Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/015,194

TEMPLE FOR EYEGLASSES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jan 09, 2023
Examiner
SANZ, GABRIEL A
Art Unit
2872
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
LUXOTTICA S.R.L.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
85 granted / 138 resolved
-6.4% vs TC avg
Strong +39% interview lift
Without
With
+39.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 8m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
166
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
65.4%
+25.4% vs TC avg
§102
29.5%
-10.5% vs TC avg
§112
4.3%
-35.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 138 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 03/23/2026 has been entered. Claim Objections Claims 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 4 of claim 14, claim recites “said temple body”. Due to amendments, claim limitation should read “said single temple body.” Appropriate correction is required. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 14, 17-26 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Applicant's arguments filed 03/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the prior art of record fails to disclose the limitations of amended claim 14, specifically, “the single temple body”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Examiner notes that the claimed are interpreted under the broadest reasonable interpretation. In the instant case, Examiner is interpreting the temple body to be element 11 as it comprises a singular unit forming the body of the temple. Examiner does not interpret component 122 as a part of the temple body as it does not form part of the structure of the temple and merely overlies the cover 121. For these reasons examiner maintains the rejection of claim 14 under USC 103. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 14, 17-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (Machine Translation of CN 108897143, of record) in view of Baek (US 2020/0271960, of record). Regarding claim 14, Liu discloses a temple for eyeglasses (see Fig 1) comprising: a single temple body which is provided internally with a cavity configured for accommodating electronic components (see Fig 1; Para [0028-0029]; containing body 11 has chamber 111 configured for accommodating circuit assembly 13), wherein said cavity is accessible via an opening formed at a lower surface of said single temple body (see Fig 1; Para [0028-0029]; chamber 111 has opening 112 formed at a lower surface of the containing body 11), a single covering element being adapted to close said cavity by insertion in said cavity (see Fig 1; Para [0028-0029]; Bracket 121 which is adapted to close cavity 111 by inserting and attaching to containing body 11), wherein said single covering element defines part of a lower outer profile of the single temple body (Fig 1; Para [0028-0029]; The hard bracket 121 which provides the structural rigidity defines a lower outer profile of the temple body). Liu does not disclose wherein said single covering element supports and retains said electronic components, wherein said single covering element has a profile that is complementary to a profile of said electronic components, so that said electronic components are supported and retained to said single covering element. Liu in view of Baek are related because both disclose temples for eyeglasses. Baek discloses a temple for eyeglasses (see Fig 3) wherein said single covering element supports and retains said electronic components, wherein said single covering element has a profile that is complementary to a profile of said electronic components, so that said electronic components are supported and retained to said single covering element (see Fig 3; Para [0046]; a single cover 400 on each temple supports circuits of the auxiliary frame and has a linear profile that compliments the linear terminal containing electronic elements 320, 340, and 360). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Liu with wherein said single covering element supports and retains said electronic components, wherein said single covering element has a profile that is complementary to a profile of said electronic components, so that said electronic components are supported and retained to said single covering element of Baek for the purpose of improving the capabilities of the device to protect sensitive electronic components by proper element fixing (Para [0046]). Regarding claim 17, Liu in view of Baek discloses the temple for eyeglasses according to claim 14 (see Fig 1). Liu further discloses wherein said single covering element has a profile that is configured to enter said cavity and occupy at least part of a space of said cavity (see Figs 1 and 3; Para [0032-0033]; bracket 121 which is physically connected to temple body 11 extending into the cavity of 111 as seen in Fig 3) and allow at the same time a seal between said single covering element and internal walls of said cavity (see Figs 1 and 3; Para [0032-0033]; bracket 121 closes cavity 111 by sealing up into the internal walls of said cavity as seen in Fig 4). Regarding claim 18, Liu in view of Baek discloses the temple for eyeglasses according to claim 14 (see Fig 1). Liu further discloses further comprising a layer of overmolded material that is adapted to be overmolded on said covering element when said single covering element is inserted in said cavity so as to close said cavity (see Fig 1 and 3; Para [0030-0032]; the soft cap layer 122 is overmolded over bracket 121 further sealing the cavity 111). Regarding claim 19, Liu in view of Baek discloses the temple for eyeglasses according to claim 14 (see Fig 1). Liu further discloses further comprising an undercut formed at an internal shape of said temple body, said single covering element abutting against said undercut (see Fig 4; Para [0036-0038]; containing body 11 has inner region 1131 that examiner is interpreting as undercut; inner region 1131 abuts element 121). Regarding claim 20, Liu in view of Baek discloses the temple for eyeglasses according to claim 19 (see Fig 1). Liu further discloses wherein said undercut is formed by a gasket (see Fig 5; Para [0036-0038]; examiner is interpreting this to mean the undercut is formed with a gasket which examiner interprets as element 122 which acts as a seal). Regarding claim 21, Liu in view of Baek discloses the temple for eyeglasses according to claim 19 (see Fig 1). Liu further discloses wherein said undercut is coupled with a gasket which abuts against said undercut (see Fig 5; Para [0036-0038]; element 122 acts as gasket and abuts interpreted undercut region). Regarding claim 22, Liu in view of Baek discloses a method for the assembly of a temple for eyeglasses according to claim 14 (see Fig 1). Liu further discloses the method including the following steps: coupling said single covering element to said electronic components (see Fig 1; Para [0028-0029]; containing body 11 has chamber 111 configured for accommodating circuit assembly 13), inserting, through said opening for access to said cavity, said single covering element coupled to said electronic elements in said cavity of the body of the temple, and sealing said single covering element against said internal walls of the cavity of the body of the temple (see Fig 1; Para [0028-0029]; cover 12 has a bracket 121 which is adapted to close cavity 111 by attaching to the walls of containing body 11 as seen in Fig 4). Regarding claim 23, Liu in view of Baek discloses the method according to claim 22 (see Fig 1). Liu further discloses wherein said single covering element, when inserted in said cavity, is flush with adjacent surface portions of the temple body (see Fig 4; Para [0036-0038]; covering may be interpreted as both elements 121 and 122 which produce a flush surface with the side walls of the device). Regarding claim 24, Liu in view of Baek discloses the method according to claim 22 (see Fig 1). Liu further discloses further comprising a step of overmolding a layer of material on said covering element, in order to seal said single covering element in said cavity of the temple body (see Fig 4; Para [0030-0034]; a soft cap layer may be placed over the bracket 121 in order to further seal the device). Regarding claim 25, Liu in view of Baek discloses the method according to claim 24 (see Fig 1). Liu further discloses wherein said covering element, when inserted in said cavity, is in a recessed position with respect to the adjacent surface portions of the temple body, said recess being filled by said layer of overmolded material (see Fig 6; Para [0041]; bracket 121 may be recessed with respect to containing body 11 as seen in Fig 6 creating a gap which may be filled by cap layer 122). Regarding claim 26, Liu in view of Baek discloses a method for assembling a temple for eyeglasses according to claim 14 (see Fig 1). Liu further discloses the method including the steps of: inserting, through said opening for access to said cavity, said electronic components in said cavity of the body of the temple (see Fig 1; Para [0028-0029]; containing body 11 has chamber 111 configured for accommodating circuit assembly 13; can be inserted as seen in Fig 4), inserting, through said opening for access to said cavity, said single covering element, separately from said electronic components, and sealing said single covering element against said internal walls of the cavity of the body of the temple (see Fig 1; Para [0028-0029]; cover 12 has a bracket 121 which is adapted to close cavity 111 by attaching to the walls of containing body 11 as seen in Fig 4). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GABRIEL ANDRES SANZ whose telephone number is (571)272-3844. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 am -5:30 pm. 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, Pinping Sun can be reached at (571) 270-1284. 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. /G.A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2872 /WILLIAM R ALEXANDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 09, 2023
Application Filed
May 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 21, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 18, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Mar 23, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 31, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12578557
OPTICAL SYSTEM AND IMAGE PICKUP APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12535659
CAMERA LENS ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12523889
CONTACT LENS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12501018
DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
Patent 12498589
ASPHERICAL LENS DESIGN WITH POWER DEPENDENT SPHERICAL ABERRATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

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

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
62%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+39.1%)
3y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 138 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month