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 (IDS) submitted on 3/28/2025 was considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 1, the phrase “the plurality of layers” is assumed to be a typographical error. Examiner assumes that the phrase should have been written “the one or more layers”, as is claimed in independent claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-4 and 7-16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CRABTREE, Karlton. ("Polarization Conversion Cube Corner Retro-Reflector," A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the College of Optical Sciences, the University of Arizona, 2010, 46 pages., of record, hereinafter Crabtree).
Regarding Claim 1, Crabtree discloses a retroflector system with polarization compensation (a CCR with wedge shaped polarization rotators; page 101, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1), comprising: a corner cube reflector configured to receive input light and produce output light in six unique raypaths (a CCR has six different paths which light can transmit through; figure 3.1; page 70, paragraph 3- page 73- paragraph 2; page 102, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1), each raypath consisting of three reflections of the input light from a corresponding combination of corner cube reflector surfaces before exiting the corner cube reflector (a CCR has six different paths which light can transmit through based on the order of the reflections off the three surfaces; figure 3.1; page 70, paragraph 3- page 73- paragraph 2; page 102, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1);
a polarization compensator positioned in front of the corner cube reflector (wedge shaped rotators placed at each of the six different sub apertures to a CCR; page 102, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1), the polarization compensator including six sub-apertures that are positioned to allow light associated with each unique raypath to enter one of the sub-apertures before entering the corner cube reflector and to exit another one of the sub-apertures after exiting the corner cube reflector (wedge shaped rotators placed at each of the six different sub apertures to a CCR, each aperture corresponding to one of the sixth paths; page 102, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1), wherein:
each sub-aperture comprises one or more layers comprising birefringent material (a rotator, which can be an anisotropic SWG, is applied to each sub aperture; page 27, paragraph 3- page 28, paragraph 3; page 102, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1),
each sub-aperture has a different rotation compared to any other sub-aperture (different rotators may be placed on each path; page 27, paragraph 3- page 28, paragraph 3; page 102, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1), and
each sub-aperture is configured to impart a particular amount of polarization compensation to the light that is incident thereon such that exitant light associated with all unique raypaths has the same output polarization, regardless of which sub-aperture the light exits from, when the input light that enters the polarization compensator has a first polarization (wedge shaped rotators placed at each of the six different sub apertures to a CCR, each aperture corresponding to one of the sixth paths reduces the number of Mueller matrices for the CCR to 2, allowing output light to have the same polarization from each of the sub apertures, and may further use isotropic retarder surfaces to provide the same matrix output for all six paths, resulting in the same polarization regardless of the input polarization; figures 4.16-4.17; page 99, paragraph 4-page 101; paragraph 1; page 102, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1).
However, Crabtree fails to disclose each sub-aperture has a different fast axis compared to any other sub-aperture.
However it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the retroflector system of Crabtree to provide each sub-aperture has a different fast axis compared to any other sub-aperture since it was within the general skill of a worker in the art to provide different rotations by providing a different fast-axis for each rotator, and for the advantage that providing a different fast-axis rotation allows a set of wedge shaped rotators to have a constant thickness to provide a thin shaped waveplate which eliminates possible issues with phase mismatching due to differing traveling distances.
Regarding Claim 2, Crabtree discloses as is set forth above and Crabtree further discloses wherein each sub-aperture is configured to impart a different amount of polarization compensation to the light that is incident thereon compared to any other sub-aperture (a rotator is applied to each sub aperture, and as only two Mueller matrices are produced, each wedge rotates light a different angle; page 102, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1).
Regarding Claim 3, Crabtree discloses as is set forth above and Crabtree further discloses wherein the output polarization is the same as the first polarization (in a CCR with reflecting faces with retarders of Pi, 0, Pi, the resulting Mueller matrix is the identity matrix and preserves the handedness of the electric field when flipping the electric field around the y axis; figures 4.16-4.17; page 99, paragraph 4-page 101; paragraph 1; page 102, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1).
Regarding Claim 4, Crabtree discloses as is set forth above and Crabtree further discloses wherein the output polarization is different from the first polarization (a rotator is applied to each sub aperture, and as only two Mueller matrices are produced, each wedge rotates light a different angle to produce the output light, the output polarization being different from the incoming unless the incoming and outgoing matrices are equal; page 102, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1).
