DETAILED ACTION
Oath/Declaration
1. Oath and declaration is missing.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The prior art documents submitted by application in the Information Disclosure Statement filed on 7/1/2025 have all been considered and made of record ( note the attached copy of form PTO – 1449).
Double Patenting
3. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1,19 and 20 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness -type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1,19 and 20 respectively Application No 18/819,655..
Although the conflicting claims are not identical they are not patentable distinct from each other because the instant claims are anticipated by the patented claims.
The claims of the instant application corresponds to the patented claim as follows:
Instant application 18/819,726
Regarding claim 1, A method of implementing a virtual eye test for assessing astigmatism, comprising: at an electronic device including a head-mounted display (HMD) and a camera: generating a virtual reality (VR) user interface corresponding to a three-dimensional virtual environment; rendering the VR user interface on the HMD; simulating, in the VR user interface, a plurality of visual scenarios requiring focus adjustments; tracking, using the camera, dynamic focus adjustment to visual stimuli presented in the plurality of visual scenarios; and measuring astigmatism based on the dynamic focus adjustment.
Regarding claim 19, A non-transitory computer readable storage medium, storing one or more programs for execution by one or more processors of a computer system, the one or more programs including instructions for: generating a virtual reality (VR) user interface corresponding to a three-dimensional virtual environment; rendering the VR user interface on the HMD; simulating, in the VR user interface, a plurality of visual scenarios requiring focus adjustments; tracking, using the camera, dynamic focus adjustment to visual stimuli presented in the plurality of visual scenarios; and measuring astigmatism based on the dynamic focus adjustment.
Regarding claim 20, An electronic device, comprising: an HMD and a camera; one or more processors; and memory for storing one or more programs for execution by the one or more processors, the one or more programs including instructions for: generating a virtual reality (VR) user interface corresponding to a three-dimensional virtual environment; rendering the VR user interface on the HMD; simulating, in the VR user interface, a plurality of visual scenarios requiring focus adjustments; tracking, using the camera, dynamic focus adjustment to visual stimuli presented in the plurality of visual scenarios; and measuring astigmatism based on the dynamic focus adjustment.
U.S.Patent application No.18/819,655
Regarding claim 1, A method of implementing a virtual eye test for evaluating visual acuity, comprising: at an electronic device including a head-mounted display (HMD) and a camera: generating a virtual reality (VR) user interface corresponding to a three-dimensional virtual environment; rendering the VR user interface on the HMD; simulating a dynamic real-world visual experience in the VR user interface; tracking, using the camera, eye movements and response times to visual stimuli presented in the dynamic real-world visual experience; and evaluating depth perception, motion detection, and spatial awareness based on the eye movements and the response times.
Regarding claim 19, A non-transitory computer readable storage medium, storing one or more programs for execution by one or more processors of a computer system, the one or more programs including instructions for: generating a virtual reality (VR) user interface corresponding to a three-dimensional virtual environment; rendering the VR user interface on the HMD; simulating a dynamic real-world visual experience in the VR user interface; tracking, using the camera, eye movements and response times to visual stimuli presented in the dynamic real-world visual experience; and evaluating depth perception, motion detection, and spatial awareness based on the eye movements and the response times.
Regarding claim 20, An electronic device, comprising: an HMD and a camera; one or more processors; and memory for storing one or more programs for execution by the one or more processors, the one or more programs including instructions for: generating a virtual reality (VR) user interface corresponding to a three-dimensional virtual environment; rendering the VR user interface on the HMD; simulating a dynamic real-world visual experience in the VR user interface; tracking, using the camera, eye movements and response times to visual stimuli presented in the dynamic real-world visual experience; and evaluating depth perception, motion detection, and spatial awareness based on the eye movements and the response times.
Analysis
the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are but different definitions of the same disclosed subject matter, varying in breadth or scope of definition as set forth in MPEP 806.03. In this case, claims 1,19,and 20 met claims 1,19 and 20 (18/819,655) and dynamic focus adjustment to visual stimuli presented in the plurality of visual scenarios; and measuring astigmatism based on the dynamic focus adjustment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Samec et al (2017/0017083 A1) in view of Adema et al (2025/0130428 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Samec et al a discloses a method of implementing a virtual eye test for assessing astigmatism, comprising: at an electronic device including a head-mounted display (HMD) (figure 5, element 62) and a camera (24): generating a virtual reality (VR) user interface corresponding to a three-dimensional virtual environment; rendering the VR user interface on the HMD; simulating, in the VR user interface (see paragraph 1434 – note that the VR environment is generated) , a plurality of visual scenarios (see paragraph 1484) requiring focus adjustments; tracking, using the camera, dynamic focus adjustment to visual stimuli presented in the plurality of visual scenarios (see paragraph 1469—note dynamic scenarios).
Samec et al a discloses all of the claimed limitations except measuring astigmatism based on the dynamic focus adjustment.
Adema et al discloses measuring astigmatism based on the dynamic focus adjustment.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to provide astigmatism based on the dynamic focus adjustment in to the Samec et al method of implementing a virtual eye test correct image and adjust the view dynamically as taught by Adema et al (paragraph 0003).
Regarding claim 2, combination of Samec et al in view of Adema et al discloses wherein the three-dimensional virtual environment requires users to continuously adjust their focus, simulating real-life visual tasks.
Regarding claim 3, combination of Samec et al in view of Adema et al discloses wherein the three-dimensional virtual environment constricts a test subject from rotating their head or squinting to temporarily compensate for astigmatism.
Regarding claim 4, combination of Samec et al in view of Adema et al discloses wherein the plurality of visual scenarios comprises scenarios that require rapidly shifting focus between distant and near objects.
Regarding claim 5, combination of Samec et al in view of Adema et al discloses wherein the plurality of visual scenarios comprises scenarios that require adjusting focus while tracking moving objects.
Regarding claim 6, combination of Samec et al in view of Adema et al discloses wherein the plurality of visual scenarios replicates real-world viewing conditions by presenting targets at multiple distances and angles.
Regarding claim 7, combination of Samec et al in view of Adema et al discloses wherein the plurality of visual scenarios test perception of depth, curvature and dimensionality using 3D shapes and contours.
Regarding claim 13, Samec et al a discloses further comprising displaying a split screen for comparison, showing how a scene appears with and without simulated astigmatism (paragraph 1695 and paragraph 1731).
Regarding claim 14, Samec et al a discloses wherein measuring astigmatism includes analyzing focus adjustment times at different distances and comparing performance under different lighting conditions (paragraph 1452, depth of focus eye (20) and projected light (38)).
Regarding claim 15, Samec et al a discloses further comprising using foveated rendering to optimize the detail and resolution in the area where the user is directly focusing, encouraging active focus adjustments during the visual scenarios [paragraph 1456].
Regarding claim 16, Samec et al a discloses wherein the plurality of visual scenarios includes interactive scenarios requiring users to shift attention and focus between objects or elements at different virtual distances (paragraph 1614 and paragraph 1621).
Regarding claim 17, Samec et al a discloses further comprising using variable focus displays to dynamically adjust the focal plane to match the virtual distance of objects being viewed, simulating natural accommodation (paragraph 1621).
Regarding claim 18, Samec et al a discloses wherein tracking dynamic focus adjustment includes analyzing gaze patterns, fixations, and saccades to determine the user’s focus of attention and cognitive processing during the visual scenarios.
Regarding claim 19,Samec et al a discloses, a non-transitory computer readable storage medium, storing one or more programs for execution by one or more processors of a computer system (figure 3A) , the one or more programs including instructions for: generating a virtual reality (VR) user interface corresponding to a three-dimensional virtual environment; rendering the VR user interface on the HMD(figure 5, element 62); simulating, in the VR user interface (see paragraph 1434 – note that the VR environment is generated), a plurality of visual scenarios requiring focus adjustments; tracking, using the camera (24) (see paragraph 1469—note dynamic scenarios).
Samec et al a discloses all of the claimed limitations except measuring astigmatism based on the dynamic focus adjustment.
Adema et al discloses measuring astigmatism based on the dynamic focus adjustment.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to provide astigmatism based on the dynamic focus adjustment in to the Samec et al method of implementing a virtual eye test correct image and adjust the view dynamically as taught by Adema et al (paragraph 0003).
PNG
media_image1.png
387
547
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 20, Samec et al a discloses, An electronic device, comprising: an HMD (figure 5, element 62) and a camera (24) ; one or more processors; and memory for storing one or more programs for execution by the one or more processors, the one or more programs including instructions for: generating a virtual reality (VR) user interface corresponding to a three-dimensional virtual environment; rendering the VR user interface on the HMD; simulating, in the VR user interface, a plurality of visual scenarios(see paragraph 1434 – note that the VR environment is generated) requiring focus adjustments; tracking, using the camera, dynamic focus adjustment to visual stimuli presented in the plurality of visual scenarios (see paragraph 1469—note dynamic scenarios).
Samec et al a discloses all of the claimed limitations except measuring astigmatism based on the dynamic focus adjustment.
Adema et al discloses measuring astigmatism based on the dynamic focus adjustment.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to provide astigmatism based on the dynamic focus adjustment in to the Samec et al method of implementing a virtual eye test correct image and adjust the view dynamically as taught by Adema et al (paragraph 0003).
Allowable Subject Matter
5. Claims 8-12 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.
6. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: wherein the plurality of visual scenarios dynamically introduce or manipulate cylindrical and other complex lens powers to precisely map the degree and axis of astigmatic errors and further comprising using biometric sensors to track eye movements, pupil responses, and/or neural activity, to adjust the plurality of visual scenarios in real-time and further comprising using artificial intelligence to tailor the plurality of visual scenarios based on a user’s visual profile, thereby adjusting the complexity and focus requirements dynamically and further comprising generating one or more insights into visual environment interaction including data on how individuals with astigmatism interact with various visual elements, including how quickly they can refocus between objects at different distances or under different lighting conditions and further comprising providing targeted treatments and corrective measures utilizing insights based on the measurement of astigmatism to recommend treatments and corrective measures, including customized corrective lenses or specific vision therapy exercises that address the unique challenges faced by each patient.
Conclusion
7.Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMED A HASAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2331. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 6 AM -4 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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at 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.
/MOHAMMED A HASAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 7/1/2026
Prosecution Insights