate using vapor deposition, wherein the material comprises a silane coupling agent.
However, in a related field of endeavor Soane teaches high vacuum vapor deposited upon the release layer 20, column 5, lines 61-65, FIG. 2…depositing an acrylated silane coupling agent layer upon the optical coating, see claim 1 of Soane … an acrylated material which promotes adhesion of the cured primer coating to the substrate, column 7, lines 43-46.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Mack such that high vacuum vapor deposited upon the release layer (e.g., substrate), depositing an acrylate silane coupling agent layer upon the optical coating as taught by Soane, for the purpose of providing on-site formation of completed optical elements having durable optical coatings and a hard coat layer, thereby significantly reducing required handling time and costs to the customer.
Regarding claim 10, Mack fails to teach prior to depositing the prepolymer onto the substrate, depositing a material onto the surface of the substrate using liquid deposition, wherein the material comprises a monomer having one or more functional groups, wherein the one or more functional groups comprise at least one of alkyl, carboxyl, carbonyl, hydroxyl, or alkoxy, and wherein the material is deposited onto the surface of the substrate by at least one of: ink jetting the material onto the surface, spin coating the material onto the surface, or spraying the material onto the surface.
However, in a related field of endeavor Soane teaches the desired liquid optical material 36 is supplied into the mold 10 and in contact with the tinted hard coat layer 34. In one embodiment, the liquid optical material 36 is a thermo-set, column 8, lines 57-60, FIG. 3... The tinted hard coat layer 34 can be spin deposited with the spin coater, column 7, lines 65-67.
Primers contain combinations of alkane polyols, polyacrylated urethane, polyacryloylated alkane polyols, mono vinyl functional reactive diluent, and photoinitiators. A first class comprises twenty to seventy parts of alkane polyols, wherein the alkane polyols contain up to about forty eight carbon atoms and average at least three O-[acryloyl-(polyalkylene oxide)] chains, column 7, lines 21-30…. high vacuum vapor deposited upon the release layer 20, column 5, lines 61-65, FIG. 2.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Mack such that the desired liquid optical material (liquid deposition of a material), the alkane polyols contain up to about forty eight carbon atoms, and a hard coat layer 34 can be spin deposited with the spin coater as taught by Soane, for the purpose of providing on-site formation of completed optical elements having durable optical coatings and a hard coat layer.
Regarding claim 13, Mack fails to teach the prepolymer comprises at least one of: an epoxy vinyl ester, or cyclic aliphatic epoxy, and wherein the prepolymer further comprises at least one of a photoinitiator or a co-reactant for promoting a curing of the prepolymer.
However, in a related field of endeavor Soane teaches thirty to eighty parts of an acrylated material which promotes adhesion of the cured primer coating to the substrate; one to seventy parts of a mono vinyl functional reactive diluent, and acrylic acid esters column 7, lines 16-20 and 42-47.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Mack such that thirty to eighty parts of an acrylated material which promotes temperature
adhesion (epoxy) of the cured primer coating to the substrate; one to seventy parts of a mono vinyl functional reactive diluent (vinyl ester) as taught by Soane, for the purpose of providing on-site formation of completed optical elements having durable optical coatings and a hard coat layer.
Regarding claim 16, Mack teaches exposing the prepolymer to actinic radiation comprises: exposing the prepolymer to actinic radiation having a wavelength between 310 nm and 410 nm (i.e., Curing, may include at least one of exposing the material to heat (intensity) and exposing the material to ultraviolet or other wavelengths of light, para. [0013]).
Mack fails to teach an intensity between 0.1 J/cm.sup.2 and 100 J/cm.sup.2.
However, in a related field of endeavor Soane teaches the speed of the spin coater controls the thickness of the hard coat, enabling the operator to tint the lens to any desired intensity to control the transmission loss, column 7, line 65 to column 8, line 2.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Mack such that enabling the operator to tint the lens to any desired intensity (e.g., an intensity between 0.1 J/cm.sup.2 and 100 J/cm.sup.2) to control the transmission loss as taught by Soane to reproduce the features of polished surfaces for precise replication and control tint intensity level.
Regarding claim 17, Mack fails to teach while exposing the prepolymer to actinic radiation, applying heat of the prepolymer, and wherein applying heat of the prepolymer comprises heating the prepolymer to a temperature between 40° C and 120° C.
However, in a related field of endeavor Soane teaches the tint is incorporated into the primer by holding the primer at a temperature between 20º. and 60º C, column 7, lines 56-58.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Mack such that holding the primer at a temperature between 20º. and 60º C as taught by Soane to give a solution of the desired absorbency.
Regarding claim 19, Mack in view of Soane teaches the surface of the substrate is planar (Basic lens blank, as shown in FIG. 9A), and wherein the ophthalmic lens (230) comprises a planar surface corresponding to the planar surface of the substrate, and wherein the planar surface of the ophthalmic lens is opposite the curved surface of the ophthalmic lens (i.e., the optical elements completely contained within the ophthalmic lens and/or waveguide (planner surface), para. [0034] …While the various body sections may be physically discrete from one another, they are formed or coupled in a way that gives the appearance of a lens 200 with a unitary body 208, para. [0056], FIG. 3A).
Mack discloses the claimed invention except for the ophthalmic lens comprises a planar surface corresponding to the planar surface of the substrate. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a planar or a curved surface as desired, since it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art. In re Stevens, 101 USPQ 284 (CCPA 1954).
Regarding claim 20, Mack in view of Soane teaches the surface of the substrate is curved (as shown in FIG. 9A), and wherein the ophthalmic lens (230) comprises a second curved surface corresponding to the curved surface of the substrate, wherein the second curved surface of the ophthalmic lens is opposite the curved surface of the ophthalmic lens (i.e., the optical elements completely contained within the ophthalmic lens and/or waveguide (planner surface), para. [0034] …While the various body sections may be physically discrete from one another, they are formed or coupled in a way that gives the appearance of a lens 200 with a unitary body 208, para. [0056], FIG. 3A)
Mack discloses the claimed invention except for the ophthalmic lens comprises a planar surface corresponding to the planar surface of the substrate. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a planar or a curved surface as desired, since it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art. In re Stevens, 101 USPQ 284 (CCPA 1954).
Regarding claim 36, Mack in view of Soane teaches applying at least one of an anti-reflecting coating or a protective coating to a surface of the integrated optical component (e.g., lens 200 may further include a protective coating, para. [0053]).
Regarding claim 37, Mack in view of Soane teaches at least one of the prepolymer or the substrate comprises at least one of: a photochromic material, or an electrochromic material (i.e., lens 200 may further include an electrochromic or similar coating, para. [0054]).
Claims 21, 29, 75 and 83 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mack in view of Oh et al. (US 2021/0356670; herein after “Oh”).
Regarding claim 21, Mack teaches the ophthalmic lens has an optical power in a range from at least one of: +1 D to +1.5D, −1 D to −1.5D, +0.5 D to +4 D, or 0.5 D to −4D (i.e., Profile 12 may optionally be configured with a curvature for defining a corrective power of lens 200, para. [0058], FIG. 8A … other front surface 202 and/or edge 206 may also be machined as necessary to form lens 200 of suitable shape and corrective power (if desire), para. [0065], FIGS. 9A-9J).
Mack discloses the claimed invention except for explicit teaching of an optical power +1 D to +1.5D, −1 D to −1.5D, +0.5 D to +4 D, or 0.5 D to −4D.
However, in a related field of endeavor Oh teaches the optical element can be characterized by a negative optical power or a positive optical power, para. [0008].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Mack such that an optical element can be characterized by a negative optical power or a positive optical power such as +1 D to +1.5D, −1 D to −1.5D, +0.5 D to +4 D, or 0.5 D to −4D as taught by Oh to provide very thin and compact wearable form-factors and to improve user experience.
Furthermore, it has held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 29, Mack fails to teach the ophthalmic lens has a radius of curvature greater than 200 mm, an aperture size greater than 5 mm, a refractive index between 1.5 and 1.75, and a focal length between 25 cm and 2 m.
However, in a related field of endeavor Oh teaches a single mold can be utilized to produce laminated lenses with different focal lengths, … and utilizing castable materials with their indices of refraction varying from about 1.5 to 1.75, focal lengths varying from a focal length of +/−1 m to 0.690 m can be produced for an example radius of curvature of 0.515 m, para. [0085]. The moldable material can be a UV curable resin. Moreover, at least one of the mold plates can include nano-features. In an embodiment, the optical element comprises a planar region and a clear aperture adjacent the planar region and characterized by an optical power, para. [0008].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Mack such that to produce laminated lenses with their indices of refraction varying from about 1.5 to 1.75, focal lengths varying from a focal length of +/−1 m to 0.690 m, the optical element comprises a planar region and a clear aperture adjacent the planar region and characterized by an optical power (e.g., with desired aperture size greater than 5 mm) as taught by Oh to provide very thin and compact wearable form-factors and to improve user experience.
