DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 December 15, 2025 has been entered.
Specification
The amendments to the specification were received on December 15, 2025. These amendments to the specification are acceptable.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) because the claim limitations uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are:
“receive, in an online portal, a first input to begin a session from the computerized screen terminal” in claims 1 and 12;
“responsive to the first input, start the session” in claims 1 and 12;
“receive, in the online portal, patient information including a prior corrective lenses prescription” in claim 1;
“receive, in the online portal, a second input including a phone number or an electronic address of the handheld terminal for adding the handheld terminal to the session” in claims 1 and 12;
“transmit a message to the handheld terminal using the phone number or the electronic address, the message including a link to the session” in claims 1 and 12;
“receive, in the online portal, a connection request from the handheld terminal for adding the handheld terminal to the session” in claims 1 and 12;
“associate the handheld terminal and the computerized screen terminal with the same session after receiving the connection request” in claims 1 and 12;
“use the prior corrective lenses prescription to select eye examination diagrams for the session the eye examination diagrams associated with corresponding input interfaces” in claim 1;
“select eye examination diagrams for the session the eye examination diagrams associated with corresponding input interfaces: in claim 12;
“during the session, cause the eye examination diagrams to be sequentially displayed by the computerized screen terminal while causing the corresponding input interfaces to be displayed by the handheld terminal” in claims 1 and 12;
“during the session, receive at least one input from the input interface displayed by the handheld terminal and associate the received at least one input to the currently displayed eye examination diagram” in claims 1 and 12;
“determine the corrective lenses prescription using the received inputs in relation to the corresponding eye examination diagrams” in claims 1 and 12;
“transmit information to the handheld terminal or the computerized screen terminal that is indicative of the corrective lenses prescription” in claims 1 and 12;
“selection of the link within the message causes the connection request to be received in the online portal” in claims 3;
“the session is a web session that causes the handheld terminal to operate as a remote control for the computerized screen terminal” in claims 4 and 14;
“select the eye examination diagrams to test for an axis component and a cylinder component of the corrective lenses prescription” in claims 5 and 15;
“select the eye examination diagrams to test for a sphere component of the corrective lenses prescription” in claims 6 and 16;
“test for the sphere component by: presenting a first eye examination diagram via the computerized screen terminal and a corresponding first input interface via the handheld terminal, where the first eye examination diagram is too small to be clearly seen by the patient; receiving in the first input interface at least one first input to increase a size of the first eye examination diagram until it can just barely be made out by the patient; and using the at least one first input for determining the sphere component” in claims 7 and 17;
“test for the sphere component by: presenting a second eye examination diagram via the computerized screen terminal and a corresponding second input interface via the handheld terminal, where the second eye examination diagram is large enough to be clearly seen by the patient; receiving in the second input interface the at least one second input to decrease a size of the second eye examination diagram until it can no longer be made out by the patient; and using the at least one second input for additionally determining the sphere component” in claims 8 and 18; and
“use at least one of the computerized screen terminal or the handheld terminal to verify during the session that the patient is at a known, fixed distance from the computerized screen terminal” in claims 9 and 19.
Because this/these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed December 15, 2025, with respect to claim rejections under 102 have been fully considered and in combination with the amendments are persuasive. Particularly, Pellicano does not disclose two display screens, i.e. “a computerized screen terminal and a separate handheld terminal having a display screen” as now required by the independent claims. Further, the examiner agrees that Berry does not teach this feature. The claim rejections under 102 have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed December 15, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s argument that Yoo fails to cure the deficiency of Pellicano and/or Berry because “Yoo discloses that the connection may include a Bluetooth® connection or a Wi-Fi connection. (Yoo, par. [0030])” and Yoo instead discloses that the devices (104, 106) communicate directly with each other without any assistance from a server or at least one processor for establishing communication, the examiner is unpersuaded. Yoo discloses a sensory input touch device, which is commensurate with the claimed separate handheld terminal having a display screen. The claim does not require any particular communication means for the or path (such as having the separate handheld terminal communicate with the other elements through the internet) for the “online portal session.” Further since this is interpreted under 112(f) and any functional equivalents will read on the limitations. Thus, while Yoo paragraphs [0038 & 0043] contemplate examples where “the touch-screen device may communicate utilizing Bluetooth and/or Wi-Fi compatible technologies” Yoo paragraph [0030] discloses it can communicate via “Internet Protocol (IP) such as Transport Control Protocol (TCP) or User Datagram Protocol (UDP)” with extensive discussion of UDP, i.e. communicating via the internet, see figure A below, instead of via a short-range wireless network, a.k.a. Bluetooth®. These are all functional equivalents for the “processor”, the “computerized screen terminal” and the “separate handheld terminal having a display screen” to communicate during a session.
PNG
media_image1.png
396
424
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure A. Reproduction of Yoo figure 1, showing communications between elements via a network and paragraph [0028] notes network 102 may be “the internet.”
Regarding applicant’s argument:
Yoo fails to disclose a handheld terminal that is not part of a session between at least one processor and a computerized screen terminal when a session is started. Yoo also fails to disclose a computerized screen terminal that transmits to at least one processor a second input including a phone number or an electronic address of the handheld terminal for adding the handheld terminal to the session.
The examiner is unpersuaded. Regardless which of the “computerized screen terminal” or the “separate handheld terminal having a display screen” starts the session or is added to session leads to an equivalent result. This is evidenced by instant application paragraph [0088] “the patient is enabled to log into an online portal on either terminal”. Since these features are interpreted under 112(f) and any functional equivalents will read on the limitations. Further, there is a limited number of ways to order the “computerized screen terminal” and the “separate handheld terminal having a display screen” to be part of an online session. Either the “computerized screen terminal” is first and the “separate handheld terminal having a display screen” is second or visa-versa. It has been held that where there are only a finite number of predictable identifiable solutions, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to try the known options within his or her technical grasp. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), see MPEP 2143. Regarding the use of “a second input including a phone number or an electronic address of a handheld terminal” - it is respectfully noted that these limitations are also interpreted under 112(f) and they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. In this case the display (108/408), the separate handheld terminal (104/402) and server (106) are all in communication through the internet (102). Since the elements are in communication across the internet, using TCP or UDP – all of the elements necessarily have some electronic address and messages/instructions/signals between elements during an internet session/eyetest.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 12-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pellicano US Patent 6,386,707, of record, in view of Yoo et al. US Patent Application Publication 2011/0025611, of record.
Regarding claim 12 Pellicano discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium including a plurality of instructions, which when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to operate with a user’s computer (e.g. test subject's computer terminal 10) to determine a corrective lenses prescription for a patient (title e.g. see figures 1a-1b) by: receive, in an online portal (e.g. web page 300), a first input to begin a session from the user’s computer (e.g. figure 1 column 2 line 65-column 3 line 3 e.g. test subject's computer terminal 10 connected to internet server/CVS 30 via the internet 20 using any commercially available internet browser); responsive to the first input, start the session (axiomatic); receive, select eye examination diagrams for the session (inherent for a functional equivalent see abstract e.g. figures 5-8); the eye examination diagrams (e.g. figures 3 & 5-8) associated with corresponding input interfaces (e.g. figure 4 shows interface and column 4 lines 37-56 “input may be provided via a computer mouse, a keyboard or audio means”); during the session, cause the eye examination diagrams to be sequentially displayed by the user’s computer and causing the corresponding input interfaces to be displayed by the user’s computer (see figure 4 loop of steps 430, 440 & 450); during the session, receive at least one input from the input interface displayed by the user’s computer (inherent since loop is executed at least once) and associate the received at least one input to the currently displayed eye examination diagram (inherent in order to evaluate patient); determine the corrective lenses prescription using the received inputs in relation to the corresponding eye examination diagrams (column 6 lines 32-49 “test results are transferred to the Century vision Internet server 30 [FIG. 1(a)] for evaluation by an expert system that diagnoses and recommends prescription”); and transmit information to the user’s computer that is indicative of the corrective lenses prescription (column 6 lines 32-49 “client is advised”).
Pellicano does not disclose the user’s computer is a computerized screen terminal and a separate handheld terminal having a display screen, the handheld terminal not being a part of the session when the session is started; and a connection request from the handheld terminal for adding the handheld terminal to the session in the online portal, a second input including a phone number or an electronic address of the handheld terminal; transmit a message to the handheld terminal using the phone number or the electronic address, the message including a link to the session; receive, in the online portal, a connection request from the handheld terminal; associate the handheld terminal and the computerized screen terminal with the same session after receiving the connection request.
Yoo teaches a similar invention (see paragraph [0026] and figures 1-2, 4 & 8) including at least one processor (e.g. computing device 106 paragraph [0031] “106 is a computing device comprised of a processor and memory”), cause the at least one processor to operate with a computerized screen terminal (e.g. display 108 or 408 paragraph [0031] “106 may control one or more graphical elements displayed by the display 108”) and a separate handheld terminal (e.g. sensory input touch device 104 or 402) having a display screen (e.g. paragraph [0029] “sensory input touch device 104 is a touch-screen device” and notes an exemplary device includes an “IPOD TOUCH” see figure 4) receive, in an online portal (inherent given network 102 & paragraph [0028] notes 104, 106, 108 & 110 are connected over commonplace networking environments such as the Internet), a first input to begin a session (inherent that something starts with a first input); responsive to the first input, start the session (axiomatic); receive, in the online portal, a second input including a phone number or an electronic address of the handheld terminal (implicit a functional equivalent is present since communication is already taking place); transmit a message to the handheld terminal using the phone number or the electronic address (inherent given internet protocols such as TCP or UDP discussed in paragraph [0030]), the message including a link to the session (implicit a functional equivalent is present since communication via 102 is taking place); associate the handheld terminal and the computerized screen terminal with the same session after receiving the connection request (inherent for the required functions); select eye examination diagrams for the session (e.g. paragraph [0020] discusses displaying a Landolt C test), the eye examination diagrams associated with corresponding input interfaces (inter alia paragraph [0050] “subject 404 entering an input 406 to a touch-screen device 402 in response to a graphical element 410 displayed from a sensory testing and training device 408”); during the session, cause the eye examination diagrams to be sequentially displayed by the computerized screen terminal while causing the corresponding input interfaces to be displayed by the handheld terminal (inter alia Figure 8 sets forth steps 802 & 812 for displaying graphical elements); during the session, receive at least one input from the input interface displayed by the handheld terminal and associate the received at least one input to the currently displayed eye examination diagram (inter alia paragraphs [0020 & 0050] and figures 4 & 8). One would be motivated to replace the user’s computer with a computerized screen terminal and a separate handheld terminal for the purpose of having a testing activities and the subject to be positioned a particular distance from the testing device as may be required (inter alia paragraph [0050]). Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the invention as disclosed by Pellicano to have the user’s computer with a computerized screen terminal and a separate handheld terminal as taught by Yoo for the purpose of having a testing activities and the subject to be positioned a particular distance from the testing device as may be required.
Yoo is silent regarding the connection order/protocol/procedure for connecting the computing device and the sensory input touch device to the processor via the internet. Specifically, Yoo does not explicitly require the session to begin with the computerized screen terminal, the handheld terminal not being a part of the session when the session is started, receive, in the online portal, a connection request from the handheld terminal for adding the handheld terminal to the session. These features are interpreted under 112(f) and any functional equivalents will read on the limitations. As long as the “computerized screen terminal” or the “separate handheld terminal having a display screen” are both in communication during the session the eye testing function is achieved, regardless of which terminal is connected to the processor first (evidenced by instant application paragraph [0088] “the patient is enabled to log into an online portal on either terminal”). Further, there is a limited number of ways to order the “computerized screen terminal” and the “separate handheld terminal having a display screen” to be part of an online session. Either the “computerized screen terminal” is first and the “separate handheld terminal having a display screen” is second or visa-versa. It has been held that where there are only a finite number of predictable identifiable solutions, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to try the known options within his or her technical grasp. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), see MPEP 2143. Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the invention as disclosed by Pellicano as modified by Yoo to have the session to begin with the computerized screen terminal, the handheld terminal not being a part of the session when the session is started, receive, in the online portal, a connection request from the handheld terminal for adding the handheld terminal to the session since there are a limited number of ways for the order of the elements to be added to the session, all of which result in functionally equivalent, and since where there are only a finite number of predictable identifiable solutions, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to try the known options within his or her technical grasp.
Regarding claim 13 Pellicano as modified by Yoo discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 12, as set forth above. Pellicano further discloses wherein the message is one of a text message, an email message, or a voice message (implicit functional equivalent is present since internet communication is already taking place and Pellicano uses e-mail communication/prompts as seen in column 6 line 59 and column 7 line 10).
Regarding claim 14 Pellicano as modified by Yoo discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 12, as set forth above. Pellicano further discloses wherein the session is a web session for the user’s computer (inter alia column 3 lines 4-7 “connection is made with the CVS server 30, a Century vision web page is downloaded to the test subject's terminal 10”). Pellicano does not disclose the handheld terminal to operates as a remote control for the computerized screen terminal. Yoo further teaches the handheld terminal to operates as a remote control for the computerized screen terminal (inter alia paragraphs [0020 & 0050] “subject 404 entering an input 406 to a touch-screen device 402 in response to a graphical element 410 displayed from a sensory testing and training device 408” see figure 4) for the purpose of having a testing activities and the subject to be positioned a particular distance from the testing device as may be required (inter alia paragraph [0050]). Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the invention as disclosed by Pellicano as modified by Yoo to have the handheld terminal to operates as a remote control for the computerized screen terminal as further taught by Yoo for the purpose of having a testing activities and the subject to be positioned a particular distance from the testing device as may be required.
Regarding claim 15 Pellicano as modified by Yoo discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 12, as set forth above. Pellicano further discloses including a plurality of additional instructions, which when executed by the at least one processor (inherent for a network-based system), cause the at least one processor to select the eye examination diagrams to test for an axis component and a cylinder component of the corrective lenses prescription (implicit for a functional equivalent see abstract e.g. figure 7b).
Regarding claim 16 Pellicano as modified by Yoo discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 15, as set forth above. Pellicano further discloses including a plurality of additional instructions, which when executed by the at least one processor (inherent for a network-based system), cause the at least one processor to select the eye examination diagrams to test for a sphere component of the corrective lenses prescription (implicit for a functional equivalent see abstract e.g. figure 3 and/or 5).
Regarding claim 17 Pellicano as modified by Yoo discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 16, as set forth above. Pellicano further discloses including a plurality of additional instructions, which when executed by the at least one processor (inherent for a network-based system), cause the at least one processor to test for the sphere component by: presenting a first eye examination diagram via the computerized screen terminal and a corresponding first input interface via the handheld terminal, where the first eye examination diagram is too small to be clearly seen by the patient; receiving in the first input interface at least one first input to increase a size of the first eye examination diagram until it can just barely be made out by the patient; and using the at least one first input for determining the sphere component (implicit for a functional equivalent see abstract e.g. figure 5 shows a Snellen-type chart and figure 3 has the loop of steps 430, 440 & 450 executed at least once that when ends, i.e. has a result, goes to step 460).
Regarding claim 18 Pellicano as modified by Yoo discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 17, as set forth above. Pellicano further discloses including a plurality of additional instructions, which when executed by the at least one processor (inherent for a network-based system), cause the at least one processor to test for the sphere component by: presenting a second eye examination diagram via the computerized screen terminal and a corresponding second input interface via the handheld terminal, where the second eye examination diagram is large enough to be clearly seen by the patient; receiving in the second input interface the at least one second input to decrease a size of the second eye examination diagram until it can no longer be made out by the patient; and using the at least one second input for additionally determining the sphere component (implicit for a functional equivalent see abstract e.g. figure 5 shows a Snellen-type chart and figure 3 has the loop of steps 430, 440 & 450 executed at least once that when ends, i.e. has a result, goes to step 460).
Claims 1-11 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pellicano US Patent 6,386,707, of record, Yoo et al. US Patent Application Publication 2011/0025611, of record, and in further view of Berry US Patent Application Publication 2013/0141697, of record.
Regarding claim 1 Pellicano discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium including a plurality of instructions, which when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to operate with a user’s computer (e.g. test subject's computer terminal 10) to determine a corrective lenses prescription for a patient (title e.g. see figures 1a-1b) by: receive, in an online portal (e.g. web page 300), a first input to begin a session from the user’s computer (e.g. figure 1 column 2 line 65-column 3 line 3 e.g. test subject's computer terminal 10 connected to internet server/CVS 30 via the internet 20 using any commercially available internet browser); responsive to the first input, start the session (axiomatic); receive, in the online portal, patient information including a prior corrective lenses prescription (e.g. step 345 column 3 lines 35-42 “new test subject is asked to fill out a blank questionnaire which may request information such as: the test subject's name, address, phone number, e-mail address, brief medical history, eye prescription information and other dynamic miscellaneous questions. Alternately, an existing test subject is asked to verify a questionnaire filled in with previously supplied information retrieved at step 335”); the eye examination diagrams (e.g. figures 3 & 5-8) associated with corresponding input interfaces (e.g. figure 4 shows interface and column 4 lines 37-56 “input may be provided via a computer mouse, a keyboard or audio means”); during the session, cause the eye examination diagrams to be sequentially displayed by the user’s computer while causing the corresponding input interfaces to be displayed by the user’s computer (see figure 4 loop of steps 430, 440 & 450); during the session, receive at least one input from the input interface displayed by the user’s computer (inherent since loop is executed at least once) and associate the received at least one input to the currently displayed eye examination diagram (inherent in order to evaluate patient); determine the corrective lenses prescription using the received inputs in relation to the corresponding eye examination diagrams (column 6 lines 32-49 “test results are transferred to the Century vision Internet server 30 [FIG. 1(a)] for evaluation by an expert system that diagnoses and recommends prescription”); and transmit information to the user’s computer that is indicative of the corrective lenses prescription (column 6 lines 32-49 “client is advised”).
Pellicano does not disclose the user’s computer is a computerized screen terminal and a separate handheld terminal having a display screen, the handheld terminal not being a part of the session when the session is started; and a connection request from the handheld terminal for adding the handheld terminal to the session in the online portal, a second input including a phone number or an electronic address of the handheld terminal; transmit a message to the handheld terminal using the phone number or the electronic address, the message including a link to the session; receive, in the online portal, a connection request from the handheld terminal; associate the handheld terminal and the computerized screen terminal with the same session after receiving the connection request, and using the prior corrective lenses prescription to select eye examination diagrams for the session.
Yoo teaches a similar invention (see paragraph [0026] and figures 1-2, 4 & 8) including at least one processor (e.g. computing device 106 paragraph [0031] “106 is a computing device comprised of a processor and memory”), cause the at least one processor to operate with a computerized screen terminal (e.g. display 108 or 408 paragraph [0031] “106 may control one or more graphical elements displayed by the display 108”) and a separate handheld terminal (e.g. sensory input touch device 104 or 402) having a display screen (e.g. paragraph [0029] “sensory input touch device 104 is a touch-screen device” and notes an exemplary device includes an “IPOD TOUCH” see figure 4) receive, in an online portal (inherent given network 102 & paragraph [0028] notes 104, 106, 108 & 110 are connected over commonplace networking environments such as the Internet), a first input to begin a session (inherent that something starts with a first input); responsive to the first input, start the session (axiomatic); receive, in the online portal, a second input including a phone number or an electronic address of the handheld terminal (implicit a functional equivalent is present since communication is already taking place); transmit a message to the handheld terminal using the phone number or the electronic address (inherent given internet protocols such as TCP or UDP discussed in paragraph [0030]), the message including a link to the session (implicit a functional equivalent is present since communication via 102 is taking place); associate the handheld terminal and the computerized screen terminal with the same session after receiving the connection request (inherent for the required functions); select eye examination diagrams for the session (e.g. paragraph [0020] discusses displaying a Landolt C test), the eye examination diagrams associated with corresponding input interfaces (inter alia paragraph [0050] “subject 404 entering an input 406 to a touch-screen device 402 in response to a graphical element 410 displayed from a sensory testing and training device 408”); during the session, cause the eye examination diagrams to be sequentially displayed by the computerized screen terminal while causing the corresponding input interfaces to be displayed by the handheld terminal (inter alia Figure 8 sets forth steps 802 & 812 for displaying graphical elements); during the session, receive at least one input from the input interface displayed by the handheld terminal and associate the received at least one input to the currently displayed eye examination diagram (inter alia paragraphs [0020 & 0050] and figures 4 & 8). One would be motivated to replace the user’s computer with a computerized screen terminal and a separate handheld terminal for the purpose of having a testing activities and the subject to be positioned a particular distance from the testing device as may be required (inter alia paragraph [0050]). Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the invention as disclosed by Pellicano to have the user’s computer with a computerized screen terminal and a separate handheld terminal as taught by Yoo for the purpose of having a testing activities and the subject to be positioned a particular distance from the testing device as may be required.
Yoo is silent regarding the connection order/protocol/procedure for connecting the computing device and the sensory input touch device to the processor via the internet. Specifically, Yoo does not explicitly require the session to begin with the computerized screen terminal, the handheld terminal not being a part of the session when the session is started, receive, in the online portal, a connection request from the handheld terminal for adding the handheld terminal to the session. These features are interpreted under 112(f) and any functional equivalents will read on the limitations. As long as the “computerized screen terminal” or the “separate handheld terminal having a display screen” are both in communication during the session the eye testing function is achieved, regardless of which terminal is connected to the processor first (evidenced by instant application paragraph [0088] “the patient is enabled to log into an online portal on either terminal”). Further, there is a limited number of ways to order the “computerized screen terminal” and the “separate handheld terminal having a display screen” to be part of an online session. Either the “computerized screen terminal” is first and the “separate handheld terminal having a display screen” is second or visa-versa. It has been held that where there are only a finite number of predictable identifiable solutions, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to try the known options within his or her technical grasp. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), see MPEP 2143. Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the invention as disclosed by Pellicano as modified by Yoo to have the session to begin with the computerized screen terminal, the handheld terminal not being a part of the session when the session is started, receive, in the online portal, a connection request from the handheld terminal for adding the handheld terminal to the session since there are a limited number of ways for the order of the elements to be added to the session, all of which result in functionally equivalent, and since where there are only a finite number of predictable identifiable solutions, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to try the known options within his or her technical grasp.
Yoo does not teach using the prior corrective lenses prescription to select eye examination diagrams for the session.
Berry teaches a similar network-based eye test system (e.g. see figures 1-2) and further teaches using the prior corrective lenses prescription to select eye examination diagrams for the session (e.g. paragraphs [0052 & 0061] discuss user input data of a prescription to select an optimal order and/or starting point for testing) for the purpose of using known/provided information to optimize testing (paragraphs [0052 & 0061]). Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the non-transitory computer readable medium including a plurality of instructions, which when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to operate with a computerized screen terminal and a handheld terminal to determine a corrective lenses prescription for a patient as disclosed by Pellicano as modified by Yoo to use the prior corrective lenses prescription to select eye examination diagrams for the session as taught by Berry for the purpose of using known/provided information to optimize testing.
Regarding claims 2 and 4-8, the limitations of claims 2 and 4-8 are the same as the limitations of claims 13-18, respectively, and claims 2 and 4-8 are rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 3 Pellicano as modified by Yoo and Berry discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1, as set forth above. Pellicano further discloses wherein selection of the link within the message causes the connection request to be received in the online portal (implicit for a functional equivalent is present since internet communication is already taking place with the server).
Regarding claim 9 Pellicano as modified by Yoo and Berry discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1, as set forth above. Pellicano does not disclose cause the at least one processor to use at least one of the computerized screen terminal or the handheld terminal to verify during the session that the patient is at a known, fixed distance from the computerized screen terminal.
Berry further teaches cause the at least one processor to use at least one of the computerized screen terminal or the handheld terminal to verify during the session that the patient is at a known, fixed distance from the computerized screen terminal (paragraphs [0067-69] discuss automatically detecting/calculating the distance) for the purpose of ensuring the positioning at a proper distance (paragraph [0069]). Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the non-transitory computer readable medium including a plurality of instructions, which when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to operate with a computerized screen terminal and a handheld terminal to determine a corrective lenses prescription for a patient as disclosed by Pellicano as modified by Yoo and Berry to cause the at least one processor to use at least one of the computerized screen terminal or the handheld terminal to verify during the session that the patient is at a known, fixed distance from the computerized screen terminal as further taught by Berry for the purpose of ensuring the positioning at a proper distance.
Regarding claim 10 Pellicano as modified by Yoo and Berry discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1, as set forth above. Pellicano does not disclose wherein the handheld terminal includes at least one of a cell phone, a smartphone, a tablet computer, or a notebook computer.
Berry further teaches “[t]hose skilled in the art will appreciate that the invention may be practiced in network computing environments with many types of computer system configurations, including … desktop personal (such as disclosed by Pellicano), laptop/notebook computers, … hand-held devices … tablets, mobile telephones, PDAs … and the like” (paragraph [0039]) and particularly notes “traditional notebook and netbook computers to an emerging and rapidly growing market of handheld devices, including smart phones (e.g., the APPLE IPHONE, ANDROID phones, WINDOWS phones, SYMBIAN phones), tablet computers (e.g., the APPLE IPAD, ANDROID tablets), gaming devices (e.g., NINTENDO or PLAYSTATION portable gaming devices, the APPLE IPOD), multimedia devices (e.g., the APPLE IPOD), and combinations thereof” (paragraph [0039] see figures 3A-4F) for the purpose of using devices enabling rich user-interactivity by including combinations of output, input, and other sensory devices, such as touch- or pressure-sensitive displays, still and video cameras, light sensors, proximity sensors, microphones, speakers, and can also comprise a variety of communications devices, such as cellular modems, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth (paragraph [0039]). Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the non-transitory computer readable medium including a plurality of instructions, which when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to operate with a computerized screen terminal and a handheld terminal to determine a corrective lenses prescription for a patient as disclosed by Pellicano as modified by Yoo and Berry to have the handheld terminal be one of a cell phone, a smartphone, a tablet computer, or a notebook computer as further taught by Berry for the purpose of using devices enabling rich user-interactivity by including combinations of output, input, and other sensory devices, such as touch- or pressure-sensitive displays, still and video cameras, light sensors, proximity sensors, microphones, speakers, and can also comprise a variety of communications devices, such as cellular modems, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth.
Regarding claim 11 Pellicano as modified by Yoo and Berry discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1, as set forth above. Pellicano further discloses wherein the user’s computer includes one of a personal computer (e.g. 10) or a tablet computer. Pellicano does not discloses wherein the computerized screen terminal includes one of a personal computer or a tablet computer. Yoo further teaches wherein the computerized screen terminal (e.g. 108) includes one of a personal computer or a tablet computer (paragraph [0032] “display 108 may include a computer screen”) for the purpose of utilizing a high-resolution monitor (paragraph [0032]). Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the invention as disclosed by Pellicano as modified by Yoo and Berry to have the computerized screen terminal includes one of a personal computer or a tablet computer as further taught by Yoo for the purpose of utilizing a high-resolution monitor.
Regarding claims 19-20, the limitations of claims 19-20 are the same as the limitations of claims 9-10, respectively, and claims 19-20 are rejected for the same reasons.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to George G King whose telephone number is (303)297-4273. 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.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ricky Mack can be reached at (571) 272-2333. 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.
/George G. King/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 January 21, 2026