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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-16 are currently pending and have been amended.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/23/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being 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.
Claim 9 is 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.
The term “preferably” in claim 9 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “preferably” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The limitation “wherein the system preferably comprises an acoustic unit for outputting the acoustic signal” has been rendered indefinite by the use of the term “preferably” because one of ordinary skill in the art would not know when it is preferable for the system to include (i.e., comprise) the acoustic unit for outputting the acoustic signal over the system being communicatively couplable to said acoustic unit.
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 1-3, 5, 7-8 and 11-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Herz et al. (US 11343420 B1, hereinafter Herz).
Concerning claim 1, Herz teaches system for projecting at least a portion of an object of interest onto a predefined retinal area (fig. 3: image 210) of a human eye of a user (fig. 3; col. 4, ll. 17-32), comprising:
a camera for capturing an image (fig. 4A: camera 410; col. 5, l. 60 – col. 6, l. 6),
a projector device for projecting a light beam into a human eye based on an inputted signal (figs. 1-2: display 104; col. 3, ll. 5-21 – display 104 may be a miniature video projector),
at least a first user input device (col. 5, ll. 54-57), and
a processor being in communication with the camera, at least the first user input device, and the projector device (fig. 4B: accessory device 452 or server 454; col. 6, l. 29 – col. 7, l. 22),
wherein the processor is configured to detect at least a portion of the object of interest in a captured image based on a user input received from the first user input device and to output a signal corresponding to a portion of the captured image to the projector device (col. 9, ll. 30-56; col. 15, ll. 12-45) and to output a signal for centering at least said portion of the object of interest relative to the predefined retinal area (col. 10, ll. 36-52).
Concerning claim 2, Herz further teaches the system according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to detect one or more objects in the captured image based on the first user input (col. 9, ll. 30-43) and to select the object of interest based on a second user input (col. 15, ll. 12-45).
Concerning claim 3, Herz further teaches the system according to claim 2, wherein the system is configured to provide a feedback signal corresponding to the detected one or more objects to the user based on the first user input (col. 14, ll. 26-33).
Concerning claim 5, Herz teaches the system according to claim 2, further comprising at least a second user input device being in communication with the processor, wherein the processor is configured to detect the one or more objects in the captured image based on the first user input from the first user input device and to select the object of interest based on the second user input from the second input device (col. 3, l. 50 – col. 4, l. 15).
Concerning claim 7, Herz teaches the system according to claim 1, wherein the signal for centering comprises a zoom adjustment signal for the camera (col. 10, ll. 36-52).
Concerning claim 8, Herz teaches the system according to claim 1, wherein the signal for centering is output as a support signal to the user indicating a relative position between the camera and the object of interest and/or a required zoom level of the camera (col. 10, ll. 36-52).
Concerning claim 11, Herz teaches the system according to claim 8, wherein the processor is configured to provide the support signal to the projector device, the support signal defining a predefined pattern for a portion of the light beam not corresponding to the object of interest, the predefined pattern comprising one or more guidelines originating from the object of interest and indicating a direction for centering the camera and/or the predefined retinal area (fig. 3; col. 4, l. 33 – col. 5, l. 12; col. 11, ll. 16-51).
Concerning claim 12, Herz teaches the system according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to output a signal corresponding to a portion of the captured image comprising the object of interest to the projector device and to output the signal for centering said object of interest relative to the predefined retinal area to the projector device (col. 9, ll. 30-56; col. 10, ll. 36-52; col. 15, ll. 12-45).
Concerning claim 13, Herz teaches the system according to claim 12, wherein the processor is configured to output a signal corresponding to a portion of the captured image based on a received first user input, the portion of the captured image being in a central field of view of the camera at a time point of the received first user input, wherein the processor is configured to output the signal corresponding to a portion of the captured image comprising the object of interest and the signal for centering said object of interest relative to the predefined retinal area based on a subsequently received second user input (col. 15, ll. 12-45).
Concerning claim 14, Herz teaches the system according to claim 12, wherein the processor is configured to modify the signal for centering in a predefined direction and/or predefined speed (col. 9, l. 57 – col. 10, l. 27).
Concerning claim 15, Herz teaches the system according to claim 14, wherein the processor is configured to modify the predefined direction and/or the predefined speed based on a received second or third user input (col. 9, l. 57 – col. 10, l. 27).
Concerning claim 16, Herz teaches a computer implemented method for projecting at least a portion of an object of interest onto a predefined retinal area of a human eye of a user, comprising the steps of:
receiving a user input from a fist user input device (col. 5, ll. 54-57);
capturing an image using a camera (fig. 4A: camera 410; col. 5, l. 60 – col. 6, l. 6); and
outputting a signal corresponding to a portion of the captured image to a projector device (col. 9, ll. 30-56; col. 15, ll. 12-45);
wherein an object of interest in the captured image is detected based on the user input and a signal for centering said object of interest relative to the predefined retinal area is output (col. 10, ll. 36-52).
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.
Claims 4 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herz et al. (US 11343420 B1, hereinafter Herz) in view of Bhat et al. (US 20220066549 A1, hereinafter Bhat).
Concerning claim 4, Herz teaches the system according to claim 3, wherein the system is communicatively couplable to or comprises an acoustic unit and to output the feedback signal as an acoustic input signal to the acoustic unit.
Bhat, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the system is communicatively couplable to or comprises an acoustic unit and to output the feedback signal as an acoustic input signal to the acoustic unit (¶0034: audio device). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features of Bhat to the Herz invention in order to generate audios or a haptic device that generates haptic feedback to output together with or instead of the virtual images (Bhat, ¶0034).
Concerning claim 9, Herz teaches the system according to claim 8, wherein the support signal comprises an acoustic signal, wherein the system preferably comprises and/or is communicatively couplable to an acoustic unit for outputting the acoustic signal.
Bhat, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the support signal comprises an acoustic signal, wherein the system preferably comprises and/or is communicatively couplable to an acoustic unit for outputting the acoustic signal (¶0034: audio device). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features of Bhat to the Herz invention in order to generate audios or a haptic device that generates haptic feedback to output together with or instead of the virtual images (Bhat, ¶0034).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herz et al. (US 11343420 B1, hereinafter Herz) in view of Tran et al. (US 20220001134 A1, hereinafter Tran).
Concerning claim 6, Herz teaches the system according to claim 1. Not explicitly taught is the system, wherein the first user input device is formed as a hand-held pointing device.
Tran, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the first user input device is formed as a hand-held pointing device (figs. 8A-8B; ¶0278). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features of Tran to the Herz invention in order to define one or more physical activities performed by the user (Tran, ¶0278).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herz et al. (US 11343420 B1, hereinafter Herz) in view of Van Heugten (US 9933620 B2).
Concerning claim 10, Herz teaches the system according to claim 8. Not explicitly taught is the system comprising and/or being communicatively couplable to one or more portable electromechanical transducers and wherein the system is configured to actuate the one or more portable electromechanical transducers based on the outputted support signal.
Van Heugten, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the system comprising and/or being communicatively couplable to one or more portable electromechanical transducers and wherein the system is configured to actuate the one or more portable electromechanical transducers based on the outputted support signal (col. 5, l. 50 – col. 6, l. 3: coupling an image with feedback delivered to the user via ultrasound transducers.). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features of Van Heugten to the Herz invention in order to supplement a visual image with corresponding information (Van Heugten , col. 5, l. 50 – col. 6, l. 3).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES M ANDERSON II whose telephone number is (571)270-1444. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10AM-6PM.
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, BRIAN PENDLETON can be reached at 571-272-7527. 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.
/James M Anderson II/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425
Prosecution Insights