Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/643,721

MAGNETIC TRIAL LENS ADAPTERS FOR AR/VR HEADSET

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Dec 10, 2021
Examiner
FISSEL, TRAVIS S
Art Unit
2872
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Virtual Field Inc.
OA Round
4 (Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
408 granted / 538 resolved
+7.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
572
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.4%
-38.6% vs TC avg
§103
51.0%
+11.0% vs TC avg
§102
22.6%
-17.4% vs TC avg
§112
20.6%
-19.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 538 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 § 103 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 7-9, 12-15, 17 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hilkes et al. (PGPUB 20170235161, of record) in view of Lee et al. (USPAT 6375321). Regarding claim 1, Hilkes disclose a lens adapter comprising: at least one base component comprising (Figs. 2, 10 and 16 show the electronic assembly and its components): a first magnetic structure (8A) and a headset attachment structure (Fig. 16 shows the attachment structure) corresponding to a base attachment structure (2) of a virtual reality headset ([0003]); and at least one removable component (10) comprising: a second magnetic structure (8B), wherein the second magnetic structure is releasably attached to the first magnetic structure ([0048]); and at least one lens attachment structure corresponding to at least one trial lens ([0050] where 10 may be used to carry trial lenses), wherein the at least one removable component is configured to detachably couple, via the second magnetic structure, the at least one lens attachment structure to the at least one wearable base component ([0069] 2 and 10 are coupled via 8A and B). Hilkes does not explicitly disclose wherein the headset attachment comprises at least one extruded magnetic surface configured to couple the at least one wearable base component to a headset and the lens attachment structure comprising at least one recessed slot for holding at least one lens. However, Lee teaches a method for connecting a lens to a lens frame comprising a headset attachment comprising at least one extruded magnetic surface (301) configured to couple the at least one wearable base component to a headset and the lens attachment structure comprising at least one recessed slot for holding at least one lens (300 and Fig. 7). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine Hilkes and Lee such that the attachment mechanism for the trial lens assembly included an extruded magnetic structure and an recessed slot motivated by allowing quick and accurate assembly. Regarding claim 2, modified Hilkes discloses wherein the removable component comprises one or more mechanical attachment points (Fig. 7 non-labeled strap, temple arms or hinge assemblies 8B). Regarding claim 4, modified Hilkes discloses wherein the headset attachment structure comprises a magnet (8A). Regarding claim 5, modified Hilkes discloses wherein the at least one lens attachment structure comprises a magnet (8B). Regarding claim 7, modified Hilkes discloses wherein the lens adapter comprises two base components (2 and 7) and two removable components (7 is removable from 2 and 17 is also removable, [0065]). Regarding claim 8, modified Hilkes discloses wherein the lens adapter comprises one base components (2 or 7) and two removable components (7 is removable from 2 and 17 is also removable, [0065]). Regarding claim 9, Hilkes discloses a virtual reality (VR) headset comprising: a base attachment structure (2); at least one base component comprising: a first magnetic structure (8A); and a headset attachment structure corresponding the base attachment structure (Fig. 2); and at least one removable component (Fig. 7) comprising: a second magnetic structure (8B), wherein the second magnetic structure is releasably attached to the first magnetic structure ([0069]); and at least one lens attachment structure (10) corresponding to at least one trial lens (3), wherein the at least one removable component is configured to detachably couple, via the second magnetic structure, the at least one lens attachment structure to the at least one wearable base component ([0069] 2 and 10 are coupled via 8A and B). Hilkes does not explicitly disclose wherein the headset attachment comprises at least one extruded magnetic surface configured to couple the at least one wearable base component to a headset and the lens attachment structure comprising at least one recessed slot for holding at least one lens. However, Lee teaches a method for connecting a lens to a lens frame comprising a headset attachment comprising at least one extruded magnetic surface (301) configured to couple the at least one wearable base component to a headset and the lens attachment structure comprising at least one recessed slot for holding at least one lens (300 and Fig. 7). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine Hilkes and Lee such that the attachment mechanism for the trial lens assembly included an extruded magnetic structure and an recessed slot motivated by allowing quick and accurate assembly. Regarding claim 12, modified Hilkes discloses wherein the headset attachment structure comprises a magnet (8A). Regarding claim 13, modified Hilkes discloses wherein the at least one lens attachment structure comprises a magnet (8B). Regarding claim 14, modified Hilkes discloses wherein the lens adapter comprises two base components (2 and 7) and two removable components (7 is removable from 2 and 17 is also removable, [0065]). Regarding claim 15, modified Hilkes discloses wherein the lens adapter comprises one base components (2 or 7) and two removable components (7 is removable from 2 and 17 is also removable, [0065]). Regarding claim 17, modified Hilkes discloses wherein the at least one lens attachment structure comprises at least one recessed cavity associated with holding the at least one trial lens (Figs. 9-10 best show the final assembly and apparent that there is a recessed cavity in which the trial lenses are attached). Regarding claim 19, modified Hilkes discloses wherein the at least one lens attachment structure comprises at least one recessed cavity associated with holding the at least one trial lens (Figs. 9-10 best show the final assembly and apparent that there is a recessed cavity in which the trial lenses are attached). Regarding claim 20, Hilkes discloses a removable component comprising: a first magnetic structure (8A), wherein the first magnetic structure is associated with a releasable attachment to a second magnetic structure (8B) of a base component (10) and the base component comprises a headset attachment structure (7 where 8B is located on the hinge) corresponding to a base attachment structure of a virtual reality headset ([0003]); and at least one lens attachment structure corresponding to at least one trial lens (3), wherein the at least one lens attachment structure is configured to detachably couple, via the second magnetic structure, to the base component ([0069] 2 and 10 are coupled via 8A and B). Hilkes does not explicitly disclose wherein the headset attachment comprises at least one extruded magnetic surface configured to couple the at least one wearable base component to a headset and the lens attachment structure comprising at least one recessed slot for holding at least one lens. However, Lee teaches a method for connecting a lens to a lens frame comprising a headset attachment comprising at least one extruded magnetic surface (301) configured to couple the at least one wearable base component to a headset and the lens attachment structure comprising at least one recessed slot for holding at least one lens (300 and Fig. 7). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine Hilkes and Lee such that the attachment mechanism for the trial lens assembly included an extruded magnetic structure and an recessed slot motivated by allowing quick and accurate assembly. Regarding claim 21, modified Hilkes discloses further comprising a display (4 and/or 9). Claim(s) 3, 6 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hilkes in view of Lee and further in view of Lipawsky (PGPUB 20060256280, of record). Regarding claim 3, Hilkes discloses magnets being used for fastening components but does not disclose wherein the removable component and the base component are electrically connected. However, Lipawsky teaches a lens attachment method that includes an electromagnet ([0045]). It would have been obvious to one having skilled in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine modified Hilkes and Lipawsky such that the removable component could be attached and removed from the base component using an electromagnet motivated by allowing a quick release of parts. Regarding claim 6, Hilkes does not disclose wherein the lens attachment structure comprises an electrical connection to the at least one trial lens. However, Lipawsky teaches a lens attachment method that includes an electromagnet ([0045]). It would have been obvious to one having skilled in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine modified Hilkes and Lipawsky such that the trial lenses are inserted and retained by an electro-magnetic motivated by allowing a quick release of parts during assembly/disassembly. Regarding claim 11, Hilkes discloses magnets being used for fastening components but does not disclose wherein the removable component and the base component are electrically connected. However, Lipawsky teaches a lens attachment method that includes an electromagnet ([0045]). It would have been obvious to one having skilled in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine modified Hilkes and Lipawsky such that the removable component could be attached and removed from the base component using an electromagnet motivated by allowing a quick release of parts. Claim(s) 16 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hilkes in view of Lee and further in view of Pascal (USPAT 2008224, of record). Regarding claim 16, Hilkes does not disclose wherein the at least one removable component further comprises a demarcation indicating a degree associated with a rotational position of the at least one trial lens. However, Pascal teaches also teaches an ophthalmic assessment device (Col. 1 lens 1-6 of Pascal and [0067] and [0079]of Hilkes) wherein the at least one removable component further comprises a demarcation indicating a degree associated with a rotational position of the at least one trial lens (Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine Hilkes and Pascal such that the trial lenses and/or removable component included demarcations indicating a rotation position of the lens motivated by providing accurate ophthalmic diagnostics. Regarding claim 18, modified Hilkes does not disclose wherein the at least one removable component further comprises a demarcation indicating a degree associated with a rotational position of the at least one trial lens. However, Pascal teaches also teaches an ophthalmic assessment device (Col. 1 lens 1-6 of Pascal and [0067] and [0079]of Hilkes) wherein the at least one removable component further comprises a demarcation indicating a degree associated with a rotational position of the at least one trial lens (Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine modified Hilkes and Pascal such that the trial lenses and/or removable component included demarcations indicating a rotation position of the lens motivated by providing accurate ophthalmic diagnostics. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-9, 11-18, 20 and 21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection relies on an additional, new, reference to address each of the applicant’s remarks. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRAVIS S FISSEL whose telephone number is (313)446-6573. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-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, Stephone Allen can be reached on (571) 272-2434. 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. /TRAVIS S FISSEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 10, 2021
Application Filed
Jul 09, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Sep 20, 2024
Response Filed
Dec 05, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
May 22, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
May 29, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 19, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Nov 19, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 08, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 17, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599302
Volumetric OCT Image Data Processing
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601899
DISPLAY DEVICE FOR IMAGING AND DISPLAYING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601898
IMAGING LENS AND IMAGING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593119
SLIM POP-OUT WIDE CAMERA LENSES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582287
MEDICAL DEVICE, ACCESSORIES FOR USE THEREWITH, AND METHODS OF USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+11.3%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 538 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month