CTNF 18/818,128 CTNF 71589 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Specification The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it contains more than 150 words. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Hu et al (U.S. Patent Publication 2019/0129183) . With regard to independent claim 1, Hu et al teaches a device (Figure 2F), comprising: a frame (see annotated Figure 2F below); a window secured to the frame (see annotated Figure 2F below); a securement arm (Figure 2F, element 223) including: a proximal end secured to the frame (see annotated Figure 2F below); and a distal tip opposite the proximal end (see annotated Figure 2F below); a waveguide disposed in the securement arm (Figure 2F, element 228) and configured to direct light displayed at the window (page 5, paragraph [0071]); and an electronic port disposed at the distal tip and electrically coupled to the waveguide (Figure 6A, element 602 and page 7, paragraph [0094], wherein cable 602 supplies optical input to the window via element 228 and page 8, paragraph [0101], wherein the cable is pluggable, i.e., provided with a port). PNG media_image1.png 804 899 media_image1.png Greyscale With regard to dependent claim 2, Hu et al teaches all of the claimed limitations of the instant invention as outlined above with respect to independent claim 1, and further teaches wherein the distal tip is configured to be disposed behind a user’s war when the user dons the device (page 4, paragraph [0063], wherein the device does not appear any different from normal glasses; and see annotated Figure 2F above) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu et al (U.S. Patent Publication 2019/0129183), as applied to claim 2 above, in further view of Ronzani et al (U.S. Patent Publication 2002/0163486) . With regard to dependent claim 3, although Hu et al teaches all of the claimed limitations of the instant invention as outlined above with respect to dependent claim 2, Hu et al fails to teach wherein: the securement arm includes: a first joint between the proximal end and the frame; and a second joint between the proximal end and the distal tip. In a related endeavor, Ronzani et al teaches a device (Figure 1, element 12), comprising a frame (Figure 1, element 10); a window secured to the frame (Figure 1, element 100) and a securement arm (Figure 1, elements 32 and 34) wherein: the securement arm includes: a first joint between the proximal end and the frame (page 4, paragraph [0096] and Figure 1, element 31); and a second joint between the proximal end and the distal tip (Figure 1, element 33), such that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the device, as taught by Hu et al, with the multiple joints, as taught by Ronzani et al, to provide compact storage . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu et al (U.S. Patent Publication 2019/0129183), as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Ronzani et al (U.S. Patent Publication 2002/0163486) . With regard to dependent claim 5, although Hu et al teaches all of the claimed limitations of the instant invention as outlined above with respect to independent claim 1, Hu et al fails to teach wherein the port comprises an aperture defined by the distal tip. In a related endeavor, Ronzani et al teaches a device (Figure 1, element 12), comprising a frame (Figure 1, element 10); a window secured to the frame (Figure 1, element 100) and a securement arm (Figure 1, elements 32 and 34) wherein the port comprises an aperture defined by the distal tip (page 4, paragraph [0097], lines 18-19 and Figure 1, element 38), such that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the device, as taught by Hu et al, with the female connector, as taught by Ronzani et al, to interface with an electronic device. With regard to dependent claim 6, although Hu et al in view of Ronzani et al teach all of the claimed limitations of the instant invention as outlined above with respect to dependent claim 5, both fail to teach such a device wherein the distal tip includes an inner surface defining the aperture; and a first electrical contact and a second electrical contact define the inner surface. However, it should be noted that the choice of an electronic port is within the scope of one of routine skill in the art as there are a multitude of electronic ports that would perform a similar function, such that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the device, as taught by Hu et al in view of Ronzani et al, with a known alternative electronic port to provide audio, visual or other electronic information to the device. With regard to dependent claim 7, although Hu et al in view of Ronzani et al teach all of the claimed limitations of the instant invention as outlined above with respect to dependent claim 6, both fail to teach such a device further comprising a battery disposed in the distal tip and electrically connecting the first electrical contact and the second electrical contact to the waveguide. Again, it should be noted that providing a battery, or any power source, is within the scope of one of routine skill in the art, such that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the device, as taught by Hu et al in view of Ronzani et al, with a battery to render the device operable . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu et al (U.S. Patent Publication 2019/0129183) . With regard to dependent claim 8, although Hu et al teaches all of the claimed limitations of the instant invention as outlined above with respect to independent claim 1, Hu et al fails to teach wherein the electronic port comprises: a first electrical contact defining a first portion of an external surface of the securement arm; and a second electrical contact defining a second portion of the external surface. However, it should be noted that the choice of an electronic port is within the scope of one of routine skill in the art as there are a multitude of electronic ports that would perform a similar function, such that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the device, as taught by Hu et al, with a known alternative electronic port to provide audio, visual or other electronic information to the device . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 9, 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uhm et al (U.S. Patent Publication 2022/0210922), in view of Ronzani et al (U.S. Patent Publication 2002/0163486) . With regard to independent claim 9, although Uhm et al teaches an electronic securement arm for a wearable device (Figure 2, elements 298-1 and 298-2), comprising: a housing (page 4, paragraph [0054], lines 10-14) including: a proximal portion; and a distal portion disposed at an angle relative to the proximal portion (see annotated Figure 2 below); a battery disposed in the housing (Figure 2, elements 289-1 and 289-2); Uhm et al fails to teach a port disposed in the distal portion, the port comprising: an aperture defined by the distal portion; a contact electrically coupled to the battery and disposed in the aperture; and a retention feature defined by the distal portion. In a related endeavor, Ronzani et al teaches a device (Figure 1, element 12), comprising a frame (Figure 1, element 10); a window secured to the frame (Figure 1, element 100) and a securement arm (Figure 1, elements 32 and 34) comprising a port disposed in the distal portion wherein the port comprises an aperture defined by the distal portion (page 4, paragraph [0097], lines 18-19 and Figure 1, element 38), such that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the device, as taught by Ohm et al, with the female connector, as taught by Ronzani et al, to interface with an electronic device and electrically couple the battery to power the device. PNG media_image2.png 810 911 media_image2.png Greyscale With regard to dependent claim 11, although Uhm et al in view of Ronzani et al teach all of the claimed limitations of the instant invention as outlined above with respect to independent claim 9, both fail to teach wherein the port comprises a data entry port. However, it should be noted that the choice of an electronic port is within the scope of one of routine skill in the art as there are a multitude of electronic ports that would perform a similar function, such that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the device, as taught by Uhm et al in view of Ronzani et al, with a known alternative electronic port to provide audio, visual or other electronic information to the device. With regard to dependent claim 12, although Uhm et al in view of Ronzani et al teach all of the claimed limitations of the instant invention as outlined above with respect to dependent claim 11, both fail to teach wherein the port comprises a power port. However, once again, it should be noted that the choice of an electronic port is within the scope of one of routine skill in the art as there are a multitude of electronic ports that would perform a similar function, such that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the device, as taught by Uhm et al in view of Ronzani et al, with a known alternative electronic port to provide power . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ronzani et al (U.S. Patent Publication 2002/0163486), in view of Bagneris (U.S. Patent Publication 2022/0236577) . With regard to independent claim 15, although Ronzani et al teaches a smart glasses arm (Figure , elements 32L, 32R, 34L and 34R), comprising: a distal tip (Figure 2, elements 63L and 63R); an electronic component disposed in the distal tip (Figure 2, elements 40L and 40R); an electronic port disposed at the distal tip (Figure 2, element 38), Ronzani et al fails to teach such an smart glasses arm wherein the electronic port comprises: a selectively translatable electrical contact; an open configuration including the electrical contact exposed to an external environment; and a closed configuration including the electrical contact disposed within the distal tip. In a related endeavor, Bagneris teaches a smart glasses arm (page 1, paragraph [00014] and Figure 1, element 2) having an electronic port (Figure 1, element 11) wherein the electronic port comprises: a selectively translatable electrical contact; an open configuration including the electrical contact exposed to an external environment; and a closed configuration including the electrical contact (page 2, paragraph [0026]; page 3, paragraph [0030]; and Figures 1, 3 and 4, element 12), such that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the device, as taught by Ronzani et al, with port cover, as taught by Bagneris, to protect the port from water or dust during storage. With regard to dependent claim 17, Ronzani et al in view of Bagneris teach all of the claimed limitations of the instant invention as outlined above with respect to independent claim 15, wherein Bagneris further teaches wherein the electronic port is configured to be manually operable between the open configuration and the closed configuration (page 3, paragraph [0030]) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ronzani et al (U.S. Patent Publication 2002/0163486), in view of Bagneris (U.S. Patent Publication 2022/0236577) , as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Sale et al (U.S. Patent Number 9,910,298) . With regard to dependent claim 18, although Ronzani et al in view of Bagneris teach all of the claimed limitations of the instant invention as outlined above with respect to independent claim 15, both fail to teach a smart glasses arm wherein the electronic port comprises a magnet. In a related endeavor, Sales et al teaches a smart glasses arm (column 1, lines 21-36 and Figure 3, element 102) further comprising an electronic port with a magnet (column 1, lines 53-59), such that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the device, as taught by Ronzani et al in view of Bagneris, with a port having a magnet, as taught by Sales et al, to secure any electrical connection to the port . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 4, 10, 13, 14, 16, 19 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art taken either singularly or in combination fails to anticipate or fairly suggest the limitations of the independent claims, in such a manner that a rejection under 35 U.S.C. §102 or §103 would be proper . With regard to dependent claim 4, although the prior art teaches a device, comprising: a frame; a window secured to the frame; a securement arm including: a proximal end secured to the frame; and a distal tip opposite the proximal end; a waveguide disposed in the securement arm and configured to direct light displayed at the window; and an electronic port disposed at the distal tip and electrically coupled to the waveguide, wherein: the distal tip is configured to be disposed behind a user’s ear when the user dons the device; the securement arm includes: a first joint between the proximal end and the frame; and a second joint between the proximal end and the distal tip, the prior art fails to teach such a device wherein: the port is disposed distal to the second joint; and the waveguide is disposed between the first joint and the second joint. With regard to dependent claims 10, 13 and 14, although the prior art teaches an electronic securement arm for a wearable device, comprising: a housing including: a proximal portion; and a distal portion disposed at an angle relative to the proximal portion; a battery disposed in the housing; and a port disposed in the distal portion, the port comprising: an aperture defined by the distal portion; a contact electrically coupled to the battery and disposed in the aperture; and a retention feature defined by the distal portion, the prior art fails to teach such a device wherein the aperture defined by the distal portion comprises a through-hole extending entirely through the distal portion, as claimed in dependent claim 10; or wherein the port comprises a data entry port and the distal portion includes an inner surface defining the aperture; the inner surface further defines a detent; and the retention feature comprises the detent, as claimed in dependent claims 13 and 14. With regard to dependent claims 16, 19 and 20, although the prior art teaches a smart glasses arm, comprising: a distal tip; an electronic component disposed in the distal tip; an electronic port disposed at the distal tip, the electronic port comprising: a selectively translatable electrical contact; an open configuration including the electrical contact exposed to an external environment; and a closed configuration including the electrical contact disposed within the distal tip, the prior art fails to teach such a smart glass arm, wherein: the electronic port comprises: a first portion having a first diameter; and a second portion having a second diameter less than the first diameter; the first portion defines an external surface of the distal tip in the closed configuration; and the second portion includes the electrical contact as claimed in dependent claim 15; or wherein the electronic port comprises a magnet and the electronic port is magnetically operable between the open configuration and the closed configuration, as claimed in dependent claims 19 and 20 . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Howell et al (U.S. Patent Publication 2005/0248717), Nicholson et al (U.S. Patent Publication 2019/0094549) and Kanuganti et al (WO 2019/108980) all teach arms for smart glasses . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARRYL J COLLINS whose telephone number is (571) 272-2325. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 5:30 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. 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, Ricky L Mack can be reached at 571-272-2333. 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. /DARRYL J COLLINS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 09 June 2026 Application/Control Number: 18/818,128 Page 2 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/818,128 Page 3 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/818,128 Page 4 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/818,128 Page 5 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/818,128 Page 6 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/818,128 Page 7 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/818,128 Page 8 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/818,128 Page 9 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/818,128 Page 10 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/818,128 Page 11 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/818,128 Page 12 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/818,128 Page 13 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/818,128 Page 14 Art Unit: 2872
Prosecution Insights