Regarding claim 75, Mack teaches a viewing optics assembly (200) (VOA) for a head mounted display (100) (as shown in FIG. 1, para. [0028]), comprising: an eyepiece (220, 230) configured to display images toward a user side of the head mounted display during use of the head mounted display (para. [0029]); and an integrated optical component (220) arranged on a world side of the eyepiece (as shown in FIG. 6B opposite the eye), the integrated optical component (220) comprising a segmented dimmer (e.g., lens 200 may be provided with any other suitable layer of electrochromic material as dimmer, para. [0054]) and an ophthalmic lens (230) disposed on a surface of the segmented dimmer (i.e., the electrochromic material (dimmer) may darken, thereby reducing the transparency of lens 200 (e.g., modulate an intensity), para. [0055] and [0056], FIGS. 7A-7B), the ophthalmic lens having a convex surface and an optical power in a range from +0.5 D to +4 D (i.e., Profile 12 may optionally be configured with a curvature for defining a corrective power of lens 200, para. [0058], FIG. 8A … other front surface 202 and/or edge 206 may also be machined as necessary to form lens 200 of suitable shape and corrective power (if desire), para. [0065], FIGS. 9A-9J).
Mack discloses the claimed invention except for explicit teaching of an optical power of the ophthalmic lens +0.5 D to +4 D.
However, in a related field of endeavor Oh teaches the optical element can be characterized by a negative optical power or a positive optical power, para. [0008].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Mack such that an optical element can be characterized by a negative optical power or a positive optical power such as +0.5 D to +4 D as taught by Oh to provide very thin and compact wearable form-factors and to improve user experience.
Furthermore, it has held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 83, Mack teaches a viewing optics assembly (200) (VOA) for a head mounted display (100) (as shown in FIG. 1, para. [0028]), comprising: an eyepiece (220, 230) configured to display images toward a user side of the head mounted display during use of the head mounted display (para. [0029]); and an integrated optical component (220) arranged on a user side of the eyepiece (as shown in FIG. 6B toward the eye), the integrated optical component comprising an illumination layer (250) and an ophthalmic lens (230) disposed on a surface of the illumination layer (as shown in FIGS. 6A-7B and FIGS. 8F-8G, see para. 0050]-[0052], [0060] and [0077]), the ophthalmic lens (230) having a concave surface (as shown in FIG. 9I) and an optical power in a range from −0.5 D to −4 D (i.e., Profile 12 may optionally be configured with a curvature for defining a corrective power of lens 200, para. [0058], FIG. 8A … other front surface 202 and/or edge 206 may also be machined as necessary to form lens 200 of suitable shape and corrective power (if desire), para. [0065], FIGS. 9A-9J).
Mack discloses the claimed invention except for explicit teaching of an optical power of the ophthalmic lens −0.5 D to −4 D.
However, in a related field of endeavor Oh teaches the optical element can be characterized by a negative optical power or a positive optical power, para. [0008].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Mack such that an optical element can be characterized by a negative optical power or a positive optical power such as −0.5 D to −4 D as taught by Oh to provide very thin and compact wearable form-factors and to improve user experience.
Furthermore, it has held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claims 34 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mack in view of FUJIKAWA et al. (US PUB 2018/0094098; herein after “FUJIKAWA”).
Regarding claim 34, Mack fails to teach the ophthalmic lens comprises a Fresnel lens on a plano surface.
However, in a related field of endeavor FUJIKAWA teaches “Fresnel lens” refers to a lens that is designed by dividing a regular lens into a set of concentric annular sections and has a smaller thickness as compared with the regular lens. The Fresnel lens has a ridged (sawtooth) cross-section. A single Fresnel lens has dimensions of a diameter of about 1 to about 10 mm and a thickness of about 100 to about 2000 μm, para. [0079].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Mack such that a Fresnel lens that is designed by dividing a regular lens into a set of concentric annular sections as taught by FUJIKAWA can form a fresnel lens that has excellent transfer accuracy from the mold and offers heat resistance and optical properties at excellent levels.
Regarding claim 35, Mack fails to teach the Fresnel lens has a lens ridge height between 25 μm and 1000 μm.
However, in a related field of endeavor FUJIKAWA teaches a single Fresnel lens has dimensions of a diameter of about 1 to about 10 mm and a thickness of about 100 to about 2000 μm, para. [0079].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Mack such that a Fresnel lens that has a thickness including ridges/peaks/ height of about 100 to about 2000 μm as taught by FUJIKAWA can form a fresnel lens that has excellent transfer accuracy from the mold and offers heat resistance and optical properties at excellent levels.
Cited prior art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Giri et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9568734) teaches “An eyepiece includes a first lens body having a first interface side and a second lens body having a second interface side. At least one of the first and second interface sides includes a recess. The first and second lens bodies are mated together along the first and second interface sides to form a cavity at the recess. A lightguide insert is provided that has a shape and a size to fit within the cavity. The lightguide insert includes an in-coupling region to receive display light into the lightguide insert and an out-coupling region to direct the display light out of the lightguide insert through the first lens body.”, see Abstract.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUSTAK CHOUDHURY whose telephone number is (571)272-5247. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8AM-5PM EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ricky Mack can be reached on 5712722333. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MUSTAK CHOUDHURY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
February 10, 2026