DETAILED ACTION
Response to Remarks
1. Applicant’s remarks (see pgs. 6-7), filed 07/15/2026, regarding the rejection of claims 1 and 6-13 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant appears to make arguments that “a consequence of the amendment above (replacing "movement" with "deviation of the body axis"), one of ordinary skill in the art would understand "good trunk balance" to mean a smaller deviation of the body axis of the person under evaluation. This renders the meaning of "good trunk balance" clear (see also paragraphs [0042] and [0052] of Applicant's original specification, in which the colored paper sheets / lens colors providing good trunk balance are selected by comparison with the trunk balance observed without a colored paper sheet / candidate lens color, or with a different colored paper sheet / candidate lens color” (pgs. 6-7). However, the newly-amended limitation fails to remedy the deficiencies of the claim limitation at hand. Applicant’s remarks directed to “the deviation of the body axis” are not germane to the issue at hand, namely that the as-filed specification fails to provide any objective standard for measuring the scope of the term in the form of specifying what a ‘good trunk balance’ corresponds to. Paragraphs ¶0043 and ¶0052 of the as-filed specification do not provide evidence indicating the limitations must be read into the claims to give meaning to the disputed term “good trunk balance”. See MPEP § 2145 Section VI, citing Constant v. Advanced Micro-Devices, Inc., 848 F.2d 1560, 1571-72, 7 USPQ2d 1057, 1064-1065 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 892 (1988). When subjective terminology is used in a claim, some objective standard must be provided in order to allow the public to determine the scope of the claim. See MPEP § 2173.05(b) Sections I & IV, citing Ex parte Oetiker, 23 USPQ2d 1641 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1992), In re Musgrave, 431 F.2d 882, 893 (CCPA 1970) and Datamize, 417 F.3d at 1344-45. Thus, Applicant’s remarks that the degree of deviation of the body axis implies good trunk balance are insufficient to overcome the indefiniteness issue because these statements are not reflected in the present claim language. Claim scope cannot depend solely on the unrestrained, subjective opinion of a particular individual purported to be practicing the invention. See also Datamize LLC v. Plumtree Software, Inc., 417 F.3d 1342, 1350, 75 USPQ2d 1801, 1807 (Fed. Cir. 2005)); see also Interval Licensing LLC v. AOL, Inc., 766 F.3d 1364, 1373, 112 USPQ2d 1188 (Fed. Cir. 2014). Thus, the Examiner maintains that Applicant’s amendments to the claims are insufficient to overcome the rejection of the claims under 35 U.S.C 112(b), as detailed supra and further below.
2. Applicant’s remarks (see pgs. 7-9) regarding the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant asserts that “in St. George, the subjects are only shown a pattern of colored dots projected onto a screen in their visual field; the subjects do not hold any colored object, and the colors of the projected pattern are not varied. By contrast, claim 1 of the present application requires that the person under evaluation hold each of things of different colors (e.g., colored paper sheets) in his/her hand in sequence, i.e., the person physically holds colored objects, and the colors held are varied through a sequence. Read in light of the specification (paragraphs [0039] and [0040]), this language denotes that the person under evaluation physically holds objects of different colors in his/her hand in sequence - a feature that is not disclosed in St. George.” Applicant also argues that “the manipulated variable in St. George is velocity of visual-field motion, not color. The experimental manipulation in St. George is the velocity of the visual field (the NATURAL/ SLOW / FAST conditions; see, e.g., St. George at pp. 1932-1934); the colored dots merely serve as a moving visual stimulus (optic flow). St. George neither presents different colors in sequence nor evaluates trunk balance per color. This confirms that the technical concept of St. George is fundamentally different from the present application, in which color itself is the variable to be optimized through a trunk-balance evaluation.” However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees for the following reasons. Applicant appears to be arguing features that are not positively recited anywhere in the claims. Applicant is respectfully reminded that although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See MPEP § 2145 Section VI, citing In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993) and Constant v. Advanced Micro-Devices, Inc., 848 F.2d 1560, 1571-72, 7 USPQ2d 1057, 1064-1065 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 892 (1988). The present claim language does not require that the person under evaluation must hold in their hand(s) each of things of different colors in sequence; rather, the claim language only requires that the person “hold each of things of different colors in sequence”. The disclosure of St. George satisfies the broadest reasonable interpretation of the present claim language light consistent with the specification, that the person under evaluation holds each of things of different colors in sequence by virtue of holding the moving colored dot pattern visual stimuli with his/her eyes (see FIG. 1 of St. George; p. 1932 c. 1: A visual pattern was projected onto this screen that filled subjects’ field of view…subjects were asked to keep their head in this orientation for the trial duration so that the screen filled their field of view (FOV)); furthermore, since the visual stimuli comprised three different presented colored visual field conditions projected in sequence to the person under evaluation (see pg. 1931 c. 2: “The projected visual pattern consisted of coloured dots (diameter 18 mm) randomly positioned with a density of 300 dots m–2….presenting the moving visual stimulus”; see also pg. 1932 c. 2 to 1933 c. 1: “each of the three presented visual field conditions [visual field forward, visual field backward and visual field stationary (NATURAL)]…these trials were repeated seven times for each of nine conditions: visual field (forward, backward, NATURAL)”; see also FIG. 1 showing three different patterns in the form of projected visual image velocities), St. George’s disclosure satisfies the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed limitation that the things of different colors are held by the person in sequence by virtue of the person under evaluation holding with their eyes things of different colors (i.e., St. George’s projected colored dot pattern visual stimuli) in sequence (i.e., the connected series of the three visual field conditions presented to the person wherein the sequence is temporal). The Examiner further notes that the present claim language does not require a particular type of sequential order, but merely that a sequence directed to things of different colors exists. St. George’s disclosure of the three visual field conditions satisfies the present claim language by disclosing both a temporal sequence (by virtue of the dot pattern moving with a particular velocity) and a sequence comprising the three different visual field conditions of the stimuli: “forward”, “backward” and “natural”. Applicant’s arguments that the sequence comprises a series of different colors and/or that the trunk balance is evaluated per color is not positively recited anywhere in the claims. Thus, none of Applicant’s arguments against the prior art of St. George are persuasive, the Examiner maintains that said reference discloses and therefore anticipates each and every limitation of the newly-amended Claim 1, as explained in detail below.
3. Applicant’s remarks (see pgs. 8-9) regarding the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant appears to make arguments that “Tanaka does not teach selecting a color based on a trunk balance measurement. In Tanaka, the lens color is selected according to the psychological/mental effect desired by the wearer (see paragraphs [0025]-[0029] of Tanaka: red - sympathetic-nervous-system dominance; green - calming / eye rest; blue - parasympathetic dominance; etc.; and claim 4 - "colored in a color determined according to the influence to be exerted on the wearer"). Tanaka does not teach or suggest selecting a color based on a measurement result of trunk balance of the person under evaluation.” However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees and notes that the Tanaka reference was not relied upon for teachings directed to the claimed ‘trunk balance measurement’ limitation, but rather for combining the teachings of St. George with the teachings of Tanaka specifically directed to the claimed eyewear lens color determination method in claims 6-13. In the interest of the clarity of the record, Applicant is reminded that one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See MPEP § 2145 Section IV, citing In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981) and In re Merck & Co., Inc., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Additionally, the Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s narrow selection of certain portions of the Tanaka reference disclosure to argue a lack of obviousness. Applicant is respectfully reminded that "The use of patents as references is not limited to what the patentees describe as their own inventions or to the problems with which they are concerned. They are part of the literature of the art, relevant for all they contain." In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)). See MPEP § 2123 Section I. Contrary to Applicant’s assertions, Tanaka does indeed teach in ¶0096 and ¶0125 that the eyewear lens color determination method comprising a color acquisition step provides measurement results of good trunk balance (¶0096: By wearing the prism glasses 1400 for a certain period of time or longer (for example, half a day, but not limited to this), the wearer can stimulate areas of the brain that are not normally affected by shifting the image input to the eyes. Furthermore, as shown in the above embodiment, it can also be used to correct the wearer's posture; ¶0125: wearing prism lens glasses for a certain period of time can influence the wearer's usual posture). Tanaka further discloses a color determination step in ¶0025-27 and ¶0066-67 (green, yellow, red eyewear lens colors based on acquisition step where the subject P2 is asked to maintain the posture during the mid-stance phase of walking). Given that good trunk balance equates to postural stability, Tanaka’s disclosure satisfies the present claim language directed to the color acquisition step providing measurement results of good trunk balance followed by a color determination step. Thus, the Applicant has not disputed with any evidence the Examiner’s factual findings regarding St. George’s teaching and St. George in view of Tanaka’s teaching, both findings rendering the obviousness of the claimed limitations as recited in newly amended claims.
Applicant appears to make arguments that “Tanaka's lens "selection" method (claim 20) is about prism base direction, not color. The lens-selection method recited in claim 20 (and described at paragraphs [0066]-[0075]) is performed by identifying an "immobile direction" of the eyeball of the subject and selecting a corresponding prism base direction (base-left / base-right / base-up / base-down). Claim 20 does not select a lens color, much less by reference to a trunk-balance measurement.” As a preliminary matter, the Examiner notes that there doesn’t appear to be a claim 20, as only claims 1 and 6-13 are being examined on the merits. Nonetheless, Examiner notes that Applicant has selected certain portions of Tanaka’s disclosure to argue that Tanaka’s selection precludes trunk balance measurement. However, it appears that Applicant has misconstrued Tanaka’s disclosure in that Tanaka discloses a trunk balance measurement as a component of measuring eyeball mobility. Applicant is directed to ¶0068-73 of Tanaka’s disclosure which states “as a step to determine the direction of movement, subject P2 is instructed to maintain a posture that is the mid-stance phase of the right leg (first posture), as shown in Figure 6…. check B) whether the user can maintain their posture while looking to the right using only their eyeballs… If the judgments are negative, a plan will be created to enhance spatial perception using the lens… wearing prism lens glasses for a certain period of time can influence the wearer's usual posture. More specifically, it is possible to achieve alignment with body coordinates through a visuospatial map (visuospatial coordinates), activate brain nerves, and use senses that are not normally utilized to generate visual perception that is easier to recognize through changes in the field of vision.” The Examiner further notes that the present claim language utilizes the open-ended transitional phrase “comprising”, thereby allowing additional, unrecited elements in the claims as within the scope of the claims. Tanaka additionally disclosing an eyeball mobility determination step does not teach away from the claimed method, but merely adds an additional element in accordance with the claim scope. Thus, Examiner maintains that Tanaka’s disclosure combined with the teachings of St. George render obvious the recited eyewear lens color determination method as it pertains to the trunk balance measurement.
Applicant argues that “The trunk-balance feedback loop of claims 7, 9, 11, and 13 is absent from both references. Claims 7, 9, 11, and 13 recite a specific sequence in which (i) a plurality of candidate colors is selected based on the color information acquired in the color acquisition step, (ii) the person under evaluation is caused to wear eyewear / contact lens / eyewear frame/ wearable thing of each candidate color in sequence, (iii) trunk balance is measured for each candidate, and (iv) the color that provides a measurement result of good trunk balance is determined. This trunk- balance feedback loop for color determination is taught or suggested by neither St. George nor Tanaka.” However, Applicant is also respectfully reminded that it is not necessary that the inventions of the St. George and Tanaka references be physically combinable to render obvious the invention under review, and that combining the teachings of references does not involve an ability to combine their specific structures. See MPEP § 2145 Section III, stating "The test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference.... Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of those references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art." In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425, 208 USPQ 871, 881 (CCPA 1981). See also In re Sneed, 710 F.2d 1544, 1550, 218 USPQ 385, 389 (Fed. Cir. 1983) and In re Nievelt, 482 F.2d 965, 179 USPQ 224, 226 (CCPA 1973). In the present case, Applicant appears to have misconstrued the disclosure of St. George reference with respect to the teachings of Tanaka. As stated in pgs. 12-13 of the Non-Final Office Action, St. George discloses: the person under evaluation is caused to have readily an unstable posture upon external application of a force to the person under evaluation, in order to measure trunk balance of the person under evaluation based on a movement of the person under evaluation produced by externally applying a force to the person under evaluation (pgs. 1935-36: During the pull [external force input], Fy forces acted on the body initially in the opposite direction to that of the pull in order to remain standing; pgs. 1933, 1941: When we are pushed or pulled unexpectedly, a fast and effective reaction by the postural muscles is required to avoid falling over…lateral weight shifts that were indicative of step preparation were identified when there was a lateral shear force (Fx) after the pull of over 5 N that lasted more than 50 ms occurring concurrently with diverging vertical forces (Fz) under the two feet; p. 1933 c. 1: Participants stood at a comfortable foot-width, with each foot on a separate force plate; p. 1931 c. 2: Wireless surface electromyography (EMG) was recorded bilaterally from muscles. The 3-D positions of infrared emitting diode markers were recorded…The EMG, ground reaction 3-D forces were recorded with a CODA motion-capture system). The Examiner further noted that St. George does not appear to explicitly disclose the color determination step as claimed. However, Tanaka teaches: in the color determination step, a plurality of candidates for eyewear lens colors is selected based on the color information acquired in the color acquisition step, then the person under evaluation is caused to wear eyewear with each eyewear lens color of the plurality of candidates in sequence, and an eyewear lens color that provides a measurement result of good trunk balance is determined (¶0025-27 and ¶0066-67: color acquisition step and trunk balance measurement; ¶0096: By wearing the prism glasses 1400, it can also be used to correct the wearer's posture; ¶0125: wearing prism lens glasses for a certain period of time can influence the wearer's usual posture). Thus, 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 method of St. George in view of Tanaka to satisfy the claimed condition, because such an eyewear lens color determination is known and selected to influence and correct the wearer’s posture when wearing prism lens glasses for a certain period of time, as taught in paragraph ¶0096, 0125 of Tanaka.
Applicant asserts that “Impermissible hindsight in the Examiner's combination rationale. The Examiner's rationale for combining the references goes beyond what Tanaka actually discloses. The Examiner's rationale, with respect, appears to draw on the present application's own disclosure to bridge the gap, which is impermissible hindsight reconstruction.” However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees and notes that "[a]ny judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based on hindsight reasoning, but so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was made and does not include knowledge gleaned only from applicant’s disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper." See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 1395, 170 USPQ 209, 212 (CCPA 1971). See also Uber Techs., Inc. v. X One, Inc., 957 F.3d 1334, 1339-40, 2020 USPQ2d 10476 (Fed. Cir. 2020). Furthermore, such an argument unaccompanied by evidentiary support is insufficient to rebut Examiner's finding of obviousness. Arguments of counsel cannot take the place of evidence in the record. See In re Schulze, 346 F.2d 600, 602, 145 USPQ 716, 718 (CCPA 1965); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 43 USPQ2d 1362 (Fed. Cir. 1997) ("An assertion of what seems to follow from common experience is just attorney argument and not the kind of factual evidence that is required to rebut a prima facie case of obviousness."). Applicant’s arguments lack any evidentiary findings with respect to Examiner relying on the instant disclosure to bridge any such gap. See discussion supra regarding Applicant’s arguments directed to details of Tanaka’s disclosure. Furthermore, Applicant’s arguments also do not comply with 37 CFR 1.111(c) because they do not clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Further, these arguments do not sufficiently show how the amendments avoid such references or objections.
Therefore, the Examiner has clearly articulated multiple reasons why the claimed invention would have been obvious, the rationales being: (1) combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, (2) known work in one field of endeavor prompting variations of it for use in the same field since the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art, and (3) some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention (see pgs. 9-26 of Non-Final Office Action on 04/28/2026). Thus, the Applicant has not disputed the Examiner’s evidentiary findings regarding the Tanaka and St. George references which support a conclusion of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 by utilization of valid rationales, as detailed previously and below.
In conclusion, as explained above, none of Applicant’s arguments against the prior art are persuasive, and thus the newly amended Claims 1 and 6-13 remain rejected based upon previously-cited references, as detailed below.
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 body axis must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). 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 § 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.
Claims 1 and 6-13 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 6-13 recite the limitation: “measurement result of good trunk balance”. It is unclear what is meant by the term ‘good trunk balance’ as this appears to be relative terminology, wherein the as-filed specification fails to provide any objective standard for measuring the scope of the term in the form of specifying what a ‘good trunk balance’ corresponds to. Rather, the instant disclosure merely restates in ipsis verbis the generic claim language, thereby rendering the limitation indefinite. When subjective terminology is used in a claim, some objective standard must be provided in order to allow the public to determine the scope of the claim. See MPEP § 2173.05(b) Sections I & IV, citing Ex parte Oetiker, 23 USPQ2d 1641 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1992), In re Musgrave, 431 F.2d 882, 893 (CCPA 1970) and Datamize, 417 F.3d at 1344-45. Similarly claims 1, 7, 9, 11 and 13 recite “the person under evaluation is caused to have readily an unstable posture upon external application of a force to the person under evaluation”. It is unclear what is meant by “unstable posture” since the disclosure fails to provide any objective standard for either a stable or an unstable posture, thereby rendering the limitation as subjective terminology and therefore indefinite. Claims 6-13 also recite: “measure trunk balance of the person under evaluation based on a movement of the person under evaluation produced by externally applying a force to the person under evaluation”. It is also unclear how the trunk balance is generally measured and what form of movement (of the person under evaluation) is measured in addition to the relationship between said movement and the external force applied on the person. The instant specification fails to elucidate this limitation beyond a mere restatement of the generic claim language, with no further support and/or clarity for such any mathematical relationship between the parameters as claimed. Thus, not only is the trunk balance measurement unclear as recited in the claims, but also what is meant by a “good trunk balance” as discussed supra. See also corresponding rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a). For the purposes of examination, these limitations will be treated as inherent. Claims 6-13 are dependent on claim 1 and therefore inherit at least the same deficiencies as claim 1.
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by St. George et al. (see NPL titled “Visual field motion during a body pull…” (2020)).
Regarding Claim 1, St. George discloses: A trunk balance measurement method for measuring trunk balance of a person (FIG. 1), comprising: an external force input step of causing a person under evaluation of which trunk balance is to be measured to have readily an unstable posture upon external application of a force to the person under evaluation (pgs. 1935-36: During the pull [external force input], Fy forces acted on the body initially in the opposite direction to that of the pull in order to remain standing; pgs. 1933, 1941: When we are pushed or pulled unexpectedly, a fast and effective reaction by the postural muscles is required to avoid falling over…lateral weight shifts that were indicative of step preparation were identified when there was a lateral shear force (Fx) after the pull of over 5 N that lasted more than 50 ms occurring concurrently with diverging vertical forces (Fz) under the two feet), then causing the person under evaluation to hold each of things of different colors in sequence (FIG. 1; p. 1932 c. 1: A visual pattern was projected onto this screen that filled subjects’ field of view [holding in view different colors in sequence]), and externally applying a force to the person under evaluation (p. 1932 c. 2: testing subjects over a 20 N pull force window); and a measurement step of measuring trunk balance of the person under evaluation based on a movement of the person under evaluation in the external force input step (p. 1933 c. 1: Participants stood at a comfortable foot-width, with each foot on a separate force plate; p. 1931 c. 2: Wireless surface electromyography (EMG) was recorded bilaterally from muscles. The 3-D positions of infrared emitting diode markers were recorded…The EMG, ground reaction 3-D forces were recorded with a CODA motion-capture system).
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 6-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over St. George et al. (see NPL titled “Visual field motion during a body pull…” (2020)) in view of Tanaka et al. (WO 2020/175591 A1).
The Examiner notes that the text of foreign references as cited throughout this Office Action are to the English translation retrieved from the Patent Translate feature of https://worldwide.espacenet.com on 04/18/2026 and provided herewith.
Regarding Claim 6, as best understood, St. George discloses the trunk balance measurement method according to Claim 1, as above. St. George does not appear to explicitly disclose: An eyewear lens color determination method for determining an eyewear lens color using the trunk balance measurement method, the eyewear lens color determination method comprising: a color acquisition step of acquiring color information on the thing providing measurement results of good trunk balance in the measurement step; and a color determination step of determining an eyewear lens color based on the color information acquired in the color acquisition step.
Tanaka is related to St. George with respect to determining an eyewear lens color using a trunk balance measurement method (¶0011, 0025, 0027, 0029 0034-35, 0050, 0061, 0067-73, 0096, 0125), and Tanaka teaches: An eyewear lens color determination method for determining an eyewear lens color using the trunk balance measurement method, the eyewear lens color determination method comprising (¶0001: a method for selecting lenses in prism eyeglasses; ¶0025: The prism lens 11 may be colored and transparent; ¶0096: By wearing the prism glasses 1400 for a certain period of time or longer (for example, half a day, but not limited to this), the wearer can stimulate areas of the brain that are not normally affected by shifting the image input to the eyes. Furthermore, as shown in the above embodiment, it can also be used to correct the wearer's posture; ¶0125: wearing prism lens glasses for a certain period of time can influence the wearer's usual posture): a color acquisition step of acquiring color information on the thing providing measurement results of good trunk balance in the measurement step; and a color determination step of determining an eyewear lens color based on the color information acquired in the color acquisition step (¶0027: if the prism lens 11 is made of transparent green, for example, it becomes an intermediate color between warm and cool colors, and because it is less stimulating, it can provide a sense of calm and security…green has long been believed to have an eye-soothing effect, and looking straight ahead through a green, transparent prism lens is expected to reduce eye strain; ¶0025: if the prism lens 11 is made red and transparent, it is expected that the sympathetic nervous system of the wearer P1 (see Figure 2) will become dominant over the parasympathetic nervous system; ¶0026: if the prism lens 11 is made of yellow transparent material, for example, it can stimulate the left brain of the wearer P1; ¶0066-67: The method for selecting lenses in prism glasses 1 involves performing an eyeball immobility direction determination step to determine the immobility direction of the subject P2's eyeball, and a lens selection step to select a prism lens 11 based on the immobility Direction… the subject P2 is asked to maintain the posture during the mid-stance phase of walking).
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 method of St. George in view of Tanaka to satisfy the claimed condition, because such an eyewear lens color determination is known and selected to influence and correct the wearer’s posture when wearing prism lens glasses for a certain period of time, as taught in paragraph ¶0096, 0125 of Tanaka.
Regarding Claim 7, as best understood, St. George discloses the trunk balance measurement method according to Claim 6, as above. St. George further discloses: then the person under evaluation is caused to have readily an unstable posture upon external application of a force to the person under evaluation, in order to measure trunk balance of the person under evaluation based on a movement of the person under evaluation produced by externally applying a force to the person under evaluation (pgs. 1935-36: During the pull [external force input], Fy forces acted on the body initially in the opposite direction to that of the pull in order to remain standing; pgs. 1933, 1941: When we are pushed or pulled unexpectedly, a fast and effective reaction by the postural muscles is required to avoid falling over…lateral weight shifts that were indicative of step preparation were identified when there was a lateral shear force (Fx) after the pull of over 5 N that lasted more than 50 ms occurring concurrently with diverging vertical forces (Fz) under the two feet; p. 1933 c. 1: Participants stood at a comfortable foot-width, with each foot on a separate force plate; p. 1931 c. 2: Wireless surface electromyography (EMG) was recorded bilaterally from muscles. The 3-D positions of infrared emitting diode markers were recorded…The EMG, ground reaction 3-D forces were recorded with a CODA motion-capture system).
St. George does not appear to explicitly disclose: in the color determination step, a plurality of candidates for eyewear lens colors is selected based on the color information acquired in the color acquisition step, then the person under evaluation is caused to wear eyewear with each eyewear lens color of the plurality of candidates in sequence, and an eyewear lens color that provides a measurement result of good trunk balance is determined.
Tanaka is related to St. George with respect to determining an eyewear lens color using a trunk balance measurement method (¶0011, 0025, 0027, 0029 0034-35, 0050, 0061, 0067-73, 0096, 0125), and Tanaka teaches: in the color determination step, a plurality of candidates for eyewear lens colors is selected based on the color information acquired in the color acquisition step, then the person under evaluation is caused to wear eyewear with each eyewear lens color of the plurality of candidates in sequence, and an eyewear lens color that provides a measurement result of good trunk balance is determined (¶0027: if the prism lens 11 is made of transparent green, for example, it becomes an intermediate color between warm and cool colors, and because it is less stimulating, it can provide a sense of calm and security…green has long been believed to have an eye-soothing effect, and looking straight ahead through a green, transparent prism lens is expected to reduce eye strain; ¶0025: if the prism lens 11 is made red and transparent, it is expected that the sympathetic nervous system of the wearer P1 (see Figure 2) will become dominant over the parasympathetic nervous system; ¶0026: if the prism lens 11 is made of yellow transparent material, for example, it can stimulate the left brain of the wearer P1; ¶0066-67: The method for selecting lenses in prism glasses 1 involves performing an eyeball immobility direction determination step to determine the immobility direction of the subject P2's eyeball, and a lens selection step to select a prism lens 11 based on the immobility Direction… the subject P2 is asked to maintain the posture during the mid-stance phase of walking; ¶0001: a method for selecting lenses in prism eyeglasses; ¶0025: The prism lens 11 may be colored and transparent; ¶0096: By wearing the prism glasses 1400 for a certain period of time or longer (for example, half a day, but not limited to this), the wearer can stimulate areas of the brain that are not normally affected by shifting the image input to the eyes. Furthermore, as shown in the above embodiment, it can also be used to correct the wearer's posture; ¶0125: wearing prism lens glasses for a certain period of time can influence the wearer's usual posture).
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 method of St. George in view of Tanaka to satisfy the claimed condition, because such an eyewear lens color determination is known and selected to influence and correct the wearer’s posture when wearing prism lens glasses for a certain period of time, as taught in paragraph ¶0096, 0125 of Tanaka.
Regarding Claim 8, as best understood, St. George discloses the trunk balance measurement method according to Claim 1, as above. St. George does not appear to explicitly disclose: A contact lens color determination method for determining a contact lens color using the trunk balance measurement method according to claim 1, the contact lens color determination method comprising: a color acquisition step of acquiring color information on the thing providing measurement results of good trunk balance in the measurement step; and a color determination step of determining a contact lens color based on the color information acquired in the color acquisition step.
Tanaka is related to St. George with respect to determining an eyewear color using a trunk balance measurement method (¶0011, 0025, 0027, 0029 0034-35, 0050, 0061, 0067-73, 0096, 0125), and Tanaka teaches: A lens color determination method for determining a lens color using the trunk balance measurement method according to claim 1, the lens color determination method comprising (¶0001: a method for selecting lenses in prism eyeglasses; ¶0025: The prism lens 11 may be colored and transparent; ¶0096: By wearing the prism glasses 1400 for a certain period of time or longer (for example, half a day, but not limited to this), the wearer can stimulate areas of the brain that are not normally affected by shifting the image input to the eyes. Furthermore, as shown in the above embodiment, it can also be used to correct the wearer's posture; ¶0125: wearing prism lens glasses for a certain period of time can influence the wearer's usual posture): a color acquisition step of acquiring color information on the thing providing measurement results of good trunk balance in the measurement step; and a color determination step of determining a lens color based on the color information acquired in the color acquisition step (¶0027: if the prism lens 11 is made of transparent green, for example, it becomes an intermediate color between warm and cool colors, and because it is less stimulating, it can provide a sense of calm and security…green has long been believed to have an eye-soothing effect, and looking straight ahead through a green, transparent prism lens is expected to reduce eye strain; ¶0025: if the prism lens 11 is made red and transparent, it is expected that the sympathetic nervous system of the wearer P1 (see Figure 2) will become dominant over the parasympathetic nervous system; ¶0026: if the prism lens 11 is made of yellow transparent material, for example, it can stimulate the left brain of the wearer P1; ¶0066-67: The method for selecting lenses in prism glasses 1 involves performing an eyeball immobility direction determination step to determine the immobility direction of the subject P2's eyeball, and a lens selection step to select a prism lens 11 based on the immobility Direction… the subject P2 is asked to maintain the posture during the mid-stance phase of walking).
Although Tanaka does not appear to explicitly disclose a contact lens color, Tanaka teaches a colored eyewear lens (¶0025-29). Therefore, substituting the colored eyewear lens of Tanaka for colored contact lens would yield a contact lens color determination method for determining a contact lens color using the trunk balance measurement method as claimed.
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 method of Tanaka via a simple substitution of colored contact lens to satisfy the claimed condition, because such a colored contact lens is known and selected to influence and correct the wearer’s posture when wearing the eyewear for a certain period of time, as taught in paragraph ¶0096, 0125 of Tanaka.
Regarding Claim 9, St. George discloses the trunk balance measurement method according to Claim 8, as above. St. George further discloses: the person under evaluation is caused to have readily an unstable posture upon external application of a force to the person under evaluation, in order to measure trunk balance of the person under evaluation based on a movement of the person under evaluation produced by externally applying a force to the person under evaluation (pgs. 1935-36: During the pull [external force input], Fy forces acted on the body initially in the opposite direction to that of the pull in order to remain standing; pgs. 1933, 1941: When we are pushed or pulled unexpectedly, a fast and effective reaction by the postural muscles is required to avoid falling over…lateral weight shifts that were indicative of step preparation were identified when there was a lateral shear force (Fx) after the pull of over 5 N that lasted more than 50 ms occurring concurrently with diverging vertical forces (Fz) under the two feet; p. 1933 c. 1: Participants stood at a comfortable foot-width, with each foot on a separate force plate; p. 1931 c. 2: Wireless surface electromyography (EMG) was recorded bilaterally from muscles. The 3-D positions of infrared emitting diode markers were recorded…The EMG, ground reaction 3-D forces were recorded with a CODA motion-capture system).
St. George does not appear to explicitly disclose: in the color determination step, a plurality of candidates for contact lens colors is selected based on the color information acquired in the color acquisition step, the person under evaluation is caused to wear either a contact lens or contact lenses with each color of the plurality of candidates in sequence, and a contact lens color providing a measurement result of good trunk balance is determined.
Tanaka is related to St. George with respect to determining an eyewear lens color using a trunk balance measurement method (¶0011, 0025, 0027, 0029 0034-35, 0050, 0061, 0067-73, 0096, 0125), and Tanaka teaches: in the color determination step, a plurality of candidates for lens colors is selected based on the color information acquired in the color acquisition step, the person under evaluation is caused to wear either a lens or lenses with each color of the plurality of candidates in sequence, and a lens color providing a measurement result of good trunk balance is determined (¶0027: if the prism lens 11 is made of transparent green, for example, it becomes an intermediate color between warm and cool colors, and because it is less stimulating, it can provide a sense of calm and security…green has long been believed to have an eye-soothing effect, and looking straight ahead through a green, transparent prism lens is expected to reduce eye strain; ¶0025: if the prism lens 11 is made red and transparent, it is expected that the sympathetic nervous system of the wearer P1 (see Figure 2) will become dominant over the parasympathetic nervous system; ¶0026: if the prism lens 11 is made of yellow transparent material, for example, it can stimulate the left brain of the wearer P1; ¶0066-67: The method for selecting lenses in prism glasses 1 involves performing an eyeball immobility direction determination step to determine the immobility direction of the subject P2's eyeball, and a lens selection step to select a prism lens 11 based on the immobility Direction… the subject P2 is asked to maintain the posture during the mid-stance phase of walking; ¶0001: a method for selecting lenses in prism eyeglasses; ¶0025: The prism lens 11 may be colored and transparent; ¶0096: By wearing the prism glasses 1400 for a certain period of time or longer (for example, half a day, but not limited to this), the wearer can stimulate areas of the brain that are not normally affected by shifting the image input to the eyes. Furthermore, as shown in the above embodiment, it can also be used to correct the wearer's posture; ¶0125: wearing prism lens glasses for a certain period of time can influence the wearer's usual posture).
Although Tanaka does not appear to explicitly disclose a contact lens color, Tanaka teaches a colored eyewear lens (¶0025-29). Therefore, substituting the colored eyewear lens of Tanaka for colored contact lens would yield a contact lens color determination method for determining a contact lens color using the trunk balance measurement method as claimed.
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 method of Tanaka via a simple substitution of colored contact lens to satisfy the claimed condition, because such a colored contact lens is known and selected to influence and correct the wearer’s posture when wearing the eyewear for a certain period of time, as taught in paragraph ¶0096, 0125 of Tanaka.
Regarding Claim 10, as best understood, St. George discloses the trunk balance measurement method according to Claim 1, as above. St. George does not appear to explicitly disclose: An eyewear frame color determination method for determining an eyewear frame color using the trunk balance measurement method according to claim 1, the eyewear frame color determination method comprising: a color acquisition step of acquiring color information on the thing providing measurement results of good trunk balance in the measurement step; and a color determination step of determining an eyewear frame color based on the color information acquired in the color acquisition step.
Tanaka is related to St. George with respect to determining an eyewear color using a trunk balance measurement method (¶0011, 0025, 0027, 0029 0034-35, 0050, 0061, 0067-73, 0096, 0125), and Tanaka teaches: An eyewear color determination method for determining an eyewear color using the trunk balance measurement method according to claim 1, the eyewear color determination method comprising (¶0001: a method for selecting lenses in prism eyeglasses; ¶0025: The prism lens 11 may be colored and transparent; ¶0096: By wearing the prism glasses 1400 for a certain period of time or longer (for example, half a day, but not limited to this), the wearer can stimulate areas of the brain that are not normally affected by shifting the image input to the eyes. Furthermore, as shown in the above embodiment, it can also be used to correct the wearer's posture; ¶0125: wearing prism lens glasses for a certain period of time can influence the wearer's usual posture): a color acquisition step of acquiring color information on the thing providing measurement results of good trunk balance in the measurement step; and a color determination step of determining an eyewear color based on the color information acquired in the color acquisition step (¶0027: if the prism lens 11 is made of transparent green, for example, it becomes an intermediate color between warm and cool colors, and because it is less stimulating, it can provide a sense of calm and security…green has long been believed to have an eye-soothing effect, and looking straight ahead through a green, transparent prism lens is expected to reduce eye strain; ¶0025: if the prism lens 11 is made red and transparent, it is expected that the sympathetic nervous system of the wearer P1 (see Figure 2) will become dominant over the parasympathetic nervous system; ¶0026: if the prism lens 11 is made of yellow transparent material, for example, it can stimulate the left brain of the wearer P1; ¶0066-67: The method for selecting lenses in prism glasses 1 involves performing an eyeball immobility direction determination step to determine the immobility direction of the subject P2's eyeball, and a lens selection step to select a prism lens 11 based on the immobility Direction… the subject P2 is asked to maintain the posture during the mid-stance phase of walking).
Although Tanaka does not appear to explicitly disclose an eyewear frame color, Tanaka teaches an colored eyewear lens in an eyewear frame (¶0116: the prism lens eyeglasses 2000 comprises a frame and a prism lens 11 as shown in the above embodiment. The frame comprises a bridge 2001, a front section 2002 (2002a, 2002b) connected by the bridge 2001 and holding the prism lens 11, a temple 2003 extending from the front section 2002b, an earpiece 2004 provided at the end of the temple, and a nose pad 2005 provided on the front section 2002 and in contact with the wearer's nose to support the prism lens glasses; ¶0009, 0079, 0091). Therefore, substituting the colored eyewear lens of Tanaka for colored eyewear frames would yield an eyewear frame color determination method for determining an eyewear frame color using the trunk balance measurement method as claimed.
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 method of Tanaka via a simple substitution of colored eyewear frames to satisfy the claimed condition, because such a colored eyewear frame is known and selected to influence and correct the wearer’s posture when wearing glasses for a certain period of time, as taught in paragraph ¶0096, 0125 of Tanaka.
Regarding Claim 11, St. George discloses the trunk balance measurement method according to Claim 10, as above. St. George further discloses: the person under evaluation is caused to have readily an unstable posture upon external application of a force to the person under evaluation, in order to measure trunk balance of the person under evaluation based on a movement of the person under evaluation produced by externally applying a force to the person under evaluation (pgs. 1935-36: During the pull [external force input], Fy forces acted on the body initially in the opposite direction to that of the pull in order to remain standing; pgs. 1933, 1941: When we are pushed or pulled unexpectedly, a fast and effective reaction by the postural muscles is required to avoid falling over…lateral weight shifts that were indicative of step preparation were identified when there was a lateral shear force (Fx) after the pull of over 5 N that lasted more than 50 ms occurring concurrently with diverging vertical forces (Fz) under the two feet; p. 1933 c. 1: Participants stood at a comfortable foot-width, with each foot on a separate force plate; p. 1931 c. 2: Wireless surface electromyography (EMG) was recorded bilaterally from muscles. The 3-D positions of infrared emitting diode markers were recorded…The EMG, ground reaction 3-D forces were recorded with a CODA motion-capture system).
St. George does not appear to explicitly disclose: in the color determination step, a plurality of candidates for eyewear frame colors is selected based on the color information acquired in the color acquisition step, then the person under evaluation is caused to wear eyewear with each eyewear frame color of the plurality of candidates in sequence, and then an eyewear frame color providing a measurement result of good trunk balance is determined.
Tanaka is related to St. George with respect to determining an eyewear lens color using a trunk balance measurement method (¶0011, 0025, 0027, 0029 0034-35, 0050, 0061, 0067-73, 0096, 0125), and Tanaka teaches: in the color determination step, a plurality of candidates for eyewear colors is selected based on the color information acquired in the color acquisition step, then the person under evaluation is caused to wear eyewear with each eyewear color of the plurality of candidates in sequence, and then an eyewear color providing a measurement result of good trunk balance is determined (¶0027: if the prism lens 11 is made of transparent green, for example, it becomes an intermediate color between warm and cool colors, and because it is less stimulating, it can provide a sense of calm and security…green has long been believed to have an eye-soothing effect, and looking straight ahead through a green, transparent prism lens is expected to reduce eye strain; ¶0025: if the prism lens 11 is made red and transparent, it is expected that the sympathetic nervous system of the wearer P1 (see Figure 2) will become dominant over the parasympathetic nervous system; ¶0026: if the prism lens 11 is made of yellow transparent material, for example, it can stimulate the left brain of the wearer P1; ¶0066-67: The method for selecting lenses in prism glasses 1 involves performing an eyeball immobility direction determination step to determine the immobility direction of the subject P2's eyeball, and a lens selection step to select a prism lens 11 based on the immobility Direction… the subject P2 is asked to maintain the posture during the mid-stance phase of walking; ¶0001: a method for selecting lenses in prism eyeglasses; ¶0025: The prism lens 11 may be colored and transparent; ¶0096: By wearing the prism glasses 1400 for a certain period of time or longer (for example, half a day, but not limited to this), the wearer can stimulate areas of the brain that are not normally affected by shifting the image input to the eyes. Furthermore, as shown in the above embodiment, it can also be used to correct the wearer's posture; ¶0125: wearing prism lens glasses for a certain period of time can influence the wearer's usual posture).
Although Tanaka does not appear to explicitly disclose an eyewear frame color, Tanaka teaches an colored eyewear lens in an eyewear frame (¶0116: the prism lens eyeglasses 2000 comprises a frame and a prism lens 11 as shown in the above embodiment. The frame comprises a bridge 2001, a front section 2002 (2002a, 2002b) connected by the bridge 2001 and holding the prism lens 11, a temple 2003 extending from the front section 2002b, an earpiece 2004 provided at the end of the temple, and a nose pad 2005 provided on the front section 2002 and in contact with the wearer's nose to support the prism lens glasses; ¶0009, 0079, 0091). Therefore, substituting the colored eyewear lens of Tanaka for colored eyewear frames would yield an eyewear frame color determination method for determining an eyewear frame color using the trunk balance measurement method as claimed.
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 method of Tanaka via a simple substitution of colored eyewear frames to satisfy the claimed condition, because such a colored eyewear frame is known and selected to influence and correct the wearer’s posture when wearing glasses for a certain period of time, as taught in paragraph ¶0096, 0125 of Tanaka.
Regarding Claim 12, as best understood, St. George discloses the trunk balance measurement method according to Claim 1, as above. St. George does not appear to explicitly disclose: A human wearable thing color determination method for determining a color of a human wearable thing using the trunk balance measurement method according to claim 1, the wearable thing color determination method comprising: a color acquisition step of acquiring color information on the thing providing measurement results of good trunk balance in the measurement step; and a color determination step of determining a color of a wearable thing of the person under evaluation based on the color information acquired in the color acquisition step.
Tanaka is related to St. George with respect to determining a human wearable thing color using a trunk balance measurement method (¶0011, 0025, 0027, 0029 0034-35, 0050, 0061, 0067-73, 0096, 0125), and Tanaka teaches: A human wearable thing color determination method for determining a color of a human wearable thing using the trunk balance measurement method according to claim 1, the wearable thing color determination method comprising: (¶0001: a method for selecting lenses in prism eyeglasses; ¶0025: The prism lens 11 may be colored and transparent; ¶0096: By wearing the prism glasses 1400 for a certain period of time or longer (for example, half a day, but not limited to this), the wearer can stimulate areas of the brain that are not normally affected by shifting the image input to the eyes. Furthermore, as shown in the above embodiment, it can also be used to correct the wearer's posture; ¶0125: wearing prism lens glasses for a certain period of time can influence the wearer's usual posture): a color acquisition step of acquiring color information on the thing providing measurement results of good trunk balance in the measurement step; and a color determination step of determining a color of a wearable thing of the person under evaluation based on the color information acquired in the color acquisition step (¶0027: if the prism lens 11 is made of transparent green, for example, it becomes an intermediate color between warm and cool colors, and because it is less stimulating, it can provide a sense of calm and security…green has long been believed to have an eye-soothing effect, and looking straight ahead through a green, transparent prism lens is expected to reduce eye strain; ¶0025: if the prism lens 11 is made red and transparent, it is expected that the sympathetic nervous system of the wearer P1 (see Figure 2) will become dominant over the parasympathetic nervous system; ¶0026: if the prism lens 11 is made of yellow transparent material, for example, it can stimulate the left brain of the wearer P1; ¶0066-67: The method for selecting lenses in prism glasses 1 involves performing an eyeball immobility direction determination step to determine the immobility direction of the subject P2's eyeball, and a lens selection step to select a prism lens 11 based on the immobility Direction… the subject P2 is asked to maintain the posture during the mid-stance phase of walking).
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 method of St. George in view of Tanaka to satisfy the claimed condition, because such a human wearable thing color determination is known and selected to influence and correct the wearer’s posture when wearing prism lens glasses for a certain period of time, as taught in paragraph ¶0096, 0125 of Tanaka.
Regarding Claim 13, St. George discloses the trunk balance measurement method according to Claim 12, as above. St. George further discloses: the person under evaluation is caused to have readily an unstable posture upon external application of a force to the person under evaluation, in order to measure trunk balance of the person under evaluation based on a movement of the person under evaluation produced by externally applying a force to the person under evaluation (pgs. 1935-36: During the pull [external force input], Fy forces acted on the body initially in the opposite direction to that of the pull in order to remain standing; pgs. 1933, 1941: When we are pushed or pulled unexpectedly, a fast and effective reaction by the postural muscles is required to avoid falling over…lateral weight shifts that were indicative of step preparation were identified when there was a lateral shear force (Fx) after the pull of over 5 N that lasted more than 50 ms occurring concurrently with diverging vertical forces (Fz) under the two feet; p. 1933 c. 1: Participants stood at a comfortable foot-width, with each foot on a separate force plate; p. 1931 c. 2: Wireless surface electromyography (EMG) was recorded bilaterally from muscles. The 3-D positions of infrared emitting diode markers were recorded…The EMG, ground reaction 3-D forces were recorded with a CODA motion-capture system).
St. George does not appear to explicitly disclose: in the color determination step, a plurality of candidates for colors of a wearable thing is selected based on the color information acquired in the color acquisition step, then the person under evaluation is caused to wear a wearable thing with each color of the plurality of candidates in sequence, and a color of the wearable thing providing a measurement result of good trunk balance is determined.
Tanaka is related to St. George with respect to determining an eyewear lens color using a trunk balance measurement method (¶0011, 0025, 0027, 0029 0034-35, 0050, 0061, 0067-73, 0096, 0125), and Tanaka teaches: in the color determination step, a plurality of candidates for colors of a wearable thing is selected based on the color information acquired in the color acquisition step, then the person under evaluation is caused to wear a wearable thing with each color of the plurality of candidates in sequence, and a color of the wearable thing providing a measurement result of good trunk balance is determined (¶0027: if the prism lens 11 is made of transparent green, for example, it becomes an intermediate color between warm and cool colors, and because it is less stimulating, it can provide a sense of calm and security…green has long been believed to have an eye-soothing effect, and looking straight ahead through a green, transparent prism lens is expected to reduce eye strain; ¶0025: if the prism lens 11 is made red and transparent, it is expected that the sympathetic nervous system of the wearer P1 (see Figure 2) will become dominant over the parasympathetic nervous system; ¶0026: if the prism lens 11 is made of yellow transparent material, for example, it can stimulate the left brain of the wearer P1; ¶0066-67: The method for selecting lenses in prism glasses 1 involves performing an eyeball immobility direction determination step to determine the immobility direction of the subject P2's eyeball, and a lens selection step to select a prism lens 11 based on the immobility Direction… the subject P2 is asked to maintain the posture during the mid-stance phase of walking; ¶0001: a method for selecting lenses in prism eyeglasses; ¶0025: The prism lens 11 may be colored and transparent; ¶0096: By wearing the prism glasses 1400 for a certain period of time or longer (for example, half a day, but not limited to this), the wearer can stimulate areas of the brain that are not normally affected by shifting the image input to the eyes. Furthermore, as shown in the above embodiment, it can also be used to correct the wearer's posture; ¶0125: wearing prism lens glasses for a certain period of time can influence the wearer's usual posture).
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 method of St. George in view of Tanaka to satisfy the claimed condition, because such a human wearable thing color determination is known and selected to influence and correct the wearer’s posture when wearing prism lens glasses for a certain period of time, as taught in paragraph ¶0096, 0125 of Tanaka.
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 extension fee 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 SAMANVITHA SRIDHAR whose telephone number is (571)270-0082. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0730-1700 (EST).
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 on 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.
/SAMANVITHA SRIDHAR/ Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/BALRAM T PARBADIA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights