DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-9 in the reply filed on 3/24/25 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.
Claim(s) 1 and 3-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Law (US 2024/0111163) in view of Lucas (US 10,515,484).
Regarding claim 1, Law discloses a wearable device (750, fig. 16A), comprising:
a display (720, fig. 16A);
a connecting band (760, fig. 16A);
a fulcrum strap (780, fig. 16A) positioned above the connecting band (see fig. 16A);
a counterbalance strap (764, fig. 16A) positioned below the connecting band (see fig. 16A); and
a weighted pad (790, fig. 16A and para. 592, wherein 790 is a counter weight) attached to the counterbalance strap (para. 592), the weighted pad being positionally adjustable to at least partially counterbalance a weight of the display about the fulcrum strap (para. 592, 611).
Law fails to disclose the connecting band comprising a processor.
Lucas discloses a connecting band comprising a processor (see col. 3-4, lines 61-4; wherein a processor can be located in a head strap).
When the invention was made (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include the teachings of Lucas in the device of Law. The motivation for doing so would have been to further distribute the weight of the electrical components of the HMD by placing the processor on the head strap of the HMD (Lucas; col. 3-4, lines 61-4 and fig. 3; ultimately for weight distribution to increase comfort).
Regarding claim 3, Law discloses wherein: the weighted pad is positioned in a Z-direction lower than the connection point (see 790 in fig. 16A and para. 592); and
a center of gravity for the wearable device is positioned below the connection point (see center of mass in para. 611; wherein the center of mass is located near the ear of the user, below the junction point of the straps in fig. 16A).
Regarding claim 4, Law disclose wherein the connection band comprises a first moment arm (780, fig. 16A and para. 633) and the counterbalance strap comprises a second moment arm (764, fig. 16A and para. 633).
Regarding claim 5, Law discloses wherein an angle between the fulcrum strap and the counterbalance strap is adjustable (para. 633).
Regarding claim 6, Law discloses wherein the counterbalance strap is rigid (para. 636-637).
Regarding claim 7, Law discloses wherein a length of the counterbalance strap is adjustable (para. 633).
Regarding claim 8, Law discloses wherein the weighted pad is centered along the counterbalance strap (see 790 in fig. 16A).
Regarding claim 9, Law discloses wherein the weighted pad is removable from the counterbalance strap (para. 592).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Law in view of Lucas in further view of Davidson (US 2023/0152594).
Regarding claim 2, Law discloses further comprising a connection point (see round junction connecting 760, 780, 764 in fig. 16A and para 722, wherein the angles of separation of the straps is adjustable) coupling the connecting band, the fulcrum strap, and the counterbalance strap (see fig. 16A).
Law fails to disclose wherein the coupling is rotatably coupling.
Davidson disclose a connection point (1260, in fig. 5A-5B and para. 1121) rotatably coupling the connecting band, the fulcrum strap and the counter balance strap (see straps in fig. 5A-5B).
When the invention was made (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include the teachings of Davidson in the device of Law. The motivation for doing so would have been to allow the adjustable straps to pivot (Davidson in fig. 5A-5B and para. 1121), such that a user can find the a desired fit by adjusting/pivoting the straps.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBIN J MISHLER whose telephone number is (571)270-7251. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00 M-F.
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, NITIN PATEL can be reached at (571)272-7677. 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.
/ROBIN J MISHLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2628
Prosecution Insights