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 .
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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 16 January 2024 fails to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609 because the box identifying that a full translation into the English language is checked for each foreign patent document, but none of the foreign patent documents are translated into the English language. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered as to the merits. An English language translation of the Abstract is not considered an English translation meriting the checking of the English language translation box. While footnote 5 identifies that “Applicant is to place a check mark here if English language translation is attached”, this is with respect to the document itself. The Abstract is considered a concise explanation of relevance of the document which is distinctly different from a translation. See at least MPEP 609.04(a) Content Requirements for an Information Disclosure Statement, section (II) Legible Copies, which recites
“37 CFR 1.98(a)(3)(ii) states that if a written English language translation of a non-English language document, or portion thereof, is within the possession, custody or control of, or is readily available to any individual designated in 37 CFR 1.56(c), a copy of the translation shall accompany the statement. Translations are not required to be filed unless they have been reduced to writing and are actually translations of what is contained in the non-English language information. If no translation is submitted, the examiner will consider the information in view of the concise explanation and insofar as it is understood on its face, e.g., drawings, chemical formulas, English language abstracts, in the same manner that non-English language information in Office search files is considered by examiners in conducting searches.”
See also MPEP 609.04(a)(III) Concise Explanation of Relevance for Non-English Language Information which also at least more explicitly recites that “[e]ach information disclosure statement must further include a concise explanation of the relevance, as it is presently understood by the individual designated in 37 CFR 1.56(c) most knowledgeable about the content of the information listed that is not in the English language. The concise explanation may be either separate from the specification or part of the specification. If the concise explanation is part of the specification, the IDS listing should include the page(s) or line(s) numbers where the concise explanation is located in the specification” and that “[s]ubmission of an English language abstract of a reference, such as one generated by a foreign patent office, may fulfill the requirement for a concise explanation.” Applicant is advised that the date of any re-submission of any item of information contained in this information disclosure statement or the submission of any missing element(s) will be the date of submission for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements based on the time of filing the statement, including all certification requirements for statements under 37 CFR 1.97(e). See MPEP § 609.05(a).
The information disclosure statement filed 16 January 2024 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered. Specifically, a copy of NPL reference titled “LED GLASSES WITH MOTION ACTIVIATION, WALMART” is not filed in this application. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Specification
A substitute specification excluding the claims is required pursuant to 37 CFR 1.125(a) because the specification is improperly formatted including at least missing paragraph numbers.
A substitute specification must not contain new matter. The substitute specification must be submitted with markings showing all the changes relative to the immediate prior version of the specification of record. The text of any added subject matter must be shown by underlining the added text. The text of any deleted matter must be shown by strike-through except that double brackets placed before and after the deleted characters may be used to show deletion of five or fewer consecutive characters. The text of any deleted subject matter must be shown by being placed within double brackets if strike-through cannot be easily perceived. An accompanying clean version (without markings) and a statement that the substitute specification contains no new matter must also be supplied. Numbering the paragraphs of the specification of record is not considered a change that must be shown.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The term “attentive” is misspelled in line 3 of pg. 4.
The last sentence of the paragraph ending on line 7 of pg. 4 is missing a period.
The term “positive” is misspelled in line 1 of pg. 3 and line 8 of pg. 4.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoffmann (US 2024/0074019) in view of Nell (US 2014/0309050).
Regarding claims 1 and 6, (claim 1) Hoffmann teaches motion sensitive device (Hoffmann Abstract, “wearable or portable device may include motion-based lighting control system”; para. 35, “Aspects of motion-tracking light control systems described herein may be embodied as a computer method, computer system, or computer program product”), comprising:
a structure (Hoffmann, Fig. 1, article 10, sub-article 16; para. 48, “article 10: any structure, object, or device … configured to be worn … article 10 including sub-article 16”; para. 93, “A wearable or portable device”);
a motion sensor located along the structure (Hoffmann, Fig. 1, sensor(s) 20 illustrated to include at least an accelerometer and a gyroscope which individually and combined sense motion; Fig. 12, measuring a movement or an orientation of a wearable or portable object 1202; para. 132, “Step 1202 of method 1200 includes measuring a movement … of a wearable object … using a motion sensor”; para. 34, “sensed motion”; para. 52, “Motion sensor suite 20 may include any suitable sensor or sensors configured to convert sensed motion or orientation of article 10 (or sub-article 16) into an electrical signal”; para. 94, “a motion sensor configured to sense movement of the wearable or portable device when worn or carried”; para. 0107 and 0145, “wherein the motion sensor comprises a gyroscope, and the received information comprises a rate of angular rotation”; para. 129, “other motion sensing devices may be utilized in addition to these devices and/or instead of these devices. For example, suitable motion sensors may include magnetometers, six-axis inertial measurement units (IMUs), and nine-axis absolute orientation sensors (i.e., a packaged accelerometer/gyroscope/magnetometer”); and
LEDs located along the structure (Hoffmann, Fig. 1, lighting array 12, sub-article 16; para. 50, “lighting array 12 is disposed on, coupled to, or incorporated into a sub-article 16, also referred to as a portion or component of article 10”; para. 95, “a plurality of light emitting diode (LED) lamps disposed on the wearable or portable device”), wherein the LEDs are illuminated when motion is detected by the motion sensor (Hoffmann, Fig. 12, automatically controlling one or more light sources of the wearable object, based on the measured movement or orientation 1204; para. 133, “Step 1204 of method 1200 includes automatically controlling one or a plurality of light sources (e.g., light emitting diode (LED) lamps) of (e.g., disposed on or in) the wearable object, based on the measured movement or orientation. In some examples, the light sources are LED lamps, and controlling the LED lamps includes changing a respective brightness of each of the LED lamps in response to a movement”; para. 34, “based on sensed motion, state and/or intensity of light source is changed, e.g., LED bulbs activated”; para. 96, “processing logic configured to receive information from the motion sensor and to control the plurality of LED lamps based on the received information”; para. 146, “changing a state of the LED lamps based on the measured rate of rotation”).
(claim 6) Hoffmann teaches a method of utilizing motion sensitive device (Hoffmann, Abstract, “wearable or portable device may include motion-based lighting control system”; para.35, “Aspects of motion-tracking light control systems described herein may be embodied as a computer method, computer system, or computer program product”), comprising:
sensing motion of motion sensitive device through a motion sensor located along a structure of the motion sensitive device (Hoffmann, Fig. 1, article 10, sub-article 16; para. 48, “article 10: any structure, object, or device … configured to be worn … article 10 including sub-article 16”; para. 93, “A wearable or portable device; Fig. 1, sensor(s) 20 illustrated to include at least an accelerometer and a gyroscope which individually and combined sense motion; Fig. 12, measuring a movement or an orientation of a wearable or portable object 1202; para. 132, “Step 1202 of method 1200 includes measuring a movement … of a wearable object … using a motion sensor; para. 34, “sensed motion”; para. 52, “Motion sensor suite 20 may include any suitable sensor or sensors configured to convert sensed motion or orientation of article 10 (or sub-article 16) into an electrical signal”; para. 94, “a motion sensor configured to sense movement of the wearable or portable device when worn or carried”; para. 107 and 145, “wherein the motion sensor comprises a gyroscope, and the received information comprises a rate of angular rotation”; para. 129, “other motion sensing devices may be utilized in addition to these devices and/or instead of these devices. For example, suitable motion sensors may include magnetometers, six-axis inertial measurement units (IMUs), and nine-axis absolute orientation sensors (i.e., a packaged accelerometer/gyroscope/magnetometer)”); and
illuminating red LEDs located along the structure of the motion sensitive device (Hoffmann, Fig. 1, sub-article 16; para. 50, “lighting array 12 is disposed on, coupled to, or incorporated into a sub-article 16, also referred to as a portion or component of article 10”; para. 95, “a plurality of light emitting diode (LED) lamps disposed on the wearable or portable device, including a red LED or at least one RGB LED comprising a red LED (e.g., para. 34 and 99)”) when motion is sensed by the motion sensor (Hoffmann, Fig. 12, automatically controlling one or more light sources of the wearable object, based on the measured movement or orientation 1204; para. 133, “Step 1204 of method 1200 includes automatically controlling one or a plurality of light sources (e.g., light emitting diode (LED) lamps) of (e.g., disposed on or in) the wearable object, based on the measured movement or orientation. In some examples, the light sources are LED lamps, and controlling the LED lamps includes changing a respective brightness of each of the LED lamps in response to a movement”; para. 34, “based on sensed motion, state and/or intensity of light source is changed, e.g., LED bulbs activated”; para. 96, “processing logic configured to receive information from the motion sensor and to control the plurality of LED lamps based on the received information”; para. 146, “changing a state of the LED lamps based on the measured rate of rotation”; Additionally, Examiner notes that the specific color of the LED claimed has no mechanical function to the claimed device as the color, but instead is merely a matter of ornamentation because the device functions the same with any color (e.g., when motion is detected, the LED emits a light via one of the plurality of RGB LED lamps), and thus the specific color claimed does not patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. See In re Seid, 161 F.2d 229, 73 USPQ 431 (CCPA 1947)).
Regarding claims 1 and 6, although Hoffman teaches the motion sensitive device includes a structure comprising a wearable device intended to be worn on a user’s head (e.g., para. 48, “any structure, object, or device having a lighting component and configured to be worn, such as a hat”), Hoffmann does not expressly disclose the device comprises eyeglasses including a frame, and the motion sensor and LEDs located along the frame.
However, in a related art, Nell teaches a known structure of a wearable motion sensitive device for monitoring the motion of a user’s head comprising eyeglasses with a frame and a motion sensor and LEDs located along the frame (Nell, Fig. 5, sunglasses frame 102; para. 27-28 describe the motion sensor and LEDS located along the frame.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a known motion sensitive head-mounted device for monitoring a user’s head motion, as taught by Nell, into the motion-based wearable or portable device of Hoffmann, in order to utilize a known wearable structure, object, or device having a motion sensitive lighting component and configured to be worn on the user’s head, thereby applying a known technique to a known device or method in the same way.
Regarding claim 2, Hoffmann in view of Nell teaches the motion sensitive eyeglasses as recited in claim 1, wherein the LEDs include red LEDs, yellow LEDs and green LEDs (Hoffmann, para. 34, “In RGB (i.e., Red, Green, and Blue) LED lamps, varying the voltage in different ratios to each of the three primary colors results in a myriad of controllable colors (typically over 16 million possible hues). Because combining red and green at equal intensity produces yellow, the device inherently includes yellow LEDs”; para. 87, “alternatively, a plurality of single-colored LED lamps may be used”; para. 99, “wherein the plurality of LED lamps comprise red-green-blue (RGB) LED lamps, each having a red LED, a green LED, and a blue LED in a same respective lamp package”; para. 134, “each output associated with movement, including using different colors”; Additionally, Examiner notes that the specific color of the LED claimed has no mechanical function to the claimed device as the color, but instead is merely a matter of ornamentation because the device functions the same with any color (e.g., when motion is detected, the LED emits light via one of the plurality of RGB LED lamps), and thus the specific color claimed does not patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. See In re Seid, 161 F.2d 229, 73 USPQ 431 (CCPA 1947)).
Regarding claim 3, Hoffmann in view of Nell teaches the motion sensitive eyeglasses as recited in claim 2, wherein the red LEDs are illuminated when the motion sensor detects motion (Hoffmann, para. 95, “a plurality of light emitting diode (LED) lamps disposed on the wearable or portable device, including a red LED or at least one RGB LED comprising a red LED” (e.g., para. 34 and 99, “based on sensed motion, state and/or intensity of light source is changed, e.g., LED bulbs activated”); para. 134, “each output associated with movement, including using different colors”; Additionally, Examiner notes that the specific color of the LED claimed has no mechanical function to the claimed device as the color, but instead is merely a matter of ornamentation because the device functions the same with any color (e.g., when motion is detected, the LED emits light via one of the plurality of RGB LED lamps), and thus the specific color claimed does not patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. See In re Seid, 161 F.2d 229, 73 USPQ 431 (CCPA 1947)).
Regarding claim 4, Hoffmann in view of Nell teaches the motion sensitive eyeglasses as recited in claim 2, wherein the yellow LEDs are illuminated when the motion sensor detects a decrease in motion (Hoffmann, para. 45, “This selective variation uses acceleration and/or deceleration to translate motion and/or orientation information into light intensity and/or color”; para. 47, “The accelerometer data can be used to detect a quick deceleration, adding more brightness or holding the brightness for a few seconds. This combination of an accelerometer and gyroscope with customized processing logic can be used in a variety of novel ways. In some examples, accelerometer information is utilized to control lighting color based on orientation of the overall object (e.g., a wearable wristband or other device)”; para. 57, “accelerometer data can be used to detect a quick deceleration, adding more brightness or holding the brightness for a few seconds”; para. 34, “In RGB (i.e., Red, Green, and Blue) LED lamps, varying the voltage in different ratios to each of the three primary colors results in a myriad of controllable colors (typically over 16 million possible hues).” Because combining red and green at equal intensity produces yellow, the device inherently includes yellow LEDs; para. 134, “each output associated with movement, including using different colors”; Additionally, Examiner notes that the specific color of the LED claimed has no mechanical function to the claimed device as the color, but instead is merely a matter of ornamentation because the device functions the same with any color (e.g., when motion is detected, the LED emits light via one of the plurality of RGB LED lamps), and thus the specific color claimed does not patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. See In re Seid, 161 F.2d 229, 73 USPQ 431 (CCPA 1947)).
Regarding claim 7, Hoffmann in view of Nell teaches the method as recited in claim 6, further comprising illuminating yellow LEDs located along the frame of the motion sensitive eyeglasses when decreased motion is detected by the motion sensor (Hoffmann, para. 45, “This selective variation uses acceleration and/or deceleration to translate motion and/or orientation information into light intensity and/or color”; para. 47, “The accelerometer data can be used to detect a quick deceleration, adding more brightness or holding the brightness for a few seconds. This combination of an accelerometer and gyroscope with customized processing logic can be used in a variety of novel ways. In some examples, accelerometer information is utilized to control lighting color based on orientation of the overall object (e.g., a wearable wristband or other device)”; para. 57, “accelerometer data can be used to detect a quick deceleration, adding more brightness or holding the brightness for a few seconds”; para. 34, “In RGB (i.e., Red, Green, and Blue) LED lamps, varying the voltage in different ratios to each of the three primary colors results in a myriad of controllable colors (typically over 16 million possible hues)”. Because combining red and green at equal intensity produces yellow, the device inherently includes yellow LEDs; para. 134, “each output associated with movement, including using different colors”; Additionally, Examiner notes that the specific color of the LED claimed has no mechanical function to the claimed device as the color, but instead is merely a matter of ornamentation because the device functions the same with any color (e.g., when motion is detected, the LED emits light via one of the plurality of RGB LED lamps), and thus the specific color claimed does not patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. See In re Seid, 161 F.2d 229, 73 USPQ 431 (CCPA 1947)).
Regarding claim 5, Hoffmann in view of Nell teaches the motion sensitive eyeglasses as recited in claim 2, wherein the green LEDs are illuminated when the motion sensor does not detect motion (Hoffmann, para. 47, “if brightness is increasing as a result of an increasing revolutions per second (sensed by the gyro), and the rotation then stops abruptly (sensed by the accelerometer), the system may be configured to respond by adding a pop of bright light”; para. 34, “In RGB (i.e., Red, Green, and Blue) LED lamps, varying the voltage in different ratios to each of the three primary colors results in a myriad of controllable colors (typically over 16 million possible hues)”; para. 134, “each output associated with movement, including using different colors”; Additionally, Examiner notes that the specific color of the LED claimed has no mechanical function to the claimed device as the color, but instead is merely a matter of ornamentation because the device functions the same with any color (e.g., when stopping motion is detected, the LED emits light via one of the plurality of RGB LED lamps), and thus the specific color claimed does not patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. See In re Seid, 161 F.2d 229, 73 USPQ 431 (CCPA 1947)).
Regarding claim 8, Hoffmann in view of Nell teaches the method as recited in claim 6, further comprising illuminating green LEDs located along the motion sensitive device when no motion is detected by the motion sensor (Hoffmann, para. 47, “if brightness is increasing as a result of an increasing revolutions per second (sensed by the gyro), and the rotation then stops abruptly (sensed by the accelerometer), the system may be configured to respond by adding a pop of bright light”; para. 34, “In RGB (i.e., Red, Green, and Blue) LED lamps, varying the voltage in different ratios to each of the three primary colors results in a myriad of controllable colors (typically over 16 million possible hues)”; para. 134, “each output associated with movement, including using different colors”; Additionally, Examiner notes that the specific color of the LED claimed has no mechanical function to the claimed device as the color, but instead is merely a matter of ornamentation because the device functions the same with any color (e.g., when stopping motion is detected, the LED emits light via one of the plurality of RGB LED lamps), and thus the specific color claimed does not patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. See In re Seid, 161 F.2d 229, 73 USPQ 431 (CCPA 1947)).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Finch (US 2021/0407310) discloses monitoring the attention of a student and providing a notification to a teacher informing the teacher of the distracted student.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL LANE whose telephone number is (303)297-4311. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 - 4:30 MT.
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, Xuan Thai can be reached at (571) 272-7147. 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.
/DANIEL LANE/Examiner, Art Unit 3715