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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 2-10-26 has been entered and fully considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-9, 17, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris et al. (US 2021/0349322) in view of Lee et al. (US 2023/0049355).
Regarding claim 1, Harris (Fig. 1 and 19) discloses a head-mountable electronic device, comprising:
a housing (102);
an optical module (1915A and 1915B) secured to the housing (“102 incorporates one or more displays” as discussed in [0151]);
a strap (103) connected to the housing (via 111, as discussed in [0167]) and electrically connected to the optical module (eg. connected to the display with “power-cabling” as discussed in [0169]), the strap defining a volume (the temple arms include “an interior hollow region” as discussed in [0169]) and including a processor (1420) disposed in the volume (“the Processor Module 1420 is located… in one of the Temple Arms 1430” discussed in [0190]); and
a securement band (101) connected to the strap (via 110).
However, Harris fails to teach or suggest a facial interface, or wherein the strap includes a first and second stiffener.
Lee (Fig. 3, 7, and 20) discloses a head-mountable electronic device, comprising:
a housing (322);
an optical module (312) secured to the housing (similarly to the “display contained by the display unit housing 22” discussed in [0964]);
a facial interface (311) connected to the housing (as seen in Fig. 7a);
a strap (326) connected to the housing (as seen in Fig. 7a, connected to 322, similarly to how 26 is connected to 22 via 28, as discussed in [0966]), the strap including a first stiffener (a first part of the rigidiser 360 inside the right side strap, seen in Fig. 7a, similar to 32 shown in Fig. 3, which includes multiple rigid segments, see “a plurality of flexible sections (e.g., flexible section formed by a flexible or bendable material) spaced apart by rigid segments” discussed in [0983]) in an upper region of the strap at a first location (“the hinges and/or weakened regions may extend transverse to the longitudinal direction or may extend in the longitudinal direction” as discussed in [0982], and so when separated horizontally in the view of Fig. 3, at least two of the rigid sections will be above and below each other in one area of the strap, with the claimed “first stiffener” being the rigid segment above the flexible section) and a second stiffener in a lower region of the strap at a second location (as discussed above, at least two of the rigid sections will be above and below each other in one area of the strap, with the claimed “second stiffener” being the rigid segment below the flexible section), wherein the first stiffener and the second stiffener are configured to flex in a first direction to accommodate a curvature of a user's head (“rigidisers can be flexible or able to conform to the user's head along the longitudinal axis of the rigidiser” as discussed in [0980], and so the “first direction” corresponds to the horizontal direction as shown in Fig. 7a) and remain substantially rigid in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction (“cannot flex or deform across their width” discussed in [0980], with the “width” and “longitudinal axis” of the straps being perpendicular, eg. the vertical direction in Fig. 7a); and
a securement band (348) connected to the strap (via 338).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Harris to include a facial interface and stiffeners as taught by Lee because this allows the device to “engage with the face and include a cushion for user comfort and/or be light sealing to cut ambient light from the display” (see [0007]).
Regarding claim 17, Harris (Fig. 1 and 19) discloses a head-mountable display device, comprising:
a housing (102);
an optical module (1915A and 1915B) translatably connected (via rail 1140 which can “allow lateral motion” as discussed in [0181]) to the housing (“102 incorporates one or more displays” as discussed in [0151]), the optical module including a display screen (eg. an “LCD display, LED display, or OLED display” discussed in [0092]);
a first strap (103 on the left, seen in Fig. 1) connected to the housing (via 111, as discussed in [0167]), the first strap defining a first volume (the temple arms include “an interior hollow region” as discussed in [0169]) and comprising:
a processor (1420) disposed in the volume (“the Processor Module 1420 is located… in one of the Temple Arms 1430” discussed in [0190]);
a power connector (eg. a “USB Type C connection” as discussed in [0190]); and
a first conductor (called “power cabling” in [0169]) electrically connecting the power connector to the processor (“Power flows… into the other Temple Arm wherein resides the processor” discussed in [0190]) and the optical module (the “power-cabling” also connects to the display as discussed in [0169]);
a second strap (103 on the right, seen in Fig. 1) connected to the housing (via 111, see Fig. 1), the second strap defining a second volume (both temple arms include “an interior hollow region” as discussed in [0169]) and comprising a second conductor (another part of the “power cabling”) electrically connecting to the power connector (the second strap, corresponding to a “battery temple arm” in [0190], includes a battery which sources the power for the cabling, see “Power flows from the battery-temple arm through the Display 1410 and into the other Temple Arm wherein resides the processor” discussed in [0190]); and
a band (101) connected to the first strap and the second strap (101 is connected to both straps 103 via hinges 110).
However, Harris fails to teach or suggest a facial engagement structure, or wherein the straps include stiffeners.
Lee (Fig. 3, 75, and 20) discloses a head-mountable display device, comprising:
a housing (322);
an optical module (312) connected to the housing (similarly to the “display contained by the display unit housing 22” discussed in [0964]), the optical module including a display screen (“display screen” discussed in [1582]);
a facial engagement structure (311) disposed on an external surface of the housing (as seen in Fig. 7a);
a first strap (the left side 326, seen in Fig. 7c, corresponding to 26 in Fig. 3) connected to the housing (as seen in Fig. 7c, connected to 322, similarly to how 26 is connected to 22 via 28, as discussed in [0966]), the first strap including a first stiffener (360, called a “rigidiser”) configured to flex in a first direction (“rigidisers can be flexible or able to conform to the user's head along the longitudinal axis of the rigidiser” as discussed in [0980]) more than in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction (“cannot flex or deform across their width” discussed in [0980], with the “width” and “longitudinal axis” of the straps being perpendicular); and
a second strap (the right side 360, seen in Fig. 7a and 7c) connected to the housing (as seen in Fig. 7c), the second strap including a plurality of second stiffeners (a plurality of 360 shown in Fig. 7a, see also [1250] which discusses how “multiple stiffeners 13900 may be used” and “as shown in FIG. 3a-2, stiffeners 13900 are spaced apart from one another around the different straps,” and “an unstiffened region 13902 (see e.g., FIG. 75) is disposed in the gap between the adjacent stiffeners 13900”) configured to flex in a first direction (“rigidisers can be flexible or able to conform to the user's head along the longitudinal axis of the rigidiser” as discussed in [0980]) more than in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction (“cannot flex or deform across their width” discussed in [0980], see also Fig. 5, with the “width” and “longitudinal axis” of the straps being perpendicular); and
a band (labelled 16 in Fig. 3, corresponding to 348 in Fig. 7) connected to the first strap and the second strap (eg. 26 connects to 16 as seen in Fig. 3, while 348 connects to both straps 326 via 338 as seen in Fig. 7b), wherein the plurality of second stiffeners are configured to engage with the band (“the rigidiser 32 may form a lever-arm, i.e. a means to pivot, about the rear support hoop 16. Advantageously, the support hoop 16 can provide an anchor point for the positioning and stabilising structure 14, thus forming a pivot point. The rigidiser may articulate about the anchor point of the hoop 16” as discussed in [0973]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Harris to include a facial engagement structure as taught by Lee because this allows the device to “engage with the face and include a cushion for user comfort and/or be light sealing to cut ambient light from the display” (see [0007]).
Regarding claim 2, Harris and Lee disclose a head-mountable electronic device as discussed above, and Harris further discloses wherein the optical module comprises:
a movable display (seen in Fig. 10, the display 1001 can be moved side to side to allow for “accommodating inter-pupillary distance (IPD) adjustment” as discussed in [0180]);
a motor (adjustment using “motorized control” discussed in [0156]) connected to the display (both commonly connected to 102, as discussed in [0156]); and
a sensor (1935) facing inward to detect a facial feature (eg. gaze direction) of a user donning the head-mountable electronic device (“Eye-tracking subsystem 1935 for tracking the position of the user's eye and direction of the user's gaze” discussed in [0223]).
Regarding claim 3, Harris and Lee disclose a head-mountable electronic device as discussed above, and Harris further discloses wherein the optical module comprises:
a first display (1915A);
a second display (1915B); and
a sensor (1935) facing inward to detect a facial feature (eg. gaze direction) of a user donning the head-mountable electronic device (“Eye-tracking subsystem 1935 for tracking the position of the user's eye and direction of the user's gaze” discussed in [0223]).
Regarding claim 4, Harris and Lee disclose a head-mountable electronic device as discussed above, and Lee further discloses wherein the facial interface comprising:
a structural frame (821) connected to the housing (eg. via magnets, as discussed in [1182]); and
a pad (813, called a “foam cushion” in [1135]) connected to the structural frame (the foam cushion is attached “directly to the chassis 821” as discussed in [1137]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Harris and Lee for the same reasons as discussed above.
Regarding claim 5, Harris and Lee disclose a head-mountable electronic device as discussed above, and Lee further discloses wherein the structural frame is magnetically attached to the housing (the magnets 3114 are “sufficient to retain the display unit housing in an operational position in relation to the user interfacing structure 811” as discussed in [1182]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Harris and Lee for the same reasons as discussed above.
Regarding claim 6, Harris and Lee disclose a head-mountable electronic device as discussed above, and Harris further discloses wherein:
the strap is connected to the housing on a first end (via 111 as discussed above, see Fig. 1);
the strap further comprises a power connector (called “power cabling” in [0169] and “implemented using a USB Type C connection” as discussed in [0190]) disposed on a second end (the cabling “enter the temple-arm 103 at the hinge-point 110” as discussed in [0169]); and
the power connector is electrically connected to the processor (“Power flows from the battery-temple arm through the Display 1410 and into the other Temple Arm wherein resides the processor” discussed in [0190]) and the optical module (“cabling from the Battery 116 providing power to the Display 102” discussed in [0169]).
Regarding claim 7, Harris and Lee disclose a head-mountable electronic device as discussed above, and Harris further discloses wherein the device comprises a speaker disposed in the volume (“temple arm 103 may incorporate a speaker” discussed in [0179]).
Regarding claim 8, Harris and Lee disclose a head-mountable electronic device as discussed above, and Harris further discloses wherein the strap comprises:
a first strap (the left side 103, seen in Fig. 1) connected to the housing (via 111); and
a second strap (the right side 103) connected to the housing (via 111), the second strap connected to the securement band (via 110).
Regarding claim 9, Harris and Lee disclose a head-mountable electronic device as discussed above, and Harris further discloses wherein:
the securement band is flexible (101 is “formed from a flexible material” as discussed in [0161]); and
the securement band is rotatably connected to the strap (via “hinge” 110).
Regarding claim 18, Harris and Lee disclose a head-mountable display device as discussed above, and Harris further discloses the device comprising:
a first speaker disposed in the first volume (“each temple arm 103 may incorporate a speaker” as discussed in [0179]); and
a second speaker disposed in the second volume (both arms include a speaker as discussed above).
Regarding claim 20, Harris and Lee disclose a head-mountable display device as discussed above, and Lee further discloses wherein the facial engagement structure is removably connected (“formed as a separate removable component” discussed in [1118]) to the housing via a magnet (the magnets 3114 are “sufficient to retain the display unit housing in an operational position in relation to the user interfacing structure 811” as discussed in [1182]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Harris, Lee, and Aghara for the same reasons as discussed above.
Claims 10-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris in view of Lee and Aghara et al. (US 2017/0344107).
Regarding claim 10, Harris (Fig. 1 and 19) discloses a wearable electronic device, comprising:
a housing (102);
a first optical module (1915A) secured to the housing (“102 incorporates one or more displays” as discussed in [0151]), the first optical module comprising a first display screen (eg. an “LCD display, LED display, or OLED display” discussed in [0092]), the first display screen and the first sensor facing an inward direction (facing inward towards the user’s eye, see “Left display 1915A within the left POD of the NR2I HMD for rendering content to a left eye of a user” discussed in [0216]);
a second optical module (1915B) secured to the housing (similarly to above, “102 incorporates one or more displays” as discussed in [0151]), the second optical module comprising a second display screen (eg. an “LCD display, LED display, or OLED display” discussed in [0092]), the second display screen facing the inward direction (facing inward towards the user’s eye, see “Right display 1915B within the right POD of the NR2I HMD for rendering content to a right eye of the user” discussed in [0217]);
a first electronic strap (103 on the left, seen in Fig. 1) connected to a first side of the housing (connected to the left side via 111, as discussed in [0167]) and electrically connected to the first optical module (eg. connected to the display with “power-cabling” as discussed in [0169]), the first electronic strap defining a volume (the temple arms include “an interior hollow region” as discussed in [0169]) and including a processor (1420) disposed in the volume (“the Processor Module 1420 is located… in one of the Temple Arms 1430” discussed in [0190]); and
a second electronic strap (103 on the right, seen in Fig. 1) connected to a second side of the housing (connected to the right side via 111, see Fig. 1), the second electronic strap electrically connected to the first electronic strap (“Power flows from the battery-temple arm through the Display 1410 and into the other Temple Arm wherein resides the processor” discussed in [0190]) and defining a second volume (both temple arms include “an interior hollow region” as discussed in [0169]); and
a band (101) connected to the first electronic strap and the second electronic strap (connected to both via hinges 110).
However, Harris fails to teach or suggest a facial interface, or wherein the first and second optical modules specifically include sensors facing the inward direction, or wherein the straps include stiffeners or a channel.
Lee (Fig. 3 and 20) discloses a wearable electronic device, comprising:
a housing (22);
a first optical module (12) secured to the housing (“display contained by the display unit housing 22” discussed in [0964]);
a facial interface (11) connected to the housing (as seen in Fig. 3c);
a first electronic strap (26 on the left, see Fig. 3c) connected to a first side of the housing (connected to the left side of 22 via 28, as discussed in [0966]), the first electronic strap including a first stiffener (32, called a “rigidiser”) configured to allows the first electronic strap to flex in a first direction (“rigidisers can be flexible or able to conform to the user's head along the longitudinal axis of the rigidiser” as discussed in [0980]) more than in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction (“cannot flex or deform across their width” discussed in [0980], see also Fig. 5, with the “width” and “longitudinal axis” of the straps being perpendicular); and
a second electronic strap (26 on the right, see Fig. 3c) connected to a second side of the housing (connected to the right side of 22 via 28), the second electronic strap including a channel (as seen in Fig. 3d, the strap 26 includes a channel in the interior to receive the rigidiser 32, “rigidisers 32 may be encapsulated within the resilient (e.g. elastomeric and/or textile) component 34 of the temporal arms 26” discussed in [0969], and the examiner interprets the location inside of the straps with the rigidiser to read upon the claimed “channel”) configured to receive a second stiffener (32, called a “rigidiser” similarly to as discussed above regarding the first electronic strap, see [0967] which discusses how both “arms” 26 include a rigidiser) configured to allow the second electronic strap to flex in a first direction (“rigidisers can be flexible or able to conform to the user's head along the longitudinal axis of the rigidiser” as discussed in [0980]) more than in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction (“cannot flex or deform across their width” discussed in [0980], see also Fig. 5, with the “width” and “longitudinal axis” of the straps being perpendicular), wherein the second stiffener is removably received by the channel (eg. the inside of a “sock” or “sleeve,” see “a sleeve (e.g., constructed from comfortable material like textile) may be removably positioned along at least a portion of one or both temporal arms 26” discussed in [0993], and “a sock (e.g., a cover or an enclosure) of user contacting material (e.g., Breath-O-Prene™) may be wrapped or slid over the rigidiser” discussed in [0986]); and
a band (16) connected to the first electronic strap and the second electronic strap (connected to both via 30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Harris to include a facial interface as taught by Lee because this allows the device to “engage with the face and include a cushion for user comfort and/or be light sealing to cut ambient light from the display” (see [0007]).
However, Harris and Lee still fail to teach or suggest a first optical module comprising a first sensor or a second optical module comprising a second sensor.
Aghara (Fig. 1-3) discloses a wearable electronic device, comprising:
a housing (unlabeled, but shown in Fig. 3A, housing elements 243, 251, etc.);
a first optical module (corresponding to the module for the left eye, including sensor 341A, lens 343A, and “sub-display” 315A seen in Fig. 3B, with “two lenses 243 and/or two displays offered by display screens 245” also discussed in [0028]) secured to the housing (as seen in Fig. 3A, displays 245 are inside the housing), the first optical module comprising a first display screen (315A) and a first sensor (241A), the first display screen and the first sensor facing an inward direction (seen in Fig. 3B, see also “users eyes would not only face lenses 243 but also view any virtual reality display when shown on one or more display screens” discussed in [0044], and “eye-tracking sensors 341A, 341B are placed to track the corresponding pupils” discussed in [0051]);
a second optical module (corresponding to the module for the right eye, including sensor 341B, lens 343B, and “sub-display” 315B seen in Fig. 3B, with “two lenses 243 and/or two displays offered by display screens 245” also discussed in [0028]) secured to the housing (as seen in Fig. 3A), the second optical module comprising a second display screen (315B) and a second sensor (341B), the second display screen and the second sensor facing the inward direction (similarly to as discussed above, facing inwards towards the user’s right eye, as seen in Fig. 3B);
a facial interface (251) connected to the housing (as seen in Fig. 3A);
a first electronic strap (the left side strap 253) connected to a first side of the housing (connected to the left side of the housing, as seen in Fig. 3A);
a second electronic strap (the right side strap 253) connected to a second side of the housing (connected to the right side of the housing, as seen in Fig. 3A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Harris and Lee to include a first and second sensor in the first optical module and second optical module as taught by Aghara because this allows the device to “compute an accurate IPD of the user… for clarity and comfort to facilitate the optimum virtual reality experience for the user” (see [0028]).
Regarding claim 11, Harris, Lee, and Aghara disclose a wearable electronic device as discussed above, and Harris further discloses the device comprising:
a first speaker disposed in the first volume (“each temple arm 103 may incorporate a speaker” as discussed in [0179]); and
a second speaker disposed in the second volume (both arms include a speaker as discussed above).
Regarding claim 12, Harris, Lee, and Aghara disclose a wearable electronic device as discussed above, and Harris further discloses the first electronic strap comprising a power connector (called “power cabling” in [0169] and “implemented using a USB Type C connection” as discussed in [0190]) electrically connected to the processor (“Power flows from the battery-temple arm through the Display 1410 and into the other Temple Arm wherein resides the processor” discussed in [0190]).
Regarding claim 13, Harris, Lee, and Aghara disclose a wearable electronic device as discussed above, and Harris further discloses wherein:
the first electronic strap is removably connected to the housing (“Temple-Arm 1430 is… removably… attached to the Display Module 1410” discussed in [0192]); and
the second electronic strap is removably connected to the housing (as discussed above, both temple arms are removable).
Regarding claim 14, Harris, Lee, and Aghara disclose a wearable electronic device as discussed above, and Aghara further discloses the device comprising:
a first motor (317A) movably connecting the first optical module to the housing (“one or more motor(s) 217 serving as a movement mechanism for facilitating movement of one or more lenses 243 and/or one or more displays” discussed in [0021] and “two displays offered by display screens 245 may be movable” discussed in [0028]); and
a second motor (317B) movably connecting the second optical module to the housing (similarly to as discussed above, 317B will move the lens and display of the right eye optical module).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Harris, Lee, and Aghara for the same reasons as discussed above.
Regarding claim 15, Harris, Lee, and Aghara disclose a wearable electronic device as discussed above, and Lee further discloses the facial interface comprising:
a structural frame (821) connected to the housing (eg. via magnets, as discussed in [1182]); and
a pad (813, called a “foam cushion” in [1135]) connected to the structural frame (the foam cushion is attached “directly to the chassis 821” as discussed in [1137]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Harris, Lee, and Aghara for the same reasons as discussed above.
Regarding claim 16, Harris, Lee, and Aghara disclose a wearable electronic device as discussed above, and Lee further discloses wherein the facial interface removably connected (“formed as a separate removable component” discussed in [1118]) to the housing by a magnet (the magnets 3114 are “sufficient to retain the display unit housing in an operational position in relation to the user interfacing structure 811” as discussed in [1182]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Harris, Lee, and Aghara for the same reasons as discussed above.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris and Lee as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Aghara.
Regarding claim 19, Harris and Lee disclose a head-mountable display device as discussed above, and although Harris teaches a motor (“motorized control” discussed in [0156]), Harris and Lee fail to teach or suggest “a motor translatably connecting the optical module to the housing, the processor controllably connected to the motor.”
Aghara (Fig. 1-3) discloses a head-mountable display device, comprising:
a housing (unlabeled, but shown in Fig. 3A, housing elements 243, 251, etc.);
an optical module (eg. including lens 343A, and “sub-display” 315A seen in Fig. 3B) translatably connected to the housing (as seen in Fig. 3A, displays 245 are inside the housing, while [0049] discusses how they can be moved “to the left or right of the X-axis to compensate for any correspondingly deficiencies, such as Lx and Rx,” with “two motors responsible for both lenses 343A, 343B and/or display 313” more specifically discussed in [0050]), the optical module including a display screen (315A);
a facial engagement structure (251) disposed on an external surface of the housing (as seen in Fig. 3A);
a first strap (the left side strap 253) connected to the housing (connected to the left side of the housing, as seen in Fig. 3A);
a second strap (the right side strap 253) connected to the housing (connected to the right side of the housing, as seen in Fig. 3A); and
a motor (317A) translatably connecting the optical module to the housing (as discussed above, the motor allows the optical module to be adjusted left and right, eg. to adjust IPD as discussed in [0051]), the processor (102, which includes the “logic” units as discussed in [0041]) controllably connected to the motor (specifically, using 209, see “adjustment/execution logic 209 of FIG. 2 may then be triggered to facilitate one or more of motors 317A, 317B to move one or more of the corresponding lenses 343A, 343B” discussed in [0051]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Harris and Lee to include a motor translatably connecting the optical module to the housing, the processor controllably connected to the motor as taught by Aghara because this allows the device to “compute an accurate IPD of the user… for clarity and comfort to facilitate the optimum virtual reality experience for the user” (see [0028]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2-10-26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, the applicant argues that Lee fails to teach or suggest “the strap including a first stiffener in an upper region of the strap at a first location and a second stiffener in a lower region of the strap at a second location.” The examiner respectfully disagrees. As discussed above, Lee teaches wherein the strap including a rigidiser that comprises multiple “rigid segments” (see [0983], each segment corresponding to a claimed “stiffener”) which are separated by “flexible sections” that can either “extend transverse to the longitudinal direction or may extend in the longitudinal direction” (see [0982]). Therefore, when the strap 26 extends longitudinally to the left and right as seen in Fig. 3, and the flexible sections also extend longitudinally, the multiple rigid segments will be located above and below each other (eg. above and below a flexible section), allowing for additional customization for the flexibility and biasing of the strap (see [0983]).
Regarding claim 10, the applicant argues that Lee fails to teach or suggest wherein the second stiffener is removably received by the channel. The examiner respectfully disagrees. As discussed above, Lee discloses wherein the stiffener (rigidiser 32, but also corresponding to 26, see “temporal arms 26 comprise a rigidiser 32” discussed in [0967]) is removably received by the channel (eg. the channel corresponding to the inside of a “sock” or “sleeve,” see “a sleeve (e.g., constructed from comfortable material like textile) may be removably positioned along at least a portion of one or both temporal arms 26” discussed in [0993], see also “a sock (e.g., a cover or an enclosure) of user contacting material (e.g., Breath-O-Prene™) may be wrapped or slid over the rigidiser” discussed in [0986]).
Regarding claim 17, the applicant argues that Lee fails to teach or suggest wherein the plurality of second stiffeners are configured to engage with the band. The examiner respectfully disagrees. As discussed above, Lee discloses wherein the plurality of second stiffeners are configured to engage with the band (“the rigidiser 32 may form a lever-arm, i.e. a means to pivot, about the rear support hoop 16. Advantageously, the support hoop 16 can provide an anchor point for the positioning and stabilising structure 14, thus forming a pivot point. The rigidiser may articulate about the anchor point of the hoop 16” as discussed in [0973]).
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 JONATHAN M BLANCHA whose telephone number is (571)270-5890. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 9-5.
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, Chanh Nguyen can be reached at 5712727772. 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.
/JONATHAN M BLANCHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2623