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 .
Drawings
The drawings filed on 03/01/2024 are acknowledged and accepted.
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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sales (US20040130790A1).
With respect to Claim 1, Sales discloses an optical element capable of diffusing incident light to a predetermined diffusion range ([0082]: 5-10 degrees), the optical element (Fig. 1A— microlens array; [0063]) comprising:
a transparent body (Fig. 1A-- element 14, glass substrate; [0063]) that comprises concavity-and-convexity (Fig. 1A-- element 10, randomized microlenses; [0063]) on at least one surface (Fig. 1A—microlenses are arranged on a surface of element 14),
wherein:
the diffusion range ([0082]: 5-10 degrees) is defined as an internal side of a singular closed curved line on a predetermined plane (Fig. 5—the diffusion range lies in the curved portion of the graph);
the concavity-and-convexity (Fig. 1A-- element 10, randomized microlenses; [0063]) includes a plurality of crests and valleys without a periodicity ([0010]: the spatial arrangement and diameter of each microlens differ randomly); and
a region of the concavity-and-convexity (Fig. 1A-- element 10, randomized microlenses; [0063]) with the gradient that causes the incident light to be emitted and outgo to a region outside the diffusion range ([0082]: 5-10 degrees) by Snell's law is equal to or smaller than 5 % of an entire region (Fig. 5—light is not emitted outside of the diffusion range; thus, 0% of the region allows light to be emitted to a region outside the diffusion range).
However, Sales does not explicitly disclose wherein a frequency distribution of an inclination angle θ of a surface of the concavity-and-convexity that diffuses the light to the diffusion range is proportional to cos-nθ (where 1 ≤ n ≤ 7).
The prior art and the instant claim differ by the shape of a frequency distribution of an inclination angle θ of a surface of the concavity-and-convexity.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to shape the inclination angles of the concavity-and-convexity such that the frequency distribution of the inclination angles are proportional to cos-nθ (where 1 ≤ n ≤ 7), since it has been held that a mere change in shape of an element is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art when the change in shape is not significant to the function of the combination, In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966), MPEP §2144.04(IV)(B). In the instant case, the change in shape does not appear to be significant to the function because as disclosed by NAME in paragraph [0063]: “The microlenses 10 within each of the sections N of the substrate surface 16 can be defined by variables including radii of curvature”.
With respect to Claim 2, Sales discloses the optical element according to Claim 1, and further discloses wherein the concavity-and-convexity (Fig. 1A-- element 10, randomized microlenses; [0063]) is formed so as not to have, in a contour of the crest or the valley, a discontinuous portion that causes diffraction (Fig. 12A—the surface profile is continuous; [0008]: the invention desires to have no holes in the scatter pattern which exclude light).
With respect to Claim 3, Sales discloses the optical element according to Claim 2, and further discloses wherein the concavity-and-convexity (Fig. 1A-- element 10, randomized microlenses; [0063]) has a height (Fig. 12—the thickness of the microlenses us approximately 30 µm) that is equal to or greater than (633nm/ (1.43-1)= 1.3 µm) five times as much as λ /(n1 – n0) where λ (Fig. 5—λ= 633 nm) is a wavelength of the light, n1 ([0079]: refractive index of the substrate= 1.46) is a refractive index of the transparent body (Fig. 1A-- element 14, glass substrate; [0063]), and n0 (refractive index of air= 1) is a refractive index of a medium around the transparent body (Fig. 1A-- element 14, glass substrate; [0063]).
With respect to Claim 4, Sales discloses an optical system device ([0001]: beam shaper) comprising:
the optical element according to any one of claims 1 to 3; and
a light source ([0010]: an input beam is incident on the microlenses) that emits light to the optical element (Fig. 1A— microlens array; [0063]).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sales (US20040130790A1) in view of Sales (US20200133012A1; hereinafter Sales2; of record in the IDS dated 3/14/2024).
With respect to Claim 5, Sales discloses the optical system device according to claim 4, and does not disclose further comprising a camera unit that detects light reflected from an object. Sales and Sales2 are related as both pertaining to the field of microlens arrays.
Sales2 discloses an optical system device (Fig. 7—element 300, optical system; [0061]) comprising a camera unit (Fig. 7—element 20, camera; [0061]) that detects light reflected from an object ([0061]: light is reflected by the field of view into the camera).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the optical system device of Sales with the camera of Sales2 in order to create a device which is capable of 3D sensing objects (Sales2, [0003]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Uchida (US 20200284952 A1) discloses aspects of the instant invention, see Fig. 2 and [0072]-[0106].
Arima (US 20200386919 A1) discloses aspects of the instant invention, see Fig. 1 and [0063]-[0064].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MACKENZI BOURQUINE whose telephone number is (571)272-5956. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 - 4:30 EST.
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.
/MACKENZI BOURQUINE/ Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/WILLIAM R ALEXANDER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights