US 11487138

Here's a concise summary of US Patent 11487138:

US Patent 11487138: Eyewear docking station and electronic module

• Title: Eyewear docking station and electronic module
• Assignee: E Vision Smart Optics Inc
• Inventors: Ronald Blum, Yongping Wang, Mark Graham, William Kokonaski, Richard Clompus
• Filing Date: March 16, 2020
• Issue Date: November 1, 2022
• Abstract: An eyewear system is described, comprising an eyewear frame and an application module. The eyewear frame includes a docking station and an electronic connector with a first set of preconfigured application connection points. The application module is designed to be mounted to the docking station and contains an electronic device for performing a specific function, along with a second set of preconfigured application connection points that correspond to at least some of the first set. The second set of connection points includes at least two different sub-function connections to support the electronic device's function.

Plain-Language Overview of Independent Claims:

• Independent Claim 1: This claim describes an application module designed to attach to an eyewear docking station. The module includes an electronic device that performs a function, an attachment mechanism to secure it to the docking station, and multiple preconfigured connection points. These connection points have at least two different sub-function connections (like power, audio, or video) to support the electronic device's function.

• Independent Claim 13: This claim outlines an eyewear system. It consists of an eyewear frame with a docking station and an application module that can be mounted to it. The eyewear frame has an electronic connector with a first set of preconfigured connection points. The application module includes an electronic device with a function and a second set of preconfigured connection points that align with at least some of the first set. Similar to Claim 1, this second set also features at least two different sub-function connections to support the electronic device's operation.

• Independent Claim 25: This claim details an electronic eyewear system worn by a user. It comprises a way to secure the eyewear to the wearer's head, an eyewear front, and a docking station integrated into the eyewear. The system allows for multiple application device modules to fit into the docking station, one at a time, and the docking station facilitates the routing of electrical power to the module.

CAFC 2026 Dockets:
A search of CAFC 2026 dockets for patent 11487138 indicates that there is no publicly available record of a new case specifically filed against this patent in 2026 within the CAFC dockets at this time. However, Google Patents notes "Family has litigation" and "PTAB case IPR2025-00216 filed (Adverse Judgment)" and "First worldwide family litigation filed" for US11487138B2, with a link to Unified Patents portal (portal.unifiedpatents.com/ptab/case/IPR2025-00216) and Darts-ip (patents.darts-ip.com/?family=48745555&utm_source=google_patent&utm_medium=platform_link&utm_campaign=public_patent_search&patent=US11487138(B2)). This indicates ongoing patent validity challenges, but not necessarily a direct CAFC appeal in 2026 dockets.

As of April 26, 2026, the following litigation involving US patent 11487138 is known:

• PTAB Case IPR2025-00216
  • Jurisdiction: Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)
  • Case Number: IPR2025-00216
  • Filing Date: Google Patents indicates this case was filed, but a specific filing date within 2025 is not provided in the readily available information.
  • Outcome/Current Status: The case has an "Adverse Judgment". The petitioner for this case is "Unified Patents PTAB Data" by Unified Patents.

Google Patents also generally notes "Family has litigation" and "First worldwide family litigation filed" for US11487138B2, with a link to Darts-ip for global patent litigation data. However, specific details such as plaintiff(s), defendant(s), jurisdiction, case number, filing date, and outcome for this worldwide family litigation are not explicitly provided in the initial search results.

Proceedings overview

One inter partes review (IPR) proceeding has been filed against US Patent 11487138. This proceeding, IPR2025-00216, is terminated with an Adverse Judgment against the patent owner, E-Vision Smart Optics, Inc. This outcome indicates a significant vulnerability for the patent and suggests a weakened defensive posture for the patent owner, as claims involved in the adverse judgment were likely found unpatentable or conceded.

IPR2025-00216 — Luxottica of America Inc. et al. v. E-Vision Smart Optics, Inc.

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2024-11-20
• Status: Terminated — The proceeding concluded with an "Adverse Judgment" against the patent owner.
• Judge panel: Sean P. O'Hanlon is publicly associated with cases resulting in Adverse Judgment, including IPR2025-00216. The full panel composition is not publicly available in the search results.
• Petition grounds: Specific claims challenged, prior art asserted, and statutory bases (§ 102 / § 103) are not explicitly detailed in publicly available summaries of the Adverse Judgment.
• Institution decision: The proceeding was likely instituted around 2025-06-03, based on the timeline from filing to termination, but specific details or reasoning for institution are not publicly available in the search results.
• Final Written Decision (if issued): The proceeding terminated with an "Adverse Judgment" on 2026-03-31. While this indicates an unfavorable outcome for the patent owner, the specific claim-level verdict (i.e., which claims were canceled or found unpatentable) and the detailed reasoning for the adverse judgment are not publicly detailed in the provided search snippets. An "Adverse Judgment" typically means the patent owner lost the proceeding, often due to a procedural default or a concession of unpatentability, rather than a full merits trial decision.
• Settlement / termination: The proceeding was terminated via "Adverse Judgment" on 2026-03-31. The specific terms of this termination, beyond the judgment itself, are not publicly disclosed.
• Appeal: There is no publicly available record of an appeal of this Adverse Judgment to the Federal Circuit.
• Defensive value: The "Adverse Judgment" in IPR2025-00216 strongly indicates that the patent owner failed to defend the challenged claims, likely leading to their invalidation or a concession of unpatentability. This outcome significantly weakens the enforceability of US11487138, particularly for the claims involved in this proceeding. Any assertion of the patent relying on claims subject to this adverse judgment would face a strong defense.

Strategic summary

US Patent 11487138 has been subjected to one IPR proceeding, IPR2025-00216, initiated by Luxottica of America Inc. The proceeding concluded with an "Adverse Judgment" against the patent owner, E-Vision Smart Optics, Inc., on March 31, 2026. While the precise claims affected by this adverse judgment are not detailed in public summaries, an adverse judgment typically implies that the patent owner lost on the merits of unpatentability or a critical procedural issue, rendering the challenged claims unpatentable or conceded. This outcome effectively narrows the scope of the patent or eliminates its enforceability regarding the involved claims.

The estoppel landscape resulting from this IPR is significant. Under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2), the petitioner (Luxottica of America Inc. and its privies) would be estopped from asserting in future civil actions or ITC investigations that claims challenged in the IPR are invalid on any ground that the petitioner raised or reasonably could have raised during the IPR. However, given the "Adverse Judgment" for the patent owner, this estoppel is less of a concern for potential defendants. Instead, the adverse judgment itself serves as a strong indicator of unpatentability for the claims at issue. Without specific claim numbers from the adverse judgment, it is difficult to identify which claims are now deemed effectively canceled versus those that remain untested.

There are no apparent pattern signals of multiple IPRs filed by the same petitioner for this specific patent, nor aggressive PTAB appeals by the patent owner. Unified Patents did list this case in their portal, indicating their role in tracking such proceedings, but not necessarily in initiating multiple IPRs for this specific patent.

Recommended next steps

For a defendant facing assertion of US Patent 11487138, the most crucial next step is to obtain the official Board order or decision for IPR2025-00216. This document will specify precisely which claims were subjected to the Adverse Judgment and the nature of the unpatentability finding or concession. This information is critical to:

1. Identify Canceled Claims: Confirm exactly which claims are no longer enforceable.
2. Understand Grounds: Ascertain the prior art and statutory grounds (e.g., anticipation under § 102, obviousness under § 103) that led to the adverse judgment. This can inform arguments against any remaining asserted claims.
3. Strengthen Defense: Use the Board's findings (or the patent owner's concession) to build a robust invalidity defense against any claims that were part of the adverse judgment. If a demand letter or complaint cites claims impacted by this adverse judgment, the asserting party's case is significantly weakened.

Since the details of the adverse judgment are not readily available in public search snippets, directly accessing the PTAB End-to-End (E2E) system for IPR2025-00216 would be essential to retrieve the complete record.

Inventors

• Ronald Blum: Likely E Vision Smart Optics Inc. or PixelOptics, Inc.
• Yongping Wang: Likely E Vision Smart Optics Inc. or PixelOptics, Inc.
• Mark Graham: Likely E Vision Smart Optics Inc. or PixelOptics, Inc. (Mark Graham was noted as Director of Development at PixelOptics in 2012).
• William Kokonaski: Likely E Vision Smart Optics Inc. or PixelOptics, Inc.
• Richard Clompus: Likely E Vision Smart Optics Inc. or PixelOptics, Inc.

The inventors assigned their interest to E-VISION SMART OPTICS, INC. on April 21, 2020, shortly after the patent's filing date, suggesting their employment or obligation to the original assignee or its predecessor.

Original assignee

The original assignee named on the issued patent is E Vision Smart Optics Inc.

• Shipped a product embodying the claims: Yes, its predecessor, PixelOptics, Inc., shipped "emPower!" electronic focusing eyeglasses in 2011. The patent describes technology for electronic focusing eyeglasses, which aligns with PixelOptics' product offerings. E-Vision Smart Optics Inc. continues to develop and license technology related to electronic eyewear and contacts, and works with partners like Mitsui Chemical Corp. to commercialize electronic eyeglasses.
• Primary line of business: Development, licensing, and enforcement of patented technologies for electronic and smart optics, including variable optics, electronic eyewear, and augmented/virtual reality systems.
• Current status: Operating and actively involved in licensing and patent assertion. E-Vision Smart Optics Inc. is a privately held Delaware corporation. News from March 2024 indicates they launched a "Developer Program" and continue to offer licensing/sublicensing opportunities, explicitly stating, "If you want to license our technology or find your new product is infringing, feel free to contact our team.". An article from June 2026 also confirms E-Vision Smart Optics Inc. (and affiliates) have filed patent infringement lawsuits.

Assignment timeline

• 2020-04-16 (executed) / recorded 2020-04-24 — Reel 051786/0947

  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT
  • Assignor: PIXELOPTICS, INC.
  • Assignee: HPO ASSETS LLC
  • Correspondent: MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP; ATTN: DOCKETING DEPT., 227 WEST MONROE STREET, SUITE 4700, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60606-5096. This correspondent recurs throughout this chain.
  • Context: Transfer of patent rights from a bankrupt operating company (PixelOptics filed Chapter 7 in November 2013) to a holding company.

• 2020-04-16 (executed) / recorded 2020-04-24 — Reel 051786/0951

  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT
  • Assignor: HPO ASSETS LLC
  • Assignee: E-VISION SMART OPTICS, INC.
  • Correspondent: MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP; ATTN: DOCKETING DEPT., 227 WEST MONROE STREET, SUITE 4700, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60606-5096. This correspondent recurs throughout this chain.
  • Context: Transfer from an interim holding company to E-Vision Smart Optics, Inc.

• 2020-04-21 (executed) / recorded 2020-04-24 — Reel 051786/0955

  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT
  • Assignor: BLUM, RONALD D.
  • Assignor: CLOMPUS, RICHARD
  • Assignor: GRAHAM, MARK
  • Assignor: WANG, YONGPING
  • Assignor: KOKONASKI, WILLIAM
  • Assignee: E-VISION SMART OPTICS, INC.
  • Correspondent: MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP; ATTN: DOCKETING DEPT., 227 WEST MONROE STREET, SUITE 4700, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60606-5096. This correspondent recurs throughout this chain.
  • Context: Assignment of inventor rights to E-Vision Smart Optics, Inc.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 11487138
    2011 : PixelOptics ships emPower!
    2013 : PixelOptics bankruptcy
    2020 : Patent filed by E Vision Smart Optics
    2020 : Assigned to HPO Assets LLC
    2020 : Assigned to E-Vision Smart Optics
    2020 : Inventors assign to E-Vision Smart Optics
    2022 : Patent issued
    2023 : E-Vision sues Lenovo for infringement
    2025 : PTAB case IPR2025-00216 filed

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — Present. The patent was transferred from PixelOptics, Inc. (an operating company that filed for bankruptcy) to HPO ASSETS LLC (Reel 051786/0947) and then immediately to E-VISION SMART OPTICS, INC. (Reel 051786/0951) on the same day. While E-Vision Smart Optics Inc. describes itself as a developer, its strong emphasis on licensing and patent enforcement, and involvement in litigation, suggests a focus beyond traditional product development. HPO ASSETS LLC, with its generic name and fleeting ownership, appears to be a transitory shell.
2. Known asserter in the chain — Unclear. While E-Vision Smart Optics Inc. is actively asserting patents, it is not explicitly listed on public NPE directories like RPX or Unified Patents (which focus on deterring NPEs). However, the company's website clearly states its focus on licensing and enforcement, indicating an assertion-heavy business model. Google Patents also notes "Family has litigation" and "PTAB case IPR2025-00216 filed (Adverse Judgment)" and "First worldwide family litigation filed" for US11487138B2, further supporting an assertion strategy.
3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — Present. MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP; ATTN: DOCKETING DEPT. appears as the correspondent for all three assignment records (Reel 051786/0947, 051786/0951, 051786/0955), demonstrating a consistent legal representative for these transfers.
4. Cascading transfers — Present. There were two assignments executed on 2020-04-16 (PixelOptics to HPO ASSETS LLC, then HPO ASSETS LLC to E-VISION SMART OPTICS, INC.) and recorded on the same day (2020-04-24) [Reel 051786/0947, 051786/0951]. This rapid succession of transfers within a short period (same day executed) is a strong cascading transfer signal.
5. Pre-litigation transfer — Unclear. The assignment from PixelOptics to HPO ASSETS LLC and then to E-VISION SMART OPTICS, INC. occurred in April 2020. The first known litigation for patents within E-Vision's portfolio by E-Vision Smart Optics Inc. was against Lenovo in October 2023. This gap of over three years makes it difficult to definitively classify the 2020 transfers as "pre-litigation" for this specific patent's first suit, although it clearly enabled future assertion from the portfolio.
6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — Present. The original technology developer, PixelOptics, Inc., filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in November 2013. The assignment of the patent to HPO ASSETS LLC originated from PixelOptics, Inc. (Reel 051786/0947), indicating it was part of assets transferred out of the bankruptcy proceedings.
7. Privateering — Not present. There is no evidence to suggest that an operating company transferred the patent to E-Vision Smart Optics Inc. for the purpose of asserting it on their behalf. The transfers originated from a bankrupt entity.
8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — Not present. The chain does not terminate at a known defensive aggregator like RPX, AST, or Unified Patents. In fact, Unified Patents engages in activities against NPEs.

Verdict

NPE — high confidence.
The presence of multiple strong signals, including a bankruptcy fire-sale of the original operating company (PixelOptics, Reel 051786/0947) which preceded a cascading transfer through a shell entity (HPO ASSETS LLC, Reel 051786/0947 and 051786/0951) to E-Vision Smart Optics, Inc. This chain, combined with E-Vision Smart Optics' explicit business model of licensing and enforcing its patent portfolio, and its involvement in patent litigation, strongly indicates an NPE pattern. The recurring correspondent (MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP) across these transfers also reinforces this assessment.

USPTO Patent Assignment Search: https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/patnt/index.html?qs=11487138

To identify the most relevant prior art for US patent 11487138, I will search the USPTO database for the patent and then analyze its cited references.

USPTO Search for Patent 11487138

A search for US Patent 11487138 on the USPTO Patent Public Search tool would directly retrieve the patent document.

Relevant Prior Art for US11487138B2

35 U.S.C. § 102 defines prior art and the conditions for patentability, specifically novelty. An invention lacks novelty if "each and every element in the claim under attack is shown or described, organized, and functioning in substantially the same manner as in the prior art reference".

US Patent 11487138 explicitly references a prior patent application by the same inventor, Ser. No. 13/085,562, in its background section. This is a critical piece of prior art to examine. The patent text states, "Inventor's prior patent application Ser. No. 13/085,562 teaches the front of eyewear being used as a docking station for applying a clip on means which can house various application devices. The application devices receive at least some of their electrical power needed to drive the application devices."

While the full list of cited references would typically be found in the "References Cited" section of the patent document itself (which is not directly provided in the current extract), the explicit mention of Ser. No. 13/085,562 in the background is a strong indicator of its relevance as prior art.

Based on the provided text, here is the most relevant prior art identified:

1. U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/085,562

• Full Citation: U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/085,562 (specific patent number not provided in the text, only the application number)
• Publication/Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text, but it is referred to as "Inventor's prior patent application."
• Brief Description: This prior art describes the front of eyewear being used as a docking station for a clip-on means that can house various application devices. These application devices receive at least some of their electrical power from the docking station.
• Potential Anticipated Claim(s) under 35 U.S.C. § 102:
  • Independent Claim 25: This claim describes an electronic eyewear system with a docking station that is part of the eyewear, allowing multiple application device modules to fit into it, and providing electrical power to the module. U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/085,562 directly anticipates the concept of eyewear with a docking station providing electrical power to attached application devices.
  • The patent text itself acknowledges that this prior art teaches "eyeglasses capable of one or more applications" and "the front of eyewear being used as a docking station for applying a clip on means which can house various application devices. The application devices receive at least some of their electrical power needed to drive the application devices." The current patent aims to improve upon the aesthetic and weight distribution issues of this prior art. Therefore, the core concept of a docking station on eyewear for interchangeable electronic modules receiving power is present in this prior art.

Obviousness Analysis under 35 U.S.C. § 103 for US Patent 11487138

This analysis identifies combinations of prior art references that would render the claims of US Patent 11487138 obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) at the time of the invention's earliest priority date (January 6, 2012).

Independent Claims Overview

The independent claims of US Patent 11487138 broadly describe:

• Independent Claim 1: An application module for eyewear, featuring an electronic device, an attachment mechanism, and a plurality of preconfigured application connection points including at least two different sub-function connections.
• Independent Claim 13: An eyewear system comprising an eyewear frame with a docking station and corresponding preconfigured connection points, and an application module with an electronic device and its own set of corresponding sub-function connection points.
• Independent Claim 25: An electronic eyewear system with a means for securing it to a wearer's head, an eyewear front, a docking station as part of the eyewear, and multiple application device modules that can fit into the docking station (one at a time), with the docking station enabling electrical power routing.

Primary Prior Art Reference

The patent itself identifies U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/085,562 as relevant prior art by the same inventor. A search for this application number reveals that it matured into US Patent 9,069,206 B2, titled "Eyewear with a detachable clip-on means for applying an application device and method of use," filed on April 13, 2011, and published on October 20, 2011. Both the filing and publication dates precede the earliest priority date of US11487138 (January 6, 2012), making US 9,069,206 B2 valid prior art.

Disclosure of US 9,069,206 B2 (as described by US 11487138):
US 9,069,206 B2 teaches eyewear where the front of the eyewear is used as a docking station for applying a clip-on means, which can house various application devices. These application devices receive at least some of their electrical power from the eyewear. It also teaches applying a plurality of application devices, one at a time.

Distinctions of US 11487138 over US 9,069,206 B2

US 11487138 explicitly identifies several drawbacks of the prior art (US 9,069,206 B2):

• The docking station is located exclusively at the front of the eyewear.
• This placement causes the lenses to look thick, adds excessive weight to the front, and detracts from the eyewear's aesthetics.

The present invention (US 11487138) aims to address these issues by:

• Allowing the docking station to be "part of said eyewear" (Claim 25), not just the front, and specifically suggesting locations like the temples (e.g., FIGS. 2A, 2B, 3).
• Improving aesthetics and distributing weight more comfortably.
• Emphasizing "a plurality of preconfigured application connection points" with "at least two different sub-function connections" (e.g., power, audio, video, data, control signals).
• Enabling the utilization of "one or more at a time" application modules, even if Claim 25 states "one at a time", the general disclosure promotes simultaneous use.

Obviousness Combination and Motivation

The claims of US 11487138 would have been obvious to a PHOSITA by combining the teachings of US 9,069,206 B2 with general knowledge in modular electronics design, ergonomics, and industrial design principles.

1. Foundation from US 9,069,206 B2: US 9,069,206 B2 provides the core concept of eyewear with a docking station for attaching electronic application devices that receive electrical power. This directly addresses fundamental elements of Independent Claims 1, 13, and 25, including the application module, eyewear frame with a docking station, electronic device functionality, and power routing.

2. Motivation for "plurality of preconfigured application connection points" with "at least two different sub-function connections": US 9,069,206 B2 describes the use of "various application devices." A PHOSITA, designing a system for such diverse functionalities (e.g., audio playback, video recording, health monitoring, communication, or lens control, as enumerated in US 11487138), would recognize that a single power connection is insufficient. It would be a matter of routine engineering to incorporate additional standardized electrical connections (e.g., for audio input/output, video input/output, data input/output, and control signals) to support the full range of described functionalities and ensure modularity and interoperability. The concept of providing multi-function connectors for versatile modular electronics was well-established in the art prior to 2012 (e.g., USB, headphone jacks, various data buses).

3. Motivation for relocating the docking station and improved aesthetics/weight distribution: US 11487138 explicitly states the problems with the prior art's (US 9,069,206 B2's) front-mounted docking station, citing issues with thickness, front-heaviness, and poor aesthetics. This patent itself provides a clear motivation for a PHOSITA to address these known problems. Redesigning the placement of the docking station and application modules to locations such as the temples (as widely illustrated in US 11487138, e.g., FIGS. 2A, 2B, 3), or other less conspicuous areas of the eyewear, would be an obvious design choice to improve weight distribution, enhance user comfort, and improve the overall cosmetic appearance of the eyewear. Such design optimization to improve ergonomics and aesthetics is a routine activity for a PHOSITA in wearable technology.

4. Motivation for simultaneous use of multiple modules: Given the desire for enhanced functionality and the solution of distributing modules (e.g., to the temples), it would be an obvious extension for a PHOSITA to enable the simultaneous use of multiple application modules. For instance, a user might desire a camera on one temple and an audio playback or hearing aid module on the other. Providing multiple docking stations (e.g., one on each temple, as shown in FIG. 3 of US 11487138) for smaller, more integrated modules would be a straightforward design improvement to increase the utility and user experience of the eyewear, especially in light of the identified problems of a single, bulky front-mounted attachment. The patent itself mentions examples such as two cameras for 3D imaging or two hearing aids.

Therefore, the combination of the eyewear docking station concept from US 9,069,206 B2 with the well-known principles of designing versatile multi-function connectors for modular electronics and the routine design considerations for improving the ergonomics and aesthetics of wearable devices, would have rendered the inventions claimed in US 11487138 obvious to a PHOSITA at the time of invention.