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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1,3,8,10,11,12, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shramkova (EP 3671320 A1) in view of Mather et al (US 20070058258)
Regarding Claim 1,12,
Shramkova discloses (Fig. 1) a projection optical system [0001] comprising: a projection substrate [0003-0005] for projecting an image light onto a second surface while transmitting at least a part of light, that is incident from a first surface, to the second surface opposite to the first surface, the projection substrate having an optical waveguide (WG1); and a diffracted light reduction plate (OM1) that (i) is provided on the first surface side or the second surface side of the projection substrate [0026-0028], (ii) covers at least a part of the optical waveguide, which diffracts an input light incident from the first surface of the projection substrate at a predetermined incident angle [0021-0024], and (iii) reduces diffracted light that travels in an emission direction of the image light [0026-0028], wherein the optical waveguide guides at least a part of projection light for projecting the image light, and emits the at least part of the projection light as the image light from the second surface [0005].
Shramkova does not disclose an air layer between itself and the optical waveguide.
Mather el al discloses (Fig. 28) an air layer (82) between itself and the optical waveguide (74)[0230-0232].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Shramkova to include Mather et al’s air layer between itself and the optical waveguide motivated by the desire to maintain total internal reflection at the waveguide/air interfaces [0232].
Regarding Claim 3,
In addition to Shramkova and Mather et al, Sharmakova discloses wherein the diffracted light reduction plate (OM1) [0026-0028]is provided facing the first surface or the second surface of the projection substrate, and has a polarization filter (po) that reduces P-polarized waves parallel to a plane of incidence of the input light that has entered the diffracted light reduction plate.
Regarding Claim 8
In addition to Shramkova and Mather et al, Shramkova discloses (Fig. 1) wherein the diffracted light reduction plate is provided in a range including a position above the optical waveguide when glasses-type terminal, including the projection optical system, are worn in a manner that covers the eyes of a user [0014].
Regarding Claim 10,
In addition to Shramkova and Mather et al, Shramkova discloses (Fig. 1) wherein the optical waveguide has:an incident region, into which a projection light for projecting the image light enters, which includes an input diffraction grating and guides the incident projection light inside the projection substrate; and an emission region that includes an output diffraction grating, guides at least a part of the projection light incident from the incident region, and emits the at least part of the projection light as the image light from the second surface, and the diffracted light reduction plate covers at least a part of the output diffraction grating [0022-0026].
Regarding Claim 11,
In addition to Shramkova and Mather et al, Shramkova discloses (Fig. 1) wherein the optical waveguide further has an intermediate region that includes an intermediate diffraction grating and guides a part of the projection light incident from the incident region toward the emission region, in the input diffraction grating, a plurality of first grooves are formed with a first period, in the intermediate diffraction grating, a plurality of second grooves are formed with a second period, and in the output diffraction grating, a plurality of third grooves are formed with a third period [0022-0026].
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shramkova (EP 3671320 A1) and of Mather et al (US 20070058258) in view of Karasawa (US 20130077156) and in view of Chang et al (US 20120212809)
Regarding Claim 2,
Shramkova and Mather et al discloses everything as disclosed above.
Shramkova and Mather et al do not disclose wherein the diffracted light reduction plate has: a protective substrate that is provided facing the first surface or the second surface of the projection substrate ;a polarization filter provided on one of a third surface or a fourth surface of the protective substrate, the third surface being on the side opposite to the projection substrate and the fourth surface facing the projection substrate, and that reduces P- polarized waves parallel to a plane of incidence of the input light incident on the diffracted light reduction plate; and an infrared cut filter provided on a surface of the protective substrate opposite to a surface on which the polarization filter is provided, and that reduces light in the infrared region among the input light.
Karasawa discloses (Fig. 3-4) a protective substrate (3) and a polarization filter (9) provided on a third surface that is a surface of the protective substate [0055] and an infrared cut filter (14).
Chang discloses (Fig. 2) a protective substate (210), a fourth surface (214) that is a surface of the protective substrate opposite to the third surface (212) and infrared cut filter provide on a fourth surface [0016-0017].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Shramkova and Mather to include Karasawa’s a protective substrate (3) and a polarization filter (9) provided on a third surface that is a surface of the protective substate [0055] and an infrared cut filter (14) to further include Chang’s protective substate (210), a fourth surface (214) that is a surface of the protective substrate opposite to the third surface (212) and infrared cut filter provide on a fourth surface [0016-0017] motivated by the desire to reduce transmission of incident light in the near infrared region (Chang [0018]).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shramkova (EP 3671320 A1) and of Mather et al (US 20070058258) in view of Karasawa (US 20130077156)
Regarding Claim 4,
Shramkova and Mather et al discloses everything as disclosed above.
Shramkova discloses (Fig. 1) the diffracted light reduction plate has a polarization filter (po)[0026-0028].
Shramkova and Mather et al do not disclose protective substrate (glass substrate) and a polarizing film that is coated on at least one of the third surface or a fourth surface of the protective substrate.
Karasawa discloses a protective substrate (glass substrate) and a polarizing film that is coated on at least one of the third surface or a fourth surface of the protective substrate.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Shramkova and Mather et al to include Karasawa’s protective substrate (glass substrate) and a polarizing flim that is coated on at least one of the third surface or a fourth surface of the protective substrate motivated by the desire to provide the polarizer coated on the protective substrate.
Claim(s) 5-7,9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shramkova (EP 3671320 A1) and of Mather et al (US 20070058258) in view Bhakta et al (US 20210247610)
Regarding Claim 5,
Shramkova and Mather et al discloses everything as disclosed above.
Shramkova and Mather et al do not disclose wherein the diffracted light reduction plate has: a protective substrate that is provided facing the first surface or the second surface of the projection substrate; and a light control filter provided on at least one of a third surface or a fourth surface of the protective substrate, the third surface being on the side opposite to the projection substrate and the fourth surface facing the projection substrate, allows the input light incident on the diffracted light reduction plate at an incident angle in a first angle range to pass through the optical waveguide, diffuses the input light incident on the diffracted light reduction plate at an incident angle in a second angle range different from a first angle range and attenuates an amount of light that travels straight to and reaches the optical waveguide as compared with a case where the input light enters at an incident angle in the first angle range.
Bhakta discloses an angle selective transmission filter (ASTF 44), transmits a first portion of the emitted light, first set of incident angles, a second set of incident angles [0006-0007]; allows the input light incident on the diffracted light reduction plate at an incident angle in a first angle range to pass through; diffuses the input light incident on the diffracted light reduction plate at an incident angle in a second angle range different from a first angle range
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Shramkova and Mather et al to include Bhakta angle selective transmission filter (ASTF 44), transmits a first portion of the emitted light, first set of incident angles, a second set of incident angles [0006-0007] motivated by the desire to remove light outside the desired angular range from the optical path and minimize stray light [0006-0007].
Regarding Claim 6,
In addition to Shramkova, Mather et al, and Bhakta, Bhakta discloses wherein the light control filter is formed by depositing a filter material on at least one of the third surface or the fourth surface of the protective substrate [0034].
Regarding Claim 7,
In addition to Shramkova, Mather et al, and Bhakta, Bhakta discloses wherein the second angle range of the light control filter includes the predetermined incident angle of the input light, which has entered from the first surface of the projection substrate and causes the optical waveguide to generate diffracted light [0034-0035].
Regarding Claim 9,
In addition to Shramkova, Mather et al, and Bhakta, Bhakta discloses wherein the diffracted light reduction plate is provided in a range above a lower end of the optical waveguide when glasses-type terminal, including the projection optical system, are worn in a manner that covers the eyes of a user [0006-0007].
Claim(s) 13-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shramkova (EP 3671320 A1) and of Mather et al (US 20070058258) in view Deng (US 20200209471)
Regarding Claim 13,
Shramkova and Mather et al discloses everything as disclosed above.
Shramkova and Mather et al do not disclose wherein the projection unit has a polarization adjustment unit that adjusts a polarization direction of the projection light to be radiated onto the incident region, the diffracted light reduction plate of the projection optical system is provided facing the first surface of the projection substrate, and the polarization adjustment unit adjusts the polarization direction of the projection light so that a polarization direction of the image light matches a polarization direction of the light that the diffracted light reduction plate reduces.
Deng discloses (Fig. 4a-4b) the projection unit (110) has a polarization adjustment unit that adjusts a polarization direction of the projection light to be radiated onto the incident region [0045-0050]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Shramkova and Mather et al to include Deng’s projection unit (110) has a polarization adjustment unit that adjusts a polarization direction of the projection light to be radiated onto the incident region [0045-0050] motivated by the desire to adjust the polarization of the projection light according to the polarization characteristic of the polarizing element.
Regarding Claim 14,
In addition to Shramkova, Mather et al and Deng, Deng discloses wherein the projection unit (110) has a polarization adjustment unit (340) that adjusts a polarization direction of the projection light to be radiated onto the incident region, the diffracted light reduction plate (121a) of the projection optical system is provided facing the second surface of the projection substrate, and the polarization adjustment unit adjusts the polarization direction of the projection light so that a polarization direction of the image light matches a polarization direction of the light that the diffracted light reduction plate transmit [0045-0050].
Regarding Claim 15,
In addition to Shramkova, Mather et al and Deng, Deng discloses wherein a plurality of the projection substrates are fixed to the frame (Shramkova discloses stacked waveguides Wg1,Wg2,Wg3), the diffracted light reduction plate is provided on (i) the user-opposite side of one projection substrate among the plurality of projection substrates or (ii) between the one projection substrate and the user, the projection unit radiates the projection light [0028], including different wavelengths, onto the respective incident regions provided on each of the plurality of projection substrates, and the emission regions, provided on each of the plurality of projection substrates, overlap at least partially in a planar view, and respectively emit the image light, corresponding to the projection light radiated onto a plurality of the incident regions from the projection unit, from the second surface of the plurality of projection substrates to the eyes of the user.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Shramkova and Mather et al to include Deng’s plurality of projections including different wavelengths onto the incident regions motivated by the desire to transmit the three primary colors through the waveguides and therefore provide a color image to the user [0004].
Regarding Claim 16,
In addition to Shramkova, Mather et al and Deng, Deng discloses wherein the projection unit (110) has a polarization adjustment unit (340)that adjusts a polarization direction of at least one projection light among a plurality of the projection lights to be radiated onto the incident regions, the diffracted light reduction plate of the projection optical system is provided on the user- opposite side of the plurality of projection substrates, and the polarization adjustment unit adjusts the polarization direction of the projection light so as to match a polarization direction of at least one of a plurality of the image lights and a polarization direction of the light that the diffracted light reduction plate reduces [0045-0050].
Regarding Claim 17,
In addition to Shramkova, Mather et al and Deng, Deng discloses wherein the projection unit has a polarization adjustment unit that adjusts a polarization direction of at least oneprojection light among the plurality of projection lights to be radiated onto the incident regions, the diffracted light reduction plate of the projection optical system is provided between (i) one projection substrate among the plurality of projection substrates and (ii) the user, and the polarization adjustment unit adjusts the polarization direction of the projection light so that a polarization direction of the image light emitted by the one projection substrate, among the plurality of image lights, matches a polarization direction of the light that the diffracted light reduction plate transmits [0047-0050].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUCY P CHIEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8579. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM PST 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, Michael Caley can be reached at 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.
/LUCY P CHIEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights