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 .
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 1, 3, and 5-17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 2, 5, 7-9, 20, 22, 25,-26 and 28 of U.S. Patent No. 11,187,900 B2 and the currently examined claims 1-2, 4-8, 13-14 and 16-17 are unpatentable over claims 1-3, 5-6, 7, 9 and 13 of US Patent No. 12,271,001 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the currently examined application are anticipated by or are obvious variants of the issued patent claims as clearly illustrated below.
Currently Examined Application 19/025,019
U.S. Patent No. 11,187,900 B2
Claim 1. An optical device comprising:
a wedge-shaped light turning element comprising:
a first surface parallel to a horizontal axis;
a second surface that is opposite the first surface and inclined with respect to the horizontal axis by a wedge angle;
a light input surface between the first and the second surfaces, the light input surface configured to receive light emitted from a light source,
wherein the light includes light having a first polarization state and light having a second polarization state;
an end reflector disposed on a side of the light turning element that is opposite the light input surface; and
a plurality of light turning features disposed on the second surface, the plurality of light turning features including a polarization selective element to redirect, toward the first surface, light having the first polarization state and to not redirect light having the second polarization state,
wherein the second surface is inclined such that a height of the light input surface is less than a height of the side on which the end reflector is disposed, and wherein at least a portion of the light received into the light turning element is reflected by the end reflector and redirected by the plurality of turning features towards the first surface.
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; and 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, said eyepiece comprising one or more waveguides disposed to direct light into the user's eye, a light source configured to emit light;
a wedge-shaped light turning element comprising:
a first surface parallel to an axis;
a second surface opposite to the first surface and inclined with respect to the axis by a wedge angle α;
a light input surface between the first and the second surfaces configured to receive light emitted from the light source; and
(claim 8, dependent on 5) wherein the plurality of turning features are configured to redirect a portion of the light received through the light input surface having a first polarization state towards the spatial light modulator +
(claim 9, dependent on 8) light turning element is configured to transmit a portion of the light reflected from the spatial light modulator having a second polarization state.
an end reflector disposed on a side opposite the light input surface;
(Claim 5, dependent on 1) wherein the wedge-shaped light turning element comprises a plurality of turning features disposed on the second surface, said plurality of turning features configured to redirect light reflected by said end reflector towards the first surface.
the second surface of said wedge-shaped light turning element is inclined such that a height of the light input surface is less than a height of the end reflector opposite the light input surface and such that light coupled into the wedge-shaped light turning element is reflected by the end reflector and redirected by the second surface towards the first surface, a spatial light modulator disposed with respect to said wedge-shaped light turning element to receive said light ejected from said wedge-shaped light turning element and to modulate said light, wherein said wedge-shaped light turning element and said spatial light modulator are disposed with respect to said eyepiece to direct modulated light into said one or more waveguides of said eyepiece such that said modulated light is directed into the user's eye to form images therein, wherein the spatial light modulator is a reflective spatial light modulator and the wedge-shaped light turning element is configured to transmit light reflected from the spatial light modulator therethrough.
Claim 3.
Claim 7 (dependent on claim 6, dependent on claim 5).
Claim 5.
Claim 20 (dependent on 19, dependent on 1).
Claim 6.
Claim 28.
Claim 7.
Claim 1.
Claim 8.
Claim 8.
Claim 9.
Claim 9.
Claim 10.
Claim 2.
Claim 11.
Claim 9.
Claim 12.
Claim 9.
Claim 13.
Claim 22.
Claim 14.
Claim 22.
Claim 15.
Obvious to try given the finite range of possibilities of which one would fall within the degrees claimed.
Claim 16.
Claim 25.
Claim 17.
Claim 26.
Currently Examined Application 19/025,019
U.S. Patent No. 12,271,001 B2
Claim 1. An optical device comprising:
a wedge-shaped light turning element comprising:
a first surface parallel to a horizontal axis;
a second surface that is opposite the first surface and inclined with respect to the horizontal axis by a wedge angle;
a light input surface between the first and the second surfaces, the light input surface configured to receive light emitted from a light source, wherein the light includes light having a first polarization state and light having a second polarization state;
an end reflector disposed on a side of the light turning element that is opposite the light input surface; and
a plurality of light turning features disposed on the second surface, the plurality of light turning features including a polarization selective element to redirect, toward the first surface, light having the first polarization state and to not redirect light having the second polarization state,
wherein the second surface is inclined such that a height of the light input surface is less than a height of the side on which the end reflector is disposed, and
wherein at least a portion of the light received into the light turning element is reflected by the end reflector and redirected by the plurality of turning features towards the first surface.
Claim 1. An optical device comprising: a spatial light modulator; and
a light turning element comprising:
a waveguide including:
a first surface parallel to a first axis;
a second surface opposite to the first surface; a plurality of polarization selective light turning features directly on the second surface; and
a light input surface between the first and the second surfaces, the light input surface arranged to receive light that is emitted from a light source and to couple the light into the waveguide; and
an end reflector proximal to a side of the light turning element that is opposite the light input surface;
wherein the plurality of polarization selective light turning features are configured to: i) redirect, toward the first surface and the spatial light modulator, a first portion of the light that has a first polarization state, and ii) not redirect a second portion of the light that has a second polarization state different than the first polarization state,
(SLM commonly wedge shaped)
wherein at least a portion of the light coupled into the waveguide is reflected by the end reflector and redirected by the plurality of polarization selective light turning features toward the first surface and the spatial light modulator.
Claim 2.
Claim 13.
Claim 4.
Claim 2.
Claim 5.
Claim 2.
Claim 6.
Claim 3.
Claim 7.
Claim 1.
Claim 8.
Claim 1.
Claim 13.
Claim 5.
Claim 14.
Claim 6.
Claim 16.
Claim 9.
Claim 17.
Claim 7.
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 1-2, 4-5, 7-9, 13-15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Robinson, US 2012/0243204 A1 (hereinafter “Robinson”).
Regarding claim 1, Robinson discloses an optical device (Abstract, waveguide for a wedge type direction backlight or optical valve apparatus and FIGS. 1A-1B generally) comprising:
a wedge-shaped light turning element (optical valve and waveguide 1 structure in FIGS. 1A-3, 10-12, and 24 and [0060]-[0068],[0077]-[0079] and [0117]) and comprising:
a first surface (first light directing side 6, FIGS. 1A-3, 10-12, and 24 and [0065]-[0067],[0077]-[0079] and [0117]) parallel to a horizontal axis (FIGS. 1A-3, 10-12, and 24, based on orientation this side would be parallel to a horizontal plane/axis);
a second surface that is opposite the first surface (second light directing side 8, FIGS. 1A-3, 10-12, and 24 and [0067]-[0069]) and inclined with respect to the horizontal axis by a wedge angle (FIGS. 1A-3, 10-12, and 24 angled wedge shaped for the waveguide 1);
a light input surface between the first and the second surfaces (thin end 2, FIGS. 1A-3, 10-12, 17, and 24 and [0062]-[0063], [0092] and [0094], the light input surface configured to receive light emitted from a light source (illuminator array 15 and 15a, FIGS. 1A-3, 10-12, and 24 at [0062]-[0067], [0077] and FIG. 15 with LED 1515 at [0090]),
wherein the light includes light having a first polarization state (FIGS. 1A-3, 10-12, and 21 and 24 [0007]-[0009] s-polarized and [0084]-[0085]) and light having a second polarization state (FIGS. 1A-3, 10-12, 21, and 24 [0007]-[0009] p-polarized and [0084]-[0085]);
an end reflector disposed on a side of the light turning element that is opposite the light input surface (FIG. 11, corrugated surface 1102 and [0079], FIG. 17, end reflector 1710, FIG. 24, corrugated reflecting end 2420 and [0117]); and
a plurality of light turning features disposed on the second surface (FIGS. 1A-3, extraction features 12 and guiding features 10 and [0063] and [0067] and FIGS. 11B-11C reflective layer 1106 at [0079], FIG. 12, birefringent layer 1220 at [0084]-[0085], FIG. 24 polarization conversion film 2415 at [0117]), the plurality of light turning features including a polarization selective element to redirect, toward the first surface, light having the first polarization state and to not redirect light having the second polarization state (FIG. 12, birefringent layer 1220 at [0084]-[0085], FIG. 24 polarization conversion film 2415 at [0117] converting to P-polarized light for exit),
wherein the second surface is inclined such that a height of the light input surface is less than a height of the side on which the end reflector is disposed (FIG. 2c and other similar FIGS, and [0066] t < T as illustrated), and wherein at least a portion of the light received into the light turning element is reflected by the end reflector and redirected by the plurality of turning features towards the first surface (FIG. 3, light ray 16 are reflected off of surface 8 to reflective side 4, and eventually out through first light directing side 6 at [0067]-[0069]) .
Regarding claim 2, Robinson discloses the optical device of claim 1 (see above), wherein the first polarization state is an s-polarization state (FIGS. 1A-3, 10-12, and 21 and 24 [0007]-[0009] s-polarized and [0084]-[0085]), and wherein the second polarization state is a p-polarization state (FIGS. 1A-3, 10-12, 21, and 24 [0007]-[0009] p-polarized and [0084]-[0085]).
Regarding claim 3, Robinson discloses the optical device of claim 1 (see above), wherein the polarization selective element comprises at least one of a thin film (see below, condition satisfied), a dielectric coating (FIGS. 12 and 21-24, at [0084]-[0086] and [0102]-[0105] dichroic layer is a dielectric coating), or a wire grid (see above, condition satisfied).
Regarding claim 4, Robinson discloses the optical device of claim 1 (see above), wherein the end reflector is configured to reflect at least a portion of the light received through the light input surface back toward the light input surface along a direction that is substantially parallel to the horizontal axis (FIG. 17, forward and backward propagation of the light shown to travel in a substantially parallel path at [0092]-[0096]).
Regarding claim 5, Robinson discloses the optical device of claim 1 (see above), wherein the end reflector comprises a spherical mirror or a parabolic mirror (FIG. 1A, generally illustrating curved end side 4 at [0064], and FIG. 18 illustrating a parabolic reflection surface for the end reflector 1810 and [0096]).
Regarding claim 7, Robinson discloses the optical device of claim 1 (see above), further comprising a spatial light modulator (FIGS. 1A-B an LCD 48 which is a SLM at [0062]) disposed with respect to the first surface such that at least a portion of the light received into the light turning element through the input surface is reflected by the end reflector and redirected by the plurality of turning features towards the first surface and toward the spatial light modulator (FIGS. 1A-2C at [0061]-[0066] placement as illustrated for receiving portions of the light).
Regarding claim 8, Robinson discloses the optical device of claim 7 (see above), wherein the plurality of light turning features are configured to redirect, toward the spatial light modulator, a portion of the light that is received through the light input surface and that has the first polarization state (FIGS. 1A-3, 10-12, and 21 and 24 [0007]-[0009] s-polarized and [0084]-[0085]).
Regarding claim 9, Robinson discloses the optical device of claim 7 (see above), wherein the plurality of turning features are configured to transmit at least a portion of the light that is reflected from the spatial light modulator and that has the second polarization state (FIGS. 1A-3, 10-12, 21, and 24 [0007]-[0009] p-polarized and [0084]-[0085]).
Regarding claim 13, Robinson discloses the optical device of any of claim 1 (see above), further comprising a refractive optical element disposed over the light turning element (see FIG. 11A and refractive imaging element 119 with materials 111 and 113 at [0078]).
Regarding claim 14, Robinson discloses the optical device of claim 13 (see above), further comprising a polarization selective component disposed over the refractive optical element (FIG. 12, and [0102] dichroic layers 1210 and [0084]-[0085] and FIG. 24 with dichroic stack 2410 and [0117]).
Regarding claim 15, Robinson discloses the optical device of claim 1 (see above), wherein the wedge angle is between about 15 degrees and about 45 degrees (FIGS. 1A-1B and [0064] describing angle of tilted extraction feature is approximately 45 degrees; and further at FIG. 13, and [0087]-[0095] the max wedge angle cannot exceed 45 degrees and [0106]-[0116] lower limit of the wedge angle in accordance for proper functionality).
Regarding claim 17, Robinson discloses the optical device of claim 1 (see above), wherein the end reflector is configured to collimate the light that is incident on the end reflector (FIG. 18 illustrating a parabolic reflection surface capable of collimating light based on the curvature at [0096]).
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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robinson in view of Woodgate et al., US 2013/0308339 A1 (hereinafter “Woodgate”).
Regarding claim 6, Robinson discloses the optical device of claim 1 (see above).
However, Robinson does not explicitly disclose wherein the end reflector comprises a reflective holographic structure comprising one or more holograms.
In the same field of endeavor, Woodgate discloses wherein the end reflector comprises a reflective holographic structure comprising one or more holograms (FIGS. 45-48B generally at [0258]-[0261] and FIGS. 34D-F and at [0238]-[0241] diffractive reflector 300 being a holographically recorded diffraction pattern comprising a volume hologram).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the waveguide for a wedge type direction backlight / optical valve apparatus of Robinson to incorporate the holographic structure as disclosed by Woodgate because the references are within the same field of endeavor, namely, waveguide structures for a display apparatus. The motivation to combine these references would have been to improve a focusing function of the end reflector to provide high efficiency reflection (see Woodgate at [0238]). Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the prior art to achieve the claimed invention and there would have been a reasonable expectation of success.
wherein the end reflector comprises a reflective holographic structure comprising one or more holograms.
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robinson in view of Ohsumi, US 6,663,254 B2 (hereinafter “Ohsumi”).
Regarding claim 10, Robinson discloses the optical device of claim 7 (see above) wherein the spatial light modulator is configured to modulate received light ([0066]-.
However, Robinson does not explicitly disclose direct the modulated light back toward the first surface.
In the same field of endeavor, Ohsumi discloses a similar optical device (FIGS. 1-4B generally) wherein the spatial light modulator (FIGS. 1-4B LCD 2 and LCD 21 at col. 7, lines 35-45, 64-end and col. 8, lines 1-46) direct the modulated light back toward the first surface (FIGS. 1-4B LCD 2 and LCD 21 at col. 7, lines 35-45, 64-end and col. 8, lines 1-46 describing light returning from the LCD (SLM)).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify waveguide for a wedge type direction backlight / optical valve apparatus of Robinson to incorporate the spatial light modulator with returning light as disclosed by Ohsumi because the references are within the same field of endeavor, namely, waveguides and optical valve apparatus for a display system. The motivation to combine these references would have been to improve brightness and display and prevent light leakage (see Ohsumi at least at col. 2, lines 65-end and col. 3, lines 1-6). Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the prior art to achieve the claimed invention and there would have been a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 11, Robinson in view of Ohsumi discloses the optical device of claim 10 (see above), wherein the spatial light modulator is configured to emit modulated light having the second polarization state (Robinson at FIGS. 1A-3, 10-12, 21, and 24 [0007]-[0009] p-polarized and [0084]-[0085], and claims 8 and 9).
Regarding claim 12, Robinson in view of Ohsumi discloses the optical device of claim 11 (see above), wherein the optical device further comprises a clean-up polarizer that is configured to transmit light having the second polarization state and block light having the first polarization state (Robinson at FIGS. 1A-3, 10-12, 21, and 24 [0007]-[0009] s-polarized and [0084]-[0085], claim 3, claims 8-12).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robinson, US 2012/0243204 A1 (hereinafter “Robinson”).
Regarding claim 16, Robinson discloses the optical device of claim 1 (see above), further comprising the light source, wherein the light source is disposed with respect to the light input surface such that at least a portion of the light from the light source that is received into the light turning element through the input surface is reflected by the end reflector (see Robinson at FIGS. 15-19, at [0090]-[0101] describing the reflection by the end reflector 1710 therein).
and redirected by the plurality of turning features towards the first surface in an angular range between about ±10 degrees with respect to a normal to the first surface (Robinson at FIGS. 1A-4B describing light exiting close to the normal given the various elements used in the construction at least at [0060]-[0068]; additionally, Robinson at FIGS. 12, 15-20, at [0085] and [0090]-[0101] describing the reflection by the end reflector 1710 therein and specifically describing a Fresnel waveguide at FIG. 20. Although not explicitly disclosing the range, given the limited inputs and finite variables for producing a specific form of output of light given the type of display, before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to try various combinations of materials to produce a workable range of outputs suitable for the intended purpose (i.e., the display type and SLM limitations) and there would have been a reasonable expectation of success).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Robinson et al., US 10,228,505 B2;
Woodgate et al., US 9,420,266 B2;
Waldern et al., US 12,397,477 B2;
Robinson et al., US 9,482,874 B2;
Robinson et al., US 8,651,726 B2;
Woodgate et al., US 2014/0177032 A1;
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARVESH J NADKARNI whose telephone number is (571)270-7562. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-5PM M-F.
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, LunYi Lao can be reached at (571) 272-7671. 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.
/SARVESH J NADKARNI/Examiner, Art Unit 2621