DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10-9-24 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 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 1, 3-6, and 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being fully anticipated by Hu et al. (US20210307608).
Re claim 1, Hu et al. teaches for example in fig. 1, 6, and 8a-c, and 9, a light-sensing arrangement for an eye-tracking system (para. 0030), the light-sensing arrangement comprising: a light sensor (180) comprising a plurality of light-sensitive elements (150; para. 0050, 0074) which collectively form a light-sensitive surface of the light sensor (para. 0050, 0074; fig. 1); and a light collimation element (120, 840; para. 0030) arranged on the light-sensitive surface of the light sensor (fig. 1), wherein the light collimation element defines an angle of acceptance for each light-sensitive element of the light sensor to lie within a field of view of said light-sensitive element in which a user's eye is expected to be present (8a-c; para. 0046).
Re claim 3, Hu et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1, 6, and 8a-c, and 9, the light collimation element is implemented as one of: a prismatic film (para. 0036), a fibre optic plate-based film, a privacy filter film, a combination of lenticular arrays and aperture arrays.
Re claim 4, Hu et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1, 6, and 8a-c, and 9, the light collimation element is arranged on the light-sensitive surface of the light sensor by: lamination, casting, and injection moulding (para. 0080); wherein the examiner interprets “conventional micro-fabrication techniques” to include the claimed limitations).
Re claim 5, Hu et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1, 6, and 8a-c, and 9, the light collimation element is configured to have one of a planar structure or a curved structure (para. 0031).
Re claim 6, Hu et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1, 6, and 8a-c, and 9, a thickness of the light collimation element lies in a range of 200 micrometers to 1.5 millimeters (para. 0047).
Re claim 8, Hu et al. teaches for example in fig. 1, 6, and 8a-c, and 9, an eye-tracking system (para. 0030) comprising: a plurality of light-emitting units (820, 850; para. 0073); a light-sensing arrangement comprising: a light sensor (830, 850) comprising a plurality of light-sensitive elements which collectively form a light-sensitive surface of the light sensor (para. 0074); and a light collimation element (120, 812, 840; para. 0030) arranged on the light-sensitive surface of the light sensor (fig. 1, 8a-c), wherein the light collimation element defines an angle of acceptance (θ.sub.a) for each light-sensitive element of the light sensor to lie within a field of view (θ.sub.t) of said light-sensitive element in which a user's eye is expected to be present (fig. 8a-c; para. 0046); and at least one processor (para. 0050, 0074) configured to: control the plurality of light-emitting units to emit the light towards the user's eye; collect sensor data, wherein the sensor data comprises information of reflections of the emitted light from the user's eye (para. 0074), wherein the reflections are received by the light sensor within the angle of acceptance for each light-sensitive element (para. 0074); and process the collected sensor data to determine a gaze direction of the user's eye (para. 0074).
Re claim 9, Hu et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1, 6, and 8a-c, and 9, each of the plurality of light-emitting units comprises at least one of: a light source operable to generate the light to be emitted towards the user's eye (150; para. 0073), a reflector (620) operatively coupled to the light source for directing the generated light towards the user's eye (fig. 6), and a light collimating element (610) operatively coupled to the reflector for collimating the directed light from the reflector towards the user's eye (fig. 6).
Re claim 10, Hu et al. teaches for example in fig. 1, 6, and 8a-c, and 9, a method comprising: controlling a plurality of light-emitting units to emit light towards a user's eye (para. 0074); collecting sensor data from a light sensor, wherein the sensor data comprises information of reflections of the emitted light from the user's eye (para. 0074), wherein the reflections are received by the light sensor within an angle of acceptance defined by a light collimation element (120, 840; para. 0030) for each light-sensitive element from a plurality of light sensitive elements of the light sensor (para. 0074); and processing the collected sensor data to determine a gaze direction of the user's eye (para. 0074).
Re claim 11, Hu et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1, 6, and 8a-c, and 9, each of the plurality of light-emitting units comprises at least one of: a light source operable to generate the light to be emitted towards the user's eye (150; para. 0073), a reflector (620) operatively coupled to the light source for directing the generated light towards the user's eye (fig. 6), and a light collimating element (610) operatively coupled to the reflector for collimating the directed light from the reflector towards the user's eye (fig. 6).
Re claim 12, Hu et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1, 6, and 8a-c, and 9, the light collimation element is implemented as one of: a prismatic film (para. 0036), a fibre optic plate-based film, a privacy filter film, a combination of lenticular arrays and aperture arrays.
Re claim 13, Hu et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1, 6, and 8a-c, and 9, he light collimation element is configured to have one of a planar structure or a curved structure (para. 0031).
Re claim 14, Hu et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1, 6, and 8a-c, and 9, a thickness of the light collimation element lies in a range of 200 micrometres to 1.5 millimetres (para. 0047).
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 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 of this title, 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 2, 7, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu et al. (US20210307608).
Re claim 2, supra claim 1.
But, the instant prior art of record fails to explicitly teach the angle of acceptance is from 0 degrees up to 30 degrees from a central axis of said light-sensitive element.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to vary the angle of acceptance, 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.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the teachings of Hu et al. in order to provide a system and method to maximize the light-collecting area of conventional eye tracking sensors while minimizing the overall size and maintaining a compact profile for integration into narrow-area devices such as eyeglasses or augmented reality glasses, as taught by Hu et al. (para. 0005).
Re claim 7, supra claim 1. Furthermore, Hu et al. teaches for example in fig. 1, 6, 8a-c, and 9, a thickness of the light collimation element is 50 microns (para. 0047).
But, Hu et al. fails to explicitly teach a thickness of the arrangement of the light collimation element and the plurality of light-sensitive elements of the light sensor lies in a range of 100 μm to 1 mm.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to vary the thickness of the arrangement, 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.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the teachings of Hu et al. in order to provide a system and method to maximize the light-collecting area of conventional eye tracking sensors while minimizing the overall size and maintaining a compact profile for integration into narrow-area devices such as eyeglasses or augmented reality glasses, as taught by Hu et al. (para. 0005).
Re claim 15, supra claim 10. Furthermore, Hu et al. teaches for example in fig. 1, 6, 8a-c, and 9, a thickness of the light collimation element is 50 microns (para. 0047).
But, Hu et al. fails to explicitly teach a thickness of the arrangement of the light collimation element and the plurality of light-sensitive elements of the light sensor lies in a range of 100 μm to 1 mm.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to vary the thickness of the arrangement, 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.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the teachings of Hu et al. in order to provide a system and method to maximize the light-collecting area of conventional eye tracking sensors while minimizing the overall size and maintaining a compact profile for integration into narrow-area devices such as eyeglasses or augmented reality glasses, as taught by Hu et al. (para. 0005).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH P MARTINEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-2335. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9am to 7pm PACIFIC.
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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571) 272-2713. 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.
/Joseph P Martinez/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 8-8-26
Prosecution Insights