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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/01/2025 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/01/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed on 12/01/2025 has been entered. Claims 1, 8, and 10 have been amended. Accordingly, claims 1-10 are pending and under consideration..
Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every objection previously set forth in the Office action mailed on 09/19/2025. Therefore, all objections are hereby withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 12/01/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Applicant’s remarks stating that Jacobsen does not teach or suggest a first pressure disposed on an inner surface of one of the strut areas on page 5-6 of Applicant’s remarks, Examiner acknowledged the remarks, but respectfully disagrees. Applicant traverses that the strut area of Jacobsen interpreted by Examiner is actually just a portion of the body of the catheter 10 in between the holes 20, as presented on page 5. However, according to the claimed invention and Applicant’s disclosure/drawings, said interpretation is reasonably consistent with Applicant’s disclosure. Applicant’s strut areas are also part of the body of the implant and are in-between openings, i.e. “the ocular implant comprising… a plurality of openings and strut areas formed in the body, the strut areas surrounding the plurality of openings”. Thus, Jacobsen reasonably reads on the limitation of strut areas, even though Jacobsen is not entirely relied upon for teachings of an ocular implant, rather, Schieber is relied upon for the structure of the ocular implant.
Applicant’s remarks traversing that the Jacobsen’s device is not configured to support the tissue forming Schlemm’s canal, new grounds of rejection have been applied necessitated by amendment. Jacobsen is not relied upon for any teaching of tissue support, rather, Schieber is relied upon for the structure and tissue support function of the ocular implant. See rejection of claims below.
Applicant’s remarks traversing Jacobsen’s limited teachings of an internally placed pressure sensor and the unsatisfactory intended purpose upon modification on page 5-6, Examiner acknowledged Applicant’s remarks, but respectfully disagrees. While Applicant’s recited paragraph 31 of Jacobsen does discuss the pressure measuring of the external environment, according to MPEP 2123.II, it states that "disclosed examples and preferred embodiments do not constitute a teaching away from a broader disclosure or nonpreferred embodiments", and/or "Furthermore, "[t]he prior art's mere disclosure of more than one alternative does not constitute a teaching away from any of these alternatives because such disclosure does not criticize, discredit, or otherwise discourage the solution claimed....". Therefore, Jacobsen's brief description of an internal pressure sensor compared to the detailed description of an external pressure sensor does not teach away from the claimed invention. In addition to the aforementioned reasoning, placing the pressure sensor would not render the device of Jacobsen or the combined device of Schieber in view of Jacobsen inoperable or unsatisfactory for its intended purpose, because Jacobsen’s pressure sensor would still monitor bodily fluid pressure wherever it is located. See rejection of claims below.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). In this instant case, the combination of references teaches the limitation of claim 8; see rejection of claims below.
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 1-4, 7-8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schieber et al. US 2009/0082862 A1 (previously cited, hereinafter Schieber), as cited in the IDS, in view of Jacobsen US 2016/0287111 A1 (previously cited, hereinafter Jacobsen), Ding et al. US 2014/0275923 A1 (previously cited, hereinafter Ding), Haffner et al. US 2014/0275923 A1 (previously cited, hereinafter Haffner ‘923), and Bergheim et al. US 2003/0060752 A1 (previously cited, hereinafter Bergheim), as cited in the IDS.
Regarding claim 1, Schieber discloses an ocular implant kit 236 (Fig. 8 – ocular implant 236), the ocular implant kit 236 (Fig. 8) comprising:
an ocular implant 236 (Fig. 8 – ocular implant 236) adapted to reside at least partially in a portion of Schlemm's canal of an eye (Par. 11 – “the ocular implant being adapted to be disposed within a canal of Schlemm in a human eye”), the ocular implant 236 (Fig. 8) comprising:
a body 200 (Fig. 8 and Par. 54 – body 200) having an inner surface (Fig. 8 – the interior surface of implant 236 that defines channel 242) and an outer surface (Fig. 8 – the exterior surface of implant 236 that defines strut 220), the body 200 (Fig. 8 and Par. 54) extending in a curved volume (Fig. 9 and Par. 55 – “ocular implant 236… have a generally curved resting shape”) whose longitudinal axis forms an arc of a circle (Fig. 9 – sections AA, AB, and AC are arcs of a circle);
a plurality of openings 228, 230 (Fig. 8 and Par. 52 – first opening 228, second opening 230, and “additional openings shown in Fig. 8”) and strut areas 220, 222 (Fig. 8 and Par. 52 – first strut 220 and second strut 222) formed in the body 200 (Fig. 8 – body 200 of implant 236), the strut areas 220, 222 surrounding the plurality of openings 228, 230 (Fig. 8 and Par. 52 – struts 220, 220 surround openings 228, 230 by having struts areas sandwiching an opening on the body of implant 236, and said structure is repeated throughout the body 200 to form an implant 236), and configured to support tissue 22 (Fig. 11 – trabecular mesh 22) forming part of Schlemm’s canal 20 (Fig. 11 – Schlemm’s canal 20, and Par. 65 – “Ocular implant 236 shown in FIG. 11 includes a plurality of struts, spines and openings. When in place within the eye, ocular implant 236 will support trabecular mesh tissue and Schlemm's canal tissue”);
an elongate open channel 242 (Fig. 8 – channel 242) of the body 200 (Fig. 8 and Par. 54), wherein the strut areas 220, 222 define the elongate open channel 242 (Fig. 8, and Par. 52 – “a channel 242 that opens into a first opening 228. In FIG. 8, first opening 228 of ocular implant 236 can be seen extending between first strut 220 and second strut 222”).
However, Schieber does not disclose a first pressure sensor disposed on the inner surface of one of the strut areas of the body adjacent one of the openings of the plurality of openings, the first pressure sensor comprising a diaphragm facing an elongate open channel of the body and a piezoresistor disposed on the diaphragm; and a cannula defining a passageway extending from a proximal end to a distal end, the cannula having a distal opening extending through a side wall and the distal end of the cannula to form a trough, a curved distal portion, a curved intermediate portion, and a proximal portion; and a delivery tool having a distal interlocking portion engaging a complementary interlocking portion of the ocular implant.
Jacobsen, in the same field of endeavor of implant and implant system (Par. 7), teaches a first pressure sensor 30b (Fig. 1A – pressure sensor 30b) disposed on the inner surface (Par. 35 – “the sensor 30-30b… may be formed on an internal surface that forms the lumen 17…”) of one of the strut areas (see annotated Fig. 1A below – pressure sensor 30b on the surface of the annotated strut area) of the body 15 (Fig. 1A – external wall 15) adjacent one of the openings 20 of the plurality of openings 20 (Fig. 1A – pressure sensor 30b is also adjacent a hole 20 on the right or left, and Par. 32 – “the pressure sensor 30-30b may measure a pressure at or near the holes 20…”).
PNG
media_image1.png
411
1011
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1A of Jacobsen
Ding, in the same field of endeavor of MEMS pressure sensing elements (Abstract), teaches the first pressure sensor 300 (Fig. 4 – sensing element 300) comprising a diaphragm 309 (Fig. 4 – diaphragm 309) and a piezoresistor 314, 332 (Fig. 4 – piezoresistive bridge circuit 314 and electrical components 332 that include silicone piezoresistors) disposed on the diaphragm 309 (Par. 17 – “the diaphragm 309 is embedded with a piezoresistive bridge 314” and “the piezoresistive bridge circuit 314 on the diaphragm 309 comprises electrical components 332 that include silicon piezoresistors”).
Haffner ‘923, in the same field of endeavor of implantable intraocular sensor (Abstract), teaches a cannula (Fig. 13 and Par. 162 – a hollow needle) defining a passageway (Fig. 13, Fig. 14A-14B, and Par. 162 – inside the shaft of the needle) extending from a proximal end (see annotated Fig. 13 below – break line on the left indicates an elongated portion of the needle on the other side, implying a “proximal end of the cannula”) to a distal end (see annotated Fig. 13 below – “distal end of cannula”), the cannula (Fig. 13 and Par. 162 – needle) having a distal opening 2150 (Fig. 13 – beveled opening 2150) extending through a side wall (Fig. 13 – opening 2150 is formed through the shaft of the needle) and the distal end of the cannula (see annotated Fig. 13 below – beveled opening 2150 is at the distal end of the cannula) to form a trough 2150 (Fig. 13 – trough being the beveled opening 2150 at the tip of the hollow needle), a curved distal portion (see annotated Fig. 14A below – “curved distal portion”), and a proximal portion (see annotated Fig. 14A below – “proximal portion”).
Haffner ‘923, in another embodiment and in the same field of endeavor of implantable intraocular sensor (Abstract), teaches a delivery tool 2270 (Fig. 16 – pusher tube 2270) having a distal interlocking portion (Fig. 16 – the left edge, or the distal edge, of pusher tube 2270) engaging a complementary interlocking portion of the ocular implant 2200 (Fig. 16 – the proximal edge of sensor/shunt 2200 engages with the distal edge of pusher tube 2270, and Par. 141 – the sensor/shunt can be secured by viscoelastic or mechanical interlock with the pusher tube).
Bergheim, in the same field of endeavor of glaucoma treatment device (Title), teaches , the cannula 55 (Fig. 6 – cannular portion 55) to form a curved intermediation portion 55 (Fig. 6 and Par. 92 –“The cannula portion 55 may be curved…”; the curved portion 55 is also in the middle of said cannula).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the ocular implant of Schieber to incorporate a pressure sensor on the inner surface of a strut area such that it is adjacent an opening as taught by Jacobsen, in order to measure a pressure at or near the holes said body (Par. 32 of Jacobsen). The pressure sensor located at such a location can maximize information relevant for navigation or long-term monitoring, or both (Par. 29 of Jacobsen).
It also would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the pressure sensor of Schieber in view of Jacobsen to further have the pressure sensor comprising a diaphragm and a piezoresistor as taught by Ding, so that the deflection of the diaphragm containing piezoresistors can be detected and output an electrical signal representative of the applied pressure (Par. 1 of Ding). This type of pressure sensing is known in the art (Par. 1 of Ding), and it is important in measuring the intraocular pressure of a patient receiving ophthalmic treatment. Once the modification is made as discussed, the diaphragm 309 of Ding will be exposed to the inner surface of the ocular implant of the combined device, such that intraocular pressure can be applied onto the diaphragm as seen in Fig. 8 of Ding for an exemplary demonstration. Therefore, the limitation “a diaphragm facing an elongate open channel of the body” is met.
Furthermore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied and combined the cannula of Haffner ‘923 to the device of Schieber, Jacobsen, and Ding, in order to yield predictable result of delivering the ocular implant to a patient’s eye. Since the cannula of Haffner ‘923 is known to use in conjunction with an ocular implant, applying said cannula to the ocular implant of the combined device would still result in a delivery system that assists in positioning the ocular implant in a human eye. MPEP 2143.D.
Furthermore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combined device of Schieber, Jacobsen, Ding, and Haffner ‘923 to further include a delivery tool that engages with the ocular implant via a corresponding interlock as taught by Haffner ‘923, in order to accommodate placement of the implant within the lumen of the cannula and secure the implant in position (Par. 141 of Haffner ‘923). The delivery tool with the complimentary interlock allows operator to advance or retract the delivery tool and the implant will follow as desired (Par. 141 of Haffner ‘923).
Lastly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cannula of the combination of Schieber, Jacobsen, Ding, Haffner ‘923 to further have a curved intermediate portion as taught by Bergheim, in order to facilitate inserting the implant into the anatomical iris closure (Par. 92 of Bergheim).
PNG
media_image2.png
647
1093
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 13 and Fig. 14A of Haffner ‘923
Regarding claim 2, Schieber in view of Jacobsen in view of Ding in view of Haffner ‘923 in view of Bergheim suggests the invention of claim 1. The combination further discloses wherein the first pressure sensor 30b (Fig. 1A of Jacobsen) further comprises a first substrate 310 (Fig. 4 and Par. 17 of Ding – layer 310) comprising a layered silicon substrate 310 (Fig. 4 and Par. 17 of Ding – thick silicone layer 310) and a cavity 311 (Fig. 4 and Par. 17 of Ding – thick silicon layer 310 where a cavity 311 is formed), the diaphragm 309 (Fig. 4 of Ding) being disposed over the cavity 311 (Fig. 4 of Ding – diaphragm 309 deposited over cavity 311), and a second substrate comprising a semiconductor wafer 308 (Fig. 4 and Par. 17 of Ding – thin silicon layer 308, which is a semiconducting layer).
Examiner notes that once the modification is made as discussed in claim 1, the sensor structure of Ding will be incorporated in its entirety to the pressure sensor of the combined device, thus the limitation is met.
Regarding claim 3, Schieber in view of Jacobsen in view of Ding in view of Haffner ‘923 in view of Bergheim suggests the invention of claim 1. However, the combination currently does not disclose wherein the first pressure sensor includes an antenna for transmitting data from the first pressure sensor to a remote location.
Haffner ‘923, in another embodiment and in the same field of endeavor of implantable intraocular sensor (Abstract), teaches wherein the first pressure sensor 2000 (Fig. 20 – intraocular pressure sensor 2000) includes an antenna 2085 (Fig. 20 – wireless transmitter/antenna 2085) for transmitting data from the first pressure sensor 2000 to a remote location (Par. 182 – “the transmitter/antenna 2085 can be used to wirelessly transmit pressure measurements stored in the measurement storage module 2060 to an external reader device”).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the pressure sensor of the combined device to further include an antenna as taught by Haffner ‘923, in order to wirelessly transmit intraocular pressure measurements to an external device (Par. 182 of Haffner ‘923). This allows for further data analysis of pressure readings on a separate device and quickly detect any pressure abnormality of the eye.
Regarding claim 4, Schieber in view of Jacobsen in view of Ding in view of Haffner ‘923 in view of Bergheim suggests the invention of claim 3. The combination further discloses wherein the data is automatically transmitted from the remote location (Par. 182 of Haffner ‘923 – external reader device) to a second remote device (Par. 182 of Haffner ‘923 – a pair of eyeglasses worn by the patient; data can be wirelessly transferred to an external reader device, and to an external reader device integrated into a pair of eyeglasses; Examiner notes that Par. 93 of Haffner ‘923 also teaches data is automatically sent to a doctor’s office).
Examiner notes that once the combination is made as discussed in claim 3, the antenna of Haffner ‘923 and its ability to transmit data is incorporated in its entirety to the combined device. Thus, the limitation is met.
Regarding claim 7, Schieber in view of Jacobsen in view of Ding in view of Haffner ‘923 in view of Bergheim suggests the invention of claim 1. The combination further discloses wherein the curved intermediate portion 55 (Fig. 6 of Bergheim) is a segment of the cannula (Fig. 13 of Haffner ‘923 and/or Fig. 6 of Bergheim) separate from the trough 2150 (Fig. 13 of Haffner ‘923).
Examiner notes that once the combination is made as discussed in claim 1, the combined device’s cannula (Fig. 13 of Haffner ‘923) will have a curved intermediate portion 55 as taught by Bergheim (Fig. 6 of Bergheim); this curved intermediate portion 55 of Bergheim is away and separate from the distal space 56, which is the tip of the cannula 55 (Fig. 6 of Bergheim). Thus, as modified by Bergheim, the combined device’s cannula will also have the curved intermediation portion 55 away and separate from the cannula’s tip comprising the trough. Thus, the limitation is met.
Regarding claim 8, Schieber in view of Jacobsen in view of Ding in view of Haffner ‘923 in view of Bergheim suggests the invention of claim 1. The combination further discloses wherein the first pressure sensor 30b (Fig. 1A of Jacobsen) is positioned in between two adjacent openings 228,230/20 (Fig. 8 of Schieber, and Fig. 1A of Jacobsen) of the ocular implant 236 (Fig. 8 of Schieber), wherein the two adjacent openings 228,230/20 (Fig. 8 of Schieber, and Fig. 1A of Jacobsen) are opposite one another (Fig. 8 of Sschieber, and Fig. 1A of Jacobsen – left side and right side).
Examiner notes that once the modification is made as discussed in claim 1, the first pressure sensor of Jacobsen will be incorporated into the ocular implant of Schieber, including its position being on the annotated strut area and between two openings 20, as seen in the annotated Fig. 1A of Jacobsen above. Thus, the limitation is met.
Regarding claim 10, Schieber in view of Jacobsen in view of Ding in view of Haffner ‘923 in view of in view of Bergheim suggests claim 1. The combination further discloses wherein the ocular implant 236 (Fig. 8 of Schieber) further comprises spines 202, 204 (Fig. 8 of Schieber – first and second spine 202, 204) connecting adjacent strut areas 220, 222 (Fig. 8 of Schieber, and Par. 51 of Schieber – “a first strut 220 that extends between first spine 202 and second spine 204…”),
However, the combination does not currently disclose wherein the ocular implant further comprises a second pressure sensor disposed on an inner surface of one of the spines.
Jacobsen, in the same field of endeavor of implant and implant system (Par. 7), teaches wherein the implant 10 (Fig. 1A – shunt/catheter 10, and Par. 7 – “The shunt and/or a catheter may be permanently implanted in a patient”) further comprises a second pressure sensor 30a (Fig. 1A – pressure sensor 30a) disposed on an inner surface (Par. 35 – “the sensor 30-30b… may be formed on an internal surface that forms the lumen 17…”) of one of the spines (annotated Fig. 1A of Jacobsen above – the pressure sensor 30a disposed on the annotated spine).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the ocular implant of the combination to further incorporate another pressure sensor on the inner surface of a spine as taught by Jacobsen, in order to measure a pressure at or near the holes said body (Par. 32 of Jacobsen). The pressure sensor located at such a location can maximize information relevant for navigation or long-term monitoring, or both (Par. 29 of Jacobsen).
Claims 5, 6, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schieber in view of Jacobsen in view of Ding in view of Haffner ‘923 in view of Bergheim as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pang et al. US 2009/0306585 A1 (previously cited, hereinafter Pang).
Regarding claim 5, Schieber in view of Jacobsen in view of Ding in view of Haffner ‘923 in view of Bergheim suggests the invention of claim 1. However, the combination does not disclose the kit further comprising a second pressure sensor disposed within the trough of the cannula.
Pang, in the same field of endeavor of implantable cannula (Title), teaches the kit 100 (Fig. 1A – implantable drug-delivery pump 100) further comprising a second pressure sensor 148C (Fig. 1A and Fig. 11 – pressure sensor 148C) disposed within the cannula 120 (Fig. 1A, Fig. 11 – cannula 120, and Par. 78 – “the pressure sensor 148 can be placed… inside the cannula 120 and at its distal tip (as illustrated by the placement of pressure sensor 148C in FIG. 11”).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combined device to further include a second pressure sensor within the cannula and at its distal tip as taught by Pang, in order to measure pressure at the site of administration (Par. 51 of Pang). Said placement of the second sensor is also advantageous because it prevents flow-related pressure drops inside the cannula 120 from causing an error in the pressure reading (Par. 78 of Pang).
Once the combination is made as discussed, the second pressure sensor of Pang will be disposed within and at the distal tip of the combined cannula. As established in claim 1, the distal tip of cannula comprises a trough 2150 (Fig. 13 of Haffner ‘923), therefore, the internal second pressure sensor upon combination will be placed within said trough 2150. Thus, the limitation “disposed within the trough of the cannula” is met.
Regarding claim 6, Schieber in view of Jacobsen in view of Ding in view of Haffner ‘923 in view of in view of Bergheim in view of Pang suggests the invention of claim 5. However, the combination of does not disclose wherein the second pressure sensor comprises a micro-electro-mechanical system (MEMS) pressure sensor and includes an antenna for transmitting data from the second pressure sensor to a remote location.
Haffner ‘932, in another embodiment and in the same field of endeavor of implantable intraocular sensor (Abstract), teaches the pressure sensor 2000 (Fig. 20) comprises a micro-electro-mechanical system (MEMS) pressure sensor 2050 (Fig. 20 and Par. 176 – pressure sensing module 2050 includes a microelectromechanical system (MEMS)) and includes an antenna 2085 (Fig. 20 – antenna) for transmitting data (Par. 182 – antenna 2085 can be used to wirelessly transmit pressure measurements) from the second pressure sensor 2000 to a remote location (Par. 182 – “the transmitter/antenna 2085 can be used to wirelessly transmit pressure measurements stored in the measurement storage module 2060 to an external reader device”).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the second pressure sensor of the combined device to further include a MEMS pressure sensor and an antenna as taught by Haffner ‘923, so that the membrane inside the MEMS sensor can be used to measure intraocular pressure via displacement (Par. 176 of Haffner ‘923) and pressure data can be transmitted wirelessly to another location for download/evaluation (Par. 182 of Haffner ‘923). The use of MEMS sensors is particularly advantageous in this setting because during surgery, fluid constantly enters and exits the cannula, which can create a force high enough to move the surrounding environment/components, such as a membrane of a MEMS sensor. Therefore, MEMS sensor can record the displacement of its membrane and convert the measurements into flow pressure, ocular pressure, etc. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized said characteristic of a MEMS sensor and implemented it into the combined device to accurately measure pressures at the surgical site. Furthermore, transmitting data to a remote location as taught by Haffner ‘923 allows further data analysis of pressure readings on a separate device and quickly detect any pressure abnormality of the eye.
Regarding claim 9, Schieber in view of Jacobsen in view of Ding in view of Haffner ‘923 in view of in view of Bergheim in view of Pang suggests the invention of claim 5. The combination further discloses wherein the second pressure sensor 48C (Fig. 1A of Pang, and Fig. 11 of Pang) is configured to provide an instantaneous pressure reading during implantation (Par. 78 of Pang – “A pressure sensor 148 located in or on the cannula 120 can be used to measure and monitor the local pressure at the injection site. For example, if knowledge of the injection-site pressure is required during infusion”, and Par. 104 – “When the fluid experiences an extremely high (i.e., abnormal) pressure (e.g., due to an unexpected force during operation or implantation, etc.)…”, which relies on the instantaneous reading of pressure sensor during operation) of the ocular implant 236 (Fig. 8 of Schieber).
Examiner notes that once the combination is made as discussed in claim 5, the second pressure sensor 48C at the trough of the cannula as taught by Pang will be incorporated into the combined device, including its ability to monitor pressure at implantation/operation stage. Thus, the limitation is met.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hastings et al. US 10,687,704 B2 teaches an ocular implant with a pressure sensor.
Chang et al. US 2022/0249285 A1 teaches an ocular implant for monitoring pressure.
Weibel US 9,289,123 B2 teaches contact lens for measuring intraocular pressure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUYNH DAO LE whose telephone number is (571)272-7198. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5:30 pm.
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, Sarah Al-Hashimi can be reached at (571) 272-7159. 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.
/QUYNH DAO LE/Examiner, Art Unit 3781
/PHILIP R WIEST/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781
Prosecution Insights