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.
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 92, 98 and 104 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 92, 98 and 104, applicant claims pre-existing conditions that are not distinguishable from one another. For example, “lack of focus”, “reading focus” and “lack of general focus” is not clear since “general” and/or “reading” does not distinguish the three focus conditions.
For the purposes of this action the office will interpret “lack of focus” to encompass all other focus-related limitations.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 91-108 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coulter et al. (PGPUB 20080055541, of record) in view of Guillous et al. (PGPUB 20070008489).
Regarding claim 91, Coulter discloses a method, comprising:
providing, to a subject having a diagnosed pre-existing condition or symptom ([0071]), a device comprising:
at least one lens (104/106), and
at least one correcting element disposed on the at least one lens (Fig. 1),
wherein at least one correcting element is disposed within at least one correction zone (Figs, 1-10),
wherein the at least one correction zone is disposed so as to be within the subject's field of view when the device is worn (Fig. 1);
wherein the center is configured to be horizontally aligned with an optical center of a left eye or a right eye of the subject when the device is worn by the subject (Fig. 13); and
wherein the at least one correction zone is located at a distance and an angle that is determined based on the diagnosed pre-existing condition or symptom ([0071]-[0073] where the pattern is selected based on the needs of the wearer, which includes wearers having injuries).
Coulter does not specifically disclose wherein the at least one correction zone is defined using a polar coordinate system measured from a center of the at least one lens.
However, Guillous teaches a method of designing lenses wherein polar coordinates are used ([0082]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine Coulter and Guillous such that the location of the correction zones are defined using polar coordinates motivated by simplifying the lens design.
Regarding claim 92, as best understood, modified Coulter discloses wherein the pre-existing condition or symptom comprises lack of focus, restlessness, lack of assertiveness, emotional stress, predisposition for negative moods, nausea, asthma symptoms, headaches, migraine, difficulty hearing in a noisy environment, lack of general focus, lack of stability, dizziness, sinus congestion, appetite imbalance, epilepsy, lack of depth perception, eye strain, stutter, atopic dermatitis, difficulty balancing note rhythm while reading music, difficulty in reading focus, stress, lack of equilibrium, lack of visual balance, difficulty in reading focus while reading a language read from right to left, difficulty in reading focus while reading a language read from left to right, and sinusitis ([0071] wherein a brain injury can lead to many of the conditions above and promoting perception of a weak eye relates to eye strain and/or lack of focus).
Regarding claim 93, modified Coulter discloses wherein the at least one correction zone comprises a plurality of correction zones (Figs. 5-10 of Coulter shows a plurality of correction zones).
Regarding claim 94, modified Coulter discloses wherein the plurality of correction zones comprises at least one correction zone over the right eye and at least one correction zone over the left eye (Fig. 13).
Regarding claim 95, modified Coulter discloses wherein the device is eyeglasses (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 96, modified Coulter discloses wherein the one or more correcting elements comprise a sticker, a painted mark, an etch, or a light beam (Fig. 16B, for example, shows where all light beams are substantially blocked and Fig. 12 shows only a portion of the light beams and the blocked zones are arguably etched. Additionally, it should be noted that making any of the zones permanently blocked with paint or a stick would be obvious.).
Regarding claim 97, Coulter discloses a device, comprising:
at least one lens (104/106)), and
at least one correcting element disposed on the at least one lens (Fig. 1 shows correction elements on both lenses),
wherein at least one correcting element is disposed within at least one correction zone (Figs. 1-10),
wherein the at least one correction zone is disposed so as to be within a subject's field of view when the device is worn (Fig. 1);
wherein the center is configured to be horizontally aligned with an optical center of a left eye or a right eye of the subject when the device is worn by the subject (Fig. 13); and
wherein the at least one correction zone is located at a distance from the optical center and an angle that are selected based on a condition or symptom to be treated by the device ([0071]-[0073] where the pattern is selected based on the needs of the wearer, which includes wearers having injuries).
Coulter does not specifically disclose wherein the at least one correction zone is defined using a polar coordinate system measured from a center of the at least one lens.
However, Guillous teaches a method of designing lenses wherein polar coordinates are used ([0082]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine Coulter and Guillous such that the location of the correction zones are defined using polar coordinates motivated by simplifying the lens design.
Regarding claim 98, as best understood, modified Coulter discloses wherein the pre-existing condition or symptom comprises lack of focus, restlessness, lack of assertiveness, emotional stress, predisposition for negative moods, nausea, asthma symptoms, headaches, migraine, difficulty hearing in a noisy environment, lack of general focus, lack of stability, dizziness, sinus congestion, appetite imbalance, epilepsy, lack of depth perception, eye strain, stutter, atopic dermatitis, difficulty balancing note rhythm while reading music, difficulty in reading focus, stress, lack of equilibrium, lack of visual balance, difficulty in reading focus while reading a language read from right to left, difficulty in reading focus while reading a language read from left to right, and sinusitis ([0071] wherein a brain injury can lead to many of the conditions above and promoting perception of a weak eye relates to eye strain and/or lack of focus).
Regarding claim 99, modified Coulter discloses wherein the at least one correction zone comprises a plurality of correction zones (Figs. 5-10 of Coulter shows a plurality of correction zones).
Regarding claim 100, modified Coulter discloses wherein the plurality of correction zones comprises at least one correction zone over the right eye and at least one correction zone over the left eye (Fig. 13).
Regarding claim 101, modified Coulter discloses wherein the device is eyeglasses (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 102, modified Coulter discloses wherein the one or more correcting elements comprise a sticker, a painted mark, an etch, or a light beam (Fig. 16B, for example, shows where all light beams are substantially blocked and Fig. 12 shows only a portion of the light beams and the blocked zones are arguably etched. Additionally, it should be noted that making any of the zones permanently blocked with paint or a stick would be obvious.).
Regarding claim 103, Coulter discloses a kit (100), comprising:
one or more correcting elements (108/110) configured to be positioned on one or more lenses (104/106); and
instructions for applying the one or more correcting elements on one or more lenses, to thereby define one or more correction zones on the one or more lenses (Fig. 7, [0046]),
wherein the one or more correction zones are disposed on the one or more lenses so as to be within a wearer's field of view when a device comprising the one or more lenses is worn by the wearer (Fig. 1);
wherein the center is configured to be horizontally aligned with an optical center of a left eye or a right eye of the subject when the device is worn by the subject (Fig. 13); and
wherein the one or more correction zones are located at corresponding one or more distances from the optical center and angles that are selected based on a condition or symptom to be treated by the device ([0071]).
Coulter does not specifically disclose wherein the at least one correction zone is defined using a polar coordinate system measured from a center of the at least one lens.
However, Guillous teaches a method of designing lenses wherein polar coordinates are used ([0082]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine Coulter and Guillous such that the location of the correction zones are defined using polar coordinates motivated by simplifying the lens design.
Regarding claim 104, as best understood, modified Coulter discloses wherein the pre-existing condition or symptom comprises lack of focus, restlessness, lack of assertiveness, emotional stress, predisposition for negative moods, nausea, asthma symptoms, headaches, migraine, difficulty hearing in a noisy environment, lack of general focus, lack of stability, dizziness, sinus congestion, appetite imbalance, epilepsy, lack of depth perception, eye strain, stutter, atopic dermatitis, difficulty balancing note rhythm while reading music, difficulty in reading focus, stress, lack of equilibrium, lack of visual balance, difficulty in reading focus while reading a language read from right to left, difficulty in reading focus while reading a language read from left to right, and sinusitis ([0071] wherein a brain injury can lead to many of the conditions above and promoting perception of a weak eye relates to eye strain and/or lack of focus).
Regarding claim 105, modified Coulter discloses wherein the at least one correction zone comprises a plurality of correction zones (Figs. 5-10 of Coulter shows a plurality of correction zones).
Regarding claim 106, modified Coulter discloses wherein the plurality of correction zones comprises at least one correction zone over the right eye and at least one correction zone over the left eye (Fig. 13).
Regarding claim 107, modified Coulter discloses wherein the device is eyeglasses (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 108, modified Coulter discloses wherein the one or more correcting elements comprise a sticker, a painted mark, an etch, or a light beam (Fig. 16B, for example, shows where all light beams are substantially blocked and Fig. 12 shows only a portion of the light beams and the blocked zones are arguably etched. Additionally, it should be noted that making any of the zones permanently blocked with paint or a stick would be obvious.).
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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRAVIS S FISSEL whose telephone number is (313)446-6573. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-5PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Stephone Allen can be reached on (571) 272-2434. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TRAVIS S FISSEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights