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
Prosecution Insights