DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/22/2024 being considered by the examiner. A copy of initialed form is attached for Applicant’s record.
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fisher et al.(US 7,914,148 of record, hereafter Fisher) in view of Bouchier et al.(US 10,416,456 of record hereafter Bouchier).
Regarding claim 1, Fisher discloses a method for simulating an ophthalmic lens on an eye of a subject (col.1, lines 38-40) viewing a virtual three-dimensions scene (col.3, lines19-27) said method comprising the following steps:
- receiving a set of input parameters comprising scene parameters of the virtual three dimensions scene (col.3, lines 19-27),
- calculating, by ray tracing, a virtual ray between a point of the virtual three-dimensions scene and a point of an eye pupil plane (col.3, lines 28-34),
the virtual ray passing through a virtual lens and being defined on the
basis of a model providing a deviation angle of the virtual ray through the
virtual lens ("distortion matrix"),
the deviation angle depending on at least one incidence angle and position of the virtual ray on the virtual lens, repeating the calculating by ray tracing for a plurality of virtual rays passing through the virtual lens and joining couples of one point of the virtual three-dimensions scene and another point of the eye pupil
plane, so as to scan spatially and angularly a light field window (col.5, lines 16-19);
- determining a light field representing a modified virtual three-dimensions scene based
on the scene parameters and on the deviation angle associated to each virtual ray of
the plurality of virtual rays;
- generating the light field representing the modified virtual three-dimensions scene on
the light field window towards the eye pupil plane of the subject (col.3, lines 57-61). Fisher does not disclose in that the method for simulating uses a light field display. However, Bouchier teaches a simulating uses a light field display (col.1, lines 44-48). Therefore, it would be obvious to the person skilled in the art, before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply teachings of Bouchier to device of Fisher for simulation purpose.
Regarding claim 4, Fisher and Bouchier discloses the method according to claim 1. Fisher further discloses a step of acquiring a three-dimensions image of the scene using a three-dimensions capturing device to extract the scene parameters, the scene parameters comprising geometric and/or photometric properties of the scene (col.3, lines 19-27).
Regarding claim 5, Fisher and Bouchier discloses the method according to claim 4. Fisher further discloses, wherein the step of determining a light field comprises a step of applying the geometric and/or photometric properties of the scene (col.3, lines 19-27).
Regarding claim 6, Fisher and Bouchier discloses the method according to claim 1. Fisher further discloses wherein the step of calculating and/or the step of generating comprises a step of selecting a subset of the plurality of virtual rays passing through the pupil of the eye of the subject (col.3, lines.28-34)
Regarding claim 7, Fisher and Bouchier discloses the method according to claim 1. Fisher further discloses wherein the model is determined on the basis of geometrical optics calculations and/or wave optics calculations and/or photometric optics calculation (col.3, lines 28-34).
Regarding claim 8, Fisher and Bouchier discloses the method according to claim 1. Fisher further discloses wherein the model comprises a shape of the lens and a positioning of the lens in relation to the eye (col.2, lines 9-23).
Regarding claim 9, Fisher and Bouchier discloses the method according to claim 1. Fisher further discloses wherein the model comprises distortion model of the virtual lens and/or a spherical power model of the virtual lens comprising at least a sphere parameter, and/or an astigmatism power model of the virtual lens comprising at least a cylinder and/or an axis parameters or J0 and J45 parameters and/or a filtering lens (col.3, lines 28-34).
Regarding claim 10, Fisher and Bouchier discloses the method according to claim 1. Fisher further discloses wherein the step of determining comprises a step of representing the modified virtual three-dimensions scene further comprising applying a convolution or image deformation, adapted for simulating blur, distortion, diffraction, chromatism, scattering or transmission attenuation (col.3, lines 28-34).
Regarding claim 13, Fisher and Bouchier discloses the method according to claim 1. Fisher further discloses wherein the virtual ray and the plurality of virtual rays in the step of calculating are configured to propagate from the eye pupil plane to the at least one object of the scene (col.3, lines 28-34).
Regarding claim 14, Fisher and Bouchier discloses the method according to claim 1. Fisher further discloses wherein the virtual ray and the plurality of virtual rays in the step of calculating are configured to propagate from the at least one object of the scene to the eye pupil plane (col.3, lines 28-34).
Regarding claim 3, Fisher and Bouchier discloses the method according to claim 1 with the light field window, except for said light field window extends spatially over a surface area of at least 3 mm in a horizontal plane and 3 mm in a vertical plane and/or a spatial resolution of at least 0.5 dot/mm (i.e., dimension of said light field window). However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use a different dimensions in a design of a light field window where simple modification of size has been held per se obvious (MPEP 2144.04). Additionally, there is no evidence provided that there is any criticality or unexpected result occurring at such a difference, and appears to only be a preferred size of device.
Regarding claim 12, Fisher and Bouchier discloses the method according to claim 1 with the virtual lens, except for said virtual lens comprises a progressive power lens or a multifocal lens, a single vision lens, an eyeglass lens, a contact lens or a filter.
Since the virtual lens or a progressive power lens or a multifocal lens, or a single vision lens or an eyeglass lens or a contact lens or a filter is function for purpose of light filtering. The selection of a progressive power lens or a multifocal lens, or a single vision lens or an eyeglass lens or a contact lens or a filter in place of the virtual lens seems to be design experience to optimum the performance, since it has been held to be within the general skill of worker in the art to select a known display on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as master of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fisher et al.(US 7,914,148 of record, hereafter Fisher) in view of Bouchier et al.(US 10,416,456 of record hereafter Bouchier), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kubota et al.(WO 2021/022193 of record, hereafter Kubota).
Fisher in view of Bouchier discloses the method according to claim 1. Neither Fisher nor Bouchier discloses wherein the light field window corresponds to a field of view of at least 40 degrees in a horizontal plane and 40 degrees in a vertical plane and/or an angular resolution of less than 5 degrees. Kubota teaches wherein the light field window corresponds to a field of view of at least 40 degrees in a horizontal plane and 40 degrees in a vertical plane and/or an angular resolution of less than 5 degrees (par.[0111]). Therefore, it would be obvious to the person skilled in the art, before effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply teachings of Kubota to device of Fisher for simulation purpose.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 is 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: (claim 11) wherein the method is adapted for simulating an other ophthalmic lens on an other eye of the subject, the method comprising the steps of calculating, determining and generating for simulating the other ophthalmic lens for the other eye of the subject, the subject parameters in the step of receiving comprising other parameters among a pupil diameter of the other eye and/or a pupil position of the other eye relative to the light field display.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUYEN TRA whose telephone number is (571)272-2343. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6.
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.
/TUYEN TRA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights