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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 7-9 and 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Vaziri U.S. Patent Publication No. 2018/0144196 (hereinafter Vaziri).
Consider claim 1, Vaziri teaches smart glasses (Figure 3), comprising: one or more lenses ([0008] and figure 3, eyeglass); a light emitting diode (LED) disposed on a portion of the smart glasses ([0053], LEDs), the portion of the smart glasses facing towards an eye of a user such that a light emitted from the LED is visible i) to the eye of the user ([0053], the status LED must be placed within the field of view of the eyewear wearer) and ii) from the portion of the smart glasses not including the one or more lenses (Figure 15, [0053], [0091] and claim 1, rim area and at least one light emitter disposed on the eyeglass frame); one or more processors configured to: receive an indication corresponding to a first message for the user; responsive to receiving the indication corresponding to the first message for the user, present, via the LED, a first light-based representation of the first message, the first light-based representation presented using first visual characteristics associated with the first message ([0053], the status LED 604 is a multi-color visible light emitting diode and it can be turned on and off in a predetermined fashion to communicate a message or an alarm to the user); receive an indication corresponding to a second message for the user, the second message being distinct from the first message; and responsive to receiving the indication corresponding to the second message for the user, present, via the LED, a second light-based representation of the second message ([0053], when a user issues a command using eye gestures, the status LED will turn on a green light to inform the command was received and understood but if a command was not understood, a red LED may turn on), the second light-based representation presented using second visual characteristics associated with the second message, wherein the second visual characteristics are distinct from the first visual characteristics ([0053], when a user issues a command using eye gestures, the status LED will turn on a green light to inform the command was received and understood but if a command was not understood, a red LED may turn on).
Consider claim 7, Vaziri teaches all the limitations of claim 1. In addition, Vaziri teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: receive an indication corresponding to a third message for the user, the third message being distinct from the first message and second message ([0053], when a user issues a command using eye gestures, the status LED will turn on a green light to inform the command was received and understood but if a command was not understood, a red LED may turn on. A flashing red LED may be used to announce the battery is running low. [0093], A green light can be used when an eye gesture is understood or executed…red followed by blue can mean one message, and a red, green, blue sequence could communicate another message); responsive to receiving the indication corresponding to the third message for the user, present, via the LED, a third light-based representation of the second message, the third light- based representation presented using third visual characteristics associated with the third message [0093], a red, green, blue sequence could communicate another message), wherein the third visual characteristics are distinct from the first visual characteristics and the second visual characteristics ([0093], a red, green, blue sequence could communicate another message); and wherein the third message is provided via one of a social-media application, a banking application, a messaging applications, a web browser, a gaming application, a streaming application, a media applications, an imaging application, or a productivity application ([0093], a red, green, blue sequence could communicate another message. [0093] refers to eye gesture and related to an imaging application).
Consider claim 8, Vaziri teaches all the limitations of claim 1. In addition, Vaziri teaches wherein the portion of the smart glasses is coupled to another portion of the smart glasses including the one or more lenses (Figure 3 and [0008], eyeglass).
Consider claim 9, it includes the limitations of claim 1, and thus it is rejected by the same reasoning. In addition, Vaziri teaches a non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium including instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of smart glasses (Figures 6-7, memory 514, micro-controller 518).
Consider claim 15, it includes the limitations of claim 7, and thus it is rejected by the same reasoning.
Consider claim 16, it includes the limitations of claim 8, and thus it is rejected by the same reasoning.
Consider claim 17, it includes the limitations of claim 1, and thus it is rejected by the same reasoning.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 2-3, 10-11 and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vaziri as applied to claims 1, 9 and 17 above, and further in view of Border et al. U.S. Patent Publication No. 2016/0133201 (hereinafter Border).
Consider claim 2, Vaziri teaches all the limitations of clam 1. In addition, Vaziri teaches wherein: the first visual characteristics associated with the first message is a first color-coded illumination [0053]; and the second visual characteristics associated with the second message is a second color-coded illumination [0053].
Vaziri does not appear to specifically disclose a health application monitoring one or more physiological-based thresholds; a navigation application.
However, in a related field of endeavor, Border teaches a head-worn computer (abstract) and further teaches a health application monitoring one or more physiological-based thresholds [0240]; a navigation application [0109].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide health monitoring and navigation as taught by Border with the benefit that the wearer's eyes may then be monitored through eye imaging for changes in their performance. In addition, each HWC 102 may communicate its GPS position such that all the HWCs 102 know where all of HWC 102 are located as suggested in [0240] and [0109].
Consider claim 3, Vaziri and Border teach all the limitations of clam 2. In addition, Vaziri teaches the first color-coded illumination includes at least one of a green hue, and red hue ([0093], red, green blue); and the second color-coded illumination includes at least a blue hue ([0093], red followed by blue).
Vaziri does not appear to specifically disclose yellow.
However, Boder teaches yellow in [0197] and Vaziri teaches in [0093], multi-color LEDs can allow creation of a large combination of colors when needed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide yellow as taught by Border to indicate a slowing trace as suggested in [0197] or when needed as suggested by Vaziri in [0093].
Consider claim 10, it includes the limitations of claim 2, and thus it is rejected by the same reasoning.
Consider claim 11, it includes the limitations of claim 3, and thus it is rejected by the same reasoning.
Consider claim 18, it includes the limitations of claim 2, and thus it is rejected by the same reasoning.
Consider claim 19, it includes the limitations of claim 3, and thus it is rejected by the same reasoning.
Claim(s) 4-5, 12-13 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vaziri as applied to claims 1, 9 and 17 above, and further in view of Kim et al. U.S. Patent Publication No. 2017/0364156 (hereinafter Kim) and further in view of Border.
Consider claim 4, Vaziri teaches all the limitations of claim 1. In addition, Vaziri teaches the first visual characteristics associated with the first message is a first illumination [0093]; and the second visual characteristics associated with the second message is a second illumination [0093].
Vaziri does not appear to specifically disclose a first illumination frequency and a second illumination frequency.
However, in a related field of endeavor, Kim teaches a wearable device feedback (abstract) and further teaches a first illumination frequency and a second illumination frequency ([0023], the frequency and intensity of the feedback from the LEDs 108 will also change).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have frequencies as taught by Kim in order to provide visual feedback to the user according to a variety of feedback patterns as suggested in [0023].
Vaziri does not appear to specifically disclose a health application monitoring one or more physiological-based thresholds; a navigation application.
However, in a related field of endeavor, Border teaches a head-worn computer (abstract) and further teaches a health application monitoring one or more physiological-based thresholds [0240]; a navigation application [0109].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide health monitoring and navigation as taught by Border with the benefit that the wearer's eyes may then be monitored through eye imaging for changes in their performance. In addition, each HWC 102 may communicate its GPS position such that all the HWCs 102 know where all of HWC 102 are located as suggested in [0240] and [0109].
Consider claim 5, Vaziri, Kim and Border teach all the limitations of claim 4. In addition, Kim teaches the first illumination frequency includes at least one of a steady light, a strobe, and a predetermined interval ([0023] the frequency and intensity of the feedback from the LEDs 108 will also change (e.g., repeated pulse of 250 ms on and off)); and the second illumination frequency includes at least one of a steady light and a predetermined interval ([0023] the frequency and intensity of the feedback from the LEDs 108 will also change (e.g., repeated pulse of 250 ms on and off)), see motivation to combine in claim 4.
Consider claim 12, it includes the limitations of claim 4, and thus it is rejected by the same reasoning.
Consider claim 13, it includes the limitations of claim 5, and thus it is rejected by the same reasoning.
Consider claim 20, it includes the limitations of claim 4, and thus it is rejected by the same reasoning.
Claim(s) 6 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vaziri.
Consider claim 6, Vaziri teaches all the limitations of claim 1. In addition, Vaziri teaches wherein: the first light-based representation of the first message is presented ([0053], when a user issues a command using eye gestures, the status LED will turn on a green light to inform the command was received and understood but if a command was not understood, a red LED may turn on); and the second light-based representation of the second message is presented ([0053], when a user issues a command using eye gestures, the status LED will turn on a green light to inform the command was received and understood but if a command was not understood, a red LED may turn on).
Vaziri’s [0053] do not mention presented while forging presenting a first audio cue and second audio cue.
However, Vaziri teaches in [0058] and [0103], visual and audio feedback to the user.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide visual and audio feedback in order to anticipate the user's needs, provide natural conversation and/or confirm an action as suggested by Vaziri in [0058] and [0103].
Consider claim 14, it includes the limitations of claim 6, and thus it is rejected by the same reasoning.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERTO W FLORES whose telephone number is (571)272-5512. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7am-4pm, EST.
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, AMR A AWAD can be reached at (571)272-7764. 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.
/ROBERTO W FLORES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2621
Prosecution Insights