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
The Information Disclosure Statements filed on 12/20/2024, 5/7/2026, 6/16/2026, 6/18/2026 have been considered.
Preliminary Amendment
The preliminary Amendment filed on 12/20/2024 has been considered. In the preliminary Amendment, Applicant amended claims 1 and 3-25.
DETAILED ACTION
The instant application having Application No. 18/877,598 filed on 12/20/2024 is presented for examination by the Examiner.
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the Applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference signs mentioned in the description: “104”, “424’” and XYZ axes.
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. 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
Claims 15 and 16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 15 recites “claim 1, wherein optical device…” in line 2. The above should be
replaced by “claim 1, wherein the optical device…”, for better clarity.
Claim 16 recites “wherein the optical devices…” in line 2. The above should be
replaced by “wherein the optical device forms…”, for better clarity.
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.
Claims 1-8, 10, 12-13, 15-23, 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Griffin et al. (US 2018/0143427, hereinafter, “Griffin’) in view of McGuire, Jr. (US 2007/0177275, hereinafter, “McGuire, Jr.”).
Regarding claim 1, Griffin discloses an optical device (Fig. 8c) comprising:
a light source 8 configured to generate a light (Fig. 1, 8c, [0043]);
a lens assembly 18, 19, 20 off-axis from the light source 8 and configured to receive the light, wherein the lens assembly includes a plurality of lenses (Fig. 8c, [0104]); and
a combiner 1 configured to receive the light from the lens assembly via one or more optical elements 21 and direct the light to form a virtual image at an exit pupil at a position of an eye of a user (Fig. 8c, [0045], [0048], [0096]).
Griffin does not disclose wherein the lens assembly has been truncated by removal of material from one or more of the lenses where an expected light beam is not predicted to pass.
McGuire, Jr. discloses a head mounted display (Abstract). In one embodiment, the display includes a light source 402, a lens assembly 406, a combiner 408 that projects the image light to pupil 412 (Fig. 51, [0190]). McGuire, Jr. also discloses that some of the edges of some of the lenses, e.g., B3, B4, B6, B7 may be cut off, that is, the lens assembly is truncated by removal of material from one or more of the lenses where an expected light beam is not predicted to pass, i.e., the edges ([0191] in McGuire, Jr.).
Both Griffin and McGuire, Jr. disclose head mounted devices.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the present application to modify Griffin so that some of the lenses 18, 19, 20 of Griffin are truncated by removal of material, as taught by McGuire, Jr., for reducing the weight of the optical system ([0191] in McGuire, Jr.).
Regarding claim 2, Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. discloses the optical device according to claim 1, wherein the lens assembly is a relay lens (Fig. 8c, [0093] in Griffin).
Regarding claim 3, Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. discloses the optical device according to claim 1, wherein the lens assembly comprises three or more lenses (Fig. 8c in Griffin).
Regarding claim 4, Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. discloses the optical device according to claim 1, wherein the lens assembly is made from a plastics material or glass ([0104] in Griffin).
Regarding claim 5, Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. discloses the optical device according to claim 1, wherein the lens assembly comprises a combination of singlet lenses and doublet lenses (Fig. 8c in Griffin).
Regarding claim 6, Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. discloses the optical device according to claim 1, wherein at least one of the lenses has a plano rear surface (Fig. 8c, [0104] in Griffin).
Regarding claim 7, Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. discloses the optical device according to claim 1, wherein at least two of the lenses are arranged as a cemented optical doublet (Fig. 50, [0188] in McGuire, Jr).
Regarding claim 8, Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. discloses the optical device according to claim 1, wherein the lenses are arranged co-axially (Fig. 8c in Griffin).
Regarding claim 10, Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. discloses the optical device according to claim 1, wherein each of the lenses has a different optical prescription. ([0058, [0059] in Griffin).
Regarding claim 12, Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. discloses the optical device according to claim 1, wherein the one or more optical elements comprise:
a first optical device (left side of member 17 in Griffin), the first optical device being an at least partially mirrored device (Fig. 8c, [0052], [0053] in Griffin); and
a second optical device (right side of member 17 in Griffin) positioned substantially orthogonal relative to the at least partially mirrored device, and located intermediate the lens assembly and the at least partially mirrored device, the second optical device configured to receive the light from the lens assembly and transmit the light to the at least partially mirrored device (Fig. 8c in Griffin).
Regarding claim 13, Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. discloses the optical device according to claim 1, wherein the light source is an emissive source including a plurality of self-emissive pixels ([0075] in Griffin).
Regarding claim 15, Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. discloses the optical device according to claim 1, wherein the optical device is arranged to fold a light path about a first axis and a second axis (Fig. 8c in Griffin).
Regarding claim 16, Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. discloses the optical device according to claim 1, wherein the optical device forms part of a wearable device, and wherein at least a part of the optical device is folded upward or to the side of a brow of a user ([0001]-[0002] in Griffin).
Regarding claim 17, Griffin discloses an optical device (Fig. 8c, [0108]) comprising:
a light source 8 configured to generate a light (Fig. 1, 8c, [0043]);
a lens assembly 18, 19, 20 off-axis from the light source 8 and configured to receive the light, wherein the lens assembly includes a plurality of lenses ([0104]); and
a combiner 1, configured to receive the light from the lens assembly via one or more optical elements 21 and direct the light to form a virtual image at an exit pupil at a position of an eye of a user, wherein the combiner comprises a first inner optical surface form and a second outer optical surface form, wherein the first inner optical surface form and the second inner optical surface form are different to minimize deviations in an outside view from the combiner (Fig. 2, 8c, [0045], [0048], [0096]. The reflecting surface 1 is contained within an embedding component 13, which means that there are two optical surfaces with different surface form);
wherein the one or more optical elements include
a first optical device (left side of member 17), the first optical device being an at least partially mirrored device (Fig. 8c, [0052], [0053]),
and a second optical device (right side of member 17) positioned substantially orthogonal relative to the at least partially mirrored device, and located intermediate the lens assembly and the at least partially mirrored device, the second optical device configured to receive the light from the lens assembly and transmit the light to the at least partially mirrored device (Fig. 8c).
Griffin does not disclose wherein the lens assembly has been truncated by removal of material from one or more of the lenses where an expected light beam is not predicted to pass.
McGuire, Jr. discloses a head mounted display (Abstract). In one embodiment, the display includes a light source 402, a lens assembly 406, a combiner 408 that projects the image light to pupil 412 (Fig. 51, [0190]). McGuire, Jr. also discloses that some of the edges of some of the lenses, e.g., B3, B4, B6, B7 may be cut off, that is, the lens assembly is truncated by removal of material from one or more of the lenses where an expected light beam is not predicted to pass, i.e., the edges ([0191] in McGuire, Jr.).
Both Griffin and McGuire, Jr. disclose head mounted devices.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the present application to modify Griffin so that some of the lenses 18, 19, 20 of Griffin are truncated by removal of material, as taught by McGuire, Jr., for reducing the weight of the optical system ([0191] in McGuire, Jr.).
Regarding claim 18, Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. discloses a binocular optical device comprising two optical devices according to claim 1 ([0086] in Griffin).
Regarding claim 19, Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. discloses a wearable device comprising two optical devices according to claim 1 ([0086] in Griffin).
Regarding claim 20, Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. discloses a system comprising:
a plurality of processors configured to send and receive data and to process data;
one or more sensors configured to collect at least some of the data from an environment and send the data to the processors; and one or more wearable devices according to claim 19 ([0086] in Griffin. Smart glasses collect data from the environment via sensors embedded therein and send the data to processors which process the data to display a corresponding virtual image).
Regarding claim 21, Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. discloses the method according to claim 22, wherein in operation, the optical device is configured to:
emit, via a light source 8, a light to the lens assembly 18, 19, 20 ([0043], [0104] in Griffin), wherein one or more of the lenses is truncated where an expected light beam is not predicted to pass ([0191] in McGuire, Jr.);
direct, via one or more optical elements 21, the light towards a combiner 1 (Fig. 8c in Griffin); and
direct, via the combiner, the light to form a virtual image at an exit pupil of the optical device (Fig. 8c, [0045], [0048], [0096].in Griffin);
wherein the combiner comprises a first inner optical surface form and a second outer optical surface form, and wherein the first inner optical surface form and the second inner optical surface form are different to minimize deviations in an outside view from the combiner (Fig. 2, 8c, [0045], [0048], [0096] in Griffin. The reflecting surface 1 is contained within an embedding component 13, which means that there are two optical surfaces with different surface form).
Regarding claim 22, Griffin discloses a method for making an optical device through which light can be directed (Fig. 8c), the method comprising:
designing the optical device, the optical device including a lens assembly that includes a plurality of lenses 18, 19, 20 ([0104]);
determining a light path through the design ([0108]).
Griffin does not disclose identifying areas of the lens assembly through which no light is predicted to pass; and updating the design to truncate one of more of the lenses based on where the light is predicted to pass.
McGuire, Jr. discloses a head mounted display (Abstract). In one embodiment, the display includes a light source 402, a lens assembly 406, a combiner 408 that projects the image light to pupil 412 (Fig. 51, [0190]). McGuire, Jr. also discloses that some of the edges of some of the lenses, e.g., B3, B4, B6, B7 may be cut off, that is, the lens assembly is truncated by removal of material from one or more of the lenses where an expected light beam is not predicted to pass, i.e., the edges ([0191] in McGuire, Jr.).
Both Griffin and McGuire, Jr. disclose head mounted devices.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the present application to modify/update the design of Griffin so that some of the lenses 18, 19, 20 of Griffin are truncated by removal of material, as taught by McGuire, Jr., for reducing the weight of the optical system ([0191] in McGuire, Jr.).
Regarding claim 23, Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. discloses the method according to claim 22, further comprising removing lens material from the lens assembly in regions where no light is projected to pass, i.e., the edges ([0191] in McGuire, Jr.).
Regarding claim 25, Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. discloses the method according to claim 22, further comprising cementing one or more of the plurality of lenses together (Fig. 50, [0188] in McGuire, Jr).
Claims 9, 11, 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Griffin, McGuire, Jr., and Thomas (US 5,078,773, hereinafter, “Thomas”).
Regarding claim 9, Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. discloses the optical device according to claim 1.
Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. does not disclose wherein each of the lenses includes an absorbent edge.
Thomas discloses optical lenses (Abstract). In one embodiment, the lenses may include blackened edges 26 (Fig. 3, col. 3, lines 32-34).
Both Griffin and Thomas disclose optical systems comprising lenses.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the present application to modify Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. so that the lenses 18, 19, 20 of Griffin include an absorbent, i.e., a blackened edge, as taught by Thomas, for reducing stray light of the optical system (col. 3, lines 61-67 of Thomas).
Regarding claim 11, Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. discloses the optical device according to claim 10.
Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. does not disclose wherein each of the lenses includes an absorbent edge.
Thomas discloses optical lenses (Abstract). In one embodiment, the lenses may include blackened edges 26 (Fig. 3, col. 3, lines 32-34).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the present application to modify Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. so that the lenses 18, 19, 20 of Griffin include an absorbent, i.e., a blackened edge, as taught by Thomas, for reducing stray light of the optical system (col. 3, lines 61-67 of Thomas).
Regarding claim 24, Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. discloses the method according to claim 22.
Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. does not disclose further comprising applying absorbent edges to each of the plurality of lenses.
Thomas discloses optical lenses (Abstract). In one embodiment, the lenses may include blackened edges 26 (Fig. 3, col. 3, lines 32-34).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the present application to modify Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. so that to further apply an absorbent, i.e., a blackened edge, to the lenses 18, 19, 20 of Griffin, as taught by Thomas, for reducing stray light of the optical system (col. 3, lines 61-67 of Thomas).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Griffin, McGuire, Jr., and Ouderkirk et al. (US 2017/0357100, hereinafter, “Ouderkirk”).
Regarding claim 14, Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. discloses the optical device according to claim 1.
Griffin/McGuire, Jr. does not disclose wherein each pixel is adapted for illumination and emission over a cone angle which is greater than +/- 25 deg.
Ouderkirk discloses a display system, used, for example, in a head mounted display. In one embodiment, the display system comprises a pixelated display 132 (Fig. 1A, [0041]). The light emitted by each pixel 241b falls in a bundle of light 239b that has a Lambertian distribution (Fig. 2B, [0056]).
Both Griffin and Ouderkirk disclose optical systems comprising lenses and displays.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the present application to modify Griffin/ McGuire, Jr. so that each pixel emits light in the Lambertian distribution, as taught by Ouderkirk, for providing a uniform brightness across viewing angles.
Griffin/McGuire, Jr./Ouderkirk does not disclose the spatial distribution of the light emitted by a pixel being greater than +/- 25 deg.
The parameter of the cone angle of light emitted by a pixel is a result-effective variable, i.e., it is recognized to achieve a recognized result, for example, affecting the visibility of the displayed image.
Griffin/McGuire, Jr./Ouderkirk discloses the claimed invention except for the cone angle being greater then +/- 25 deg.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the present application to modify Griffin/McGuire, Jr./Ouderkirk so that the cone angle lies within the claimed range, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A. 1955).
In the current instance, the cone angle is an art recognized result- effective variable in that it helps realize a desired visibility feature of the display system.
Thus, one would have been motivated to optimize the cone angle because it is an art-recognized result-effective variable and it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP §2144.05(II)(B) “after KSR, the presence of a known result-effective variable would be one, but not the only, motivation for a personal of ordinary skill in the art to experiment to reach another workable product or process”.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Von Spiegel (US 2023/0393389) discloses a head up display system comprising a first 21 and a second 22 mirror receiving light from the display 1 and transmitting to the combiner 3 (Fig. 1).
Zhou et al. (US 2023/0266588) discloses a head up display system comprising a first M1 and a second M2 mirror receiving light from the display and transmitting to the combiner (Fig. 1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEONIDAS BOUTSIKARIS whose telephone number is (703)756-4529. The Examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fr. 9.00-5.00.
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, Stephone Allen, can be reached on 571-272-2434. 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.
/L.B./
Patent Examiner, AU 2872
/STEPHONE B ALLEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights