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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on 12/06/2023. These drawings are acceptable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 7 are indefinite because they recite the limitation “an absolute value of the reverse prism slope is larger than 0.014 times the absolute value of the addition prism slope on the progressive zone” but the claims do not recite any positions on the lens surfaces or constraints which regions on the lens are intended to be considered for comparing the slopes. Examiner will interpret the limitations as referring to any slopes disclosed in the prior art that can be compared to the values disclosed in the claims as currently recited. Claims 2-6 and 8-16 depend on claim 1 and inherit at least the same deficiencies. Appropriate clarification and correction is required.
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 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaga et al. US PGPub 2017/0351116 A1 (hereinafter, “Kaga”) in view of Izawa et al. US PGPub 2016/0209677 A1 (of record, see IDS dated 12/06/2023, hereinafter, “Izawa”).
Regarding independent claim 1, Kaga discloses a spectacle lens (refer to title and abstract where the technology concerns a spectacle lens) to which a base in prism deflecting light toward a nose of a user is added (abstract refers to a base in prism formed in a spectacle lens, and Kaga teaches a base in prism refracts a ray toward the nose of the user, pars. [0024-26]),
wherein the spectacle lens has a reverse prism slope that has a sign opposite to a sign of an addition prism slope on a progressive zone at least in a distance side region of the addition prism curve expressed as a function of vertical coordinates on the spectacle lens (Kaga discloses a base in prism is formed in a portion of the spectacle lens in which power continuously changes and through which a main line of sight influenced by convergence of the user of the spectacle lens passes, such that at least a part of a base out prism which may be generated in the progressive region is cancelled, par. [0026], which as best understood by the Examiner is equivalent to a lens with a reverse prism slope with a sign opposite to a sign of an addition prism slope, and that the spectacle lens may be a progressive multifocal lens which includes a distance portion for viewing a distant area, par. [0099], therefore Kaga teaches the inclusion of the equivalent of a reverse prism slope in a distance zone of a progressive lens, and as depicted in at least Figs. 9 and 10, Kaga expresses the amount of prism as a function of position in the vertical direction, refer to at least par. [0032], thereby teaching the prism curve expressed as a function of vertical coordinates on the spectacle lens).
Kaga does not explicitly disclose an absolute value of the reverse prism slope is larger than 0.014 times the absolute value of the addition prism slope on the progressive zone (Kaga is silent as to parameters relevant to comparing the prior art to the instant limitation).
In the same field of invention, Izawa teaches a spectacle lens with progressive regions (abstract, and see at least Figs. 9A, 9B, and 9C thereof, par. [0082]) with a first example that has an addition refractive power change ratio less than or equal to the peak in the first existing design example (see Figs. 5A and 5B, par. [0065] thereof), and a differential value of the addition refractive power change ratio changes in the side closer to the near portion AN (refer to Fig. 3 thereof), demonstrating the addition refractive power change ratio is high in the side closer to the near portion AN (refer to at least par. [0083] and Fig. 3 thereof). Izawa teaches a section of the spectacle lens where the refractive power is progressively added and caused to overrun, i.e., the refractive power is progressively added to a predetermined range in the near portion AN (Fig. 3 thereof), beyond the ending point of the progressive region AP (refer to Figs. 3 and 9A thereof), and Izawa further teaches that causing the section where the refractive power is progressively added to overrun allows for suppressing variations in the differential value of the addition refractive power change ratio in the side closer to the near portion AN (Figs. 3 and 9C thereof), and thus allowing the addition refractive power change ratio in the side closer to the near portion AN to be gentle (Fig. 9B thereof), and suppressing the local variation of aberration (Figs. 10A-10C thereof, par. [0084]). As a result, Izawa discloses a preferable center vision performance is ensured by progressively adding 20 to 30% of the addition power to the range of the overrun (par. [0086] thereof). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have applied the teachings of Izawa to the disclosure of Kaga and ensured the center vision performance of the spectacles lenses is optimized by adding up to 30% of the addition power to the range of the overrun, to minimize discomfort for the spectacle wearer (Izawa, par. [0005]) by designing a short progressive region length in spectacle lens types such as a distance-near vision lens having progressive refractive power (Izawa, par. [0009]). Furthermore, the prior art combination of Kaga in view of Izawa teaches and renders obvious the limitation that an absolute value of the reverse prism slope is larger than 0.014 times the absolute value of the addition prism slope on the progressive zone because, as best understood by the Examiner, addition of up to 30% (i.e., 0.30) of the addition power to the progressive region satisfies the limitation of being larger than 0.014.
Regarding dependent claim 2, Kaga in view of Izawa (hereinafter, “modified Kaga”), discloses the spectacle lens according to claim 1, and Kaga and Izawa both further disclose wherein both on a principal meridian of the spectacle lens (Kaga Fig. 3, main line of sight is equivalent to a meridian, pars. [0003-4], and Izawa in par. [0002] defines a meridian as a principal vision line) and on an umbilical point that has been shifted toward the nose of the user by the base in prism (as best understood by the Examiner, an umbilical point is a point on a lens surface that has zero astigmatism, therefore Kaga in at least Fig. 15 discloses Example 1 with regions of zero astigmatism, and Izawa in at least Fig. 10A shows astigmatism distribution in the first example, par. [0082] thereof), and Izawa further discloses the absolute value of the reverse prism slope is larger than 0.014 times the absolute value of the addition prism slope on the progressive zone (Izawa discloses a preferable center vision performance is ensured by progressively adding 20 to 30% of the addition power to the range of the overrun, par. [0086] thereof). Therefore, the prior art combination teaches and renders obvious the limitation that a principal meridian and an umbilical point both have the absolute value of the reverse prism slope larger than 0.014 times the absolute value of the addition prism slope on the progressive zone.
Regarding dependent claim 3, modified Kaga discloses the spectacle lens according to claim 1, and Kaga further discloses wherein the absolute value of the prism slope is less than 0.00625 D/mm (Kaga, in Figs. 9-14 show graphs of prism diopters, from 0.00 to -0.80 D, versus position on meridian in millimeters, from 20 to -20, refer to at least pars. [0056-61], and over the plotted ranges there must be a point with a slope of less than 0.00625 D/mm).
The prior art combination does not explicitly disclose the absolute value of the reverse prism slope is less than 0.00625 D/mm. However, because the prior art combination teaches the inclusion of a base in prism to cancel unintended base out prism effects in the progressive region of a spectacle lens, the prior art inherently teaches the inclusion of a reverse prism slope with an absolute value of less than 0.00625 D/mm to cancel out any unintended prismatic effects with that slope so the spectacle lens disclosed functions as intended.
Regarding dependent claim 4, modified Kaga discloses the spectacle lens according to claim 3, and Kaga further discloses wherein both on a principal meridian of the spectacle lens and on an umbilical point that has been shifted toward the nose of the user by the base in prism, the absolute value of the prism slope is less than 0.00625 D/mm (Kaga in at least Fig. 15 discloses Example 1 with regions of zero astigmatism, and in Figs. 9-14 shows graphs of prism diopters, from 0.00 to -0.80 D, versus position on meridian in millimeters, from 20 to -20, refer to at least pars. [0056-61] of Kaga, and over the plotted ranges there must be a point with a slope of less than 0.00625 D/mm).
The prior art combination does not explicitly disclose the absolute value of the reverse prism slope is less than 0.00625 D/mm. However, because the prior art combination teaches the inclusion of a base in prism to cancel unintended base out prism effects in the progressive region of a spectacle lens, the prior art inherently teaches the inclusion of a reverse prism slope with an absolute value of less than 0.00625 D/mm to cancel out any unintended prismatic effects with that slope so the spectacle lens disclosed functions as intended.
Regarding dependent claim 5, modified Kaga discloses the spectacle lens according to claim 1, and Kaga further discloses wherein an amount of the base in prism that is added changes depending on a viewing distance (Kaga teaches the unintended prismatic effect generated by the distance power can be cancelled, par. [0109], and the amount of prism is determined at points by Equations 3 and 4, par. [0110], and Equation 7 indicates that the unintended base out prism is cancelled by the prescription prism, par. [0114], where Equation 7 relates unintended base out prism and distance h between the vertex of the horizontal sectional shape of the spectacle lens to a point on the main line of sight, par. [0019], therefore as best understood by the Examiner, the unintended base out prism in the distance viewing portion of the progressive lenses is canceled by a deliberate base in prism with refractive power that depends on viewing distance).
Regarding dependent claim 6, modified Kaga discloses the spectacle lens according to claim 1, and Kaga further discloses wherein a difference between a maximum value and a minimum value of the amount of the base in prism that is added is 0.25 D or more (Kaga in Figs. 9 and 10, shows the amount of prism, in diopters, as a function of position on the meridian, varies by up to 0.60 D, satisfying the instant limitation).
Regarding independent claim 7, Kaga discloses a manufacturing method of a spectacle lens to which a base in prism deflecting light toward a nose of a user is added (refer to at least title and par. [0001] disclosing manufacturing method for a spectacle lens, the abstract refers to a base in prism formed in spectacle lens, and Kaga teaches a base in prism refracts a ray toward the nose of the user, pars. [0024-26]), comprising:
a prism design step to design so that the spectacle lens has a reverse prism slope that has a sign opposite to a sign of an addition prism slope on a progressive zone at least in a distance side region of the addition prism curve expressed as a function of vertical coordinates on the spectacle lens (Kaga discloses a designing step of forming a shape of a base in prism in a portion in which power continuously changes and through which a main line of sight passes such that at least a part of a base out prism is cancelled, pars. [0026], [0045-46], and Kaga discloses that the spectacle lens may be a progressive multifocal lens which includes a distance portion for viewing a distant area, par. [0099], therefore Kaga teaches the inclusion of the equivalent of a reverse prism slope in a distance zone of a progressive lens, and as depicted in at least Figs. 9 and 10, Kaga expresses the amount of prism as a function of position in the vertical direction, refer to at laeast par. [0032], thereby teaching the prism curve expressed as a function of vertical coordinates on the spectacle lens).
Kaga does not explicitly disclose wherein in the prism design step, an absolute value of the reverse prism slope is designed to be is larger than 0.014 times the absolute value of the addition prism slope on the progressive zone (Kaga is silent as to parameters relevant to comparing the prior art to the instant limitation).
In the same field of invention, Izawa teaches a spectacle lens with progressive regions (abstract, and see at least Figs. 9A, 9B, and 9C thereof, par. [0082]) with a first example that has an addition refractive power change ratio less than or equal to the peak in the first existing design example (see Figs. 5A and 5B, par. [0065] thereof), and a differential value of the addition refractive power change ratio changes in the side closer to the near portion AN (refer to Fig. 3 thereof), demonstrating the addition refractive power change ratio is high in the side closer to the near portion AN (refer to at least par. [0083] and Fig. 3 thereof). Izawa teaches a section of the spectacle lens where the refractive power is progressively added and caused to overrun, i.e., the refractive power is progressively added to a predetermined range in the near portion AN (Fig. 3 thereof), beyond the ending point of the progressive region AP (refer to Figs. 3 and 9A thereof), and Izawa further teaches that causing the section where the refractive power is progressively added to overrun allows for suppressing variations in the differential value of the addition refractive power change ratio in the side closer to the near portion AN (Figs. 3 and 9C thereof), and thus allowing the addition refractive power change ratio in the side closer to the near portion AN to be gentle (Fig. 9B thereof), and suppressing the local variation of aberration (Figs. 10A-10C thereof, par. [0084]). As a result, Izawa discloses a preferable center vision performance is ensured by progressively adding 20 to 30% of the addition power to the range of the overrun (par. [0086] thereof). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have applied the teachings of Izawa to the disclosure of Kaga and ensured the center vision performance of the spectacles lenses is optimized by adding up to 30% of the addition power to the range of the overrun, to minimize discomfort for the spectacle wearer (Izawa, par. [0005]) by designing a short progressive region length in spectacle lens types such as a distance-near vision lens having progressive refractive power (Izawa, par. [0009]). Furthermore, the prior art combination of Kaga in view of Izawa teaches and renders obvious the limitation that an absolute value of the reverse prism slope is larger than 0.014 times the absolute value of the addition prism slope on the progressive zone because, as best understood by the Examiner, addition of up to 30% (i.e., 0.30) of the addition power to the progressive region satisfies the limitation of being larger than 0.014.
Regarding dependent claim 8, modified Kaga discloses the spectacle lens according to claim 1, and Kaga further discloses wherein the absolute value of the prism slope is less than 0.00625 D/mm (Kaga, in Figs. 9-14 show graphs of prism diopters, from 0.00 to -0.80 D, versus position on meridian in millimeters, from 20 to -20, refer to at least pars. [0056-61], and over the plotted ranges there must be a point with a slope of less than 0.00625 D/mm).
The prior art combination does not explicitly disclose the absolute value of the reverse prism slope is less than 0.00625 D/mm. However, because the prior art combination teaches the inclusion of a base in prism to cancel unintended base out prism effects in the progressive region of a spectacle lens, the prior art inherently teaches the inclusion of a reverse prism slope with an absolute value of less than 0.00625 D/mm to cancel out any unintended prismatic effects with that slope so the spectacle lens disclosed functions as intended.
Regarding dependent claim 9, modified Kaga discloses the spectacle lens according to claim 3, and Kaga further discloses wherein both on a principal meridian of the spectacle lens and on an umbilical point that has been shifted toward the nose of the user by the base in prism, the absolute value of the prism slope is less than 0.00625 D/mm (Kaga in at least Fig. 15 discloses Example 1 with regions of zero astigmatism, and in Figs. 9-14 shows graphs of prism diopters, from 0.00 to -0.80 D, versus position on meridian in millimeters, from 20 to -20, refer to at least pars. [0056-61] of Kaga, and over the plotted ranges there must be a point with a slope of less than 0.00625 D/mm).
The prior art combination does not explicitly disclose the absolute value of the reverse prism slope is less than 0.00625 D/mm. However, because the prior art combination teaches the inclusion of a base in prism to cancel unintended base out prism effects in the progressive region of a spectacle lens, the prior art inherently teaches the inclusion of a reverse prism slope with an absolute value of less than 0.00625 D/mm to cancel out any unintended prismatic effects with that slope so the spectacle lens disclosed functions as intended.
Regarding dependent claim 10, modified Kaga discloses the spectacle lens according to claim 2, and Kaga further discloses wherein an amount of the base in prism that is added changes depending on a viewing distance (Kaga teaches the unintended prismatic effect generated by the distance power can be cancelled, par. [0109], and the amount of prism is determined at points by Equations 3 and 4, par. [0110], and Equation 7 indicates that the unintended base out prism is cancelled by the prescription prism, par. [0114], where Equation 7 relates unintended base out prism and distance h between the vertex of the horizontal sectional shape of the spectacle lens to a point on the main line of sight, par. [0019], therefore as best understood by the Examiner, the unintended base out prism in the distance viewing portion of the progressive lenses is canceled by a deliberate base in prism with refractive power that depends on viewing distance).
Regarding dependent claim 11, modified Kaga discloses the spectacle lens according to claim 2, and Kaga further discloses wherein a difference between a maximum value and a minimum value of the amount of the base in prism that is added is 0.25 D or more (Kaga in Figs. 9 and 10, shows the amount of prism, in diopters, as a function of position on the meridian, varies by up to 0.60 D, satisfying the instant limitation).
Regarding dependent claim 12, modified Kaga discloses the spectacle lens according to claim 3, and Kaga further discloses wherein an amount of the base in prism that is added changes depending on a viewing distance (Kaga teaches the unintended prismatic effect generated by the distance power can be cancelled, par. [0109], and the amount of prism is determined at points by Equations 3 and 4, par. [0110], and Equation 7 indicates that the unintended base out prism is cancelled by the prescription prism, par. [0114], where Equation 7 relates unintended base out prism and distance h between the vertex of the horizontal sectional shape of the spectacle lens to a point on the main line of sight, par. [0019], therefore as best understood by the Examiner, the unintended base out prism in the distance viewing portion of the progressive lenses is canceled by a deliberate base in prism with refractive power that depends on viewing distance).
Regarding dependent claim 13, modified Kaga discloses the spectacle lens according to claim 3, and Kaga further discloses wherein a difference between a maximum value and a minimum value of the amount of the base in prism that is added is 0.25D or more (Kaga in Figs. 9 and 10, shows the amount of prism, in diopters, as a function of position on the meridian, varies by up to 0.60 D, satisfying the instant limitation).
Regarding dependent claim 14, modified Kaga discloses the spectacle lens according to claim 4, and Kaga further discloses wherein an amount of the base in prism that is added changes depending on a viewing distance (Kaga teaches the unintended prismatic effect generated by the distance power can be cancelled, par. [0109], and the amount of prism is determined at points by Equations 3 and 4, par. [0110], and Equation 7 indicates that the unintended base out prism is cancelled by the prescription prism, par. [0114], where Equation 7 relates unintended base out prism and distance h between the vertex of the horizontal sectional shape of the spectacle lens to a point on the main line of sight, par. [0019], therefore as best understood by the Examiner, the unintended base out prism in the distance viewing portion of the progressive lenses is canceled by a deliberate base in prism with refractive power that depends on viewing distance).
Regarding dependent claim 15, modified Kaga discloses the spectacle lens according to claim 4, and Kaga further discloses wherein a difference between a maximum value and a minimum value of the amount of the base in prism that is added is 0.25D or more (Kaga in Figs. 9 and 10, shows the amount of prism, in diopters, as a function of position on the meridian, varies by up to 0.60 D, satisfying the instant limitation).
Regarding dependent claim 16, modified Kaga discloses the spectacle lens according to claim 5, and Kaga further discloses wherein a difference between a maximum value and a minimum value of the amount of the base in prism that is added is 0.25D or more (Kaga in Figs. 9 and 10, shows the amount of prism, in diopters, as a function of position on the meridian, varies by up to 0.60 D, satisfying the instant limitation).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Justin W Hustoft whose telephone number is (571)272-4519. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 AM - 5:30 PM Eastern Time.
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, Thomas Pham can be reached at (571)272-3689. 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.
/JUSTIN W. HUSTOFT/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/THOMAS K PHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872