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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-8 and 11-22 are currently pending in the present application. Claims 1, 5 and 7 are currently amended; claims 2-4, 6 and 8 are original; claims 9-10 are canceled; and claims 11-22 are newly added. The amendment dated October 24, 2024 has been entered into the record.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/11/2025 and 10/27/2025 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 § 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, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-5, 11, 13, 15-16 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kong et al. (CN 111123524 A; the English translation document attached, hereinafter “Kong”) in view of Vallius (US 20170102544).
Regarding claim 1, Kong discloses a diffraction optical waveguide structure (Fig. 8; Page 10 lines 4-9), comprising:
a light-guiding layer (201; Page 9 line 35 – Page 10 line 9), and a coupling-in region (a region of 202), a deflecting region (a region of 205), and a coupling-out region (a region of 204) all disposed on the light-guiding layer (Fig. 8) and sequentially arranged along a direction of an optical path (Fig. 8 and Page 3 lines 3-5), the coupling-in region, the deflecting region and the coupling-out region are all configured with a first diffractive layer (diffractive grating layers of 202, 205, 204);
the diffraction optical waveguide structure further comprises light-homogenizing region (a region of 203), the light-homogenizing region is arranged between the deflecting region and the coupling-out region (Fig. 8), the light-homogenizing region is configured with a second diffractive layer (a diffractive grating layer of 203), the second diffractive microstructure layer is configured to spatially redistribute energy of lights (Figs. 4 and 8; see the incoming light spatially redistributed via the homogenizing grating array 203; Page 10 lines 5-9).
<Figure 8 of Kong>
PNG
media_image1.png
342
520
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kong does not explicitly disclose the first diffractive layer and the second diffractive layer are a first diffractive microstructure layer and a second diffractive microstructure layer.
However, Vallius teaches a known diffractive layer in an optical waveguide comprises a diffractive microstructure layer (Figs. 2 and 9 and Para. [0032] teaching microstructure layers).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the diffractive layers of Kong with the teachings of Vallius, wherein the first diffractive layer and the second diffractive layer are a first diffractive microstructure layer and a second diffractive microstructure layer, for the purpose of using known grating microstructures in a waveguide (Vallius: Para. [0032]).
Regarding claim 2, Kong as modified by Vallius discloses the limitations of claim 1 above, and Kong further discloses wherein the light-homogenizing region is at least one of a region enclosed by straight edges and a region enclosed by curved edges (see Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 3, Kong as modified by Vallius discloses the limitations of claim 1 above.
In the Figure 8 embodiment, Kong does not explicitly disclose the light-homogenizing region includes more than one sub-light-homogenizing region, more than one sub-light-homogenizing region is disposed at intervals, and a distance between two adjacent sub-light-homogenizing regions is less than or equal to 30 mm.
In the Figure 10 embodiment and discussion, however, Kong teaches the light-homogenizing region includes more than one sub-light-homogenizing region, more than one sub-light-homogenizing region is disposed at intervals (Fig. 10; Page 10 lines 31-35), and Vallius further teaches known diffractive grating structures have a region in the micrometer range (Para. [0032]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the diffractive layers of Kong, wherein the light-homogenizing region includes more than one sub-light-homogenizing region, more than one sub-light-homogenizing region is disposed at intervals, and a distance between two adjacent sub-light-homogenizing regions is less than or equal to 30 mm, for the purpose of obtaining a better light homogenization effect and using micrometer scale structures (Kong: Page 10 lines 33-35; Vallius: Para. [0032]).
Regarding claim 4, Kong as modified by Vallius discloses the limitations of claim 1 above.
In the Figure 8 embodiment, Kong does not explicitly disclose the light-homogenizing region is configured with one or more hole regions, a hole size of the hole region is less than or equal to 30 mm.
In the Figure 10 embodiment and discussion, however, Kong teaches the light-homogenizing region is configured with one or more hole regions (Fig. 10; Page 10 lines 31-35), and Vallius further teaches known diffractive grating structures have a region in the micrometer range (Para. [0032]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the diffractive layers of Kong, wherein the light-homogenizing region is configured with one or more hole regions, a hole size of the hole region is less than or equal to 30 mm, for the purpose of obtaining a better light homogenization effect and using micrometer scale structures (Kong: Page 10 lines 33-35; Vallius: Para. [0032]).
Regarding claim 5, Kong as modified by Vallius discloses the limitations of claim 1 above, and Kong further discloses wherein the light-homogenizing region is arranged on the same side as the coupling-in region, the deflecting region, and the coupling-out region (Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 11, Kong as modified by Vallius discloses the limitations of claim 1 above, and Kong further discloses wherein the light-homogenizing region is at least one of quadrilateral, elliptical, and cloud-shaped (Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 13, Kong as modified by Vallius discloses the limitations of claim 1 above.
In the Figure 8 embodiment, Kong does not explicitly the light-homogenizing region includes 2 to 10 sub-light-homogenizing regions.
In the Figure 10 embodiment and discussion, however, Kong teaches the light-homogenizing region includes 2 to 10 sub-light-homogenizing regions (Fig. 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the diffractive layers of Kong, wherein the light-homogenizing region includes 2 to 10 sub-light-homogenizing regions, for the purpose of obtaining a better light homogenization effect (Kong: Page 10 lines 33-35).
Regarding claim 15, Kong as modified by Vallius discloses the limitations of claim 1.
In the Figure 8 embodiment, Kong does not explicitly disclose the light-homogenizing region is configured with one or more hole regions, a second diffractive microstructure layer is configured in a region other than the hole region of the light-homogenizing region.
In the Figure 10 embodiment and discussion, however, Kong teaches the light-homogenizing region is configured with one or more hole regions, a second diffractive microstructure layer is configured in a region other than the hole region of the light-homogenizing region (Fig. 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the diffractive layers of Kong, wherein the light-homogenizing region is configured with one or more hole regions, a second diffractive microstructure layer is configured in a region other than the hole region of the light-homogenizing region, for the purpose of obtaining a better light homogenization effect (Kong: Page 10 lines 33-35).
Regarding claim 16, Kong as modified by Vallius discloses the limitations of claim 1 above.
In the Figure 8 embodiment, Kong does not explicitly the light-homogenizing region is configured with more than one hole region.
In the Figure 10 embodiment and discussion, however, Kong teaches the light-homogenizing region is configured with more than one hole region (Fig. 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the diffractive layers of Kong, wherein the light-homogenizing region is configured with more than one hole region, for the purpose of obtaining a better light homogenization effect (Kong: Page 10 lines 33-35).
Regarding claim 21, Kong discloses an optical apparatus (Page 1 lines 25-26 “near-eye display devices”), comprising: a micro-image source (Page 2 lines 5-6), and a diffraction optical waveguide structure (Fig. 8; Page 10 lines 4-9); wherein, the diffraction optical waveguide structure comprises:
a light-guiding layer (201; Page 9 line 35 – Page 10 line 9), and a coupling-in region (a region of 202), a deflecting region (a region of 205), and a coupling-out region (a region of 204) all disposed on the light-guiding layer (Fig. 8) and sequentially arranged along a direction of an optical path (Fig. 8 and Page 3 lines 3-5), the coupling-in region, the deflecting region and the coupling-out region are all configured with a first diffractive layer (diffractive grating layers of 202, 205, 204);
the diffraction optical waveguide structure further comprises light-homogenizing region (a region of 203), the light-homogenizing region is arranged between the deflecting region and the coupling-out region (Fig. 8), the light-homogenizing region is configured with a second diffractive layer (a diffractive grating layer of 203), the second diffractive microstructure layer is configured to spatially redistribute energy of lights (Figs. 4 and 8; see the incoming light spatially redistributed via the homogenizing grating array 203; Page 10 lines 5-9).
Kong does not explicitly disclose the first diffractive layer and the second diffractive layer are a first diffractive microstructure layer and a second diffractive microstructure layer.
However, Vallius teaches a known diffractive layer in an optical waveguide comprises a diffractive microstructure layer (Figs. 2 and 9 and Para. [0032] teaching microstructure layers).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the diffractive layers of Kong with the teachings of Vallius, wherein the first diffractive layer and the second diffractive layer are a first diffractive microstructure layer and a second diffractive microstructure layer, for the purpose of using known grating microstructures in a waveguide (Vallius: Para. [0032]).
Regarding claim 22, Kong discloses a near-eye display device (Page 1 lines 25-26 “near-eye display devices”), comprising: an optical apparatus, the optical apparatus comprises a micro-image source (Page 2 lines 5-6), and a diffraction optical waveguide structure (Fig. 8; Page 10 lines 4-9); wherein, the diffraction optical waveguide structure comprises:
a light-guiding layer (201; Page 9 line 35 – Page 10 line 9), and a coupling-in region (a region of 202), a deflecting region (a region of 205), and a coupling-out region (a region of 204) all disposed on the light-guiding layer (Fig. 8) and sequentially arranged along a direction of an optical path (Fig. 8 and Page 3 lines 3-5), the coupling-in region, the deflecting region and the coupling-out region are all configured with a first diffractive layer (diffractive grating layers of 202, 205, 204);
the diffraction optical waveguide structure further comprises light-homogenizing region (a region of 203), the light-homogenizing region is arranged between the deflecting region and the coupling-out region (Fig. 8), the light-homogenizing region is configured with a second diffractive layer (a diffractive grating layer of 203), the second diffractive microstructure layer is configured to spatially redistribute energy of lights (Figs. 4 and 8; see the incoming light spatially redistributed via the homogenizing grating array 203; Page 10 lines 5-9).
Kong does not explicitly disclose the first diffractive layer and the second diffractive layer are a first diffractive microstructure layer and a second diffractive microstructure layer.
However, Vallius teaches a known diffractive layer in an optical waveguide comprises a diffractive microstructure layer (Figs. 2 and 9 and Para. [0032] teaching microstructure layers).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the diffractive layers of Kong with the teachings of Vallius, wherein the first diffractive layer and the second diffractive layer are a first diffractive microstructure layer and a second diffractive microstructure layer, for the purpose of using known grating microstructures in a waveguide (Vallius: Para. [0032]).
Claims 6 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kong in view of Vallius, and in further view of Blomstedt (US 20210165142).
Regarding claim 6, Kong as modified by Vallius discloses the limitations of claim 5 above.
Kong does not explicitly disclose the diffraction optical waveguide structure comprises at least one of the following:
the light-homogenizing region is disposed between the deflecting region and the coupling-out region, the light-homogenizing region is adjacent to the deflecting region and the coupling-out region;
and, the light-homogenizing region is disposed between the deflecting region and the coupling-out region, the light-homogenizing region is spaced apart from the deflecting region and the coupling-out region, a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the deflecting region is less than or equal to 40 mm, and a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the coupling-out region is less than or equal to 40 mm;
and, the light-homogenizing region is disposed between the deflecting region and the coupling-out region, the light-homogenizing region is adjacent to the deflecting region, the light-homogenizing region is spaced apart from the coupling-out region, and a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the coupling-out region is less than or equal to 40 mm;
and, the light-homogenizing region is disposed between the deflecting region and the coupling-out region, the light-homogenizing region is adjacent to the coupling-out region, the light-homogenizing region is spaced apart from the deflecting region, a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the deflecting region is less than or equal to 40 mm.
However, Blomstedt teaches a diffraction optical waveguide structure (Figs. 1-3) comprise a plurality of regions arranged in a waveguide, configured to couple light propagating in the waveguide, wherein a region is disposed between two other regions and the region is adjacent to other regions (Paras. [0033], [0070], [0075]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the diffraction optical waveguide structure as disclosed by Kong with the teachings of Blomstedt, wherein the diffraction optical waveguide structure comprises at least one of the following: the light-homogenizing region is disposed between the deflecting region and the coupling-out region, the light-homogenizing region is adjacent to the deflecting region and the coupling-out region; and, the light-homogenizing region is disposed between the deflecting region and the coupling-out region, the light-homogenizing region is spaced apart from the deflecting region and the coupling-out region, a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the deflecting region is less than or equal to 40 mm, and a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the coupling-out region is less than or equal to 40 mm; and, the light-homogenizing region is disposed between the deflecting region and the coupling-out region, the light-homogenizing region is adjacent to the deflecting region, the light-homogenizing region is spaced apart from the coupling-out region, and a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the coupling-out region is less than or equal to 40 mm; and, the light-homogenizing region is disposed between the deflecting region and the coupling-out region, the light-homogenizing region is adjacent to the coupling-out region, the light-homogenizing region is spaced apart from the deflecting region, a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the deflecting region is less than or equal to 40 mm, for the purpose of providing new freedoms for design and efficiently allowing for spreading light (Blomstedt: Paras. [0022]-[0023]).
Regarding claim 20, Kong as modified by Vallius discloses the limitations of claim 1 above.
Kong does not explicitly disclose a length of an overlap between the light-homogenizing region and the deflecting region ranges from 0 mm to 100 mm, or, a length of an overlap between the light-homogenizing region and the coupling-out region ranges from 0 mm to 100 mm.
However, Blomstedt teaches a diffraction optical waveguide structure (Figs. 1-3) comprise a plurality of regions arranged in a waveguide, configured to couple light propagating in the waveguide, wherein a region is disposed between two other regions and the region is adjacent to other regions, i.e., a length of an overlap is 0 mm (Paras. [0033], [0070], [0075]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the diffraction optical waveguide structure as disclosed by Kong with the teachings of Blomstedt, wherein a length of an overlap between the light-homogenizing region and the deflecting region ranges from 0 mm to 100 mm, or, a length of an overlap between the light-homogenizing region and the coupling-out region ranges from 0 mm to 100 mm, for the purpose of providing new freedoms for design and efficiently allowing for spreading light (Blomstedt: Paras. [0022]-[0023]).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kong in view of Vallius, and in further view of Woltman et al. (US 20170131546, hereinafter “Woltman”).
Regarding claim 7, Kong as modified by Vallius discloses the limitations of claim 5 above.
Kong does not explicitly disclose at least one of the light-homogenizing region, the coupling-in region, the deflecting region, and the coupling-out region is arranged on a different side from remaining others.
However, Woltman teaches a known diffraction optical waveguide (Fig. 9A) includes different diffraction regions arranged on different sides.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the diffraction optical waveguide structure as disclosed by Kong with the teachings of Woltman, wherein at least one of the light-homogenizing region, the coupling-in region, the deflecting region, and the coupling-out region is arranged on a different side from remaining others, for the purpose of providing couplers in the waveguide to propagate along the waveguide (Woltman: Paras. [0093]-[0095]) and as conventionally known in the art.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kong in view of Vallius, and in further view of Lam et al. (US 20220137411, hereinafter “Lam”).
Regarding claim 12, Kong as modified by Vallius discloses the limitations of claim 1.
In the Figure 8 embodiment, Kong does not explicitly disclose the light-homogenizing region comprises more than one sub-light-homogenizing regions.
In the Figure 10 embodiment and discussion, however, Kong teaches the light-homogenizing region comprises more than one sub-light-homogenizing regions (Fig. 10; Page 10 lines 31-35).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the diffractive layers of Kong, wherein the light-homogenizing region comprises more than one sub-light-homogenizing regions, for the purpose of obtaining a better light homogenization effect (Kong: Page 10 lines 33-35).
Kong further fails to disclose the second diffractive microstructure layer in each the sub-light-homogenizing region has different duty cycles and groove depths.
However, Lam teaches grating couplers may be optimized by adjusting duty cycles and groove depths (Para. [0080]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the diffractive layers of Lam, wherein the second diffractive microstructure layer in each the sub-light-homogenizing region has different duty cycles and groove depths, for the purpose of maximizing the power of the display light in the desire path (Lam: Para. [0080]).
Claims 14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kong in view of Vallius, and in further view of Urness et al. (US 20200225476, hereinafter “Urness”).
Regarding claim 14, Kong as modified by Vallius discloses the limitations of claim 1.
In the Figure 8 embodiment, Kong does not explicitly disclose the light-homogenizing region comprises more than one sub-light-homogenizing region.
In the Figure 10 embodiment and discussion, however, Kong teaches the light-homogenizing region comprises more than one sub-light-homogenizing region (Fig. 10; Page 10 lines 31-35).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the diffractive layers of Kong, wherein the light-homogenizing region comprises more than one sub-light-homogenizing region, for the purpose of obtaining a better light homogenization effect (Kong: Page 10 lines 33-35).
Kong further fails to disclose a distance between two adjacent sub-light-homogenizing regions ranges from 5 mm to 25 mm.
However, Urness teaches sub-light-homogenizing regions in a light-homogenizing region (1014 in 1004; Fig. 10A and Para. [0153]) and the distance between two adjacent sub-light-homogenizing regions is 13 mm (Para. [0173]) (a prima facie case of obviousness exists where claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art [MPEP 2144.05]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the diffractive layers of Kong with the teachings of Urness, wherein a distance between two adjacent sub-light-homogenizing regions ranges from 5 mm to 25 mm, for the purpose of obtaining light homogenization structures (Urness: Para. [0153]) and as conventionally known in the art.
Regarding claim 17, Kong as modified by Vallius discloses the limitations of claim 1.
In the Figure 8 embodiment, Kong does not explicitly disclose the light-homogenizing region is configured with one or more hole regions.
In the Figure 10 embodiment and discussion, however, Kong teaches the light-homogenizing region is configured with one or more hole regions (Fig. 10; Page 10 lines 31-35) and Vallius further teaches known diffractive grating structures have a region in the micrometer range (Para. [0032]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the diffractive layers of Kong, wherein the light-homogenizing region is configured with one or more hole regions, for the purpose of obtaining a better light homogenization effect (Kong: Page 10 lines 33-35).
Kong further fails to disclose a hole size of the hole region ranges from 5 mm to 25 mm.
However, Urness teaches holes in a light-homogenizing region (1014 in 1004; Fig. 10A and Para. [0153]) and a hole size may be 6.6 mm) (a prima facie case of obviousness exists where claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art [MPEP 2144.05]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the diffractive layers of Kong with the teachings of Urness, wherein a hole size of the hole region ranges from 5 mm to 25 mm, for the purpose of obtaining light homogenization structures (Urness: Para. [0153]) and as conventionally known in the art.
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kong in view of Vallius, and in further view of Amirparviz (US 8666208 B1).
Regarding claim 18, Kong as modified by Vallius discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Kong further discloses wherein the light-homogenizing region is disposed between the deflecting region and the coupling-out region (see Fig. 8).
Kong does not explicitly disclose a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the deflecting region is greater than a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the coupling-out region.
However, Amirparviz teaches a distance between different diffractive regions for heads-up display may be adjusted based on the application (Column 9 lines 1-17).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the diffractive layers of Kong with the teachings of Amirparviz, wherein a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the deflecting region is greater than a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the coupling-out region, for the purpose of providing wearable or heads-up display including diffractive regions (Amirparviz: Column 9 lines 1-17).
Regarding claim 19, Kong as modified by Vallius discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Kong further discloses wherein the light-homogenizing region is disposed between the deflecting region and the coupling-out region (Fig. 8).
Kong does not explicitly disclose a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the deflecting region ranges from 10 mm to 30 mm, a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the coupling-out region ranges from 10 mm to 30 mm.
However, Amirparviz teaches a distance between different diffractive regions for heads-up display may be adjusted based on the application, wherein a distance between regions may be 33 mm (Column 9 lines 1-17) (a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close [MPEP 2144.05]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the diffractive layers of Kong with the teachings of Amirparviz, wherein a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the deflecting region ranges from 10 mm to 30 mm, a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the coupling-out region ranges from 10 mm to 30 mm, for the purpose of providing wearable or heads-up display including diffractive regions (Amirparviz: Column 9 lines 1-17).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kong in view of Vallius and Blomstedt, and in further view of Woltman.
Regarding claim 8, Kong as modified by Vallius and Woltman discloses the limitations of claim 7 above.
Kong does not explicitly disclose the diffraction optical waveguide structure comprises at least one of the following: the light-homogenizing region is disposed between the deflecting region and the coupling-out region, the light-homogenizing region is adjacent to the deflecting region and the coupling-out region in an axial direction; and, the light-homogenizing region is disposed between the deflecting region and the coupling-out region, the light-homogenizing region is spaced apart from the deflecting region and the coupling-out region in an axial direction, a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the deflecting region is less than or equal to 40 mm, and a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the coupling-out region is less than or equal to 40 mm; and, the light-homogenizing region is disposed between the deflecting region and the coupling-out region, the light-homogenizing region is adjacent to the deflecting region in an axial direction, the light-homogenizing region is spaced apart from the coupling-out region in an axial direction, and a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the coupling-out region is less than or equal to 40 mm; and, the light-homogenizing region is disposed between the deflecting region and the coupling-out region, the light-homogenizing region is adjacent to the coupling-out region in an axial direction, the light-homogenizing region is spaced apart from the deflecting region in an axial direction, and a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the deflecting region is less than or equal to 40 mm; and, the light-homogenizing region is disposed between the deflecting region and the coupling-out region, and the light-homogenizing region overlaps with at least one of the deflecting region and the coupling-out region in an axial direction.
However, Blomstedt teaches a known diffraction optical waveguide structure (Figs. 1-3) includes a plurality of regions arranged in a waveguide, configured to couple light propagating in the waveguide, wherein a region is disposed between two other regions and the region is adjacent to other regions (Paras. [0033], [0070], [0075]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the diffraction optical waveguide structure as disclosed by Kong with the teachings of Blomstedt, wherein the diffraction optical waveguide structure comprises at least one of the following: the light-homogenizing region is disposed between the deflecting region and the coupling-out region, the light-homogenizing region is adjacent to the deflecting region and the coupling-out region in an axial direction; and, the light-homogenizing region is disposed between the deflecting region and the coupling-out region, the light-homogenizing region is spaced apart from the deflecting region and the coupling-out region in an axial direction, a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the deflecting region is less than or equal to 40 mm, and a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the coupling-out region is less than or equal to 40 mm; and, the light-homogenizing region is disposed between the deflecting region and the coupling-out region, the light-homogenizing region is adjacent to the deflecting region in an axial direction, the light-homogenizing region is spaced apart from the coupling-out region in an axial direction, and a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the coupling-out region is less than or equal to 40 mm; and, the light-homogenizing region is disposed between the deflecting region and the coupling-out region, the light-homogenizing region is adjacent to the coupling-out region in an axial direction, the light-homogenizing region is spaced apart from the deflecting region in an axial direction, and a distance between the light-homogenizing region and the deflecting region is less than or equal to 40 mm; and, the light-homogenizing region is disposed between the deflecting region and the coupling-out region, and the light-homogenizing region overlaps with at least one of the deflecting region and the coupling-out region in an axial direction, for the purpose of providing new freedoms for design and efficiently allowing for spreading light (Blomstedt: Paras. [002]-[0023]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN Y JUNG whose telephone number is (469)295-9076. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 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, Michael H Caley can be reached on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JONATHAN Y JUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights