Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/019,526

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IMPROVING VISION OF A VIEWER'S EYE WITH IMPAIRED RETINA

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Feb 03, 2023
Examiner
PINKNEY, DAWAYNE
Art Unit
2872
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Hes Ip Holdings LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
1378 granted / 1704 resolved
+12.9% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
50 currently pending
Career history
1754
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.7%
-38.3% vs TC avg
§103
49.8%
+9.8% vs TC avg
§102
26.4%
-13.6% vs TC avg
§112
9.1%
-30.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1704 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 05/01/23, 02/02/24, 04/26/24, 07/30/24, 10/23/24, 12/16/24, 05/29/25 and 10/07/25 have been considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale , or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-7, 12-14 and 19-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Fleischman et al. (US 9,028,067) . Regarding claim 1 , Fleischman discloses, a portable system for training an alternate retinal location on a viewer's eye with impaired retina (Figs. 3a and 4 -8) , comprising: an eye tracking module (101, 120) to provide eye information of the viewer's eye (Col. 9, lines 24-28) ; a virtual image display module (Col. 2, lines 48-58 and see 34) to display a virtual image (Col. 2, lines 48-58 and see 37) centered at the alternate retinal location on the viewer's eye other than centered at a fovea (Col. 2, lines 48-67 and Col. 3, lines 1-18) , comprising: a first light signal generator (31 and 84) generating multiple first light signals for the virtual image; a first combiner (32) redirecting the multiple first light signals from the first light signal generator towards the alternate retinal location of the viewer's eye to display multiple first pixels of the virtual image (Col. 6, lines 7-36) when a pupil of the viewer's eye is located approximately at a center of the viewer's eye based on the eye information from the eye tracking module (Col. 10 lines 10-15, 21-59 and see Figs. 7, 8) . Regarding claims 2 and 20 , Fleischman discloses, the alternate retinal location on the viewer's eye is selected to facilitate binocular fusion (Col. 8, lines 35-47, 54-62 and 110, 112 of Fig. 4) . Regarding claims 3 and 2 1 , Fleischman discloses, the alternate retinal location on the viewer's eye is selected based on visual function and a height of the alternate retinal location (Col. 6, lines 53-64, Col. 10, lines 41-51 and see 63u, 63D and 75 L/R of Figs. 6-7) . Regarding claims 4 and 2 2 , Fleischman discloses, the alternate retinal location on the viewer's eye is selected to have a first height closer to a second height of a preferred sensing location of a viewer's the other eye (Col. 6, lines 53-64, Col. 10, lines 41-51 and see 63u, 63D and 75 L/R of Figs. 6-7) . Regarding claims 5 and 2 3 , Fleischman discloses, the alternate retinal location on the viewer's eye is selected to be at an outer side of the fovea (Col. 6, lines 53-64, Col. 10, lines 41-51 and see 63u, 63D and 75 L/R of Figs. 6-7) . Regarding claim 6 , Fleischman discloses, the alternate retinal location on the viewer's eye has a coordinate based on a landmark of the viewer's eye (Claim 1; note, discloses PRL retinal coordinates) . Regarding claim 7 , Fleischman discloses, the landmark of the viewer's eye is an optic nerve head of the viewer's eye (Col. 2, lines 48-67, Col. 3, lines 1-18; note, the Examiner points out that the retina contains optic nerve head) . Regarding claim 12 , Fleischman discloses, the first combiner redirects the multiple first light signals to the alternate retinal location on the viewer's eye through approximately a center of a pupil of the viewer's eye (Col. 2, lines 48-67 and Col. 3, lines 1-18) . Regarding claim 13 , Fleischman discloses, the first light signal generator comprises a laser light source (Col. 8, lines 6-9 and see 31) . Regarding claim 14 , Fleischman discloses, a process module (83 and 118) to generate information of the virtual image for the virtual image display module or to execute a training program (Col. 2, lines 48-67, Col. 3, lines 1-18; note, discloses a PRL area) . Regarding claim 19 , Fleischman discloses, a system for improving vision of a viewer's eye with impaired retina (Figs. 3a and 4 -8) , comprising: an image capture module (120) configured to receive multiple image pixels of a target object (Col. 9, lines 24-28) ; a process module (83 and 118) configured to generate information of a virtual image related to the target object; a virtual image display module (Col. 2, lines 48-58 and see 34) to display a virtual image (Col. 2, lines 48-58 and see 37) centered at the alternate retinal location on the viewer's eye other than centered at a fovea (Col. 2, lines 48-67 and Col. 3, lines 1-18) , comprising: a first light signal generator (31 and 84) generating multiple first light signals for the virtual image; a first combiner (32) redirecting the multiple first light signals from the first light signal generator towards the alternate retinal location of the viewer's eye to display multiple first pixels of the virtual image (Col. 6, lines 7-36) when a pupil of the viewer's eye is located approximately at a center of the viewer's eye based on the eye information from the eye tracking module (Col. 10m lines 10-15, 21-59 and see Figs. 7, 8) . 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. Claim s 8-11 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fleischman et al. (US 9,028,067) as applied to claim s 1 and 14 above, in view of Wahl et al. (US 2019/0282082). Fleischman as applied to claim s 1 and 14 above . Fleischman does not disclose a feedback module configured to provide a feedback when the pupil of the viewer's eye is more than a predetermined degree away from the center of the viewer's eye based on the eye information from the eye tracking module. Wahl teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in a portable system that it would have been desirable to make a feedback module (Para. 0089; note, discloses a computer and a control unit) configured to provide a feedback when the pupil of the viewer's eye is more than a predetermined degree away from the center of the viewer's eye (Para. 0076) based on the eye information from the eye tracking module (Para. 0075; note, discloses a capturing unit as an eye tracker) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a feedback module configured to provide a feedback when the pupil of the viewer's eye is more than a predetermined degree away from the center of the viewer's eye based on the eye information from the eye tracking module as taught by the portable system of Wahl in the portable system of Fleischman since Wahl teaches it is known to include these features in a portable system for the purpose of providing a portable system with improved effectiveness of training the preferred retinal locus of fixation. Regarding claim 9 , Fleischman in view of Wahl discloses and teaches as set forth above, and Wahl further teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in a portable system that it would have been desirable to make the feedback includes a sound guidance or a vision guidance (Para. 0044, 0046 and 0076) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the above mentioned limitations as taught by the portable system of Wahl in the portable system of Fleischman since Wahl teaches it is known to include these features in a portable system for the purpose of providing a portable system with improved effectiveness of training the preferred retinal locus of fixation. Regarding claim 10 , Fleischman in view of Wahl discloses and teaches as set forth above, and Wahl further teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in a portable system that it would have been desirable to make the vision guidance includes a visual indicator to direct a movement of the viewer's eye (Para. 0044, 0046 and 0076) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the above mentioned limitations as taught by the portable system of Wahl in the portable system of Fleischman since Wahl teaches it is known to include these features in a portable system for the purpose of providing a portable system with improved effectiveness of training the preferred retinal locus of fixation. Regarding claim 11 , Fleischman in view of Wahl discloses and teaches as set forth above, and Wahl further teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in a portable system that it would have been desirable to make the sound guidance includes a vocal feedback to indicate a direction for movement of the viewer's eye (Para. 0044, 0046 and 0076) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the above mentioned limitations as taught by the portable system of Wahl in the portable system of Fleischman since Wahl teaches it is known to include these features in a portable system for the purpose of providing a portable system with improved effectiveness of training the preferred retinal locus of fixation. Regarding claim 15 , Fleischman in view of Wahl discloses and teaches as set forth above, and Wahl further teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in a portable system that it would have been desirable to make the training program does not include a period of time when the viewer's eye blinks into a predetermined training time (Para. 0046 and 0076) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the above mentioned limitations as taught by the portable system of Wahl in the portable system of Fleischman since Wahl teaches it is known to include these features in a portable system for the purpose of providing a portable system with improved effectiveness of training the preferred retinal locus of fixation. Claim s 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fleischman et al. (US 9,028,067) as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Watola et al. (US 2020/0184730). Fleischman remains as applied to claim 1 above . Fleischman does not disclose a height adjustable chin holder. Watola teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in a portable system that it would have been desirable to include a height adjustable chin holder (Para. 0169 and 0227). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a height adjustable chin holder as taught by the portable system of Watola in the portable system of Fleischman since Watola teaches it is known to include this feature in a portable system for the purpose of providing a portable system that is effectively supported on a user. Regarding claim 17 , Fleischman in view of Watola discloses and teaches as set forth above, and Watola further teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in a portable system that it would have been desirable to make the virtual image is a cross in green color (Para. 0012 and 0223; note, discloses a cross pattern) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the above mentioned limitations as taught by the portable system of Watola in the portable system of Fleischman since Watola teaches it is known to include this feature in a portable system for the purpose of providing a portable system that is effectively supported on a user. Claim s 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fleischman et al. (US 9,028,067) as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Blum et al. (US 2018/0348524). Fleischman remains as applied to claim 1 above . Fleischman does not disclose a weight of the portable system is less than three kilograms. Blum teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in a portable system that it would have been desirable to make a weight of the portable system is less than three kilograms (Para. 0003, lines 12-16) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make a weight of the portable system is less than three kilograms as taught by the portabl e system of Blum in the portable system of Fleischman since Blum teaches it is known to include this feature in a portable system for the purpose of providing an inexpensive, compact and lightweight portable system. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hilkes et al. (US 2013/0335543), Antaki et al. (US 2017/0068119) and Jones et al. (US 2019/0179409) discloses a portable system for training an alternate retinal location on a viewer's eye with impaired retina, comprising: an eye tracking module , a virtual image display module , a light signal generator and a combiner. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT DAWAYNE A PINKNEY whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-1305 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 8:00-5:00 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Pinping Sun can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 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. /DAWAYNE PINKNEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 02/25/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 03, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593976
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MEASURING VISUAL AXIS OF THE EYE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588808
Imaging Systems with Improved Accuracy and Measurements
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591162
Controllable Aperture with Index-Matched Central Region for a Portable Electronic Device Imaging System
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588811
Modular Platform for Ocular Evaluations
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590489
WINDOW OR DOOR, AND BUILDING WALL COMPRISING SAID WINDOW OR DOOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
81%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+18.0%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1704 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