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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The instant application having Application No. 19009549 filed on 01/03/2025 is presented for examination by the examiner.
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.
Priority
As required by e M.P.E.P. 201.04, acknowledgement is made of applicant’s claim for priority based on provisional application US 63618130.
Drawings
The applicant’s drawings submitted are not acceptable for examination purposes.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the limitation where “the rotation limiter comprises interacting protrusions and grooves located respectively on the first hinge member and the second hinge member” as recited in claim 15 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Currently no drawings depict such specific structures for the rotation limiter with interacting protrusions and grooves located respectively on the first hinge member and the second hinge member.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen et al. (hereafter Chen, of record, see IDS dated 04/23/2026) US 20220082857 A1.
In regard to independent claim 1, Chen (see Figs. 1-10) teaches a hinge apparatus (as hinge 100 of smart wearable device 1 e.g. AR glasses, with body 10, and side arm(s) 20, see abstract, paragraphs [02, 06-07, 22-30, 33-45]) comprising:
a first hinge member (i.e. as 2nd connection element 160, or 1st 110 with elastic 120 and 150, with respective hinge end part of the body 10, and end part of arm 20, e.g. paragraphs [24-30,33-45], e.g. Figs. 2-3, 5-10);
a second hinge member (e.g. 110 with 120, or 160, paragraphs [24-30,33-45], e.g. Figs. 2-3, 5-10) rotatably coupled to the first hinge member to allow rotation of the second hinge member through a rotation zone (as 110,120 is rotationally coupled to 160 allows of 110,120 with arm 20 from initial state in D2(D1) direction, through e.g. A2 angle, e.g. paragraphs [23, 33-38], Fig. 1); and
a hyperextension mechanism (as elastic 120, 150 acting with 160, paragraphs [24-30,33-45], e.g. Figs. 2-3, 5-10), configured to exert a hyperextension clamping force between the first hinge member and the second hinge member when the first and second hinge members are over rotated with respect to one another into a hyperextension zone (i.e. as smart device 1 goes from the initial state to the first limit state in D1 direction of 20, the 1st elastic element 120 goes from its initial position to the first limit position and also deforms to some extent, the 2nd elastic element 150 is compressed due to interference with the body 10, and exerts clamping force between arm 20 with 110 and 160 on the body 10, paragraphs [34-41], see depictions in Figs. 1, 3-8), wherein the hyperextension mechanism is engaged upon an over rotation between the first hinge member and the second hinge member (i.e. as 120,150 is engaged with 160 and 10 as 150 touched body 10 at plane P, also corresponding to direction D1 and rotation angle A1, see paragraphs [34-41], as depicted in Figs. 1, 3-8).
Regarding claim 2, Chen (see Figs. 1-10) teaches that the hyperextension mechanism is formed integrally with the second hinge member (i.e. as 120 with 150 is integrated with 110 connection member, paragraphs [24-30, 32-38], Figs. 2-3).
Regarding claim 3, Chen teaches (see Figs. 1-10) further comprising a friction component configured to provide rotational resistance between the first hinge member and the second hinge member in the rotation zone (i.e. as 2nd elastic 150 part of 120, on 110, interferes with connection 160 during rotation movement of 120, as damping effects are achieved because of the interference and the friction generated between 150 and the bent portion 163 of 160, and also due to fixing element 130 between pillar 111 of 110 and portion(s) 161 of 160 in a close interference fit for effective position and affix the first connection element 110 to the second connection element 160, see paragraphs [29-32, 44-45], e.g. Figs. 3, 5-9).
Regarding claim 4, Chen teaches (see Figs. 1-10) that a resistive torque of the friction component is less than a clamping force or resistive torque generated by the hyperextension mechanism (i.e. as the resistive torque is due to damping and friction of 150 moving over bent portion 163 of 160, or resistive torque of close fit of 130 with 111, whereas clamping force and its larger torque causing deformation of 120 and 150 occurring as 150 contacts body 150, as depicted in Figs. 7-10, paragraphs [29-32, 38-45]).
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Chen teaches (see Figs. 1-10) the hyperextension mechanism comprises a cantilevered or clip structure (i.e. as elastic 120 acting with 160 has a C-shaped clip structure, paragraphs [29-30, 36-45], Figs, 2-3, 5-10), and regarding claim 6 that the clip structure comprises at least one of a U- shape, a C-shape, or a triangular shape in a transverse view or a cross section (i.e. as elastic 120 acting with 160 comprises C-shaped clip structure, paragraphs [29-30, 36-45], Figs, 2-3, 5-10).
Regarding claim 7, Chen teaches (see Figs. 1-10) that the hyperextension mechanism is configurable to provide variable hyperextension clamping force based on a change in a thickness or a width of the hyperextension mechanism (i.e. as 120, 150 acting with 160 is configurable to provide clamping force that can vary due to a change on e.g. thickness, e.g. varying thickness of 150, e.g. paragraphs [24-30,33-45], e.g. Figs. 5-10; note that phrase “is configurable to provide...” is considered optional and conditional on someone providing possible configuration with a change in thickness or width of the mechanism, as it is held that language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art. See, e.g., Fresenius USA, Inc. v. Baxter Int’l, Inc., 582 F.3d 1288, 1298, 92 USPQ2d 1163, 1171 (Fed. Cir. 2009). MPEP §2143.03).
Regarding claim 8, Chen teaches (see Figs. 1-10) that the first hinge member or the second hinge member comprises a part cylindrical shell structure configured to divide or enclose a first compartment from a second compartment during rotation between the first hinge member and the second hinge member (i.e. as 110/120 and 160 have parts of cylindrical shell structure e.g. at bent part 121, and bent, stop parts 163/1631, separating inner and outer compartments of the hinge during rotation of 110 and 160, e.g. paragraphs [23-28, 38-40], Figs. 3, 5, 7, 9).
Regarding claim 9, Chen teaches (see Figs. 1-10) that the part cylindrical shell structure is configured to allow passage of a flexible electrical connection between the first compartment and the second compartment (i.e. as 110/120 and 160 with cylindrical shell structure e.g. at bent part 121, and bent, stop parts 163/1631, providing compartments on the outer of the with space for routing electrical connections, cables, ribbon or flexible connections, e.g. paragraphs [23-28, 38-40], as clearly depicted Figs. 5, 7, 9).
Regarding claim 10, Chen teaches (see Figs. 1-10) further comprising first installation portions on the first hinge member configured to engage with corresponding second installation portions on a device (i.e. as hinge part 160 having connection portion 162 and connection hole 1621, corresponding to corresponding structure on the body 10 of the smart wearable AR device 1, paragraphs [28-30], Figs. 2-3), the first installation portions comprising one or more of a plurality of pins, holes, alignments of walls, or fasteners to attach the first hinge member to the device (160 having connection portion 162 and connection hole 1621, corresponding to corresponding structure on the body 10 of smart wearable AR device 1, for connecting 160 to 10 of 1, paragraphs [03, 22,28-30], Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 11, Chen teaches (see Figs. 1-10) that the device includes augmented reality (AR) glasses (i.e. as 1 are AR smart glasses, paragraphs [03, 22,28-30], Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 12, Chen teaches (see Figs. 1-10) that the hyperextension clamping force exerted by the hyperextension mechanism is variable based on a degree of entry, by the first or second hinge member, into the hyperextension zone when the first and second hinge members are over rotated with respect to one another (i.e. as 120, 150 acting with 160 provides clamping force that varies based on degree of entry of 120 with 150 into 160 part as 150 starts touching the body 10 at plane P, e.g. paragraphs [24-30,33-45], e.g. Figs. 5-10).
Regarding claim 13, Chen teaches (see Figs. 1-10) that the first hinge member is coupled to a temple of AR glasses and the second hinge member is coupled to a front frame of the AR glasses (i.e. as 110,120 with 150 is coupled to arm/temple 20 of smart AR glasses 1, and as 160 is coupled to front body 10 of smart AR glasses 1, e.g. paragraphs [03, 22-30], Figs. 1,3,5,7,9).
Regarding claim 14, Chen teaches (see Figs. 1-10) further comprising a rotation limiter configured to restrict rotation of the first hinge member relative to the second hinge member to a specified angular range of the rotation zone before entry into the hyperextension zone (i.e. as first limit stop, and inner part of body 10 limiting rotation of 110,120 due to 150 touching the inner part of 10 at plane P at 1652 portion, before moving/rotating further and elastically deforming 150, paragraphs [33-45], as depicted in Figs. 5, 7).
Regarding claim 15, Chen teaches (see Figs. 1-10) that the rotation limiter comprises interacting protrusions and grooves located respectively on the first hinge member and the second hinge member (i.e. as best understood given that 150 is protruding part of 110,120 that interacts with groove formed by edge part of bent and connecting portions 163, 162 of 160 and end portion of 10 body in hinge, as best depicted in Figs. 5, 7, paragraphs [28, 36-44]). .
Regarding claim 16, Chen teaches (see Figs. 1-10) that the first hinge member and the second hinge member each comprise, or are constituted by, a metal or plastic construction (i.e. as 110,120,160 are made of metal and/or plastic, see paragraphs [25-28]).
Regarding claim 18, Chen teaches (see Figs. 1-10) augmented reality glasses (as smart wearable device 1 e.g. AR glasses, with body 10, and side arm(s) 20, and hinge 100, see abstract, paragraphs [02-03, 06-07, 22-30, 33-45]) comprising: a frame with optical components configured to project augmented reality content (i.e. as body frame 10 with central part 15 having optical components and configured as smart AR glasses 1, paragraphs [02-03, 22-30, 33-45]); and
at least one temple coupled to the frame via the hinge apparatus of claim 1 (as 1 has arms 20 coupled to body 10 via hinge 100, as depicted in Fig. 1, paragraphs [02-03, 22-30, 33-46]).
In regard to independent claim 19, Chen teaches (see Figs. 1-10) A method of manufacturing a hinge apparatus (i.e. as assembling hinge 100, of smart wearable device 1 e.g. AR glasses, with body 10, and side arm(s) 20, see abstract, paragraphs [02, 06-07, 22-30, 32-45]), the method (assembling) comprising:
providing a first hinge member (i.e. as 2nd connection element 160, or 1st 110 with elastic 120 and 150, with respective hinge end part of the body 10, and end part of arm 20, e.g. paragraphs [24-30,33-45], e.g. Figs. 2-3, 5-10);
providing a second hinge member e.g. 110 with 120, or 160, paragraphs [24-30,33-45], e.g. Figs. 2-3, 5-10);
rotatably coupling the first hinge member to the second hinge member to allow rotation of the second hinge member through a rotation zone (as fixing and coupling rotationally 110,120 with 160 allows of 110,120 with arm 20 from initial state in D2(D1) direction, through e.g. A2 angle, e.g. paragraphs [23, 33-38], Fig. 1); and
integrating a hyperextension mechanism (as integrating elastic 120, 150 and that are acting with 160, paragraphs [24-30,33-45], e.g. Figs. 2-3, 5-10) configured to exert a hyperextension clamping force between the first hinge member and the second hinge member when the first and second hinge members are over rotated with respect to one another into a hyperextension zone (i.e. as smart device 1 goes from the initial state to the first limit state in D1 direction of 20, the 1st elastic element 120 goes from its initial position to the first limit position and also deforms to some extent, the 2nd elastic element 150 is compressed due to interference with the body 10, and exerts clamping force between arm 20 with 110 and 160 on the body 10, paragraphs [34-41], see depictions in Figs. 1, 3-8), wherein the hyperextension mechanism is engaged upon an over rotation between the first hinge member and the second hinge member (i.e. as 120,150 is engaged with 160 and 10 as 150 touched body 10 at plane P, also corresponding to direction D1 and rotation angle A1, see paragraphs [34-41], as depicted in Figs. 1, 3-8).
Regarding claim 20, Chen teaches (see Figs. 1-10) further comprising integrating a friction component configured to provide rotational resistance between the first hinge member and the second hinge member in the rotation zone (i.e. integrating, assembling 2nd elastic 150 part of 120, on 110, that interferes with connection 160 during rotation movement of 120, as damping effects are achieved because of the interference and the friction generated between 150 and the bent portion 163 of 160, and also due to fixing element 130 between pillar 111 of 110 and portion(s) 161 of 160 in a close interference fit for effective position and affix the first connection element 110 to the second connection element 160, see paragraphs [29-32, 44-45], e.g. Figs. 3, 5-9).
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 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (hereafter Chen, of record, see IDS dated 04/23/2026) US 20220082857 A1 (as evidenced by Han et al. (hereafter Han) US 20260118697 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Chen teaches (see Figs. 1-10) the hinge apparatus (as hinge 100 with various parts, 110, 160, paragraphs [02, 06-07, 22-30, 32-45,48], Figs. 2-3), but does not specify that it has a weight in the range 1.4 to 10 grams. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to optimize the hinge (100) of Chen made of plastic and/or metal materials (i.e. as hinge with component 110,120,160 that are made of metal and/or plastic, see paragraphs [25-28]), to have low weight in the above range, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A. 1955). In the current instance, the weight of hinge structure of smart glasses is an art-recognized results effective variable in that the hinge, while fulfilling its rotating shaft function, needs to be as lightweight as possible to avoid making the overall device too heavy, and at the same time, due to limited space in the temples, the hinge size also needs to be as small as possible . Therefore, effectively designing a lightweight and compact hinge structure is a problem that those skilled in the art need to solve (as evidenced by Han, e.g. paragraphs [03-04, 42]). Thus, one would have been motivated to optimize the weight of the hinge (100) of smart glasses of Chen withing the above range, and because it is an art-recognized result-effective variable and it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP §2144.05(II)(B) “after KSR, the presence of a known result-effective variable would be one, but not the only, motivation for a personal of ordinary skill in the art to experiment to reach another workable product or process.” Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success when making this modification because selecting the above materials for hinge elements based in the desired low wight of the hinge of smart glasses is a routine activity in lens design.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Wang et al. US 20240353691 A1 also disclose features of instant invention (see Figs. 38-50 and their descriptions).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIN PICHLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4015. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am -5:00pm.
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, Ricky L Mack can be reached at (571)272-2333. 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.
/MARIN PICHLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights