UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`15/933,639
`
`03/23/2018
`
`Miller H. Schuck
`
`229501
`
`1048
`
`REALD Inc. - Patent Department
`Stefan Bump
`5700 Flatiron Parkway
`Boulder CO 80301
`
`KO” TONY
`
`2878
`
`PAPERNUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`12/21/2020
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`
`following e—mail address(es):
`
`eofficeaction @ appcoll.com
`patent@rea1d.com
`patpros @reald.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`017/09 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`15/933,639
`Examiner
`TONY KO
`
`Applicant(s)
`Schuck et al.
`Art Unit
`2878
`
`AIA (FITF) Status
`N0
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet wit/7 the correspondence address -
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing
`date of this communication.
`|f NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1). Responsive to communication(s) filed on 10/30/2020.
`CI A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a)[:] This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)
`
`This action is non-final.
`
`3)[:] An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4):] Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Expade Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)
`
`Claim(s)
`
`21—99 is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`
`
`[:1 Claim(ss)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`8)
`Claim(s 2_199 Is/are rejected
`
`D Claim(ss_) is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`S)
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[:1 Claim(s
`* If any claims have been determined aflowable. you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`
`10)|:l The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`is/are: a)[] accepted or b)l:] objected to by the Examiner.
`11)[:] The drawing(s) filed on
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`
`12)D Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a)I:l All
`
`b)|:] Some**
`
`c)l:i None of the:
`
`1C] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2C] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`3D Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1) [3 Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`2) C] Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date_
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) E] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) CI Other-
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20201211
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/933,639
`Art Unit: 2878
`
`Page 2
`
`Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
`
`The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
`
`Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
`
`A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR
`
`1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued
`
`examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the
`
`finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's
`
`submission filed on 10/30/2020 has been entered.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
`
`The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
`
`(a) IN GENERAL—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and
`of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to
`enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to
`make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor orjoint
`inventor of carrying out the invention.
`
`The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
`
`The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and
`process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person
`skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the
`same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
`
`Claims 21-99 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), first paragraph, as
`
`failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which
`
`was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the
`
`relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the
`
`inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
`
`Claims 21, 76 and 92 recite the following limitations ”a polarization conversion system operable
`
`II
`to direct time-sequential left and right stereo images ,
`
`II
`
`a first image light path” and ”a second image
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/933,639
`Art Unit: 2878
`
`Page 3
`
`light path”, ”diverging image light bearing the time-sequential left and right stereo images” which are
`
`not part of the original disclosure. MPEP 2163 dictates ”An appiioani Shows possession 01° the
`
`claimed invention by describing the ciairneci invention with aii of its iin3itations using such
`
`descriptive means as words, structures, figures, diagrams, and iorrnuias that tuiiy set forth the
`
`strained invention Lockwood 1/ Amer Aiiiines inc, it)? F. 3d 1563157341 USPQZd 1361,
`
`136?: (Fed. Cir. 1337)
`
`MPEP 2163.92 states —
`
`'i’he courts have described the essential question to he addressed in a description
`’7
`reouirernent issue in a variety of ways. An ehiective star: dard for determining comoiianoe with
`the written description requirement is. "does the descrioti oncciearly aii-ow persons oi ordinary
`skiii in the art to recognize that he or she invented whatis ci ai.=ned‘ in re Gosteii. 8'72 Fid
`10313, 1312,10 USFQZd 1614-18181ii3eti.Cir 1389). Underil—asCain inc. t/..“via .uritar, ..3:.=
`F2} 1555, 156’364,1313.SP02dii
`, 1.117 (Fed. Cir. 133‘”, to satistythe written
`description requirement, an appiicaht must convey with reasonahie oiaiity‘ to these skiiied in
`the art that, as of the filing date sought, he or she was in possession of the invention, and that
`the invention, in that context, is whatever is new eiainied. The test for suiticiency ot support in
`a parent application is whether the disciosure of the appiioatioh reiied upon "reasona'oiy
`conveys to the artisan that the inventor hati possession at that time of the tater oiaimed
`suhi eot :rzatter ” Sarision Purina (So. i! FarMar-£30., ML, 777’2 F. 2d 15731573227 USFQ
`177, 173 (Fed. Cir.
`385,: (quoting In re Kaslow, 707i:d 1 3?6 i375, 217 USPQ iiJ33, 103?e
`3i
`_
`(Fed.£‘.ir.1383ii.{§
`
`Whenever the issue arises, the fundamentai tactuai inquiry is whether the specification
`conveys viritii reasonable ciarity to those skiiied in the art that, as at the tiiing date sought,
`applicant was in possession oi the invention as new claimed. See, eg tfas~Garh, Inc. v.
`Mahurirar, 335 F.2d 1555, 15334154, 19 USPQ2d ii '11,
`‘i 117 (Fed. Cir. i931). An appiicant
`shows possession of the claimed invention by describing the eiairned invention with aii oi its
`iimitations using such descriptive means as words, structures, figures, diagrams, anti tormtzias
`that fully set forth the claimed invention. Lockwood iI. Am. Airiines, inc, it)? F.3d 1565, 15722,
`41 LISFQZd 1981, 1966 (Fed. Cir. 1397'). Possession may he shown in a variety of ways
`inciuding description of an actuai reduction to practice, or bv showing that the invention was
`"ready tor patentino" such as by thc- disclcsure-at drayin-gs or strLcturai-L.hemicai torrnLias
`that show that the invention was compiete or by desoriping distinguishing identiiyi no
`characteristics sutii-cie'nt to show that the appii-cant was in possessien oi the oiaairned
`invention. See e no Pie?'3‘ v Waits Eieos inc. 525 U S 55,68,119 S Ct 334, 3if2, 48
`USP’‘Ed tar-ii ie-t-.Ii1398,=; Regentsotthe Univ. of Cal. t/ EiiLi'iiy 119 F.3ti1553, 1538, 4-3
`USF’QEd i 398. i436 (F-eoi C‘i-r. 1997‘}; Kimgen, inc. v.1;iregret F’hann., 327’ F.2d i203, 12138.
`18 USF‘QQd 1015, 1021 (Fed Cir 199i) (one must define a compound 'oy "whatev' i
`characteristics siiiiioientiy distinguish it").
`
`The siihiect matter at the oiaim need not he described iiteraily (Le, using the same terms or in
`trees verbs) in order for the disciosure to satiety the description requirement. it a ciaini is
`amended to include suhiect matter, limitations, or terminoiogy not present in the anpiication as
`tiied, invoiving a departure from, addition to, or deietion from the tiisciossure of the appii-cation
`stiied, the e). arnir:er sh oL-iti LonLiude that the ciairnedsjuh eLt matter is not deerihedin that
`
`application This cpnciusion wii'1 result'in the reiection oi the ciairns attested untier :1} -
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/933,639
`Art Unit: 2878
`
`Page 4
`
`first paragraph -- description requirement, or denial {if the ‘
`
`
`
`in this instance, the rejectieh under this seetieh i3 pteper because the newiy fiieti etaims
`
`“tnctude subject matter, limitations, er terminotogy not preseht in the eppitcetien as filed,
`
`inveivtng a departure tram, addittee t0, er detetten tram the diesieeute of the appiicattee
`
`as; iiied, the examiner eheuid eeneiude that the Cieimed eubject matter is net deecribed
`
`in that epptteatien,”
`
`Claims 23%, 77/191 and 93-99 are rejected because of their dependency upen rejected
`
`Claims.
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`Applicant's arguments filed 10/30/2020 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
`
`Three arguments made in supporting applicant was in possession of the claimed invention to
`
`claim priority benefit under 35 U.S.C. 120.
`
`First, applicant argues ”..[b]ut respectfully submits that the terms ’ray bundle’ and ’image’ are
`
`used somewhat synonymously to describe the technical concept set out in the specification, and as
`
`presently claimed.” Examiner respectfully disagrees. Paragraph [0026] of the specification shows
`
`images are produced by ray bundles (e.g. A’, B’, C’). The causal relationship between ray bundles and
`
`images set forth by the specification (one produced by another) does not appear to be consistent with
`
`the argument (section A1) set forth in applicant’s response filed on 10/30/2020. Also in A1, applicant
`
`argues ”[b]ecause the projection of stereoscopic images may be described in terms of ray bundles in the
`
`specification to teach or demonstrate the technical concept therein, it does not prevent the applicant
`
`from claiming the invention in terms that a Person of Ordinary Skill In The Art (POSITA) would clearly
`
`understand.” The argument is not persuasive because the original disclosure does n_ot teach ”projection
`
`of stereoscopic images” as argued, rather, the original disclosure teaches [0039] ”the stereoscopic
`
`images are displayed”.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/933,639
`Art Unit: 2878
`
`Page 5
`
`Second, applicant argues the specification implicitly teaches directing time-sequential left and
`
`right stereo images onto an overlapping area of a cinema projection screen. Applicant relies upon US
`
`Patent 4792850 to Liptoh (hereafter ’850 patent). Upon a quick text search of the term ”ray bundle” in
`
`the ’850 patent, Examiner was unable to find reference to ray bundle. Therefore, it is unclear how ray
`
`bundles and images are used synonymously. The citation of paragraph [0029] in the argument dated
`
`10/30/2020, in addition to paragraph [0026] of the specification, demonstrates the relationship
`
`between ray bundle and images, but it does not support the applicant, at the filing of application (in
`
`pursuing priority date under 35 U.S.C. 120) has in their position ”a polarization conversion system
`
`operable to direct time-sequential left and right stereo images onto an overlapping area of a cinema
`
`projection screen”.
`
`Conclusion
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
`
`should be directed to TONY KO whose telephone number is (571)272-1926. The examiner can normally
`
`be reached on Monday-Friday 9-5pm.
`
`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,
`
`Georgia Epps can be reached on 571-272-2328. The fax phone number for the organization where this
`
`application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
`
`Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application
`
`Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained
`
`from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available
`
`through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/933,639
`Art Unit: 2878
`
`Page 6
`
`my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact
`
`the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a
`
`USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-
`
`9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
`
`/TONY KO/
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2878
`
`TK
`
`

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.

We are unable to display this document.

PTO Denying Access

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket