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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on August 21, 2024, September 27, 2024 and April 22, 2026 have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 states that a functional region in which the plurality of defocus regions are arranged in such a manner that the diameters d1 fall within a range of ± 20%, but it is unclear as to what the diameters are within 20% of, i.e., what reference value is d1 compared to, therefore claim 3 is indefinite.
With regard to dependent claim 4, claim 4 is rejected as it depends, directly or indirectly, from dependent claim 3 and therefore inherits all of the deficiencies of the claim from which it depends.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1, 2 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Matsuoka (WO 2021/132079).
With regard to independent claim 1, Matsuoka teaches an eyeglass lens comprising: a base region configured to cause light incident on an object-side surface to exit from an eye-side surface, enter an eye, and converge at a predetermined position A on a retina (paragraph [0025]); and a plurality of defocus regions having a characteristic of causing light to converge at a position B farther from an object side than the position A is (paragraph [0025]), wherein d1/d2 is greater than 2 and less than 3, where d1, which is the diameter of a circle circumscribing a triangle connecting centers of three of the defocus regions closest to each other (wherein d1 has been determined, using the relationship of a circle having an inscribed triangle of a/√3 = R, wherein a is a side of the triangle and R is the radius of the circle, such that d1 = 1.63. See annotated Figure 1 below), is divided by d2, which is the diameter of the defocus regions (paragraph [0093], wherein d2 = 0.6 mm and d1/d2 = 2.71).
PNG
media_image1.png
957
906
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regard to dependent claim 2, Matsuoka teaches al of the claimed limitations of the instant invention as outlined above with respect to independent claim 1, and further teaches such an eyeglass lens wherein the plurality of defocus regions are spaced apart and not adjacent to each other (see annotated Figure 1 above wherein the defocus regions (element 6) are spaced apart).
With regard to dependent claim 5, Matsuoka teaches al of the claimed limitations of the instant invention as outlined above with respect to independent claim 1, and further teaches such an eyeglass lens wherein a surface shape of the plurality of defocus regions is a spherical shape (Figure 2 and paragraph [0055]).
With regard to dependent claim 6, Matsuoka teaches al of the claimed limitations of the instant invention as outlined above with respect to independent claim 1, and further teaches such an eyeglass lens wherein the eyeglass lens is a hyperopia reducing lens (paragraph [0026]).
With regard to independent claim 7, Matsuoka teaches a design method for an eyeglass lens, comprising the steps of: designing a base region configured to cause light incident on an object-side surface to exit from an eye-side surface, enter an eye, and converge at a predetermined position A on a retina (paragraph [0025]); and designing a plurality of defocus regions having a characteristic of causing light to converge at a position B farther from an object side than the position A is (paragraph [0025]), wherein in the step of designing the plurality of defocus regions, the plurality of defocus regions are designed in such a manner that d1/d2 is greater than 2 and less than 3, where d1, which is the diameter of a circle circumscribing a triangle connecting centers of three of the defocus regions closest to each other (wherein d1 has been determined, using the relationship of a circle having an inscribed triangle of a/√3 = R, wherein a is a side of the triangle and R is the radius of the circle, such that d1 = 1.63. See annotated Figure 1 above), is divided by d2, which is the diameter of the defocus regions (paragraph [0093], wherein d2 = 0.6 mm and d1/d2 = 2.71).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Qi et al (U.S. Patent Publication 2023/0273458), Qi (U.S. Patent Publication 2023/0229018) and Chalberg , Jr, et al (U.S. Patent Publication 2022/0011602) all teach eyeglass lenses comprising defocus regions.
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
10 June 2026
Prosecution Insights