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 .
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-5, 7-9, 11, 12, and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jiawei Wang, Wenfeng Cai, Huilin He, Mengjia Cen, Jianxun Liu, Delai Kong, Dan Luo, Yan-Qing Lu, Yan Jun Liu; Cholesteric liquid crystal-enabled electrically programmable metasurfaces for simultaneous near-and far-field displays. Nanoscale 2022; 14 (48): 17921–17928 (hereinafter Wang et al.).
In regard to claim 1, Wang et al. discloses a stimuli-responsive meta-holographic device comprising (see e.g. annotated Figure 5 below):
a metasurface layer provided with a plurality of nanostructures (see e.g. annotated Figure 5 and page 17922, last paragraph- page 17923 first paragraph); and
a liquid crystal layer provided on one side of the metasurface layer (see e.g. annotated Figure 5 below and page 17923 last paragraph-page 17924 first paragraph) and including a plurality of unit liquid crystal molecules (see e.g. Figure 3 where it is noted that the device can be split into “unit liquid crystal molecules”) of which arrangement is changed by an external stimulus (see e.g. page 17925, last paragraph for voltage application);
wherein, when light is incident on the liquid crystal layer, the liquid crystal layer reflects light of a specific wavelength region to the metasurface layer according to a degree of the external stimulus applied thereon, and the plurality of unit liquid crystal molecules are arranged to have a specific cone angle with respect to a twisting axis to form a twisted-type liquid crystal composite (It is noted that this limitation is conditional, i.e. use of “when” and is at least always satisfied for when light is not incident on the liquid crystal layer. Further, the limitation is functional in nature. Such a functional limitation is only given patentable weight insofar as it imparts a structural limitation. Here, the device of Wang et al. has the cited structure and thus may be operated to perform the function).
PNG
media_image1.png
400
700
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regard to claim 2, Wang et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and
wherein the twisted- type liquid crystal composite is provided to have an interlayer spacing formed at a constant period in a longitudinal direction of the twisting axis (see e.g. Figure 5 for periodic structure), and wherein the interlayer spacing is changed according to the external stimulus (This limitation is functional in nature. Such a functional limitation is only given patentable weight insofar as it imparts a structural limitation. Here, the device of Wang et al. has the cited structure and thus may be operated to perform the function.).
In regard to claim 3, Wang et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 2 above, and
wherein the liquid crystal layer has a pseudo-layer that is regularly arranged in a two-dimensional or a three- dimensional form (see e.g. Figure 5 for layer structure), and the pseudo-layer is formed by the interlayer spacing P of the twisted-type liquid crystal composite that is periodically arranged (see e.g. Figure 5 for layer structure).
In regard to claim 4, Wang et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and
wherein the twisted- type liquid crystal composite has a spiral shape twisted around the twisting axis (see e.g. Figure 5).
In regard to claim 5, Wang et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and
wherein the external stimulus is any one stimulus selected from a group consisting of an electric field, a temperature, a magnetic field, and an electric field frequency (see e.g. page 17925, last paragraph for voltage application).
In regard to claim 7, Wang et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and
wherein the light incident on the liquid crystal layer is light with a wavelength range of 400 nm to 750 nm (note that this limitation appears to be an intended use limitation. It is noted that the recitation of an intended use limitation must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. In this case, the device of Wang et al. is cable of receiving light in the claimed range and thus meets the limitations of the claim), and wherein the light reflected toward the metasurface layer from the liquid crystal layer is light with 10 different wavelength ranges according to the external stimulus (This limitation is functional in nature. Such a functional limitation is only given patentable weight insofar as it imparts a structural limitation. Here, the device of Wang et al. has the cited structure and thus may be operated to perform the function.).
In regard to claim 8, Wang et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and
wherein the unit liquid crystal molecule is provided to have right-handed chirality (see e.g. page 17924, first full paragraph), and wherein the metasurface layer operates under right circularly polarized light to generate a hologram (see e.g. page 17925, second full paragraph).
In regard to claim 9, Wang et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and
wherein the liquid crystal layer includes the twisted-type liquid crystal composite having an interlayer spacing formed at a constant period (see e.g. Figure 5 for layer structure), wherein the external stimulus is provided as an electric field (see e.g. page 17925, last paragraph for voltage application), and wherein the interlayer spacing decreases as an intensity of the electric field increases (This limitation is functional in nature. Such a functional limitation is only given patentable weight insofar as it imparts a structural limitation. Here, the device of Wang et al. has the cited structure and thus may be operated to perform the function.).
In regard to claim 11, Wang et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and
wherein the nanostructure of the metasurface layer is formed in a rectangular parallelepiped shape having a length, a width, and a height (see e.g. Figures 1 and 5), and
the length of the nanostructure is provided at 350 nm to 430 nm (see e.g. caption of Figure 1 for length of 350nm), the width of the nanostructure is provided at 100 nm to 120 nm (see e.g. caption of Figure 1 for width of 100nm), and the height of the nanostructure is provided at 900 nm to 980 nm (see e.g. caption of Figure 1 for height of 900nm).
It is noted that a specific example in the prior art which is within a claimed range anticipates that range (see e.g. MPEP 2131.03).
In regard to claim 12, Wang et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and
wherein the liquid crystal layer is provided to reflect light in the specific wavelength region by different types of the external stimuli, and wherein the different types of external stimuli include an electric field and a temperature (This limitation is functional in nature. Such a functional limitation is only given patentable weight insofar as it imparts a structural limitation. Here, the device of Wang et al. has the cited structure and thus may be operated to perform the function.).
In regard to claim 16, Wang et al. discloses a hologram generating device comprising (see e.g. Figure 5):
the stimuli-responsive meta-holographic device of claim 1 (see e.g. rejection of claim 1, above);
a stimulus control device capable of applying an external stimulus to a liquid crystal layer of the stimuli-responsive meta-holographic device (see e.g. page 19724, first full paragraph for multiple voltages frequencies that may be applied); and
a light source capable of irradiating light to the stimuli-responsive meta- holographic device (see e.g. page 17923, first full paragraph and captions of Figures 2, 6 for halogen lamp or laser light source),
wherein the stimulus control device is configured to apply different types of the external stimuli to the liquid crystal layer (see e.g. page 19724, first full paragraph for multiple voltages frequencies that may be applied).
In regard to claim 17, Wang et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 16 above, and
wherein the light transmitted through the stimuli-responsive meta-holographic device generates as holograms having different shapes and colors according to the external stimuli (see e.g. page 17925, second full paragraph and further note the limitation is functional in nature. Such a functional limitation is only given patentable weight insofar as it imparts a structural limitation. Here, the device of Wang et al. has the cited structure and thus may be operated to perform the function. ).
In regard to claim 18, Wang et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 16 above, and
wherein the liquid crystal layer controls the wavelength of the light reflected toward the metasurface layer differently according to the external stimulus (see e.g. Figure 5 and note that cholesteric layer will reflect light according to the layer spacing/helical twist power of the layer which will depend on applied voltage paragraph and further note the limitation is functional in nature. Such a functional limitation is only given patentable weight insofar as it imparts a structural limitation. Here, the device of Wang et al. has the cited structure and thus may be operated to perform the function), and
the metasurface layer generates holograms having different shapes and colors according to the wavelength of the light incident from the liquid crystal layer (see e.g. page 17923, first full paragraph and captions of Figures 2, 6 for halogen lamp or laser light source paragraph and further note the limitation is functional in nature. Such a functional limitation is only given patentable weight insofar as it imparts a structural limitation. Here, the device of Wang et al. has the cited structure and thus may be operated to perform the function.),
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, 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 6, 10, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al., Cholesteric liquid crystal-enabled electrically programmable metasurfaces for simultaneous near- and far-field displays. Nanoscale 2022; 14 (48): 17921–17928.
In regard to claim 6, Wang et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and
wherein the light incident on the liquid crystal layer is white light (note that this limitation appears to be an intended use limitation. It is noted that the recitation of an intended use limitation must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. In this case, the device of Wang et al. is capable of receiving white light and thus meets the limitations of the claim),
only the light of a specific wavelength region in the white light is reflected to the metasurface layer by the liquid crystal layer (note that the device will undergo Bragg reflection inherently dependent on the pitch of the layer).
Wang et al. fails to disclose
a bandwidth of the light of a specific wavelength region reflected to the metasurface layer is provided to be less than 30 nm.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize using a bandwidth of the light of a specific wavelength region reflected to the metasurface layer is provided to be less than 30 nm, since it has been held that where the general condition of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art (see e.g. MPEP 2144.05).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Wang et al. with a bandwidth of the light of a specific wavelength region reflected to the metasurface layer is provided to be less than 30 nm.
Selecting the bandwidth of light for the application would allow effective operation of the device.
In regard to claim 10, Wang et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 2 above, but fails to disclose
wherein the number of the interlayer spacings formed in the liquid crystal layer at the constant period is provided in 8 to 60.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize using wherein the number of the interlayer spacings formed in the liquid crystal layer at the constant period is provided in 8 to 60, since it has been held that where the general condition of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art (see e.g. MPEP 2144.05).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Wang et al. with wherein the number of the interlayer spacings formed in the liquid crystal layer at the constant period is provided in 8 to 60.
Providing the configuration of the layer to have a specific number of pitches would allow optimized operation of the device.
In regard to claim 13, Wang et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, but fails to explicitly disclose
wherein the metasurface layer is provided to be transmitted by light with a wavelength range of 420 nm to 720 nm to generate three or more different holograms.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize using wherein the metasurface layer is provided to be transmitted by light with a wavelength range of 420 nm to 720 nm to generate three or more different holograms, since it has been held that where the general condition of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art (see e.g. MPEP 2144.05). Further, the limitation appears to be an intended use limitation. It is noted that the recitation of an intended use limitation must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. In this case, the device of Wang et al. is capable of performing the limitation and thus meets the limitations of the claim.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Wang et al. with wherein the metasurface layer is provided to be transmitted by light with a wavelength range of 420 nm to 720 nm to generate three or more different holograms.
Providing several holograms at different wavelengths would allow for a higher functioning device.
In regard to claim 14, Wang et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 13 above, but fails to disclose
wherein the metasurface layer is transmitted by light with the wavelength range of 420 nm to 720 nm to generate 10 different holograms.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize using wherein the metasurface layer is transmitted by light with the wavelength range of 420 nm to 720 nm to generate 10 different holograms, since it has been held that where the general condition of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art (see e.g. MPEP 2144.05). Further, the limitation appears to be an intended use limitation. It is noted that the recitation of an intended use limitation must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. In this case, the device of Wang et al. is capable of performing the limitation and thus meets the limitations of the claim.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Wang et al. with wherein the metasurface layer is transmitted by light with the wavelength range of 420 nm to 720 nm to generate 10 different holograms.
Providing several holograms at different wavelengths would allow for a higher functioning device.
In regard to claim 15, Wang et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 13 above, but fails to disclose
wherein the metasurface layer is configured to be transmitted by light with a wavelength 420 nm, 450 nm, 480 nm, 510 nm, 540 nm, 570 nm, 600 nm, 640 nm, 680 nm, and 720 nm to generate 10 different holograms.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize using wherein the metasurface layer is configured to be transmitted by light with a wavelength 420 nm, 450 nm, 480 nm, 510 nm, 540 nm, 570 nm, 600 nm, 640 nm, 680 nm, and 720 nm to generate 10 different holograms, since it has been held that where the general condition of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art (see e.g. MPEP 2144.05). Further, the limitation appears to be an intended use limitation. It is noted that the recitation of an intended use limitation must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. In this case, the device of Wang et al. is capable of performing the limitation and thus meets the limitations of the claim.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Wang et al. with wherein the metasurface layer is configured to be transmitted by light with a wavelength 420 nm, 450 nm, 480 nm, 510 nm, 540 nm, 570 nm, 600 nm, 640 nm, 680 nm, and 720 nm to generate 10 different holograms.
Providing several holograms at different wavelengths would allow for a higher functioning device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following references are cited for disclosing related limitations of the applicant’s claimed and disclosed invention: Foo (US 2018/0083364 A1), Saitoh et al. (US 2024/0337891), Yoo et al. (US 2019/0196267 A1), and Valentine et al. (US 11,209,716 B2).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA M MERLIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3207. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:00AM-5:00PM.
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, Jennifer Carruth can be reached at (571) 272-9791. 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.
/JESSICA M MERLIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights