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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgement is made of receipt of Information Disclosure Statement (PTO-1449) filed 08/08/2024. An initialed copy is attached to this Office Action.
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, the “first plane”, “a tilt of the display area”, “propagation axis”, “normal of the display area”, “normal of the plane of the input port” and “light emission zones” must be shown or the features canceled from the claim. 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 Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: the term “n” in line 3 is not defined. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the hologram" in line 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes the term "the hologram" will be interpreted as “the first hologram” as defined in claim 1.
Claims 2-13 are rejected for their dependency on claim 1.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the wavefront" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes the term "the wavefront" will be interpreted as “the holographic wavefront” as defined in claim 1.
Claims 4-5 are rejected for their dependency on claim 1.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the display device" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes the term "the display device" will be interpreted as “the display arrangement” as defined in claim 1.
The term “n” in claim 7 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “n” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For examination purposes “n” is being interpreted as an integer.
Claim 8 is rejected for its dependency on claim 7.
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 1-4, 6-8 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lacoste et al. (US 20120002256 A1) in view of Kokanne (WO 2023034080 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Lacoste discloses in at least figure 9a, a holographic projection system (holographic image projection system 1010 fig. 9A) comprising:
a display arrangement (display arrangement as shown below in annotated fig. 9A) comprising a display area (SLM fig. 9A may be a liquid crystal device paragraph [0116]) arranged to display (the SLM diffracts light that is reflected to L4 paragraph [0119] toward the user 1540 fig. 9A) a first hologram (the SLM is the hologram paragraph [0116]) of a first picture (displayed image paragraph [0130]) and to spatially modulate light incident thereon (the SLM is modulated with holographic data approximating a hologram of the image to be displayed paragraph [0130]) of a first picture (displayed image paragraph [0130]) in accordance with the first hologram (the SLM is the hologram paragraph [0116]) to form a holographic wavefront (diffracted light produced by the SLM--naturally rotated (with a liquid crystal SLM) in polarization by 90 degrees paragraph [0119] and holographic wavefront as shown below in annotated fig. 9a);
an optical system (optical system as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) arranged to receive (the SLM diffracts light that is reflected to L4 paragraph [0119] in the optical system as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) the holographic wavefront (diffracted light produced by the SLM--naturally rotated (with a liquid crystal SLM) in polarization by 90 degrees paragraph [0119] and holographic wavefront as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) and form a relayed image (the image of the holographic wavefront of the diffracted light produced by the SLM is relayed through the optical system as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) of the first hologram (the SLM is the hologram paragraph 0116]); and
a waveguide (image replication optics waveguide 1050 fig. 9a) comprising an input port (injection element 1056 fig. 9a) arranged to receive (this captures the light from the image projection system and has an angled end within the image replication optics waveguide to facilitate release of the captured light into the image replication optics waveguide paragraph [0124]) the holographic wavefront (diffracted light produced by the SLM--naturally rotated (with a liquid crystal SLM) in polarization by 90 degrees paragraph [0119] and holographic wavefront as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) and a pair of surfaces (first and second surfaces ass shown below in fig. 9a) arranged to waveguide (image replication optics waveguide 1050 fig. 9a) the holographic wavefront (diffracted light produced by the SLM--naturally rotated (with a liquid crystal SLM) in polarization by 90 degrees paragraph [0119] and holographic wavefront as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) therebetween (the holographic wavefront is between the first and second surfaces as shown below in annotated fig. 9a);
wherein a plane of the display area (SLM plane as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) comprising a display area (SLM fig. 9A may be a liquid crystal device paragraph [0116]) arranged to display (the SLM diffracts light that is reflected to L4 paragraph [0119] toward the user 1540 fig. 9A) is angled such that (the SLM plane is at an angle so that the light can be directed by the PBS to L4 in the optical system to relay the image to the first plane at L5 as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) the relayed image (the image of the holographic wavefront of the diffracted light produced by the SLM is relayed through the optical system as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) of the first hologram (the SLM is the hologram paragraph 0116]) is formed at (the image of the holographic wavefront of the diffracted light produced by the SLM is relayed through the optical system to a first plane as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) a first plane (first plane as shown below in annotated fig. 9a), the first plane (first plane as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) being parallel (the first plane is parallel to the input plane as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) with a plane (input plane as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) of the input port (injection element 1056 fig. 9a).
PNG
media_image1.png
798
1033
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Lacoste does not disclose, wherein a tilt of the display area opposes that of the relayed image of the hologram.
However Kokanee discloses in at least figure 5, wherein a tilt (display module 20 A may emit image light 38 in a direction parallel to projector vector Vp paragraph [0043]) of the display area (display module 20 A fig. 5) opposes that (the optical axis of display module 20 A (projector vector Vp) may be separated in angle space from input vector Vi by an angle α paragraph [0043] and angle α of display input 20A and angle θ of Vi are shown as opposing angles in fig. 5) of the relayed image (image light 38 fig. 5) of the hologram (display module 20 A includes a spatial light modulator 103 paragraph [0048] and emits image light 38 fig. 5, the SLM is the hologram as taught above by Lacoste ).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use a display with an opposite tilt to the relayed image as taught by Kokanee in the holographic image projection system of Lacoste. The tilt of display module 20A allows it to be at location 82 which may allow display module 20A to fit within the housing of system 10 more easily and ergonomically (paragraph [0040]).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Lacoste and Kokanee discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Lacoste further discloses, wherein the first plane (first plane as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) is co-planar (the first plane and input plane are coplanar as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) with the plane (input plane as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) of the input port (injection element 1056 fig. 9a).
PNG
media_image1.png
798
1033
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Lacoste and Kokanee discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Lacoste further discloses, wherein the holographic projection system (holographic image projection system 1010 fig. 9A) is arranged such that (the holographic image projection system 1010 is arranged so that the wavefront emitted from the SLM has a propagation axis as shown below in annotated fig. 9) the wavefront (diffracted light produced by the SLM--naturally rotated (with a liquid crystal SLM) in polarization by 90 degrees paragraph [0119] and holographic wavefront as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) propagates along (the diffracted light produced by the SLM as the holographic wavefront is emitted along the propagation axis as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) a propagation axis (propagation axis as shown below in annotated fig. 9a).
Lacoste does not disclose, wherein a first angle is defined between a normal of the display area and a first portion of the propagation axis and a second angle is defined between a normal of the plane of the input port and a second portion of the propagation axis.
However Kokanne further disclose, wherein a first angle (angle α fig. 5 as shown in current application fig. 6 by angle 670) is defined between a normal (normal axis 81 fig. 5) of the display area (display module 20A) and a first portion (first portion as shown below in annotated fig. 5) of the propagation axis (propagation axis as shown below in annotated fig. 5) and a second angle (angle θ fig. 5, as shown in current application fig. 6 by angle 672) is defined between a normal of the plane (normal axis 81 fig. 5) of the input port (lateral surface 72 fig. 5) and a second portion (second portion as shown below in annotated fig. 5) of the propagation axis (propagation axis as shown below in annotated fig. 5).
PNG
media_image2.png
649
726
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use a display with an opposite tilt to the relayed image as taught by Kokanee in the holographic image projection system of Lacoste. The tilt of display module 20A allows it to be at location 82 which may allow display module 20A to fit within the housing of system 10 more easily and ergonomically (paragraph [0040]).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Lacoste and Kokanee discloses all the limitations of claim 3 and Lacoste further discloses, wherein the optical system (optical system as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) has a unity magnification (Lenses L4 and L5 form an output telescope (demagnifying optics).
PNG
media_image1.png
798
1033
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Lacoste does not disclose, the first angle is substantially equal to the second angle.
However Kokanne further discloses, the first angle (angle α fig. 5 as shown in current application fig. 6 by angle 670) is substantially equal (angles α and θ can be by 10° paragraph [0043] resulting in position where both angles can equal 5°) to the second angle (angle θ fig. 5, as shown in current application fig. 6 by angle 672).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use a display with an opposite tilt to the relayed image as taught by Kokanee in the holographic image projection system of Lacoste. The tilt of display module 20A allows it to be at location 82 which may allow display module 20A to fit within the housing of system 10 more easily and ergonomically (paragraph [0040]).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Lacoste and Kokanee discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Lacoste further discloses, wherein the optical system (optical system as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) is an optical relay (the lenses L4 and L5, diffuser D and mirror M4 relay the image from the PBS to the injection element 1056 fig. 9a) comprising (the optical system comprises lenses L4 and L5 as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) a pair of lenses (lenses L4 and L5 fig. 9a) between (the lenes L4 and L5 are between the display arrangement and the injection element 1056 as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) the display device (display arrangement as shown below in annotated fig. 9A) and the input port (injection element 1056 fig. 9a), the optical relay (the lenses L4 and L5, diffuser D and mirror M4 relay the image from the PBS to the injection element 1056 fig. 9a) being arranged to form the relayed image (the image of the holographic wavefront of the diffracted light produced by the SLM is relayed through the optical system as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) of the first hologram (the SLM is the hologram paragraph 0116]).
PNG
media_image1.png
798
1033
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Lacoste and Kokanee discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Lacoste further discloses, wherein a first surface (second surface as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) of the pair of surfaces (first and second surface as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) of the waveguide (image replication optics waveguide 1050 fig. 9a) is arranged to provide a plurality (the second surface provides a plurality of light emission zones N as shown below in annotated fig. 9a), n, of light emission zones (light emission zones N as show below in fig. 9a) for emitting a corresponding plurality of replicas (the diffracted light produced by the SLM is relayed though the optical system to the image replication optics waveguide 1050 to the emission zones as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) of the holographic wavefront (diffracted light produced by the SLM--naturally rotated (with a liquid crystal SLM) in polarization by 90 degrees paragraph [0119] and holographic wavefront as shown below in annotated fig. 9a).
PNG
media_image1.png
798
1033
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Lacoste and Kokanee discloses all the limitations of claim 7 and Lacoste further discloses, wherein a separation (S as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) of the pair of surfaces (first and second surfaces as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) of the waveguide (image replication optics waveguide 1050 fig. 9a) is arranged such that at least a portion (the separation S of the waveguide surfaces is arranged for the light emission zones to overlap as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) of each of the light emission zones (light emission zones as show below in fig. 9a) overlaps with an adjacent (the light emission zones N1 and N2 overlap and are adjacent as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) emission zone (light emission zones as show below in fig. 9a).
PNG
media_image1.png
798
1033
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lacoste et al. (US 20120002256 A1) in view of Kokanne (WO 2023034080 A1) as applied to claim 3 above and in further view of Fictionart (WO 2018031634 A1).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Lacoste and Kokanee discloses all the limitations of claim 3.
Lacoste does not disclose, wherein the optical system has non-unity magnification such that the first angle is not equal to the second angle.
However Fictionart discloses in at least figure 1, wherein the optical system (projection lenses fig. 1) has non-unity magnification (A finite/infinite conjugate lens images the display to an infinite image distance. Hence an field points at the object, the display panel, are projected as a focal field angles by the projection lens paragraph [0005]) such that the first angle (first angle as shown below in annotated fig. 1, as shown in fig. 6 of current application) is not equal to (the first and second angles are not equal as shown below in annotated fig. 1) the second angle (second angle as shown below in annotated fig. 1 as shown in fig. 6 of current application).
PNG
media_image3.png
650
675
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use a display and waveguide with different angles to the propagation axis as taught by Fictionart in the holographic image projection system of Lacoste. The Y waveguide
diffracts the most extreme vertical field angles, from the top and bottom of the
display panel, to preferentially adjust entrance location at the in-coupling hologram while
maintaining propagation angle (paragraph [0005]).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lacoste et al. (US 20120002256 A1) in view of Kokanne (WO 2023034080 A1) as applied to claim 1 above and in further view of Hong et al. (US 11287655 B2).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Lacoste and Kokanee discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Lacoste does not disclose, wherein a waveguiding direction of the waveguide is perpendicular to a normal of first plane.
However Hong further discloses, wherein a waveguiding direction (waveguiding direction as shown below in annotated fig. 8) of the waveguide (the light guide plate 120 may include a material transparent to visible light such that the light guide plate 120 may be configured to transmit light as a waveguide col. 6 lines 12-14) is perpendicular to (the waveguiding direction is perpendicular to the plane normal as shown below in annotated fig. 8) a normal (plane normal as shown below in annotated fig. 8) of first plane (first plane as shown below in annotated fig. 8).
PNG
media_image4.png
535
905
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use a perpendicular waveguide as taught by Kokanee in the holographic image projection system of Lacoste. A holographic image modulated and reproduced by the spatial light modulator 113 may pass through the lens 114 and may be provided to the eye E of the viewer through the input coupler 121 of the light guide plate 120, the interior of the light guide plate 120, and the output coupler 122 of the light guide plate 120 (col. 9 lines 9-14).
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lacoste et al. (US 20120002256 A1) in view of Kokanne (WO 2023034080 A1) as applied to claim 1 above and in further view of Christmas (US 20210255459 A1).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Lacoste and Kokanee discloses all the limitations of claim 3.
Lacoste does not disclose, wherein the holographic projection system further comprises a second hologram of a second picture, wherein the optical system is arranged to form a relayed second hologram which is also positioned at the first plane.
However Christmas discloses in at least figure 6, wherein the holographic projection system (holographic display system paragraph [0097]) further comprises a second hologram (second single color computer-generated hologram paragraph [0099]) of a second picture (second picture paragraph [0098]), wherein the optical system (optical system as shown below in annotated fig. 6) is arranged to form (the optical system forms a second holographic reconstruction on the light receiving surface 670 as shown below in annotated fig. 6) a relayed second hologram (a second holographic reconstruction paragraph [0099]) which is also positioned at (a second holographic reconstruction on the light receiving surface 670 at the replay plane paragraph [0099]) the first plane (receiving surface 670 fig. 6).
PNG
media_image5.png
648
717
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use a second hologram as taught by Christmas in the holographic image projection system of Lacoste. Three or more display channels may be provided configured to display respective single color holograms. For example, a full-color composite image/picture may be formed by displaying respective red, green and blue single color holograms paragraph [0100]).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Lacoste, Kokanee and Christmas discloses all the limitations of claim 10.
Lacoste does not disclose, wherein the relayed first hologram is adjacent to the relayed second hologram.
However Christmas further discloses, wherein the relayed first hologram (a first holographic reconstruction paragraph [0099]) is adjacent to (the first and second holographic reconstructions are on the light receiving surface 670 paragraph [0099]) the relayed second hologram (a second holographic reconstruction paragraph [0099]).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use a second hologram as taught by Christmas in the holographic image projection system of Lacoste. Three or more display channels may be provided configured to display respective single color holograms. For example, a full-color composite image/picture may be formed by displaying respective red, green and blue single color holograms paragraph [0100]).
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lacoste et al. (US 20120002256 A1) in view of Kokanne (WO 2023034080 A1) and Christmas (US 20210255459 A1) as applied to claim 10 above and in further view of Kleindienst et al. (US 20220146845 A1).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Lacoste, Kokanee and Christmas discloses all the limitations of claim 10.
Lacoste does not disclose, wherein the input port comprises a first input area arranged to receive the first relayed hologram and a second input area arranged to receive the second relayed hologram.
However Kleindienst discloses in at least figure 18A, wherein the input port (input port as shown below in annotated fig. 18A) comprises a first input area (first area as shown below in annotated fig. 18A) arranged to receive (the first area receives the input coupling hologram 41 as shown below in annotated fig. 18A) the first relayed hologram (input coupling hologram 41 fig. 18A) and a second input area (second area as shown below in annotated fig. 18A) arranged to receive (the second area receives the input coupling hologram 42 as shown below in annotated fig. 18A) the second relayed hologram (input coupling hologram 42 fig. 18A).
PNG
media_image6.png
731
641
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use a second hologram input areas as taught by Kleindienst in the holographic image projection system of Lacoste. With this differentiation of the different vertical propagation angle ranges, the radiation from each input coupling volume hologram 41-43 and thus each horizontal FoV propagate in a different vertical Fov (paragraph [0208]).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Lacoste, Kokanee and Christmas discloses all the limitations of claim 12.
Lacoste does not disclose, wherein the waveguide is arranged to waveguide the holographic wavefront in a first direction of waveguiding, and wherein a width of the first input area in the first direction is substantially equal to the width of the second input area in the direction of waveguiding.
However Kleindienst further discloses, wherein the waveguide (base body 6 fig. 18 of waveguide 1 paragraph [0149]) is arranged to waveguide (the base body 6 fig. 18 of waveguide 1 paragraph [0149] waveguides the radiation from each input coupling volume hologram 41-43 paragraph [0208] in the direction R1 as shown below in annotated fig. 18A) the holographic wavefront (the radiation from each input coupling volume hologram 41-43 paragraph [0208]) in a first direction of waveguiding (the waveguiding direction is R1 fig. 1 and as shown below in annotated fig. 6), and wherein a width (first width W1 as shown below in annotated fig. 18A) of the first input area (first area as shown below in annotated fig. 18A) in the first direction (the waveguiding direction is R1 fig. 1 and as shown below in annotated fig. 6) is substantially equal to (the first width W1 and second width W2 are equal a shown below in fig. 18A) the width (second width W2 as shown below in annotated fig. 18A) of the second input area (second area sha shown below in fig. 18A) in the direction of waveguiding (the waveguiding direction is R1 fig. 1 and as shown below in annotated fig. 6).
PNG
media_image7.png
731
641
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use a second hologram input areas as taught by Kleindienst in the holographic image projection system of Lacoste. With this differentiation of the different vertical propagation angle ranges, the radiation from each input coupling volume hologram 41-43 and thus each horizontal FoV propagate in a different vertical Fov (paragraph [0208]).
Claims 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lacoste et al. (US 20120002256 A1) in view of Hong et al. (US 11287655 B2).
Regarding Claim 14, Lacoste discloses in at least figure 9a, a method of holographic projection (holographic image projection system 1010 fig. 9A), the method comprising:
spatially modulating light (the SLM is modulated with holographic data approximating a hologram of the image to be displayed paragraph [0130]) in accordance with a first hologram (the SLM is the hologram paragraph 0116]) to form a holographic wavefront (diffracted light produced by the SLM--naturally rotated (with a liquid crystal SLM) in polarization by 90 degrees paragraph [0119] and holographic wavefront as shown below in annotated fig. 9a);
receiving (the SLM diffracts light that is reflected to L4 paragraph [0119] in the optical system as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) the holographic wavefront (diffracted light produced by the SLM--naturally rotated (with a liquid crystal SLM) in polarization by 90 degrees paragraph [0119] and holographic wavefront as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) at an optical system (optical system as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) so as to form a relayed image (the image of the holographic wavefront of the diffracted light produced by the SLM is relayed through the optical system as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) of the first hologram (the SLM is the hologram paragraph 0116]); and
then receiving (this captures the light from the image projection system and has an angled end within the image replication optics waveguide to facilitate release of the captured light into the image replication optics waveguide paragraph [0124]) the holographic wavefront (diffracted light produced by the SLM--naturally rotated (with a liquid crystal SLM) in polarization by 90 degrees paragraph [0119] and holographic wavefront as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) at the input port (injection element 1056 fig. 9a) of a waveguide (image replication optics waveguide 1050 fig. 9a),
wherein the waveguide (image replication optics waveguide 1050 fig. 9a) comprises a pair of surfaces (first and second surfaces ass shown below in fig. 9a) such that the received (this captures the light from the image projection system and has an angled end within the image replication optics waveguide to facilitate release of the captured light into the image replication optics waveguide paragraph [0124]) holographic wavefront (diffracted light produced by the SLM--naturally rotated (with a liquid crystal SLM) in polarization by 90 degrees paragraph [0119] and holographic wavefront as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) is waveguided therebetween (the holographic wavefront is between the first and second surfaces as shown below in annotated fig. 9a);
wherein the first hologram (the SLM is the hologram paragraph 0116]) is positioned at (the image of the holographic wavefront of the diffracted light produced by the SLM is relayed through the optical system to a first plane as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) a first plane (first plane as shown below in annotated fig. 9a), the first plane (first plane as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) being co-planar (the first plane is parallel to the input plane as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) with a plane (input plane as shown below in annotated fig. 9a) of the input port (injection element 1056 fig. 9a).
Lacoste does not disclose, wherein a plane of the display area is non-parallel with a plane of the first plane.
However Hong discloses in at least figure 8, wherein a plane of the display area (SLM plane as shown below in annotated fig. 8) is non-parallel (the SLM plane and the first plane are non-parallel as shown below in annotated fig. 8) with a plane of the first plane (the relayed image of the hologram leaves lens 114 at the first plane as shown below in annotated fig. 1).
PNG
media_image8.png
535
905
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use a display non parallel to first plane as taught by Kokanee in the holographic image projection system of Lacoste. When the distance between the lens 114 and the spatial light modulator 113 is equal to the focal length of the lens 114, a holographic image reproduced on the same plane as the spatial light modulator 113 may be delivered to the eye E of the viewer without image quality deterioration (col. 9 lines 4-8).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Taylor (US 5543251 A) discloses a method of recording holographic images with an angled mirror and recording material.
Karafin et al. (US 20200314415 A1) discloses a light field display with a display area and holographic object volume.
Travers et al. (US 20140300966 A1) discloses a controllable waveguide for near eye display with an image generator with an angled mirror.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW R WRIGHT whose telephone number is (703)756-5822. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 7:30-5 Friday 8-12.
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 1-571-270-1284. 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.
/ANDREW R WRIGHT/ Examiner, Art Unit 2872 /PINPING SUN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights