Detailed Office 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 .
Status: Please all the replies and correspondence should be addressed to Examiner’s new art unit 2693. Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted on 12-31-2024 under new application, which is being continuation of a parent application # 18/472,512 filed on 09/22/2023, matured to PAT # 12238405, is a continuation of a parent application # 17/662,509 filed on 05/09/2022, matured to a PAT # 11805309
is a continuation of a parent application # 16/883,665 filed on 05/26/2020 matured to a PAT # 11330165, is a continuation of a parent application 15/717,637 filed on 09/27/2017 matured to a PAT # 10708488, has provisional Application # 62/400,241 filed on 09/27/2016, which have been placed of record in the file. Claims 1-18 are pending in this action.
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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12-31-2024, 12-31,2024, 10-16-2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) with a specific reference to the prior-filed application in compliance with 37 CFR 1.78(a) is included in the first sentence(s) of the specification following the title or in an application data sheet.
The factual inquiries 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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.
Claim 1-2 and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marston Nicholas Jamie et al. (US 20150244910 A1 IDS) hereinafter referenced as Marston et al.in view of Stafford Jeffrey Roger et al. (US 20180292911 A1IDS) hereinafter referenced as Stafford et al. and Pearson Kent D et al. (US 20080192114 A1 IDS) hereinafter referenced as Pearson et al.
Regarding Claim 1, Marston et al. suggests an eyewear device (please see figure 1) comprising: an eyewear frame (page 1, paragraph 4); a camera incorporated in the eyewear frame (page 1, paragraph 4); a mode indicator comprising a series of light emitters mounted on an outwardly-directed surface of the eyewear frame (page 4, paragraph 79, figure 16); and a controller incorporated in the eyewear frame (page 4, paragraph 79, Item # 52) in communication with the mode indicator (page 4, paragraph 79, figure 16), the controller being configured to: detect activation of a particular operational mode of the camera (page 4, paragraph 79, figure 16); and during operation of the camera in the particular operational mode, cause display by the mode indicator of a visual indication corresponding to the particular operational mode of the camera (page 4, paragraph 79, figure 16).
Marston et al. fails to suggest a series of light emitters mounted on a forward-facing surface of the eyewear frame such that the mode indicator is directed away from a user when the eve wear device is worn by the user.
The prior art of Stafford et al. discloses An eyewear device comprising: an eyewear frame a camera incorporated in the eyewear frame (para. 125, fig. 5, items # 510, 512), and a controller incorporated in the eyewear frame (para. 253) a mode indicator comprising one or more light emitters mounted on an outwardly-directed surface of the eyewear frame; and a controller incorporated in the eyewear frame in communication with the mode indicator (figs. 21, 24, page 22, pars. 242-245); detecting a predefined device operation, causing the mode indicator to produce a corresponding predefined visual indication, wherein the visual indication comprises illuminating the one or more light emitters at graduated light intensities (paras. 242-245).
Marston et al. teaches a method comprising: using one or more computer processing devices incorporated in an eyewear device; an eyewear device comprising: an eyewear frame; a camera incorporated in the eyewear frame; a mode indicator comprising a series of light emitters mounted on an outwardly-directed surface of the eyewear frame; and a controller incorporated in the eyewear frame.
Stafford et al. teaches a controller a controller in communication with the mode indicator, the controller being configured to: detect the mode of operation and a series of light emitters mounted on a forward-facing surface of the eyewear frame such that the mode indicator is directed away from a user when the eve wear device is worn by the user.
Marston et al. does not teach a controller a controller in communication with the mode indicator, the controller being configured to: detect the mode of operation and a series of light emitters mounted on a forward-facing surface of the eyewear frame such that the mode indicator is directed away from a user when the eve wear device is worn by the user.
Hence the prior art includes each element claimed, although not necessarily in a single prior art reference, with the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference.
In combination, Marston Nicholas Jamie et al. (US 20150244910 A1) discloses same eyewear display structure as it does separately detecting modes of operation and use light emitting diode to indicate modes of operation
Stafford et al. discloses the same structure as it does separately providing array of LED around frame of the eyewear frame, being peripheral to user eyes when user is wears the eyewear in front of his face and detecting modes of operation and use array of light emitting diode to indicate modes of operation
Therefore one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately.
The results of the combination would have been predictable and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Marston et al. to include a controller a controller in communication with the mode indicator, the controller being configured to: detect the mode of operation and a series of light emitters mounted on a forward-facing surface of the eyewear frame such that the mode indicator is directed away from a user when the eve wear device is worn by the user, as disclosed by Stafford et al. to be able eyewear that presents information through visual and audible means to with minimal impact on user focus and attention toward user activity as Stafford et al. discusses at paras. 241-245.
Further Regarding Claim 1, Marston et al. fails to disclose the controller being configured to: detect activation (monitoring) of a particular operational mode of the camera and during operation of the camera in the particular operational mode, cause display by the mode indicator of a visual indication
corresponding to the particular operational mode of the camera and detect activation, at different times, of a plurality of different operational modes of the camera; and at the different times, cause display by the mode indicator of different respective visual indications corresponding to the plurality of different, operational modes.
Pearson discloses the controller being configured to: detect activation (monitoring) of a particular operational mode of the camera (paras. 17-19, 55-58, 64, 65 discloses after receiving activation signal and detected by controller activates the camera and performs the selected mode of operation),; and during operation of the camera in the particular operational mode, cause display by the mode indicator of a visual indication corresponding to the particular operational mode of the camera (paras. 17-19, suggests plurality of modes of operation of camera at different time , please notice further suggests the camera operation such as single shot photo or picture indicated by red lighted LED, further when camera doing video is indicated by green LED and delete operation is indicated by amber lighted LED the above operation obviously suggests different mode of operation are performed during different time further suggests camera either does still photo or moving images and these modes of operations are indicated with different color LED light emitting further paras. 55-60, 62, 64, 65 provides further detail about modes of operation of camera indicated with different color light at different time since camera does not have capability to achieve multiple task at same time).
The prior art of Marston et al. provides an eyewear device comprising: an eyewear frame; a camera incorporated in the eyewear frame; a mode indicator comprising a series of light emitters mounted on an outwardly-directed surface of the eyewear frame; and a controller incorporated in the eyewear frame in communication with the mode indicator; in which the claimed invention can be seen as an improvement in that, detect activation of a particular operational mode of the camera; and during operation of the camera in the particular operational mode, cause display by the mode indicator of a visual indication corresponding to the particular operational mode of the camera is known technique disclosed by Pearson and is applicable to base process of Marston et al. Pearson disclosing known technique of the controller being configured to: detect activation of a particular operational mode of the camera and during operation of the camera in the particular operational mode, cause display by the mode indicator of a visual indication corresponding to the particular operational mode of the camera and detect activation, at different times, of a plurality of different operational modes of the camera; and at the different times, cause display by the mode indicator of different respective visual indications corresponding to the plurality of different, operational modes would have been recognized by one skill in the art as applicable to base process of Marston et al. and the results would have been predictable and resulted in an eyewear with a controllable camera operation as well as monitoring other mode of operation of camera and also having plurality of indicators indicating mode operation; which results in an improved process. Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made.
Regarding Claim 2, Stafford et al. discloses the mode indicator comprises a light array provided by a plurality of light emitters mounted on an operatively forward-facing surface of the eyewear frame ((figs. 21, 24, page 22, pars. 242-245).
Regarding Claim 10, Marston et al. discloses method comprising: using one or more computer processing devices incorporated in an eyewear device (please see fig. 1, para. 79) an eyewear device (please see fig. 1) comprising: an eyewear device (please see fig. 1) comprising: an eyewear frame (page 1, para. 4); a camera incorporated in the eyewear frame (para. 4); a mode indicator comprising a series of light emitters mounted on an outwardly-directed surface of the eyewear frame (para. 79, fig. 16); and a controller incorporated in the eyewear frame (para. 79, Item # 52) in communication with the mode indicator (para. 79, fig. 16), the controller being configured to: detect activation of a particular operational mode of the camera (para. 79, fig. 16); and during operation of the camera in the particular operational mode, cause display by the mode indicator of a visual indication corresponding to the particular operational mode of the camera (para. 79, fig. 16).
Marston et al. fails to suggest a series of light emitters mounted on a forward-facing surface of the eyewear frame such that the mode indicator is directed away from a user when the eve wear device is worn by the user.
The prior art of Stafford et al. discloses An eyewear device comprising: an eyewear frame a camera incorporated in the eyewear frame (para. 125, fig. 5, items # 510, 512), and a controller incorporated in the eyewear frame (para. 253) a mode indicator comprising one or more light emitters mounted on an outwardly-directed surface of the eyewear frame; and a controller incorporated in the eyewear frame in communication with the mode indicator (figs. 21, 24, page 22, pars. 242-245); detecting a predefined device operation, causing the mode indicator to produce a corresponding predefined visual indication, wherein the visual indication comprises illuminating the one or more light emitters at graduated light intensities (paras. 242-245).
Marston et al. teaches a method comprising: using one or more computer processing devices incorporated in an eyewear device; an eyewear device comprising: an eyewear frame; a camera incorporated in the eyewear frame; a mode indicator comprising a series of light emitters mounted on an outwardly-directed surface of the eyewear frame; and a controller incorporated in the eyewear frame.
Stafford et al. teaches a controller a controller in communication with the mode indicator, the controller being configured to: detect the mode of operation and a series of light emitters mounted on a forward-facing surface of the eyewear frame such that the mode indicator is directed away from a user when the eve wear device is worn by the user.
Marston et al. does not teach a controller a controller in communication with the mode indicator, the controller being configured to: detect the mode of operation and a series of light emitters mounted on a forward-facing surface of the eyewear frame such that the mode indicator is directed away from a user when the eve wear device is worn by the user.
Hence the prior art includes each element claimed, although not necessarily in a single prior art reference, with the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference.
In combination, Marston Nicholas Jamie et al. (US 20150244910 A1) discloses same eyewear display structure as it does separately detecting modes of operation and use light emitting diode to indicate modes of operation
Stafford et al. discloses the same structure as it does separately providing array of LED around frame of the eyewear frame, being peripheral to user eyes when user is wears the eyewear in front of his face and detecting modes of operation and use array of light emitting diode to indicate modes of operation
Therefore one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately.
The results of the combination would have been predictable and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Marston et al. to include a controller a controller in communication with the mode indicator, the controller being configured to: detect the mode of operation and a series of light emitters mounted on a forward-facing surface of the eyewear frame such that the mode indicator is directed away from a user when the eve wear device is worn by the user, as disclosed by Stafford et al. to be able eyewear that presents information through visual and audible means to with minimal impact on user focus and attention toward user activity as Stafford et al. discusses at paras. 241-245.
Further Regarding Claim 1, Marston et al. fails to disclose the controller being configured to: detect activation of a particular operational mode of the camera and during operation of the camera in the particular operational mode, cause display by the mode indicator of a visual indication
corresponding to the particular operational mode of the camera and detect activation, at different times, of a plurality of different operational modes of the camera; and at the different times, cause display by the mode indicator of different respective visual indications corresponding to the plurality of different, operational modes.
Pearson discloses the controller being configured to: detect activation of a particular operational mode of the camera (paras. 17-19, 55-58, 64, 65 discloses after receiving activation signal and detected by controller activates the camera and performs the selected mode of operation),; and during operation of the camera in the particular operational mode, cause display by the mode indicator of a visual indication corresponding to the particular operational mode of the camera (paras. 17-19, suggests plurality of modes of operation of camera at different time , please notice further suggests the camera operation such as single shot photo or picture indicated by red lighted LED, further when camera doing video is indicated by green LED and delete operation is indicated by amber lighted LED the above operation obviously suggests different mode of operation are performed during different time further suggests camera either does still photo or moving images and these modes of operations are indicated with different color LED light emitting further paras. 55-60, 62, 64, 65 provides further detail about modes of operation of camera indicated with different color light at different time since camera does not have capability to achieve multiple task at same time).
The prior art of Marston et al. in view of Smit et al. provides an eyewear device comprising: an eyewear frame; a camera incorporated in the eyewear frame; a mode indicator comprising a series of light emitters mounted on an outwardly-directed surface of the eyewear frame; and a controller incorporated in the eyewear frame in communication with the mode indicator; in which the claimed invention can be seen as an improvement in that, detect activation of a particular operational mode of the camera; and during operation of the camera in the particular operational mode, cause display by the mode indicator of a visual indication corresponding to the particular operational mode of the camera is known technique disclosed by Pearson and is applicable to base process of Marston et al. Pearson disclosing known technique of the controller being configured to: detect activation of a particular operational mode of the camera and during operation of the camera in the particular operational mode, cause display by the mode indicator of a visual indication corresponding to the particular operational mode of the camera and detect activation, at different times, of a plurality of different operational modes of the camera; and at the different times, cause display by the mode indicator of different respective visual indications corresponding to the plurality of different, operational modes would have been recognized by one skill in the art as applicable to base process of Marston et al. and the results would have been predictable and resulted in an eyewear with a controllable camera operation as well as other mode of operation and also having plurality of indicators indicating mode operation; which results in an improved process. Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made.
Regarding Claim 11, Stafford et al. discloses the mode indicator comprises a light array provided by a plurality of light emitters mounted on an operatively forward-facing surface of the eyewear frame ((figs. 21, 24, page 22, pars. 242-245).
Claim 3-5, 7, 9, 12-14, 16 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marston Nicholas Jamie et al. (US 20150244910 A1 IDS) hereinafter referenced as Marston et al.in view of Stafford Jeffrey Roger et al. (US 20180292911 A1IDS) hereinafter referenced as Stafford et al. and Pearson Kent D et al. (US 20080192114 A1 IDS) hereinafter referenced as Pearson et al.as applied to claims 1-2 and 10-11 above and further in view of Potter Daniel (US 20130097038 A1) hereinafter referenced as Potter.
Regarding Claim 3, Marston fails to disclose the visual indication corresponding to the particular operational mode of the camera comprises displaying an animation pattern.
However, prior art of Potter discloses the mode indicator is configured to produce a visual progress indication provided by an illuminated progress portion of the light array such that the progress portion progressively increases in size to indicate progress of the predefined device operation (para 213 discloses goggle as eyewear with camera, para. 212 discloses animation, paras. 145, 146 discloses different color lighting with contours shape patterned the figs. 7-11 suggests the ring shape or circular patterned).
Marston et al. teaches a method comprising: using one or more computer processing devices incorporated in an eyewear device; an eyewear device comprising: an eyewear frame; a camera incorporated in the eyewear frame; a mode indicator comprising a series of light emitters mounted on an outwardly-directed surface of the eyewear frame; and a controller incorporated in the eyewear frame.
Potter teaches the visual indication corresponding to the particular operational mode of the camera comprises displaying an animation pattern.
Marston et al. does not teach the visual indication corresponding to the particular operational mode of the camera comprises displaying an animation pattern.
Hence the prior art includes each element claimed, although not necessarily in a single prior art reference, with the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference.
In combination, Marston Nicholas Jamie et al. (US 20150244910 A1) discloses same eyewear display structure as it does separately detecting modes of operation and use light emitting diode to indicate modes of operation
Potter discloses the same structure as it does separately providing array of LED around frame of the eyewear frame, being peripheral to user eyes when user is wears the eyewear in front of his face and the visual indication corresponding to the particular operational mode of the camera comprises displaying an animation pattern
Therefore one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately.
The results of the combination would have been predictable and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Marston et al. to include the visual indication corresponding to the particular operational mode of the camera comprises displaying an animation pattern, as disclosed by Potter thereby to be able to have an eyewear providing interactive system capturing video as well as providing animated video to wearer. as Potter discusses at paras. 212-213.
Regarding Claim 4, Potter discloses the visual indication further comprises displaying via the light array both the progress portion and an animated pattern generated by dynamically illuminating a plurality of respective light emitters forming part of the light array (para. 322 disclosing array of LED, paras. 213 discloses goggle as eyewear with camera, para. 212 discloses both the progress portion and an animated pattern generated by dynamically illuminating a plurality of respective light emitters forming part of the light array paras.145, 146 different color lighting with contours shape patterned the figs. 7-11 suggests the ring shape patterned lights).
Regarding Claim 5, Stafford et al. discloses the progress portion and the animated pattern are provided at different respective intensity levels (paras. 241-245 video games maps to animation).
Please also see prior art of Potter at paras. para. 322 disclosing array of LED, paras. 213 discloses goggle as eyewear with camera, para. 212 discloses both the progress portion and an animated pattern generated by dynamically illuminating a plurality of respective light emitters forming part of the light array paras.145, 146 different color lighting with contours shape patterned the figs. 7-11 suggests the ring shape patterned lights
Regarding Claim 7, Potter discloses the light array is arranged to define an indicator ring provided by respective light emitters mounted in a ring- shaped configuration, wherein the progress portion is provided by a progress bar extending circumferentially along a proportional part of the ring, and wherein the animated pattern comprises one or more points appearing to circulate around the indicator ring (paras. para. 322 disclosing array of LED, paras. 213 discloses goggle as eyewear with camera, para. 212 discloses both the progress portion and an animated pattern generated by dynamically illuminating a plurality of respective light emitters forming part of the light array paras.145, 146 different color lighting with contours shape patterned the figs. 7-11 suggests the ring shape patterned lights).
Regarding Claim 9, Stafford et al. discloses the controller is configured produce the visual indication responsive to detecting video capture via the camera, and wherein the visual indication comprises an animated pattern generated by the light array using graduated light intensities (paras. 241-245 video games maps to animation).
Regarding Claim 12, Potter discloses the mode indicator is configured to produce a visual progress indication provided by an illuminated progress portion of the light array such that the progress portion progressively increases in size to indicate progress of the predefined device operation (para 213 discloses goggle as eyewear with camera, para. 212 discloses animation, paras. 145, 146 discloses different color lighting with contours shape patterned the figs. 7-11 suggests the ring shape or circular patterned).
Regarding Claim 13. Stafford et al. discloses the progress portion and the animated pattern are provided at different respective intensity levels (paras. 241-245 video games maps to animation).
Please also see prior art of Potter at paras. para. 322 disclosing array of LED, paras. 213 discloses goggle as eyewear with camera, para. 212 discloses both the progress portion and an animated pattern generated by dynamically illuminating a plurality of respective light emitters forming part of the light array paras.145, 146 different color lighting with contours shape patterned the figs. 7-11 suggests the ring shape patterned lights
Regarding Claim 14, Stafford et al. discloses the progress portion and the animated pattern are provided at different respective intensity levels (paras. 241-245 video games maps to animation).
Regarding Claim 16 Potter discloses the light array is arranged to define an indicator ring provided by respective light emitters mounted in a ring- shaped configuration, wherein the progress portion is provided by a progress bar extending circumferentially along a proportional part of the ring, and wherein the animated pattern comprises one or more points appearing to circulate around the indicator ring (paras. para. 322 disclosing array of LED, paras. 213 discloses goggle as eyewear with camera, para. 212 discloses both the progress portion and an animated pattern generated by dynamically illuminating a plurality of respective light emitters forming part of the light array paras.145, 146 different color lighting with contours shape patterned the figs. 7-11 suggests the ring shape patterned lights).
Regarding Claim 18, Stafford et al. discloses the controller is configured produce the visual indication responsive to detecting video capture via the camera, and wherein the visual indication comprises an animated pattern generated by the light array using graduated light intensities (paras. 241-245 video games maps to animation).
Claim 8 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marston Nicholas Jamie et al. (US 20150244910 A1 IDS) hereinafter referenced as Marston et al.in view of Stafford Jeffrey Roger et al. (US 20180292911 A1IDS) hereinafter referenced as Stafford et al. Pearson Kent D et al. (US 20080192114 A1 IDS) hereinafter referenced as Pearson et al. and Potter Daniel (US 20130097038 A1) hereinafter referenced as Potter as applied to claims 1-7, 9-16 and 18 above and further in view of Paley Eric B et al. (US 20080199829 A1) hereinafter referenced as Paley et al. .
Regarding Claim 8 and 17 Marston fails to disclose said particular device activity comprises a system recovery operation.
However, prior art of Paley et al. does disclose particular device activity comprises a system recovery operation.(para. 42).
The prior art of Marston et al. provides an eyewear device comprising: an eyewear frame; a camera incorporated in the eyewear frame; a mode indicator comprising a series of light emitters mounted on an outwardly-directed surface of the eyewear frame; and a controller incorporated in the eyewear frame in communication with the mode indicator; in which the claimed invention can be seen as an improvement in that, particular device activity comprises a system recovery operation is known technique disclosed by Paley et al. and is applicable to base process of Marston et al. Paley et al. disclosing known technique of the reset control may, for example, restore a view of a three-dimensional representation to a global coordinate system, or to a most recent view from which data was acquired during a scan would have been recognized by one skill in the art as applicable to base process of Marston et al. and the results would have been predictable and resulted in an eyewear with a controllable camera operation as well as particular device activity comprises a system recovery operation and also having plurality of indicators indicating mode operation; which results in an improved process. Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made.
Double Patenting
The non-statutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper time-wise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A non-statutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on non-statutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-19 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting over claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. US 10,708,488 B2; since the claims, if allowed, would improperly extend the “right to exclude” already granted in the patent. The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter, as follows: Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter, as follows: Comparison of Instant application Claims 1-19 to Claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. US 10,708,488 B2 of patented applications;
Furthermore, there is no apparent reason why applicant was prevented from presenting claims corresponding to those of the instant application during prosecution of the application which matured into a patent. See In re Schneller, 397 F.2d 350, 158 USPQ 210 (CCPA 1968). See also MPEP § 804.
Instant Application Number
19007094
US Patent Number
US 11,330,165 B2
1. An eyewear device comprising: an eyewear frame; a camera incorporated in the eyewear frame; a mode indicator comprising one or more light emitters mounted on an outwardly-directed surface of the eyewear frame; and a controller incorporated in the eyewear frame in communication with the mode indicator and the camera, the controller being configured to perform operations comprising monitoring camera activity; in response to detecting a predefined device operation, causing the mode indicator to produce a corresponding predefined visual indication, wherein the visual indication comprises illuminating the one or more light emitters at graduated light intensities.
Eyewear and camera and detect and frame and mode and indicator and light and emit and mount and controller and visual and graduated and intensities
1. An eyewear device comprising: an eyewear body that comprises: an eyewear frame; one or more eyewear lenses mounted on the eyewear frame; and a pair of temples that are connected to the eyewear frame and that configured to enable supporting of the eyewear frame on a user during wear such that the ambient view by the user is through the one or more eyewear lenses; a camera incorporated in the eyewear frame; a mode indicator comprising a series of light emitters mounted on a forward-facing surface of the eyewear frame such that the mode indicator is directed away from a user when the eyewear device is worn by the user; and onboard electronics housed by the eyewear body, the onboard electronics including a controller that is in communication with the mode indicator, the controller comprising circuitry that is configured to perform automated operations comprising: at different respective times, detecting operation of the camera in respective ones of a predefined plurality of different operational modes; and at each of the different respective times, causing display by the mode indicator of a respective visual indication corresponding to the respective detected operation mode, the respective visual indication being selected from a predefined plurality of different visual indications corresponding respectively to the predefined plurality of different operational modes.
9. The eyewear device includes the controller is configured to cause display by the mode indicator of a plurality of different visual indications corresponding to a plurality of respective different operational modes of the camera.
10. The eyewear device includes the plurality of visual indications includes a photo capture indication and a video capture indication provided by the animation pattern, corresponding respectively to a video capture mode and a photo capture mode of the camera.
15. one or more of the visual indications for the predefined plurality of different operational modes provide for display of using an animation graduated light intensities for at least a subset of the series of light emitters.
Note the comparison of independent claim 1 of instant application, to Claim 1, 9, and 10 of U.S. Patent No. US 11,330,165 B2, to avoid 101 statutory double patenting rejections the claims limitation by curtailing the details and language has been changed. However, instant application independent claim limitations are described in independent claims of the parent applications. They both are claiming “An electronics-enabled eyewear device includes a mode indicator comprising a series of light emitters arranged on a forward-facing surface of the eyewear device, for example being provided by a ring of LEDs arranged peripherally about a camera lens opening in a front surface of an eyewear frame. The mode indicator automatically displays different visual indications corresponding to different modes of operation or states of the eyewear device. One visual indication provides an animated pattern of circulating LEDs during video capture by the eyewear device”. Please further notice the patented application does disclose, plurality of different operation occasion not carried out simultaneously, patented application with the curtailing of the details of claims limitations and changed language.
Further Claims 1-5 7, 9-11,12-14, 16, and 18 of instant application claims same or similar limitation as well as maps to Claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. US 11,330,165 B2 of patented parent applications.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Applicant is requested to review all the cited prior arts on USPTO 892’s.
Prior Art of Fergason, John D (US 20010038491 A1) disclosure, paras. 55-83, disclosing eyewear for generating a three dimension image from a viewed two dimensional image using a reference signal, and at least two transmission sources for generating the reference signal, wherein the reference signal coordinates the eyewear to the two dimensional image, and wherein each of the at least two transmission sources transmits to an area not covered by another of the at least two transmission sources. A viewing apparatus for viewing stereoscopic images includes a mounting frame for wearing on the head of a person, a pair of light shutters in the mounting frame, circuitry to provide signals to the light shutters for operating the shutters, and further comprising a strain relief to retain with respect to the frame wiring to provide for operation of light shutters, wherein the strain relief comprises a number of bar-like protrusions on the frame for passing wiring therebetween. A viewing apparatus for viewing stereoscopic images includes a mounting frame for wearing on the head of a person, a pair of light shutters in the mounting frame, circuitry to provide signals to the light shutters for operating the shutters, and wherein the mounting frame includes temple pieces, the circuitry comprising wiring connection to an external electrical source, and a clip slidable on a temple piece for clipping wiring with respect to the temple piece to hold the wiring in generally parallel relation with at least a portion of the temple piece and to determine the location along the temple piece where the wiring is released from substantially parallel relation.
Landowski Roger et al. (US 20100309535 A1) discloser, paras. 30-71, disclosing A method for transmitting an infrared signal of a command sequence to shutter glasses is provided. According to an aspect, a command sequence having shutter timing information is provided. The shutter timing relates to one or more actions including, but not limited to, opening a left shutter of the shutter glasses, closing the left shutter of the shutter glasses, opening a right shutter of the shutter glasses, and closing the right shutter of the shutter glasses. The infrared signal of the command sequence is also emitted. The infrared signal of the command sequence is offset from a shutter glasses switching point. A method for processing an infrared signal of a command sequence is also provided. According to an aspect, an infrared signal of a command in a command sequence is received. The command includes shutter timing information for one or more actions including, but not limited to, opening a left shutter of the shutter glasses, closing the left shutter of the shutter glasses, opening a right shutter of the shutter glasses, and closing the right shutter of the shutter glasses. In accordance with this aspect, the infrared signal of the command is signal processed to determine logic 1's and logic 0's in the command. In some embodiments, the command is used to initialize an action including, but not limited to, one of opening the left shutter of the shutter glasses, closing the left shutter of the shutter glasses, opening the right shutter of the shutter glasses, and closing the right shutter of the shutter glasses.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PRABODH M DHARIA whose telephone number is (571)272-7668. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:00 AM to 5:30 PM.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PRABODH M DHARIA whose telephone number is (571)272-7668. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday 9:00 AM to 5:30 PM.
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, Benjamin Lee can be reached at 571-272-2963. 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.
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria VA 22313-1450
/Prabodh M Dharia/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2629
06-19-2026
Prosecution Insights