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) 24-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(A)(1) as being anticipated by US 20180074322 A1 (ROUSSEAU; Denis et al.)
Per claim 24, Rousseau et al. teach a see-through optical combiner for use in an optical system comprising a glass or plastic body [see paragraph 0121: “The combiner 1305 can be manufactured as a flat optic (FIG. 13) using a polymer or a glass material, and then slumped to conform to a curvature, or complex curvature. Alternately, the combiner 1305 can be cast or molded with the pin-mirrors 1330 imbedded within it. Once the combiner 1305 matches the desired shape, it can be AR coated on both the inner surface 1315 and outer surface 1320”] and a plurality of partially-transparent reflectors arranged in a spaced-apart parallel relationship along said glass or plastic body there inside to successively interact with an input light propagating in a direction through said body [730], wherein each of said partially-transparent reflectors comprises a Metasurface [see paragraph 0128] structure having a grating pattern [see figure 7] and being adapted to partially reflect a number N (N≥1) of predetermined discrete wavelengths [inherent].
Per claim 25, Rousseau teaches the see-through optical combiner according to claim 24, wherein said Metasurface structure is a multi-layer structure comprising an intermediate patterned layer having a one-dimensional or two-dimensional grating pattern, said Metasurface structure being adapted to partially reflect a number N (N≥1) of predetermined discrete wavelengths [see figure 20].
Per claim 26, Rousseau teaches the see-through optical combiner according to claim 25, wherein said one-dimensional or two-dimensional grating pattern is arbitrary and/or non-periodic [see paragraph 0133: “A further optimization to image uniformity and optical efficiency can be made by removing the constraint that the reflective elements or pin-mirrors be round or ellipsoidal “pinholes”. FIG. 22 depicts a configuration in which a pin-mirror combiner 2200 has reflective elements 2201, 2202, 2203 that are designed or fabricated to have arbitrary patterns or shapes on one or more of the sub-arrays, facets, or eyepiece layers. These variations in the pin-mirror configurations can result from a pin-mirror design or optimization process that includes a randomization of the individual pin-mirrors within a pin-mirror array or sub-arrays relative to pin-mirror positioning or pitch, size, or shape.”]
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) 1-8, 14, 17-20, and 31-47 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20180074322 A1 (ROUSSEAU; Denis et al.) in view of US 20230044063 A1 (Peng; Ziqi et al.)
PNG
media_image1.png
376
362
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
496
454
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
562
436
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
492
406
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
622
398
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
632
386
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
634
466
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Per claims 1, 36, and 38, Rousseau teaches an optical system for use in augmented reality glasses [10], the optical system defining an eyebox [area relative to eye 18] and comprising a lens unit [11] comprising: an integral structure formed by a lens having a predetermined wavefront curvature [inherent to the lens shape, see paragraph 0053: “at least an optical lens 11 mounted in the spectacle frame and designed to be placed in front of a corresponding eye 18 of the wearer”], and a see-through optical combiner embedded inside the lens such that said see-through optical combiner is located in an inner part of the lens being enclosed by opposite lens segments of, respectively [14, see paragraphs 0031-0035: “the optical waveguide comprises refractive optics, for example mirrors, prism combiner, semi-reflective diopter, light guide optical element (LOE); [0032] the optical waveguide comprises diffractive optics, for example embedded grating and/or holographic optical elements; [0033] the optical waveguide comprises Fourier optics; [0034] the optical waveguide comprises multiplexed beam splitters; [0035] the light emitting source comprises one or several colored LEDs, for example blue-green and/or amber LEDs”, front [object side] and rear parts of the lens [viewer side].
Rousseau lacks, but Peng teaches, a see-through optical combiner [705] comprising a plurality of partially-transparent reflectors [pin hole reflector 730] arranged in a spaced-apart parallel relationship [725] along said inner part [see enclosure 725-727] and exposed to interaction with input light propagating along a first axis through said inner part of the lens [light incident axis] and being indicative of image being projected with a certain exit pupil [722], said partially-transparent reflectors being inclined with respect to said first axis [see figure7], such that said partially-transparent reflectors successively interact with the input light [see propagation light 755], and form light reflections therefrom [inherent], thereby providing replication of said exit pupil along a first dimension of the eyebox while maintaining said wavefront curvature of the lens [inherent to the combination, see figures 9E and 12].
Peng teaches at paragraph 0008 that “improved wide FOV AR glasses or headsets that have better optical designs and performance, including approaches that provide enhanced resolution or smaller blur circles” would have been an expected benefit. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Peng with Rousseau.
Per claim 2, Rousseau et al. teach the optical system according to claim 1, wherein said partially-transparent reflectors have different reflectance efficiencies [See paragraph 0090: “Therefore, the pin-mirrors 730 and pin-mirror arrays 735 can be optimized within a combiner 705 and a light guide based ARHS, to improve both image quality and a light efficiency or high fill factor for the virtual image light (745), with little impact on a high light efficiency or low fill factor for the ambient light (760). Other efficiency optimizations, including for nominally equal ambient and image light through the pin-mirror array efficiencies (e.g., ˜75% each), or for image light efficiency being higher than ambient light efficiency, can be favored, depending on the application.]”
Per claim 3, Rousseau et al. teach the optical system according to claim 2, but lack said partially-transparent reflectors are configured with gradually increasing reflectance efficiencies from a first to a last partially-transparent reflector in a direction of the input light propagation along the first axis, to thereby provide uniform illumination of the eyebox. However, official notice is taken that it would have been a matter of routine skill in that art to configured the reflectors with gradually increasing reflectance efficiencies from a first to a last partially-transparent reflector in a direction of the input light propagation along the first axis, to thereby provide uniform illumination of the eyebox in order to improve light output uniformity. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per claim 4, Rousseau et al. teach the optical system according to claim 1, but lack each of said partially-transparent reflectors is configured such that a partial reflectivity of said partially-transparent reflector is wavelength and angle of incidence dependent, thereby partially reflecting light of predetermined wavelengths at predetermined angles towards user’s eye. However, official notice is taken that it would have been a matter of routine skill in that art to configured the reflectors with each of said partially-transparent reflectors is configured such that a partial reflectivity of said partially-transparent reflector is wavelength and angle of incidence dependent, thereby partially reflecting light of predetermined wavelengths at predetermined angles towards user’s eyebox in order to improve light output uniformity. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per claims 5 and 37, Rousseau et al. teach the optical system according to claim 1, wherein said partially-transparent reflector is characterized by at least one of the following: is configured to partially reflect a number N (N≥1) of predetermined discrete wavelengths [inherent as the reflector muse at partially reflect at least one wavelength of light, though not a single wavelength of light]; has a reflectance efficiency of 10%-25% in a wavelength range of the input light indicative of the image being projected; is configured with a one-dimensional or two-dimensional grating pattern [see figure 20].
Per claim 6, Rousseau et al. teach the optical system according to claim 1, wherein said partially-transparent reflector comprises a Metasurface structure being a multi-layer structure comprising an intermediate patterned layer having a one-dimensional or two-dimensional grating pattern, said Metasurface structure being adapted to partially reflect a number N (N≥1) of predetermined discrete wavelengths [see paragraph 0128: “these improved pin-mirror based ARHS systems, including image source optics, projection optics, and eyepiece optics, can include optics or components that can include, but are not limited to, optics that are refractive, diffractive, free-form, or Kinoform, fresnel, combined elements, holographic elements, metasurface or sub-wavelength structured elements, gradient index elements, optomechanical components, spatial light modulators, variable shape membranes, liquid lenses, different display components, or static or electrical controlled crystal materials” and figure 20].
Per claim 7, Rousseau et al. teach the optical system according to claim 6, but lack said one-dimensional or two-dimensional grating pattern is arbitrary and/or non-periodic. However, official notice is taken that it would have been a matter of routine skill in that art to configured the reflectors said one-dimensional or two-dimensional grating pattern is arbitrary and/or non-periodic in order to improve light output uniformity. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per claim 8, Rousseau et al. teach the optical system according to claim 1, but lack said inner part has a thickness of about 0.5-4mm. However, official notice is taken that it would have been a matter of routine skill in that art to form the inner part such that a thickness of about 0.5-4mm in order to reduce lens thickness. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per claim 14, Rousseau et al. teach the optical system according to claim 1, further comprising at least one projector configured and operable to propagate said input light directly along said first axis to be successively incident at an oblique angle on said partially-transparent reflectors [750].
Per claim 17, Rousseau et al. teach the optical system according to claim 1, but lacks said lens segments are characterized by at least one of the following: the lens segments are made of material compositions different from those of the inner part containing the combiner; the lens segments are made of one or more plastic materials, and said inner part is configured as a glass or plastic body with said partially-transparent reflectors embedded inside said glass or plastic body. However, official notice is taken that it would have been a matter of routine skill in that art to form said lens segments are characterized by at least one of the following: the lens segments are made of material compositions different from those of the inner part containing the combiner; the lens segments are made of one or more plastic materials, and said inner part is configured as a glass or plastic body with said partially-transparent reflectors embedded inside said glass or plastic body in order to simplify manufacturing. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per claim 18, Rousseau et al. teach Augmented reality glasses comprising: a pair of optical systems associated with a pair of lenses of the glasses, wherein each of the optical systems is configured according to claim 1 [see figure 3A].
Per claim 19, Rousseau et al. teach the augmented reality glasses according to claim 18, wherein each of said optical systems comprises at least one projector configured and operable to propagate the input light directly along said first axis to be successively incident at an oblique angle on said partially-transparent reflectors [1240].
Per claim 20, Rousseau et al. teach the augmented reality glasses according to claim 19, characterized by at least one of the following: the at least one projector is embedded inside the respective lens or is located outside the respective lens [inherent]; the at least one projector comprises a lens assembly configured to define said exit pupil of the respective optical system [950], such that the exit pupil has an elongated geometry with a large aspect ratio between said first dimension and a second dimension of the exit pupil, wherein said first dimension is replicated by the combiner and said second dimension defines a second dimension of the eyebox [inherent to the combination, see figure 9E].
Per claims 31 and 44-45, Rousseau teaches the see-through optical combiner according to claim 24, being manufactured by a method comprising: - manufacturing a plurality of glass or plastic plates [see paragraph 0121: “The combiner 1305 can be manufactured as a flat optic (FIG. 13) using a polymer or a glass material, and then slumped to conform to a curvature, or complex curvature. Alternately, the combiner 1305 can be cast or molded with the pin-mirrors 1330 imbedded within it. Once the combiner 1305 matches the desired shape, it can be AR coated on both the inner surface 1315 and outer surface 1320”] but lacks each carrying the Metasurface structure; - stacking the plurality of said plates and bonding them together using an optical adhesive, to form a bonded stack ; - slicing said bonded stack along a cut axis inclined at a predetermined angle with respect to a Metasurface plane, into a plurality of combiner plates, each comprising a predetermined set of Metasurface structures.
However, official notice is taken that it would have been a matter of routine skill form each carrying the Metasurface structure; - stacking the plurality of said plates and bonding them together using an optical adhesive, to form a bonded stack ; - slicing said bonded stack along a cut axis inclined at a predetermined angle with respect to a Metasurface plane, into a plurality of combiner plates, each comprising a predetermined set of Metasurface structures in order to simplify manufacturing. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per claim 32, Rousseau et al. teach the see-through optical combiner according to claim 31, but lacks applying a liquid or vapor surface chemical priming to each of said Metasurface structures prior to said stacking. However, official notice is taken that it would have been a matter of routine skill to apply a liquid or vapor surface chemical priming to each of said Metasurface structures prior to said stacking in order to simplify manufacturing. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per claim 33, Rousseau et al. teach the see-through optical combiner according to claim 24, being manufactured by a method but lack by a single molding or casting step, a sawtooth structure, in which each tooth carries a respective Metasurface structure of a predetermined grating pattern, wherein a material composition used for the molding or casting step has a first index of refraction; - interpenetrating features of the grating pattern of the Metasurface structures with a material composition having a second index of refraction being higher than the first index of refraction; - applying a support layer having the second index of refraction on top of the Metasurface structures. However, official notice is taken that it would have been a matter of routine skill to form a single molding or casting step, a sawtooth structure, in which each tooth carries a respective Metasurface structure of a predetermined grating pattern, wherein a material composition used for the molding or casting step has a first index of refraction; - interpenetrating features of the grating pattern of the Metasurface structures with a material composition having a second index of refraction being higher than the first index of refraction; - applying a support layer having the second index of refraction on top of the Metasurface structures in order to simplify manufacturing. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per claim 34, Rousseau et al. teach the see-through optical combiner according to claim 24, being manufactured by a method but lack manufacturing, by molding or casting, a sawtooth structure using a material composition having a first index of refraction; - manufacturing, on top of each tooth of the sawtooth structure, a Metasurface structure comprising a support layer and a respective grating pattern of features, using a material having a second index of refraction being higher than the first index of refraction; interpenetrating feature of the grating pattern and forming a superstrate layer on top of the Metasurfaces structures using material having an index of refraction lower than the second index of refraction. However, official notice is taken that it would have been a matter of routine skill to form manufacturing, by molding or casting, a sawtooth structure using a material composition having a first index of refraction; - manufacturing, on top of each tooth of the sawtooth structure, a Metasurface structure comprising a support layer and a respective grating pattern of features, using a material having a second index of refraction being higher than the first index of refraction; interpenetrating feature of the grating pattern and forming a superstrate layer on top of the Metasurfaces structures using material having an index of refraction lower than the second index of refraction in order to simplify manufacturing. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per claim 35, Rousseau et al. teach the see-through optical combiner according to claim 24, but lack being manufactured by a method comprising: providing a pair of plates comprising first and second matching saw-tooth structures, respectively, wherein first and second teeth of the first and second saw-tooth structures, respectively, are arranged in an interlaced fashion; forming, on each tooth of the saw-tooth structures, a respective one of the Metasurface structures; bonding the first and second saw-tooth structures thereby forming a common array of the Metasurface structures of said first and second saw-tooth structures arranged in the interlaced fashion. However, official notice is taken that it would have been a matter of routine skill to form being manufactured by a method comprising: providing a pair of plates comprising first and second matching saw-tooth structures, respectively, wherein first and second teeth of the first and second saw-tooth structures, respectively, are arranged in an interlaced fashion; forming, on each tooth of the saw-tooth structures, a respective one of the Metasurface structures; bonding the first and second saw-tooth structures thereby forming a common array of the Metasurface structures of said first and second saw-tooth structures arranged in the interlaced fashion in order to simplify manufacturing. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per claims 39-43, Rousseau et al. teach the lens unit according to claim 38, but lack a method comprising: providing said see-through optical combiner; and encapsulating said see-through optical combiner into the inner part of the lens to be enclosed by the opposite lens segments, said encapsulating comprising one of the following: encapsulating by gluing of the combiner between the front and back lens segments; or partially or fully encapsulating the combiner by casting or molding using a lens material. However, official notice is taken that it would have been a matter of routine skill to form the lens by providing said see-through optical combiner; and encapsulating said see-through optical combiner into the inner part of the lens to be enclosed by the opposite lens segments, said encapsulating comprising one of the following: encapsulating by gluing of the combiner between the front and back lens segments; or partially or fully encapsulating the combiner by casting or molding using a lens material in order to simplify manufacturing. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per claims 46-47, Rousseau et al. teach the lens unit according to claim 45, but lack said pair of plates are configured in accordance with the predetermined wavefront curvature of the lens comprises applying a surface treatment to the pair of plates to obtain a predetermined wavefront curvature of the lens. However, official notice is taken that it would have been a matter of routine skill to form a pair of plates configured in accordance with the predetermined wavefront curvature of the lens comprises applying a surface treatment to the pair of plates to obtain a predetermined wavefront curvature of the lens in order to simplify manufacturing. Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-13, 15-16, 21-23 and 27-30 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Per claim 9, the prior art teaches the optical system according to claim 6. In combination with the limitations above, the prior art does not teach said Metasurface structure comprises: a first layer being a substrate of a predetermined first thickness and a first index of refraction, a second layer interfacing with the first layer, said second layer being configured as a support layer of a predetermined second thickness and a second index of refraction being higher than the first index of refraction, a third layer interfacing with the second layer, said third layer being said patterned layer comprising a pattern formed by ridges and grooves of said one-dimensional or two-dimensional grating pattern, wherein said ridges have a third index of refraction higher than said first index of refraction, and said grooves are filled with air, and a fourth layer interfacing with the third layer, said fourth layer being an overcoat layer of a predetermined fourth thickness and a fourth index of refraction being lower than said second index of refraction.
Per claim 11-12, the prior art teaches the optical system according to claim 6. In combination with the limitations above, the prior art does not teach said partially transparent Metasurface comprises: a first layer being a substrate of a predetermined first thickness and a first index of refraction, a second layer interfacing with the first layer, said second layer being configured as a support layer of a predetermined second thickness and a second index of refraction being higher than the first index of refraction, a third layer interfacing with the second layer, said third layer being said patterned layer comprising a pattern formed by ridges and grooves of said one-dimensional or two-dimensional grating pattern, wherein said ridges have said second index of refraction, and said grooves are filled with a material having an index of refraction lower than said second index of refraction.
Per claim 13, the prior art teaches the optical system according to claim 1. In combination with the limitations above, the prior art does not teach said lens unit comprises said opposite lens segments configured as matching bonded saw-tooth structures, respectively, such that teeth of the saw-tooth structures of the opposite lens segments are arranged in an interlaced fashion, and wherein each tooth of the saw-tooth structures carries a respective one of the partially-transparent reflectors.
Per claim 15, Rousseau et al. teach the optical system according to claim 14, characterized by at least one of the following: the at least one projector comprises a micro display comprising any one of the following: OLED, Micro-OLED, LCD, MicroLED, laser scanner, or DLP [750]; the at least one projector is either embedded inside the lens, or located outside the lens [see figure 8]; the at least one projector comprises a lens assembly configured to define said exit pupil [11]. In combination with the limitations above, the prior art does not teach the exit pupil has an elongated geometry with a large aspect ratio between said first dimension and a second dimension of the exit pupil, wherein said first dimension is replicated by the combiner and said second dimension defines a second dimension of the eyebox [inherent to the combination, see eyebox 722].
Per claims 16 and 21-22, Rousseau et al. teach the optical system according to claim 14, wherein the at least one projector comprises a lens assembly configured to define said exit pupil [780]. In combination with the limitations above the prior art does not teach the exit pupil has an elongated geometry with a large aspect ratio between said first dimension and a second dimension of the exit pupil, wherein said first dimension is replicated by the combiner and said second dimension defines a second dimension of the eyebox, said second dimension of the eyebox being defined by one of the following (i) is defined by the second dimension of the lens assembly of the single projector; or (ii) is defined by second dimensions of lens assemblies of two or more projectors.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES A DUDEK whose telephone number is (571)272-2290. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6:30-4:30 MT.
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, Jennifer Carruth can be reached at 571-272-9791. 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.
/JAMES A DUDEK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights