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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/21/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In particular, the applicant argues that there is no motivation to combine Blum with Esmaeili to teach “at least one of the one or more hinges comprise one or more magnetic elements suitable for attaching said one or more detachable arms to the frame, and wherein the one or more hinges are retractable, such that said one or more hinges are configured to retract into a cavity within said frame with a pulling force from within the cavity when said one or more detachable arms are detached from the respective hinge” as recited in claim 1.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Blum discloses an eyewear device comprising a magnetic hinge connecting a temple to a frame front by using magnets (see Fig.10b). The magnetic hinge also provides an electrical connection to supply power to an electro-active lens that may reside in the frame (para. [0057]). Blum further discloses that the magnet may be housed within a structure to hide or dress up the magnet (para. [0062]). Blum does not teach that the magnet is “retractable”. To cure the deficiency of Blum, Esmaeili discloses a magnetic connector for communicating and exchanging power between an electronic device and various accessory devices. More specifically, the magnetic connector comprises a retractable magnet 208 (Figs.4A and 4B). When a device 400 comprising a magnet 402 is detached (far) from the magnet 208, the magnet 208 is retracted into the cavity of the connector 200 by a magnetic force 406. When the device 400 is close to the magnet 208 (i.e., magnetic force 404 becomes large enough to overcome magnetic force 406), the magnet 208 is pulled out of the cavity to engage with the magnet 402. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the magnetic hinge in the eyewear device of Blum to include the teaching of Esmaeili of providing a magnetic connector including a retractable magnet such that the magnet of Blum can be retractable. The motivation of doing so would have been in order to prevent inadvertent connection of the eyewear device with unintended device that does not have a magnetic connection (see Esmaeili, para. [0061]). Furthermore, Esmaeili also states that the retractable magnet would be beneficial to preventing the electrical contacts from experiencing excessive wear on account of rough or careless handling leading to scratching or degrading of the electrical contacts (see Esmaeili, para. [0033]).
Regarding claim 15, the applicant similarly argues that there is no motivation to combine Blum and Esmaeili. The Office respectfully submits that Esmaeili discloses a concept of retractably hiding a magnet within a cavity of a magnetic connector. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the magnetic hinge of Blum to include the concept of Esmaeili to render an eyewear device comprising retractable magnets located within a structure of a frame.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4-7, 9-10, 13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blum et al. (US Pub. 2008/0100792 A1) in view of Esmaeili et al. (US Pub. 2017/0093087 A1).
Regarding claim 1; Blum teaches an eyewear device (an eyewear device 3800, Figs. 10a and 10b), comprising:
one or more detachable arms (a temple 3840, Fig.10b. Para. [0010], the temple (end-piece) is detachably attached to the eyeglass frame); and
a frame (a frame 3810, Fig.10b, para. [0057]) comprising one or more lenses or displays (Figs. 10a and 10b, the eyewear device comprises two lenses) and one or more hinges (Fig.10b shows a magnetic hinge connecting the temple 3840 and the frame 3810), wherein at least one of the one or more hinges comprise one or more magnetic elements (Fig.10b, the hinge comprises two magnets 3820 and 3821) suitable for attaching said one or more detachable arms to the frame (para. [0014 and 0056-0061], two magnets are detachably coupled to two magnetic surfaces 3843 and 3844 of the temple 3840).
Blum does not teach that wherein the one or more hinges are retractable, such that said one or more hinges are configured to retract into a cavity within said frame with a pulling force from within the cavity when said one or more detachable arms are detached from the respective hinge.
[AltContent: textbox (Second device)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (First device)][AltContent: textbox (Cavity)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
300
492
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(Fig.4A of Esmaeili reproduced)
Esmaeili teaches the one or more magnets are retractable (Fig.4A, a magnet 208 is retracted within a cavity of a connector 200), such that said one or more magnets are configured to retract into a cavity within said frame with a pulling force from within the cavity when said one or more detachable devices are detached from the respective hinge (Fig.4A, para. [0046], when a device 400 comprising a magnet 402 is detached (far) from the magnet 208, the magnet 208 is retracted into the cavity of the connector 200 by a magnetic force 406. Fig.4B, when the device 400 is close to the magnet 208 (i.e., magnetic force 404 becomes large enough to overcome magnetic force 406), the magnet 208 is pulled out of the cavity to engage with the magnet 402).
At the time of invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the eyewear device of Blum to include the teaching of Esmaeili of providing a magnetic connection between a first magnet of a first device and a second magnet of a second device; and retracting the first magnet into a cavity of the first device when the second magnet is detached from the first magnet. Accordingly, in the eyewear device of Blum as modified by Esmaeili, the eyewear device would comprise a frame having a cavity to accommodate the magnets 3820 and 3821. When the temple is close to the frame, the magnets 3820 and 3821 would be pulled out to engage with the magnetic surfaces 3843 and 3844. When the temple is detached from the hinge, the magnets 3820 and 3821 would be retracted into the cavity in the frame by a magnetic force. The motivation would have been in order to prevent inadvertent connection of the eyewear device with another device that doesn’t include magnetically attractable material.
Regarding claim 2; Blum in view of Esmaeili teaches the eyewear device of claim 1 as discussed above. Blum further teaches the one or more detachable arms comprise one or more rechargeable power supplies configured to supply power to the eyewear device when the one or more detachable arms are attached to the frame (para. [0057], when the temple 3840 is attached to the frame 3810, contact points 3822 and 3823 are on or within each magnet for providing contact with wires 3824 and 3825 for powering an electro-active lens that may reside in the frame).
Regarding claim 4; Blum in view of Esmaeili teaches a frame of an eyewear device comprising: one or more hinges comprising one or more magnetic elements suitable for attaching one or more detachable arms to said frame, wherein the one or more hinges are retractable, such that said one or more hinges are configured to retract into a cavity within said frame when said one or more detachable arms are detached from the respective hinge (similar to the analysis of claim 1).
Regarding claim 5; Blum in view of Esmaeili teaches the eyewear device of claim 1 as discussed above. Blum further teaches the one or more hinges are configured to engage with said one or more detachable arms for attaching the frame with the one or more detachable arms (Fig.10b, the magnetic hinge is configured to engage with the magnetic surfaces3843 and 3844 of the temple 3840 for attaching the frame 3810 with the temple 3840).
Blum does not teach the one or more hinges are configured to eject from said cavity to engage with said one or more detachable arms for attaching the frame with the one or more detachable arms.
Esmaeili teaches the one or more magnets are configured to eject from said cavity to engage with said one or more magnets for attaching the first device to the second device (Fig.4B, when the device 400 is close to the connector 200, the magnetic force 404 pulls the magnet 208 out of the cavity to engage with the magnet 402 for attaching the first device and the second device).
The motivation is the same as the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 6; Blum in view of Esmaeili teaches the eyewear device of claim 1 as discussed above. Blum further teaches the one or more magnetic elements comprise magnetic cylinders (Fig.10b, magnets 3820 and 3821 are magnetic cylinders).
Regarding claim 7; Blum in view of Esmaeili teaches the eyewear device of claim 1 as discussed above. Blum further teaches the one or more hinges comprise rotation mechanisms to allow the one or more detachable arms to be rotated with respect to said frame (Fig.10b, para. [0060 and 0062], magnets 3820 and 3821 are magnetic cylinders. Therefore, the temple 3840 would be able to rotate with respect to the frame 3810).
Regarding claim 9; Blum in view of Esmaeili teaches the eyewear device of claim 1 as discussed above. Blum further teaches the one or more hinges comprise electric wiring (Fig.10b, para. [0057], wires 3824 and 3825 are connected to wires 3845 and 3846 via contacts 3821 and 3822).
Regarding claim 10; Blum in view of Esmaeili teaches the eyewear device of claim 1 as discussed above. Blum further teaches the one or more detachable arms each comprises:
PNG
media_image2.png
274
452
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(Fig.10b of Blum reproduced)
an elongated member having a first end and a second end (Fig.1, the temple 3840 comprises an elongated member having a first end and a second end);
a hinge end at the first end of the elongated member (Fig.10b reproduced above, a hinge end at the first end of the temple 3840 is coupled to a magnetic hinge), the hinge end being configured to allow the elongated member to be selectively attached and detached to a hinge on a frame of the eyewear device (Fig.10b, the temple 3840 is detachably attached to the frame 3810 via the magnetic hinge);
wherein the hinge end comprises a first curved surface (see Fig.10b, the magnetic surfaces 3843 and 3844 comprises a first curved surface) configured to engage a corresponding second curved surface of a magnetic element of the hinge on the frame (Fig.10b, the first curved surface is configured to attach to a second curved surface of magnets 3820 and 3821 of the magnetic hinge), the hinge end providing a magnetic attraction with the magnetic element of the hinge on the frame (Fig.10b, para. [0057]).
Regarding claim 13; Blum in view of Esmaeili teaches the eyewear device of claim 1 as discussed above.
