DETAILED ACTION
Status
This Office Action is responsive to claims filed on 04/23/2025. Please note Claims 2-21 are pending and have been examined.
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) submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 2-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-18 of U.S. Patent No. 12613420 in view of Mukawa (US 20130242555 A1, cited on IDS 1/15/2025).
Claims 2-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 11977230 in view of Mukawa (US 20130242555 A1, cited on IDS 1/15/2025).
Instant Application
U.S. Patent No. 12613420
U.S. Patent No. 11977230
2. A display system for presenting virtual image content to a user, the display system comprising:
1. A head-mounted display system comprising:
1. A head-mounted display system comprising:
one or more emissive micro-displays each comprising an array of light emitters corresponding to pixels, wherein the array of light emitters is configured to output image light that defines the virtual image content;
an emissive micro-display comprising an array of light emitters corresponding to pixels, wherein the array of light emitters is configured to output image light that defines images, wherein the array of light emitters includes a plurality of groups of the light emitters, and wherein each group of the light emitters includes respective first and second light emitters;
a head-mountable frame; a plurality of emissive micro-displays supported by the frame, wherein the emissive micro-displays are configured to output image light;
one or more collimating elements each arranged to at least partly collimate the image light output by one or more of the light emitters; and
and an array of light collimators proximate the array of light emitters, wherein each of the groups of light emitters is associated with a single light collimator of the array of light collimators that is configured to receive and to concentrate the image light that is output by the associated group of light emitters, wherein a first light collimator of the array of light collimators is associated with a first group of the light emitters, wherein a second light collimator of the array of light collimators is associated with a second group of the light emitters, and wherein the first and second light collimators are arranged such that: the image light that is output by the first light emitter of the first group and the first light emitter of the second group is directed to a same first output area, and the image light that is output by the second light emitter of the first group and the second light emitter of the second group is directed to a same second light output area that is offset from the first output area.
and a plurality of arrays of light collimators, wherein each of the plurality of micro-displays has an associated array of light collimators that is configured to capture and reduce an angular emission profile of light from the respective micro-display.
an eyepiece arranged to receive the at least partly collimated image light that is output from the one or more collimating elements, the eyepiece configured to convey the image light to an eye of a user,
an eyepiece configured to receive the image light from the emissive micro-display and to direct the image light to an eye of a user;
an eyepiece supported by the frame, wherein the eyepiece is configured to receive the image light from the emissive micro-displays and to direct the image light to an eye of a user upon mounting the frame on the user;
wherein at least one of the one or more emissive micro-displays is arranged to initially output the image light along an optical path that is at an angle relative to a normal to a surface of the eyepiece.
Claim 14.
Claims 1-18 of U.S. Patent No. 12613420 and claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 11977230 do not expressly disclose at least one of the one or more emissive micro-displays is arranged to initially output the image light along an optical path that is at an angle relative to a normal to a surface of the eyepiece.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Mukawa discloses at least one of the one or more emissive micro-displays is arranged to initially output the image light along an optical path that is at an angle relative to a normal to a surface of the eyepiece (see Fig. 24, the blue light emitting panel 511B (and the green light emitting panel 511G) outputs light along a path that is at an angle relative to a normal of the surface of the eyepiece).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified claims 1-18 of U.S. Patent No. 12613420 or claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 11977230 with the feature of arranging at least one of the one or more emissive micro-displays to initially output the image light along an optical path that is at an angle relative to a normal to a surface of the eyepiece. The arrangement of emissive micro-displays is a designer’s choice.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 2-10 and 13-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tosaya (US 20140043320 A1, cited on IDS 3/26/2025), in view of Mukawa (US 20130242555 A1, cited on IDS 1/15/2025).
Regarding Claim 2, Tosaya discloses a display system for presenting virtual image content to a user, the display system comprising:
one or more emissive micro-displays each comprising an array of light emitters corresponding to pixels (Fig. 4, “a source display 8”), wherein the array of light emitters is configured to output image light that defines the virtual image content ([0055] “This Type 1 BPRD item 7 comprises a source display 8 having an array of light emitting display pixels 11”);
one or more collimating elements each arranged to at least partly collimate the image light output by one or more of the light emitters ([0056] “In FIG. 4 BPRD Type 1, the parallel-microhole, microchannel or microcapillary collimator 9 acts both to couple to mating pixels 11 and to collimate light beams from such pixels 11 until the light from each has achieved a very high degree of collimation and low divergence or nondivergence as measured in milliradians or minutes-of-arc divergence of its respective pixel beam.”); and
an eyepiece arranged to receive the at least partly collimated image light that is output from the one or more collimating elements, the eyepiece configured to convey the image light to an eye of a user ([0056] “The shared lens 10 then uniquely directs the pixel-beams 14a, 14b, etc. light from each such pixel 11 at the appropriate angles simultaneously through the user's eye entrance pupil 1a.”),
Tosaya does not expressly disclose wherein at least one of the one or more emissive micro-displays is arranged to initially output the image light along an optical path that is at an angle relative to a normal to a surface of the eyepiece.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Mukawa discloses at least one of the one or more emissive micro-displays is arranged to initially output the image light along an optical path that is at an angle relative to a normal to a surface of the eyepiece (see Fig. 24, the blue light emitting panel 511B (and the green light emitting panel 511G) outputs light along a path that is at an angle relative to a normal of the surface of the eyepiece).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the system of Tosaya with the feature of arranging at least one of the one or more emissive micro-displays to initially output the image light along an optical path that is at an angle relative to a normal to a surface of the eyepiece. The arrangement of emissive micro-displays is a designer’s choice.
Regarding Claim 3, Tosaya-Mukawa discloses the display system of claim 2, wherein the at least one of the one or more emissive micro-displays is arranged to initially output the image light along an optical path that is at an angle of approximately 90 degrees relative to a normal to a surface of the eyepiece (Mukawa Fig. 24, the blue light emitting panel 511B (and the green light emitting panel 511G) outputs the light along a path that is at an angle of approximately 90 degrees relative to a normal to a surface of the eyepiece).
Regarding Claim 4, Tosaya-Mukawa discloses the display system of claim 2, wherein the array of light emitters is an array of micro-light emitting diodes (LEDs) (Tosaya [0019] “(Typically employed as a 2D, multipixel, flat or curved display whose emitted light is produced by the pixels or whose pixels are lamp, LED or laser backlit and possibly backlight-switched at the pixel by a shutter.” Mukawa [0093] “an image generating device formed by a light emitting element array including light emitting elements such as an organic EL, an inorganic EL, and light emitting diodes (LEDs) can be included as the image generating device in the first form of image generating device.”).
Regarding Claim 5, Tosaya-Mukawa discloses the display system of claim 2, wherein the array of light emitters is a two-dimensional array of light emitters (Tosaya [0019] “(Typically employed as a 2D, multipixel, flat or curved display whose emitted light is produced by the pixels or whose pixels are lamp, LED or laser backlit and possibly backlight-switched at the pixel by a shutter.”).
Regarding Claim 6, Tosaya-Mukawa discloses the display system of claim 2, wherein at least one of the one or more emissive micro-displays is configured to output image light of a plurality of component colors (Tosaya [0060] “1) A single source-display output pixel has separate red/green/blue output subpixels”).
Regarding Claim 7, Tosaya-Mukawa discloses the display system of claim 2, further comprising a reflective surface arranged to redirect, toward the eyepiece, the image light that is output by the one or more emissive micro-displays (Tosaya [0070] “b) (not shown) Rendering at least the near-pixel region of the interior collimator holes or channels 13 reflective but not reflective all the way out to the collimator 9 lens 10 interface, as being reflective the entire length would increase beam divergences at the hole 13 exit into lens 10.” Or Mukawa [0003] “The light guide unit 120 includes a light guide plate 121, which outputs the incident light after the incident light propagates through the inside according to total reflection, a first deflecting unit 130 (for example, including a light reflecting film of one layer), which reflects the light incident on the light guide plate 121 so that the light incident on the light guide plate 121 is totally reflected inside the light guide plate 121, and a second deflecting unit 140 (for example, including a light reflecting multi-film having a multi-layer laminated structure), which outputs from the light guide plate 121 the light propagating through the inside of the light guide plate 121 according to the total reflection.”).
Regarding Claim 8, Tosaya-Mukawa discloses the display system of claim 7, wherein the one or more collimating elements are arranged to receive the image light output by the one or more of the light emitters and output the at least partly collimated image light toward the reflective surface (Mukawa [0178] “In Embodiment 1, the first deflecting unit 130 and the second deflecting unit 140 are disposed inside the light guide plate 121. The first deflecting unit 130 reflects light incident on the light guide plate 121, and the second deflecting unit 140 transmits and reflects light propagating through the inside of the light guide plate 121 according to total reflection a plurality of times.”).
Regarding Claim 9, Tosaya-Mukawa discloses the display system of claim 7, wherein the one or more collimating elements are arranged to receive the image light reflected from the reflective surface and output the at least partly collimated image light toward the eyepiece (Tosaya [0070] “b) (not shown) Rendering at least the near-pixel region of the interior collimator holes or channels 13 reflective but not reflective all the way out to the collimator 9 lens 10 interface, as being reflective the entire length would increase beam divergences at the hole 13 exit into lens 10.”).
