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
Acknowledgment is made of receipt of Information Disclosure Statements (PTO-1449) filed 09/16/2024, 11/22/2024, 12/20/2024, 05/30/2025, 12/16/2025, 01/23/2026 and 05/11/2026. An initialed copy is attached to this Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Independent claim 2, line 15, recites “a proximal variable focus optical element and a distal variable focus optical element”. It is unclear in relation to what (“transparent emissive display”, “first occluder”, “second occluder”, etc.) or to whom (“user”) the variable focus optical elements are proximal and distal to. For the purpose of continuing examination, the proximal and distal variable focus optical elements are interpreted as two variable focus optical elements.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 2, 7, 12, 13 and 16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-3, 10, 11, 15, 16, 19 and 20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,733,516. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claimed subject matter for the head-mounted display system of the current application is similarly presented in the claimed subject matter of the referenced patent (see below).
Current Application
USP No. 11,733,516
Claim 2. A head-mounted display system configured to project light to an eye of a user to display augmented reality image content in a vision field of the user, the head-mounted display system comprising: a frame configured to be supported on a head of the user; an eyepiece disposed on the frame at a location in front of the eye of the user when the head mounted display is mounted on to the head of the user, the eyepiece including: a transparent emissive display comprising a plurality of emitters, the transparent emissive display configured to emit light into the eye of the user to display augmented reality image content in a vision field of the user, the transparent emissive display being transparent and emissive over an area, the transparent emissive display disposed at a location in front of the eye of the user when the head-mounted display is mounted on to the head of the user such that the transparent emissive display transmits light from an environment in front of the user through the transparent emissive area to the eye of the user to provide a view of the environment in front of the user; a proximal variable focus optical element and a distal variable focus optical element, each of the proximal variable focus optical element and the distal variable focus optical element comprising a plurality of electrical inputs configured to control an optical power of the optical element by varying divergence of light projected from the transparent emissive display to the user; a first occluder comprising a first spatial light modulator configured to receive an electrical input to cause one or more pixels of the first spatial light modulator to transmit light while other one or more pixels of the first spatial light modulator are opaque; a second occluder comprising a second spatial light modulator configured to receive an electrical input to cause one or more pixels of the second spatial light modulator to transmit light while other one or more pixels of the second spatial light modulator are opaque; and electronics coupled to the transparent emissive display and to the first and second occluder, wherein the electronics are configured to coordinate operation of the transparent emissive display and the first and second occluder to control an opacity of the one or more pixels of the first and second spatial light modulator, at a frequency greater than that which can be detected by human eyes, while simultaneously controlling a light emission of at least one of the emitters that is aligned with the one or more pixels.
Claim 16. The system of claim 2, wherein the eyepiece further comprises a distal occluder on a distal side of the transparent emissive display between the transparent emissive display and the environment in front of the user.
Claim 1. A head mounted display system configured to project light to an eye of a user to display augmented reality image content in a vision field of said user, said head-mounted display system comprising: a frame configured to be supported on a head of the user; an eyepiece disposed on the frame, at least a portion of said eyepiece being transparent and disposed at a location in front of the user's eye when the user wears said head-mounted display such that said transparent portion transmits light from the environment in front of the user to the user's eye to provide a view of the environment in front of the user, the eyepiece including: a transparent emissive display comprising a plurality of emitters, said transparent emissive display further comprising electrodes comprising transparent conductive material, said transparent emissive display configured to emit light into said user's eye to display augmented reality image content to the user's vision field, said transparent emissive display being transparent and emissive over an area, said transparent emissive display disposed at a location in front of the user's eye when the user wears said head-mounted display such that said transparent emissive display transmits light from the environment in front of the user through said transparent emissive area to the user's eye to provide a view of the environment in front of the user; and at least one occluder comprising a spatial light modulator configured to receive electrical input to cause one or more pixels of the spatial light modulator to be transmissive while other pixels of the spatial light modulator are opaque, wherein the at least one occluder comprises a distal occluder disposed in an optical path between the transparent emissive display and the environment; a first distal lens disposed in an optical path between the transparent emissive display and the environment and a second distal lens disposed in an optical path between the transparent emissive display and the environment, wherein the distal occluder is between the first lens and the second lens; and electronics coupled to the transparent emissive display and to the at least one occluder, wherein the electronics are configured to coordinate operation of the transparent emissive display and the at least one occluder to control an opacity of the one or more pixels of the spatial light modulator, at a frequency greater than that which can be detected by human eyes, while simultaneously controlling a light emission of at least one of the emitters that is aligned with the one or more pixels.
Claim 10. The system of claim 1, further comprising a proximal variable focus optical element disposed on a proximal side of the transparent emissive display such that said proximal variable focus optical element is between the transparent emissive display and the user's eye.
Claim 11. The system of claim 10, wherein said proximal variable focus optical element has an electrical input configured to receive an electrical signal to alter a state of the variable focus optical element and a focus of said variable focus optical element.
Claim 15. The system of claim 10, further comprising a distal variable focus optical element disposed on a distal side of the transparent emissive display such that said distal variable focus optical element is between the transparent emissive display and the environment in front of the user.
Claim 16. The system of claim 15, wherein said distal variable focus optical element has an electrical input configured to receive an electrical signal to alter a state of the distal variable focus optical element and a focus of said distal variable focus optical element.
Claim 19. The system of claim 18, wherein said at least one occluder comprises first and second spatial light modulators each including a plurality of pixels, said first and second spatial light modulators having an electrical input configured to receive an electrical signal to selectively alter a transmissive state of the pixels.
Claim 20. The system of claim 19, wherein the electronics are electrically coupled to said electrical input of said first and second spatial light modulators to cause one or more pixels on said first spatial light modulator to be transmissive while surrounding pixels are opaque and one or more of said pixels on said second spatial light modulator to be transmissive while surrounding pixels on said second spatial light modulator are opaque such that light of a certain angular direction that is emitted from certain emitters of the transparent emissive display propagates both through said transmissive pixels of said first spatial light modulator and through said transmissive pixels of said second spatial light modulator.
Claim 7. The system of claim 2, wherein the transparent emissive display is an organic light emitting diode (OLED) film.
Claim 2. The system of claim 1, wherein said transparent emissive display comprises an organic light emitting diode (OLED) display.
Claim 12. The system of claim 2, wherein the eyepiece further comprises at least one lens array comprising a plurality of lenses, wherein a lens of the plurality of lenses is associated with two or more emitters of a plurality of emitters.
Claim 3. The system of claim 1, wherein the eyepiece includes at least one lens array comprising a plurality of lenses, wherein a lens of the plurality of lenses is associated with two or more emitters of a plurality of emitters, and wherein the at least one lens array comprises a proximal lens array disposed on a proximal side of the transparent emissive display such that said proximal lens array is between the transparent emissive display and the user's eye.
Claim 13. The system of claim 2, wherein a first portion of light emissions from the plurality of emitters of the transparent emissive display is blocked by one or more opaque pixels of the first spatial light modulator and the second spatial light modulator, and a second portion of light emissions from the plurality of emitters of the transparent emissive display passes through the first spatial light modulator and the second spatial light modulator to the proximal variable focus optical element at a specific angle.
Claim 20. The system of claim 19, wherein the electronics are electrically coupled to said electrical input of said first and second spatial light modulators to cause one or more pixels on said first spatial light modulator to be transmissive while surrounding pixels are opaque and one or more of said pixels on said second spatial light modulator to be transmissive while surrounding pixels on said second spatial light modulator are opaque such that light of a certain angular direction that is emitted from certain emitters of the transparent emissive display propagates both through said transmissive pixels of said first spatial light modulator and through said transmissive pixels of said second spatial light modulator.
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 2, 3, 5-7 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lapstun (USPG Pub No. 2016/0139402).
Regarding claim 2, Lapstun discloses a head-mounted display system (860) configured to project light to an eye of a user (250) to display augmented reality image content in a vision field of the user (see Fig. 55A, Paragraph 840), the head-mounted display system comprising: a frame configured to be supported on a head of the user (250) (see Fig. 55B); an eyepiece (200) disposed on the frame at a location in front of the eye of the user when the head mounted display is mounted on to the head of the user (see Figs. 55A, 55B, Paragraphs 839-840), the eyepiece including: a transparent emissive display (180) comprising a plurality of emitters (Paragraph 533), the transparent emissive display configured to emit light into the eye of the user to display augmented reality image content in a vision field of the user (Paragraph 836), the transparent emissive display being transparent and emissive over an area (see Fig. 54B), the transparent emissive display disposed at a location in front of the eye of the user when the head-mounted display is mounted on to the head of the user such that the transparent emissive display transmits light from an environment in front of the user through the transparent emissive area to the eye of the user to provide a view of the environment in front of the user (see Fig. 54B); a proximal variable focus optical element (406) and a distal variable focus optical element (416), each of the proximal variable focus optical element and the distal variable focus optical element comprising a plurality of electrical inputs configured to control an optical power of the optical element by varying divergence of light projected from the transparent emissive display to the user (see Figs. 14A, 14B, Paragraphs 534-536, 543); a first occluder (652) comprising a first spatial light modulator (“ferroelectric liquid crystal design”) configured to receive an electrical input to cause one or more pixels of the first spatial light modulator to transmit light while other one or more pixels of the first spatial light modulator are opaque (Paragraph 819); a second occluder (634) comprising a second spatial light modulator (“nematic liquid crystal design”) configured to receive an electrical input to cause one or more pixels of the second spatial light modulator to transmit light while other one or more pixels of the second spatial light modulator are opaque (Paragraph 819); and electronics coupled to the transparent emissive display and to the first and second occluder, wherein the electronics are configured to coordinate operation of the transparent emissive display and the first and second occluder to control an opacity of the one or more pixels of the first and second spatial light modulator, at a frequency greater than that which can be detected by human eyes, while simultaneously controlling a light emission of at least one of the emitters that is aligned with the one or more pixels (Paragraphs 534, 535, 819, 841, 848 – the “electronics” is implied which is required in order for each recited element to function and for the control of each element).
Regarding claim 3, Lapstun discloses wherein the one or more pixels of the first spatial light modulator (652) that transmit light and the one or more pixels of the second spatial light modulator (634) that transmit light are aligned along a linear optical path which receives light from the one or more emitters on the transparent emissive display (see Fig. 50B).
Regarding claim 5, Lapstun discloses wherein the first spatial modulator (652) is a liquid crystal spatial modulator (Paragraph 819).
Regarding claim 6, Lapstun discloses wherein the transparent emissive display is a transparent film spatial modulator (Paragraph 533).
Regarding claim 7, Lapstun discloses wherein the transparent emissive display is an organic light emitting diode (OLED) film (Paragraph 546).
Regarding claim 9, Lapstun discloses wherein the proximal variable focus optical element is configured to alter divergence of light emitted from the transparent emissive display to cause different image content to appear as if emitted from different distances in front of the eyepiece (Paragraphs 534-536, 543).
Regarding claim 10, Lapstun discloses wherein the proximal variable focus optical element is a switchable liquid crystal lens assembly (Paragraph 535).
Regarding claim 11, Lapstun discloses wherein the proximal variable focus optical element is configured to vary between two states that introduce different negative optical powers to vary divergence of light from the transparent emissive display (Paragraph 537).
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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lapstun (USPG Pub No. 2016/0139402) in view of Border et al. (USPG Pub No. 2012/0235886), hereinafter “Border”.
Regarding claim 8, Lapstun discloses the claimed invention, but does not specify wherein the transparent emissive display is a quantum-dot light-emitting diode (QLED) display. In the same field of endeavor, Border discloses wherein the transparent emissive display is a quantum-dot light-emitting diode (QLED) display (Paragraph 158). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the head-mounted display system of Lapstun with wherein the transparent emissive display is a quantum-dot light-emitting diode (QLED) display of Border for the purpose of providing a display with higher power efficiency, is brighter, and has cost efficient (Paragraph 158).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lapstun (USPG Pub No. 2016/0139402) in view of Itani (USPG Pub No. 2017/0168307).
Regarding claim 12, Lapstun discloses the claimed invention, but does not specify wherein the eyepiece further comprises at least one lens array comprising a plurality of lenses, wherein a lens of the plurality of lenses is associated with two or more emitters of a plurality of emitters. In the same field of endeavor, Itani discloses wherein the eyepiece further comprises at least one lens array comprising a plurality of lenses, wherein a lens of the plurality of lenses is associated with two or more emitters of a plurality of emitters (see Figs. 10C, 10D, Paragraph 243). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the head-mounted display system of Lapstun with wherein the eyepiece further comprises at least one lens array comprising a plurality of lenses, wherein a lens of the plurality of lenses is associated with two or more emitters of a plurality of emitters of Itani for the purpose of providing independently controlled optical effect for the displayed and transmitted optical content (Paragraph 6).
Prior Art Citations
Samec et al. (USPG Pub No. 2016/0270656) is being cited herein to show a HMD system relevant to the claimed invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHIDERE S SAHLE whose telephone number is (571)270-3329. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00 AM to 5:00 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, Ricky Mack can be reached at 571 272-2333. 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.
/MAHIDERE S SAHLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 7/25/2026
Prosecution Insights