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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/20/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8, 9 and 13-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ouderkirk et al. (“Kirk”) (U.S. PG Publication No. 2021/0263342) in view of Latta et al. (“Latta”) (U.S. PG Publication No. 2013/0194304).
In regards to claim 1, Kirk teaches a head-mounted device, comprising:
a head-mounted support structure having a transparent front portion that overlaps an eye box (See FIG. 1 and 6); and
a camera that is configured to gather eye tracking information from the eye box using light reflected from the transparent front portion (See ¶0080 in view of FIG. 6).
Kirk, however, fails to teach and to gather images of real- world objects through the transparent front portion.
That is, Kirk does indeed teach in ¶0089 that the eye tracking device [camera]may indeed perceive light from the outside of the display device through the lenses, but fails to specify that objects represented through the light from the outside are to be considered and gathered by the camera. In other words, that the image data by which the camera images through the transparent lens includes those of real-world objects themselves. Meanwhile, in a similar endeavor Latta shows in ¶0043, 0045-0048 and FIG. 5 that objects may indeed be perceived through the lenses of glasses, from which further processing may be executed.
Thereforfe Latta teaches to gather images of real-world objects through the transparent front portion (See ¶0043, 0045-0048 and FIG. 5).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, and before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teaching of Latta into Kirk because it allows for the optical axis of the camera to be aligned parallel to the line of sight of the wearer of the HMD device such that the camera acquires video of the external imagery sighted by the wearer which may include real image of real objects as described in ¶0045.
In regards to claim 2, Kirk teaches the head-mounted device of claim 1, wherein the camera is sensitive at visible and infrared wavelengths (See ¶0041, 0081 and 0083 with regards to infrared wavelengths, also see 0041 in view of 0046 wherein visible light may also be created by the locators which is also captured by the imaging device/camera).
In regards to claim 3, Kirk teaches the head-mounted device of claim 2, wherein the camera is configured to gather the eye tracking information in response to infrared light reflected from the transparent front portion (See ¶0080-0083 and FIG. 6).
In regards to claim 4, Kirk fails to teach the head-mounted device of claim 3, wherein the camera is configured to gather the images of the real-world objects in response to visible light that has passed through the transparent front portion.
In a similar endeavor Latta teaches wherein the camera is configured to gather the images of the real-world objects in response to visible light that has passed through the transparent front portion (See ¶0043, 0045-0048 and FIG. 5).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, and before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teaching of Latta into Kirk because it allows for the optical axis of the camera to be aligned parallel to the line of sight of the wearer of the HMD device such that the camera acquires video of the external imagery sighted by the wearer which may include real image of real objects as described in ¶0045.
In regards to claim 5, Kirk teaches the head-mounted device of claim 1, wherein the camera is configured to gather the eye tracking information in response to visible light reflected from the transparent front portion (See ¶0041 in view of 0046 wherein visible light may also be created by the locators which is also captured by the imaging device/camera).
In regards to claim 6, Kirk teaches the head-mounted device of claim 1, further comprising: a light source configured to illuminate the eye box with infrared light, wherein the camera is configured to gather the eye tracking information in response to the infrared light that reflects from the transparent front portion (See ¶0080-0083 in view of FIG. 6).
In regards to claim 8, Kirk teaches the head-mounted device of claim 1, further comprising:
a speaker coupled to the head-mounted support structure in an ear-aligned location (See ¶0030).
In regards to claim 9, Kirk teaches the head-mounted device of claim 1, wherein the head-mounted support structure further includes a nose bridge and temples configured to hold the head-mounted device on a face (See FIG. 1).
In regards to claim 13, Kirk teaches a head-mounted device, comprising:
a head-mounted housing including a lens that overlaps an eye box (See FIG. 1 and 6); and
a camera that is configured to gather eye tracking information from the eye box using light reflected from the lens (See ¶0080 in view of FIG. 6).
Kirk, however, fails to teach to gather images of real-world objects through the lens.
In a similar endeavor Latta teaches to gather images of real-world objects through the lens (See ¶0043, 0045-0048 and FIG. 5).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, and before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teaching of Latta into Kirk because it allows for the optical axis of the camera to be aligned parallel to the line of sight of the wearer of the HMD device such that the camera acquires video of the external imagery sighted by the wearer which may include real image of real objects as described in ¶0045.
In regards to claim 14, Kirk teaches the head-mounted device of claim 13, wherein the lens exhibits a lens power (See ¶0040 wherein the curvature and/or refractive lens power may be dynamically adjusted by the system).
In regards to claim 15, Kirk teaches the head-mounted device of claim 13, wherein the lens does not exhibit a lens power (See ¶0036 and 0040 wherein such alterations and changes may be optional).
In regards to claim 16, Kirk teaches the head-mounted device of claim 13, wherein the lens is a first lens and the eye box is a first eye box, the head-mounted housing further comprising:
a second lens that overlaps a second eye box (See FIG. 6).
In regards to claim 17, Kirk teaches the head-mounted device of claim 16, wherein the camera is a first camera, the head-mounted device further comprising:
a second camera configured to gather additional eye tracking information from the second eye box using light reflected from the second lens and to gather additional images of additional real-world objects through the second lens (See ¶0112 and FIG. 1 in view of FIG. 6 wherein such techniques may be applied to each eye).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ouderkirk et al. (“Kirk”) (U.S. PG Publication No. 2021/0263342) in view of Latta et al. (“Latta”) (U.S. PG Publication No. 2013/0194304) and Xu et al. (“Xu”) (U.S. PG Publication No. 2019/0295271).
In regards to claim 7, Kirk fails to teach the head-mounted device of claim 6, wherein the light source is configured to illuminate the eye box with modulated light having an intensity modulated as a function of time, wherein the camera is configured to detect the modulated light.
In a similar endeavor Latta teaches wherein the light source is configured to illuminate the eye box with modulated light having an intensity modulated as a function of time (See ¶0036-0037 in view of FIG. 5).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, and before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teaching of Latta into Sharma because it allows for not only imaging from infrared radiation, but also including real image data such that it enables depth-resolved video through the combination of both cameras, thus providing additional depth information for such a system, and thus providing further information.
In a similar endeavor Xu teaches wherein the camera is configured to detect the modulated light (See ¶0019).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, and before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teaching of Xu into Sharma because it allows for the use of “invisible” light patterns onto objects in order to image a structured light pattern modulated by a target that allows for depth imaging, thus enabling distance calculation as described in ¶0019.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ouderkirk et al. (“Kirk”) (U.S. PG Publication No. 2021/0263342) in view of Latta et al. (“Latta”) (U.S. PG Publication No. 2013/0194304) and Pohl (U.S. PG Publication No. 0294209).
In regards to claim 10, Kirk fails to teach the head-mounted device of claim 1, wherein the head-mounted support structure further includes a strap configured to hold the head-mounted device on a face.
In a similar endeavor Pohl teaches wherein the head-mounted support structure further includes a strap configured to hold the head-mounted device on a face (See ¶0070).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, and before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teaching of Pohl into Kirk because it allows for the wearable device to be attached to a part of the body as described in at least ¶0070.
Claim(s) 11, 12, 18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ouderkirk et al. (“Kirk”) (U.S. PG Publication No. 2021/0263342) in view of Latta et al. (“Latta”) (U.S. PG Publication No. 2013/0194304) and Sears et al. (“Sears”) (U.S. Patent No. 11,067,809).
In regards to claim 11, Kirk fails to teach the head-mounted device of claim 1, further comprising:
an electrically adjustable shutter that overlaps the camera, wherein the electrically adjustable shutter is configured to exhibit an open state and a closed state, and the camera is configured to gather the eye tracking information when the electrically adjustable shutter is in the closed state.
In a similar endeavor Sears teaches an electrically adjustable shutter that overlaps the camera, wherein the electrically adjustable shutter is configured to exhibit an open state and a closed state (See col. 5, li. 17 – col. 6, li. 4 in view of FIG. 2A, 2B, 4A and 4B), and the camera is configured to gather the eye tracking information when the electrically adjustable shutter is in the closed state (See col. 5, li. 17 – col. 6, li. 4 in view of FIG. 2A, 2B, 4A and 4B, this is taken in consideration of FIG. 6 of Kirk wherein it is understood by one of ordinary skill in the art that as light is being blocked then only the image data of the eye may be appropriately imaged).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, and before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teaching of Sears into Kirk because it allows for an artificial-reality system to have a variety of forms as described in col. 26, li. 55 – col. 27, li. 31 of Sears with a combination of optical subsystems by which a user may view a display screen, and it allows for not only imaging from infrared radiation, but also including real image data such that it enables depth-resolved video through the combination of both cameras, thus providing additional depth information for such a system, and thus providing further information to the system.
In regards to claim 12, Kirk fails to teach the head-mounted device of claim 11, wherein the camera is configured to gather the images of the real-world objects when the electrically adjustable shutter is in the open state.
In a similar endeavor Sears teaches wherein the camera is configured to gather the images of the real-world objects when the electrically adjustable shutter is in the open state (See col. 5, li. 17 – col. 6, li. 4 and FIG. 2A, 2B, 4A and 4B of Sears in view of FIG. 6 of Kirk wherein it is understood to one of ordinary skill in the art that as light is being blocked then only the image data of the eye may be appropriately imaged).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, and before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teaching of Sears into Kirk because it allows for an artificial-reality system to have a variety of forms as described in col. 26, li. 55 – col. 27, li. 31 of Sears with a combination of optical subsystems by which a user may view a display screen, and it allows for not only imaging from infrared radiation, but also including real image data such that it enables depth-resolved video through the combination of both cameras, thus providing additional depth information for such a system, and thus providing further information to the system.
In regards to claim 18, Kirk teaches a head-mounted device, comprising:
a head-mounted support structure having a transparent front portion that overlaps an eye box See FIG. 1 and 6),
a camera coupled to the head-mounted support structure (See FIG. 2 and 6).
Kirk, however, fails to teach wherein transparent front portion includes a shutter that overlaps the eye box, wherein the shutter is adjustable between an open state and a closed state; and wherein the camera is configured to gather images of real-world objects when the shutter is in the open state and is configured to gather gaze tracking information from the eye box when the shutter is in the closed state.
In a similar endeavor Latta and Sears teaches wherein transparent front portion includes a shutter that overlaps the eye box (See col. 5, li. 17 – col. 6, li. 4 in view of FIG. 2A, 2B, 4A and 4B), wherein the shutter is adjustable between an open state and a closed state; and
wherein the camera is configured to gather images of real-world objects when the shutter is in the open state and is configured to gather gaze tracking information from the eye box when the shutter is in the closed state (See col. 5, li. 17 – col. 6, li. 4 and FIG. 2A, 2B, 4A and 4B of Sears in view of FIG. 6 of Kirk wherein it is understood to one of ordinary skill in the art that as light is being blocked then only the image data of the eye may be appropriately imaged, this is taken in view of ¶0045-0048 and FIG. 5 of Latta which allows for view of real-world objects through such cameras).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, and before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teaching of Latta and Sears into Kirk because it allows for an artificial-reality system to have a variety of forms as described in col. 26, li. 55 – col. 27, li. 31 of Sears with a combination of optical subsystems by which a user may view a display screen, and it allows for not only imaging from infrared radiation, but also including real image data such that it enables depth-resolved video through the combination of both cameras, thus providing additional depth information for such a system, and thus providing further information to the system.
In regards to claim 20, Kirk teaches the head-mounted device of claim 18, further comprising:
an infrared light source that is configured to illuminate the eye box with infrared light, wherein the camera is configured to gather the gaze tracking information in response to the infrared light that has reflected from the transparent front portion (See ¶0080-0083 in view of FIG. 6).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ouderkirk et al. (“Kirk”) (U.S. PG Publication No. 2021/0263342) in view of Latta et al. (“Latta”) (U.S. PG Publication No. 2013/0194304) and Sears et al. (“Sears”) (U.S. Patent No. 11,067,809), in further view of von und zu Liechtenstein (“Liech”) (U.S. PG Publication No. 2017/0336641).
In regards to claim 19, Kirk fails to teach the head-mounted device of claim 18, wherein the shutter has a first visible light transmission of greater than 90% in the open state and a second visible light transmission of less than 10% in the closed state.
In a similar endeavor Liech teaches wherein the shutter has a first visible light transmission of greater than 90% in the open state and a second visible light transmission of less than 10% in the closed state (See ¶0072 wherein when in the open-state the cells allow for greater than or equal to 37.5% [thus including 90%] and while in the closed state it may allow transmittance of less than 5%).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, and before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teaching of Liech into Sharma because it allows for a liquid crystal structure which may be turned according to drive voltage as described in ¶0072 for very differing transmittance percentages, thus giving a powerful light blocker when needed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDEMIO NAVAS JR whose telephone number is (571)270-1067. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, ~ 9 AM -6 PM.
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, Joseph Ustaris can be reached at 5712727383. 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.
EDEMIO NAVAS JR
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2483
/EDEMIO NAVAS JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2483