Regarding Claim 10, Tosaya-Mukawa discloses the display system of claim 7, wherein: the one or more collimating elements include one or more first collimating elements (Mukawa Fig. 23, 512) and one or more second collimating elements (Mukawa Fig. 23, 503); the one or more first collimating elements are arranged to receive the image light output by the one or more of the light emitters (Mukawa Fig. 23, 501) and output the at least partly collimated image light toward the reflective surface (Mukawa Fig. 23, 504); and the one or more second collimating elements are arranged to receive the image light reflected from the reflective surface and further collimate and output the reflected image light toward the eyepiece (Mukawa [0241] “Alternatively, a conceptual view of an image generating device including light emitting panels 511R, 511G, and 511B in which light emitting elements 501R, 501G, and 501B are arranged in a 2D matrix is illustrated in FIG. 23. Light output from the light emitting panels 511R, 511G, and 511B is incident on a dichroic prism 503 after passage/non-passage thereof is controlled by light passage control devices 504R, 504G, and 504B. The optical paths of the light beams are integrated into one optical path, and the light beams are incident on the light guide plate 121 or 321 via the light output angle control member (microlens array) 60 and the collimating optical system 112.”).
Regarding Claim 13, it recites similar limitations of claim 2. The rationale of claim 2 rejection is applied to reject claim 13.
Regarding Claim 14, it recites similar limitations of claim 3. The rationale of claim 3 rejection is applied to reject claim 14.
Regarding Claim 15, it recites similar limitations of claim 4. The rationale of claim 4 rejection is applied to reject claim 15.
Regarding Claim 16, it recites similar limitations of claim 5. The rationale of claim 5 rejection is applied to reject claim 16.
Regarding Claim 17, it recites similar limitations of claim 6. The rationale of claim 6 rejection is applied to reject claim 17.
Regarding Claim 18, it recites similar limitations of claim 7. The rationale of claim 7 rejection is applied to reject claim 18.
Regarding Claim 19, it recites similar limitations of claim 10. The rationale of claim 10 rejection is applied to reject claim 19.
Claims 11, 12, 20 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tosaya (US 20140043320 A1, cited on IDS 3/26/2025), in view of Mukawa (US 20130242555 A1, cited on IDS 1/15/2025), further in view of Yeoh (US 20170329140 A1, cited on IDS 1/15/2025).
Regarding Claim 11, Tosaya-Mukawa discloses the display system of claim 2. In the same field of endeavor, Yeoh discloses wherein the eyepiece comprises a waveguide assembly comprising one or more waveguides ([0113] “FIG. 13 schematically illustrates a side view of an example stacked waveguide assembly 178. FIG. 13 shows two waveguide stacks 960a, 960b.”), each of the one or more waveguides comprising: an in-coupling optical element configured to in-couple image light into the waveguide ([0116] “As illustrated in FIG. 13, each waveguide 962a, 966a, 968a, 962b, 966b, 968b can comprise a corresponding incoupling optical element 1007a, 1007b, 1007c, 1007d, 1007e, 1007f.”); and an out-coupling optical element configured to out-couple at least a portion of the in-coupled light out of the waveguide toward the eye of the user ([0124] “The corresponding light distributing element 1011a, 1011b, 1011c, 1011d, 1011e, 1011f can deflect the light at the corresponding design wavelength to a corresponding layer of the outcoupling optical element (not shown). The corresponding layer of the outcoupling optical element is configured to couple the light at the corresponding design out of the stacked waveguide assembly.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the system of Tosaya-Mukawa with the features of comprising waveguides including in-coupling optical elements and out-coupling optical elements. Doing so could properly direct the light at desired direction, as taught by Yeoh.
Regarding Claim 12, Tosaya-Mukawa discloses the display system of claim 2. In the same field of endeavor, Yeoh discloses wherein the eyepiece is configured to output the image light toward the eye of the user with different amounts of wavefront divergence corresponding to different depth planes ([0114] “In some embodiments, the waveguide stacks 960a, 960b may each be associated with a particular depth plane in a light field display. For example, the waveguide stack 960a may be used to display images perceivable at a first distance from the wearer, and the waveguide stack 960b may be used to display images perceivable at a second distance from the wearer, where the second distance is different from the first distance.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the system of Tosaya-Mukawa with the features of outputting the image light toward the eye of the user with different amounts of wavefront divergence corresponding to different depth planes. Doing so could “produce a true sensation of depth” for a 3D display, as taught by Yeoh.
Regarding Claim 20, it recites similar limitations of claim 11. The rationale of claim 11 rejection is applied to reject claim 20.
Regarding Claim 21, it recites similar limitations of claim 12. The rationale of claim 12 rejection is applied to reject claim 21.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Chieh Chen (US 20170222107 A1) – this reference discloses a monochromatic chip-scale packaging (CSP) light emitting diode (LED) device with an asymmetrical radiation pattern, including a flip-chip LED semiconductor die, and a reflective structure, is disclosed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHONG WU whose telephone number is (571)270-5207. The examiner can normally be reached MON-FRI: 9AM-5PM EST.
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, Xiao Wu can be reached at 571-272-7761. 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.
/CHONG WU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2613
Prosecution Insights