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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters “23” and “33” have been used to designate a protrusion in Figures 7-9. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The specification is replete with terms which are not clear, concise, and exact, for there are inconsistencies and lack of antecedent basis for several elements within the present invention. See § 112(b) rejections below in the present Office action for further detail regarding inconsistent terminology. The specification should be revised carefully in order to comply with 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112. A substitute specification in proper idiomatic English and in compliance with 37 CFR 1.52(a) and (b) is required. The substitute specification filed must be accompanied by a statement that it contains no new matter.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1-11 utilize single block/paragraph indents to separate the claim limitations. “Where a claim sets forth a plurality of elements or steps, each element or step of the claim should be separated by a line indentation, 37 CFR 1.75(i).” See MPEP § 608.01(m). Since the claims are replete with inconsistent terminology and lack of antecedent basis for several claimed elements, the Examiner has mapped the rejections following the exact formatting of the as-filed claims in the present Office action. See §§ 102 and 103 rejections.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(d) & 112(b)
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.
Claims 6 and 11 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.
With respect to Claim 6, the claim recites “the spectacle rod according to claim 1, wherein…at the side facing the second protrusions of the metal rod, has an abutment face for an end face of the friction element” despite Claim 1 not reciting “second protrusions” whatsoever.
With respect to Claim 11, the claim recites “the spectacle rod according to claim 1, wherein the transverse protrusion is a hook shaped protrusion” despite Claim 1 not reciting this transverse protrusion at all. A “transverse protrusion” is first recited in Claim 3.
Thus, Claims 6 and 11 fail to further limit the subject matter of Claim 1. Since the scope of Claims 1, 6, and 11 cannot be ascertained, Claims 1-11 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
With respect to Claims 1-11, the claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors.
With respect to Claims 1-11, several claimed elements of the present application lack antecedent basis for the limitations:
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the ear of a user" in line 7. Claim 1 recites the limitation "the metal rod" in line 10. Claim 1 recites the limitation "the first end part of the friction element" and "the first end of the friction element" in lines 11, 17, 30-31, and 34. Claim 1 recites the limitation "the conduit" in lines 14, 19, and 30. Claim 1 recites the limitation "the conduit walls and bottom" and “the walls and the bottom of the conduit” in lines 14 and 19. Claim 1 recites the limitation "formed in the material quantity" in line 15. Claim 1 recites the limitation "the open recess" in lines 18, and 34-35. Claim 1 recites the limitation "the recess" in lines 18 and 29. Claim 1 recites the limitation "the displacement of the friction element" in lines 20-21. Claim 1 recites the limitation "the outermost second end part" in line 27.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the bottom of the conduit" in lines 3 and 6. Claim 2 recites the limitation "the elastic compliance of the friction element material" in line 7. Claim 3 recites the limitation "the opening of the recess" in line 2. Claim 3 recites the limitation "the outermost second end part" in lines 3-4. Claim 4 recites the limitation "the first hole" in line 2. Claim 4 recites the limitation "the first protrusion" in lines 2-3. Claim 5 recites the limitation "the conduit" in line 2. Claim 5 recites the limitation "the thickness of the metal rod" in lines 2-3. Claim 5 recites the limitation "the conduit side walls" in line 3. Claim 6 recites the limitation "the side facing the second protrusions" in lines 2-3. Claim 7 recites the limitation "the outermost second end face of the second part" in lines 2-3. Claim 9 recites the limitation "the side walls of the friction element conduit" in line 2. Claim 10 recites the limitation "its outermost second end part" in line 2. Claim 11 recites the limitation "the transverse protrusion" in line 1.
This is not an exhaustive list. Thus, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitations in the claims. Proper correction is required to ensure accuracy and consistency in the claims, for the language is so awkward that it renders the claims nearly incomprehensible. The primary purpose of the requirement of definiteness of claim language is to ensure that the scope of the claims is clear so the public is informed of the boundaries of what constitutes infringement of the patent. It is of utmost importance that patents issue with definite claims that clearly and precisely inform persons skilled in the art of the boundaries of protected subject matter. See MPEP § 2173.
With respect to Claims 1-11, the terms “conduit-shaped" and "obliquely" in Claim 1, "at a distance from the metal rod" in Claim 2, "a size smaller" in Claim 4, "a smaller width" in Claim 5, "form a smooth transition" in Claim 9, and "hook shaped" in Claim 11 are relative terms which render the claims indefinite. The terms “conduit-shaped," "obliquely," "at a distance from the metal rod," "a size smaller," "a smaller width," "form a smooth transition," and "hook shaped” are not defined by the claims, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
In the instant case, “conduit-shaped” in “the friction element is conduit-shaped so that the conduit walls and bottom cover the side faces and the bottom face of the metal rod” is relative because it does not specify the actual geometric parameters that qualify a structure as a conduit which leaves the shape boundary indeterminate (Claim 1). “Obliquely” in “first transverse protrusion is directed in the transverse direction and obliquely in the longitudinal direction” recites no reference angle, angular range, or measurement baseline so the degree of obliqueness is undefined and could indefinitely vary by subjective interpretation of a person having ordinary skill in the art (Claim 1). “At a distance from the metal rod” in “the second protrusions at their connection to the metal rod have a smaller cross-section than that of the second protrusions at a distance from the metal rod” does not specify the distance e.g., magnitude, range, reference point, etc. from the metal rod so a person having ordinary skill in the art cannot ascertain where the comparison applies (Claim 2). “A size smaller” in “the first hole in the friction element is made with a size smaller than that of the first protrusion of the metal rod” provides only a comparative relationship without actually quantifying the size, dimensional metric, etc. of the claimed elements, and thus, it is undefined (Claim 4). “A smaller width” in “the conduit is formed with a smaller width than the thickness of the metal rod” also recites a comparative relationship but fails to define the numerical bounds or proportional requirements which makes the permissible width differential unknown to a person having ordinary skill in the art (Claim 5). “A smooth transition” in “the side walls of the friction element conduit have decreasing thickness towards the side faces of the metal rod to form a smooth transition” has no objective requirements of the function and intended result so the transition compliance remains subjective (Claim 9). “Hook shaped” in “wherein the transverse protrusion is a hook shaped protrusion” does not define the structural features that constitute a hook, and thus, encompasses an indefinite range of forms of a hook-shaped element (Claim 11). Since the scope of these claims cannot be ascertained, all other limitations within the claims have been rendered indefinite by the use of these relative terms.
With respect to Claims 1-11, and notwithstanding the permissible instances, the use of functional language in a claim may fail "to provide a clear-cut indication of the scope of the subject matter embraced by the claim" and thus be indefinite. In re Swinehart, 439 F.2d 210, 213 (CCPA 1971). For example, when claims merely recite a description of a problem to be solved or a function or result achieved by the invention, the boundaries of the claim scope may be unclear. Halliburton Energy Servs., Inc. v. M-I LLC, 514 F.3d 1244, 1255, 85 USPQ2d 1654, 1663 (Fed. Cir. 2008); see also United Carbon Co. v. Binney & Smith Co., 317 U.S. 228, 234 (1942) See MPEP §2173.05(g).
In the current instance, “a first end part intended for connection with a front piece, as well as a second end part intended to be bent to form an ear bend” and “material quantity” in Claim 1 and “clamping effect” in Claim 4, recites functional language, for the claim limitations merely recite a description of a problem to be solved or a function or result achieved by the invention. For example, XXX, and thus, these limitations are purely functional and result-oriented. Examiner reminds the applicant that “apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does.” Hewlett-Packard Co.v.Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
For the prosecution on merits, examiner interprets the claimed subject matter described above as introducing optional elements, optional structural limitations, optional expressions, and optional functionality within a spectacle rod.
Applicant should clarify the claim limitations as appropriate. Care should be taken during revision of the description and of any statements of problem or advantage, not to add subject-matter which extends beyond the content of the application (specification) as originally filed.
If the language of a claim, considered as a whole in light of the specification and given its broadest reasonable interpretation, is such that a person of ordinary skill in the relevant art would read it with more than one reasonable interpretation, then a rejection of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, is appropriate. See MPEP 2173.05(a), MPEP 2143.03(I), and MPEP 2173.06.
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, and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tormen US 20150160473 A1.
With respect to Claim 1, Tormen discloses a spectacle rod (eyeglasses frame temple 1; [0074]; figs. 1-15) with a first end part (end 4; [0076]) intended for connection (hinged to front rim of eyeglasses; [0076]) with a front piece (front rim of the eyeglasses; [0076-77]), as well as a second end part (end 7; [0079]) intended to be bent to form an ear bend (designed to be rested on a wearer’s ear; [0079]), the spectacle rod (eyeglasses frame temple 1; [0074]; figs. 1-15) having a longitudinal direction (longitudinal direction 10; [0081]) and a transverse direction (locking direction 13, direction transversal to longitudinal direction; [0083]), and the spectacle rod (eyeglasses frame temple 1; [0074]; figs. 1-15) being formed (figs. 1-2), at least above (fig. 3) the second end part (end 7; [0079]) of the spectacle rod (eyeglasses frame temple 1; [0074]; figs. 1-15), by a plate-shaped rod (first portion 2; [0075], plate shape as seen in figs. 1-3) having side faces (of first portion 2; figs. 9-11) as well as bottom and top faces (of first portion 2; figs. 6-7), and wherein a friction element (second portion 3 comprising a fastening end; [0075-80]) made from an elastic, compliant material (second portion 3 comprising elastically deformable tongues and tabs; [0085], [0108]; fig. 3) is connected (detachably connected to each other; [0075]) to the plate-shaped rod (first portion 2; [0075], plate shape as seen in figs. 1-3) in a position at the ear bend (rested on wearer’s ear; [0079]) for contact behind the ear of a user (second portion 3 comprising end 7 can be rested on wearer's ear; [0037], [0079]), and wherein the plate-shaped rod (first portion 2; [0075], plate shape as seen in figs. 1-3) has a first transverse protrusion (transversal wall/abutment 20 and/or wall 18; [0090-91]), which first transverse protrusion (transversal wall/abutment 20 and/or wall 18; [0090-91]) is directed (figs. 9-11) in the transverse direction (locking direction 13, direction transversal to longitudinal direction; [0083]) and obliquely (figs. 9-11) in the longitudinal direction (longitudinal direction 10; [0081]) in order to form (figs. 1-2), together with the second end part (end 7; [0079]) of the metal rod (first portion 2 of temple 1 is made of metal; [0135]), a longitudinally open recess (opening 17 guiding during insertion and extraction in longitudinal direction 10; [0088]), and wherein, in the first end part (fastening end 8; [0081]) of the friction element (second portion 3 comprising a fastening end; [0075-80]), a first transverse hole (cavity located on front face 25 formed in locking direction 13; [0112]) is provided for receiving (figs. 10-11) the first transverse protrusion (transversal wall/abutment 20 and/or wall 18; [0090-91]) of the plate-shaped rod (first portion 2; [0075], plate shape as seen in figs. 1-3), and wherein the plate-shaped rod (first portion 2; [0075], plate shape as seen in figs. 1-3) is a metal rod (first portion 2 of temple 1 is made of metal; [0135]), and wherein the friction element (second portion 3 comprising a fastening end; [0075-80]) is conduit-shaped (as seen in figs. 3-5) so that the conduit walls (side walls 23; [0104]) and bottom cover (step 31; [0131-132]; figs. 10-11) the side faces (of first portion 2; figs. 9-11) and the bottom face (of first portion 2; figs. 6-7) of the metal rod (first portion 2 of temple 1 is made of metal; [0135]), and wherein the first transverse hole (cavity located on front face 25 formed in locking direction 13; [0112]) of the friction element (second portion 3 comprising a fastening end; [0075-80]) is formed in the material quantity (figs. 10-11) and directed in the transverse direction (locking direction 13, direction transversal to longitudinal direction; [0083]) in order to receive (figs. 10-11) the first transverse protrusion (transversal wall/abutment 20 and/or wall 18; [0090-91]) of the metal rod (first portion 2 of temple 1 is made of metal; [0135]), and wherein elastic material (second portion 3 comprising elastically deformable tongues and tabs; [0085], [0108]; fig. 3) at the first end part (fastening end 8; [0081]) of the friction element (second portion 3 comprising a fastening end; [0075-80]) is received (figs. 9-10) in the open recess (opening 17 guiding during insertion and extraction in longitudinal direction 10; [0088]) of the metal rod (first portion 2 of temple 1 is made of metal; [0135]), so that the first transverse protrusion (transversal wall/abutment 20 and/or wall 18; [0090-91]) and the recess (opening 17 guiding during insertion and extraction in longitudinal direction 10; [0088]) form first retaining means (insertion and extraction, means of a snap-in connection; [0088-89]), and wherein between the walls (side walls 23; [0104]) and the bottom (step 31; [0131-132]; figs. 10-11) of the conduit (as seen in figs. 3-5) and the side faces (of first portion 2; figs. 9-11) of the metal rod (first portion 2 of temple 1 is made of metal; [0135]), further retaining means (means of the fastening system; [0030]; fig. 7) are provided which prevent the displacement (prevents elongate member 9 of second portion 3 from being inserted further; [0132]) of the friction element (second portion 3 comprising a fastening end; [0075-80]) in the longitudinal direction (longitudinal direction 10; [0081]) and transverse direction (locking direction 13, direction transversal to longitudinal direction; [0083]) of the metal rod (first portion 2 of temple 1 is made of metal; [0135]), wherein the first transverse protrusion (transversal wall/abutment 20 and/or wall 18; [0090-91]) of the plate-shaped rod (first portion 2; [0075], plate shape as seen in figs. 1-3) is provided at its outermost second end (wall 18 within fastening end 5 of first portion 2; [0076]; figs. 1 and 9), wherein the longitudinally open recess (opening 17 guiding during insertion and extraction in longitudinal direction 10; [0088]) is formed (figs. 3, and 9-10), together with the outermost second end part (wall 18 within fastening end 5 of first portion 2; [0076]; figs. 1 and 9) of the metal rod (first portion 2 of temple 1 is made of metal; [0135]), which a longitudinally open recess (opening 17 guiding during insertion and extraction in longitudinal direction 10; [0088]) has at its opening (further recess 21 near opening 17; [0094]) a smaller cross-section (socket 16 through opening 17 having smaller cross-section; [0087]; figs. 10-11) than at a central part (fig. 10) of the recess (opening 17 guiding during insertion and extraction in longitudinal direction 10; [0088]), wherein the friction element (second portion 3 comprising a fastening end; [0075-80]) at a first end (elongate member 9; [0106]) of the conduit (as seen in figs. 3-5) is closed by a material quantity (resilient tabs 24; [0106]; figs. 9-11) at the first end (fastening end 8; [0081]) of the friction element (second portion 3 comprising a fastening end; [0075-80]), wherein the first transverse hole (cavity located on front face 25 formed in locking direction 13; [0112]) of the friction element (second portion 3 comprising a fastening end; [0075-80]) is also directed obliquely (figs. 9-11) in the longitudinal direction (longitudinal direction 10; [0081]), wherein elastic material (resilient tabs 24 are elastically deformable; [0092], [0108]) at the first end part (fastening end 8; [0081]) of the friction element (second portion 3 comprising a fastening end; [0075-80]) is received in the open recess (opening 17 guiding during insertion and extraction in longitudinal direction 10; [0088]) of the metal rod (first portion 2 of temple 1 is made of metal; [0135]) in an elastically compressed state (resilient tabs 24 are elastically deformable in such a way as to apply elastic force in direction perpendicular to elastic force applied by tongue 11 of second portion 3; [0108], elastic compressed state as seen in fig. 11).
With respect to Claim 2, Tormen discloses the spectacle rod (eyeglasses frame temple 1; [0074]; figs. 1-15) according to claim 1, wherein the metal rod (first portion 2 of temple 1 is made of metal; [0135]) at its bottom face (of first portion 2; figs. 6-7) is provided with transverse second protrusions (transversal wall/abutment 20 and/or wall 18; [0090-91]) for releasable (detachably connectable; [0080]) snap engagement (snap-in connection; [0080]) with second holes (cavity located on rear face 26 formed in locking direction 13; [0112]) in the bottom of the conduit (as seen in figs. 3-5), wherein the second protrusions (transversal wall/abutment 20 and/or wall 18; [0090-91]) at their connection (as seen in figs. 9-11) to the metal rod (first portion 2 of temple 1 is made of metal; [0135]) have a smaller cross-section (transversal wall/abutment 20 having smaller cross section than wall 18 of first portion 2 bottom surface directly across from walls 29; [0124]; figs. 9-11) than that of the second protrusions (transversal wall/abutment 20 and/or wall 18; [0090-91]) at a distance (figs. 9-11) from the metal rod (first portion 2 of temple 1 is made of metal; [0135]), so that the second protrusions (transversal wall/abutment 20 and/or wall 18; [0090-91]) are retained in the second holes (cavity located on rear face 26 formed in locking direction 13; [0112]) at the bottom of the conduit (as seen in figs. 3-5) due to the elastic compliance (resilient tabs 24 are elastically deformable in such a way as to apply elastic force in direction perpendicular to elastic force applied by tongue 11 of second portion 3; [0108]; fig. 11) of the friction element (second portion 3 comprising a fastening end; [0075-80]) material (second portion 3 comprising elastically deformable tongues and tabs; [0085], [0108]; fig. 3).
With respect to Claim 3, Tormen discloses the spectacle rod (eyeglasses frame temple 1; [0074]; figs. 1-15) according to claim 1, wherein a transverse protrusion (upper and lower tip portions extending from wall 18 at opening 17; as seen in figs. 9-11) is formed at the opening (further recess 21 near opening 17; [0094]) of the recess (opening 17 guiding during insertion and extraction in longitudinal direction 10; [0088]) on the first transverse protrusion (transversal wall/abutment 20 and/or wall 18; [0090-91]) and/or on the outermost second end part (wall 18 within fastening end 5 of first portion 2; [0076]; figs. 1 and 9) of the metal rod (first portion 2 of temple 1 is made of metal; [0135]).
With respect to Claim 4, Tormen discloses the spectacle rod (eyeglasses frame temple 1; [0074]; figs. 1-15) according to claim 1, wherein the first hole (cavity located on front face 25 formed in locking direction 13; [0112]) in the friction element (second portion 3 comprising a fastening end; [0075-80]) is made with a size smaller (as seen in figs. 9-11) than that of the first protrusion (transversal wall/abutment 20 and/or wall 18; [0090-91]) of the metal rod (first portion 2 of temple 1 is made of metal; [0135]), so that the first protrusion (transversal wall/abutment 20 and/or wall 18; [0090-91]) of the metal rod (first portion 2 of temple 1 is made of metal; [0135]) is received (fig. 9) therein with a clamping effect (means of the fastening system, connectable by a snap-in connection; [0030], [0080]).
With respect to Claim 5, Tormen discloses the spectacle rod (eyeglasses frame temple 1; [0074]; figs. 1-15) according to claim 1, wherein the conduit (as seen in figs. 3-5) is formed with a smaller width (width of conduit-shaped portion of second portion 3 is smaller than first portion 2 thickness, as seen in figs. 6-8) than the thickness (fig. 7) of the metal rod (first portion 2 of temple 1 is made of metal; [0135]), so that the conduit side walls (side walls 23; [0104]) are in elastic abutment (side walls 23 of resilient tabs 24 are elastic, resilient tabs 24 project in longitudinal direction 10; [0104-106]; fig. 5) with the side faces (of first portion 2; figs. 9-11) of the metal rod (first portion 2 of temple 1 is made of metal; [0135]).
With respect to Claim 6, Tormen discloses the spectacle rod (eyeglasses frame temple 1; [0074]; figs. 1-15) according to claim 1, wherein the metal rod (first portion 2 of temple 1 is made of metal; [0135]) in an intermediate part (first portion 2 between end 4 of front rim of eyeglasses and second portion 3; [0075-76]; fig. 1), at the side facing (figs. 9-11) the second protrusions (transversal wall/abutment 20 and/or wall 18; [0090-91]) of the metal rod (first portion 2 of temple 1 is made of metal; [0135]), has an abutment face (step portion of upper and lower tip portions extending from wall 18 at opening 17; as seen in figs. 9-11) for an end face (front surface 28; [0120]; figs. 10-11) of the friction element (second portion 3 comprising a fastening end; [0075-80]).
With respect to Claim 7, Tormen discloses the spectacle rod (eyeglasses frame temple 1; [0074]; figs. 1-15) according to claim 1, wherein the friction element (second portion 3 comprising a fastening end; [0075-80]) covers at least part of the outermost end face (second portion 3 covers front portion/inner end zone of side walls 30 within opening 17, causing socket 16 to flare during insertion; [0050], [0128-129]; as seen in figs. 10-11) of the second end part (wall 18 within fastening end 5 of first portion 2; [0076]; figs. 1 and 9) of the metal rod (first portion 2 of temple 1 is made of metal; [0135]).
With respect to Claim 9, Tormen discloses the spectacle rod (eyeglasses frame temple 1; [0074]; figs. 1-15) according to claim 1, wherein the side walls (side walls 23; [0104]) of the friction element (second portion 3 comprising a fastening end; [0075-80]) conduit (as seen in figs. 3-5) have decreasing thickness (side walls 23 defining a profile which is tapered; [0104]; decreasing thickness as seen in fig. 4) towards the side faces (of first portion 2; figs. 9-11) of the metal rod (first portion 2 of temple 1 is made of metal; [0135]) to form a smooth transition (through agency of particularly stable and secure system, guiding elongate member 9 during insertion and extraction; [0013], [0088]; smooth transition as seen in figs. 9-11).
With respect to Claim 10, Tormen discloses the spectacle rod (eyeglasses frame temple 1; [0074]; figs. 1-15) according to claim 1, wherein the metal rod (first portion 2 of temple 1 is made of metal; [0135]) at its outermost second end part (wall 18 within fastening end 5 of first portion 2; [0076]; figs. 1 and 9) has a groove (recess 19; [0089-90]), where an end part (tooth 12; [0089]) of the friction element (second portion 3 comprising a fastening end; [0075-80]) is in abutment (recess 19 which is shaped to receive the tooth 12; [0089]; figs. 9-11).
With respect to Claim 11, Tormen discloses the spectacle rod (eyeglasses frame temple 1; [0074]; figs. 1-15) according to claim 1, wherein the transverse protrusion (upper and lower tip portions extending from wall 18 at opening 17; as seen in figs. 9-11) is a hook shaped protrusion (wall 18 is shaped, i.e. contoured; [0019]; hook shape as seen in figs. 9-11).
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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tormen US 20150160473 A1 in view of Lee KR 20010063177 A (see machine translation).
With respect to Claim 8, Tormen discloses the spectacle rod (eyeglasses frame temple 1; [0074]; figs. 1-15) according to claim 1.
Tormen does not appear to explicitly teach the following limitation wherein the metal rod is made from titanium.
However, in another field of endeavor, Lee teaches an abrasion prevention unit made of titanium or alloy titanium for temple of glasses (pg. 1, para. 1), wherein a friction portion (57, 57’; pg. 3, para. 4) of the connector (7; pg. 3, para. 4) and legs of the glasses (2; pg. 3, para. 4) are made of titanium or titanium alloy (pg. 3, para. 4). Lee further teaches that by utilizing the elastic device (5; pg. 3, para. 5), the eyeglass legs exhibit a very appropriate elasticity (pg. 3, para. 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the eyeglasses frame temple of Tormen to include the technical feature of selecting titanium for eyeglass temples, for the purpose of extending the life of eyeglasses, providing high-performance glasses, and maximizing reliability, as taught by Lee (pg. 3, para. 4-5). Furthermore, it has been held that the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use is within the skill of one of ordinary skill in the art. See Sinclair & Carroll Co. v.Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) See also In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960. See also MPEP § 2144.07.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Artusi WO 2020244918 A1 discloses a mount for spectacles substantially similar to that of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to K MUHAMMAD whose telephone number is (571)272-4210. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 1:00pm - 9:30pm EDT.
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, Ricky Mack can be reached at 571-272-2333. 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.
/K MUHAMMAD/Examiner, Art Unit 2872 12 February 2026
/SHARRIEF I BROOME/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights