DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This office action is in response to filing of 7/28/2026.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
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.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 11/24/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election of specie 1 (claims 1-7, 9 and 11-12) in the reply filed on 7/28/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.03(a)). Claims 8 and 10 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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 1-7, 9 and 11-12 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, cited term of “to balance stress with stress at a position close to the optical function-applying layer” (line 17-18) is vague and renders the claims indefinite. The term of “close to” normally has a mean of “a short distance away in physical space”. So term of “stress at a position close to the optical function-applying layer” indicating that the stress is at a short distance away from the optical function-applying layer; -- the stress is not on the optical function-applying layer. It is unclear that how to balance stress when the stress is actually not on the optical function-applying layer.
Claims 2-7 and 9 are rejected as containing the deficiencies of claim 1 through their dependency from claim 1.
Claim 11 has same undefined issue as that of claim 1 in line 11-12.
Claim 12 is rejected as containing the deficiencies of claim 11 through their dependency from claim 11.
Therefore proper amendments are required in order to clarify the scopes of the claims and overcome the rejections.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 11 are rejected as having 112 issues, but would be allowable if the 112 rejections are overcome by proper amendments.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art taken singularly or in combination fails to anticipate or fairly suggest the limitations of the independent claims, in such a manner that a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103 would be proper.
In regard to independent claims 1 and 11, the closest prior art are WO 2021054222 of Yokoi et al (US equivalent US 20220197582) and US 20070211344 of Setoguchi.
Regarding Claims 1 and 11, Yokoi (US 20220197582) teaches a display device configured to perform display toward a viewer area (abstract; figs. 8 and 30), the device comprising:
a plurality of display units configured to emit display light (fig. 8, 106; fig. 9, 106A-106E; fig. 30, 319); and
a display optical component that is provided for the plurality of display units and placed to direct the display light from each of the display units toward the viewer area (fig. 8, 104; fig. 30, 317), and has a plurality of layers in a lamination state (fig. 35, 317a, 317b, 318),
wherein a total numerical number of the display optical component provided for the plurality of display units is one (fig. 30, 317; fig. 35, 317), and
the plurality of layers include:
a base material layer (fig. 35, 317a);
an optical function-applying layer (fig. 35, 317b) and applies an optical function to the display optical component (fig. 35, 317b-- transmission reflector);
a balancer layer (fig.35, 108), wherein the balancer layer and the optical function-applying layer sandwich the base material layer (fig. 35, 317a, 317b, 318; ¶[0353], line 1-5, a layer 318 capable of changing optical characteristics may be provided on the surface of the front or back side of the transmission reflector 317).
Setoguchi (US 20070211344) teaches display optical component (abstract; figs. 1-3), comprising:
a display optical component that has a plurality of layers in a lamination state (fig. 1, 11, 12, 13; fig. 3, 61, 62, 63),
wherein a total numerical number of the display optical component provided for the plurality of display units is one (fig. 1, 1; fig. 3, 60), and
the plurality of layers include:
a base material layer (fig. 1. 11; fig. 3, 61);
an optical function-applying layer that has a thermal dimensional change characteristic that more easily contracts than the base material layer and applies an optical function to the display optical component (fig. 1, 12-BS coat; ¶[0013], line 1-10, a half mirror having a beam splitter coating formed on one main surface of a transparent substrate and an anti-reflection coating formed on the other main surface, in that: a correction coating having substantially the same refractive index as that of the transparent substrate is formed between the transparent substrate and the anti-reflection coating so that a warpage of the transparent substrate caused by a stress of the beam splitter coating is corrected by a stress of the correction coating);
a balancer layer that has a thermal dimensional change characteristic closer to the optical function-applying layer than the base material layer so as to balance stress with stress at a position close to the optical function-applying layer (fig. 1, 13, 14; ¶[0014], line 1-10, the stress of the beam splitter coating formed on one main surface of the transparent substrate and the stress of the anti-reflection coating formed on the other main surface may be balanced out by the stress of the correction coating formed on the other main surface of the transparent substrate. As a result, it becomes possible to correct the warpage of the transparent substrate and to thereby obtain a half mirror satisfying the desired characteristics without the deterioration of the wavefront aberration),
wherein the balancer layer and the optical function-applying layer sandwich the base material layer (fig. 1, 11, 12, 13/14).
But none of them teaches that wherein an additional adjustment layer laminated on a part of an area formed by a surface of the balancer layer and locally adjusts stress balance.
Examiner’s Note
Regarding the references, the Examiner cites particular figures, paragraphs, columns and line numbers in the reference(s), as applied to the claims above. Although the particular citations are representative teachings and are applied to specific limitations within the claims, other passages, internally cited references, and figures may also apply. In preparing a response, it is respectfully requested that the Applicant fully consider the references, in their entirety, as potentially disclosing or teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as fully consider the context of the passage as taught by the reference(s) or as disclosed by the Examiner.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to Jie Lei whose telephone number is (571) 272 7231. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon.-Thurs. 8:00 am to 5:30 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by the telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Stephone Allen can be reached on (571) 272 2434.The Fax number for the organization where this application 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 application 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 Services Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199(In USA or Canada) or 571-272-1000.
/JIE LEI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights