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 .
Application Status
This office action is responsive to the amendments filed on 05/26/2026.
Claims 1-20 are pending and presented for examination.
This action has been made FINAL.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: In view of the most recent claim amendments, it is unclear whether the Applicant intends for claim 1 to be an independent claim or dependent claim, since the claim has been amended to mention dependent claim 9. The examiner suggest deleting “of claim 9” from claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant alleges the following: “Chumbley et al. fails to disclose, teach or suggest a fully parametric system in which (every) dimensional variable can be dynamically and continuously modified.” The examiner is not persuaded. Chumbley discloses the Applicant’s claim language of “provides continuous and dynamic adjustment within ranges across multiple independent adjustable parameters of the set of adjustable parameters” in Paragraphs 0062; 0102. Accordingly, the examiner maintains the rejection.
The Applicant alleges the following: “Claim 9 is clarified, becoming an independent Claim reciting that the stretchable parametric model provides continuous and dynamic adjustment within ranges across multiple independent adjustable parameters of the set of adjustable parameters. It is respectfully submitted that Claim 9 is novel over Chumbley et al. Each of Claims 1-8 and 10-12 is patentable in view of its ultimate dependency from an allowable Claim 9 and the further recitation therein. Claim 13 recites the same subject matter related to the innovative use of the stretchable parametric model in a method for creating custom eyewear as recited in Claim 9. Claim 13 is novel over Chumbley et al.
Each of Claims 14-20 is patentable in view of its ultimate dependency from an allowable Claim 13 and the further recitation therein.” The examiner is not persuaded. The Applicant is rehashing arguments already addressed above. Nonetheless, the examiner asserts Chumbley discloses the Applicant’s claim language of “provides continuous and dynamic adjustment within ranges across multiple independent adjustable parameters of the set of adjustable parameters” in Paragraphs 0062; 0102. More specifically, Chumbley’s teachings of “the eyewear customization system 220 or some other system) can generate a 3D eyewear model defining a particular style of eyewear, such as a specific eyeglass frame, goggles, or the like. In addition, the eyewear model defining a particular style of eyewear may include or otherwise be associated with data indicating which portions of the eyewear may be customized, the manner or degree to which the eyewear may be customized, etc. For example, an eyewear designer or manufacturer may offer several different styles of sunglasses (e.g., dozens or hundreds of different styles). A separate eyewear model may be generated or obtained for each of the styles or for some subset thereof. The eyewear model for a particular style may include measurements, relationships, and other parameters defining the style (or individual components thereof). In addition, the eyewear model may include, or be modified to include, information regarding the customizations that may be made to the eyewear while still maintaining the features and design elements of the particular style. In some embodiments, the eyewear model may include ranges within which specific components may be created or modified, or minimum/maximum sizes or other measurements for various components. For example, the eyewear model may specify a value between 0.5 mm and 1.50 mm as the maximum adjustment to the distance between the lenses or to the distance of each lens from the center point between the lenses; in some cases, this maximum may be specified as 1 mm.” in paragraph 0062 discloses the Applicant’s claim language. MPEP § 2106 states Office personnel are to give claims their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the supporting disclosure. In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054-55, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027-28 (Fed Cir. 1997). Accordingly, the examiner maintains the rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 –
(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.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chumbley, US 20180017815.
Claim 1:
Chumbley discloses a method for creating custom eyewear (See Chumbley Title; Abstract; Figure 8A/8B; Paragraphs 0002-0003; 0044-0047) comprising:
generating the custom eyewear frame design data file (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0049; 0070) of claim 9 by:
obtaining a model of at least a portion of the head of the user, the model including the user features (See Chumbley Figure 8A/8B; Paragraphs 0002-0003; 0044-0047);
determining the set of body parameters1 based, at least in part, on the user features (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0044-0047), and
determining values for the set of adjustable parameters2 (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0062; 01023).
Claim 2:
Chumbley discloses fabricating the custom eyewear frame (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0044-0047) based, at least in part, on the custom eyewear frame design data file (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0049; 0070).
Claim 3:
Chumbley discloses selecting a generic eyewear frame design (See Chumbley Title; Abstract) from a plurality of generic eyewear frame designs (See Chumbley Figure 11, Item 1120; Paragraph 0123), wherein the set of adjustable parameters is associated with the selected generic eyewear frame design (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0062; 01024).
Claim 4:
Chumbley discloses wherein the set of body parameters (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0044-0047) comprises a plurality of facial dimensions based, at least in part, on landmarks (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0044-0047).
Claim 5:
Chumbley discloses wherein the plurality of facial dimensions comprises forehead contour (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0064; 0089), nasial tilt (See Chumbley Paragraph 0117), pupil position (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0094; 0099; 0124), eye orbit length (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0102), eye orbit height, eye length, head breadth, back of ear contour, nose bridge contour, or any combination thereof (See Chumbley Paragraph 0100 Note: Chumbley discloses “bridge of a wearer’s nose”).
Claim 6:
Chumbley discloses wherein the set of adjustable parameters comprises: one or more of aesthetic parameters; and one or more comfort factors (See Chumbley Paragraph 0104), wherein the values for the set of adjustable parameters are based, at least in part, on one or more user preferences of the user (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0062; 01025).
Claim 7:
Chumbley discloses wherein the one or more aesthetic parameters comprise frame style, lens size, arm style, arm length, frame width, or any combination thereof (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0062; 01026).
Claim 8:
Chumbley discloses wherein the one or more comfort factors comprise a vertex distance, an arm breadth, a nose pad, a frame grip, or any combination thereof (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0064; 0102).
Claim 9:
Chumbley discloses a method of generating a custom eyewear frame design data file (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0049; 0070) comprising:
determining a set of eyewear fit factors (See Chumbley Paragraph 0089);
generating a stretchable parametric model (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0057-0058) based, at least in part, on the set of eyewear fit factors and a set of body parameters based, at least in part, on user features of a head of a user of a custom eyewear frame (See Chumbley Paragraph 0089);
and generating the custom eyewear frame design (See Chumbley Figure 11, Item 1120; Paragraph 0123) data file (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0049; 0070) based, at least in part, on the stretchable parametric model (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0057-0058) and a set of adjustable parameters (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0062; 01027);
wherein the stretchable parametric model (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0057-0058) provides continuous and dynamic adjustment within ranges across multiple independent adjustable parameters of the set of adjustable parameters (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0062; 0102).
Claim 10:
Chumbley discloses herein the set of eyewear fit factors comprises a quantitative fit factor, a contact fit factor, an interference fit factor, a ventilated fit factor, or any combination thereof (See Chumbley Paragraph 0089).
Claim 11:
Chumbley discloses wherein generating the custom eyewear frame design data file (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0049; 0070) further comprises adjusting values for the set of adjustable parameters (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0062; 01028), which, in turn, provide for the continuous and dynamic adjustment of the stretchable parametric model (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0057-0058).
Claim 12:
Chumbley discloses wherein fabricating the custom eyewear frame (See Chumbley Title; Abstract) comprises: generating a CAD model (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0049; 0070) of the custom eyewear frame (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0049; 0070) based, at least in part, on the custom eyewear frame design data file (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0049; 0070); and manufacturing the CAD model (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0049; 0070) via additive manufacturing (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0049; 0070).
Claim 13:
Chumbley discloses a method for creating custom eyewear (See Chumbley Title; Abstract; Figure 8A/8B; Paragraphs 0002-0003; 0044-0047), comprising:
receiving a scan of at least a portion of a head of a user (See Chumbley Figure 8A/8B; Figure 11, Item 1108; Paragraphs 0002-0003; 0044-0047);
identifying a group of landmarks (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0044-0047) based, at least in part, on the scan (See Chumbley Figure 8A/8B; Figure 11, Item 1108; Paragraphs 0002-0003; 0044-0047);
determining a set of body parameters (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0044-0047) based, at least in part, on the groups of landmarks (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0044-0047);
generating a stretchable parametric model (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0055-0058) based at least in part on the set of body parameters (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0062; 01029);
determining values for a set of adjustable parameters (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0062; 010210) associated with the stretchable parametric model (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0055-0058);
and generating a custom eyewear frame design data file (See Chumbley Figure 11, Item 1120; Paragraph 0123) based at least in part on the stretchable parametric model (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0055-0058) and the values for the set of adjustable parameters (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0062; 010211)
wherein: the stretchable parametric model (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0055-0058) provides continuous and dynamic adjustment within ranges across multiple independent adjustable parameters of the set of adjustable parameters (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0062; 010212); and the groups of landmarks comprise a nose group, an eye group, an ear group, and any combination thereof (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0064; 0102).
Claim 14:
Chumbley discloses fabricating a custom eyewear frame (See Chumbley Title; Abstract; Figure 8A/8B; Paragraphs 0002-0003; 0044-0047) based, at least in part, on the custom eyewear frame design data file (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0049; 0070).
Claim 15:
Chumbley discloses wherein identifying the groups of landmarks (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0044-0047) comprises: inputting the scan into a landmark identification software (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0049; 0070); and outputting, via the landmark identification software (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0049; 0070), a coordinate location of at least a portion of landmarks in the groups of landmarks (See Chumbley Paragraph 0064).
Claim 16:
Chumbley discloses wherein the stretchable parametric model (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0057-0058) is a wire-frame model (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0049; 0070).
Claim 17:
Chumbley discloses wherein the stretchable parametric model (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0057-0058) is automatically generated based, at least in part, on the set of body parameters (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0044-0047).
Claim 18:
Chumbley discloses wherein the stretchable parametric model (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0057-0058) comprises one or more front frames, one or more lens cavities, one or more hinges (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0044-00047), one or more arms, a nose bridge, or any combination thereof (See Chumbley Paragraph 0100 Note: Chumbley discloses “bridge of a wearer’s nose”).
Claim 19:
Chumbley discloses wherein the stretchable parametric model (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0057-0058) is based, at least in part, on body product relationship (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0044-0047).
Claim 20:
Chumbley discloses wherein the body product relationship is based, at least in part, on a front frame position, a face wrap (See Chumbley Paragraph 0053 Note: Chumbley discloses “lenses wrap around the wearer's face”), a pantoscopic tilt (See Chumbley Paragraph 0053), a vertex distance (See Chumbley Paragraph 0102), a front frame size, a hinge component (See Chumbley Paragraphs 0044-0047), a lens cavity size, an eyeglasses arm, a nose bridge, or any combination thereof (See Chumbley Paragraph 0100 Note: Chumbley discloses “bridge of a wearer’s nose”).
Pertinent Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20150055086 discloses a customized product model to a manufacturer for manufacturing eyewear for the user in accordance with the customized product model.
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHEREE N BROWN whose telephone number is (571)272-4229. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 5:30-2:00 PM EST.
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, SAID BROOME can be reached at (571) 272-2931. 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.
/SHEREE N BROWN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2612 July 7, 2026
1 Note: In paragraph 0040 of the Applicant’s specification, the Applicant defines “body parameters” as “In an example embodiment, the set of body parameters can further comprise a plurality of facial dimensions, wherein the plurality of facial dimensions can be based at least in part on the plurality of landmarks. In exemplary embodiments, the plurality of facial dimensions can comprise forehead contour, nasial tilt, pupil position, eye orbit length, eye orbit height, eye length, hinge, head breadth, back of ear contour, nose bridge contour, or any combination thereof.”
2 Note: In paragraph 0042 of the Applicant’s specification, the Applicant defines adjustable parameters as “The one or more aesthetic parameters, in an exemplary embodiment, can comprise frame style, lens size, arm style, or any combination thereof.”
3 The examiner interprets Chumbley’s teachings of “cat eye” (i.e. frame style) as being the same as “adjustable parameters.”
4 The examiner interprets Chumbley’s teachings of “cat eye” (i.e. frame style) as being the same as “adjustable parameters.”
5 The examiner interprets Chumbley’s teachings of “cat eye” (i.e. frame style) as being the same as “adjustable parameters.”
6 The examiner interprets Chumbley’s teachings of “cat eye” (i.e. frame style) as being the same as “adjustable parameters.”
7 The examiner interprets Chumbley’s teachings of “cat eye” (i.e. frame style) as being the same as “adjustable parameters.”
8 The examiner interprets Chumbley’s teachings of “cat eye” (i.e. frame style) as being the same as “adjustable parameters.”
9 The examiner interprets Chumbley’s teachings of “cat eye” (i.e. frame style) as being the same as “adjustable parameters.”
10 The examiner interprets Chumbley’s teachings of “cat eye” (i.e. frame style) as being the same as “adjustable parameters.”
11 The examiner interprets Chumbley’s teachings of “cat eye” (i.e. frame style) as being the same as “adjustable parameters.”
12 The examiner interprets Chumbley’s teachings of “cat eye” (i.e. frame style) as being the same as “adjustable parameters.”
Prosecution Insights