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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 8 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 5, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Canales (US-20190107732-A1) in view of. Sheldon (US20050073645A1)
With respect to Claim 1, while Canales discloses:
A modular eyeglasses assembly (Canales at ¶ 3) for facilitating corrective lenses (Fig. 16B – 301, 311; ¶ 8) to be installed into eyeglass frames, said assembly comprising:
a pair of corrective lenses being prepared to conform to a predetermined optical prescription wherein said pair of corrective lenses is configured to correct visual deficiencies for a specific user (This is intended use, and has no patentable weight in terms of having to be mapped to structure. See MPEP §§2112 et seq and 2114 et seq, for a discussion of how products are defined by the structure not what they do/intended manner of operation/intended use, also see [0241] In some embodiments, the first lens 301 and the second lens 311 are configurable to accommodate a corrective lens prescription. In some embodiments, the first lens 301 or the second lens 311 or both comprise a corrective lens shape);
a plurality of eyeglass frames (Figs. 1B & 16B; ¶ 3), each of said eyeglass frames having a pair of frame rims (Fig. 1A – 120 & Fig. 16A 320; ¶s 109 & 160) where 120 is designed to hold a single continuous corrective lens and 320 is designed to hold a pair of discrete corrective lenses, each of said frame rims having a receiving element (Fig. 1C – 126; ¶ 4) being integrated into said frame rims, said receiving element in each of said frame rims of a respective one of said eyeglass frames, releasably engaging said rim being positioned around a respective one of said corrective lenses wherein said respective eyeglass frames is configured to be worn by the specific user for correcting the specific user's vision, each of said eyeglass frames having a unique structure with respect to each other, each of said lenses being removably insertable in a respective one of said eyeglass frames wherein said plurality of eyeglass frames is configured to facilitate the user to choose various styles of eyeglass frames;
a pair of temples (Fig. 4 – 190 & Fig. 5 – 188; ¶ 134), each of said temples having a temple grip (Fig. 7 – 192a & 192b; ¶ 134) being integrated into said temple, said temple grip on each of said temples releasably engaging a respective one of said corrective lenses wherein each of said temples is configured to facilitate said corrective lenses to be worn by the user;
a nose bridge (Fig. 1B – 150; ¶ 4) having a pair of bridge grips (Fig. 1B – 153; ¶ 115) where element 153 is meant to grip lenses, just like the bridge grips in the application, and “at least one” means multiple grips, just like the application, being integrated into said nose bridge, each of said bridge grips 44 releasably engaging a respective one of said corrective lenses wherein said nose bridge is configured to facilitate said corrective lenses to be positioned for correcting the user's vision; and
a pair of rimless eyeglass frames (Fig. 8A – 200; ¶ 29, rimless version of eyeglass with interchangeable single lens) said pair of rimless eyeglass frames having a pair of receiving elements each being integrated into said rimless eyeglass frames, each of said receiving elements in said rimless eyeglass frames releasably engaging a respective one of said corrective lenses wherein said rimless eyeglass frames is configured to be worn by the specific user for correcting the specific user's vision.
Canales doesn’t explicitly state:
a pair of lens rims each of said lens rims being continuous such that said each of said lens rims forms a close loop, each of said lens rims being positionable extending fully around a respective one of said corrective lenses;
However, Sheldon discloses:
a pair of lens rims each of said lens rims being continuous such that said each of said lens rims forms a close loop, (Fig. 2A, [0049]A rim element 106 is provided for encircling the lens 104) each of said lens rims being positionable extending fully around a respective one of said corrective lenses (The rim element 106 has an outer periphery shaped and sized to be snuggly fitted into the circumferential recess 30 in the inner periphery of the opening 18 of the frame section 14. The inner periphery of the rim element 106 is preferably formed with a radially inwardly projecting circumferential center lip 108 which is snuggly fitted into a corresponding circumferential groove 110 defined in the outer periphery of the lens 104. Thus, the rim element 106 firmly secures the lens 104 therein to form the lens unit 102 which is then removably attached to the frame section 14 of the frame structure 12[0050])
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the lens rims from the analogous modular glasses assembly of Sheldon with the analogous modular glasses assembly of Canales so that the rim element firmly secures the lens to form the lens unit which is then removably attached to the frame section of the frame structure ([0050] of Sheldon). In addition, the aesthetic quality of rim element provides distinguished aesthetic quality of sunglasses and make it possible to configure the sunglasses in various aesthetic appearances without changing the configuration of frame structure 12. This advantage of the present invention particularly benefits the manufacturers of eyewear by simplifying the design and manufacturing processes of frame structures, and also benefits consumers by allowing them to meet several kinds of eyewear needs at a reduced overall cost ([0054] of Sheldon).
With respect to Claim 5, the combination of Canales and Sheldon discloses:
The assembly according to claim 1, Canales further teaches wherein
said nose bridge has a first end, a second end and an outer surface (Fig. 1B – 162, 166, 156; ¶ 119) extending between said first end and said second end, said nose bridge being curved (Fig. 1B –156; ¶ 119) between said first end and said second end such that said nose bridge forms a U-shape where the 1st medial side and 2nd lateral side for the 1st and 2nd end with the linker arch forming the curved connection, each of said bridge grips extending away from said outer surface in opposite directions from each other, each of said bridge grips being spaced from a respective one of said first end and said second end.
With respect to Claim 7, the combination of Canales and Sheldon discloses:
The assembly according to claim 1, Canales further discloses that wherein:
each of said corrective lenses having a front surface, a back surface and a perimeter edge extending between said front surface and said back surface;
and said pair of rimless eyeglass frames including a pair of lens arms (Fig. 16A, Fig. 16B, part of 320 with 311, and part of 320 with 301), each of said lens arms being curved to conform to said perimeter edge of a respective one of said corrective lenses, each of said lens arms having a bottom surface where, though not labeled explicitly, (see Fig. 16A, 16B) show the top surface of each lens which would clearly connect to the bottom surface of the lens rim,
each of said lens arms having a groove (Fig. 16A, 16Bsee groove of part of 320 with 311, and part of 320 with 301) extending into said bottom “said” (applicant’s typo) surface, said groove in each of said lens arms extending along a full length of said respective lens arm, said groove in each of said lens arms insertably receiving said perimeter edge of said respective corrective lens ( see Fig. 16B, the lens 301 and 311 are insertable to the 320).
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Canales et al., US-20190107732-A1 and Sheldon (US20050073645A1) in view of Okuma et al. (US-20130000019-A1).
With respect to Claim 2, while the combination of Canales and Sheldon discloses:
The assembly according to claim 1, Canales further teaches wherein:
each of said corrective lenses having a front surface (Figs. 3, 18A), a back surface (Figs. 6, 21) and a perimeter edge (Fig. 1B – 102, 104-107, 110; Fig. 16B – 302, 304-308, 312-318; ¶s 11-13) extending between said front surface and said back surface where the front and back view of the assembly show the front and back view of the lenses, and all the outer edges of the lenses form the perimeter;
Canales doesn’t explicitly state that:
each of said frame rims of each of said eyeglass frames has an inwardly facing edge and a rear surface, said inwardly facing edge having a groove extending around a full circumference of said inwardly facing edge, said groove in said inwardly facing edge of each of said frame rims of a respective one of said eyeglass frames accommodating said lens rim being positioned around a respective one of said corrective lenses.
However, in the same field of endeavor of modular glasses, Okuma discloses:
each of said frame rims of each of said eyeglass frames has an inwardly facing edge (Fig. 1; ¶ 0003 – “…and a groove 102 for fitting a lens 103 is formed…”) and a rear surface (Fig. 1, element A; ¶ 0003), said inwardly facing edge having a groove (Fig. 1 – 102; ¶ 0003 – “…inserting the lens 103 along the groove 102 from an outer region…”) extending around a full circumference of said inwardly facing edge, said groove in said inwardly facing edge of each of said frame rims of a respective one of said eyeglass frames accommodating said lens rim (Fig. 1 – element 101; ¶ 0003) being positioned around a respective one of said corrective lenses.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the analogous glasses assembly of Okuma with the analogous modular glasses assembly of Canales & Austin because:
they provide greater support for the lenses and prevents them from being dislodged: “…Therefore, even if the lenses attached into the rims are detached due to a strong impact from outside, fall of the lenses on the side of the face of a wearer can be prevented.” (Okuma: ¶ 0014).
PNG
media_image1.png
427
623
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to Claim 3, Canales and Sheldon Okuma teach all the limitations of claim 2, Canales does not teach
wherein said inwardly facing edge of each of said frame rims of each of said eyeglass frames has a slot extending between said groove and said rear surface thereby facilitating said perimeter edge of said corrective lens to be engaged for removing said corrective lens from said respective rim.
However, in the same field of endeavor of modular glasses, Okuma discloses:
said inwardly facing edge of each of said frame rims of each of said eyeglass frames has a slot (Fig. 1 – element 104; ¶ 0003 – “…an engagement protrusion…”) extending between said groove and said rear surface thereby facilitating said perimeter edge of said corrective lens to be engaged for removing said corrective lens from said respective rim.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the analogous glasses assembly of Okuma with the analogous modular glasses assembly of Claim 2 because:
they provide greater support for the lenses and prevents them from being dislodged: “…Therefore, even if the lenses attached into the rims are detached due to a strong impact from outside, fall of the lenses on the side of the face of a wearer can be prevented.” (Okuma: ¶ 0014).
Claims 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Canales ( US-20190107732-A1) and Sheldon (US20050073645A1) in view of Jang (WO-2004059368-A1 )
With respect to Claim 4, while the combination of Canales and Sheldon discloses:
The assembly according to claim 1, Canales further teaches wherein:
each of said temples has a leading end (Fig. 1B – 184, 186 & Fig. 16B – 384, 386; ¶s 132, 231), said temple grip on each of said temples being positioned on said leading end.
Canales doesn’t explicitly state that:
said temple grip on each of said temples comprising a pair of fingers each being perpendicularly oriented with said respective temple, said fingers being spaced apart from each other thereby facilitating said perimeter edge of said respective corrective lens to be positioned between said fingers, said fingers being biased together such that each of said fingers compresses against a receptive front surface and said back surface of said respective corrective lens.
However, that limitation is known in the art of optics as disclosed by Jang.
Jang discloses that:
said temple grip on each of said temples comprising a pair of fingers (Fig. 1 – element 111 & Fig. 13 – elements 310,320; Page 4 of 37 – lines 11-18 – “…rimless glasses 1 include an insertion element…”) each being perpendicularly oriented with said respective temple, said fingers being spaced apart from each other thereby facilitating said perimeter edge of said respective corrective lens to be positioned between said fingers, said fingers being biased together such that each of said fingers compresses against a receptive front surface and said back surface of said respective corrective lens.
PNG
media_image2.png
689
930
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
328
684
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the fingers from the analogous modular glasses assembly of Jang with the analogous modular glasses assembly of Canales because the fingers provide greater support and stability for the lens for glasses without a rim. “Furthermore, rimless glasses can prevent the eyesight from being hidden by the rim of the glasses and allow a wearer' s face to naturally come into view without being hidden.” (Page 3 lines 11-13)
With respect to Claim 6, while the combination of Canales and Sheldon discloses:
The assembly according to claim 5, Canales further teaches wherein:
each of said corrective lenses having a front surface, a back surface and a perimeter edge extending between said front surface and said back surface ( Fig. 16A, Fig. 16B);
Canales doesn’t explicitly state that:
and each of said bridge grips comprises a pair of fingers, each of said fingers of said bridge grips being spaced apart from each other thereby facilitating said perimeter edge of a respective one of said corrective lenses to be positioned between said fingers associated with a respective one of said bridge grips, each of said fingers of each of said bridge grips being biased toward each other such that each of said fingers of each of said bridge grips compresses against a respective one of said front surface and said back surface of said respective corrective lens.
However, that limitation is known in the art of optics as disclosed by Jang.
Jang discloses that:
and each of said bridge grips comprises a pair of fingers (Fig. 1 – 111 & Fig. 13 – 310, 320; Page 4 lines 11-18), each of said fingers of said bridge grips being spaced apart from each other thereby facilitating said perimeter edge of a respective one of said corrective lenses to be positioned between said fingers associated with a respective one of said bridge grips, each of said fingers of each of said bridge grips being biased toward each other such that each of said fingers of each of said bridge grips compresses against a respective one of said front surface and said back surface of said respective corrective lens.
PNG
media_image2.png
689
930
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
328
684
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the fingers from the analogous modular glasses assembly of Jang with the analogous modular glasses assembly of Canales (i.e., the references are analogous to the claimed invention because they are from the same field of endeavor: modular glasses) because the fingers provide greater support and stability for the lens for glasses without a rim. “Furthermore, rimless glasses can prevent the eyesight from being hidden by the rim of the glasses and allow a wearer' s face to naturally come into view without being hidden.” (Page 3 lines 11-13)
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Canales et al., US-20190107732-A1 in view of Sheldon (US20050073645A1), Okuma et al. (US-20130000019-A1) Jang (WO-2004059368-A1).
With respect to Claim 8, Canales discloses:
A modular eyeglasses assembly for facilitating corrective lenses to be installed into eyeglass frames, said assembly comprising:
a pair of corrective lenses being prepared to conform to a predetermined optical prescription wherein said pair of corrective lenses is configure to correct visual deficiencies for a specific user, each of said corrective lenses having a front surface (Figs. 3, 18A), a back surface (Figs. 6, 21) and a perimeter edge (Fig. 1B – 102, 104-107, 110; Fig. 16B – 302, 304-308, 312-318; ¶s 11-13) extending between said front surface and said back surface where the front and back view of the assembly show the front and back view of the lenses, and all the outer edges of the lenses form the perimeter;
a plurality of eyeglass frames (Figs. 1B & 16B; ¶ 3), each of said eyeglass frames having a pair of frame rims (Fig. 1A – 120 & Fig. 16A 320; ¶s 109 & 160) where 120 is designed to hold a single continuous corrective lens and 320 is designed to hold a pair of discrete corrective lenses, each of said frame rims having a receiving element (Fig. 1C – 126; ¶ 4) being integrated into said frame rims, said receiving element in each of said frame rims of a respective one of said eyeglass frames releasably engaging said lens rim being positioned around a respective one of said corrective lenses wherein said respective eyeglass frames is configured to be worn by the specific user for correcting the specific user's vision, each of said eyeglass frames having a unique structure with respect to each other, each of said lenses being removably insertable in a respective one of said eyeglass frames wherein said plurality of eyeglass frames is configured to facilitate the user to choose various styles of eyeglass frames.
each of said receiving elements being positioned on said rear surface a respective one of said frame firms, each of said receiving elements releasably engaging said lens rim positioned around said respective corrective lens (Fig. 1B –122, 124 & Fig. 1C – 126, 128; ¶ 109 or (Fig. 16B – 322, 323; ¶ 223) where the lens retention steps 105 & 106 (or 306 & 316) releasably insert into the retention step receiver in order to hold the single (or dual) lens;
a pair of temples (Fig. 4 – 190 & Fig. 5 – 188; ¶ 134), each of said temples having a temple grip (Fig. 7 – 192a & 192b; ¶ 134) being integrated into said temple, said temple grip on each of said temples releasably engaging a respective one of said corrective lenses wherein each of said temples is configured to facilitate said corrective lenses to be worn by the user, each of said temples having a leading end (Fig. 1B – 184, 186 & Fig. 16B – 384, 386; ¶s 132, 231).
a nose bridge (Fig. 1B – 150; ¶ 4) having a pair of bridge grips (Fig. 1B – 153; ¶ 115) where element 153 is meant to grip lenses, just like the bridge grips in the application, and “at least one” means multiple grips, just like the application being integrated into said nose bridge, each of said bridge grips releasably engaging a respective one of said corrective lenses wherein said nose bridge is configured to facilitate said corrective lenses to be positioned for correcting the user's vision, said nose bridge having a first end, a second end and an outer surface (Fig. 1B – 162, 166, 156; ¶ 119) extending between said first end and said second end, said nose bridge being curved (Fig. 1B –156; ¶ 119) between said first end and said second end such that said nose bridge forms a U-shape where the 1st medial side and 2nd lateral side for the 1st and 2nd end with the linker arch forming the curved connection, each of said bridge grips extending away from said outer surface in opposite directions from each other, each of said bridge grips being spaced from a respective one of said first end and said second end.
a pair of rimless eyeglass frames (Fig. 8A – 200; ¶ 29), said pair of rimless eyeglass frames having a pair of receiving elements each being integrated into said rimless eyeglass frames, each of said receiving elements in said rimless eyeglass frames releasably engaging a respective one of said corrective lenses wherein said rimless eyeglass frames is configured to be worn by the specific user for correcting the specific user's vision, said pair of rimless eyeglass frames including a pair of lens arms (Fig. 1B – 120 & Fig. 16B – 320; ¶s 109, 160), each of said lens arms being curved to conform to said perimeter edge of a respective one of said corrective lenses, each of said lens arms having a bottom surface where, though not labeled explicitly, (Fig. 1B – 110 & Fig. 16B – 302; ¶s 111, 223) show the top surface of each lens which would clearly connect to the bottom surface of the lens rim., each of said lens arms having a groove (Fig. 1C –130; ¶ 111) extending into said bottom said surface, said groove in each of said lens arms extending along a full length of said respective lens arm, said groove in each of said lens arms insertably receiving said perimeter edge of said respective corrective lens.
Canales doesn’t explicitly state that:
a pair of lens rims, each of said lens rims being positionable extending fully around a respective one of said corrective lenses, each of said lens rims being continuous such that said each of said lens rims forms a closed loop, each of said lens rims having an interior edge, said interior each of each of said lens rims engaging said perimeter edge of said respective corrective lens.
However, that limitation is known in the art of optics as disclosed by Ampelio.
Sheldon discloses:
a pair of lens rims, each of said lens rims being positionable extending fully around a respective one of said corrective lenses( Fig. 2A, [0049]A rim element 106 is provided for encircling the lens 104) , each of said lens rims being continuous such that said each of said lens rims forms a closed loop ( see Fig. 2A, [0049]), each of said lens rims having an interior edge, said interior each of each of said lens rims engaging said perimeter edge of said respective corrective lens(The rim element 106 has an outer periphery shaped and sized to be snuggly fitted into the circumferential recess 30 in the inner periphery of the opening 18 of the frame section 14. The inner periphery of the rim element 106 is preferably formed with a radially inwardly projecting circumferential center lip 108 which is snuggly fitted into a corresponding circumferential groove 110 defined in the outer periphery of the lens 104. Thus, the rim element 106 firmly secures the lens 104 therein to form the lens unit 102 which is then removably attached to the frame section 14 of the frame structure 12[0050])
.It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the lens rims from the analogous modular glasses assembly of Sheldon with the analogous modular glasses assembly of Canales so that the rim element firmly secures the lens to form the lens unit which is then removably attached to the frame section of the frame structure ([0050] of Sheldon). In addition, the aesthetic quality of rim element provides distinguished aesthetic quality of sunglasses and make it possible to configure the sunglasses in various aesthetic appearances without changing the configuration of frame structure 12. This advantage of the present invention particularly benefits the manufacturers of eyewear by simplifying the design and manufacturing processes of frame structures, and also benefits consumers by allowing them to meet several kinds of eyewear needs at a reduced overall cost ([0054] of Sheldon).
Canales doesn’t explicitly state that:
each of said frame rims of each of said eyeglass frames having an inwardly facing edge and a rear surface, said inwardly facing edge having a groove extending around a full circumference of said inwardly facing edge, said groove in said inwardly facing edge of each of said frame rims of a respective one of said eyeglass frames accommodating said lens rim being positioned around a respective one of said corrective lenses, said inwardly facing edge of each of said frame rims of each of said eyeglass frames having a slot extending between said groove and said rear surface thereby facilitating said lens rim positioned around said corrective lens to be engaged for removing said corrective lens from said respective frame rim.
However, that limitation is known in the art of optics as disclosed by Okuma.
Okuma discloses: each of said frame rims of each of said eyeglass frames has an inwardly facing edge (Fig. 1; ¶ 0003 – “…and a groove 102 for fitting a lens 103 is formed…”) and a rear surface (Fig. 1, element A; ¶ 0003), said inwardly facing edge having a groove (Fig. 1 – 102; ¶ 0003 – “…inserting the lens 103 along the groove 102 from an outer region…”) extending around a full circumference of said inwardly facing edge, said groove in said inwardly facing edge of each of said frame rims of a respective one of said eyeglass frames accommodating said lens rim (Fig. 1 – element 101; ¶ 0003) being positioned around a respective one of said corrective lenses.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the analogous glasses assembly of Okuma with the analogous modular glasses assembly of Canales because:
they provide greater support for the lenses and prevents them from being dislodged: “…Therefore, even if the lenses attached into the rims are detached due to a strong impact from outside, fall of the lenses on the side of the face of a wearer can be prevented.” (Okuma: ¶ 0014).
Canales doesn’t explicitly state that:
said temple grip on each of said temples being positioned on said leading end, said temple grip on each of said temples comprising a pair of fingers each being perpendicularly oriented with said respective temple, said fingers being spaced apart from each other thereby facilitating said perimeter edge of said respective corrective lens to be positioned between said fingers, said fingers being biased together such that each of said fingers compresses against a receptive front surface and said back surface of said respective corrective lens.
each of said bridge grips comprising a pair of fingers, each of said fingers of said bridge grips being spaced apart from each other thereby facilitating said perimeter edge of a respective one of said corrective lenses to be positioned between said fingers associated with a respective one of said bridge grips, each of said fingers of each of said bridge grips being biased toward each other such that each of said fingers of each of said bridge grips compresses against a respective one of said front surface and said back surface of said respective corrective lens.
However, that limitation is known in the art of optics as disclosed by Jang.
Jang discloses:
said temple grip on each of said temples (Fig. 1 – 111 & Fig. 13 – 310,320; Page 4 lines 11-18) being positioned on said leading end, said temple grip on each of said temples comprising a pair of fingers each being perpendicularly oriented with said respective temple, said fingers being spaced apart from each other thereby facilitating said perimeter edge of said respective corrective lens to be positioned between said fingers, said fingers being biased together such that each of said fingers compresses against a receptive front surface and said back surface of said respective corrective lens;
each of said bridge grips comprising a pair of fingers (Fig. 1 – 111 & Fig. 13 – 310, 320; Page 4 lines 11-18), each of said fingers of said bridge grips being spaced apart from each other thereby facilitating said perimeter edge of a respective one of said corrective lenses to be positioned between said fingers associated with a respective one of said bridge grips, each of said fingers of each of said bridge grips being biased toward each other such that each of said fingers of each of said bridge grips compresses against a respective one of said front surface and said back surface of said respective corrective lens.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the fingers from the analogous modular glasses assembly of Jang with the analogous modular glasses assembly of Canales (i.e., the references are analogous to the claimed invention because they are from the same field of endeavor: modular glasses) because the fingers provide greater support and stability for the lens for glasses without a rim. “Furthermore, rimless glasses can prevent the eyesight from being hidden by the rim of the glasses and allow a wearer' s face to naturally come into view without being hidden” (Page 3 lines 11-13).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Anatole (US 20170343833 A1) teaches rimmed eyeglass frames with surround rim is designed to surround the entire periphery of the lens.
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 PINPING SUN whose telephone number is (571)270-1284. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5.
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.
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.
/PINPING SUN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872