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 filed February 10, 2026 has been considered.
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 9 and 18 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.
Claims 9 and 18 recite the limitation “the first sensor is a disparity sensor.” It is unclear how “disparity sensor” is to be interpreted as a disparity sensor is not a common term in the art. [0027] of the specification gives the definition “the disparity sensor is configured to measure light that pass through a first layer 150 and contacts at least the second and/or third layer of the lens.” This is the same function given for the first sensor in claims 1 and 10 that the first sensor obtains a first light information by measuring light that passes through the first dimmable element. Therefore it is unclear whether the first sensor being a disparity sensor adds any further limitation to the first sensor or simply renames it. Thus the claims 9 and 18 are rendered indefinite. For the purposes of compact prosecution, Examiner will interpret “a disparity sensor” as a sensor having the same function as the first sensor given in claims 1 and 10.
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 1-3, 5-6, 8-12, 14-15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Machida (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0199383).
Regarding claim 1, Machida teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium including instructions that, when executed by one or more processors (Figure 21A control device 18, [0262] control device inherently has processor and memory to carry out calculation) of a head-wearable device (Figure 21A, [0001] head mounted display), cause the head-wearable device to cause the performance of:
while a user is wearing augmented-reality glasses:
obtaining first light information measured via a first sensor (Figure 21A, transmitted light illuminance sensor 722, [0262]) positioned to receive light after it travels through a dimmable element (Figure 3A,B dimming device 700; [0262] measures illuminance base on light being incident from an external environment and transmitting through the dimming device) of the augmented-reality glasses;
obtaining second light information measured via a second sensor (Figure 20A environmental illuminance measurement sensor 721, [0263] sensors 722 and 721 may be combined) positioned to receive light that has not travelled through the dimmable element of the augmented-reality glasses (Figure 20A sensor 721 is located in from of dimming device 700; [0257] environmental illuminance measurement sensor 721 measuring illuminance of an environment where the display apparatus is located); and
actively adjusting a dimming level of the dimmable element based on a comparison between the first and second light information ([0263] transmitted light illuminance measurement sensor 722 and environmental illuminance measurement sensor 721 may be combined and perform various tests to control the light blocking ratio of dimming device 700).
Regarding claim 2, Machida teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Machida further teaches the dimmable element (Figure 21A dimming device 700) is a first dimmable element ([0263] dimming device for right eye) associated with a first lens of the augmented-reality glasses ([0155] one dimming device associated with one of the image display devices) for a first eye of the user ([0263] right eye);
the augmented-reality glasses also include a second dimmable element ([0263] dimming device for left eye) associated with a second lens of the augmented-reality glasses ([0155] other dimming device for second image display device) for a second eye of the user ([0263] left eye); and
actively adjusting includes electronically adjusting the dimming level only for the first dimmable element ([0263] dimming device for right eye can be independently controlled).
Regarding claim 3, Machida teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 2. Machida further teaches the actively adjusting includes electronically adjusting the first dimmable element to a first dimming level ([0263] light blocking ratio of dimming device for right eye can be controlled) and the second dimmable element to a second dimming level ([0263] light blocking ratio of dimming device for left eye can be controlled), distinct from the first dimming level ([0263] light blocking ratios for right eye and left devices can be controlled independently based on brightness of light passing through dimming devices).
Regarding claim 5, Machida teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Machida further teaches the dimmable element (Figure 21A dimming device 700) includes (i) a first dimmable element ([0263] dimming device for right eye) associated with a first lens of the augmented-reality glasses ([0155] one dimming device associated with one of the image display devices) for a first eye of the user ([0263] right eye) and (ii) a second dimmable element ([0263] dimming device for left eye) associated with a second lens of the augmented-reality glasses ([0155] other dimming device for second image display device) for a second eye of the user ([0263] left eye), and the actively adjusting occurs substantially simultaneously for both of the first and second dimmable elements ([0263] voltages to electrodes to adjust light blocking ratio of the dimming device for the right eye and the dimming device for the left eye are controlled together).
Regarding claim 6, Machida teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Machida further teaches actively adjusting the dimming level occurs in response to detecting a trigger condition indicating that the dimmable element requires an adjustment to the dimming level ([0262] comparison circuit compares illuminance with standard and controls dimming device based on comparison; when desired illumination is not meant the blocking ratio of the dimming device may be adjusted).
Regarding claim 8, Machida teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Machida further teaches the augmented-reality glasses include a dimmable element positioned farther away from the user compared to a display-presentation element of the augmented-reality glasses (Figure 2B dimming device 700 is farther away from observer side than deflecting unit 140 and light guiding plate 121 which from a display-presentation element, Abstract, [0004]).
Regarding claim 9, Machida teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Machida further teaches the first sensor (Figure 21A, transmitted light illuminance sensor 722) is a disparity sensor configured to output first light information by comparing light from one or more waveguides (Figures 3B, 21A transmitted light illuminance sensor 722 outputs light information from light received from light guiding plate 121 image display device 100, [0262] compared with a standard value or [0263] transmitted light illuminance measurement sensor 722 and environmental illuminance measurement sensor 721 may be combined and perform various tests to control the light blocking ratio of dimming device 700).
Regarding claim 10, Machida teaches a method of active-dimming control for augmented-reality glasses, the method comprising:
while a user is wearing augmented-reality glasses:
obtaining first light information measured via a first sensor (Figure 21A, transmitted light illuminance sensor 722, [0262]) positioned to receive light after it travels through a dimmable element (Figure 3A,B dimming device 700; [0262] measures illuminance base on light being incident from an external environment and transmitting through the dimming device) of the augmented-reality glasses;
obtaining second light information measured via a second sensor (Figure 20A environmental illuminance measurement sensor 721, [0263] sensors 722 and 721 may be combined) positioned to receive light that has not travelled through the dimmable element of the augmented-reality glasses (Figure 20A sensor 721 is located in from of dimming device 700; [0257] environmental illuminance measurement sensor 721 measuring illuminance of an environment where the display apparatus is located); and
actively adjusting a dimming level of the dimmable element based on a comparison between the first and second light information ([0263] transmitted light illuminance measurement sensor 722 and environmental illuminance measurement sensor 721 may be combined and perform various tests to control the light blocking ratio of dimming device 700).
Regarding claim 11, Machida teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 10.
Machida further teaches the dimmable element (Figure 21A dimming device 700) is a first dimmable element ([0263] dimming device for right eye) associated with a first lens of the augmented-reality glasses ([0155] one dimming device associated with one of the image display devices) for a first eye of the user ([0263] right eye);
the augmented-reality glasses also include a second dimmable element ([0263] dimming device for left eye) associated with a second lens of the augmented-reality glasses ([0155] other dimming device for second image display device) for a second eye of the user ([0263] left eye); and
actively adjusting includes electronically adjusting the dimming level only for the first dimmable element ([0263] dimming device for right eye can be independently controlled).
Regarding claim 12, Machida teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 11. Machida further teaches the actively adjusting includes electronically adjusting the first dimmable element to a first dimming level ([0263] light blocking ratio of dimming device for right eye can be controlled) and the second dimmable element to a second dimming level ([0263] light blocking ratio of dimming device for left eye can be controlled), distinct from the first dimming level ([0263] light blocking ratios for right eye and left devices can be controlled independently based on brightness of light passing through dimming devices).
Regarding claim 14, Machida teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 10. Machida further teaches the dimmable element (Figure 21A dimming device 700) includes (i) a first dimmable element ([0263] dimming device for right eye) associated with a first lens of the augmented-reality glasses ([0155] one dimming device associated with one of the image display devices) for a first eye of the user ([0263] right eye) and (ii) a second dimmable element ([0263] dimming device for left eye) associated with a second lens of the augmented-reality glasses ([0155] other dimming device for second image display device) for a second eye of the user ([0263] left eye), and the actively adjusting occurs substantially simultaneously for both of the first and second dimmable elements ([0263] voltages to electrodes to adjust light blocking ratio of the dimming device for the right eye and the dimming device for the left eye are controlled together).
Regarding claim 15, Machida teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 10. Machida further teaches actively adjusting the dimming level occurs in response to detecting a trigger condition indicating that the dimmable element requires an adjustment to the dimming level ([0262] comparison circuit compares illuminance with standard and controls dimming device based on comparison; when desired illumination is not meant the blocking ratio of the dimming device may be adjusted).
Regarding claim 17, Machida teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 10. Machida further teaches the augmented-reality glasses include a dimmable element positioned farther away from the user compared to a display-presentation element of the augmented-reality glasses (Figure 2B dimming device 700 is farther away from observer side than deflecting unit 140 and light guiding plate 121 which from a display-presentation element, Abstract, [0004]).
Regarding claim 18, Machida teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 10. Machida further teaches the first sensor (Figure 21A, transmitted light illuminance sensor 722) is a disparity sensor configured to output first light information by comparing light from one or more waveguides (Figures 3B, 21A transmitted light illuminance sensor 722 outputs light information from light received from light guiding plate 121 image display device 100, [0262] compared with a standard value or [0263] transmitted light illuminance measurement sensor 722 and environmental illuminance measurement sensor 721 may be combined and perform various tests to control the light blocking ratio of dimming device 700).
Regarding claim 19, Machida teaches a head-wearable device (Figure 21A, [0001] head mounted display), comprising:
one or more sensors (Figure 21A, transmitted light illuminance sensor 722, [0262]; Figure 20A environmental illuminance measurement sensor 721, [0263] sensors 722 and 721 may be combined);
one or more imaging devices ([0172] imaging device may be attached to the central portion of the front portion);
two lenses ([0155] two image display devices each of which has optical device 120);
memory, including instructions for performing one or more operations (Figure 21A control device 18, [0262] control device inherently has memory to carry out calculation); and
one or more processors configured to execute the instructions (Figure 21A control device 18, [0262] control device inherently has processor to carry out calculation) to cause the performance of:
while a user is wearing augmented-reality glasses:
obtaining first light information measured via a first sensor (Figure 21A, transmitted light illuminance sensor 722, [0262]) positioned to receive light after it travels through a dimmable element (Figure 3A,B dimming device 700; [0262] measures illuminance base on light being incident from an external environment and transmitting through the dimming device) of the augmented-reality glasses;
obtaining second light information measured via a second sensor (Figure 20A environmental illuminance measurement sensor 721, [0263] sensors 722 and 721 may be combined) positioned to receive light that has not travelled through the dimmable element of the augmented-reality glasses (Figure 20A sensor 721 is located in from of dimming device 700; [0257] environmental illuminance measurement sensor 721 measuring illuminance of an environment where the display apparatus is located); and
actively adjusting a dimming level of the dimmable element based on a comparison between the first and second light information ([0263] transmitted light illuminance measurement sensor 722 and environmental illuminance measurement sensor 721 may be combined and perform various tests to control the light blocking ratio of dimming device 700).
Regarding claim 20, Machida teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 19. Machida further teaches the dimmable element (Figure 21A dimming device 700) is a first dimmable element ([0263] dimming device for right eye) associated with a first lens of the augmented-reality glasses ([0155] one dimming device associated with one of the image display devices) for a first eye of the user ([0263] right eye);
the augmented-reality glasses also include a second dimmable element ([0263] dimming device for left eye) associated with a second lens of the augmented-reality glasses ([0155] other dimming device for second image display device) for a second eye of the user ([0263] left eye); and
actively adjusting includes electronically adjusting the dimming level only for the first dimmable element ([0263] dimming device for right eye can be independently controlled).
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 4, 7, 13, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Machida (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0199383) as applied to claims 2, 6, 11, and 15 above, in view of Hayashi et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0184894 – hereinafter referred to as “Hayashi”).
Regarding claim 4, Machida teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 2. Machida fails to teach the instructions that, when executed by the head-wearable device, also cause the head-wearable device to:
before actively adjusting the dimming level:
in accordance with a determination that artificial-reality content is being presented via the first lens, determine that the first dimmable element requires a dimming-level adjustment to visibly present the artificial-reality content at the first lens;
wherein the actively adjusting the dimming level is performed for the first dimmable element in response to the determination that the first dimmable element requires a dimming-level adjustment to visibly present the artificial-reality content at the first lens.
However, Hayashi is related to Machida and discloses a head-wearable device (Figure 4). Hayashi teaches the instructions that, when executed by the head-wearable device, also cause the head-wearable device to:
before actively adjusting the dimming level (Figure 3 flowchart):
in accordance with a determination that artificial-reality content is being presented via the first lens (Figure 3 step S602 light controller acquires intensity of the picture generator, [0046]), determine that the first dimmable element requires a dimming-level adjustment to visibly present the artificial-reality content at the first lens (Figure 3 steps S603, S604 light controller compares intensity of picture light to external light and determines whether dimming state needs to be adjusted, [0046]-[0047]);
wherein the actively adjusting the dimming level is performed for the first dimmable element in response to the determination that the first dimmable element requires a dimming-level adjustment to visibly present the artificial-reality content at the first lens (Figure 3 step S605 when it is determined that adjustment is necessary the light controller adjusts the transmittance of the dimmer, [0047]). Hayashi further teaches adjusting the dimmer in response to the video being displayed in order to avoid a reduction in contrast that would cause the users to hardly recognize the video ([0044]).
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 method taught by Machida by adjusting the dimming-level in response to the content being displayed as taught by Hayashi in order to avoid a reduction in contrast that would cause the users to hardly recognize the video (Hayashi [0044]).
Regarding claim 7, Machida teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 6. Machida fails to teach the trigger condition is determined to be satisfied when an additive contrast ratio for the augmented-reality glasses falls below a threshold amount. However, Hayashi teaches a trigger condition is determined to be satisfied when an additive contrast ratio for the augmented-reality glasses falls below a threshold amount ([0047] light controller 107 determines whether the dimming state has to be adjusted in order to maintain a predetermined contrast). Hayashi further using contrast as a trigger condition in order prevent a reduction in contrast that would cause the users to hardly recognize the video ([0044]).
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 method taught by Machida by having trigger condition satisfied when an additive contrast ratio for the augmented-reality glasses falls below a threshold amount as taught by Hayashi in order to avoid a reduction in contrast that would cause the users to hardly recognize the video (Hayashi [0044]).
Regarding claim 13, Machida teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 11. Machida fails to teach the instructions that, when executed by the head-wearable device, also cause the head-wearable device to:
before actively adjusting the dimming level:
in accordance with a determination that artificial-reality content is being presented via the first lens, determine that the first dimmable element requires a dimming-level adjustment to visibly present the artificial-reality content at the first lens;
wherein the actively adjusting the dimming level is performed for the first dimmable element in response to the determination that the first dimmable element requires a dimming-level adjustment to visibly present the artificial-reality content at the first lens.
However, Hayashi is related to Machida and discloses a head-wearable device (Figure 4). Hayashi teaches the instructions that, when executed by the head-wearable device, also cause the head-wearable device to:
before actively adjusting the dimming level (Figure 3 flowchart):
in accordance with a determination that artificial-reality content is being presented via the first lens (Figure 3 step S602 light controller acquires intensity of the picture generator, [0046]), determine that the first dimmable element requires a dimming-level adjustment to visibly present the artificial-reality content at the first lens (Figure 3 steps S603, S604 light controller compares intensity of picture light to external light and determines whether dimming state needs to be adjusted, [0046]-[0047]);
wherein the actively adjusting the dimming level is performed for the first dimmable element in response to the determination that the first dimmable element requires a dimming-level adjustment to visibly present the artificial-reality content at the first lens (Figure 3 step S605 when it is determined that adjustment is necessary the light controller adjusts the transmittance of the dimmer, [0047]). Hayashi further teaches adjusting the dimmer in response to the video being displayed in order to avoid a reduction in contrast that would cause the users to hardly recognize the video ([0044]).
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 method taught by Machida by adjusting the dimming-level in response to the content being displayed as taught by Hayashi in order to avoid a reduction in contrast that would cause the users to hardly recognize the video (Hayashi [0044]).
Regarding claim 16, Machida teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 15. Machida fails to teach the trigger condition is determined to be satisfied when an additive contrast ratio for the augmented-reality glasses falls below a threshold amount. However, Hayashi teaches a trigger condition is determined to be satisfied when an additive contrast ratio for the augmented-reality glasses falls below a threshold amount ([0047] light controller 107 determines whether the dimming state has to be adjusted in order to maintain a predetermined contrast). Hayashi further using contrast as a trigger condition in order prevent a reduction in contrast that would cause the users to hardly recognize the video ([0044]).
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 method taught by Machida by having trigger condition satisfied when an additive contrast ratio for the augmented-reality glasses falls below a threshold amount as taught by Hayashi in order to avoid a reduction in contrast that would cause the users to hardly recognize the video (Hayashi [0044]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Lee et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0092317) discloses a head mount display with left and right eye filters that are configured to individually adjust transmittances.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX PARK RICKEL whose telephone number is (703)756-4561. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 a.m. - 6 p.m. ET.
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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571)272-2713. 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.
Alex Rickel
Examiner
Art Unit 2872
/A.P.R./Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/BUMSUK WON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights