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 .
Status of Application
Claims 1-5, 7-9, 11, 12, 14, 16, 17 and 19 are pending and presented for examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see amendment, filed 3/10/2026, with respect to the claim objections and claim rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The previous claim objections and rejections have been withdrawn.
However, Applicant’s amendment has necessitated new rejections of claims 5, 12, 17 and 19 as presented below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
1. Claims 5, 12, 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claims 5, 12, 17 and 19 recite that the six optical layers have a total thickness of 161 nm-205 nm. However, parent claims 1, 2, 7 and 8 already recite thicknesses for the layers which yield a total thickness of 161 nm-205 nm. Therefore, claims 5, 12, 17 and 19 do not recite a further limitation of the claim upon which they depend as they simply restate a total thickness that was already recited in the parent claims. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Allowable Subject Matter
2. Claims 1-4, 7-9, 11, 14 and 16 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record fails to teach or suggest the method of claim 1. In particular, the prior art fails to teach or suggest the method forming a lens with a combination of the six specific optical layers with the specific thickness in combination with a soaking step of the lens in a mixed solution of a blue light absorber and a UV light absorber. Therefore, claim 1 is allowable over the prior art of record. Claims 2-4 depend from claim 1 and are allowable for the same reasons. Additionally, the lens and glasses including the lens as made by the process of claim 1 are allowable as the prior art fails to teach a product having the same optical layer arrangement in combination with the lens having been soaked with a mixed solution as claimed. Therefore, claims 7 and 8 are allowed. Claims 9, 11, 14 and 16 depend from claim 7 or 8 and are allowable for the same reasons.
Conclusion
Claims 1-5, 7-9, 11, 12, 14, 16, 17 and 19 are pending.
Claims 5, 12, 17 and 19 are rejected.
Claims 1-4, 7-9, 11, 14 and 16 are allowed.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT S WALTERS JR whose telephone number is (571)270-5351. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5.
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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at 571-272-1295. 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.
/ROBERT S WALTERS JR/
April 2, 2026Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1717