Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/592,627

PROCESS OF MANUFACTURING CUSTOMIZED CONTACT LENS FOR ASTIGMATISM, CONTACT LENS MANUFACTURED BY THE PROCESS, AND UNFINISHED LENS OF THE CONTACT LENS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 01, 2024
Examiner
TAUFIQ, FARAH N
Art Unit
1754
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
163 granted / 264 resolved
-3.3% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+27.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
58 currently pending
Career history
322
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.5%
-37.5% vs TC avg
§103
54.6%
+14.6% vs TC avg
§102
19.2%
-20.8% vs TC avg
§112
18.9%
-21.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 264 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-9 in the reply filed on 8/19/2025 is acknowledged. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 1 and 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng (US2023/0166467 A1) in view of Siders (EP1409198 B1). Regarding claim 1, Zheng discloses a process of manufacturing a customized contact lens [abstract] for astigmatism [0053], comprising the steps of: (A) providing at least one optical part containing astigmatic optics [0053] on an anterior surface of a lens to prepare a male mold and a female mold respectively [0031], wherein the male mold is spaced from the female mold by a gap which includes a thickness of the optical part [0045]; (B) pouring material for contact lens into the female mold [0031] (figure 2a); (C) joining the male mold and the female mold (figure 2b); (D) curing the material for contact lens to form an unfinished lens, the unfinished lens including a convex front surface and a concave rear surface [0028 -0031]; (E) removing the female mold and machining the convex front surface of the unfinished lens on the male mold (figure 2c) to remove the thickness to be machined other than the optical part, Zheng does not explicitly disclose thickness to be machined and wherein the machining comprises the sub-steps of: (E1) executing a program of a prescription of contact lens to generate a lens document; (E2) using software installed in a CNC lathe to open the lens document and translating the lens document into a format which can be read by CNC lathe software; (E3) inputting a thickness of the unfinished lens into a CNC lathe computer and performing the CNC lathe software to read the thickness of the unfinished lens; and (E4) executing the CNC lathe software to activate the CNC lathe based on the lens document and the thickness of the unfinished lens; and (F) removing the unfinished lens and hydrating the unfinished lens to manufacture a finished contact lens. However, analogous lens art, Siders, discloses wherein the machining comprises the sub-steps of: (E1) executing a program of a prescription of contact lens to generate a lens document [0051]; (E2) using software installed in a CNC lathe to open the lens document and translating the lens document into a format which can be read by CNC lathe software [0072, 0070]; (E3) inputting a thickness of the unfinished lens into a CNC lathe computer and performing the CNC lathe software to read the thickness of the unfinished lens [0049]; and (E4) executing the CNC lathe software to activate the CNC lathe based on the lens document and the thickness of the unfinished lens [0057, 0060] for the benefit of significantly reduces the costs of acquiring and operating a full service surfacing and edging ophthalmic lens laboratory [0022]. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated wherein the machining comprises the sub-steps of: (E1) executing a program of a prescription of contact lens to generate a lens document; (E2) using software installed in a CNC lathe to open the lens document and translating the lens document into a format which can be read by CNC lathe software; (E3) inputting a thickness of the unfinished lens into a CNC lathe computer and performing the CNC lathe software to read the thickness of the unfinished lens; and (E4) executing the CNC lathe software to activate the CNC lathe based on the lens document and the thickness of the unfinished lens; and (F) removing the unfinished lens and hydrating the unfinished lens to manufacture a finished contact lens, as taught by Siders into the method taught by Zhen for the benefit of significantly reducing the costs of acquiring and operating a full service surfacing and edging ophthalmic lens laboratory. Regarding claim 5, Zheng teaches wherein the male mold is formed of a material configured to adhere to the unfinished lens and the female mold is formed of a material configured to not adhere to the unfinished lens [0031], figure 2c. Regarding claim 6, Zheng does not explicitly teach wherein three molds are provided, the female mold of each mold has the same curvature at a joining surface, and the male mold of each mold has a different curvature at the joining surface so that three unfinished lenses having different concave rear surfaces are manufactured, and the three unfinished lenses have the same convex front surface. However, Zheng does disclose having different curvatures of the male and female lenses [0028, 0030]. As for the multiple lens, according to MPEP 2144.04 IV duplication of parts is within the skillset of one ordinary skilled in the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated multiple lens in order to streamline processes. Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng (US2023/0166467 A1) in view of Siders (EP1409198 B1), as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Davison (US 2010/0109176 A1). Regarding claim 2, Zheng does not explicitly disclose wherein in step (A) at least one of optical combination of myopia, presbyopia, and multi-focus is incorporated into the convex front surface of the lens; and wherein in step (E) the unfinished lens having optical features including astigmatism, myopia, presbyopia, and multi-focus is machined. Analogous art, Davidson, discloses wherein in step (A) at least one of optical combination of myopia, presbyopia, and multi-focus is incorporated into the convex front surface of the lens; and wherein in step (E) the unfinished lens having optical features including astigmatism, myopia, presbyopia, and multi-focus is machined [0035]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated at least one of optical combination of myopia, presbyopia, and multi-focus is incorporated into the convex front surface of the lens; and wherein in step (E) the unfinished lens having optical features including astigmatism, myopia, presbyopia, and multi-focus is machined based on the design needs of the final product and for the benefit of having one lens that works in different conditions. Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng (US2023/0166467 A1)) in view of Siders (EP1409198 B1), as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Chou (US 2015/0035881 A1). Regarding claim 3, Zheng does not explicitly discloses an ink is applied on a predetermined area of the male mold before the male mold and the female mold are joined, and after the male mold and the female mold are joined, the material for contact lens penetrates or joins the ink to manufacture a color contact lens after the material for contact lens has been cured. However, one ordinary skill in the art would look to conventional art to determine the conventional way to add to color to lenses; wherein a transparent protective layer is applied on the male mold prior to applying ink on the male mold, the ink is disposed between the protective layer and the material for contact lens, and the male mold and the female mold are joined and cured thereafter. Analogous art, Chou et al, discloses an ink is applied on a predetermined area of the male mold before the male mold and the female mold are joined, and after the male mold and the female mold are joined, the material for contact lens penetrates or joins the ink to manufacture a color contact lens after the material for contact lens has been cured; wherein a transparent protective layer is applied on the male mold prior to applying ink on the male mold, the ink is disposed between the protective layer and the material for contact lens, and the male mold and the female mold are joined and cured thereafter (claim 8). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated determine the conventional way to add to color to lenses; wherein a transparent protective layer is applied on the male mold prior to applying ink on the male mold, the ink is disposed between the protective layer and the material for contact lens, and the male mold and the female mold are joined and cured, as taught by Chou into the method taught by Zeng in order to shorten manufacturing time [0007]. Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng (US2023/0166467 A1) in view of Siders (EP1409198 B1), as applied to claim 1, and further in view of CN113021738, herein referred to as ‘738. Regarding claim 7, Zheng teaches wherein the material for contact lens is hydrogel or silicone glue [0034], but does not explicitly disclose the male mold is formed of a highly polarized material and has a polarity different from that of the material for contact lens, and the female mold is formed of a non-polarized material. However, analogous lens art, ‘738, discloses the use of polarity treatment to only one of the lens (claim 1) for the benefit preventing excessive stickiness (last paragraph under background). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated disclose the male mold is formed of a highly polarized material and has a polarity different from that of the material for contact lens, and the female mold is formed of a non-polarized material, as taught by ‘738, into the method taught by Zheng for the benefit of preventing excessive stickiness. Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng (US2023/0166467 A1) in view of Siders (EP1409198 B1), as applied to claim 1, and further in view of CN117067644A, herein referred to as ‘644. Regarding claim 8, Zheng does not explicitly teaches wherein the male mold is polybutylene telephthalide (PBT) and the female mold is polypropylene (PP). However, analogous art, ‘644, discloses the male mold is made of PBT while the female mole is made of PPT [80]. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included wherein the male mold is polybutylene telephthalide (PBT) and the female mold is polypropylene (PP) since it is conventionally well known and easy to demold [008]. Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng (US2023/0166467 A1) in view of Siders (EP1409198 B1), as applied to claim 1, and further in view of JP2013/538139A, herein referred to as ‘139A. Regarding claim 9, Zheng teaches, wherein in step (E) a chuck (20) is provided on an axis of rotation and is configured to fasten the male mold so as to machine the convex front surface of the unfinished lens [0052];but does not explicitly disclose wherein a pressure of 0.40-0.60mpa is applied on the male mold by the chuck. However, analogous art, ‘139, discloses a backpressure of 0.5-2.5 Mpa, which overlaps with applicant’s range of 0.40-.60 mpa (claim 1). Further, MPEP 2144.05 states In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have determined the optimum values of the relevant process parameters through routine experimentation in the absence of a showing of criticality. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARAH N TAUFIQ whose telephone number is (571)272-6765. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 8:00 am-4:30 pm. 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, Susan Leong can be reached at (571)270-1487. 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. /FARAH TAUFIQ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1754
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 01, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594603
HEATING/COOLING OF A PROCESS CHAMBER OF A MANUFACTURING DEVICE FOR ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING OF THREE-DIMENSIONAL COMPONENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594699
METHOD FOR PRODUCING POLYPROPYLENE-BASED RESIN EXPANDED BEADS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589550
PCD EXTRUSION NOZZLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12576608
METHOD OF MANUFACTURING A TUNABLE MIDSOLE FOR AN ARTICLE OF FOOTWEAR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570050
METHOD OF USING A PRINT HEAD ASSEMBLY FOR EXTRUSION-BASED ADDITIVE CONSTRUCTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
62%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+27.0%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 264 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month