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
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 13, 15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Frankel et al.(US 9470908 B1 hereinafter Frankel).
Regarding claim 1, Frankel discloses a display device applied to a lens, in figure 2, the display device comprising:
a mounting base (242);
an optical engine (200) mounted on the mounting base (242) ;
a first connecting portion (270) arranged on the mounting base (242) and configured to be connected to a first side of the lens (150); and
a second connecting portion (290) arranged opposite to the first connecting portion (242) and configured to be connected to a second side of the lens (150), the first side and the second side of the lens (150) being opposing sides; wherein the first connecting portion (242) and the second connecting portion (290) are configured to clamp the lens (150) and allow the mounting base (242) to move on the lens, so as to adjust a position of the optical engine relative to the lens (column 1, line 30 – column 2, line 35).
Regarding claim 2, Frankel discloses the display device according to claim 1, further comprising a first protective layer (250) and a second protective layer (280); wherein the first protective layer (250) is connected to the first connecting portion and faces the second connecting portion, and the second protective layer (280) is connected to the second connecting portion and faces the first connecting portion; wherein the first protective layer (250) and the second protective layer (280) are configured to be in contact with the lens (150) and prevent the lens from being damaged when the first connecting portion (270) and the second connecting portion (290) move relative to the lens (figure 2).
Regarding claim 3, Frankel discloses the display device according to claim 2, further comprising a connecting member (threaded portion 278); wherein an end of the connecting member (278) is connected to at least one of the first connecting portion (242) and the first protective layer (250), and another end of the connecting member is connected to at least one of the second connecting portion (280) and the second protective layer (290); and the connecting member is configured to span the lens (150).
Regarding claim 4, Frankel discloses the display device according to claim 1, wherein the first connecting portion (270) and the mounting base (242) are integrally formed; or the first connecting portion (270) and the mounting base (242) are separately formed.
Regarding claim 13, Frankel discloses the display device according to claim 2, wherein the first protective layer (250), the second protective layer (290), and the second connecting portion (280) are provided with light emission holes respectively (figure 2).
Regarding claim 15, Frankel discloses the display device according to claim 3, wherein the lens (150) is arranged on a frame (fig. 1); the connecting member (thread 278) spans thru the frame (122)(fig.1) and is located on opposite sides of the lens (150).
Regarding claim 20, Frankel discloses a wearable device, comprising: a lens; a frame (figure 1) on which the lens is arranged; and the display device according to claim 1, wherein the display device is arranged on the lens.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
Claims 6 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frankel et al.(US 9470908 B1 hereinafter Frankel).
Regarding claim 6, Frankel discloses the display device according to claim 1 with the first connecting portion and second connecting portion, except for the size or dimension of the connecting portions such that a maximum diameter of the first connecting portion or the second connecting portion is less than or equal to 5 mm. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have various dimensions in a design of an optical device where simple modification of size has been held per se obvious (MPEP 2144.04). Additionally, there is no evidence provided that there is any criticality or unexpected result occurring at such a difference, and appears to only be a preferred size of device.
Regarding claim 17, Frankel discloses the display device according to claim 3, with the connecting member, the first protective layer and the second protective layer, except for the connecting member, the first protective layer, and the second protective layer are integrally formed. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate the connecting member, the first protective layer, and the second protective layer in one piece since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1893).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 7, 16 ,18 and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: (claim 5) wherein the first connecting portion and the second connecting portion are made of magnetic materials that are attracted to each other; (claim 7) further comprising a sleeve; wherein the optical engine is arranged in the sleeve; the mounting base is provided with a mounting groove; the sleeve is arranged in the mounting groove to adjust a light emission angle of the optical engine; (claim 16) wherein the connecting member is wrapped around the first connecting portion or the second connecting portion; (claim 18) wherein the connecting member is capable of adjusting moving distances of the first connecting portion and the second connecting portion; and the moving distances of the first connecting portion and the second connecting portion on the lens is within approximately half a length of the connecting member; (claim 19) wherein a side of the mounting base away from the optical engine is provided with a groove; and the first connecting portion is arranged in the groove.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUYEN TRA whose telephone number is (571)272-2343. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6.
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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at 571-272-2713. 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.
/TUYEN TRA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872