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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 17-18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 20230185081 A1 (AOSHIMA; Keisuke).
PNG
media_image1.png
712
540
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
724
548
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
626
556
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
710
544
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
402
492
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
378
464
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Per claims 1, 9, 17-18, and 20, Aoshima teaches a two-dimensional scanning micromirror device [2] for an image projection system [see figure 1] comprising: a base [first support portions 23]; a first platform [61] coupled to the base by a plurality of first support flexures [22]; and a second platform [20] coupled to the first platform by a plurality of second support flexures [21A], the second platform including a reflector [20]; wherein: the first platform is oscillatable about a first axis [A axis]; and the second platform is oscillatable about a second axis orthogonal to the first axis [B axis]; the first platform, the second platform, and the plurality of second support flexures together exhibit a first resonance having a first frequency, the first resonance corresponding to oscillatory motion of at least the first platform, the second platform, and the plurality of second support flexures about the first axis [inherent, see paragraph 0100: “[0100] The first driving frequency f.sub.d1 is set so as to match the resonance frequency around the first axis a.sub.1 of the mirror portion 20 (hereinafter, referred to as a first resonance frequency). The second driving frequency f.sub.d2 is set so as to match the resonance frequency around the second axis a.sub.2 of the mirror portion 20 (hereinafter, referred to as a second resonance frequency)”]; and the first platform, the second platform, and the plurality of second support flexures together exhibit a second resonance having a second frequency, and the second resonance corresponding to oscillatory motion of at least the second platform about the second axis [inherent, see paragraph 0100: “[0100] The first driving frequency f.sub.d1 is set so as to match the resonance frequency around the first axis a.sub.1 of the mirror portion 20 (hereinafter, referred to as a first resonance frequency). The second driving frequency f.sub.d2 is set so as to match the resonance frequency around the second axis a.sub.2 of the mirror portion 20 (hereinafter, referred to as a second resonance frequency)”].
Per claim 3, Aoshima teaches the two-dimensional scanning micromirror device of claim 1, wherein the first platform is suspended from the base by the plurality of first support flexures and wherein the second platform is suspended from the first platform by the plurality of second support flexures [see figure 4].
Per claim 4, Aoshima teaches the two-dimensional scanning micromirror device of claim 1, wherein the first support flexures comprise resilient members having structures adapted for oscillatory motion of the first platform about the first axis at the first frequency [see paragraph 0060: “The pair of movable frames 22 are disposed at positions facing each other across the first axis a.sub.1, and have a shape that is line-symmetrical with respect to the first axis a.sub.1.”]
Per claim 5, Aoshima teaches the two-dimensional scanning micromirror device of claim 1, wherein the second support flexures comprise resilient members having structures adapted for oscillatory motion of the second platform about the second axis at the second frequency and for oscillatory motion of the second platform about the first axis at a third frequency [inherent, see paragraph 0070: “As shown in FIG. 4, the first support portion 21 is composed of a swing shaft 21A and a pair of coupling portions 21B. The swing shaft 21A is a so-called torsion bar stretched along the first axis a.sub.1.”]
18. The image projection system of claim 17, wherein the first platform, the second platform, and the plurality of second support flexures together exhibit a first oscillatory resonance having a first frequency, the first oscillatory resonance corresponding to rotational motion of at least the first platform, the second platform, and the plurality of second support flexures about the first axis; and the first platform, the second platform, and the plurality of second support flexures together exhibit a second oscillatory resonance having a second frequency, the second oscillatory resonance corresponding to rotational motion of at least the second platform about the second axis.
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.
Claim(s) 2, 6-11, 13-16, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20230185081 A1 (AOSHIMA; Keisuke).
PNG
media_image7.png
386
540
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
392
534
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Per claim 9, Aoshima teaches a method of projecting an image, the method comprising: providing a two-dimensional scanning micromirror device; inducing a first resonant oscillation of the two-dimensional scanning micromirror device at a first frequency; inducing a second resonant oscillation of the two-dimensional scanning micromirror device at a second frequency, wherein the second frequency is an integer multiple of the first frequency [see paragraph 0100: “[0100] The first driving frequency f.sub.d1 is set so as to match the resonance frequency around the first axis a.sub.1 of the mirror portion 20 (hereinafter, referred to as a first resonance frequency). The second driving frequency f.sub.d2 is set so as to match the resonance frequency around the second axis a.sub.2 of the mirror portion 20 (hereinafter, referred to as a second resonance frequency)”]; and illuminating a reflector of the two-dimensional scanning micromirror device with a light source to generate reflected light [3].
Per claim 2, 9, and 19 Aoshima teaches the two-dimensional scanning micromirror device of claim 1, but lacks the second frequency is an integer or odd-integer multiple of the first frequency. However, figures 17 and 18 teaches frequency ranges of about 35 and 18 hz. Furthermore, the courts have held overlapping ranges to be at least obvious. Reduce noise would have been an expected benefit. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per claim 6-8, Aoshima teaches the two-dimensional scanning micromirror device of claim 1, further comprising an actuator coupled to the first platform or the second platform for inducing resonant oscillations of the first platform or the second platform [see piezoelectric actuator 24]. Aoshima lacks an electromagnet or electrostatic actuator and a magnetic field source arranged to provide a magnetic field oriented non-orthogonal with both the first axis and the second axis and the second platform comprises a conducting coil arranged to apply magnetic forces to the second platform about the first axis and about the second axis. However, official notice is taken that it was common knowledge to use electromagnet or electrostatic actuators for both axis in order to simplify manufacturing. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per claim 10, Aoshima teaches the method of claim 9, wherein the first resonant oscillation corresponds to oscillatory motion of a reflector of the two-dimensional scanning micromirror device about a first axis, and wherein the second resonant oscillation corresponds to oscillatory motion of the reflector about a second axis orthogonal to the first axis [see paragraph 0100: “[0100] The first driving frequency f.sub.d1 is set so as to match the resonance frequency around the first axis a.sub.1 of the mirror portion 20 (hereinafter, referred to as a first resonance frequency). The second driving frequency f.sub.d2 is set so as to match the resonance frequency around the second axis a.sub.2 of the mirror portion 20 (hereinafter, referred to as a second resonance frequency)”].
Per claim 11, Aoshima teaches the method of claim 10, wherein the reflected light is projected along a path that oscillates in a first direction perpendicular to the first axis and in a second direction perpendicular to the second axis [see figure 1].
Per claim 13-14, Aoshima teaches the method of claim 9, wherein inducing a resonant oscillation comprises applying a driving signal to an electrostatic or electromagnetic actuator coupled to the two-dimensional scanning micromirror device, wherein the driving signal has a periodic waveform characterized by a corresponding driving frequency [see figure 1].
Per claim 15, Aoshima teaches the method of claim 9, wherein a driving signal for inducing the first resonant oscillation, and inducing the second resonant oscillation comprises a sum of: a first periodic waveform characterized by a first driving frequency, and a second periodic waveform characterized by a second driving frequency [see figures 9A and 9B].
Per claim 16, Aoshima teaches the method of claim 15, wherein the first driving frequency is equal to or about the first frequency, and wherein the second driving frequency is equal to or about the second frequency [inherent, see figures 9A and 9B].
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20230185081 A1 (AOSHIMA; Keisuke), as applied to claims 2 and 6-9 above, and further in view of US 5225923 A (Montagu; Jean I.)
Per claim 12, Aoshima teaches the method of claim 11, but lacks the path is a non-sinusoidal path. However, Montagu teaches at column 8: “Accordingly, the control system of FIG. 8 maintains a constant phase relationship between the output of scanner 52 and the input to scanner 50. As was observed above, however, the relationship between the input and output of a high-Q scanner such as scanner 50 operating near resonance can vary greatly, and this has been the source of problems in previous attempts to employ multiply resonant systems to provide desired non-sinusoidal periodic signals. Without more, therefore, the phase relationship between the outputs of scanner 50 and 52 would tend to vary even though the relationship between scanner 52's output and scanner 50's input is fixed.” Reduced noise would have been an expected benefit. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Montagu with Aoshima.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES A DUDEK whose telephone number is (571)272-2290. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6:30-4:30 MT.
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, Jennifer Carruth can be reached at 571-272-9791. 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.
/JAMES A DUDEK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights