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 .
The instant application having Application No. 18/885,500 filed on 9/13/2024 is presented for examination by the examiner.
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 13 recites “generating a vision sensitivity probfile”, which should be “generating a vision sensitivity profile”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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, 4, and 8-10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Samec (US 20170017083 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Samec discloses method of implementing a virtual reality (VR) system for recommending lens tints through an interactive vision sensitivity test, comprising:
at an electronic device (1400 "wearable augmented (or virtual) reality device", Figure 14) including a head-mounted display (HMD) (1402 "display platform", Figure 14) and a camera (paragraph 0695 states "the wearable augmented (or virtual reality) device 1400 can include one or more outward facing cameras. In certain implementations, the one or more outward facing cameras can be similar to the cameras 16 described herein with reference to FIG. 5. The outward facing cameras in an augmented reality display device can be configured to capture images the surrounding environment to determine, for example, where to superimpose a test image such as letters or symbols"):
generating a VR user interface (1404 "user interface", Figure 14) corresponding to a three-dimensional virtual environment (paragraph 1696 states "The wearable augmented reality device 1400 can include one or more user interface features 1404 configured to allow a wearer or other person to provide input to the device … the user interface features 1404 can include capacitive features sensitive to touch, keyboards, buttons, microphones, photodetectors, cameras, and/or a variety of software-implemented features provided by a graphical user interface", paragraph 1697 states "the user interface features 1404 can be used by the wearer to provide feedback regarding the quality of the image as perceived by the wearer. The wearer can provide feedback through the user interface features 1404 regarding whether the wearer can comfortably view the image being projected to the user");
rendering the VR user interface (1404 "user interface") on the head-mounted display (1402 "display platform", paragraph 1969 states “a virtual touch screen is provided through the images projected to the user's eyes and sensors to sense the users moving body … the user interface features 1404 include gaze detection components to allow a wearer to provide user input through gaze of the eyes (e.g., this can include selecting a button or other element when the wearer fixates on the button for a time or when the wearer blinks when fixated on the button)”);
simulating various lighting conditions and glare levels sequentially in the VR user interface (paragraph 01964 states "the system can be configured to administer a brightness or glare test that include objective measurements of functional visual acuity in different brightness and glare conditions. In various embodiments, the system can be configured to administer a brightness acuity test to determine the functional visual acuity in various bright light conditions. For example, the system can be configured to simulate three or more bright-light conditions: 1) high-direct overhead sunlight; 2) medium-partly cloudy day; and 3) low-bright overhead commercial lighting"); and
while simulating the various lighting conditions and glare levels, in real time:
continuously tracking, using the eye-tracking sensors, user responses to the simulated lighting conditions and glare levels (paragraph 1692 states "the ophthalmic system may be programmed to detect certain patterns of eye behavior that are symptomatic of weakening eyes. Based at least in part on the tracked eye behavior, eye adjustments may be automatically made by the ophthalmic system"); and
evaluating the tracked data for vision sensitivity performance (paragraph 1692).
Regarding claim 4, Samec discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses wherein simulating various glare levels comprises simulating conditions ranging from mild indirect light reflections to severe direct sunlight glare (paragraph 01964 states "the system can be configured to administer a brightness or glare test that include objective measurements of functional visual acuity in different brightness and glare conditions. In various embodiments, the system can be configured to administer a brightness acuity test to determine the functional visual acuity in various bright light conditions. For example, the system can be configured to simulate three or more bright-light conditions: 1) high-direct overhead sunlight; 2) medium-partly cloudy day; and 3) low-bright overhead commercial lighting").
Regarding claim 8, Samec discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses wherein evaluating the tracked data comprises assessing vision sensitivity separately for different visual tasks and environments (paragraph 1694 states “the system can be configured to administer a brightness acuity test to determine the functional visual acuity in various bright light conditions. For example, the system can be configured to simulate three or more bright-light conditions: 1) high-direct overhead sunlight; 2) medium-partly cloudy day; and 3) low-bright overhead commercial lighting. The visual acuity measurements can be similar to those that would be measured in these three conditions using a standard eye chart (e.g. the eye chart 1420). The result of such a test may be an assessment of functional visual acuity. Such tests can be used to test for sensitivity to bright light, photophobia, impaired scotopic vision, and the like”).
Regarding claim 9, Samec discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses presenting one or more interactive visual tasks in the virtual environment, wherein the tasks are selected from the group consisting of: reading under different lighting conditions, identifying objects in glare-prone environments (paragraph 1691 states “to conduct an eye exam, the user/wearer may be presented with a variety of images of varying sizes, and the user/wearer may provide input as to the clarity of the image through a user interface 1404 of the ophthalmic system”, paragraph 1694 states “the system can be configured to administer a brightness or glare test that include objective measurements of functional visual acuity in different brightness and glare conditions. In various embodiments, the system can be configured to administer a brightness acuity test to determine the functional visual acuity in various bright light conditions. For example, the system can be configured to simulate three or more bright-light conditions: 1) high-direct overhead sunlight; 2) medium-partly cloudy day; and 3) low-bright overhead commercial lighting. The visual acuity measurements can be similar to those that would be measured in these three conditions using a standard eye chart (e.g. the eye chart 1420)”, Figure 14), and navigating virtual scenes.
Regarding claim 10, Samec discloses all the limitations of claim 9 and further discloses wherein the interactive visual tasks are sequenced from less to more challenging, gradually increasing light intensity and glare (paragraph 1694 states “the system can be configured to simulate three or more bright-light conditions: 1) high-direct overhead sunlight; 2) medium-partly cloudy day; and 3) low-bright overhead commercial lighting”).
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Samec (US 20170017083 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Samec discloses all the limitations of claim 1, however Samec does not disclose wherein simulating various lighting conditions comprises varying light intensities ranging from 50 lux to 100,000 lux.
It is well known in the art that a brightness of 50 lux corresponds to dim indoor lighting while a brightness of 100,000 lux corresponds to direct outdoor sunlight. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to vary light intensities ranging from 50 lux to 100,000 lux, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Antonie 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977); In re Boesch 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Claims 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Samec (US 20170017083 A1)(Figure 14), in view of Samec (US 20170017083 A1)(Figures 3A-3D).
Regarding claim 19, Samec (Figure 14) discloses a virtual reality (VR) system for recommending lens tints through an interactive vision sensitivity test, in at least Figure 14, comprising:
a head-mounted display (1402 "display platform", Figure 14);
eye-tracking sensors (paragraph 1692 states "the ophthalmic system may be programmed to detect certain patterns of eye behavior that are symptomatic of weakening eyes. Based at least in part on the tracked eye behavior, eye adjustments may be automatically made by the ophthalmic system");
one or more processors (paragraph 1687 states “An electronic hardware processor can be used to analyze light received from the eye of the wearer to examine the various structures of the wearer's eye”); and
generating a VR user interface (1404 "user interface", Figure 14) corresponding to a three-dimensional virtual environment (paragraph 1696 states "The wearable augmented reality device 1400 can include one or more user interface features 1404 configured to allow a wearer or other person to provide input to the device … the user interface features 1404 can include capacitive features sensitive to touch, keyboards, buttons, microphones, photodetectors, cameras, and/or a variety of software-implemented features provided by a graphical user interface", paragraph 1697 states "the user interface features 1404 can be used by the wearer to provide feedback regarding the quality of the image as perceived by the wearer. The wearer can provide feedback through the user interface features 1404 regarding whether the wearer can comfortably view the image being projected to the user");
rendering the VR user interface (1404 "user interface") on the head-mounted display (1402 "display platform", paragraph 1969 states “a virtual touch screen is provided through the images projected to the user's eyes and sensors to sense the users moving body … the user interface features 1404 include gaze detection components to allow a wearer to provide user input through gaze of the eyes (e.g., this can include selecting a button or other element when the wearer fixates on the button for a time or when the wearer blinks when fixated on the button)”);
simulating various lighting conditions and glare levels sequentially in the VR user interface (paragraph 01964 states "the system can be configured to administer a brightness or glare test that include objective measurements of functional visual acuity in different brightness and glare conditions. In various embodiments, the system can be configured to administer a brightness acuity test to determine the functional visual acuity in various bright light conditions. For example, the system can be configured to simulate three or more bright-light conditions: 1) high-direct overhead sunlight; 2) medium-partly cloudy day; and 3) low-bright overhead commercial lighting"); and
while simulating the various lighting conditions and glare levels, in real time:
continuously tracking, using the eye-tracking sensors, user responses to the simulated lighting conditions and glare levels (paragraph 1692 states "the ophthalmic system may be programmed to detect certain patterns of eye behavior that are symptomatic of weakening eyes. Based at least in part on the tracked eye behavior, eye adjustments may be automatically made by the ophthalmic system"); and
evaluating the tracked data for vision sensitivity performance (paragraph 1692).
However, Samec (Figure 14) does not disclose memory storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more processors.
Samec (Figures 3A-3D) teaches memory (paragraph 1432 states “The local processing and data module (70) may comprise a power-efficient processor or controller, as well as digital memory, such as flash memory, both of which may be utilized to assist in the processing, caching, and storage of data”) storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more processors (paragraph 1432).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the virtual reality (VR) system for recommending lens tints through an interactive vision sensitivity test of Samec (Figure 14) modified by memory storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more processors, in order to allow the device to be used fully autonomously from any remote module (paragraph 1433).
Regarding claim 20, Samec (Figure 14) discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, in at least Figure 14, an electronic device (1400 "wearable augmented (or virtual) reality device", Figure 14) with a head-mounted display (1402 "display platform", Figure 14) and eye-tracking sensors (paragraph 1692 states "the ophthalmic system may be programmed to detect certain patterns of eye behavior that are symptomatic of weakening eyes. Based at least in part on the tracked eye behavior, eye adjustments may be automatically made by the ophthalmic system"), the one or more programs including instructions for:
generating a VR user interface (1404 "user interface", Figure 14) corresponding to a three-dimensional virtual environment (paragraph 1696 states "The wearable augmented reality device 1400 can include one or more user interface features 1404 configured to allow a wearer or other person to provide input to the device … the user interface features 1404 can include capacitive features sensitive to touch, keyboards, buttons, microphones, photodetectors, cameras, and/or a variety of software-implemented features provided by a graphical user interface", paragraph 1697 states "the user interface features 1404 can be used by the wearer to provide feedback regarding the quality of the image as perceived by the wearer. The wearer can provide feedback through the user interface features 1404 regarding whether the wearer can comfortably view the image being projected to the user");
rendering the VR user interface (1404 "user interface") on the head-mounted display (1402 "display platform", paragraph 1969 states “a virtual touch screen is provided through the images projected to the user's eyes and sensors to sense the users moving body … the user interface features 1404 include gaze detection components to allow a wearer to provide user input through gaze of the eyes (e.g., this can include selecting a button or other element when the wearer fixates on the button for a time or when the wearer blinks when fixated on the button)”);
simulating various lighting conditions and glare levels sequentially in the VR user interface (paragraph 01964 states "the system can be configured to administer a brightness or glare test that include objective measurements of functional visual acuity in different brightness and glare conditions. In various embodiments, the system can be configured to administer a brightness acuity test to determine the functional visual acuity in various bright light conditions. For example, the system can be configured to simulate three or more bright-light conditions: 1) high-direct overhead sunlight; 2) medium-partly cloudy day; and 3) low-bright overhead commercial lighting"); and
while simulating the various lighting conditions and glare levels, in real time:
continuously tracking, using the eye-tracking sensors, user responses to the simulated lighting conditions and glare levels (paragraph 1692 states "the ophthalmic system may be programmed to detect certain patterns of eye behavior that are symptomatic of weakening eyes. Based at least in part on the tracked eye behavior, eye adjustments may be automatically made by the ophthalmic system"); and
evaluating the tracked data for vision sensitivity performance (paragraph 1692).
However, Samec (Figure 14) does not disclose storing one or more programs configured to be executed by one or more processors.
Samec (Figures 3A-3D) teach storing one or more programs configured to be executed by one or more processors (paragraph 1432 states “The local processing and data module (70) may comprise a power-efficient processor or controller, as well as digital memory, such as flash memory, both of which may be utilized to assist in the processing, caching, and storage of data”).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of Samec (Figure 14) modified by storing one or more programs configured to be executed by one or more processors, as taught by Samec (Figures 3A-3D), in order to allow the device to be used fully autonomously from any remote module (paragraph 1433).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 5-7, and 11-18 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:
Regarding claim 3, Samec discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses wherein simulating various lighting conditions and glare levels comprises: presenting a sequence of different lighting and glare scenarios (paragraph 01964 states "the system can be configured to administer a brightness or glare test that include objective measurements of functional visual acuity in different brightness and glare conditions. In various embodiments, the system can be configured to administer a brightness acuity test to determine the functional visual acuity in various bright light conditions. For example, the system can be configured to simulate three or more bright-light conditions: 1) high-direct overhead sunlight; 2) medium-partly cloudy day; and 3) low-bright overhead commercial lighting").
However, Samec (US 20170017083 A1)(Figure 14) and Samec (US 20170017083 A1)(Figures 3A-3D), either singularly or in combination, do not disclose or suggest each scenario lasting for a predetermined duration; progressively increasing the complexity and intensity of the lighting conditions and glare levels throughout the sequence; and incorporating transitions between different scenarios to assess the user’s adaptability to changing light and glare conditions, among other claim limitations.
Regarding claim 5, Samec discloses all the limitations of claim 1, however Samec does not disclose wherein evaluating the tracked data comprises: measuring reaction time to changes in lighting conditions; assessing discomfort levels through user feedback; and evaluating visual performance under different lighting conditions.
Samec (US 20170017083 A1)(Figure 14) and Samec (US 20170017083 A1)(Figures 3A-3D), either singularly or in combination, do not disclose or suggest wherein evaluating the tracked data comprises: measuring reaction time to changes in lighting conditions; assessing discomfort levels through user feedback; and evaluating visual performance under different lighting conditions, among other claim limitations.
Claims 6 and 7 depend on claim 5, so they are allowable for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 11, Samec discloses all the limitations of claim 1, however Samec does not disclose using artificial intelligence algorithms to dynamically adjust the simulated lighting conditions and glare levels based on real-time analysis of the user’s vision sensitivity performance.
Samec (US 20170017083 A1)(Figure 14) and Samec (US 20170017083 A1)(Figures 3A-3D), either singularly or in combination, do not disclose or suggest using artificial intelligence algorithms to dynamically adjust the simulated lighting conditions and glare levels based on real-time analysis of the user’s vision sensitivity performance, among other claim limitations.
Regarding claim 12, Samec discloses all the limitations of claim 1, however Samec does not disclose compiling a comprehensive report including detailed lens tint recommendations and a light sensitivity profile.
Samec (US 20170017083 A1)(Figure 14) and Samec (US 20170017083 A1)(Figures 3A-3D), either singularly or in combination, do not disclose or suggest compiling a comprehensive report including detailed lens tint recommendations and a light sensitivity profile, among other claim limitations.
Regarding claim 13, Samec discloses all the limitations of claim 1, however Samec does not disclose generating a vision sensitivity profile based on the evaluated tracked data; and recommending lens tints based on the vision sensitivity profile.
Samec (US 20170017083 A1)(Figure 14) and Samec (US 20170017083 A1)(Figures 3A-3D), either singularly or in combination, do not disclose or suggest generating a vision sensitivity profile based on the evaluated tracked data; and recommending lens tints based on the vision sensitivity profile, among other claim limitations.
Claims 14-16 depend on claim 13, so they are allowable for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 17, Samec discloses all the limitations of claim 1, however Samec does not disclose establishing baseline performance metrics by comparing the user’s vision sensitivity data with profiles of individuals with normal vision sensitivity; identifying potential vision sensitivity issues based on deviations from the established baseline; and providing recommendations for further vision evaluation if significant deviations are detected.
Samec (US 20170017083 A1)(Figure 14) and Samec (US 20170017083 A1)(Figures 3A-3D), either singularly or in combination, do not disclose or suggest establishing baseline performance metrics by comparing the user’s vision sensitivity data with profiles of individuals with normal vision sensitivity; identifying potential vision sensitivity issues based on deviations from the established baseline; and providing recommendations for further vision evaluation if significant deviations are detected, among other claim limitations.
Regarding claim 18, Samec discloses all the limitations of claim 1, however Samec does not disclose generating a color sensitivity map based on the user’s responses to different color components under various lighting conditions and glare levels, wherein the color sensitivity map represents the user’s sensitivity to specific wavelengths of light, wherein the color sensitivity map is used to fine-tune the lens tint recommendations, and wherein the color sensitivity map is presented as part of the comprehensive report, providing a visual representation of the user’s color-specific light sensitivities.
Samec (US 20170017083 A1)(Figure 14) and Samec (US 20170017083 A1)(Figures 3A-3D), either singularly or in combination, do not disclose or suggest generating a color sensitivity map based on the user’s responses to different color components under various lighting conditions and glare levels, wherein the color sensitivity map represents the user’s sensitivity to specific wavelengths of light, wherein the color sensitivity map is used to fine-tune the lens tint recommendations, and wherein the color sensitivity map is presented as part of the comprehensive report, providing a visual representation of the user’s color-specific light sensitivities, among other claim limitations.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALAINA M SWANSON whose telephone number is (703)756-5809. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 7:30am-4:00pm.
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, Pinping Sun can be reached at 571-270-1284. 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.
/ALAINA MARIE SWANSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/WILLIAM R ALEXANDER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights