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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/13/2024, 04/24/2025, 07/07/2025, 08/18/2025, 01/06/2026, 03/30/2026 and 04/27/2026 have been considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1, 3-5, 9-11, 13 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goldberg et al. (US 2017/0092007; already of record) in view of Sarkar (US 2016/0166146; already of record), and further in view of Smyth (US 6,120,461; already of record).
Regarding claim 1, Goldberg discloses, a method (Figs. 1-10) comprising:
at an electronic device (200) having a processor (Para. 0133 and see 204(D) and 211):
producing one or more light beams via a plurality of light sources (Para. 0110-0111) organized in an array and oriented at different angles (Para. 0110-0111), wherein control logic controls the coherent light sources to produce a light beam in, multiple directions over time to produce light towards various portions on a surface of an eye (Para. 0110-0111) and a reflection from a portion of the eye is received at a sensor (Para. 0126 and see 202) when the light beam is produced in a first direction of the multiple directions (Para. 0147-0148);
determining a second direction of the reflection based on data produced by the sensor (Para. 0147-0148);
determining a first angle based on the first direction of the light beam (Para. 0146-0148);
determining a second angle based on the second direction of the reflection (Para. 0146-0148);
determining a position in three-dimensional (3D) space on the surface of the cornea based on the first angle and the second angle (Para. 0146-0148);
determining a cornea center of the eye (Para. 0148);
determining a pupil center of the eye or an eyeball center of the eye (Para. 0147), wherein the pupil center or the eyeball center is determined without use of the light beam (Para. 0147); and
determining a gaze direction by determining a direction from the pupil center through the cornea center or a direction from the eyeball center through the cornea center (Para. 0146-0148).
Goldberg does not explicitly disclose the light source is a coherent light source, and the control logic controls the coherent light sources to produce a light beam in, multiple directions over time to produce light towards various portions on a surface of an eye at different times.
Sakar teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in a method (Figs. 1-2A) that it would have been desirable to make the light source is a coherent light source (Para. 0015-0016 and see 102), and the control logic controls the coherent light sources to produce a light beam in, multiple directions over time to produce light towards various portions on a surface of an eye (120) at different times (Para. 0065 and 0068).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the light source is a coherent light source, and the control logic controls the coherent light sources to produce a light beam in, multiple directions over time to produce light towards various portions on a surface of an eye at different times as taught by the method of Sarkar in the method of Goldberg since Sarkar teaches it is known to include these features in a method for the purpose of providing a method and device with reduced cost and improved resolution and eye tracking speed.
Goldberg in view of Sakar does not explicitly disclose determining a cornea center of the eye based on the position on the surface of the cornea.
Smyth teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in a method that it would have been desirable to make determining a cornea center of the eye based on the position on the surface of the cornea (Col. 15, lines 29-52 and Col. 21, lines 46-50).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make determining a cornea center of the eye based on the position on the surface of the cornea as taught by the method of Smyth in the combination of Goldberg in view of Sakar since Smyth teaches it is known to include these features in a method for the purpose of providing a method that provides quick and accurate three dimensional mapping of the cornea.
Regarding claim 3, Goldberg, Sarkar and Smyth discloses and teaches as set forth above, and Goldberg further discloses, the gaze direction is determined by determining a direction from the pupil center through the cornea center (Para. 0146-0148).
Regarding claim 4, Goldberg, Sarkar and Smyth discloses and teaches as set forth above, and Goldberg further discloses, the pupil center is determined based on ambient light reflected from the eye and detected at the sensor or a second sensor (Para. 0146-0148).
Regarding claim 5, Goldberg, Sarkar and Smyth discloses and teaches as set forth above, and Goldberg further discloses, the pupil center is determined based on light from a diffuse light source detected at the sensor or a second sensor (Para. 0146-0148).
Regarding claim 9, Goldberg, Sarkar and Smyth discloses and teaches as set forth above, and Goldberg further discloses, the cornea center is determined based on a second reflection produced by a second light beam from a second light source, wherein the cornea center is determined by determining a position of the reflection on the cornea and a position of the second reflection on the cornea (Para. 0146-0148).
Regarding claim 10, Goldberg, Sarkar and Smyth discloses and teaches as set forth above, and Goldberg further discloses, generating a three dimensional (3D) reconstruction of the cornea (Para. 0146-0148); and determining the cornea center based on the 3D reconstruction (Para. 0146-0148).
Regarding claims 11 and 15, Goldberg, Sarkar and Smyth discloses and teaches as set forth above, and Goldberg further discloses, the light source is a laser, a vertical-cavity surface-emitting laser (VCSEL), a narrow beam light source, or a collimated light source (Para. 0020).
Regarding claim 13, Goldberg discloses, a device (Figs. 1-10) comprising:
a plurality of light sources (Para. 0110-0111) organized in an array and oriented at different angles (Para. 0110-0111);
a pixel-based sensor (Para. 0126 and 202);
a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (Para. 0133 and 204(D) and 211); and
one or more processors (Para. 0133 and see 204(D) and 211) coupled to the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, wherein the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprises program instructions that, when executed on the one or more processors (Para. 0133 and see 204(D) and 211), cause a system to perform operations comprising:
producing one or more light beams via the plurality of light sources (Para. 0110-0111), wherein control logic controls (Para. 0133 and see 204(D) and 211) the light sources to produce a light beam in multiple directions over time to produce light towards various portions on a surface of an eye (Para. 0110-0111) and a reflection from a portion of the eye is received at a sensor (Para. 0126 and see 202) when the light beam is produced in a first direction of the multiple directions (Para. 0147-0148);
determining a second direction of the reflection based on data produced by the sensor (Para. 0147-0148);
determining a first angle based on the first direction of the light beam (Para. 0146-0148);
determining a second angle based on the second direction of the reflection (Para. 0146-0148);
determining a position in three-dimensional (3D) space on the surface of the cornea based on the first angle and the second angle (Para. 0146-0148);
determining a cornea center of the eye (Para. 0148);
determining a pupil center of the eye or an eyeball center of the eye (Para. 0147), wherein the pupil center or the eyeball center is determined without use of the light beam (Para. 0147); and
determining a gaze direction by determining a direction from the pupil center through the cornea center or a direction from the eyeball center through the cornea center (Para. 0146-0148).
Goldberg does not explicitly disclose the light source is a coherent light source, and the control logic controls the coherent light sources to produce a light beam in, multiple directions over time to produce light towards various portions on a surface of an eye at different times.
Sakar teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in a device (Figs. 1-2A) that it would have been desirable to make the light source is a coherent light source (Para. 0015-0016 and see 102), and the control logic controls the coherent light sources to produce a light beam in, multiple directions over time to produce light towards various portions on a surface of an eye (120) at different times (Para. 0065 and 0068).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the light source is a coherent light source, and the control logic controls the coherent light sources to produce a light beam in, multiple directions over time to produce light towards various portions on a surface of an eye at different times as taught by the device of Sarkar in the device of Goldberg since Sarkar teaches it is known to include these features in a device for the purpose of providing device with reduced cost and improved resolution and eye tracking speed.
Goldberg in view of Sakar does not explicitly disclose determining a cornea center of the eye based on the position on the surface of the cornea.
Smyth teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in a method that it would have been desirable to make determining a cornea center of the eye based on the position on the surface of the cornea (Col. 15, lines 29-52 and Col. 21, lines 46-50).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make determining a cornea center of the eye based on the position on the surface of the cornea as taught by the device of Smyth in the combination of Goldberg in view of Sakar since Smyth teaches it is known to include these features in a device for the purpose of providing a device that provides quick and accurate three dimensional mapping of the cornea.
Regarding claim 16, Goldberg discloses, a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (Para. 0133 and see 204(D) and 211), storing program instructions computer-executable on a computer (Para. 0133 and see 204(D) and 211) to perform operations comprising:
producing one or more light beams via the plurality of light sources (Para. 0110-0111), wherein control logic controls (Para. 0133 and see 204(D) and 211) the light sources to produce a light beam in multiple directions over time to produce light towards various portions on a surface of an eye (Para. 0110-0111) and a reflection from a portion of the eye is received at a sensor (Para. 0126 and see 202) when the light beam is produced in a first direction of the multiple directions (Para. 0147-0148);
determining a second direction of the reflection based on data produced by the sensor (Para. 0147-0148);
determining a first angle based on the first direction of the light beam (Para. 0146-0148);
determining a second angle based on the second direction of the reflection (Para. 0146-0148);
determining a position in three-dimensional (3D) space on the surface of the cornea based on the first angle and the second angle (Para. 0146-0148);
determining a cornea center of the eye (Para. 0148);
determining a pupil center of the eye or an eyeball center of the eye (Para. 0147), wherein the pupil center or the eyeball center is determined without use of the light beam (Para. 0147); and
determining a gaze direction by determining a direction from the pupil center through the cornea center or a direction from the eyeball center through the cornea center (Para. 0146-0148).
Claims 2 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goldberg et al. (US 2017/0092007; already of record) in view of Sarkar (US 2016/0166146; already of record) in view of Smyth (US 6,120,461; already of record) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Horesh (US 2016/0180143; already of record).
Goldberg, Sarkar and Smyth remains as applied to claim 1 above.
Goldberg, Sarkar and Smyth does not disclose the cornea center is determined using a single glint.
Horesh teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in a method that it would have been desirable to make the cornea center is determined using a single glint (Para. 0024-0025 and 0027).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the cornea center is determined using a single glint as taught by the device and method of Horesh in the combination of Goldberg, Sarkar and Smyth since Horesh teaches it is known to include these features in a device and method for the purpose of providing accurate and efficient tracking.
Regarding claim 6, Goldberg, Sarkar, Smyth and Horesh discloses and teaches as set forth above, and Horesh from teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in a device and method that it would have been desirable to make the eyeball center is determined by fitting a sphere based on positions based on an eyeball position (Para. 0023).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the above mentioned limitations of Horesh in the combination of Goldberg, Sarkar and Smyth since Horesh teaches it is known to include these features in a device and method for the purpose of providing accurate and efficient tracking.
Regarding claim 7, Goldberg, Sarkar, Smyth and Horesh discloses and teaches as set forth above, and Horesh from teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in a device and method that it would have been desirable to make the eyeball center is determined based on points on the cornea detected over time (Para. 0024-0025 and 0037).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the above mentioned limitations of Horesh in the combination of Goldberg, Sarkar and Smyth since Horesh teaches it is known to include these features in a device and method for the purpose of providing accurate and efficient tracking.
Regarding claim 8, Goldberg, Sarkar, Smyth and Horesh discloses and teaches as set forth above, and Horesh from teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in a device and method that it would have been desirable to make the cornea position is determined based on determining a position of the glint and an average or previously measured cornea radius (Para. 0035-0037).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the above mentioned limitations of Horesh in the combination of Goldberg, Sarkar and Smyth since Horesh teaches it is known to include these features in a device and method for the purpose of providing accurate and efficient tracking.
Claims 12 and 14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goldberg et al. (US 2017/0092007) in view of Sarkar (US 2016/0166146) in view of Smyth (US 6,120,461) as applied to claims 1 and 13 above, and further in view of Petljanski et al. (US 2020/0278539).
Goldberg, Sarkar and Smyth remains as applied to claims 1 and 13 above.
Goldberg, Sarkar and Smyth does not disclose the pixel-based sensor is an event camera.
Petljanski teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in a device and method that it would have been desirable to make the pixel-based sensor is an event camera (Para. 0024).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the pixel-based sensor is an event camera as taught by the device and method of Petljanski in the combination of Goldberg, Sarkar and Smyth since Petljanski teaches it is known to include this feature in a device and method for the purpose of providing a device and method with reduced power consumption and reduced distortions.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAWAYNE A PINKNEY whose telephone number is (571)270-1305. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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.
/DAWAYNE PINKNEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 09/01/2026
Prosecution Insights