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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “the first protective layer” and “the second protective layer” in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. An appropriate correction is required. (Claim 3 appears to be depend on claim 2 since claim 2 introduced a first and second protective layers).
Claims 15-18 are rejected as they inherit the rejection above.
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, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Perera (US 4867551 A).
Regarding claim 1, Perera discloses, in figure 3, a display device applied to a lens (30), the display device comprising:
a mounting base (see below figure);
an optical engine (37 or 38) mounted on the mounting base;
a first connecting portion (33) arranged on the mounting base and configured to be connected to a first side of the lens; and
a second connecting portion arranged opposite to the first connecting portion (33) and configured to be connected to a second side of the lens (30), the first side and the second side of the lens being opposing sides;
wherein the first connecting portion and the second connecting portion are configured to clamp the lens and allow the mounting base to move on the lens, wherein the first connecting portion (33) and the second connecting portion move relative to the lens (30), so as to adjust a position of the optical engine (37) relative to the lens.
PNG
media_image1.png
511
414
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Perera discloses the display device according to claim 1, wherein the first connecting portion (33) and the mounting base are integrally formed; or the first connecting portion (33) and the mounting base are separately formed (see figure 3).
Regarding claim 19, Perera discloses the display device according to claim 1, wherein a side of the mounting base away from the optical engine is provided with a groove (i.e. a thread for said connecting portion 33 to be screwed in); and the first connecting portion is arranged in the groove (see figure 3).
Regarding claim 20, Perera discloses a wearable device (figure 1), comprising:
a lens (30);
a frame (1) on which the lens (30) is arranged; and
a display device comprising:
a mounting base (see figure above);
an optical engine (37 or 38) mounted on the mounting base (32);
a first connecting portion (33) arranged on the mounting base and configured to be connected to a first side of the lens (30); and
a second connecting portion arranged opposite to the first connecting portion (32) and configured to be connected to a second side of the lens (30), the first side and the second side of the lens (30) being opposing sides;
wherein the first connecting portion (33) and the second connecting portion are configured to clamp the lens (30) and allow the mounting base to move on the lens (30), wherein the first connecting portion (32) and the second connecting portion move relative to the lens (30), so as to adjust a position of the optical engine relative to the lens (30).
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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Perera (US 4867551 A) as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 6, Perera 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.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 is allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: wherein the first connecting portion and the second connecting portion are made of magnetic materials that are attracted to each other.
Claims 2 and 7-14 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 2) further comprising a first protective layer and a second protective layer; wherein the first protective layer is connected to the first connecting portion and faces the second connecting portion, and the second protective layer is connected to the second connecting portion and faces the first connecting portion; wherein the first protective layer and the second protective layer are configured to be in contact with the lens and prevent the lens from being damaged when the first connecting portion and the second connecting portion move relative to the lens; (claim 7) 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.
Claims 3 and 15-18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
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
Prosecution Insights