DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
In response to applicant’s amendment filed 2/17/2026, claims 1, 3-4, 13, and 17-32, are pending in this application. The previous office action dated 6/3/2026 is vacated, as it was an improper final action. This action serves as a replacement, and the response time period is set with regard to this replacement action.
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.
Claims 1 and 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terrano (US 11,557,093) in view of Doken et al. (US 2025/0307880).
Regarding claim 1, Terrano discloses a system comprising a head mounted device with a processor. See col. 5: 6-14. Terrano discloses wherein the system receives input from a sensor, identifies data related to a person in the user’s environment, and presents text or audio to the user based upon the data. See col. 30: 5-19.
Terrano does not disclose a microphone and voice recognition. However, this interface mechanism is established with regard to information systems, as is disclosed by the information system of Doken in paragraph 0101. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing, to consider this with the Terrano system, so as to provide input for analysis.
Regarding claims 3-4, Terrano discloses wherein the user’s name and other information is presented in col. 30: 20-43, and past interactions are presented as described in col. 31: 9-20 and col. 44: 22-36. There is no explicit mention of hobbies or email interactions. However, the data presented is not functional. It is merely data that is looked up and presented to the user. The nature of the data itself has no functional processing, and thus it is non-functional data, and is not a patentable distinguishment. See MPEP 2111.05.
Claims 13, 17-21, 25-32, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terrano (US 11,557,093) in view of Liang et al. (US 2023/0306968).
Regarding claims 13, 17, 19-21, and 29-32, Terrano discloses a system comprising a head mounted device with a processor. See col. 5: 6-14. Terrano discloses wherein the system receives input from a sensor, identifies data related to a person in the user’s environment, and presents text or audio alerts to the user based upon the data. See col. 30: 5-19. Terrano does not disclose wherein the data is based upon eye-tracking software (claims 21 and 31), which monitors individuals in view, and if it is determined that an individual gazes at the user from within a threshold distance, and gazes at the user continually (claims 20, 30, and 32), for a threshold amount of time (claims 19 and 29), without speaking. However, this monitoring scheme is established, as is disclosed by the system of Liang in paragraph 0276. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicants filing, to consider such with the Terrano system, in order to provide various monitoring scenarios.
Regarding claims 18 and 28, Terrano discloses wherein the text can be displayed directly in the smart glasses and wherein it comprises the user’s name. See col. 30: 20-43. Terrano does not disclose wherein the system utilizes a large language model for text processing. However, this is established, as is disclosed by Liang in paragraph 0247. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing, to consider this with the Terrano system, so as to provide effective communication.
Regarding claims 25-27, Terrano discloses past conversation data transcripts in col. 31: 9-20 and col. 44: 22-36.
Claims 22-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terrano (US 11,557,093) in view of Liang et al. (US 2023/0306968) and also Wenger et al. (US 2013/0323687).
Regarding claim 22-24, Terrano does not disclose alerts which are music and increase in amplitude. However, this concept is established, as is disclosed by the training system of Wenger in 0050. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicants filing, to consider such with the Terrano system, in order to provide various monitoring scenarios.
Arguments/Remarks
Applicant’s arguments and remarks dated 2/17/2026 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the references of Terrano and Doken do not disclose voice recognition via a microphone to determine the name of the person and the data etc. Applicant essentially argues that the voice recognition of Doken is used for a different purpose. This is true but not relevant. It is Terrano that discloses recognizing a user and gathering names and data etc. Doken is only relied upon as a different interface for this same process. This was clearly stated in the rejection, i.e. the voice recognition feature would provide input for analysis, not the analysis itself. This argument is not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the combination of Terrano and Doken is improper. Examiner disagrees. One of ordinary skill in the art considering computer information systems would have been capable of considering various features other such systems (input output schemes, etc.). This argument is not persuasive.
For the above reasons, applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY A MUSSELMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1814. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 8:00AM - 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, PETER S VASAT can be reached at 571-570-7625. 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.
/TIMOTHY A MUSSELMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights