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. Election/Restrictions Claims 6-11 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on February 13, 2026. Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the claimed multifunctional hard layers and multifunctional layers must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Namely, claim 1 appears to claim a multifunctional hard layer 2 and multifunctional layer 3 on each side of lens base 1 . However, this is not accurately reflected in the Figures and in particular Figure 1 has only one multifunctional hard layer and one multifunctional layer labeled. No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. 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. Claims 1 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kalyankar et al. (US 2024/0402394 A1) in view of Han (CN 112147786, of which an English translation is attached). In regard to claim 1 , Kalyankar et al. discloses a multifunctional resin lens 66 (denoted “supplemental lens”, see e.g. Figures 4-5 and paragraph [0049]) for AR glasses (see e.g. paragraph [0027] for AR) capable of correcting vision (see e.g. paragraph [0049] where it is noted lens 66 may match a user’s prescription) , comprising (see e.g. Figures 4-5) : a lens base 78 (denoted “substrate”, see e.g. Figure 5 and paragraph [0051]) , wherein multifunctional hard layers 80 (denoted “hard coats”, see e.g. Figure 5 and paragraph [0051]) are disposed on both upper and lower end faces of the lens base 78 (see e.g. Figure 5 and note layer 80 is on both sides of element 78 ) ; a multifunctional film layer 82 and/or 84 (see e.g. Figure 5 an d paragraphs [0052]-[0053] for antireflection coatings 82 and environmental layers 84 ) is disposed on the other side of each of the multifunctional hard layers 80 (see e.g. Figure 5 and note layers 82 and 84 are disposed layers 80) ; the lens 66 consisting of the lens base 78 , the multifunctional hard layers 80 , and the multifunctional film layers 82 and/or 84 is a structure having a flat upper end face and a curved lower end face (see e.g. Figure 5 where one side of the lens 66 is flat and the other is curved) . Kalyankar et al. fails to disclose an optical waveguide sheet is disposed on the upper multifunctional film layer of the lens base. However, Han discloses (see e.g. Figure 1) : an optical waveguide sheet 2 (denoted “waveguide substrate”, see e.g. page 4, fifth full paragraph and Figure 1) is disposed on the upper portion of the lens base 5 (denoted “myopia adjusting optical element”, see e.g. page 4, fifth full paragraph and Figure 1). Given the teachings of Han, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Kalyankar et al. with an optical waveguide sheet is disposed on the upper multifunctional film layer of the lens base. Combining the lens structure integrally with a waveguide structure allows for the augmented reality system to be reduced in size (see e.g. abstract of Han). In regard to claim 4 , Kalyankar et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and wherein the multifunctional film layer 82 and/or 84 comprises any one or more of a light anti-reflection film (see e.g. paragraph [0052] for antireflective coating) , an anti-electromagnetic radiation film, a waterproof film, and an anti-fog film (see e.g. paragraph [0053]) . Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kalyankar et al. (US 2024/0402394 A1) in view of Han (CN 112147786) and further in view of Mai et al. (US 2021/0223574 A1). In regard to claim 2 , Kalyankar et al. discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, and a material of the lens base 78 includes any one of acrylate, polyurethane, polycarbonate, and allyl carbonate (see e.g. paragraph [0051] for polycarbonate). Kalyank a r et al. , in view of Han, fails to disclose wherein the lens base is a multifunctional resin base, the multifunctional resin base comprises any one or more of an anti-blue light base, a color change base, a dyeable base, and an anti-infrared light base . However, Mai et al. discloses (see e.g. Figure 1a) : wherein the lens base 1 (denoted “eyeglass lens”, see e.g. paragraph [0019] and Figure 1a) is a multifunctional resin base ( see e.g. paragraphs [0008], [0025]-[0026] for resin base) , the multifunctional resin base comprises any one or more of an anti-blue light base, a color change base, a dyeable base, and an anti-infrared light base (see e.g. Figure 1a and paragraph [0019] for incorporation of blue light blocking material into the base). Given the teachings of Mai et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Kalyankar et al., in view of Han, with wherein the lens base is a multifunctional resin base, the multifunctional resin base comprises any one or more of an anti-blue light base, a color change base, a dyeable base, and an anti-infrared light base . Providing blue light blocking capability to the lens base prevents unwanted blue light from reaching the user. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kalyankar et al. (US 2024/0402394 A1) in view of Han (CN 112147786) and further in view of Ito et al. (US 2005/0046792 A1). In regard to claim 3 , Kalyankar et al., in view of Han, discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, but fails to disclose w herein the multifunctional hard layers comprises one or more of an anti-scratch hardened layer, an anti-impact hardened layer, and a dyeable hardened layer. However, Ito et al. discloses w herein the multifunctional hard layers comprises one or more of an anti-scratch hardened layer, an anti-impact hardened layer, and a dyeable hardened layer (see e.g. paragraphs [0103] and [0127] for anti-scratch properties). Given the teachings of Ito et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Kalyankar et al., in view of Han, with w herein the multifunctional hard layers comprises one or more of an anti-scratch hardened layer, an anti-impact hardened layer, and a dyeable hardened layer. Providing a hard coating layer that reduced scratches would prevent unwanted damage that may be detrimental to a viewer’s vision. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kalyankar et al. (US 2024/0402394 A1) in view of Han (CN 112147786) and further in view of Jenkins et al. (US 2024/0369839 A1). In regard to claim 5 ¸ Kalyankar et al., in view of Han, discloses the limitations as applied to claim 1 above, but fails to disclose wherein the optical waveguide sheet is adhered using an OCA, and an adhesive thickness of the optical waveguide sheet is less than 200 microns. However, Jenkins et al. discloses (see e.g. Figure 4) : wherein the optical waveguide sheet 404 (denoted “substrate”, see e.g. paragraph [0033]) is adhered using an OCA 406 (see e.g. paragraph [0033]) , and an adhesive thickness of the optical waveguide sheet is less than 200 microns (see e.g. paragraph [0035] for thickness of 50-100 microns, which falls within applicant’s claimed range) . Given the teachings of Jenkins et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Kalyankar et al., in view of Han, with wherein the optical waveguide sheet is adhered using an OCA, and an adhesive thickness of the optical waveguide sheet is less than 200 microns. Providing an optically clear adhesive (OSA) as the adhesive for adhering the materials would prevent unwanted detrimental optical effects due to the high clarity of those materials. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following reference is cited for disclosing related limitations of the applicant’s claimed and disclosed invention: Tomoda et al. (US 2014/0347625 A1) . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT JESSICA M MERLIN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-3207 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday-Thursday 7:00AM-5:00PM . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Jennifer Carruth can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 272-9791 . 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. /JESSICA M MERLIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871