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 of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 3-6 and 10-14 are objected to.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 4/21/2025 and 2/5/2026 have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 17, in line 3, the limitation “the image intensifier bracket” lacks sufficient antecedent basis in the claim. For purposes of examination, claim 17 is being interpreted as depending from claim 16, which claims an image intensifier bracket.
Regarding claims 18-19, the claims inherit the deficiencies of claim 17 through their dependencies.
Regarding claim 19, the claim is additionally rejected because in line 6 the use of “and/or” is indefinite. It is not clear if the limitations prior to “and/or” and the limitation after “and/or” are both required or alternatives to each other. For purposes of examination, the examiner has interpreted “and/or” to mean that the limitations are alternatives to each other.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-6 and 10-14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
US 2019/0394376 to Reed et al. is considered the closest prior art to the claimed invention. Reed discloses a dual-optical fusion night vision device according to claim 1 (see the 102 rejection below). However, Reed fails to teach or suggest first and second ridge bracket pivot plates, bridge function knobs and buttons, and/or an infrared objective adjustment flange that allows the infrared objective to be moved to adjust the infrared imaging position.
Claim 3 is objected to for at least the reason that the prior art fails to teach or suggest that the bridge bracket component further includes a first ridge bracket pivot plate and a second ridge bracket pivot plate, as generally set forth in claim 3, the invention including the totality of the particular limitations recited in claims 1 and 2, from which claim 3 depends.
Claims 4-5 are objected to for at least the reason that they depend from claim 3.
Claim 6 is objected to for at least the reason that the prior art fails to teach or suggest that the bridge bracket body is equipped with a bridge transition interface on its top for external connections; the bridge bracket body is provided with a bridge function knob, and the bridge bracket body is provided with bridge function buttons on both the second and first sides of the top, the bridge function knob and the bridge function buttons are used to control and adjust the first display lens group and the second display lens group; and the bridge bracket body is provided with bracket function windows for external sensing and internal information transmission on both sides of the front end, as generally set forth in claim 6, the invention including the totality of the particular limitations recited in claim 1, from which claim 6 depends.
Claim 10 is objected to for at least the reason that the prior art fails to teach or suggest that, by moving the infrared objective adjustment flange in a plane perpendicular to the infrared optical axis, the infrared objective can be moved to adjust the infrared imaging position, as generally set forth in claim 10, the invention including the totality of the particular limitations recited in claims 1 and 9, from which claim 10 depends.
Claims 11-14 are objected to for at least the reason that they depend from claim 10.
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, 9, 15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2019/0394376 to Reed et al. made of record in the IDS filed 2/5/2026 (hereafter Reed).
Regarding claim 1, Reed discloses a dual-light fusion night vision device (see at least the abstract), comprising a first display lens assembly, a second display lens assembly, and a bridge bracket assembly, wherein the first display lens assembly and the second display lens assembly are connected through the bridge bracket assembly (see at least Figs. 1A and 3), wherein the first display lens assembly includes: a first barrel, defining a first low-light optical axis and an infrared optical axis (see at least Figs. 1A and 3, where the first optical axis includes image intensifier #1 and the third optical axis is for infrared), wherein the infrared optical axis is parallel to the low-light optical axis (see at least Fig. 3); a first low-light objective group, positioned along the first low-light optical axis on the first barrel, for low-light optical transmission and imaging to obtain a low-light image (see at least Fig. 3, where a lens is at the front of the first optical axis before image intensifier #1); and an infrared lens group, positioned along the infrared optical axis on the first barrel, for infrared optical transmission and imaging to obtain an infrared image (see at least Fig. 3, where a lens is at the front of the third optical axis before IR FPA); and the second display lens assembly includes: a second barrel, defining a second low-light optical axis (see at least Figs. 1A and 3, where the second optical axis includes Image Intensifier #2); and a second low-light objective group, positioned along the second low-light optical axis on the second barrel, for low-light optical transmission and imaging to obtain a low-light image (see at least Fig. 3, where a lens is at the front of the second optical axis before image intensifier #2); wherein the bridge bracket assembly connects the first display lens assembly and the second display lens assembly in such a way that the first low-light optical axis is parallel to the second low-light optical axis (see at least Figs. 1A and 3).
Regarding claim 9, Reed discloses all of the limitations of claim 1.
Reed also discloses that the first barrel includes a front cover plate and a barrel body, the front cover plate is installed at a front opening of the barrel body, and the first low-light objective group and the infrared lens group are mounted on the front cover plate (see at least Figs. 1A and 3).
Regarding claim 15, Reed discloses a dual-light fusion night vision device (see at least the abstract), comprising a first display lens assembly, a second display lens assembly, and a bridge bracket assembly, wherein the first display lens assembly and the second display lens assembly are connected through the bridge bracket assembly (see at least Figs. 1A and 3), wherein the first display lens assembly includes: a first barrel, defining a first low-light optical axis and an infrared optical axis (see at least Figs. 1A and 3, where the first optical axis includes image intensifier #1 and the third optical axis is for infrared), wherein the infrared optical axis is parallel to the low-light optical axis (see at least Fig. 3); a first low-light objective group, positioned along the first low-light optical axis on the first barrel, for low-light optical transmission and imaging to obtain a low-light image (see at least Fig. 3, where a lens is at the front of the first optical axis before image intensifier #1); and an infrared lens group, positioned along the infrared optical axis on the first barrel, for infrared optical transmission and imaging to obtain an infrared image (see at least Fig. 3, where a lens is at the front of the third optical axis before IR FPA); and the second display lens assembly includes: a second barrel, defining a second low-light optical axis (see at least Figs. 1A and 3, where the second optical axis includes Image Intensifier #2); and a second low-light objective group, positioned along the second low-light optical axis on the second barrel, for low-light optical transmission and imaging to obtain a low-light image (see at least Fig. 3, where a lens is at the front of the second optical axis before image intensifier #2).
Regarding claim 20, Reed discloses all of the limitations of claim 15.
Reed also discloses that the first display lens assembly is a display lens assembly for right eye (see at least Figs. 1A and 3).
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.
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.
Claims 2 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2019/0394376 to Reed et al. made of record in the IDS filed 2/5/2026 (hereafter Reed).
Regarding claim 2, Reed discloses all of the limitations of claim 1.
Reed also discloses that the bridge bracket assembly comprises a bridge bracket body, which extends on both sides to form a first bridge pivot and a second bridge pivot with parallel axes (see at least Fig. 2); the first display lens assembly includes a first bridge bracket interface, which comprises a first bridge bracket interface body (see at least Fig. 2, first coupler), the first bridge bracket interface body is installed on the first barrel (see at least Fig. 2, first coupler on first housing); the second display lens assembly includes a second bridge bracket interface, which comprises a second bridge bracket interface body (see at least Fig. 2, second coupler), the second bridge bracket interface body is installed on the second barrel (see at least Fig. 2, second coupler on second housing); the first bridge bracket interface body is rotatably mounted on the first bridge pivot (see at least Fig. 2, first hinged joint); the second bridge bracket interface body is rotatably mounted on the second bridge pivot (see at least Fig. 2, third hinged joint).
Reed does not specifically disclose a first bridge bracket adjustment screw and a second bridge bracket adjustment screw, wherein the first bridge bracket adjustment screw is screwed into the first bridge bracket interface body perpendicular to the first bridge pivot to lock the first display lens assembly at a certain angle around the first bridge pivot and the second bridge bracket adjustment screw is screwed into the second bridge bracket interface body perpendicular to the second bridge pivot to lock the second display lens assembly at a certain angle around the second bridge pivot.
However, Official Notice is taken that adjustment screws are old and well-known in the art for locking hinged joints to prevent movement of the hinged joints. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Reed so that the device comprises a first bridge bracket adjustment screw and a second bridge bracket adjustment screw, wherein the first bridge bracket adjustment screw is screwed into the first bridge bracket interface body perpendicular to the first bridge pivot to lock the first display lens assembly at a certain angle around the first bridge pivot and the second bridge bracket adjustment screw is screwed into the second bridge bracket interface body perpendicular to the second bridge pivot to lock the second display lens assembly at a certain angle around the second bridge pivot for the purpose of being able to set a particular interpupillary distance between the optical axes (see at least Figs. 4A-4C) since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results.
Regarding claim 7, Reed discloses all of the limitations of claim 1.
Reed also discloses that the second display lens group further includes a second eyepiece group and a second eyepiece flange (see at least Figs. 2 and 3, where the left eyepiece is shown to include an eyepiece flange).
Reed does not specifically disclose that the second eyepiece group is adjustably mounted on the second barrel via the second eyepiece adjustment flange.
However, Official Notice is taken that eyepiece adjustment flanges are old and well-known in the art for allowing a user to optimize the focusing of an eyepiece or ocular lens. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Reed so that the second eyepiece group is adjustably mounted on the second barrel via the second eyepiece adjustment flange for the purpose of allowing a user to optimize the focusing of the eyepiece since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2019/0394376 to Reed et al. made of record in the IDS filed 2/5/2026 (hereafter Reed) as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of US 2020/0217994 to Wang (hereafter Wang).
Regarding claim 8, Reed discloses all of the limitations of claim 7.
Reed also discloses that the second display lens group further includes a second low-light image intensifier, the second low-light image intensifier is positioned along the second low-light optical axis between the second low-light objective group and the second eyepiece group (see at least Fig. 3, where image intensifier #2 is positioned along the second optical axis between the lens and the eyepiece)
Reed does not specifically disclose a compression ring and that the compression ring is threadedly connected to the second barrel to secure the second low-light intensifier within the second barrel.
However, Wang teaches a lens barrel comprising a compression ring wherein the compression ring is threadedly connected to the barrel to secure optical elements within the barrel (see at least Fig. 3 and paragraph [0051]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Reed to include the teachings of Wang so that the device comprises a compression ring, the compression ring is threadedly connected to the second barrel to secure the second low-light intensifier within the second barrel, for the purpose of ensuring that the second low-light intensifier is not able to shift its alignment within the second barrel.
Claims 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2019/0394376 to Reed et al. made of record in the IDS filed 2/5/2026 (hereafter Reed) as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of US 2008/0290260 to Moody (hereafter Moody).
Regarding claim 16, Reed discloses all of the limitations of claim 15.
Reed also discloses that the first display lens group comprises a first low-light image intensifier (see at least Fig. 3, image intensifier #1).
Reed does not specifically disclose that the first display lens group comprises an image intensifier bracket and the first low-light image intensifier is removably installed in the image intensifier bracket along the first low-light optical axis.
However, Moody teaches a night-vision device comprising an image intensifier and an image intensifier bracket, wherein the low-light image intensifier is removably installed in the image intensifier bracket along an optical axis (see at least the abstract, Fig. 1, and paragraphs [0018]-[0021], where image intensifier 14 is held in mounting barrel 28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Reed to include the teachings of Moody so that the first display lens group comprises an image intensifier bracket and the first low-light image intensifier is removably installed in the image intensifier bracket along the first low-light optical axis for the purpose of securely aligning the image intensifier within the device.
Regarding claim 17, Reed as modified by Moody discloses all of the limitations of claim 16.
Reed also discloses that the first barrel includes a front cover plate and a barrel body, the front cover plate is installed at a front opening of the barrel body (see at least Figs. 1A and 3) and an optical combiner (see at least Fig. 3, where the optical combiner is labeled as “Optic” and is shown to combine light from image intensifier #1 and the display).
Moody also teaches that the image intensifier bracket includes a mounting tube (see at least Fig. 1 and paragraph [0021], where 28 is a mounting tube), an adjustment screw ring (see at least Fig. 1 and paragraphs [0020] and [0029], where retaining ring 26 is an adjustment thread ring), an optical combiner (see at least Fig. 6 and paragraph [0036], where 616 is an optical combiner), and an elastic component (see at least Fig. 1 and paragraph [0020], where the contact assembly includes leaf springs), the mounting tube is used to install the first low-light image intensifier (see at least Fig. 1); and the adjustment screw ring is connected to the front cover plate and the mounting tube along the first low-light optical axis, so that the mounting tube and the front cover plate move towards or away from each other along the first low-light optical axis when the adjustment screw ring is rotated (see at least Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Reed as modified by Moody to include the further teachings of Moody so that the image intensifier bracket includes a mounting tube, an adjustment screw ring, an optical combiner, and an elastic component, the mounting tube is used to install the first low-light image intensifier; and the adjustment screw ring is connected to the front cover plate and the mounting tube along the first low-light optical axis, so that the mounting tube and the front cover plate move towards or away from each other along the first low-light optical axis when the adjustment screw ring is rotated for the purpose of mounting and adjusting the image intensifier within the device to optimize the low-light viewing.
Regarding claim 18, Reed as modified by Moody discloses all of the limitations of claim 17.
Moody also teaches that the adjustment screw ring is connected to the front cover plate and the mounting tube via reverse threads (see at least Fig. 1 and paragraphs [0020]-[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 modify the device of Reed as modified by Moody to include the further teachings of Moody so that the adjustment screw ring is connected to the front cover plate and the mounting tube via reverse threads for the purpose of mounting and adjusting the image intensifier within the device to optimize the low-light viewing.
Regarding claim 19, Reed as modified by Moody discloses all of the limitations of claim 17.
Reed also discloses that the infrared lens group comprises an infrared objective and an infrared imaging component positioned along the infrared optical axis (see at least Fig. 3, lens and IR FPA along the third optical axis) and/or the display component comprises a display screen connecting to the infrared imaging component (see at least Fig. 3), the display screen is located on the top of the optical combiner (see at least Fig. 3).
Reed as modified by Moody does not specifically disclose an infrared objective adjustment flange, wherein the infrared objective is fixed within the infrared objective adjustment flange and the infrared objective adjustment flange is adjustably mounted on the front cover plate and that the position of a display area of the display screen is adjustable on the display screen.
However, Official Notice is taken that objective lens flanges are old and well-known in the art for securing and adjusting objective lenses onto optical devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Reed as modified by Moody so that the infrared lens group comprises an infrared objective adjustment flange, wherein the infrared objective is fixed within the infrared objective adjustment flange and the infrared objective adjustment flange is adjustably mounted on the front cover plate for the purpose of securing and adjusting the infrared objective lens since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results.
Additionally, Official Notice is taken that adjusting positions of a displayed image when combining images is old and well-known in the art for properly aligning images that are being combined. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Reed as modified by Moody so that the position of a display area of the display screen is adjustable on the display screen for the purpose of optimizing the alignment of the images that are being combined, in this case the low-light image from the image intensifier and the displayed image from the infrared imager since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2018/0167541 to Reed et al. discloses a fusion night vision device for both low-light and infrared imaging (see at least the abstract and Figs. 1A and 3).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM W BOOHER whose telephone number is (571)270-0573. The examiner can normally be reached M - F: 8:00am - 4:00pm.
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, Stephone Allen can be reached at 571-272-2434. 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.
/A.W.B./ Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/STEPHONE B ALLEN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
