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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 10-14, and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hu et al. (U.S. 2021/0044748).
Regarding claim 1, Hu discloses an optical lens (100, Fig. 1; page 2, para [0019]) used for light in a predetermined target wavelength region (Fig. 1; page 3, para [0054]), comprising:
a substrate (110, Fig. 1; page 3, para [0053]); and
a plurality of microstructures (120, Fig. 1; page 3, para [0053]; page 4, para [0055]) arranged on a surface (surface 114 of 110, Fig. 1; page 3, para [0053]) at intervals shorter than a shortest wavelength in the target wavelength region (Fig. 1; page 4, para [0055]), wherein
a structure and/or the interval of each of the plurality of microstructures varies (such as varying structure of the plurality of microstructures, Figs. 1 and 2C; page 4, para [0055]; page 5, para [0067]) depending on a position on the surface (114, Fig. 1) and is determined in such way as to reduce a variation in phase and transmittance depending on an incident angle of incident light at each position in a region where the plurality of microstructures is provided (reduction of variation in phase and transmittance of the plurality of microstructures with respect to incident angle, Fig. 2D; page 5, para [0068]).
Regarding claim 2, Hu discloses an optical lens with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein an amount of variation in phase and transmittance in a case where the incident light is incident on the plurality of microstructures (120, Fig. 1) indicates a response being different depending on the incident angle (demonstrated by the reduction of variation in phase and transmittance by the plurality of microstructures depending on the incident angle, Fig. 2D; page 5, para [0068]).
Regarding claim 3, Hu discloses an optical lens with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the structure and/or the interval (such as the varying structure of the plurality of microstructures 120, Figs. 1 and 2C; page 4, para [0055]; page 5, para [0067]) of each of the plurality of microstructures (120, Fig. 1) is configured. Examiner notes that the recitation of “is determined based on design data defining a relation between at least one parameter defining the structure and/or the interval, and the phase and the transmittance, the design data being created for each of a plurality of incident angles” is a product-by-process limitation; and therefore, patentable weight is being given to the product itself and not the method of production since the patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production if the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art. In the instant case, the structure and/or the interval of each of the plurality of microstructures are the same as or obvious from the product of the prior art whether or not they are "determined based on design data defining a relation between at least one parameter defining the structure and/or the interval, and the phase and the transmittance, the design data being created for each of a plurality of incident angles” because the product of the microstructures (120, Fig. 1) of Hu has a structure and/or interval configuration (120, Figs. 1 and 2C; page 4, para [0055]; page 5, para [0067]). Thus, the limitation “is determined based on design data defining a relation between at least one parameter defining the structure and/or the interval, and the phase and the transmittance, the design data being created for each of a plurality of incident angles” is not being given patentable weight since the limitation describes the process of designing the structure and/or the interval of each of the plurality of microstructures and not the product of the structure and/or the interval configuration of the plurality of microstructures themselves.
Regarding claim 4, Hu discloses an optical lens with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the structure and/or the interval of each of the plurality of microstructures (120, Fig. 1) is configured (120, Figs. 1 and 2C; page 4, para [0055]; page 5, para [0067]). Examiner notes that the recitation of “the design data are created in advance for each of a plurality of areas included in the region, each of the plurality of areas corresponds to one of the plurality of incident angles, and the structure and/or the interval of each of the plurality of microstructures is determined based on the design data corresponding to one of the plurality of areas that the position of the microstructure belongs to” is a product-by-process limitation; and therefore, patentable weight is being given to the product itself and not the method of production since the patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production if the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art. In the instant case, the structure and/or the interval of each of the plurality of microstructures are the same as or obvious from the product of the prior art whether or not "the design data are created in advance for each of a plurality of areas included in the region, each of the plurality of areas corresponds to one of the plurality of incident angles, and the structure and/or the interval of each of the plurality of microstructures is determined based on the design data corresponding to one of the plurality of areas that the position of the microstructure belongs to” because the product of the microstructures (120, Fig. 1) of Hu has a structure and/or interval configuration (120, Figs. 1 and 2C; page 4, para [0055]; page 5, para [0067]). Thus, the limitation “the design data are created in advance for each of a plurality of areas included in the region, each of the plurality of areas corresponds to one of the plurality of incident angles, and the structure and/or the interval of each of the plurality of microstructures is determined based on the design data corresponding to one of the plurality of areas that the position of the microstructure belongs to” is not being given patentable weight since the limitation describes the process of designing the structure and/or the interval of each of the plurality of microstructures and not the product of the structure and/or the interval configuration of the plurality of microstructures themselves.
Regarding claim 10, Hu discloses an optical lens with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the substrate (110, Fig. 1) and each of the plurality of microstructures (120, Fig. 1) have transparency with respect to light in the target wavelength region (page 3, para [0054]; page 4, para [0056]).
Regarding claim 11, Hu discloses an optical lens with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein a difference between a refractive index of the substrate (110, Fig. 1) and a refractive index of each of the plurality of microstructures (120, Fig. 1) is less than or equal to 10% of a refractive index being smallest of the refractive index of the substrate and the refractive index of each of the plurality of microstructures (such as a difference of less than 10% since the substrate 110 and the plurality of microstructures 120 are formed from the same material, Fig. 1; page 4, para [0056]).
Regarding claim 12, Hu discloses an optical lens with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the substrate (110, Fig. 1) and each of the plurality of microstructures (120, Fig. 1) are formed from an identical material (such as the same transparent material; page 4, para [0056]).
Regarding claim 13, Hu discloses an optical lens with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the target wavelength region includes at least a portion of a wavelength region of infrared rays greater than or equal to 2.5 um and less than or equal to 25 um (such as a target wavelength of 5.2 um; page 4, para [0062]).
Regarding claim 14, Hu discloses an optical lens with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the substrate (110, Fig. 1) and each of the plurality of microstructures (120, Fig. 1) is formed from a material containing, as a major ingredient, at least fluoride compounds such as calcium fluoride (page 3, para [005]).
Regarding claim 16, Hu discloses an optical system (1200, Fig. 12; page 9, para [0109]) comprising:
the optical lens (such as 1214, Fig. 12; page 9, para [0109]) according to claim 1 (100, Fig. 1; page 3, para [0053]); and
an aperture diaphragm (implied aperture allowing incident light from 1212 to 1214, Fig. 12; page 9, para [0109]), wherein
the incident light passes through the aperture diaphragm and is incident on the optical lens (incident light passes from 1212 through the aperture diaphragm to the optical lens 1214, Fig. 12) while, and
the structure and/or interval of the plurality of microstructures varies in accordance with a distance from a point of intersection of a center axis of the aperture diaphragm (such as varying structure of the plurality of microstructures, Figs. 1 and 2C; page 4, para [0055]; page 5, para [0067]) with the surface of the substrate (114, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 17, Hu discloses an optical system with all the limitations of claim 16 above and further discloses wherein a shape of the aperture diaphragm is polygon (such as a hexagon; page 4, para [0055]).
Regarding claim 18, Hu discloses an imaging device (such as imaging device comprising AR/VR 1200, Fig. 12; page 8, para [0097]; page 9, para [0109) comprising:
the optical system (1200, Fig. 12; page 9, para [0109]) according to claim 16; and
an image sensor (1100, Fig. 11; page 9, para [0107]) that obtains an image of light focused with the optical lens (such as 1214, Fig. 12; page 9, para [0107, 0109]).
Regarding claim 19, Hu discloses an optical system (such as an augmented/merged reality optical system, Fig. 11; page 9, para [0107]) comprising:
the optical lens (such as 1112 and 1122, Fig. 11; page 8, para [0099]) according to claim 1 (100, Fig. 1; page 3, para [0053]); and
a scanning optical system (such as a scanning optical system comprising 1100, Fig. 11; page 8, para [0099]), wherein
the incident light passes through the scanning optical system and is incident on the optical lens (such as incident light from 1114 to be incident on the optical lens 1112, Fig. 11; pages 8-9, para [0100-0102]), and
the structure and/or interval of the plurality of microstructures varies in accordance with a distance from a point of intersection of an optical axis of the scanning optical system (such as varying structure of the plurality of microstructures, Figs. 1, 2C, 11; page 4, para [0055]; page 5, para [0067]) with the surface of the substrate (114, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 20, Hu discloses a method of manufacturing an optical lens (100, Fig. 1; page 2, para [0019]) used for light in a predetermined target wavelength region (Fig. 1; page 3, para [0054]), the optical lens being provided with a plurality of microstructures (120, Fig. 1; page 3, para [0053]; page 4, para [0055]) arranged at intervals shorter than a shortest wavelength in the target wavelength region (Fig. 1; page 4, para [0055]), the method comprising:
determining a structure and/or the interval of each of the plurality of microstructures varies (such as varying structure of the plurality of microstructures, Figs. 1 and 2C; page 4, para [0055]; page 5, para [0067]) in such way as to reduce a variation in phase and transmittance depending on an incident angle of incident light at each position in a region where the plurality of microstructures is provided (reduction of variation in phase and transmittance of the plurality of microstructures with respect to incident angle, Fig. 2D; page 5, para [0068]); and
forming the plurality of microstructures (120, Fig. 1) on a surface (surface 114 of 110, Fig. 1; page 3, para [0053]) of a substrate (110, Fig. 1; page 3, para [0053]) in such a way as to be arranged at the determined intervals (plurality of microstructures 120 arranged at determined intervals (Fig. 1; page 4, para [0055]).
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.
Claim(s) 5-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu et al. (U.S. 2021/0044748) in view of Yu et al. (U.S. 2020/0096672).
Regarding claim 5, Hu discloses an optical lens with all the limitations of claim 1 above but does not expressly disclose wherein
each of the plurality of microstructures (120, Fig. 1) has an elliptic cylindrical structure and is a projecting body or a recessed body, and
at least one of a height, a major axis, or a minor axis of the elliptic cylindrical structure is determined in such a way as to compensate for the variation in phase and transmittance depending on the incident angle of the incident light at each position in the region. However, Yu discloses an optical lens comprising a plurality of microstructures (page 1, para [0007]) that can have varying shapes such as an elliptic cylindrical structure that is a projecting body (401, Fig. 4A; page 4, para [0069]) and at least one of a height, a major axis, or a minor axis of the elliptic cylindrical structure is determined in such a way as to compensate for the variation in phase and transmittance depending on the incident angle of the incident light at each position in the region (page 4, para [0069]).
Therefore, before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the plurality of microstructures (Hu: 120, Fig. 1) of Hu to have the elliptic cylindrical structure that is a projecting body (Yu: 401, Fig. 4A; page 4, para [0069]) of Yu such that at least one of a height, a major axis, or a minor axis of the elliptic cylindrical structure is determined in such a way in order to obtain the benefits of compensating for the variation in phase and transmittance depending on the incident angle of the incident light at each position in the region as taught by Hu (page 4, para [0055]; page 5, para [0067-0068]) and Yu (page 4, para [0069]).
Regarding claim 6, Hu discloses an optical lens with all the limitations of claim 1 above but does not expressly disclose wherein
each of the plurality of microstructures (120, Fig. 1) has an elliptic cylindrical structure and is a projecting body or a recessed body,
the plurality of microstructures is periodically arranged, and
a pitch of the plurality of microstructures is determined in such a way as to compensate for the variation in phase and transmittance depending on the incident angle of the incident light at each position in the region. However, Yu discloses an optical lens comprising a plurality of microstructures (page 1, para [0007]) that can have varying shapes such as an elliptic cylindrical structure that is a projecting body (401, Fig. 4A; page 4, para [0069]) and the plurality of microstructures is periodically arranged, and a pitch of the plurality of microstructures is determined in such a way as to compensate for the variation in phase and transmittance depending on the incident angle of the incident light at each position in the region (Figs. 16-28; page 6, para [0091]).
Therefore, before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the plurality of microstructures (Hu: 120, Fig. 1) of Hu to have the elliptic cylindrical structure that is a projecting body (Yu: 401, Fig. 4A; page 4, para [0069]) of Yu such that the plurality of microstructures is periodically arranged, and a pitch of the plurality of microstructures is determined in such a way in order to obtain the benefits of compensating for the variation in phase and transmittance depending on the incident angle of the incident light at each position in the region as taught by Hu (page 4, para [0055]; page 5, para [0067-0068]) and Yu (Yu: Figs. 16-28; page 6, para [0091]).
Regarding claim 7, Hu discloses an optical lens with all the limitations of claim 1 above but does not expressly disclose wherein
each of the plurality of microstructures (120, Fig. 1) has a polygonal prismatic structure and is a projecting body or a recessed body, and
a height and/or length of at least one of the sides of the polygonal prismatic structure is determined in such a way as to compensate for the variation in phase and transmittance depending on the incident angle of the incident light at each position in the region. However, Yu discloses an optical lens comprising a plurality of microstructures (page 1, para [0007]) that can have varying shapes such as a polygonal prismatic structure that is a projecting body (403, Fig. 4A; page 4, para [0069]) and a height and/or length of at least one of sides of the polygonal prismatic structure is determined in such a way as to compensate for the variation in phase and transmittance depending on the incident angle of the incident light at each position in the region (page 4, para [0069]).
Therefore, before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the plurality of microstructures (Hu: 120, Fig. 1) of Hu to have the polygonal prismatic structure that is a projecting body (Yu: 403, Fig. 4A; page 4, para [0069]) of Yu such that a length and/or height of at least one of sides of the polygonal prismatic structure is determined in such a way in order to obtain the benefits of compensating for the variation in phase and transmittance depending on the incident angle of the incident light at each position in the region as taught by Hu (page 4, para [0055]; page 5, para [0067-0068]) and Yu (page 4, para [0069]).
Regarding claim 8, Hu discloses an optical lens with all the limitations of claim 1 above but does not expressly disclose wherein
each of the plurality of microstructures (120, Fig. 1) has a polygonal prismatic structure and is a projecting body or a recessed body,
the plurality of microstructures is periodically arranged, and
a pitch of the plurality of microstructures is determined in such a way as to compensate for the variation in phase and transmittance depending on the incident angle of the incident light at each position in the region. However, Yu discloses an optical lens comprising a plurality of microstructures (page 1, para [0007]) that can have varying shapes such as polygonal prismatic structure that is a projecting body (403, Fig. 4A; page 4, para [0069]) and the plurality of microstructures is periodically arranged, and a pitch of the plurality of microstructures is determined in such a way as to compensate for the variation in phase and transmittance depending on the incident angle of the incident light at each position in the region (Figs. 16-28; page 6, para [0091]).
Therefore, before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the plurality of microstructures (Hu: 120, Fig. 1) of Hu to have the polygonal prismatic structure that is a projecting body (Yu: 403, Fig. 4A; page 4, para [0069]) of Yu such that the plurality of microstructures is periodically arranged, and a pitch of the plurality of microstructures is determined in such a way in order to obtain the benefits of compensating for the variation in phase and transmittance depending on the incident angle of the incident light at each position in the region as taught by Hu (page 4, para [0055]; page 5, para [0067-0068]) and Yu (Yu: Figs. 16-28; page 6, para [0091]).
Regarding claim 9, Hu discloses an optical lens with all the limitations of claim 1 above but does not expressly disclose wherein
some of the plurality of microstructures (120, Fig. 1) each have an elliptic cylindrical structure and are each a projecting body or a recessed body, and
other some of the plurality of microstructures (120, Fig. 1) each have a polygonal prismatic structure and are each a projecting body or a recessed body. However, Yu discloses an optical lens comprising a plurality of microstructures (page 1, para [0007]) that can have varying shapes such as an elliptic cylindrical structure (401, Fig. 4A; page 4, para [0069]) and a polygonal prismatic structure (403, Fig. 4A; page 4 para [0069]) that are each a projecting body in order to compensate for the variation in phase and transmittance depending on the incident angle of the incident light at each position in the region (page 4, para [0069]).
Therefore, before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the plurality of microstructures (Hu: 120, Fig. 1) of Hu to have some that are the elliptic cylindrical structure that is a projecting body (Yu: 401, Fig. 4A; page 4, para [0069]) of Yu and some that are the polygonal prismatic structure that is a projecting body (Yu: 403, Fig. 4A; page 4, para [0069]) of in order to obtain the benefits of compensating for the variation in phase and transmittance depending on the incident angle of the incident light at each position in the region as taught by Hu (page 4, para [0055]; page 5, para [0067-0068]) and Yu (page 4, para [0069]).
Examiner notes that Applicant has not disclosed that having some of the plurality of microstructures to each have the elliptic cylindrical structure and that are each a projecting body and also some that have the polygonal prismatic structure that are each a projecting body or a recessed body is for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected/significant result, or are otherwise critical. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention would have been led to configure the plurality of microstructures (Hu: 120, Fig. 1) of Hu to be a combination of some that are the elliptic cylindrical structure that is a projecting body (Yu: 401, Fig. 4A; page 4, para [0069]) of Yu and some that are the polygonal prismatic structure that is a projecting body (Yu: 403, Fig. 4A; page 4, para [0069]) of Yu through routine experimentation and optimization to compensate for the variation in phase and transmittance depending on the incident angle of the incident light at each position in the region as taught by Hu (page 4, para [0055]; page 5, para [0067-0068]) and Yu (Yu: Figs. 16-28; page 6, para [0091]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 15 is 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: the prior art as presently searched does not disclose the optical lens of claim 15 (having all the combination of features including the optical lens is formed from a material contain silicon as a major ingredient, and a crystal plane orientation of the silicon is (100), (110), or (111)).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL CHANG LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7923. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am-6pm.
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 at 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 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.
/PAUL C LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights