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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 9-10 and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Aimone et al. (US 2014/0347265).
(1) regarding claim 1:
Aimone ‘265 discloses an apparatus (paragraph [0059]) comprising:
an eyewear frame dimensioned to be worn by a user (paragraph [0059], where the device may comprise wearable eyeglasses); and
a plurality of radar devices secured to the eyewear frame (paragraph [0066], where sensors are installed on the eyewear frames), wherein the plurality of radar devices are each configured to:
transmit a signal toward a facial feature of the user (paragraph [0066], [0087], [0113], 0115], and [0123], where the sensors send signals towards the face of the user to detect features of the face); and
receive the signal from the facial feature of the user (paragraph [0066], [0087], [0113], 0115], and [0123], where the sensors received the signals reflected or bounced back from the face of the user).
(2) regarding claim 14:
Aimone ‘265 discloses an artificial-reality system (paragraph [0084], augmented reality) comprising:
an eyewear frame dimensioned to be worn by a user (paragraph [0059], where the device may comprise wearable eyeglasses);
a plurality of radar devices secured to the eyewear frame (paragraph [0066], where sensors are installed on the eyewear frames), wherein the plurality of radar devices are each configured to:
transmit a signal toward a facial feature of the user (paragraph [0066], [0087], [0113], 0115], and [0123], where the sensors send signals towards the face of the user to detect features of the face); and
receive the signal from the facial feature of the user (paragraph [0066], [0087], [0113], 0115], and [0123], where the sensors received the signals reflected or bounced back from the face of the user); and
an output device configured to facilitate presentation of an avatar of the user (paragraph [0150], where an avatar is shown to the user).
(3) regarding claim 20:
Aimone ‘265 discloses a method comprising:
securing a plurality of radar devices to an eyewear frame (paragraph [0066], where sensors are installed on the eyewear frames);
configuring the plurality of radar devices to transmit signals toward at least one facial feature of a user (paragraph [0066], [0087], [0113], 0115], and [0123], where the sensors send signals towards the face of the user to detect features of the face) and receive the signals from the at least one facial feature of the user (paragraph [0066], [0087], [0113], 0115], and [0123], where the sensors received the signals reflected or bounced back from the face of the user); and
configuring circuitry to detect one or more facial expressions of the user based at least in part on the signals (paragraph [0139], where facial expressions are detected based on signals from the sensors).
(4) regarding claims 2 and 15:
Aimone ‘265 further discloses circuitry configured to: process the signals received by the plurality of radar devices (paragraph [0139], where facial expressions are detected based on signals from the sensors); and
detect one or more facial expressions of the user based at least in part on the signals (paragraph [0139], where facial expressions are detected based on signals from the sensors).
(5) regarding claims 3 and 16:
Aimone ‘265 further discloses wherein the circuitry is configured to animate an avatar of the user based at least in part on the one or more facial expressions (paragraph [0150], where the avatar expressions are changed, thus animating the avatar).
(6) regarding claims 4 and 17:
Aimone ‘265 further discloses wherein the circuitry is configured to provide the avatar of the user for presentation on a display device such that the animation of the avatar is visible on the display device (paragraph [0150], where the avatar is shown in the display of the wearable device).
(7) regarding claims 5 and 18:
Aimone ‘265 further discloses wherein the plurality of radar devices comprise:
a first radar device that transmits a first signal toward the facial feature of the user (paragraph [0066], [0087], [0113], 0115], and [0123], where the sensors send signals towards the face of the user to detect features of the face); and
a second radar device that receives the first signal after having bounced off the facial feature of the user (paragraph [0066], [0087], [0113], 0115], and [0123], where the sensors received the signals reflected or bounced back from the face of the user).
(8) regarding claims 6 and 19:
Aimone ‘265 further discloses wherein the plurality of radar devices are synchronized with one another via at least one of: a common clock signal; or one or more signal strength measurements (paragraph [0126] and [0193], where the measurement of the signals during calibration synchronize all devices on the wearable device).
(9) regarding claim 7:
Aimone ‘265 further discloses the eyewear frame comprises a front frame and a pair of optical elements installed in the front frame (Figs. 11A-11C); and
the plurality of radar devices are secured to the front frame underneath the pair of optical elements (Figs. 11A-11C and paragraph [0103], where sensors are shown to be positioned underneath the display section of the wearable eyeglasses).
(10) regarding claim 9:
Aimone ‘265 further discloses at least one additional radar device secured to a bridge of the eyewear frame (paragraph [0098] and [0102]).
(11) regarding claim 10:
Aimone ‘265 further discloses at least one of the plurality of radar devices is secured to a temple of the eyewear frame (paragraph [0099]).
(12) regarding claim 13:
Aimone ‘265 further discloses wherein the facial feature toward which the signal is transmitted comprises at least one of: a mouth of the user; a lip of the user; an eyebrow of the user; an eyelid of the user (paragraph [0053], eye tracking sensor); a corner of the mouth of the user; or a forehead of the user.
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.
Claim(s) 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aimone et al. (US 2014/0347265) in view of Castañeda et al. (US 2021/0365535).
(1) regarding claim 11:
Aimone ‘265 discloses all the subject matter as described above except wherein at least one of the plurality of radar devices is secured to a hinge of the eyewear frame.
However, Castañeda ‘535 teaches wherein at least one of the plurality of radar devices is secured to a hinge of the eyewear frame (paragraph [0100], where the sensors are installed on the hinge of an eyewear).
Having a system of Castañeda ‘535 reference and then given the well-established teaching of Aimone ‘265 reference, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Aimone ‘265 to include the limitations as taught by Castañeda ‘535 because verifying the identity of the specific user of the portable eyewear device can be useful. For example, as augmented reality becomes more prevalent in such eyewear devices applications may be developed that need to verify the identity of the user for security purposes (paragraph [0004]).
Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aimone et al. (US 2014/0347265) in view of Shibata et al. (US 2022/0283351).
(1) regarding claim 12:
Aimone ‘265 discloses all the subject matter as described above except wherein the plurality of radar devices comprise a set of millimeter-wave radar devices.
However, Shibata ‘351 teaches wherein the plurality of radar devices comprise a set of millimeter-wave radar devices (paragraph [0410]-[0413], and [0418], where sensors can be substituted by millimeter-wave radar by simple substitution and still perform the same functionalities).
Having a system of Shibata ‘351 reference and then given the well-established teaching of Aimone ‘265 reference, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Aimone ‘265 to include the limitations as taught by Shibata ‘351 because by a simple substitution of a sensor for a millimeter-wave radar the same functionality can be achieved, thus providing versatility to the system and improves applicability.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8 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:
A. Claim 8 discloses the unique and distinct limitations of “wherein the plurality of radar devices each comprise a transmitter element configured to aim toward a mouth of the user”, either alone or in combination, the applied prior art does not teach the claimed subject matter.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LENNIN R RODRIGUEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-1678. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9:00am-7:00pm.
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, Abderrahim Merouan can be reached at 571-270-5254. 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.
/LENNIN R RODRIGUEZGONZALEZ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2683