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 .
Election/Restrictions
The restriction/election requirement of 8-18-25 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-6 and 8-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Huack et al. (US 2007/0274353), hereinafter (“Huack”), and provided by applicant.
Re claims 1, and 8-20, Huack discloses a method of creating a visual impairment zone, the method comprising: producing at least one beam of intense light having a bandwidth of less than 50 nm (p. [0006]); modulating the at least one beam of intense light to produce a spatial array comprising a pattern of light beams illuminating the visual impairment zone (p. [0019]); and altering the pattern of light beams as a function of time to form a varying spatial array, wherein the varying spatial array has the requisite irradiance to cause visual impairment.
Re claim 3, Huack (p. [0037]) discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the modulating comprises moving the at least one beam of intense light across a space in a predetermined temporal pattern.
Re claims 4-6, Huack discloses the method of claim 1, where the modulating comprises using a diffractive optical element (p. [0036]).
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.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huack in view of Casazza (US 7,239,655). Huack discloses the claimed invention with the exception of wherein the modulating comprises splitting the at least one beam of intense light into the pattern of light beams. Casazza teaches a method of visual impairment that modulates light and wherein the modulating comprises splitting the at least one beam of intense light into the pattern of light beams. The purpose of the beam splitting in Casazza is so that the light from the combined beams can produce the requisite disorientation and flashblinding effects without risking permanent damage to the eye (c. 11, l. 23+). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method in Huack to include the beam splitting of Casazza. The motivation (as taught by Casazza) would be so that the light from the combined beams can produce the requisite disorientation and flashblinding effects without risking permanent damage to the eye. All claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to a skilled artisan at the time the invention was made.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REGINALD S TILLMAN, JR whose telephone number is (571)270-7010. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 830-530.
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, Troy Chambers can be reached at 571-272-6874. 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.
/REGINALD S TILLMAN, JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3641