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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 01/09/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues Clark fails to teach a single housing fixed to the magnifying glass that houses both the refracting member and the camera member because Clark discloses a loupe optical path and a distinct video camera potion that receives only a reflected portion of the light redirected into the camera portion. Applicant argues Clark fails to teach a prism that refracts the camera member’s gaze axis so that a refracted gaze axis coincides with the wearer’s line of sight via the magnifying glass because Clark discloses splitting the light from the viewing optical axis and redirecting that split light to the camera via reflective elements. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Regarding applicant’s argument that Clark fails to teach a single housing fixed to the magnifying glass that houses both the refracting member and the camera member because Clark discloses a loupe optical path and a distinct video camera potion that receives only a reflected portion of the light redirected into the camera portion, Examiner notes that the overall structure depicted in Figure 6 can be considered “a housing” which houses both of the claimed elements. Thus examiner maintains that Clark teaches the limitations of claim 1.
Regarding applicant’s argument that Clark fails to teach a prism that refracts the camera member’s gaze axis so that a refracted gaze axis coincides with the wearer’s line of sight via the magnifying glass because Clark discloses splitting the light from the viewing optical axis and redirecting that split light to the camera via reflective elements, Examiner notes that although the lights are split by 158, beam splitting interface, the beam is coinciding from the entrance of 152, beam splitter, until 158, beam splitting interface. Furthermore, the light beams also coincide at least for a portion at 158, beam splitting interface. A beam splitter is known to be made of two prisms, thus the entrance until the beam splitting interface, and the beam splitting interface, is viewed to be a refracted gaze axis. Thus examiner maintains that Clark teaches the limitations of claim 1.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a camera member” in line 19 should be read as “the camera member”; specifically, “the housing being configured to house the refracting member and a camera member”, should be read as “the housing being configured to house the refracting member and the camera member”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Clark et al. (5,078,469, of record).
Regarding claim 1, Clark discloses a head-mounted loupe (Figures 5 and 6), comprising: a frame portion worn on a wearer's head (134, means; col 4 lines 22-25); a pair of left and right magnifying glasses attached to the frame portion (respective 150, objective lens or 156, objective lens, of 130, first loupe, and 132, second loupe) and arranged in front of the wearer's left and right eyes, respectively (Figure 5), in a use state where the frame portion is worn on the head of the wearer (136 and 138, operator's eyes; Figure 5); a visible object image-capturing means (Figure 6) is arranged in front of one of the wearer’s left and right eyes in the use state (Figures 5 and 6), wherein the visible object image-capturing means includes: a refracting member arranged on a front or rear side of the magnifying glass, the refracting member being positioned on a line-of-sight of the wearer passing through the magnifying glass in the use state (152, beam splitter), the refracting member including a front surface (entrance surface of 152, beam splitter) and a rear surface (depicted top or right hand side surface in Figure 6 of 152, beam splitter); a camera member that can image-capture a still image or moving image of an object via the refracting member (142, video camera portion); and a housing (outline of Figure 6) that is fixed to at least one of the left and right magnifying glasses corresponding to the one of the wearer’s left and right eyes front of which the visible object image-capturing means is arranged (Figure 6), the housing being configured to house the refracting member and the camera member (Figure 6), the housing including an insertion hole (Examiner interprets a passage provided to allow insertion of 168, cable) through which a cable (168, cable, erroneously depicted as element “186” in Figure 6) for inputting and outputting signals and information relating to image-capturing is inserted (col 4 lines 59-64), wherein the refracting member includes with a prism (Figure 6 depicts 152, beam splitter, as two right-angle prisms joined together at 158, beam splitting interface) and is configured to allow the wearer to visually recognize an object via the at least one of the left and right magnifying glasses positioned in front or behind the refracting member (Figure 6), and wherein the refracting member also refracts a gaze axis of the camera member such that a refracted gaze axis coincides with a line-of-sight of the wearer via the at least one of the left and right magnifying glasses (Figure 6, axes depicted by the line of 140, field of view, going to the operator's eye and 166, video sensor chip).
Regarding claim 2, Clark discloses the head-mounted loupe according to claim 1, wherein the refracting member of the visible object image-capturing means comprises two right-angle prisms joined together such that respective slopes of the two right-angle prisms are arranged next to each other (Figure 6 depicts 152, beam splitter, as two right-angle prisms joined together at 158, beam splitting interface), and the refracting member is arranged on a front side or a rear size of the at least one of the left and right magnifying glasses so that the gaze axis of the camera member is refracted by the slopes and coincides with the line-of-sight of wearer via the at least one of the left and right magnifying glasses (Figure 6, axes depicted by the line of 140, field of view, going to the operator's eye and 166, video sensor chip).
Regarding claim 3, Clark discloses the head-mounted loupe according to claim 1, wherein the pair of left and right magnifying glasses is attached to the frame portion so as to be arranged in front of the wearer's left and right eyes, respectively, with a predetermined gap between the left and right magnifying glasses in the use state (Figures 5 and 6), and the refracting member of the visible object image-capturing means is arranged behind the at least one of the left and right magnifying glasses so as to be arranged in the gap, in the use state (Figure 6, 152, beam splitter, is positioned behind 150, objective lens).
Regarding claim 4, Clark discloses the head-mounted loupe according to claim 1, wherein the refracting member of the visible object image-capturing means is arranged in front of the at least one of the left and right magnifying glass (Figure 6, 152, beam splitter, is positioned in front of 156, objective lens), and the camera member of the visible object image-capturing means is configured to, without using the at least one of the left and right magnifying glasses, capture an image-capturing range that is substantially the same as a visible range visually recognized by a wearer via the at least one of the left and right magnifying glasses (156, objective lens, is only provided at the operator's eye, is not used for imaging at 166, video sensor chip; thus Examiner interprets the video camera portion to have the same visible range visually recognized by the operator's eye).
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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark et al. (5,078,469, of record) in view of Beate et al. (2007/0139796, of record).
Regarding claim 5, Clark discloses the head-mounted loupe according to claim 1, comprising the cable for inputting and outputting the signals and the information relating to image-capturing is extended laterally outward from a laterally outer part of the camera member (Figure 6, depicted 186, cable, interpreted as 168, cable, in the text specification; col 4 lines 58-64).
Clark fails to teach a jump-up means that is pivotable between the use state where the pair of left and right magnifying glasses are positioned in front of the wearer’s left and right eyes, respectively, to allow the wearer to visually recognize an object via the left and right magnifying glasses, and a standby state where the pair of left and right magnifying glasses are positioned above a position of the left and right magnifying glasses in the use state to prevent the wearer to visually recognize the object via the left and right magnifying glasses, wherein the left and right magnifying glasses are attached to the frame portion via the jump-up means, the visible object image-capturing means is provided to be pivotable integrally with the magnifying glasses. Clark and Beate are related because both teach a head-mounted loupe.
Beate teaches a head-mounted loupe comprising a jump-up means (Figures 2-5, 11, rear element; [0033]) that is pivotable between the use state where the pair of left and right magnifying glasses are positioned in front of the wearer’s left and right eyes, respectively, to allow the wearer to visually recognize an object via the left and right magnifying glasses (Figure 4), and a standby state where the pair of left and right magnifying glasses are positioned above a position of the left and right magnifying glasses in the use state to prevent the wearer to visually recognize the object via the left and right magnifying glasses (Figure 5), wherein the left and right magnifying glasses are attached to the frame portion via the jump-up means (Figure 1, 5, coupling mechanism, attaches 3 and 4, oculars, to 6, head mount).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Clark to incorporate the teachings of Beate and provide a jump-up means that is pivotable between the use state where the pair of left and right magnifying glasses are positioned in front of the wearer’s left and right eyes, respectively, to allow the wearer to visually recognize an object via the left and right magnifying glasses, and a standby state where the pair of left and right magnifying glasses are positioned above a position of the left and right magnifying glasses in the use state to prevent the wearer to visually recognize the object via the left and right magnifying glasses, wherein the left and right magnifying glasses are attached to the frame portion via the jump-up means, and consequently the visible object image-capturing means is provided to be pivotable integrally with the magnifying glasses (Examiner notes the combination of Clark and Beate is viewed to teach this limitation because Clark's Figure 6 is viewed to be pivotable by Beate's Figures 1, 4, and 5). Doing so would allow for improved adjustment of the loupe so that the user may view an object without the magnifier without fully taking off the loupe.
Conclusion
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BALRAM T PARBADIA whose telephone number is (571)270-0602. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday - Friday.
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.
/BALRAM T PARBADIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872