DETAILED ACTION
Notice of 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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 21 – 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 21, the Specification fails to describe where more than one first artificial-reality object occupies a singular first portion of the field-of-view (oval like portions 122A/122B/122D) (Claim 21, Lines 4 – 6), where two or more artificial reality objects occupy a second singular portion of the field-of-view, where the second portion of the field-of-view is greater that a first portion of the field-of-view (Claim 21, Lines 13 – 15), and where more than one third artificial-reality object occupies a singular third portion of the field of view that is less than a second portion (Claim 21, Lines 21 – 23. In other words, the claimed portions are not described in the prose of the Specification or submitted drawings to convey possession of the claimed invention. Note that Claims 22 – 26 and 33 fall rejected with Claim 21 at least due to do dependency upon Claim 21.
Regarding Claim 27, the Specification fails to describe where more than one first artificial-reality object occupies a singular first portion of the field-of-view (oval like portions 122A/122B/122D) (Claim 27, Lines 4 – 6), where two or more artificial reality objects occupy a second singular portion of the field-of-view, where the second portion of the field-of-view is greater that a first portion of the field-of-view (Claim 27, Lines 13 – 16), and where more than one third artificial-reality object occupies a singular third portion of the field of view that is less than a second portion (Claim 27, Lines 24 – 26). In other words, the claimed portions are not described in the prose of the Specification or submitted drawings to convey possession of the claimed invention. Note that Claims 28 – 32 fall rejected with Claim 27 at least due to do dependency upon Claim 27.
Regarding Claim 34, the Specification fails to describe where more than one first artificial-reality object occupies a singular first portion of the field-of-view (oval like portions 122A/122B/122D) (Claim 34, Lines 5 - 7), where two or more artificial reality objects occupy a second singular portion of the field-of-view, where the second portion of the field-of-view is greater that a first portion of the field-of-view (Claim 34, Lines 14 – 16), and where more than one third artificial-reality object occupies a singular third portion of the field of view that is less than a second portion (Claim 34, Lines 22 – 24). In other words, the claimed portions are not described in the prose of the Specification or submitted drawings to convey possession of the claimed invention. Note that Claims 35 – 40 fall rejected with Claim 34 at least due to do dependency upon Claim 34.
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.
Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) 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.
At Lines 1 - 2 of Claim 33: the recitations “the first movement” and “the second movement” do not have antecedent basis because no prior - - first movement - - or - - second movement - - has been introduced in Claims 22 or 21.
Response to Applicants Amendments and Arguments
Applicants amendments and arguments filed November 26, 2025 have been fully considered.
First, the rejections of Claims 29 and 30 – 32 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as set forth and made of record in the Office Action mailed August 27, 2025 have been overcome via the amendments to Claim 27.
Second, the rejections of Claims 21 – 23, 25 – 26, 34 – 36, and 38 – 40 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1), the rejections of Claims 27 and 28 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2), and the rejections of Claims 24 and 37 under 35 U.S.C. 103 set forth and made of record in the Office Action mailed August 27, 2025 have been overcome via amendments to Claims 21, 27, and 34.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 BRIAN M BUTCHER whose telephone number is (571)270-5575. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday from 6:30 AM to 3:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Ke Xiao, can be reached at (571) 272 - 7776. 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).
/BRIAN M BUTCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2627 March 05, 2026