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.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-18 are currently pending in the present application. Claims 1 and 17 are original; claims 2-16 are currently amended; and claim 18 is newly added. The amendment dated August 9, 2024 has been entered into the record.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/08/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
[1] The drawings are objected to because FIGURE 5A is designated by a legend --Prior Art--, while the specification describes that FIGURE 5A is a perspective view of a first example. Appropriate correction is required by amending the specification or the drawings.
[2] The drawings are further objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, “a first bandpass filter” and “a second bandpass filter” in claims 10-13 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.
In addition to Replacement Sheets containing the corrected drawing figure(s), applicant is required to submit a marked-up copy of each Replacement Sheet including annotations indicating the changes made to the previous version. The marked-up copy must be clearly labeled as “Annotated Sheets” and must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change(s) to the drawings. See 37 CFR 1.121(d)(1). Failure to timely submit the proposed drawing and marked-up copy will result in the abandonment of the application.
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)(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.
Claims 1-8 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kollin et al. (US 2018/0120563, hereinafter “Kollin”).
Regarding claim 1, Kollin discloses a holographic projection system (Fig. 7; Paras. [0006], [0037]) comprising:
a first hologram and a second hologram (see “a first hologram” and “a second hologram” annotated by the examiner in Fig. 7 below; Paras. [0022] and [0037] teaching 704 being a Digital Dynamic Hologram (DDH)), wherein the holographic projection system is arranged to spatially modulate light in accordance with the first hologram to form a first holographic wavefront and to spatially modulate light in accordance with the second hologram to form a second holographic wavefront (see Fig. 7 and Para. [0011] “a waveguide coupling hologram (WGCH) positioned at the entrance of the waveguide can be configured spatially to accept only the narrow range of angles that correspond to the DDH. Since the WGCH always operates at its configured incident angle, light propagation efficiency is increased” teaching the WGCH 706 spatially accepts the range of angles for the incoming wavefronts that correspond to the DDH 704. See “a first holographic wavefront”, “a second holographic wavefront”, “a first input area” and “a second input area” in Fig. 7 below regarding the light spatially modulated by the DDH 704 and the WGCH 706);
a waveguide (708; Para. [0037]) comprising an input port (706; Para. [0037]) comprising a first input area arranged to receive the first holographic wavefront and a second input area arranged to receive the second holographic wavefront (see “a first input area” and “a second input area” in Fig. 7 below), the waveguide further comprising a pair of surfaces (the upper and lower surfaces of 708) arranged to waveguide the first and second holographic wavefront therebetween; and
wherein the waveguide is arranged such the first holographic wavefront is combined with the second holographic wavefront after one or more internal reflections of the first holographic wavefront between the pair of surfaces (see Fig. 7 and Para. [0024]).
<Figure 7 of Kollin, annotated by the examiner>
PNG
media_image1.png
448
614
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Kollin discloses the limitations of claim 1 above, and further discloses wherein the waveguide is arranged such that a footprint of the first holographic wavefront overlaps a footprint of the second holographic wavefront on a first surface of the pair of surfaces of the waveguide after one or more internal reflections (see Fig. 7 and Para. [0024]).
Regarding claim 3, Kollin discloses the limitations of claim 1 above, and further discloses wherein one of the pair of surfaces of the waveguide is partially transmissive-partially reflective such that said surface is arranged to emit a plurality of replicas of the first and second holographic wavefront when the first and second holographic wavefronts are received at the input port (see Fig. 7 wherein the incoming light is penetrating through the upper surface of 708 and reflecting the light propagating inside 708).
Regarding claim 4, Kollin discloses the limitations of claim 3 above, and further discloses wherein the waveguide is arranged such that each replica of the first holographic wavefront at least partially overlaps a corresponding replica of the second holographic wavefront (see Fig. 7 and Para. [0024]).
Regarding claim 5, Kollin discloses the limitations of claim 1 above, and further discloses wherein the waveguide is arranged such that the first holographic wavefront is substantially aligned with the second input area after one or more internal reflection such that the first holographic wavefront is superimposed on the second holographic wavefront received by the second input area (see Fig. 7 and Para. [0024]).
Regarding claim 6, Kollin discloses the limitations of claim 1 above, and further discloses wherein the holographic projection system further comprises a display arrangement (areas on 704 for displaying the hologram) comprising a first display area (an area on 704 for displaying the first hologram) arranged to display the first hologram and a second display area (an area on 704 for displaying the second hologram) arranged to display the second hologram.
Regarding claim 7, Kollin discloses the limitations of claim 6 above, and further discloses wherein the display arrangement comprises a spatial light modulator comprising an active area, wherein a first portion of the active area forms the first display area and a second portion of the active area forms the second display area (Paras. [0037] and [0052] teaching the SLM 706 being the dynamic digital hologram).
Regarding claim 8, Kollin discloses the limitations of claim 7 above, and further discloses wherein the first and second display areas are adjacent one another (Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 16, Kollin discloses the limitations of claim 1 above, and further discloses wherein the first and second holograms are positioned at a first plane and wherein the first plane is co-planar with a plane of input port (Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 17, Kollin discloses a method of holographic projection (Fig. 7; Paras. [0006], [0037]), the method comprising:
spatially modulating light in accordance with a first hologram to form a first holographic wavefront (see “a first hologram” annotated by the examiner in Fig. 7 above; Paras. [0022] and [0037] teaching 704 being a Digital Dynamic Hologram (DDH));
spatially modulating light in accordance with a second hologram to form a second holographic wavefront (see “a second hologram” annotated by the examiner in Fig. 7 above; Paras. [0022] and [0037] teaching 704 being a Digital Dynamic Hologram (DDH));
receiving the first holographic wavefront at a first input area of an input port of a waveguide and the second holographic wavefront at a second input area of the input port (see 706 being an input port and see “a first holographic wavefront” and “a first input area” in Fig. 7 above; Para. [0037]);
wherein the waveguide comprises a pair of surfaces (the upper and lower surfaces of 708) such that the received holographic wavefront is waveguided therebetween;
wherein the waveguide is arranged such the first holographic wavefront is combined with the second holographic wavefront after one or more internal reflections of the first holographic wavefront between the pair of surfaces (see Fig. 7 and Para. [0024]).
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 15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kollin.
Regarding claim 15, Kollin discloses the limitations of claim 1 above.
Kollin does not explicitly disclose a width of the first input area in the direction of waveguiding of the waveguide is substantially equal to a width of the second input area in the direction of waveguiding.
However, Kollin teaches the input port, which comprises input areas, may be configured to spatially accept range of angles for the incoming wavefronts corresponding to the holograms (Para. [0011]).
Thereby, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the input port as disclosed by Kollin, wherein a width of the first input area in the direction of waveguiding of the waveguide is substantially equal to a width of the second input area in the direction of waveguiding, for the purpose of increasing light propagation efficiency (Kollin: Para. [0011]).
Regarding claim 18, Kollin discloses the limitations of claim 8 above.
Kollin does not explicitly disclose the first and second display areas abut one another.
However, Kollin teaches the input port, which comprises input areas for displaying, may be configured to spatially accept range of angles for the incoming wavefronts corresponding to the holograms (Para. [0011]).
Thereby, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the input port as disclosed by Kollin, wherein the first and second display areas abut one another, for the purpose of increasing light propagation efficiency (Kollin: Para. [0011]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-14 are 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:
Regarding claim 9, Kollin discloses the limitations of claim 6 above.
However, Kollin fails to disclose, in light of the specification, “the holographic projection system comprises a first light source arranged to illuminate the first hologram displayed on the display arrangement with light of a first wavelength; and a second light source arranged to illuminate the second hologram displayed on the display arrangement with light of a second wavelength that is different to the first wavelength”. The examiner further considered Christmas (US 20180120768), Danziger (US 20180292592) and Rossini (US 20170031161). For example, Christmas teaches providing a plurality of light sources for a holographic projection system, but fails to disclose a waveguide comprising an input port comprising a first input area arranged to receive the first holographic wavefront and a second input area arranged to receive the second holographic wavefront. The prior art of Kollin, Christmas, Danziger and Rossini, applied alone or in combination fails to teach or suggest the combination and arrangement of elements recited in Applicant's claim 9.
Dependent claims 10-14 are allowable by virtue of their dependence on claim 9.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN Y JUNG whose telephone number is (469)295-9076. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Michael H Caley can be reached on (571)272-2286. 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.
/JONATHAN Y JUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights