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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 8, 13, and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cheng (U.S. 2017/0248790).
Regarding claim 1, Cheng discloses a pupil separation system (100, Figs. 21-23; page 10, para [0111]) comprising:
a first optical element (optical element comprising 162-1, Fig. 23; page 10, para [0113]) disposed at a first position along an axis (optical axis along 210, Fig. 21; page 10, para [0112]), wherein the first optical element (optical element comprising 162-1, Fig. 22) comprises:
a first input surface (vertical input surface of optical element comprising 162-1, Fig. 23);
a first beamsplitter (162-1, Fig. 23; page 10, para [0113]) optically coupled to the first input surface; and
a first output surface (horizontal output surface of optical element comprising 162-1, Fig. 23) optically coupled to the first beamsplitter (162-1, Fig. 23);
a second optical element (optical element comprising 162-2, Fig. 23; page 10, para [0114]) disposed at a second potion along the axis (optical axis along 210, Fig. 23), wherein the second optical element (optical element comprising 162-2, Fig. 23) comprises:
a second input surface (vertical input surface of optical element comprising 162-2, Fig. 23);
a second beamsplitter (162-2, Fig. 23; page 10, para [0114]) optically coupled to the second input surface; and
a second output surface (horizontal output surface of optical element comprising 162-2, Fig. 23) optically coupled to the second beamsplitter (162-2, Fig. 2);
a third optical element (optical element comprising 162-3, Fig. 13; page 10, para [0114]) disposed at a third position along the axis (optical axis along 210, Fig. 23), wherein the third optical element (optical element comprising 162-3, Fig. 23) comprises:
a third input surface (vertical input surface of optical element comprising 162-3, Fig. 23);
a reflective surface (reflective surface of 162-3, Fig. 23) optically coupled to the third input surface; and
a third output surface (horizontal output surface of optical element comprising 162-3, Fig. 23) optically coupled to the reflective surface (reflective surface of 162-3, Fig. 23).
Regarding claim 2, Cheng discloses a pupil separation system with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the first position (position of 162-1, Fig. 23), the second position (position of 162-2, Fig. 23), and the third position (position of 162-3, Fig. 23) are disposed in order along the axis (optical axis along 210, Fig. 23).
Regarding claim 8, Cheng discloses a pupil separation system (100, Figs. 21-23; page 10, para [0111]) comprising:
a first optical element (optical element comprising 162-3, Fig. 23; page 10, para [0114]) disposed at a first position along an axis (optical axis along 210, Fig. 21; page 10, para [0112]), wherein the first optical element (optical element comprising 162-3, Fig. 22) comprises:
a first input surface (vertical input surface of optical element comprising 162-3, Fig. 23);
a first beamsplitter (162-3, Fig. 23; page 10, para [0114]) optically coupled to the first input surface; and
a first output surface (horizontal output surface of optical element comprising 162-3, Fig. 23) optically coupled to the first beamsplitter (162-3, Fig. 23);
a second optical element (optical element comprising 162-2, Fig. 23; page 10, para [0114]) disposed at a second potion along the axis (optical axis along 210, Fig. 23), wherein the second optical element (optical element comprising 162-2, Fig. 23) comprises:
a second input surface (vertical input surface of optical element comprising 162-2, Fig. 23);
a second beamsplitter (162-2, Fig. 23; page 10, para [0114]) optically coupled to the second input surface; and
a second output surface (horizontal output surface of optical element comprising 162-2, Fig. 23) optically coupled to the second beamsplitter (162-2, Fig. 2);
a third optical element (optical element comprising 162-1, Fig. 13; page 10, para [0114]) disposed at a third position along the axis (optical axis along 210, Fig. 23), wherein the third optical element (optical element comprising 162-1, Fig. 23) comprises:
a third input surface (vertical input surface of optical element comprising 162-1, Fig. 23);
a reflective surface (reflective surface of 162-1, Fig. 23) optically coupled to the third input surface; and
a third output surface (horizontal output surface of optical element comprising 162-1, Fig. 23) optically coupled to the reflective surface (reflective surface of 162-1 Fig. 23);
wherein the third optical element (162-1, Fig. 23) comprises a right angle prism (such as right angle prism of optical element comprising 162-1, Fig. 23) operable to reflect light in a green wavelength range (162-1 comprises a right angle prism operable to reflect light in a green wavelength range, Fig. 23; page 10, para [0113]).
Regarding claim 13, Cheng discloses a pupil separation system with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the first output surface (horizontal output surface of 162-1, Fig. 23), the second output surface (horizontal output surface of 162-2, Fig. 23), and the third output surface (horizontal output surface of 163-3, Fig. 23) are coplanar.
Regarding claim 15, Cheng discloses a pupil separation system with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the first beamsplitter (162-1, Fig. 23) is parallel to the second beamsplitter (162-2, Fig. 23).
Regarding claim 16, Cheng discloses a pupil separation system with all the limitations above and further discloses wherein the reflective surface (reflective surface of 162-3, Fig. 23) is parallel to the second beamsplitter (162-2, Fig. 23).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 9-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng (U.S. 2017/0248790).
Regarding claim 9, Cheng discloses a pupil separation system with all the limitations above but does not expressly disclose wherein the reflective surface (reflective surface of 162-1, Fig. 23) comprises a metallized coating. However, official notice is taken that it is well known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention that a reflective surface can be comprised of a metallized coating in order to provide reflectivity to the reflective surface. Therefore, before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the reflective surface (Cheng: reflective surface of 162-1, Fig. 23) of Cheng to be comprised of a metallized coating in order to obtain the benefits of providing reflectivity to the reflective surface as is well known in the art.
Regarding claim 10, Cheng discloses a pupil separation system with all the limitations above but does not expressly disclose a red color filter operable to transmit a red wavelength range disposed adjacent the first output surface (horizontal output surface of optical element comprising 162-1, Fig. 23). However, Cheng discloses that the second output surface (horizontal output surface of optical element comprising 162-2, Fig. 23) outputs a red wavelength range of light (Fig. 23; page 10, para [0114]). Furthermore, official notice is taken that it is well known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention that a red color filter can effectively filter out other color wavelength ranges of light in order to improve the transmission of a red wavelength range of light. Therefore, before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the second output surface (Cheng: horizontal output surface of optical element comprising 162-2, Fig. 23) with a red color filter operable to transmit a red wavelength range such that the red color filter is disposed adjacent the first output surface (horizontal output surface of optical element comprising 162-1, Fig. 23) in order to obtain the benefits of improving the transmission of a red color wavelength range of light by filtering out other color wavelength ranges of light as is well known in the art.
Regarding claim 11, Cheng discloses a pupil separation system with all the limitations above but does not expressly disclose a blue color filter operable to transmit a blue wavelength range disposed adjacent the second output surface (horizontal output surface of optical element comprising 162-2, Fig. 23). However, Cheng discloses that the third output surface (horizontal output surface of optical element comprising 162-3, Fig. 23) outputs a blue wavelength range of light (Fig. 23; page 10, para [0114]). Furthermore, official notice is taken that it is well known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention that a blue color filter can effectively filter out other color wavelength ranges of light in order to improve the transmission of a blue wavelength range of light. Therefore, before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the third output surface (Cheng: horizontal output surface of optical element comprising 162-3, Fig. 23) with a blue color filter operable to transmit a blue wavelength range such that the blue color filter is disposed adjacent the second output surface (horizontal output surface of optical element comprising 162-2, Fig. 23) in order to obtain the benefits of improving the transmission of a blue color wavelength range of light by filtering out other color wavelength ranges of light as is well known in the art.
Regarding claim 12, Cheng discloses a pupil separation system with all the limitations above but does not expressly disclose a green color filter operable to transmit a green wavelength range disposed adjacent the third output surface (horizontal output surface of optical element comprising 162-3, Fig. 23). However, Cheng discloses that the first output surface (horizontal output surface of optical element comprising 162-1, Fig. 23) outputs a green wavelength range of light (Fig. 23; page 10, para [0114]). Furthermore, official notice is taken that it is well known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention that a green color filter can effectively filter out other color wavelength ranges of light in order to improve the transmission of a green wavelength range of light. Therefore, before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the first output surface (Cheng: horizontal output surface of optical element comprising 162-1, Fig. 23) with a green color filter operable to transmit a green wavelength range such that the green color filter is disposed adjacent the third output surface (horizontal output surface of optical element comprising 162-3, Fig. 23) in order to obtain the benefits of improving the transmission of a green color wavelength range of light by filtering out other color wavelength ranges of light as is well known in the art.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng (U.S. 2017/0248790) in view of Sun et al. (WO 2020/048536).
Regarding claim 18, Cheng discloses a pupil separation system with all the limitations of claim 1 above but does not expressly disclose wherein the pupil separation system (Cheng: 100, Figs. 21-23) is characterized by an index of refraction greater than or equal to 2.0. However, Sun discloses an optical system comprising an analogous optical waveguide that is characterized by an index of refraction of 2.0 (page 79, para [0105]) in order to improve the field of view of the optical system (page 79, page [0105-0106]).
Therefore, before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the pupil separation system (Cheng: 100, Figs. 21-23) of Cheng to be characterized by an index of refraction of 2.0 (Sun: page 79, para [0105]) in order to obtain the benefits of improving the field of view of the optical system as evidenced by Sun (page 79, page [0105-0106]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-7, 14, 17, and 19-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art as presently searched does not disclose the pupil separation system of claim 3 (having all the combination of features including wherein the first beamsplitter comprises a dichroic beamsplitter operable to transmit light in a red wavelength range and reflect light in a blue wavelength range and a green wavelength range), does not disclose the pupil separation system of claim 6 (having all the combination of features including wherein the second beamsplitter comprises a dichroic beamsplitter operable to transmit light in a green wavelength range and reflect light in a blue wavelength range), does not disclose the pupil separation system of claim 14 (having all the combination of features including wherein the first input surface is perpendicular to the second input surface and the third input surface), does not disclose the pupil separation system of claim 17 (having all the combination of features including wherein: the first beamsplitter is oriented at 45° to the first input surface; the second beamsplitter is oriented at -45° to the second input surface; and the reflective surface is oriented at -45° to the third input surface), and does not disclose the pupil separation system of claim 19 (having all the combination of features including a scanning mirror operable to rotate around an axis; and an eyepiece waveguide including: a first waveguide layer including a first in coupling grating(ICG) operable to receive light transmitted through the first output surface; a second waveguide layer including a second ICG operable to receive light transmitted through the second output surface, wherein the second ICG is spatially offset from the first ICG; and a third waveguide layer including a third ICG operable to receive light transmitted through the third output surface, wherein the third ICG is spatially offset from the first ICG and the second ICG). Claims 4-5 are objected to as being dependent on claim 3. Claim 7 is objected to as being dependent on claim 6. Claim 20 is objected to as being dependent on claim 19.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL CHANG LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7923. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am-6pm.
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 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.
/PAUL C LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
