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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 8 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Baker et al. (PGPUB 20160109728).
Regarding claim 1, Baker discloses a laser-level glasses device comprising:
a glasses frame (110);
a lens (120);
a housing comprised of a laser (130); and
a battery positioned in the housing (140).
Regarding claim 2, Baker discloses wherein the laser produces a one-axis laser line or a two-axis laser line (101, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 3, Baker discloses wherein the laser produces a vertical laser line, a horizontal laser line, or a perpendicular laser line (101, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 4, Baker discloses wherein the glasses frame is comprised of a frame arm (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 8, Baker discloses further comprised of a nosepiece (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 19, Baker discloses a method of using a laser-level glasses device, the method comprising the following steps:
providing a laser-level glasses device comprised of a frame comprised of a laser, a battery, a button, and a lens (130, 140, 141, 120);
placing the laser-level glasses device on a head of a user (Abst);
turning on the laser via the button ([0011]);
pressing the button such that the laser produces a laser line (101); and
using the laser line as a reference point ([0010]).
Regarding claim 20, Bake discloses wherein the laser produces a vertical laser line, a horizontal laser line, or a perpendicular laser line (Fig. 2).
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 5-7 and 9-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baker in view of Levy (PGPUB 20100045928).
Regarding claim 5, Baker does not disclose further comprising of a safety cord.
However, Levy teaches an electronic eyeglass device comprising a safety cord (Figs. 7, 11 where the cable from the earbuds, 86, fix the lens frames to the wearer’s ears).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine Baker and Levy such that the frames included a safety cord motivated by reducing the risk of dropping the frames.
Regarding claim 6, Baker does not disclose wherein the lens is comprised of an impact-resistant lens.
However, Levy teaches an electronic eyeglass device comprising impact resistant lenses ([0080]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine Baker and Levy such that the lenses were impact resistant motivated by reducing the risk of lens damage.
Regarding claim 7, Baker does not disclose wherein the lens is comprised of a prescription lens.
However, Levy teaches an electronic eyeglass device comprising prescription lenses ([0080]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine Baker and Levy such that the lenses prescription motivated by improving wearer vision.
Regarding claim 9, Baker does not disclose wherein the battery is removable from the housing.
However, Levy teaches an electronic eyeglass device comprising a removable battery ([0089]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine Baker and Levy such that the battery was removable motivated by improving continued use through battery exchange.
Regarding claim 10, Baker discloses a laser-level glasses device comprising:
a glasses frame (110);
a lens (120);
a housing comprised of an auto-leveling laser (130); and
a battery positioned in the housing (140).
Baker does not disclose that the battery comprises a charging port.
However, Levy teaches an electronic eyeglass device comprising a charging port for a battery ([00859]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine Baker and Levy such that the battery comprised a charging port motivated by improving device longevity.
Regarding claim 11, modified Baker discloses wherein the laser produces a one-axis laser line or a two-axis laser line (101, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 12, modified Baker discloses wherein the laser produces a vertical laser line, a horizontal laser line, or a perpendicular laser line (101, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 13, modified Baker discloses wherein the glasses frame is comprised of a frame arm (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 14, modified Baker discloses further comprising of a safety cord (Figs. 7, 11 of Levy where the cable from the earbuds, 86, fix the lens frames to the wearer’s ears).
Regarding claim 15, modified Baker discloses wherein the lens is comprised of an impact-resistant lens ([0080]).
Regarding claim 16, modified Baker discloses wherein the lens is comprised of a prescription lens ([0080]).
Regarding claim 17, Baker discloses further comprised of a nosepiece (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 18, modified Baker discloses wherein the battery is removable from the housing ([0089]).
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRAVIS S FISSEL whose telephone number is (313)446-6573. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-5PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Stephone Allen can be reached on (571) 272-2434. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TRAVIS S FISSEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872