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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgment is made of receipt of Information Disclosure Statement (PTO-1449) filed 11/09/2023. An initialed copy is attached to this Office Action.
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.
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 1-12 and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krukowski et al. (USPG Pub No. 2021/0330185), hereinafter “Krukowski”, in view of Osterhout et al. (USPG Pub No. 2011/0214082), hereinafter “Osterhout”.
Regarding claim 1, Krukowski discloses a self-prescribing auto-phoropter system for digital correction of an eye of a patient (see Fig. 1, Paragraph 34), the system comprising:
a. a head-mounted optometric device (12) (see Fig. 1, Paragraph 59) comprising: i. an assembly of tunable lenses (54) (see Fig. 2, Paragraphs 100, 101); ii. an audio configured to receive audio data (Paragraph 65 – speakers receive audio data); iii. a display component (46) optically in line with the assembly of tunable lenses (54), configured to display an image (see Fig. 3, Paragraph 93); iv. an optical measurement and correction component operatively coupled to the assembly of tunable lenses (54), configured to measure and correct one or more refractive errors in the eye of the patient (see Fig. 2, Paragraphs 53, 86, 193); and v. a communication component communicatively coupled to the optical measurement and correction component, the audio, and the display component (see Figs. 1, 2, Paragraph 64); and b. a virtual optometrist device communicatively coupled to the communication component of the head-mounted optometric device (12) (see Figs. 1, 2, Paragraphs 162, 176, 201), comprising a processor capable of executing computer-readable instructions (Paragraphs 55, 56), and a memory component comprising computer-readable instructions for (Paragraphs 55, 56): i. generating a visual eye exam (Paragraph 56); ii. displaying the visual eye exam to the patient through the display component (see Figs. 1, 2, Paragraph 46); iii. receiving the one or more refractive errors from the optical measurement and correction component (see Fig. 2, Paragraphs 53, 86, 193); iv. generating, based on the one or more refractive errors, an eye correction for the patient (Paragraphs 38, 53); v. applying one or more optometric procedures to optimize the eye correction (Paragraphs 38, 53); vi. transmitting audio instructions to the patient for the visual eye exam (Paragraphs 55, 65 – instructions received by the user are capable of being audio); vii. collecting verbal feedback to the audio instructions from the patient (Paragraph 53 – subjective feedback requires user input); and viii. generating, based on the optimized eye correction and the verbal feedback, a final optical prescription for the patient (Paragraphs 53, 196). Krukowski discloses the claimed invention, but does not specify audio transceiver configured to transmit and receive audio data; through the audio transceiver; using the audio transceiver. In the same field of endeavor, Osterhout discloses audio transceiver configured to transmit and receive audio data (Paragraphs 126, 185); through the audio transceiver (Paragraphs 126, 185); using the audio transceiver (Paragraphs 126, 185). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the system of Krukowski with audio transceiver configured to transmit and receive audio data; through the audio transceiver; using the audio transceiver of Osterhout for the purpose of providing telecommunication capability (Paragraph 185).
Regarding claim 2, Krukowski further discloses wherein the optical measurement and correction component comprises a wavefront sensor (Paragraph 53).
Regarding claim 8, Krukowski further discloses wherein the virtual optometrist device comprises a cloud server, wherein the processor and the memory component are disposed in the cloud server (Paragraphs 54-58).
Regarding claim 9, Krukowski further discloses wherein the communication component comprises a communication chip communicatively coupled to the wavefront sensor and the cloud server, wherein the communication chip is configured to transmit the one or more refractive errors and the verbal responses to the cloud server (see Figs. 1, 2, Paragraphs 54, 55, 64).
Regarding claim 10, Krukowski discloses a self-prescribing auto-phoropter system for digital correction of an eye of a patient (see Fig. 1, Paragraph 34), the system comprising: a. a head-mounted optometric device (12) (see Fig. 1, Paragraph 59) comprising: i. a light source (152) configured to generate light (see Fig. 18, Paragraph 172); ii. a mirror (160) configured to reflect light generated by the light source (152) towards a beamsplitter (134/160) (see Fig. 18, Paragraph 172); iii. the beamsplitter (134/160) configured to split the light into a first beam and a second beam, wherein the first beam is directed into the eye of the patient, wherein the second beam is directed into a wavefront sensor (see Fig. 18, Paragraphs 149, 172); iv. the wavefront sensor configured to compare light reflected from the eye of the patient and the second beam to measure one or more wavefront errors (Paragraphs 91, 92, 191); v.an audio configured to receive audio data (Paragraph 65 – speakers receive audio data); vi.an assembly of tunable lenses (5122) optically in line with a display component (108) and the beamsplitter (134/160), wherein the first beam is directed into the eye of the patient through a lens of the assembly of tunable lenses (see Fig. 18, Paragraph 144); vii. the display component (108) optically in line with the assembly of tunable lenses (122), configured to display an image (see Fig. 18, Paragraph 144); and viii. a communication component communicatively coupled to the wavefront sensor, the audio, and the display component (see Figs. 1, 2, 18, Paragraph 64); and b. a virtual optometrist device communicatively coupled to the communication component of the head-mounted optometric device (12) (see Figs. 1, 2, Paragraphs 162, 176, 201), comprising a cloud server comprising a processor capable of executing computer-readable instructions, and a memory component comprising computer-readable instructions for (Paragraphs 55, 56): i. generating a visual eye exam (Paragraph 56); ii. displaying the visual eye exam to the patient through the display component (see Figs. 1, 2, Paragraph 46); iii. receiving the one or more refractive errors from the optical measurement and correction component (see Fig. 2, Paragraphs 53, 86, 193); iv. generating, based on the one or more refractive errors, an eye correction for the patient (Paragraphs 38, 53); v. applying one or more optometric procedures to optimize the eye correction (Paragraphs 38, 53); vi. transmitting audio instructions to the patient for the visual eye exam (Paragraphs 55, 65 – instructions received by the user are capable of being audio); vii. collecting verbal feedback to the audio instructions from the patient (Paragraph 53 – subjective feedback requires user input); and viii. generating, based on the optimized eye correction and the verbal feedback, a final optical prescription for the patient (Paragraphs 53, 196). Krukowski discloses the claimed invention, but does not specify audio transceiver configured to transmit and receive audio data; through the audio transceiver; using the audio transceiver. In the same field of endeavor, Osterhout discloses audio transceiver configured to transmit and receive audio data (Paragraphs 126, 185); through the audio transceiver (Paragraphs 126, 185); using the audio transceiver (Paragraphs 126, 185). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the system of Krukowski with audio transceiver configured to transmit and receive audio data; through the audio transceiver; using the audio transceiver of Osterhout for the purpose of providing telecommunication capability (Paragraph 185).
Regarding claims 3 and 11, Krukowski further discloses wherein the wavefront sensor comprises a Shack-Hartmann sensor (Paragraph 53).
Regarding claim 12, Krukowski further discloses wherein the mirror comprises a dichroic mirror (Paragraph 172).
Regarding claim 15, Krukowski further discloses further comprising a communication chip communicatively coupled to the wavefront sensor and the cloud server, wherein the communication chip is configured to transmit the one or more wavefront errors to the cloud server (see Figs. 1, 2, Paragraphs 54, 55, 64).
Regarding claims 4 and 16, Krukowski further discloses wherein the wavefront sensor is configured to measure fixation and visual acuity of the eye of the patient (Paragraphs 53, 49, 86, 91, 193).
Regarding claims 5 and 17, Krukowski further discloses wherein the memory component further comprises instructions for cycling through the assembly of tunable lenses throughout the visual eye exam (Paragraphs 38, 196).
Regarding claims 6 and 18, Krukowski further discloses wherein the memory component further comprises instructions for applying, by the head-mounted optometric device (12), the optimal eye correction to the eye of the patient (Paragraphs 53, 196).
Regarding claims 7 and 19, Krukowski further discloses wherein the visual eye exam comprises an exam chart, a visual acuity test, or a combination thereof (see Figs. 8-11, 37-41).
Claims 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krukowski (USPG Pub No. 2021/0330185) in view of Osterhout (USPG Pub No. 2011/0214082) as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Krall et al. (WO 2022/178055 A1), hereinafter “Krall”.
Regarding claim 13, Krukowski and Osterhout disclose the claimed invention except for wherein the beamsplitter comprises a polarizing beamsplitter. In the same field of endeavor, Krall discloses wherein the beamsplitter comprises a polarizing beamsplitter (Paragraph 149). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the system of Krukowski and Osterhout with wherein the beamsplitter comprises a polarizing beamsplitter of Krall for the purpose of transmitting and reflecting the desired polarization (Paragraph 149).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krukowski (USPG Pub No. 2021/0330185) in view of Osterhout (USPG Pub No. 2011/0214082) as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Dave et al. (USPG Pub No. 2024/0402497), hereinafter “Dave”.
Regarding claim 14, Krukowski and Osterhout disclose the claimed invention except for further comprising a polarizer disposed between the beamsplitter and the wavefront sensor, wherein the polarizer is configured to polarize the second beam and the light reflected from the eye of the patient. In the same field of endeavor, Dave discloses further comprising a polarizer disposed between the beamsplitter and the wavefront sensor, wherein the polarizer is configured to polarize the second beam and the light reflected from the eye of the patient (Paragraph 116). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the system of Krukowski and Osterhout with further comprising a polarizer disposed between the beamsplitter and the wavefront sensor, wherein the polarizer is configured to polarize the second beam and the light reflected from the eye of the patient of Dave for the purpose of minimizing unwanted light (Paragraph 116).
Prior Art Citations
Zimanyi (USPG Pub No. 2023/0114699) is being cited herein to show an auto-phoropter system relevant to the claimed invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHIDERE S SAHLE whose telephone number is (571)270-3329. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00 AM to 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, Ricky Mack can be reached at 571 272-2333. 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.
/MAHIDERE S SAHLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 9/25/2025