Blum further teaches a storage unit suitable for storing one or more of an eyewear device, a frame, or one or more detachable arms (Fig. 5, an eyeglass case 500 for storing the eyewear device), the storage unit comprising: a power supply (Fig. 5, a power supply); and one or more charging interfaces suitable for supplying power from the power supply to the one or more detachable arms when said one or more detachable arms are engaged with the one or more charging interfaces (Figs. 4 and 5, para. [0014 and 0049-0050]).
Regarding claim 15; Blum teaches a method of using an eyewear device, the method comprising:
attaching one or more detachable arms (Fig.10b, temple 3840) to a frame (a frame 3810) of the eyewear device (an eyewear device 3800, Fig.10b) at one or more hinges of the frame with magnetic attraction (Fig.10b reproduced above, a magnetic hinge) between one or more magnetic elements of the one or more hinges and the one or more arms respectively (Fig.10b, the magnetic hinge connects between the frame 3810 and the temple 3840 using magnets 3820 and 3821, and magnetic surfaces 3843 and 3844), wherein the attaching comprises causing a hinge end having a first curved surface located on the one or more detachable arms (Fig.10b, a hinge end of the temple comprising magnetic surfaces 3843 and 3844 has a first curved surface) to cause the one or more magnetic elements such that the first curved surface magnetically engages a second curved surface of the one or more magnetic elements (Fig.10b, the first curved surface of magnetic surfaces 3843 and 3844 engages with a second curved surface of magnets 3820 and 3821), and
detaching the one or more detachable arms from the frame of the eyewear device (Fig.10b, para. [0010, 0012, and 0014], the temple is detachably attached to the frame).
Blum does not teach causing the one or more magnetic elements to eject from the frame; wherein the detaching causes the one or more magnetic elements to retract into a cavity within said frame when said one or more detachable arms are detached from the respective hinge.
Esmaeili teaches causing the one or more magnetic elements to eject from the frame such that the first device magnetically engages a second device (Fig.4B, when the device 400 is close to the connector 200, the magnetic force 404 pulls the magnet 208 out of the cavity to engage with the magnet 402 for attaching the first device and the second device)re; and the detaching causes the one or more magnetic elements to retract into a cavity within said frame when said one or more magnets are detached from the connector (Fig.4A, para. [0046], when a device 400 comprising a magnet 402 is detached (far) from the magnet 208, the magnet 208 is retracted into the cavity of the connector 200 by a magnetic force 406. Fig.4B, when the device 400 is close to the magnet 208 (i.e., magnetic force 404 becomes large enough to overcome magnetic force 406), the magnet 208 is pulled out of the cavity to engage with the magnet 402).
At the time of invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the eyewear device of Blum to include the teaching of Esmaeili of providing a magnetic connection between a first magnet of a first device and a second magnet of a second device; and retracting the first magnet into a cavity of the first device when the second magnet is detached from the first magnet. Accordingly, in the eyewear device of Blum as modified by Esmaeili, the eyewear device would comprise a frame having a cavity to accommodate the magnets 3820 and 3821. When the temple is close to the frame, the magnets 3820 and 3821 would be pulled out to engage with the magnetic surfaces 3843 and 3844. When the temple is detached from the hinge, the magnets 3820 and 3821 would be retracted into the cavity in the frame by a magnetic force. The motivation would have been in order to prevent inadvertent connection of the eyewear device with another device that doesn’t include magnetically attractable material.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blum et al. (US Pub. 2008/0100792 A1) in view of Esmaeili et al. (US Pub. 2017/0093087 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ikeda (US Pub. 2022/0113813 A1).
Regarding claim 3; Blum in view of Esmaeili teaches the eyewear device of claim 1 as discussed above. Baum teaches the one or more detachable arms (see the analysis of claim 1).
Blum and Esmaeili do not teach the one or more arms comprise a detachable projector for projecting visual data on said one or more lenses or displays of the frame.
Ikeda teaches the one or more arms comprise a detachable projector for projecting visual data on said one or more lenses or displays of the frame (Fig. 1A-1B and 2A-2B, para. [0080], an eyewear device comprises a display apparatus 20 including a projector 21 configured to project an image on a screen M. The display apparatus 20 is attached to a temple portion of a main body 10. The projector 21 may be attachable and detachable from the main body 10).
At the time of invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the eyewear device of Blum in view of Esmaeili to include the teaching of Ikeda of providing an eyewear device comprising a detachable projector for projecting image on a lens. The motivation would have been in order to improve the user experience.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blum et al. (US Pub. 2008/0100792 A1) in view of Esmaeili et al. (US Pub. 2017/0093087 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Maatta et al. (US Pub. 2019/0074120 A1).
Regarding claim 8; Blum in view of Esmaeili teaches the eyewear device of claim 1 as discussed above. Blum and Esmaeili do not teach the cavity is configured to at least substantially confine magnetic fields from said one or more magnetic elements within the cavity.
Maatta teaches the cavity is configured to at least substantially confine magnetic fields from said one or more magnetic elements within the cavity (Fig.1A, a cavity formed by a magnetic shielding element 110 houses a magnet 109. Para. [0027], the magnetic shielding element 110 may be formed of iron or other ferromagnetic metal, a ferromagnetic alloy, a Mu-metal, a nano-material with suitable magnetic permeability, or any other suitable material with magnetic shielding properties. Para. [0024 and 0026], the magnetic shielding element 110 is configured to partially magnetically shield the magnet 109, thereby restricting or confining its magnetic field).
At the time of invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the eyewear device of Blum in view of Esmaeili to include the teaching of Maatta of providing a magnetic shielding element to cover a magnet. The motivation would have been in order to prevent leakage of the magnetic field.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blum et al. (US Pub. 2008/0100792 A1) in view of Esmaeili et al. (US Pub. 2017/0093087 A1) as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Chaum (US Pub. 2022/0163806 A1).
Regarding claim 11; Blum in view of Esmaeili teaches the eyewear device of claim 10 as discussed above. Blum does not teach at least one or more detachable arms comprises the arm comprises one or more inductive coils suitable for inductively charging a power supply located in the arm, the power supply being configured to provide power to the eyewear device.
Chaum teaches the arm comprises one or more inductive coils suitable for inductively charging a power supply located in the arm, the power supply being configured to provide power to the eyewear device (Figs.12A-12D, para. [0115-0116], an eyewear device comprises an arm 30814 including a coil structure 30862 for inductively charging the eyewear device through inductive charging).
At the time of invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the eyewear device of Blum to include the teaching of Chaum of providing a coil structure in a side arm of an eyewear device to inductively charge the eyewear device. The motivation would have been in order to provide a charging method with convenience, safety, and durability.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blum et al. (US Pub. 2008/0100792 A1) in view of Esmaeili et al. (US Pub. 2017/0093087 A1) as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Ikeda (US Pub. 2022/0113813 A1).
Regarding claim 12; Blum in view of Esmaeili teaches the eyewear device of claim 10 as discussed above. Blum does not teach at least one or more detachable arms comprises the arm comprises a detachable projector for projecting visual data on one or more lenses or displays of the eyewear device.
Ikeda teaches the one or more arms comprise a detachable projector for projecting visual data on said one or more lenses or displays of the frame (Fig. 1A-1B and 2A-2B, para. [0080], an eyewear device comprises a display apparatus 20 including a projector 21 configured to project an image on a screen M. The display apparatus 20 is attached to a temple portion of a main body 10. The projector 21 may be attachable and detachable from the main body 10).
At the time of invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the eyewear device of Blum in view of Esmaeili to include the teaching of Ikeda of providing an eyewear device comprising a detachable projector for projecting image on a lens. The motivation would have been in order to improve the user experience.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blum et al. (US Pub. 2008/0100792 A1) in view of Esmaeili et al. (US Pub. 2017/0093087 A1) as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Satongar et al. (US Pub. 2025/0150742 A1).
Regarding claim 14; Blum in view of Esmaeili teaches the eyewear device of claim 13 as discussed above. Blum and Esmaeili do not teach a touch sensitive user interface, wherein the touch sensitive user interface is suitable for enabling user interaction with the eyewear device.
Satongar teaches a touch sensitive user interface, wherein the touch sensitive user interface is suitable for enabling user interaction with the earbud device (Figs. 1-5, a charging case (e.g., device 300, Fig.3) is configured to accommodate earbuds. The charging case comprises a user interface (e.g., 116-516). Para. [0048], the user interface 116 includes a touchpad for detecting a touch input. Para. [0010], a user may provide a touch or gesture command at the user interface on the earbud charging case to manipulate a spatial perception of audio content listened to through the earbuds).
At the time of invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the eyewear device of Blum in view of Esmaeili to include the teaching of Satongar of providing a touch-sensitive use interface on a charging case of earbuds so that a user may interact with the earbuds through touch operations on the user interface. The motivation would have been in order to improve the user experience.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Brusset (US Pub. 2022/0075206 A1) discloses an eyewear device comprising a magnetic hinge connecting a temple with a frame.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Inquiries
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NGUYEN H TRUONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1630. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 10-6.
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, Chanh Nguyen can be reached at 571-272-7772. 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.
/NGUYEN H TRUONG/Examiner, Art Unit 2623
/CHANH D NGUYEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2623