DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the amendment filed July 27, 2026 in which claims 2-13, 15-21, and 23-25 are presented for examination, claim 22 is withdrawn, and claims 1 and 14 are canceled.
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 .
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 2-13, 15-20, and 23-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over USPN 5,420,649 Lewis in view of USPN 8,764,186 Nolan.
To claim 2, Lewis discloses an apparatus (10) (see Figures 4-7; col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2) comprising:
a lens (16,40a,40b) configured to be worn by a user (see Figures 4-7; col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2), the lens having an upper portion and a lower portion, wherein the upper portion is separated from the lower portion by a longitudinal line (annotated Figure 5, see below; col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2; as depicted in annotated Figure 5, the upper portion is the portion of lens 16,40a,40b configured to be aligned with a forward viewing direction of the user while the lower portion is the portion of lens 16,40a,40b configured to be aligned with a downward field of view of the user; it is respectfully noted that the term “portion” is very broad and merely means “a part of a whole;” see https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/portion), and wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material (see Figures 4-7; col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2; when constituent elements 16, 40a, and 40b of lens 16,40a,40b are combined together in a fully-assembled configuration of apparatus 10 such as depicted in Figures 4-7, the lens is considered to be formed from a single piece of material, see MPEP 2144.04),
wherein the upper portion has a substantially constant radius of curvature in a vertical direction, such that any two meridians perpendicular to the longitudinal line have a same constant radius of curvature in the upper portion (annotated Figure 5; col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2; constant radius of curvature in the upper portion due to the lack of portions 40a,40b in the upper portion),
wherein the lower portion has a variable radius of curvature in the vertical direction such that at least two of the meridians have respective radii of curvature in the lower portion which are different from each other and different from the radius of curvature of the at least two of the meridians in the upper portion (annotated Figure 5; col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2; different radii of curvature in the lower portion due to the presence of prisms 40a,40b of Figures 4-6), and
wherein, when worn by the user, an optical axis of the upper portion is aligned with a forward viewing direction of the user and a downward field of view is viewed through the lower portion (annotated Figure 5; col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
895
638
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As detailed above, it is respectfully asserted that Lewis properly anticipates each of the limitations as recited in currently amended claim 2 including “wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material.” However, in the interest of promoting compact prosecution, to the extent to which Lewis does not properly anticipated the limitation “wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material,” to which Examiner does not concede, it is noted that Nolan teaches an apparatus (100 of Figure 1A) (see Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38) comprising a lens (130) configured to be worn by a user, the lens having an upper portion and a lower portion, wherein the upper portion is separated from the lower portion by a longitudinal line (annotated Figure 1A, see below; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; as depicted in annotated Figure 1A, the upper portion is the portion of lens 130 configured to be aligned with a forward viewing direction of the user while the lower portion is the portion of lens 130 configured to be aligned with a downward field of view of the user; it is respectfully noted that the term “portion” is very broad and merely means “a part of a whole;” see https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/portion) and wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material (col. 7, lines 25-27), wherein the upper portion has a substantially constant radius of curvature in a vertical direction, such that any two meridians perpendicular to the longitudinal line have a same constant radius of curvature in the upper portion (see annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; substantially constant radius of curvature in upper portion of lens 130 due to the absence of corrective portions 146), wherein the lower portion has a variable radius of curvature in the vertical direction such that at least two of the meridians have respective radii of curvature in the lower portion which are different from each other and different from the radius of curvature of the at least two of the meridians in the upper portion (see annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; different radii of curvature in the example meridians depicted in Figure 1A due to the differing amounts of corrective portion 146 in each meridian), and wherein, when worn by the user, an optical axis of the upper portion is aligned with a forward viewing direction of the user and a downward field of view is viewed through the lower portion (see annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38).
PNG
media_image2.png
896
643
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Lewis and Nolan teach analogous inventions in the field of goggles. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the lens of Lewis to be formed of a single, unitary material as taught by Nolan because Nolan teaches that this configuration is known in the art and allows for the lens to formed using an extrusion process (col. 7, lines 25-27) rather than relying on LOCTITE bonding product as disclosed by Lewis. It is further respectfully noted that it has been held that forming an article in one piece which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04).
To claim 3, the modified invention of Lewis (i.e., Lewis in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the lens is a goggle lens (see Figures 4-7 and col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2 of Lewis; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan).
To claim 4, the modified invention of Lewis (i.e., Lewis in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus further comprising a goggle frame (14 of Lewis; 110 of Nolan) comprising a flexible gasket (28 of Lewis; col. 7, lines 1-3 of Nolan) that defines an opening configured to encircle the user's eyes when the goggle frame is worn by the user, wherein the lens is coupled to the goggle frame (see Figures 4-7 and col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2 of Lewis; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan).
To claim 5, the modified invention of Lewis (i.e., Lewis in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein for each of the at least two meridians the greatest degree of curvature is located in the lower portion (see Figures 4-7 and col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2 of Lewis; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan).
To claim 6, the modified invention of Lewis (i.e., Lewis in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the lens has a substantially constant thickness (see especially Figures 3A-3C and col. 9, line 35 – col. 10, line 14 of Nolan; it is respectfully noted that the term “substantially” is very broad).
To claim 7, the modified invention of Lewis (i.e., Lewis in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the upper portion is a cylindrical or spherical lens and the lower portion is neither a cylindrical or spherical lens (see annotated Figure 1A and col. 7, line 37 – col. 8, line 12 of Nolan).
To claim 8, the modified invention of Lewis (i.e., Lewis in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the lens is a unitary lens configured to extend across both of the user's eyes when worn (see Figures 4-7 and col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2 of Lewis; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan).
To claim 9, the modified invention of Lewis (i.e., Lewis in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the lower portion is shaped to limit distortion to the peripheral region of the lens (see Figures 4-7 and col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2 of Lewis; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan).
To claim 10, the modified invention of Lewis (i.e., Lewis in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the lower portion has a complex curvature which is not definable by a standard curve form (see Figures 4-7 and col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2 of Lewis; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan).
To claim 11, Lewis discloses an apparatus (10) (see Figures 4-7; col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2) comprising:
a lens (16,40a,40b) configured to be worn by a user (see Figures 4-7; col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2), the lens having an upper portion and a lower portion separated by a longitudinal line (annotated Figure 5; col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2), wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material (see Figures 4-7; col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2; when constituent elements 16, 40a, and 40b of lens 16,40a,40b are combined together in a fully-assembled configuration of apparatus 10 such as depicted in Figures 4-7, the lens is considered to be formed from a single piece of material, see MPEP 2144.04), wherein when worn by the user the upper portion is positioned in front of a main field of view of the user and the lower portion is positioned in a downward field of view of the user (annotated Figure 5; col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2; as depicted in annotated Figure 5, the upper portion is the portion of lens 16,40,40b configured to be portion is positioned in front of a main field of view of the user while the lower portion is the portion of lens 16,40a,40b configured to be positioned in a downward field of view of the user; it is respectfully noted that the term “portion” is very broad and merely means “a part of a whole;” see https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/portion) and wherein the upper portion has a substantially constant radius of curvature in a vertical direction, such that any two meridians perpendicular to the longitudinal line have a same constant radius of curvature in the upper portion (annotated Figure 5; col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2; substantially constant radius of curvature due to the lack of prisms 40a,40b in the upper portion),
wherein a first meridian extending along the lens perpendicular to the longitudinal line has a radius of curvature which is constant along the first meridian in the upper portion and varies along the first meridian in the lower portion (see Figures 4-7; col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2; varied radius of curvature of the first meridian in the lower portion due to the presence of prisms 40a,40b in the lower portion),
wherein a second meridian extending along the lens perpendicular to the longitudinal line has a radius of curvature which is constant along the second meridian in the upper portion and varies along the second meridian in the lower portion (see Figures 4-7; col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2; varied radius of curvature of the second meridian in the lower portion due to the presence of prisms 40a,40b in the lower portion), and
wherein the radius of curvature of the first meridian varies along the lower portion in a manner different to how the radius of curvature of the second meridian varies along the lower portion (see Figures 4-7; col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2; radius of curvature in the lower portion differing in different meridians due to the different portions of prism 40a,40b in different meridians).
As detailed above, it is respectfully asserted that Lewis properly anticipates each of the limitations as recited in currently amended claim 11 including “wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material.” However, in the interest of promoting compact prosecution, to the extent to which Lewis does not properly anticipated the limitation “wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material,” to which Examiner does not concede, it is noted that Nolan teaches an apparatus (100 of Figure 1A) (see Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38) comprising a lens (130) configured to be worn by a user, the lens having an upper portion and a lower portion separated by a longitudinal line (annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; as depicted in annotated Figure 1A, the upper portion is the portion of lens 130 configured to be aligned with a forward viewing direction of the user while the lower portion is the portion of lens 130 configured to be aligned with a downward field of view of the user; it is respectfully noted that the term “portion” is very broad and merely means “a part of a whole;” see https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/portion), wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material (col. 7, lines 25-27), wherein when worn by the user the upper portion is positioned in front of a main field of view of the user and the lower portion is positioned in a downward field of view of the user and wherein the upper portion has a substantially constant radius of curvature in a vertical direction, such that any two meridians perpendicular to the longitudinal line have a same constant radius of curvature in the upper portion (see annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; substantially constant radius of curvature in upper portion of lens 130 due to the absence of corrective portions 146), wherein a first meridian extending along the lens perpendicular to the longitudinal line has a radius of curvature which is constant along the first meridian in the upper portion and varies along the first meridian in the lower portion (see annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; constant radius of curvature in upper portion due to the lack of corrective portions 146 while variable radius of curvature in the lower portion due to varying amounts of corrective portions 146 in the lower portion), wherein a second meridian extending along the lens perpendicular to the longitudinal line has a radius of curvature which is constant along the second meridian in the upper portion and varies along the second meridian in the lower portion (see annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; constant radius of curvature in upper portion due to the lack of corrective portions 146 while variable radius of curvature in the lower portion due to varying amounts of corrective portions 146 in the lower portion), and wherein the radius of curvature of the first meridian varies along the lower portion in a manner different to how the radius of curvature of the second meridian varies along the lower portion (see annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; radius of curvature of first and second meridians in the lower portions differs due to differing amounts of corrective portion 146 being located along first and second meridians in the lower portion).
Lewis and Nolan teach analogous inventions in the field of goggles. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the lens of Lewis to be formed of a single, unitary material as taught by Nolan because Nolan teaches that this configuration is known in the art and allows for the lens to formed using an extrusion process (col. 7, lines 25-27) rather than relying on LOCTITE bonding product as disclosed by Lewis. It is further respectfully noted that it has been held that forming an article in one piece which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04).
To claim 12, the modified invention of Lewis (i.e., Lewis in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein when worn by the user the lower portion of the lens curves to be closer to the user's face than the upper portion (see annotated Figure 5 and col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2 of Lewis; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan).
To claim 13, the modified invention of Lewis (i.e., Lewis in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the upper portion has a substantially constant longitudinal radius of curvature such that each longitude in the upper portion has a same radius of curvature (see annotated Figure 5 and col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2 of Lewis; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan).
To claim 15, the modified invention of Lewis (i.e., Lewis in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the lens is cylindrical in the upper portion such that the first and the second meridian in the upper portion have a flat radius of curvature (see annotated Figure 5 and col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2 of Lewis; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan).
To claim 16, the modified invention of Lewis (i.e., Lewis in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the lens has a substantially constant thickness (see especially Figures 3A-3C and col. 9, line 35 – col. 10, line 14 of Nolan; it is respectfully noted that the term “substantially” is very broad).
To claim 17, the modified invention of Lewis (i.e., Lewis in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus further comprising a goggle frame (14 of Lewis; 110 of Nolan) configured to hold the lens, wherein the goggle frame is configured to be worn by the user (see Figures 4-7 and col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2 of Lewis; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan).
To claim 18, the modified invention of Lewis (i.e., Lewis in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the goggle frame includes a gasket (28 of Lewis; col. 7, lines 1-3 of Nolan) configured to form an opening which encircles both of the user's eyes when worn, and wherein the lens fits over the opening and extends across both of the user's eyes (see Figures 4-7 and col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2 of Lewis; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan).
To claim 19, the modified invention of Lewis (i.e., Lewis in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the goggle frame is configured to be removably coupled to the lens (see Figures 4-7 and col. 5, lines 30-45 of Lewis).
To claim 20, Lewis discloses an apparatus (10) (see Figures 4-7; col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2) comprising:
a frame (14) configured to be worn on a user's face, the frame configured to form an opening which encircles the user's eyes when worn (see Figures 4-7; col. 5, lines 30-45); and
a lens (16,40a,40b) comprising an upper portion and a lower portion, wherein the upper portion is separated from the lower portion by a longitudinal line (annotated Figure 5; col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2; as depicted in annotated Figure 5, the upper portion is the portion of lens 16,40,40b configured to be positioned in front of a main field of view of the user while the lower portion is the portion of lens 16,40a,40b configured to be positioned in a downward field of view of the user; it is respectfully noted that the term “portion” is very broad and merely means “a part of a whole;” see https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/portion), and wherein the lens is configured to be coupled to the frame (see Figures 4-7 and 14; col. 5, lines 30-45), and wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material (col. 7, lines 25-27);
wherein the upper portion has a substantially constant radius of curvature in a vertical direction, such that any two meridians perpendicular to the longitudinal line have a same constant radius of curvature in the upper portion (annotated Figure 5; col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2; substantially constant radius of curvature in upper portion of lens 16,40a,40b due to the absence of prisms 40a,40b),
wherein the lower portion has a variable radius of curvature in the vertical direction such that at least two of the meridians have respective radii of curvature in the lower portion which are different from each other and different from the radius of curvature of the at least two of the meridians in the upper portion (annotated Figure 5; col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2; different radii of curvature in the lower portion due to the varying presence of prisms 40a,40b of annotated Figure 5), and
wherein, when worn by the user, an optical axis of the upper portion is aligned with a forward viewing direction of the user and a downward field of view is viewed through the lower portion (annotated Figure 5; col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2).
As detailed above, it is respectfully asserted that Lewis properly anticipates each of the limitations as recited in currently amended claim 20 including “wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material.” However, in the interest of promoting compact prosecution, to the extent to which Lewis does not properly anticipated the limitation “wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material,” to which Examiner does not concede, it is noted that Nolan teaches an apparatus (100 of Figure 1A) (see Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38) comprising a frame (110) configured to be worn on a user's face, the frame configured to form an opening which encircles the user's eyes when worn (see Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38); and a lens (130) comprising an upper portion and a lower portion, wherein the upper portion is separated from the lower portion by a longitudinal line (annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; as depicted in annotated Figure 1A, the upper portion is the portion of lens 130 configured to be aligned with a forward viewing direction of the user while the lower portion is the portion of lens 130 configured to be aligned with a downward field of view of the user; it is respectfully noted that the term “portion” is very broad and merely means “a part of a whole;” see https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/portion), and wherein the lens is configured to be coupled to the frame (see Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38), and wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material (col. 7, lines 25-27); wherein the upper portion has a substantially constant radius of curvature in a vertical direction, such that any two meridians perpendicular to the longitudinal line have a same constant radius of curvature in the upper portion (annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; same radius of curvature in the upper portion due to the lack of corrective portions 146 in upper portion of lens 130), wherein the lower portion has a variable radius of curvature in the vertical direction such that at least two of the meridians have respective radii of curvature in the lower portion which are different from each other and different from the radius of curvature of the at least two of the meridians in the upper portion (annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; different radii of curvature due to the varying amounts of corrective portions 146 present in the lower portions of different meridians), and wherein, when worn by the user, an optical axis of the upper portion is aligned with a forward viewing direction of the user and a downward field of view is viewed through the lower portion (annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38).
Lewis and Nolan teach analogous inventions in the field of goggles. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the lens of Lewis to be formed of a single, unitary material as taught by Nolan because Nolan teaches that this configuration is known in the art and allows for the lens to formed using an extrusion process (col. 7, lines 25-27) rather than relying on LOCTITE bonding product as disclosed by Lewis. It is further respectfully noted that it has been held that forming an article in one piece which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04).
To claim 23, the modified invention of Lewis (i.e., Lewis in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the lower portion is configured to wrap under the upper the portion and towards the user's cheeks when the frame is worn on the user's face (see annotated Figure 5 and col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2 of Lewis; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan).
To claim 24, the modified invention of Lewis (i.e., Lewis in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the lens extends across both of the user's eyes when the frame is worn on the user's face (see annotated Figure 5 and col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2 of Lewis; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan).
To claim 25, the modified invention of Lewis (i.e., Lewis in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein a greatest degree of curvature of the lens is located outside a main field of view of the user (see annotated Figure 5 and col. 5, line 25 – col. 8, line 2 of Lewis; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lewis in view of Nolan and in further view of USPN 6,009,564 Tackles et al.
To claim 21, the modified invention of Lewis (i.e., Lewis in view of Nolan, as detailed above) teaches an apparatus as recited in claim 20, above.
The modified invention of Lewis does not expressly teach an apparatus further comprising a second lens which has a generally similar shape to the first lens; and a lens bracket configured to hold the first lens and the second lens with a space between, and wherein the lens bracket is configured to be coupled to the frame.
However, Tackles teaches an apparatus (10) (see Figures 1-17; col. 4, line 13 – col. 20, line 37) comprising a second lens (14) which has a generally similar shape to a first lens (12); and a lens bracket configured to hold the first lens and the second lens with a space between, and wherein the lens bracket is configured to be coupled to a frame (see for example Figure 8; col. 4, lines 13-23).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the apparatus of the modified invention of Lewis to include a second lens as taught by Tackles because Tackles teaches that this configuration is known in the art and prevents fogging (col. 20, lines 10-15).
Claims 2-3, 5-13, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over USPN 5,187,502 Howell in view of Nolan.
To claim 2, Howell discloses an apparatus (see Figures 1-5, reproduced below for convenience; col. 3, line 18 – col. 4, line 60) comprising:
a lens (10) configured to be worn by a user (see especially Figures 1 and 5), the lens having an upper portion and a lower portion (as depicted in Figures 1-5, the upper portion is the portion of lens 10 configured to be aligned with a forward viewing direction of the user while the lower portion is the portion of lens 10 configured to be aligned with a downward field of view of the user; it is respectfully noted that the term “portion” is very broad and merely means “a part of a whole;” see https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/portion; it is further respectfully noted that peripheral portions of lens 10 such as “forehead edge 18” and “vertical side edges 22” do not form portions of the claimed “upper portion” of lens 10), wherein the upper portion is separated from the lower portion by a longitudinal line (see Figures 1-5), and wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material (see Figures 1-5; when corrective lenses 56 are attached to the inner surface 14 of lens 10 to form a fully-assembled configuration of lens 10 such as depicted in Figures 1-5, the lens 10 and corrective lenses 56 are together considered to be formed from a single piece of material, see MPEP 2144.04),
wherein the upper portion has a substantially constant radius of curvature in a vertical direction, such that any two meridians perpendicular to the longitudinal line have a same constant radius of curvature in the upper portion (see Figures 1-5; col. 3, lines 28-46; col. 3, line 61 – col. 4, line 60; substantially constant radius of curvature due to lack of corrective lenses 56 in the upper portion),
wherein the lower portion has a variable radius of curvature in the vertical direction such that at least two of the meridians have respective radii of curvature in the lower portion which are different from each other and different from the radius of curvature of the at least two of the meridians in the upper portion (see Figures 1-5; col. 3, lines 28-46; col. 3, line 61 – col. 4, line 60; variable radius of curvature in the lower portion due to the varying presence of corrective lens 56 of lens 10), and
wherein, when worn by the user, an optical axis of the upper portion is aligned with a forward viewing direction of the user and a downward field of view is viewed through the lower portion (see Figures 1-5; col. 3, lines 28-46; col. 3, line 61 – col. 4, line 60).
PNG
media_image3.png
904
568
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
908
559
media_image4.png
Greyscale
As detailed above, it is respectfully asserted that Howell properly anticipates each of the limitations as recited in currently amended claim 2 including “wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material.” However, in the interest of promoting compact prosecution, to the extent to which Howell does not properly anticipated the limitation “wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material,” to which Examiner does not concede, it is noted that Nolan teaches an apparatus (100 of Figure 1A) (see Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38) comprising a lens (130) configured to be worn by a user, the lens having an upper portion and a lower portion, wherein the upper portion is separated from the lower portion by a longitudinal line (annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; as depicted in annotated Figure 1A, the upper portion is the portion of lens 130 configured to be aligned with a forward viewing direction of the user while the lower portion is the portion of lens 130 configured to be aligned with a downward field of view of the user; it is respectfully noted that the term “portion” is very broad and merely means “a part of a whole;” see https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/portion) and wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material (col. 7, lines 25-27), wherein the upper portion has a substantially constant radius of curvature in a vertical direction, such that any two meridians perpendicular to the longitudinal line have a same constant radius of curvature in the upper portion (see annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; substantially constant radius of curvature in upper portion of lens 130 due to the absence of corrective portions 146), wherein the lower portion has a variable radius of curvature in the vertical direction such that at least two of the meridians have respective radii of curvature in the lower portion which are different from each other and different from the radius of curvature of the at least two of the meridians in the upper portion (see annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; different radii of curvature in the example meridians depicted in Figure 1A due to the differing amounts of corrective portion 146 in each meridians), and wherein, when worn by the user, an optical axis of the upper portion is aligned with a forward viewing direction of the user and a downward field of view is viewed through the lower portion (see annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38).
Howell and Nolan teach analogous inventions in the field of goggles. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the lens of Howell to be formed of a single, unitary material as taught by Nolan because Nolan teaches that this configuration is known in the art and allows for the lens to formed using an extrusion process (col. 7, lines 25-27) rather than relying on the double-headed pins as disclosed by Howell. It is further respectfully noted that it has been held that forming an article in one piece which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04).
To claim 3, the modified invention of Howell (i.e., Howell in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the lens is a goggle lens (see Figure 2 and col. 2, lines 24-29 of Howell; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan).
To claim 5, the modified invention of Howell (i.e., Howell in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein for each of the at least two meridians the greatest degree of curvature is located in the lower portion (see Figures 1-5, col. 3, lines 28-46, and col. 3, line 61 – col. 4, line 60 of Howell; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan).
To claim 6, the modified invention of Howell (i.e., Howell in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the lens has a substantially constant thickness (see Figures 1-5, col. 3, lines 28-46, and col. 3, line 61 – col. 4, line 60 of Howell; see especially Figures 3A-3C and col. 9, line 35 – col. 10, line 14 of Nolan; it is respectfully noted that the term “substantially” is very broad).
To claim 7, the modified invention of Howell (i.e., Howell in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the upper portion is a cylindrical or spherical lens and the lower portion is neither a cylindrical or spherical lens (see annotated Figure 1A and col. 7, line 37 – col. 8, line 12 of Nolan).
To claim 8, the modified invention of Howell (i.e., Howell in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the lens is a unitary lens configured to extend across both of the user's eyes when worn (see Figures 1-5, col. 3, lines 28-46, and col. 3, line 61 – col. 4, line 60 of Howell; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan).
To claim 9, the modified invention of Howell (i.e., Howell in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the lower portion is shaped to limit distortion to the peripheral region of the lens (see Figures 1-5, col. 3, lines 28-46, and col. 3, line 61 – col. 4, line 60 of Howell; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan).
To claim 10, the modified invention of Howell (i.e., Howell in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the lower portion has a complex curvature which is not definable by a standard curve form (see Figures 1-5, col. 3, lines 28-46, and col. 3, line 61 – col. 4, line 60 of Howell; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan).
To claim 11, Howell discloses an apparatus (see Figures 1-5; col. 3, line 18 – col. 4, line 60) comprising:
a lens (10) configured to be worn by a user (see especially Figures 1 and 5), the lens having an upper portion and a lower portion separated by a longitudinal line (as depicted in Figures 1-5, the upper portion is the portion of lens 10 configured to be positioned in front of a main field of view of the user while the lower portion is the portion of lens 10 configured to be positioned in a downward field of view of the user; it is respectfully noted that the term “portion” is very broad and merely means “a part of a whole;” see https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/portion; it is further respectfully noted that peripheral portions of lens 10 such as “forehead edge 18” and “vertical side edges 22” do not form portions of the claimed “upper portion” of lens 10), wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material (see Figures 1-5; when corrective lenses 56 are attached to the inner surface 14 of lens 10 to form a fully-assembled configuration of lens 10 such as depicted in Figures 1-5, the lens 10 and corrective lenses 56 are together considered to be formed from a single piece of material, see MPEP 2144.04), wherein when worn by the user the upper portion is positioned in front of a main field of view of the user and the lower portion is positioned in a downward field of view of the user and wherein the upper portion has a substantially constant radius of curvature in a vertical direction, such that any two meridians perpendicular to the longitudinal line have a same constant radius of curvature in the upper portion (see Figures 1-5; col. 3, lines 28-46; col. 3, line 61 – col. 4, line 60; substantially constant radius of curvature due to the lack of corrective lenses 56 in the upper portion),
wherein a first meridian extending along the lens perpendicular to the longitudinal line has a radius of curvature which is constant along the first meridian in the upper portion and varies along the first meridian in the lower portion (see Figures 1-5; col. 3, lines 28-46; col. 3, line 61 – col. 4, line 60; varied radius of curvature of the first meridian in the lower portion due to the presence of corrective lens 56 of lens 10),
wherein a second meridian extending along the lens perpendicular to the longitudinal line has a radius of curvature which is constant along the second meridian in the upper portion and varies along the second meridian in the lower portion (see Figures 1-5; col. 3, lines 28-46; col. 3, line 61 – col. 4, line 60; varied radius of curvature of the second meridian in the lower portion due to the presence of corrective lens 56 of lens 10), and
wherein the radius of curvature of the first meridian varies along the lower portion in a manner different to how the radius of curvature of the second meridian varies along the lower portion (see Figures 1-5; col. 3, lines 28-46; col. 3, line 61 – col. 4, line 60).
As detailed above, it is respectfully asserted that Howell properly anticipates each of the limitations as recited in currently amended claim 11 including “wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material.” However, in the interest of promoting compact prosecution, to the extent to which Howell does not properly anticipated the limitation “wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material,” to which Examiner does not concede, it is noted that Nolan teaches an apparatus (100 of Figure 1A) (see Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38) comprising a lens (130) configured to be worn by a user, the lens having an upper portion and a lower portion separated by a longitudinal line (annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; as depicted in annotated Figure 1A, the upper portion is the portion of lens 130 configured to be aligned with a forward viewing direction of the user while the lower portion is the portion of lens 130 configured to be aligned with a downward field of view of the user; it is respectfully noted that the term “portion” is very broad and merely means “a part of a whole;” see https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/portion), wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material (col. 7, lines 25-27), wherein when worn by the user the upper portion is positioned in front of a main field of view of the user and the lower portion is positioned in a downward field of view of the user and wherein the upper portion has a substantially constant radius of curvature in a vertical direction, such that any two meridians perpendicular to the longitudinal line have a same constant radius of curvature in the upper portion (see annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; substantially constant radius of curvature in upper portion of lens 130 due to the absence of corrective portions 146), wherein a first meridian extending along the lens perpendicular to the longitudinal line has a radius of curvature which is constant along the first meridian in the upper portion and varies along the first meridian in the lower portion (see annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; constant radius of curvature in upper portion due to the lack of corrective portions 146 while variable radius of curvature in the lower portion due to varying amounts of corrective portions 146 in the lower portion), wherein a second meridian extending along the lens perpendicular to the longitudinal line has a radius of curvature which is constant along the second meridian in the upper portion and varies along the second meridian in the lower portion (see annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; constant radius of curvature in upper portion due to the lack of corrective portions 146 while variable radius of curvature in the lower portion due to varying amounts of corrective portions 146 in the lower portion), and wherein the radius of curvature of the first meridian varies along the lower portion in a manner different to how the radius of curvature of the second meridian varies along the lower portion (see annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; radius of curvature of first and second meridians in the lower portions differs due to differing amounts of corrective portion 146 being located along first and second meridians in the lower portion).
Howell and Nolan teach analogous inventions in the field of goggles. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the lens of Howell to be formed of a single, unitary material as taught by Nolan because Nolan teaches that this configuration is known in the art and allows for the lens to formed using an extrusion process (col. 7, lines 25-27) rather than relying on the double-headed pins as disclosed by Howell. It is further respectfully noted that it has been held that forming an article in one piece which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04).
To claim 12, the modified invention of Howell (i.e., Howell in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein when worn by the user the lower portion of the lens curves to be closer to the user's face than the upper portion (see Figures 1-5, col. 3, lines 28-46, and col. 3, line 61 – col. 4, line 60 of Howell; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan).
To claim 13, the modified invention of Howell (i.e., Howell in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the upper portion has a substantially constant longitudinal radius of curvature such that each longitude in the upper portion has a same radius of curvature (see Figures 1-5, col. 3, lines 28-46, and col. 3, line 61 – col. 4, line 60 of Howell; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan).
To claim 15, the modified invention of Howell (i.e., Howell in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the lens is cylindrical in the upper portion such that the first and the second meridian in the upper portion have a flat radius of curvature (see Figures 1-5, col. 3, lines 28-46, and col. 3, line 61 – col. 4, line 60 of Howell; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan).
To claim 16, the modified invention of Howell (i.e., Howell in view of Nolan, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the lens has a substantially constant thickness (see Figures 1-5, col. 3, lines 28-46, and col. 3, line 61 – col. 4, line 60 of Howell; see especially Figures 3A-3C and col. 9, line 35 – col. 10, line 14 of Nolan; it is respectfully noted that the term “substantially” is very broad).
Claim 4, 17-20, and 23-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Howell in view of Nolan and in further view of USPN 10,687,981 Calilung et al.
To claim 4, Howell further discloses an apparatus further comprising a flexible gasket (20 of Howell) (see Figures 2-4 and col. 3, lines 28-46 of Howell).
Howell does not expressly disclose an apparatus further comprising a goggle frame comprising a flexible gasket that defines an opening configured to encircle the user's eyes when the goggle frame is worn by the user, wherein the lens is coupled to the goggle frame.
However, Calilung teaches an apparatus (1000) (see Figures 10A-12B; col. 17, line 50 – col. 20, line 15) comprising a goggle frame (1004) comprising a flexible gasket (1005) that defines an opening configured to encircle the user's eyes when the goggle frame is worn by the user, wherein the lens is coupled to the goggle frame (see Figures 10A-10D; col. 17, line 50 – col. 18, line 42).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the apparatus of the modified invention of Howell to include a goggle frame and flexible gasket configured to encircle the user’s eyes as taught by Calilung because Calilung teaches that this configuration is known in the art. It would further have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the goggle configuration as depicted in Figures 10A-10D of Calilung would provide additional protection to the eyes of the user from, for example, liquid splashes compared to the goggle configuration as depicted in Figure 2 of Howell.
To claim 17, Howell further discloses an apparatus that is a goggle configuration (see Figure 2; col. 2, lines 24-29).
Howell does not expressly disclose an apparatus further comprising a goggle frame configured to hold the lens, wherein the goggle frame is configured to be worn by the user.
However, Calilung teaches an apparatus (1000) (see Figures 10A-12B; col. 17, line 50 – col. 20, line 15) comprising a goggle frame (1004) configured to hold the lens, wherein the goggle frame is configured to be worn by the user (see Figures 10A-10D; col. 17, line 50 – col. 18, line 42).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the apparatus of the modified invention of Howell to include a goggle frame as taught by Calilung because Calilung teaches that this configuration is known in the art. It would further have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the goggle configuration as depicted in Figures 10A-10D of Calilung would provide additional protection to the eyes of the user from, for example, liquid splashes compared to the goggle configuration as depicted in Figure 2 of Howell.
To claim 18, the modified invention of Howell (i.e., Howell in view of Nolan and Calilung, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the goggle frame includes a gasket (1005 of Calilung) configured to form an opening which encircles both of the user's eyes when worn, and wherein the lens fits over the opening and extends across both of the user's eyes (see Figures 10A-10D and col. 17, line 50 – col. 18, line 42 of Calilung).
To claim 19, the modified invention of Howell (i.e., Howell in view of Nolan and Calilung, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the goggle frame is configured to be removably coupled to the lens (see Figures 11A-12B and col. 18, lines 43-56 of Calilung).
To claim 20, Howell discloses an apparatus (see Figures 1-5; col. 3, line 18 – col. 4, line 60) comprising:
a lens (10) comprising an upper portion and a lower portion (as depicted in Figures 1-5, the upper portion is the portion of lens 10 configured to be aligned with a forward viewing direction of the user while the lower portion is the portion of lens 10 configured to be aligned with a downward field of view of the user; it is respectfully noted that the term “portion” is very broad and merely means “a part of a whole;” see https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/portion; it is further respectfully noted that peripheral portions of lens 10 such as “forehead edge 18” and “vertical side edges 22” do not form portions of the claimed “upper portion” of lens 10), wherein the upper portion is separated from the lower portion by a longitudinal line (see Figures 1-5), wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material (see Figures 1-5; when corrective lenses 56 are attached to the inner surface 14 of lens 10 to form a fully-assembled configuration of lens 10 such as depicted in Figures 1-5, the lens 10 and corrective lenses 56 are together considered to be formed from a single piece of material, see MPEP 2144.04);
wherein the upper portion has a substantially constant radius of curvature in a vertical direction, such that any two meridians perpendicular to the longitudinal line have a same constant radius of curvature in the upper portion (see Figures 1-5; col. 3, lines 28-46; col. 3, line 61 – col. 4, line 60; same constant radius of curvature in the upper portion due to the lack of corrective lenses 56),
wherein the lower portion has a variable radius of curvature in the vertical direction such that at least two of the meridians have respective radii of curvature in the lower portion which are different from each other and different from the radius of curvature of the at least two of the meridians in the upper portion (see Figures 1-5; col. 3, lines 28-46; col. 3, line 61 – col. 4, line 60; different radii of curvature in the lower portion due to the presence of corrective lenses 56 of lens 10), and
wherein, when worn by the user, an optical axis of the upper portion is aligned with a forward viewing direction of the user and a downward field of view is viewed through the lower portion (see Figures 1-5; col. 3, lines 28-46; col. 3, line 61 – col. 4, line 60).
As detailed above, it is respectfully asserted that Howell properly anticipates each of the limitations as recited in currently amended claim 20 including “wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material.” However, in the interest of promoting compact prosecution, to the extent to which Howell does not properly anticipated the limitation “wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material,” to which Examiner does not concede, it is noted that Nolan teaches an apparatus (100 of Figure 1A) (see Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38) comprising a frame (110) configured to be worn on a user's face, the frame configured to form an opening which encircles the user's eyes when worn (see Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38); and a lens (130) comprising an upper portion and a lower portion, wherein the upper portion is separated from the lower portion by a longitudinal line (annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; as depicted in annotated Figure 1A, the upper portion is the portion of lens 130 configured to be aligned with a forward viewing direction of the user while the lower portion is the portion of lens 130 configured to be aligned with a downward field of view of the user; it is respectfully noted that the term “portion” is very broad and merely means “a part of a whole;” see https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/portion), and wherein the lens is configured to be coupled to the frame (see Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38), and wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material (col. 7, lines 25-27); wherein the upper portion has a substantially constant radius of curvature in a vertical direction, such that any two meridians perpendicular to the longitudinal line have a same constant radius of curvature in the upper portion (annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; same radius of curvature in the upper portion due to the lack of corrective portions 146 in upper portion of lens 130), wherein the lower portion has a variable radius of curvature in the vertical direction such that at least two of the meridians have respective radii of curvature in the lower portion which are different from each other and different from the radius of curvature of the at least two of the meridians in the upper portion (annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; different radii of curvature due to the differing amounts of corrective portions 146 present in the lower portions of different meridians), and wherein, when worn by the user, an optical axis of the upper portion is aligned with a forward viewing direction of the user and a downward field of view is viewed through the lower portion (annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38).
Howell and Nolan teach analogous inventions in the field of goggles. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the lens of Howell to be formed of a single, unitary material as taught by Nolan because Nolan teaches that this configuration is known in the art and allows for the lens to formed using an extrusion process (col. 7, lines 25-27) rather than relying on the double-headed pins as disclosed by Howell. It is further respectfully noted that it has been held that forming an article in one piece which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04).
Howell does not expressly disclose an apparatus further comprising a goggle frame configured to hold the lens, wherein the goggle frame is configured to be worn by the user.
However, Calilung teaches an apparatus (1000) (see Figures 10A-12B; col. 17, line 50 – col. 20, line 15) comprising a goggle frame (1004) configured to hold the lens, wherein the goggle frame is configured to be worn by the user (see Figures 10A-10D; col. 17, line 50 – col. 18, line 42).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the apparatus of the modified invention of Howell to include a goggle frame as taught by Calilung because Calilung teaches that this configuration is known in the art. It would further have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the goggle configuration as depicted in Figures 10A-10D of Calilung would provide additional protection to the eyes of the user from, for example, liquid splashes compared to the goggle configuration as depicted in Figure 2 of Howell.
To claim 23, the modified invention of Howell (i.e., Howell in view of Nolan and Calilung, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the lower portion is configured to wrap under the upper the portion and towards the user's cheeks when the frame is worn on the user's face (see Figures 1-5 and col. 3, lines 28-46; col. 3, line 61 – col. 4, line 60 of Howell; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan; see Figures 10A-10D and col. 17, line 50 – col. 18, line 42 of Calilung).
To claim 24, the modified invention of Howell (i.e., Howell in view of Nolan and Calilung, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein the lens extends across both of the user's eyes when the frame is worn on the user's face (see Figures 1-5 and col. 3, lines 28-46; col. 3, line 61 – col. 4, line 60 of Howell; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan; see Figures 10A-10D and col. 17, line 50 – col. 18, line 42 of Calilung).
To claim 25, the modified invention of Howell (i.e., Howell in view of Nolan and Calilung, as detailed above) further teaches an apparatus wherein a greatest degree of curvature of the lens is located outside a main field of view of the user (see Figures 1-5 and col. 3, lines 28-46; col. 3, line 61 – col. 4, line 60 of Howell; see annotated Figure 1A and col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38 of Nolan; see Figures 10A-10D and col. 17, line 50 – col. 18, line 42 of Calilung).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over USPN Howell in view of Nolan, Calilung, and Tackles.
To claim 21, the modified invention of Howell (i.e., Howell in view of Nolan and Calilung, as detailed above) teaches an apparatus as recited in claim 20, above.
The modified invention of Howell does not expressly teach an apparatus further comprising a second lens which has a generally similar shape to the first lens; and a lens bracket configured to hold the first lens and the second lens with a space between, and wherein the lens bracket is configured to be coupled to the frame.
However, Tackles teaches an apparatus (10) (see Figures 1-17; col. 4, line 13 – col. 20, line 37) comprising a second lens (14) which has a generally similar shape to a first lens (12); and a lens bracket configured to hold the first lens and the second lens with a space between, and wherein the lens bracket is configured to be coupled to a frame (see for example Figure 8; col. 4, lines 13-23).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the apparatus of the modified invention of Howell to include a second lens as taught by Tackles because Tackles teaches that this configuration is known in the art and prevents fogging (col. 20, lines 10-15).
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.
ALTERNATE REJECTION: Claims 2, 11, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nolan.
To claim 2, Nolan discloses an apparatus (100 of Figure 1A) (see Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38) comprising:
a lens (130) configured to be worn by a user, the lens having an upper portion and a lower portion, wherein the upper portion is separated from the lower portion by a longitudinal line (annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; as depicted in annotated Figure 1A, the upper portion is the portion of lens 130 configured to be aligned with a forward viewing direction of the user while the lower portion is the portion of lens 130 configured to be aligned with a downward field of view of the user; it is respectfully noted that the term “portion” is very broad and merely means “a part of a whole;” see https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/portion) and wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material (col. 7, lines 25-27),
wherein the upper portion has a substantially constant radius of curvature in a vertical direction, such that any two meridians perpendicular to the longitudinal line have a same constant radius of curvature in the upper portion (see annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; substantially constant radius of curvature in upper portion of lens 130 due to the absence of corrective portions 146),
wherein the lower portion has a variable radius of curvature in the vertical direction such that at least two of the meridians have respective radii of curvature in the lower portion which are different from each other and different from the radius of curvature of the at least two of the meridians in the upper portion (see annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; different radii of curvature in the example meridians depicted in Figure 1A due to the differing amounts of corrective portion 146 in the each meridian), and
wherein, when worn by the user, an optical axis of the upper portion is aligned with a forward viewing direction of the user and a downward field of view is viewed through the lower portion (see annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38).
To claim 11, Nolan discloses an apparatus (100 of Figure 1A) (see Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38) comprising:
a lens (130) configured to be worn by a user, the lens having an upper portion and a lower portion separated by a longitudinal line (annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; as depicted in annotated Figure 1A, the upper portion is the portion of lens 130 configured to be aligned with a forward viewing direction of the user while the lower portion is the portion of lens 130 configured to be aligned with a downward field of view of the user; it is respectfully noted that the term “portion” is very broad and merely means “a part of a whole;” see https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/portion), wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material (col. 7, lines 25-27), wherein when worn by the user the upper portion is positioned in front of a main field of view of the user and the lower portion is positioned in a downward field of view of the user and wherein the upper portion has a substantially constant radius of curvature in a vertical direction, such that any two meridians perpendicular to the longitudinal line have a same constant radius of curvature in the upper portion (see annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; substantially constant radius of curvature in upper portion of lens 130 due to the absence of corrective portions 146),
wherein a first meridian extending along the lens perpendicular to the longitudinal line has a radius of curvature which is constant along the first meridian in the upper portion and varies along the first meridian in the lower portion (see annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; constant radius of curvature in upper portion due to the lack of corrective portions 146 while variable radius of curvature in the lower portion due to varying amounts of corrective portions 146 in the lower portion),
wherein a second meridian extending along the lens perpendicular to the longitudinal line has a radius of curvature which is constant along the second meridian in the upper portion and varies along the second meridian in the lower portion (see annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; constant radius of curvature in upper portion due to the lack of corrective portions 146 while variable radius of curvature in the lower portion due to varying amounts of corrective portions 146 in the lower portion), and
wherein the radius of curvature of the first meridian varies along the lower portion in a manner different to how the radius of curvature of the second meridian varies along the lower portion (see annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; radius of curvature of first and second meridians in the lower portions differs due to differing amounts of corrective portion 146 being located along first and second meridians in the lower portion).
To claim 20, Nolan discloses an apparatus (100 of Figure 1A) (see Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38) comprising:
a frame (110) configured to be worn on a user's face, the frame configured to form an opening which encircles the user's eyes when worn (see Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38); and
a lens (130) comprising an upper portion and a lower portion, wherein the upper portion is separated from the lower portion by a longitudinal line (annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; as depicted in annotated Figure 1A, the upper portion is the portion of lens 130 configured to be aligned with a forward viewing direction of the user while the lower portion is the portion of lens 130 configured to be aligned with a downward field of view of the user; it is respectfully noted that the term “portion” is very broad and merely means “a part of a whole;” see https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/portion), and wherein the lens is configured to be coupled to the frame (see Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38), and wherein the lens is formed from a single piece of material (col. 7, lines 25-27);
wherein the upper portion has a substantially constant radius of curvature in a vertical direction, such that any two meridians perpendicular to the longitudinal line have a same constant radius of curvature in the upper portion (annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; same radius of curvature in the upper portion due to the lack of corrective portions 146 in upper portion of lens 130),
wherein the lower portion has a variable radius of curvature in the vertical direction such that at least two of the meridians have respective radii of curvature in the lower portion which are different from each other and different from the radius of curvature of the at least two of the meridians in the upper portion (annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38; different radii of curvature due to the differing amounts of corrective portions 146 present in the lower portions of different meridians), and
wherein, when worn by the user, an optical axis of the upper portion is aligned with a forward viewing direction of the user and a downward field of view is viewed through the lower portion (annotated Figure 1A; col. 6, line 45 – col. 8, line 38).
This ALTERNATE REJECTION over Nolan under 35 USC 102 has been limited to independent claims 1, 11, and 20 in the interest of brevity. It is respectfully noted however that this ALTERNATE REJECTION over Nolan under 35 USC 102 may be relied upon to reject additional claim(s) in future office action(s).
Response to Arguments
In view of Applicant’s amendment, the search has been updated and new prior art has been identified and applied. Applicant’s arguments, which appear to be drawn only to the newly amended limitations and previously presented rejections, have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
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 GRIFFIN HALL whose telephone number is (571)270-0546. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 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, Alissa Tompkins can be reached at (571) 272-3425. 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.
/F Griffin Hall/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