Regarding Claim 7, Crabtree discloses as is set forth above and Crabtree further discloses configured to receive the input light that spans a cone of angles of incidence (the PCCCR has a cone of rays incident which produce TIR; table 4.1; figures 4.5-4.7; page 87, paragraph 2- page 88, paragraph 2).
Regarding Claim 8, Crabtree discloses as is set forth above and Crabtree further discloses wherein the cone of angles of incidence allows light that enters the corner cube reflector to undergo total internal reflection (TIR) (a CCR has a cone of rays incident which produce TIR; table 4.1; figures 4.5-4.7; page 87, paragraph 2- page 88, paragraph 2).
Regarding Claim 9, Crabtree discloses as is set forth above and Crabtree further discloses wherein an angular extent of the cone is less than or equal to 10 degrees (a CCR has a cone of rays incident which produce TIR, the cone depending on sides, with a CCR having trapezoidal grating producing isotropic surfaces which have an apparent angular cone less than 10 degrees based on table 4.1; table 4.1; figures 4.5-4.7; page 87, paragraph 2- page 88, paragraph 2).
Regarding Claim 10, Crabtree discloses as is set forth above and Crabtree further discloses wherein the birefringent material includes one of a liquid crystal polymer, a metamaterial, a birefringent crystal, uniaxial or biaxial material, or a form birefringent coating (a rotator, which can be an anisotropic SWG, a metamaterial; page 27, paragraph 3- page 28, paragraph 3; page 102, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1).
Regarding Claim 11, Crabtree discloses as is set forth above and Crabtree further discloses wherein the one or more layers comprises coatings on a transparent substrate or on a facet of the corner cube reflector (a TIR CCR may have different isotropic coatings on each surface; page 98, paragraph 3).
Regarding Claim 12, Crabtree discloses as is set forth above and Crabtree further discloses wherein the first polarization is linear (a rotator is applied to each sub aperture, each wedge rotates light a different angle, the CCR having isotropic surfaces having come in with a MLPC; table 4.1; figures 4.5-4.7; page 87, paragraph 2- page 88, paragraph 2; page 102, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1), and the output polarization is one of a circular, elliptical or a different linear polarization than the first polarization (a rotator is applied to each sub aperture, each wedge rotates light a different angle, the light having come in with a MLPC, and the output matrix being adjustable by the use of different isotropic surfaces to produce a quarter wave plate effect; table 4.1; figures 4.5-4.7; page 87, paragraph 2- page 88, paragraph 2; page 99, paragraph 4-page 101; page 102, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1).
Regarding Claim 13, Crabtree discloses as is set forth above and Crabtree further discloses wherein the compensator is configured to compensate polarization aberrations due to both reflections of light and change of direction of propagation of light (SWG may be used as compensators for polarization aberrations, while the CCR reflects and changes the propagation direction; page 102, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1; page 104, paragraph 1).
Regarding Claim 14, Crabtree discloses as is set forth above and Crabtree further discloses configured to operate in one of the following spectral ranges of the input light: infrared, visible, ultraviolet, terahertz, radio wave or microwave (a PCCR at 633 nm or 650 nm; page 86, paragraph 2- page 87, paragraph 1).
Regarding Claim 15, Crabtree discloses as is set forth above and Crabtree further discloses wherein the corner cube reflector is solid prism corner cube reflector (a CCR may be hollow or solid; page 94, paragraph 1- page 95, paragraph 1; page 112, paragraph 3).
Regarding Claim 16, Crabtree discloses as is set forth above and Crabtree further discloses wherein the corner cube reflector is a hollow corner cube reflector with internal surfaces that include a reflective coating (a CCR may be hollow or solid, and include metal coatings forming internal reflective surfaces; page 94, paragraph 1- page 95, paragraph 1; page 112, paragraph 3).
Claims 5-6, 18-19, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CRABTREE, Karlton. ("Polarization Conversion Cube Corner Retro-Reflector," A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the College of Optical Sciences, the University of Arizona, 2010, 46 pages., of record, hereinafter Crabtree), view of Pau et al. (US 2016/0170110, of record, hereinafter Arizona).
Regarding Claim 5, Crabtree discloses as is set forth above, but Crabtree fails to disclose wherein the number of layers in each subaperture is two.
However, Arizona discloses wherein the number of layers in each subaperture is two (a device broadband polarization testor has two layers of elements 204 and 202; figures 2A and 2B; paragraph [0012, 0058]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the retroflector system of Crabtree to provide wherein the number of layers in each subaperture is two, as taught by Arizona, in order to provide the advantage of a polarizing device able to sample light over a large number of angles and a large bandwidth (Arizona, Paragraph [0012]).
Regarding Claim 6, Crabtree discloses as is set forth above, but Crabtree fails to disclose wherein all sub-apertures have the same thickness.
However, Arizona discloses wherein all sub-apertures have the same thickness (a polarizer may provide different polarizations to each of the pixel sensors using the same stack of polarizers of the same thickness; figures 11-12; paragraph [0012, 0095-0096]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the retroflector system of Crabtree to provide wherein all sub-apertures have the same thickness, as taught by Arizona, in order to provide the advantage of an integrated polarizing device able to sample light over a large number of angles and a large bandwidth (Arizona, Paragraph [0012]).
Regarding Claim 18, Crabtree discloses as is set forth above, but Crabtree fails to disclose wherein all sections of the polarization compensator have the same fast axis orientation. However, Arizona discloses wherein all sections of the polarization compensator have the same fast axis orientation (a tunable polarizer having multiple different axis may be used with a LC panel to provide selective polarization, eg provide a tunable polarization source able to select the polarization provided; figures 12, 17 paragraph [0012, 0095, 0116]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the retroflector system of Crabtree to provide wherein all sections of the polarization compensator have the same fast axis orientation, as taught by Arizona, in order to provide the advantage of an integrated polarizing device able to sample light over a large number of angles and a large bandwidth (Arizona, Paragraph [0012]).
Regarding Claim 19, Crabtree discloses as is set forth above, but Crabtree fails to disclose wherein the polarization compensator has the same thickness across all sections thereof. However, Arizona discloses wherein the polarization compensator has the same thickness across all sections thereof (a polarizer may provide different polarizations to each of the pixel sensors using the same stack of polarizers of the same thickness; figures 11-12; paragraph [0012, 0095-0096]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the retroflector system of Crabtree to provide wherein the polarization compensator has the same thickness across all sections thereof, as taught by Arizona, in order to provide the advantage of an integrated polarizing device able to sample light over a large number of angles and a large bandwidth (Arizona, Paragraph [0012]).
Regarding Claim 22, Crabtree discloses as is set forth above, and Crabtree further discloses the retroflector system of claim 17, configured to operate within a 60-degree angular cone of acceptance (the PCCCR has a cone of rays incident which produce TIR, the cone depending on the SWG, with a trapezoidal grating having an apparent angular cone less than 10 degrees based on table 4.1; table 4.1; figures 4.5-4.7; page 87, paragraph 2- page 88, paragraph 2).
But Crabtree fails to disclose configured to operate with a 400 nm spectral bandwidth.
However, Arizona discloses a 400 nm spectral bandwidth (a broadband waveplate can operate between 400-800 nm; figures 17; paragraphs [0009, 0116]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the retroflector system of Crabtree to provide a 400 nm spectral bandwidth, as taught by Arizona, in order to provide the advantage of an integrated polarizing device able to sample light over a large number of angles and a large bandwidth (Arizona, Paragraph [0012]).
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 17, 20-21, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CRABTREE, Karlton. ("Polarization Conversion Cube Corner Retro-Reflector," A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the College of Optical Sciences, the University of Arizona, 2010, 46 pages., of record, hereinafter Crabtree).
Regarding Claim 17, Crabtree discloses a retroflector system with polarization compensation (a CCR with wedge shaped polarization rotators page 101, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1), comprising: a hollow corner cube reflector configured to receive input light and produce output light in six unique raypaths (a CCR can be hollow or solid, and a CCR has six different paths whichtlight can transmit through; figure 3.1; page 70, paragraph 3- page 73- paragraph 2; page 94, paragraph 1- page 95, paragraph 1; page 102, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1; page 112, paragraph 2), each raypath consisting of three reflections of the input light from a corresponding combination of corner cube reflector reflective surfaces before exiting the corner cube reflector (a CCR has six different paths which light can transmit through based on the order of the reflections off the three surfaces; figure 3.1; page 70, paragraph 3- page 73- paragraph 2; page 102, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1), wherein:
each of the reflective surfaces includes a coating that is configured to compensate for at least a portion of polarization aberrations due to linear retardance generated by reflection of light from the reflective surface of the hollow corner cube reflector (a CCR may include different isotropic coatings on each surface to provide for retardance aligned with the S and P planes, with the retarding coating being able to adjust the orientation and handedness of the reflected light and altering the corresponding mueller matrices with a retardance of Pi, Pi/2, Pi providing the same matrix for each path; figures 4.16-4.17; page 99, paragraph 4-page 101, paragraph 1);
a polarization compensator positioned in front of the hollow corner cube reflector (wedge shaped rotators placed at each of the six different sub apertures to a CCR; page 102, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1), the polarization compensator to allow light associated with each unique raypath to enter one of sections of the polarization compensator before entering the corner cube reflector and to exit another section of the polarization compensator after exiting the hollow corner cube reflector (wedge shaped rotators placed at each of the six different sub apertures to a CCR, each aperture corresponding to one of the sixth paths; page 102, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1), wherein:
the polarization compensator comprises one or more layers comprising birefringent material (a rotator, which can be an anisotropic SWG, is applied to each sub aperture; page 27, paragraph 3- page 28, paragraph 3; page 102, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1),
each section of the polarization compensator is configured to impart an amount of polarization compensation to the light to compensate for at least a portion of polarization aberrations due to a change of direction of light upon reflection (a rotator, which can be an anisotropic SWG, is applied to each sub aperture, and as only two mueller matrices are produced, each wedge rotates light a different angle and thus has a different fast axis; page 27, paragraph 3- page 28, paragraph 3; page 102, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1), and
the combination of polarization compensations by the coating and the polarization compensator allows exitant light associated with all unique raypaths to have the same output polarization, regardless of which section of the polarization compensator the light exits from, when the input light that enters the polarization compensator has a first polarization (wedge shaped rotators placed at each of the six different sub apertures to a CCR, each aperture corresponding to one of the sixth paths reduces the number of Mueller matrices for the CCR to 2, allowing output light to have the same polarization from each of the sub apertures, and may further use isotropic retarder surfaces to provide the same matrix output for all 6 paths, resulting in the same polarization regardless of the input polarization; figures 4.16-4.17; page 99, paragraph 4-page 101; paragraph 1; page 102, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1).
Regarding Claim 20, Crabtree discloses as is set forth above and Crabtree further discloses configured to receive the input light that spans a cone of angles of incidence (the PCCCR has a cone of rays incident which produce TIR; table 4.1; figures 4.5-4.7; page 87, paragraph 2- page 88, paragraph 2).
Regarding Claim 21, Crabtree discloses as is set forth above and Crabtree further discloses wherein the reflective surfaces include a metal layer (a hollow core CCR may include reflective metal coatings; page 94, paragraph 1- page 95, paragraph 1; page 102, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1; page 104, paragraph 1; page 112, paragraph 3), and the coating on each reflective surface is configured to minimize or reduce absorption of light that is incident on the reflective surface (a hollow core CCR may include reflective metal coatings but suffer compared to dielectric coatings, while an enhanced reflectivity coating is known; page 67, paragraphs 4-5; page 94, paragraph page 95, paragraph 1).
Regarding Claim 23, Crabtree discloses as is set forth above and Crabtree further discloses wherein the polarization compensator is a uniform wave plate (a quarter wave-plate may be used to convert linear polarized light into circular polarized light; figure 4.17; page 19, paragraph 2; page 100, paragraph 2- page 103, paragraph 1).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hill (US 7,009,711), Hill (US 2003/0223080), Hill (US 2006/0001888), Hoyt et al. (US 2003/0026583), and Kalibjian (US 7,254,288) are cited to show similar retroreflector systems.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM R ALEXANDER whose telephone number is (571)270-7656. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 AM- 4:00 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, Pinping Sun can be reached on (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.
/WILLIAM R ALEXANDER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights