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
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/14/2023 and 01/04/2024 are being considered by the examiner. A copy of initialed form is attached for Applicant’s record.
Claim Objections
Dependent claim 7 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of limitation of claim 1 (dependent claim must further limit the subject matter of the claim 1). An appropriate correction is required.
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 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 1-3, 5, 7, 8, 12-15, 17, 18, 20 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Andre (FR 1110042A of record).
Regarding to claims 1 and 7, Andre discloses a lens (the lens of figure 3) for eyewear (figure 3), wherein: a curvature of the lens has a discontinuity(visible on figure 2), the discontinuity defining a first portion (4d, 4g) of the lens on one side of the discontinuity, and a second portion (1d, 1g) of the lens on another side of the discontinuity, the second portion thereby being angled relative to the first portion (figure 2, claim 1); wherein the first portion is transparent or translucent and the second portion has a reflective side being at least partially reflective (i.g., mirror); wherein an angle intended between a surface of the lens on the reflective side of the second portion and an adjacent surface of the first portion is obtuse (figure 2); and wherein the reflective side of the second portion (1d, 1g) comprises a reflective coating (“dûment traité pour former miroir” ~ duly treated to form a mirror)and the reflective coating is partially reflective (mirror reflect at least reflective).
Regarding to claim 2, Andre disclose the lens according to claim 1, wherein the angle is between 160o and 179.5o (the objective of the disclosed eyewear is to obtain a rear-view function and considering figure 2, this angle is below 180o and seems to be above 160o. Andre discloses the skilled person that angle should be chosen “appropriate”).
Regarding to claim 3, Andre discloses the lens according to claim 1, wherein the discontinuity is substantially linear (figures 2 and 3).
Regarding to claim 5, Andre discloses the lens according to claim 1, wherein the discontinuity extends across a whole height of the lens (figures 2 and 3).
Regarding to claim 7, Andre discloses the lens according to claim 1, wherein the reflective side of the second portion comprises a reflective coating (“dûment traité pour former miroir” ~ duly treated to form a mirror).
Regarding to claim 8, Andre discloses the lens according to claim 1, wherein the reflective coating covers the whole of the reflective side of the second portion (figures 2 and 3).
Regarding to claim 12, Andre discloses the lens according to claim 1, wherein the first portion and the second portion are substantially flat and planar and the plane of the first portion intersects the plane of the second portion at the discontinuity (figures 2 and 3).
Regarding to claim 13, Andre discloses the lens according to claim 1, wherein the shape of the lens is generally circular, oval, square, rectangular or teardrop (figures 2 and 3).
Regarding to claim 14, Andre discloses a lens (the lens of figure 3) for eyewear (figure 3), wherein: a curvature of the lens has a discontinuity(visible on figure 2), the discontinuity defining a first portion(4d, 4g) of the lens on one side of the discontinuity, and a second portion (1d, 1g) of the lens on another side of the discontinuity, the second portion thereby being angled relative to the first portion (figure 2, claim 1); wherein the first portion is transparent or translucent and the second portion has a reflective side being at least partially reflective (i.g., mirror); wherein an angle intended between a surface of the lens on the reflective side of the second portion and an adjacent surface of the first portion is obtuse (figure 2); and wherein the reflective side of the second portion (1d, 1g) comprises a reflective coating (“dûment traité pour former miroir”)and the reflective coating is partially reflective (mirror reflect at least reflective).
a frame (2) configured to support the or each lens such that the first portion is located toward a central region of the frame (2), the second portion is located toward a peripheral region of the frame(2), and the second portion is angled toward the wearer relative to the first portion when in use, such that the reflective side of the second portion faces the wearer in use (see figure 3).
Regarding to claim 15, Andre discloses the lens according to claim 15, wherein the discontinuity is orientated substantially vertically with respect to the wearer when in use (figures 2 and 3).
Regarding to claim 17, Andre discloses an eyewear comprising two of said lens according claim 14; wherein the two lens are arranged symmetrically about the central region of the frame (figures 2 and 3).
Regarding to claim 18, Andre discloses the lens according to claim 18, further comprising a nose-bridge member arranged in the central region of the frame, wherein each lens is arranged on opposing sides of the nose-bridge member (figures 2 and 3).
Regarding to claim 20, Andre discloses the lens according to claim 15, Andre further discloses wherein a securing means for securing the frame to a wearer's head in use (i.e, temple ends secure the frame to wearer’s ear, or nose piece for securing the frame to wearer).
Regarding to claim 21, Andre discloses the lens according to claim 21, wherein the securing means comprise a pair of arms hingedly mounted to the frame for extending over the ears of the wearer when in use (figures 2 and 3).
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 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 4, 11, 16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andre as applied to claim 1 or claim 15 above, in view of Tee Jr.(US 5416536 of record).
Regarding to claim 4, Andre discloses the lens according to claim 1 with said discontinuity. However, Andre does not disclose wherein the discontinuity is non- linear. Tee teaches a non- linear the discontinuity(figure 2)(35, 36). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apple teachings of Tee to device of Andre since such a shape of mirror section in similar eyewear is known.
Regarding to claim 11, Andre discloses the lens according to claim 1 with said lens. However, Andre does not disclose wherein the lens comprises a filter for blocking particular wavelengths of light. Tee is in same field of endeavor and teaches wherein the lens comprises a filter for blocking particular wavelengths of light (col.9, lines 19-21; col.10, lines 34-35; col.10, lines 55-60). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apple teachings of Tee to device of Andre since such a shape of mirror section in similar eyewear is known.
Regarding to claims 16 and 19, Andre discloses the lens according to claim 1 with said lens. However, Andre does not disclose wherein the or each lens is releasably supported by the frame; wherein the nose-bridge member is releasably attachable to the frame. Tee is in same field of endeavor and teaches wherein the or each lens is releasably supported by the frame (col.6, line 61); wherein the nose-bridge member is releasably attachable to the frame (col.7, lines 12-16). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apple teachings of Tee to device of Andre since such a shape of mirror section in similar eyewear is known.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andre as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Gossmann (DE29802302 of record).
Andre discloses the lens according to claim 1 with said discontinuity. However, Andre does not disclose wherein the surface area of the second portion is between about 10-35% of the surface area of the lens. Gossmann is in same field of endeavor and teaches wherein the surface area of the second portion (reference “5”)(fig.1 and 2) is between about 10-35% of the surface area of the lens (reference 3)(fig.1 and 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apple teachings of Gossmann to device of Andre since such a shape of mirror section in similar eyewear is known.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 and 10 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 9) wherein the reflective coating partially covers the reflective side of the second potion.
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, Ricky Mack can be reached on (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.
/TUYEN TRA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872