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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The instant application having Application No. 17/717,974 filed on 4/11/2022 is presented for examination by the examiner.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 March 16, 2026 has been entered.
The amended claims submitted March 16, 2026 in response to the office action mailed November 14, 2025 are under examination. Claims 1-7, 9-11 and 13-19 are pending, of which claims 10-11 are withdrawn as non-elected and claims 1-7, 9 and 13-19 are under consideration. Claims 8, 12 and 20 are cancelled.
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Information Disclosure Statement
As required by M.P.E.P. 609, the applicant' s submissions of the Information Disclosure Statement dated November 14, 2025 is acknowledged by the examiner and the cited references have been considered in the examination of the claims now pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The 35 USC §112 rejections of the previous office action have been overcome by the amendments to the claims. However, the following 35 USC §112 issues are raised by the amendments to the claims.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3-4 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 3-4, independent claim 1 now recites “receiving a first set of images from a front facing camera coupled to the pair of eyeglasses, the first set of images comprising a first view of the user wearing the pair of eyeglasses” whereas claim 3 recites this same functionality, including repetition of “a first set of images” but from “a first camera” where claim 4 specifies that this first camera is a front facing camera that faces the user of the pair of eyeglasses. To the best understanding of the examiner, these are all directed to the same first, front facing camera, and the same first set of images which now must provide color data associated with the user’s skin, and thus must be facing the user of the pair of eyeglasses. As written it is unclear whether claims 3 and 4 are merely duplicative or if they intend to recite an additional front facing camera (such as one for each side of the face, like paragraph [0033] of the specification as filed). If claims 3 and 4 are directed to the same camera, they should be cancelled. If claims 3 and 4 are directed to an additional first camera, the examiner recommends the following amendments:
3. (proposed amendment) The method of claim 1, further comprising:
receiving a third set of images from a second camera coupled to the pair of eyeglasses, the third set of images comprising a third view of the user wearing the pair of eyeglasses.
4. (proposed amendment) The method of claim 3, wherein the second camera is a front facing camera that faces the user of the pair of eyeglasses.
Appropriate correction is required. For the purpose of examination either interpretation will be considered to meet the claim.
Regarding claims 15-16, independent claim 13 now recites “receiving a first set of images from a front facing camera coupled to the pair of eyeglasses, the first set of images comprising a first view of the user wearing the pair of eyeglasses” whereas claim 15 recites this same functionality, including repetition of “a first set of images” but from “a first camera” where claim 16 specifies that this first camera is a front facing camera. To the best understanding of the examiner, these are all directed to the same first, front facing camera, and the same first set of images which now must provide color data associated with the user’s skin, and thus must be facing the user of the pair of eyeglasses. As written it is unclear whether claims 15 and 16 are merely duplicative or if they intend to recite an additional front facing camera (such as one for each side of the face, like paragraph [0033] of the specification as filed). If claims 15 and 16 are directed to the same camera, they should be cancelled. If claims 15 and 16 are directed to an additional first camera, the examiner recommends the following amendments:
15. (proposed amendment) The computer-readable storage medium of claim 13, wherein the instructions further configure the computer to: receive a third set of images from a second camera coupled to the pair of eyeglasses, the third set of images comprising a third view of the user wearing the pair of eyeglasses.
16. (proposed amendment) The computer-readable storage medium of claim 15, wherein the second camera is a front facing camera.
Appropriate correction is required. For the purpose of examination either interpretation will be considered to meet the claim.
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.
Claims 1-7, 9 and 13-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 212181165 U (cited in an IDS, hereafter CN 165, where reference will be made to the attached machine translation) in view of Aghara et al. US 2018/0046147 A1 (cited in an IDS, hereafter Aghara), Mulliken et al. US 2021/0068277 A1 (cited in an IDS, hereafter Mulliken), and Hossain et al. US 2021/0294104.
Regarding claim 1, CN 165 teaches “A method (see steps below) comprising:
receiving a set of measurements (paragraph [0030] pressure thresholds) corresponding to a length of eyeglass temple attachments on a pair of eyeglasses (The eyeglass temple attachments are the deformable components 2, which are air bags, see Fig. 1 and paragraphs [0025] -[0026] and [0030]. The pressure in the air bags corresponds to their deformation state, i.e. length. The set of measurements corresponds to the measurement of pressures in the determination of the pressure thresholds, see paragraph [0030].);…
based on the set of measurements, generating a predicted set of measurements for the length of the eyeglass temple attachments (the predicted set of measurements corresponds to the pressure thresholds, which are based on the pressure measurements in the first method step and then transmitted and stored in the actuator, see paragraph [0030]);…
for each eyeglass temple attachment of the eyeglass temple attachments:
transmitting the predicted set of measurements to … pneumatic actuators (micro air pump 3) coupled to the eyeglass temple attachment (paragraph [0028]: “The micro air pump 3 is connected to each airbag body and can automatically control the inflation and deflation of the airbag body, thereby controlling the deformation state of each airbag body.”);
determining a set of pressure measurements corresponding to a pressure of eyeglass temples against a user of the pair of eyeglasses (pressure measurements are carried out when the device is worn, see paragraphs [0030] and [0036]), the eyeglass temples being physically coupled to the eyeglass temple attachment (see Fig. 1);
based on the comparison, determining the set of pressure measurements (paragraph [0030]: “when the pressure information measured by the pressure detection module 4 obtained by the processor is less than the pressure threshold, the micro air pump 3 is controlled to continuously inflate the airbag body; when the pressure information measured by the pressure detection module 4 obtained by the processor is equal to the pressure threshold, the micro air pump 3 is controlled to stop inflating the airbag body”)…
based on the set of pressure measurements, generating an adjusted set of measurements, the adjusted set of measurements comprising a modification to the predicted set of measurements (paragraph [0030]: “when the pressure information measured by the pressure detection module 4 obtained by the processor is less than the pressure threshold, the micro air pump 3 is controlled to continuously inflate the airbag body; when the pressure information measured by the pressure detection module 4 obtained by the processor is equal to the pressure threshold, the micro air pump 3 is controlled to stop inflating the airbag body”); and
transmitting the adjusted set of measurements to the …pneumatic actuators coupled to the eyeglass temple attachment (paragraph [0030]: “when the pressure information measured by the pressure detection module 4 obtained by the processor is less than the pressure threshold, the micro air pump 3 is controlled to continuously inflate the airbag body; when the pressure information measured by the pressure detection module 4 obtained by the processor is equal to the pressure threshold, the micro air pump 3 is controlled to stop inflating the airbag body”).”
However, CN 165 fails to explicitly teach “receiving user feedback from a user wearing the pair of eyeglasses, the feedback comprising an indication of a fit of the pair of eyeglasses on the user.”
Aghara teaches (claim 1) “A method (Fig. 7) comprising:
receiving a set of measurements corresponding to a length of eyeglass temple attachments on a pair of eyeglasses (step 704 paragraph [0064]: “place the HMD straps in an initial loosened state” an initial loosened state has straps of a predetermined length. The predetermined loosened state configuration is a set of measurements.);
receiving user feedback from a user wearing the pair of eyeglasses (step 732 paragraph [0071]: “manual user input”), the feedback comprising an indication of a fit of the pair of eyeglasses on the user (paragraph [0071]: “wherein the manual user input may be fine tuning of the strap fit”);
based on the set of measurements, generating a predicted set of measurements for the length of the eyeglass temple attachments (steps 704, 720, 728 and step 732 all involve adjusting the strap, and thus generating a predicted set of measurements for the length and adjusting the strap to those predicted lengths) using … the user feedback (step 732 explicitly uses the user feedback amongst all of the steps that adjust the length);
for each eyeglass temple attachment of the eyeglass temple attachments:
transmitting the predicted set of measurements to … pneumatic actuators (545 motor and pump to inflate or deflate straps) coupled to the eyeglass temple attachment (see Fig. 5B);
determining a set of pressure measurements (step 724) corresponding to a pressure of eyeglass temples against a user of the pair of eyeglasses (see Fig. 5A), the eyeglass temples being physically coupled to the eyeglass temple attachment (see Fig. 5A);
based on the set of pressure measurements, generating an adjusted set of measurements, the adjusted set of measurements comprising a modification to the predicted set of measurements (step 728); and
transmitting the adjusted set of measurements to the pair of pneumatic actuators coupled to the eyeglass temple attachment (step 728).”
Aghara further teaches (paragraph [0003]) that properly adjusting the HMD staps play a big role in comfort and that proper fitting the HMD is necessary for a positive user experience.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate manual user input into the fitting process as taught by Aghara in the method of CN 165 for the purpose of ensuring proper fitting, comfort and a positive user experience as taught by Aghara (paragraph [0003]).
However, CN 165 and Aghara fail to explicitly teach “using a machine learning model configured to analyze the user feedback.”
Mulliken teaches a method of adjusting the fit of a headmounted device (400) using temple attachments (tension adjuster Figs. 13-19) “using a machine learning model configured to analyze [conditions] (paragraph [0080]: “a relationship between biometric conditions and tension levels can be learned using machine learning techniques, such as by training a deep neural network. According to these or other techniques, the biometric signal 736 may be used by the tension controller 726 to determine the tensioning command 738 under reactive or predictive control.” and paragraph [0089]: “a relationship between proximity values and tension levels can be learned using machine learning techniques, such as by training a deep neural network. According to these or other techniques, the proximity signal 1036 may be used by the tension controller 1026 to determine the tensioning command 1038 under reactive or predictive control.”).”
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a machine learning model as taught by Mulliken into the method of the CN 165 – Aghara combination for the purpose of enabling reactive or predictive control as taught by Mulliken (paragraphs [0080] and [0089]) and because Mulliken teaches that machine learning techniques, such as by training a deep neural network are appropriate for determining the operating parameters of an adjustable headworn device.
Note that the combination of limitations “using a machine learning model configured to analyze the user feedback” are considered to be taught by the combination of references because Aghara teaches the incorporation of user feedback into the adjustment system and Mulliken teaches utilizing a machine learning technique such as a deep neural network. Thus, taken together it would have been obvious to apply such a deep neural network analysis to any of the input mechanisms of the CN 165 – Aghara combination.
However, the CN 165 – Aghara – Mulliken combination fails to explicitly teach “for each eyeglass temple attachment .. a pair of pneumatic actuators coupled to the eyeglass temple attachment”.
CN 165 teaches (paragraph [0042]) “two micro air pumps 3 can be symmetrically arranged on the wearable component 1.”
It has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (Claims at issue were directed to a water-tight masonry structure wherein a water seal of flexible material fills the joints which form between adjacent pours of concrete. The claimed water seal has a "web" which lies in the joint, and a plurality of "ribs" projecting outwardly from each side of the web into one of the adjacent concrete slabs. The prior art disclosed a flexible water stop for preventing passage of water between masses of concrete in the shape of a plus sign (+). Although the reference did not disclose a plurality of ribs, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.). See MPEP §2144.04(VI)(B).
The CN 165 – Aghara – Mulliken combination discloses the claimed invention except for the use of a pair of pneumatic actuators for each temple attachment rather than a single pneumatic actuator for each temple. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use a pair of pneumatic actuators for each temple attachment, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). See MPEP §2144.04(VI)(B).
Note that neither claim 1, nor any claim which depends from claim 1, recite any functional or structural differences between the two pneumatic actuators of the pair of pneumatic actuators. Thus it would be improper to import any such differences from the specification into the claims.
CN 165 fails to explicitly teach “receiving a first set of images from a front facing camera coupled to the pair of eyeglasses, the first set of images comprising a first view of the user wearing the pair of eyeglasses….
receiving a second set of images from the front facing camera, the second set of images captured after transmission of the predicted set of measurements …
comparing, using an image processing algorithm, color data associated with the user’s skin from the first set of images to color data associated with the user’s skin from the second set of images;
based on the comparison, determining the set of pressure measurements.”
Hossain teaches a head-mounted device that may include displays (see Fig. 1 and paragraph [0032]). Hossain further teaches “receiving a first set of images (paragraph [0051]: “rear-facing image sensors… to monitor parts of the user's face.” an image sensor that monitors parts of the user’s face takes sets of images, including a first set of images) from a front facing camera coupled to the pair of eyeglasses (paragraph [0051]: “rear-facing image sensors in housing portion 12M may be used to monitor parts of the user's face.” The “rear-facing” image sensors are “front facing” in the terminology of the instant application in that they face the wearer.), the first set of images comprising a first view of the user wearing the pair of eyeglasses (paragraph [0051]: “rear-facing image sensors… to monitor parts of the user's face.”);
receiving a second set of images from the front facing camera, (paragraph [0051] “to monitor” thus multiple sets of images are collected as a function of time including a second set of images) the second set of images captured after transmission of the predicted set of measurements (paragraph [0063]: “Control circuitry 20 may use actuators to adjust the size, shape, stiffness, and/or other attributes of light seal 12R.” paragraph [0051] “to monitor” Thus a second set of images is captured during the monitoring of the face that would include times after instructions are sent to the actuators, and thus also after such a transmission);
comparing, using an image processing algorithm, color data associated with the user's skin from the first set of images (paragraph [0055]: “when a patch of skin in face 70 is subjected to pressure from surface 52, some of the blood near that patch of skin will be forced away, causing the patch of skin to appear lighter in color (less red). Accordingly, an optical sensor such as the sensor of FIG. 11 can be used to measure how much pressure is being exerted against face 70.” Thus color data of the user’s skin is processed by some algorithm that is an image processing algorithm to determine how much pressure is being exerted against the face of the user.) to color data associated with the user's skin from the second set of images (paragraph [0051] “to monitor” thus the color data of the user’s skin is being compared as a function of time to determine the current pressure exerted against the face);
based on the comparison, determining a set of pressure measurements (paragraph [0055]: “when a patch of skin in face 70 is subjected to pressure from surface 52, some of the blood near that patch of skin will be forced away, causing the patch of skin to appear lighter in color (less red). Accordingly, an optical sensor such as the sensor of FIG. 11 can be used to measure how much pressure is being exerted against face 70.”).”
Hossain further teaches:
paragraph [0054]: “As the user wears device 10, the user's face will apply pressure to light seal 12R and will tend to deform light seal 12R. Deformations of light seal 12R (twisting, bending, etc.) may arise both from the user's facial shape and changes to the user's facial expression and/or other real-time changes to the shape of the user's face.”
paragraphs [0065]-[0073]: “FIG. 23 is a flow chart of illustrative operations associated with operating device 10. During the operations of block 200, control circuitry 20 can gather sensor measurements from one or more sensors 16 in device 10 such as facial sensors and/or other sensors 16 in light seal 12R and/or facial image sensors or other sensors 16 located in other portions of housing 12M…. Different sensors measure different portions of the user's face and gather information such as facial pressure… other facial information (skin color…
[0066] During the operations of block 202, device 10 may, if desired, use the information gathered about the user's face to authenticate the user. Control circuitry 20 may, for example, compare the facial measurements to known facial measurements previously registered for a particular user. In this way, the user's identity can be confirmed before device 10 provides the user with access to user-specific content and device functions.
[0067] During the operations of block 204, facial sensor measurements (e.g., displacements of the type described in connection with FIGS. 19 and 20) may be used to adjust a display (e.g., to compensate for misalignment, etc.).
[0068] During the operations of block 206, actuators in seal 12R may be adjusted based on facial sensor measurements. For example, discomfort associated with locations on seal 12R that have elevated amounts of facial pressure can be reduced by selectively decreasing seal thickness in those locations….
[0070] During the operations of block 210, skin movement on the user's face can be used to determine the user's facial expression and to track how the user's facial expression is changing. If, for example, shear movement upward near the corners of the user's mouth is measured by the facial sensors in seal 12R, control circuitry 20 can determine that the user is making a smile. A computer-generated representation of the user (e.g., an avatar) that is being controlled by control circuitry 20 can be provided with a facial expression that is updated to include a corresponding smile. If the user stops smiling, the avatar can be updated in real time accordingly…
[0073] These activities that may be taken by device 10 based on facial sensor measurements from sensors in seal 12R are illustrative. In general, any suitable actions that may be taken in device 10 may be taken based partly or fully on facial sensor measurements.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a front facing camera that obtains sets of images of the user’s face in order to determine the pressure exerted on the user’s skin by processing color data of the user’s skin as taught by Hossain in the method of the CN 165 – Aghara – Mulliken combination in order to use data from facial sensor measurements to perform such functions as alleviating discomfort, authentication to identify the user so that comparisons can be made to previously registered facial measurements, adjusting the display in response to movements, or generating an avatar whose facial expression is updated in real time to correspond to the facial expression of the wearer as taught by Hossain (paragraphs [0065]-[0073]).
Regarding claim 2, the CN 165 – Aghara – Mulliken – Hossain combination teaches “The method of claim 1,” and CN 165 further teaches “wherein the predicted set of measurements are generated using … historical user data (paragraph [0030]: “in the product design stage, it can be obtained through experiments that the deformation state of the airbag body can just make the wearable component 1 and the wearer wear stably, and does not cause discomfort to the wearer.”), the historical user data comprising at least one of: eyeglass temple attachment lengths, user face measurements, and eyeglass lenses sizes (the deformation state of the airbag is a measure of the eyeglass temple attachment length, and the comfort and stability of the wearable component are user face measurements in that they are measurements of the comfort of the user’s face and the stability of the wearable component on the user’s face).”
However, CN 165 fails to explicitly teach that “the predicted set of measurements are generated using a machine learning model trained on … data.”
Mulliken teaches a method of adjusting the fit of a headmounted device (400) using temple attachments (tension adjuster Figs. 13-19) where (claim 2) “the predicted set of measurements are generated using a machine learning model trained on … data (paragraph [0089]: “a relationship between proximity values and tension levels can be learned using machine learning techniques, such as by training a deep neural network. According to these or other techniques, the proximity signal 1036 may be used by the tension controller 1026 to determine the tensioning command 1038 under reactive or predictive control.”).”
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose a machine learning technique as taught by Mulliken as the type of program used to obtain the pressure thresholds from the historical/experimental data as taught by CN 165 because Mulliken teaches that machine learning techniques, such as by training a deep neural network are appropriate for determining the operating parameters of an adjustable headworn device.
Regarding claims 3 and 4, the CN 165 – Aghara – Mulliken – Hossain combination teaches “The method of claim 1,” however, CN 165 fails to teach (claim 3) “further comprising: receiving a first set of images from a first camera coupled to the pair of eyeglasses, the first set of images comprising a first view of the user wearing the pair of eyeglasses” and (claim 4) “wherein the first camera is a front facing camera that faces the user of the pair of eyeglasses.”
Hossain teaches (claim 3) “receiving a first set of images (paragraph [0051]: “rear-facing image sensors… to monitor parts of the user's face.” an image sensor that monitors parts of the user’s face takes sets of images, including a first set of images) from a first camera coupled to the pair of eyeglasses (paragraph [0051]: “rear-facing image sensors in housing portion 12M may be used to monitor parts of the user's face.” Note that “image sensors” is plural, and thus Hossain would teach a second camera different from the front facing camera of claim 1 if this was the intended meaning.), the first set of images comprising a first view of the user wearing the pair of eyeglasses (paragraph [0051]: “rear-facing image sensors… to monitor parts of the user's face.”).”
(claim 4) “wherein the first camera is a front facing camera that faces the user of the pair of eyeglasses (paragraph [0051]: “rear-facing image sensors in housing portion 12M may be used to monitor parts of the user's face.” The “rear-facing” image sensors are “front facing” in the terminology of the instant application in that they face the wearer.).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a front facing camera that obtains sets of images of the user’s face in order to determine the pressure exerted on the user’s skin by processing color data of the user’s skin as taught by Hossain in the method of the CN 165 – Aghara – Mulliken – Hossain combination in order to use data from facial sensor measurements to perform such functions as alleviating discomfort, authentication to identify the user so that comparisons can be made to previously registered facial measurements, adjusting the display in response to movements, or generating an avatar whose facial expression is updated in real time to correspond to the facial expression of the wearer as taught by Hossain (paragraphs [0065]-[0073]).
Regarding claim 5, the CN 165 – Aghara – Mulliken – Hossain combination teaches “The method of claim 3,” However, CN 165 fails to explicitly teach “wherein the first set of images are captured before transmission of the predicted set of measurements to the pair of pneumatic actuators.”
Hossain teaches “wherein the first set of images are captured before transmission of the predicted set of measurements to the pair of pneumatic actuators (e.g. paragraphs [0066]-[0068]: “During the operations of block 202, device 10 may, if desired, use the information gathered about the user's face to authenticate the user. Control circuitry 20 may, for example, compare the facial measurements to known facial measurements previously registered for a particular user. In this way, the user's identity can be confirmed before device 10 provides the user with access to user-specific content and device functions… During the operations of block 206, actuators in seal 12R may be adjusted based on facial sensor measurements. For example, discomfort associated with locations on seal 12R that have elevated amounts of facial pressure can be reduced by selectively decreasing seal thickness in those locations.” Thus the step of obtaining a first set of images is prior to the step of actuation).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to obtain the first set of images prior to transmission of information to any actuators as taught by Hossain so that a user can be identified, authenticated and comparisons can be made to previously registered facial measurements and user-specific operations can be provided as taught by Hossain (paragraph [0066]).
Note that the limitations “before transmission of the predicted set of measurements to the pair of pneumatic actuators” is considered to be met by the combination of references because CN 165 teaches the control of a pneumatic actuator based on measurements and Hossain teaches obtaining facial measurements before any such control.
Regarding claim 6, the CN 165 – Aghara – Mulliken – Hossain combination teaches “The method of claim 1,” and CN 165 further teaches “wherein the eyeglass temples are a pair of eyeglass temples (see pair of temples in Fig. 1), and
wherein a first eyeglass temple of the pair of eyeglass temples comprises a first one of the eyeglass temple attachments and a first pair of pneumatic actuators associated therewith (as shown in Fig. 1 the left temple has a micro air pump 3, three airbag bodies 2 on the temple itself, and one airbag body 2 at the juncture between the front of the eyewear and the temple. Let the first pair be any two of the four air bag bodies 2 on the left temple) and a second eyeglass temple of the pair of eyeglass temples comprises a second one of the eyeglass temple attachments and a second pair of pneumatic actuators associated therewith (as shown in Fig. 1 the right temple has a micro air pump 3. The right temple also has three airbag bodies 2 on the temple itself, and one airbag body 2 at the juncture between the front of the eyewear and the temple, see paragraph [0023]: “the deformable components 2 that are set at symmetrical positions”. Let the second pair be any two of the four air bag bodies 2 on the right temple).”
Regarding claim 7, the CN 165 – Aghara – Mulliken – Hossain combination teaches “The method of claim 6,” and CN 165 further teaches “wherein the first pair of pneumatic actuators and the second pair of pneumatic actuators are physically coupled to an air tank (micro air pumps 3) via an air line (paragraph [0038]: “each airbag body is connected to the micro air pump 3 through a compression link”).”
Regarding claim 9, the CN 165 – Aghara – Mulliken combination teaches “The method of claim 1,” and CN 165 further teaches “wherein transmitting the predicted set of measurements to the pneumatic actuators coupled to the eyeglass temples, causes the pneumatic actuators to expand or shrink the eyeglass temple attachments (e.g. paragraph [0032]: “The airbag
body can be inflated and deflated respectively, and the deformation state of the airbag body can be changed.”).”
Regarding claim 13, CN 165 teaches “A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (e.g. paragraph [0030]: “the pressure threshold can be stored in In the processor” thus the processor includes computer-readable storage medium. Although CN 165 does not explicitly teach that the storage medium is non-transitory, this is a genus with two species, transitory and non-transitory, thus one of ordinary skill in the art would have at once envisaged that the storage medium in CN 165 is non-transitory1) including instructions that when executed by a computer (e.g. paragraph [0030]: “the control module is electrically connected to the pressure detection module 4, and the control module can obtain the pressure information measured by the pressure detection module 4, and can enable the micro air pump 3 to adjust the corresponding deformation state of the airbag body according to the pressure information.”), cause the computer to:
receive a set of measurements (paragraph [0030] pressure thresholds) corresponding to a length of eyeglass temple attachments on a pair of eyeglasses (The eyeglass temple attachments are the deformable components 2, which are air bags, see Fig. 1 and paragraphs [0025] -[0026] and [0030]. The pressure in the air bags corresponds to their deformation state, i.e. length. The set of measurements corresponds to the measurement of pressures in the determination of the pressure thresholds, see paragraph [0030].);…
based on the set of measurements, generate a predicted set of measurements for the length of the eyeglass temple attachments (the predicted set of measurements corresponds to the pressure thresholds, which are based on the pressure measurements in the first method step and then transmitted and stored in the actuator, see paragraph [0030])…
for each eyeglass temple attachment of the eyeglass temple attachments:
transmit the predicted set of measurements to… pneumatic actuators (micro air pump 3) coupled to the eyeglass temple attachments (paragraph [0028]: “The micro air pump 3 is connected to each airbag body and can automatically control the inflation and deflation of the airbag body, thereby controlling the deformation state of each airbag body.”);
determine a set of pressure measurements corresponding to a pressure of eyeglass temples against a user of the pair of eyeglasses (pressure measurements are carried out when the device is worn, see paragraphs [0030] and [0036]), the eyeglass temples being physically coupled to the eyeglass temple attachments (see Fig. 1);
based on the set of pressure measurements, generate an adjusted set of measurements, the adjusted set of measurements comprising a modification to the predicted set of measurements (paragraph [0030]: “when the pressure information measured by the pressure detection module 4 obtained by the processor is less than the pressure threshold, the micro air pump 3 is controlled to continuously inflate the airbag body; when the pressure information measured by the pressure detection module 4 obtained by the processor is equal to the pressure threshold, the micro air pump 3 is controlled to stop inflating the airbag body”); and
transmit the adjusted set of measurements to the… pneumatic actuators coupled to the eyeglass temple attachments (paragraph [0030]: “when the pressure information measured by the pressure detection module 4 obtained by the processor is less than the pressure threshold, the micro air pump 3 is controlled to continuously inflate the airbag body; when the pressure information measured by the pressure detection module 4 obtained by the processor is equal to the pressure threshold, the micro air pump 3 is controlled to stop inflating the airbag body”).”
However, CN 165 fails to explicitly teach “receive user feedback from a user wearing the pair of eyeglasses, the feedback comprising an indication of a fit of the pair of eyeglasses on the user.”
Aghara teaches (claim 13) “instructions (Fig. 7)…
receive a set of measurements corresponding to a length of eyeglass temple attachments on a pair of eyeglasses (step 704 paragraph [0064]: “place the HMD straps in an initial loosened state” an initial loosened state has straps of a predetermined length. The predetermined loosened state configuration is a set of measurements.);
receive user feedback from a user wearing the pair of eyeglasses (step 732 paragraph [0071]: “manual user input”), the feedback comprising an indication of a fit of the pair of eyeglasses on the user (paragraph [0071]: “wherein the manual user input may be fine tuning of the strap fit”);
based on the set of measurements, generate a predicted set of measurements for the length of the eyeglass temple attachments (steps 704, 720, 728 and step 732 all involve adjusting the strap, and thus generating a predicted set of measurements for the length and adjusting the strap to those predicted lengths) using … the user feedback (step 732 explicitly uses the user feedback amongst all of the steps that adjust the length);
for each eyeglass temple attachment of the eyeglass temple attachments:
transmit the predicted set of measurements to … pneumatic actuators (545 motor and pump to inflate or deflate straps) coupled to the eyeglass temple attachment (see Fig. 5B);
determine a set of pressure measurements (step 724) corresponding to a pressure of eyeglass temples against a user of the pair of eyeglasses (see Fig. 5A), the eyeglass temples being physically coupled to the eyeglass temple attachment (see Fig. 5A);
based on the set of pressure measurements, generate an adjusted set of measurements, the adjusted set of measurements comprising a modification to the predicted set of measurements (step 728); and
transmit the adjusted set of measurements to the pair of pneumatic actuators coupled to the eyeglass temple attachment (step 728).”
Aghara further teaches (paragraph [0003]) that properly adjusting the HMD staps play a big role in comfort and that proper fitting the HMD is necessary for a positive user experience.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate manual user input into the fitting process as taught by Aghara in the method of CN 165 for the purpose of ensuring proper fitting, comfort and a positive user experience as taught by Aghara (paragraph [0003]).
However, CN 165 and Aghara fail to explicitly teach “using a machine learning model configured to analyze the user feedback.”
Mulliken teaches a method of adjusting the fit of a headmounted device (400) using temple attachments (tension adjuster Figs. 13-19) “using a machine learning model configured to analyze [conditions] (paragraph [0080]: “a relationship between biometric conditions and tension levels can be learned using machine learning techniques, such as by training a deep neural network. According to these or other techniques, the biometric signal 736 may be used by the tension controller 726 to determine the tensioning command 738 under reactive or predictive control.” and paragraph [0089]: “a relationship between proximity values and tension levels can be learned using machine learning techniques, such as by training a deep neural network. According to these or other techniques, the proximity signal 1036 may be used by the tension controller 1026 to determine the tensioning command 1038 under reactive or predictive control.”).”
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a machine learning model as taught by Mulliken into the method of the CN 165 – Aghara combination for the purpose of enabling reactive or predictive control as taught by Mulliken (paragraphs [0080] and [0089]) and because Mulliken teaches that machine learning techniques, such as by training a deep neural network are appropriate for determining the operating parameters of an adjustable headworn device.
Note that the combination of limitations “using a machine learning model configured to analyze the user feedback” are considered to be taught by the combination of references because Aghara teaches the incorporation of user feedback into the adjustment system and Mulliken teaches utilizing a machine learning technique such as a deep neural network. Thus, taken together it would have been obvious to apply such a deep neural network analysis to any of the input mechanisms of the CN 165 – Aghara combination.
However, the CN 165 – Aghara – Mulliken combination fails to explicitly teach “for each eyeglass temple attachment .. a pair of pneumatic actuators coupled to the eyeglass temple attachment”.
CN 165 teaches (paragraph [0042]) “two micro air pumps 3 can be symmetrically arranged on the wearable component 1.”
It has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (Claims at issue were directed to a water-tight masonry structure wherein a water seal of flexible material fills the joints which form between adjacent pours of concrete. The claimed water seal has a "web" which lies in the joint, and a plurality of "ribs" projecting outwardly from each side of the web into one of the adjacent concrete slabs. The prior art disclosed a flexible water stop for preventing passage of water between masses of concrete in the shape of a plus sign (+). Although the reference did not disclose a plurality of ribs, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.). See MPEP §2144.04(VI)(B).
The CN 165 – Aghara – Mulliken combination discloses the claimed invention except for the use of a pair of pneumatic actuators for each temple attachment rather than a single pneumatic actuator for each temple. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use a pair of pneumatic actuators for each temple attachment, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). See MPEP §2144.04(VI)(B).
Note that neither claim 13, nor any claim which depends from claim 13, recite any functional or structural differences between the two pneumatic actuators of the pair of pneumatic actuators. Thus it would be improper to import any such differences from the specification into the claims.
CN 165 fails to explicitly teach “receiving a first set of images from a front facing camera coupled to the pair of eyeglasses, the first set of images comprising a first view of the user wearing the pair of eyeglasses….
receiving a second set of images from the front facing camera, the second set of images captured after transmission of the predicted set of measurements …
comparing, using an image processing algorithm, color data associated with the user’s skin from the first set of images to color data associated with the user’s skin from the second set of images;
based on the comparison, determining the set of pressure measurements.”
Hossain teaches a head-mounted device that may include displays (see Fig. 1 and paragraph [0032]). Hossain further teaches “receiving a first set of images (paragraph [0051]: “rear-facing image sensors… to monitor parts of the user's face.” an image sensor that monitors parts of the user’s face takes sets of images, including a first set of images) from a front facing camera coupled to the pair of eyeglasses (paragraph [0051]: “rear-facing image sensors in housing portion 12M may be used to monitor parts of the user's face.” The “rear-facing” image sensors are “front facing” in the terminology of the instant application in that they face the wearer.), the first set of images comprising a first view of the user wearing the pair of eyeglasses (paragraph [0051]: “rear-facing image sensors… to monitor parts of the user's face.”);
receiving a second set of images from the front facing camera, (paragraph [0051] “to monitor” thus multiple sets of images are collected as a function of time including a second set of images) the second set of images captured after transmission of the predicted set of measurements (paragraph [0063]: “Control circuitry 20 may use actuators to adjust the size, shape, stiffness, and/or other attributes of light seal 12R.” paragraph [0051] “to monitor” Thus a second set of images is captured during the monitoring of the face that would include times after instructions are sent to the actuators, and thus also after such a transmission);
comparing, using an image processing algorithm, color data associated with the user's skin from the first set of images (paragraph [0055]: “when a patch of skin in face 70 is subjected to pressure from surface 52, some of the blood near that patch of skin will be forced away, causing the patch of skin to appear lighter in color (less red). Accordingly, an optical sensor such as the sensor of FIG. 11 can be used to measure how much pressure is being exerted against face 70.” Thus color data of the user’s skin is processed by some algorithm that is an image processing algorithm to determine how much pressure is being exerted against the face of the user.) to color data associated with the user's skin from the second set of images (paragraph [0051] “to monitor” thus the color data of the user’s skin is being compared as a function of time to determine the current pressure exerted against the face);
based on the comparison, determining a set of pressure measurements (paragraph [0055]: “when a patch of skin in face 70 is subjected to pressure from surface 52, some of the blood near that patch of skin will be forced away, causing the patch of skin to appear lighter in color (less red). Accordingly, an optical sensor such as the sensor of FIG. 11 can be used to measure how much pressure is being exerted against face 70.”).”
Hossain further teaches:
paragraph [0054]: “As the user wears device 10, the user's face will apply pressure to light seal 12R and will tend to deform light seal 12R. Deformations of light seal 12R (twisting, bending, etc.) may arise both from the user's facial shape and changes to the user's facial expression and/or other real-time changes to the shape of the user's face.”
paragraphs [0065]-[0073]: “FIG. 23 is a flow chart of illustrative operations associated with operating device 10. During the operations of block 200, control circuitry 20 can gather sensor measurements from one or more sensors 16 in device 10 such as facial sensors and/or other sensors 16 in light seal 12R and/or facial image sensors or other sensors 16 located in other portions of housing 12M…. Different sensors measure different portions of the user's face and gather information such as facial pressure… other facial information (skin color…
[0066] During the operations of block 202, device 10 may, if desired, use the information gathered about the user's face to authenticate the user. Control circuitry 20 may, for example, compare the facial measurements to known facial measurements previously registered for a particular user. In this way, the user's identity can be confirmed before device 10 provides the user with access to user-specific content and device functions.
[0067] During the operations of block 204, facial sensor measurements (e.g., displacements of the type described in connection with FIGS. 19 and 20) may be used to adjust a display (e.g., to compensate for misalignment, etc.).
[0068] During the operations of block 206, actuators in seal 12R may be adjusted based on facial sensor measurements. For example, discomfort associated with locations on seal 12R that have elevated amounts of facial pressure can be reduced by selectively decreasing seal thickness in those locations….
[0070] During the operations of block 210, skin movement on the user's face can be used to determine the user's facial expression and to track how the user's facial expression is changing. If, for example, shear movement upward near the corners of the user's mouth is measured by the facial sensors in seal 12R, control circuitry 20 can determine that the user is making a smile. A computer-generated representation of the user (e.g., an avatar) that is being controlled by control circuitry 20 can be provided with a facial expression that is updated to include a corresponding smile. If the user stops smiling, the avatar can be updated in real time accordingly…
[0073] These activities that may be taken by device 10 based on facial sensor measurements from sensors in seal 12R are illustrative. In general, any suitable actions that may be taken in device 10 may be taken based partly or fully on facial sensor measurements.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a front facing camera that obtains sets of images of the user’s face in order to determine the pressure exerted on the user’s skin by processing color data of the user’s skin as taught by Hossain in the method of the CN 165 – Aghara – Mulliken combination in order to use data from facial sensor measurements to perform such functions as alleviating discomfort, authentication to identify the user so that comparisons can be made to previously registered facial measurements, adjusting the display in response to movements, or generating an avatar whose facial expression is updated in real time to correspond to the facial expression of the wearer as taught by Hossain (paragraphs [0065]-[0073]).
Regarding claim 14, the CN 165 – Aghara – Mulliken – Hossain combination teaches “The computer-readable storage medium of claim 13,” and CN 165 further teaches “wherein the predicted set of measurements are generated use … historical user data (paragraph [0030]: “in the product design stage, it can be obtained through experiments that the deformation state of the airbag body can just make the wearable component 1 and the wearer wear stably, and does not cause discomfort to the wearer.”), the historical user data comprising at least one of: eyeglass temple attachment lengths, user face measurements, and eyeglass lenses sizes (the deformation state of the airbag is a measure of the eyeglass temple attachment length, and the comfort and stability of the wearable component are user face measurements in that they are measurements of the comfort of the user’s face and the stability of the wearable component on the user’s face).”
However, CN 165 fails to explicitly teach that “the predicted set of measurements are generated use a machine learning model trained on … data.”
Mulliken teaches a method of adjusting the fit of a headmounted device (400) using temple attachments (tension adjuster Figs. 13-19) where (claim 14) “the predicted set of measurements are generated use a machine learning model trained on … data (paragraph [0089]: “a relationship between proximity values and tension levels can be learned using machine learning techniques, such as by training a deep neural network. According to these or other techniques, the proximity signal 1036 may be used by the tension controller 1026 to determine the tensioning command 1038 under reactive or predictive control.”).”
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose a machine learning technique as taught by Mulliken as the type of program used to obtain the pressure thresholds from the historical/experimental data as taught by CN 165 because Mulliken teaches that machine learning techniques, such as by training a deep neural network are appropriate for determining the operating parameters of an adjustable headworn device.
Regarding claims 15 and 16, the CN 165 – Aghara – Mulliken – Hossain combination teaches “The computer-readable storage medium of claim 13,” however, CN 165 fails to teach (claim 15) “wherein the instructions further configure the computer to: receive a first set of images from a first camera coupled to the pair of eyeglasses, the first set of images comprising a first view of the user wearing the pair of eyeglasses” and (claim 16) “wherein the first camera is a front facing camera.”
Hossain teaches (claim 15) “receive a first set of images (paragraph [0051]: “rear-facing image sensors… to monitor parts of the user's face.” an image sensor that monitors parts of the user’s face takes sets of images, including a first set of images) from a first camera coupled to the pair of eyeglasses (paragraph [0051]: “rear-facing image sensors in housing portion 12M may be used to monitor parts of the user's face.” Note that “image sensors” is plural, and thus Hossain would teach a second camera different from the front facing camera of claim 1 if this was the intended meaning.), the first set of images comprising a first view of the user wearing the pair of eyeglasses (paragraph [0051]: “rear-facing image sensors… to monitor parts of the user's face.”).”
(claim 16) “wherein the first camera is a front facing camera (paragraph [0051]: “rear-facing image sensors in housing portion 12M may be used to monitor parts of the user's face.” The “rear-facing” image sensors are “front facing” in the terminology of the instant application in that they face the wearer.).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a front facing camera that obtains sets of images of the user’s face in order to determine the pressure exerted on the user’s skin by processing color data of the user’s skin as taught by Hossain in the method of the CN 165 – Aghara – Mulliken – Hossain combination in order to use data from facial sensor measurements to perform such functions as alleviating discomfort, authentication to identify the user so that comparisons can be made to previously registered facial measurements, adjusting the display in response to movements, or generating an avatar whose facial expression is updated in real time to correspond to the facial expression of the wearer as taught by Hossain (paragraphs [0065]-[0073]).
Regarding claim 17, the CN 165 – Aghara – Mulliken – Hossain combination teaches “The computer-readable storage medium of claim 15,” However, CN 165 fails to explicitly teach “wherein the first set of images are captured before transmission of the predicted set of measurements to the pair of pneumatic actuators.”
Hossain teaches “wherein the first set of images are captured before transmission of the predicted set of measurements to the pair of pneumatic actuators (e.g. paragraphs [0066]-[0068]: “During the operations of block 202, device 10 may, if desired, use the information gathered about the user's face to authenticate the user. Control circuitry 20 may, for example, compare the facial measurements to known facial measurements previously registered for a particular user. In this way, the user's identity can be confirmed before device 10 provides the user with access to user-specific content and device functions… During the operations of block 206, actuators in seal 12R may be adjusted based on facial sensor measurements. For example, discomfort associated with locations on seal 12R that have elevated amounts of facial pressure can be reduced by selectively decreasing seal thickness in those locations.” Thus the step of obtaining a first set of images is prior to the step of actuation).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to obtain the first set of images prior to transmission of information to any actuators as taught by Hossain so that a user can be identified, authenticated and comparisons can be made to previously registered facial measurements and user-specific operations can be provided as taught by Hossain (paragraph [0066]).
Note that the limitations “before transmission of the predicted set of measurements to the pair of pneumatic actuators” is considered to be met by the combination of references because CN 165 teaches the control of a pneumatic actuator based on measurements and Hossain teaches obtaining facial measurements before any such control.
Regarding claim 18, the CN 165 – Aghara – Mulliken – Hossain combination teaches “The computer-readable storage medium of claim 13,” and CN 165 further teaches “wherein the eyeglass temples are a pair of eyeglass temples (see pair of temples in Fig. 1), and
wherein a first eyeglass temple of the pair of eyeglass temples comprises a first one of the eyeglass temple attachments and a first pair of pneumatic actuators associated therewith (as shown in Fig. 1 the left temple has a micro air pump 3, three airbag bodies 2 on the temple itself, and one airbag body 2 at the juncture between the front of the eyewear and the temple. Let the first pair be any two of the four air bag bodies 2 on the left temple) and a second eyeglass temple of the pair of eyeglass temples comprises a second one of the eyeglass temple attachments and a second pair of pneumatic actuators associated therewith (as shown in Fig. 1 the right temple has a micro air pump 3. The right temple also has three airbag bodies 2 on the temple itself, and one airbag body 2 at the juncture between the front of the eyewear and the temple, see paragraph [0023]: “the deformable components 2 that are set at symmetrical positions”. Let the second pair be any two of the four air bag bodies 2 on the right temple).”
Regarding claim 19, the CN 165 – Aghara – Mulliken – Hossain combination teaches “The computer-readable storage medium of claim 18,” and CN 165 further teaches “wherein the first pair of pneumatic actuators and the second pair of pneumatic actuators are physically coupled to an air tank (micro air pumps 3) via an air line (paragraph [0038]: “each airbag body is connected to the micro air pump 3 through a compression link”).”
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed March 16, 2026 have been fully considered.
In the first paragraph of page 8 of 11 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant points out where support can be found for the amendments to claims 1 and 13. The examiner agrees, no new matter has been introduced.
Under the heading “The Rejection of Claims under § 112” on page 8 of 11 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant argues that the 35 USC §112 rejections of claims 6-9 and 18-20 have been overcome by the amendments. The examiner agrees that these amendments overcome the §112 rejections of claims 6-9 and 18-20. However, as noted above, new 35 USC §112(b) issues are raised for claims 3-4 and 15-16 in light of the amendments to claims 1 and 13.
Under the heading “The Rejection of Claims under § 103” on pages 8 to 10 of and 11 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant argues that the amendments to claims 1 and 13 are not taught by the previously applied art, in particular that Osman fails to teach “color data associated with the user's skin from the first set of images to color data associated with the user's skin from the second set of images.” These arguments 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.
Under the heading “Reservation of Rights” on page 12 of 13 of the applicant’s remarks the applicant notes:
“In the interest of clarity and brevity, every assertion made in the Office Action may not have been equally addressed. Silence regarding any such assertion does not constitute any admission or acquiescence. All rights not exercised in connection with this response, such as the right to challenge or rebut any tacit or explicit characterization of any reference or of any of the present claims, the right to challenge or rebut any asserted factual or legal basis of any of the rejections, the right to swear behind any cited reference such as provided under 37 C.F.R. § 1.131 or otherwise, or the right to assert co-ownership of any cited reference, are reserved. It is not admitted that any of the cited references or any other references of record are relevant to the present claims, or that they constitute prior art. … All rights to pursue any cancelled claims in a subsequent patent application claiming the benefit of priority of the present patent application, and to request rejoinder of any withdrawn claim, as required by MPEP § 821.04, are likewise reserved.”
The reservations of rights to traverse the rejections in a variety of manners and to pursue any cancelled claims in a subsequent patent application are duly noted and extended.
However, the applicant also states “To the extent that any rejection or assertion is based upon the Examiner's personal knowledge, rather than any objective evidence of record as manifested by a cited prior art reference, timely objection to such reliance on Official Notice is made, and all rights to request that the Examiner provide a reference or affidavit in support of such assertion, as required by MPEP § 2144.03, are reserved.” This is not accurate. As noted in MPEP §2144.02(C) “To adequately traverse a finding based on official notice, an applicant must specifically point out the supposed errors in the examiner’s action, which would include stating why the noticed fact is not considered to be common knowledge or well-known in the art. A mere request by the applicant that the examiner provide documentary evidence in support of an officially-noticed fact is not a proper traversal. See 37 CFR 1.111(b).” (emphasis added). It is the examiner’s position that none of the above rejections relied upon Official Notice, however, to the extent that the applicant believes that they did, the applicant has forfeited their opportunity to traverse such findings by failing to properly traverse the Official Notice in the response immediately following such findings.
No further arguments are made after this paragraph.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARA E RAKOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-4206. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-4PM ET M-F.
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, Thomas Pham can be reached on 571-272-3689. 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.
/CARA E RAKOWSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
1 See MPEP § 2131.02(III). A reference disclosure can anticipate a claim when the reference describes the limitations but "'d[oes] not expressly spell out' the limitations as arranged or combined as in the claim, if a person of skill in the art, reading the reference, would ‘at once envisage’ the claimed arrangement or combination." Kennametal, Inc. v. Ingersoll Cutting Tool Co., 780 F.3d 1376, 1381, 114 USPQ2d 1250, 1254 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (quoting In re Petering, 301 F.2d 676, 681(CCPA 1962)).
Prosecution Insights