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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3-5, 9-22, 24-27, 31 and 32 have been considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 9-22, 24-27, 31 and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of U. S. Publication No. 2011/0117025 to Dacosta et al. in view of U. S. Publication No. 2009/0137908 to Patwardhan.
Regarding Claim 1, 31, and 32, Dacosta teaches a method, program and system for multispectral sample analysis comprising: providing at least one fluorescence excitation light wavelength to a material sample, wherein the material sample exhibits fluorescence characteristics along the Red- Green-Blue (RGB) light wavelength spectrum (abstract, para 011-013, and 080-081 teaches fluorescence excitation light for imaging); measuring output values of an RGB sensor, wherein the measuring detects the fluorescence characteristics of the material sample, and wherein the fluorescence characteristics are in response to the at least one fluorescence excitation light wavelength (para 082 teaches RGB cmos sensor); and generating an indication of composition of the material sample, wherein the indication is based on interpreting the output values that were measured (para 055-057 and 080-085 teaches fluorescence imaging for skin assessment and wound analysis).
Dacosta teaches all of the above claimed limitations but does not expressly teach a long pass filter to filter out excitation wavelength.
Patwardhan teaches a long pass filter to filter out excitation wavelength (para 0030, 059, and 073 teaches a long pass filter to filter out excitation wavelength).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Dacosta with a setup such that a long pass filter is used to filter excitation wavelength as taught by Patwardhan, since such a setup would result in imaging data without the excitation light, resulting in better imaging results.
Regarding Claim 3, Dacosta teaches that the wavelength less than a wavelength of the RGB light wavelength spectrum is substantially between 200nm and 450nm (para 078-080 teaches RGB spectrum).
Regarding Claim 4, Dacosta teaches adding an optical bandpass filter to at least one fluorescence excitation light wavelength to attenuate wavelengths of the fluorescence excitation light wavelength closest to the RGB light wavelength spectrum (para 070, 072, 073 teaches an optical band-pass filter).
Regarding Claim 5, Dacosta teaches that the bandpass filter is centered at 400nm (para 080 teaches a band pass filter at 400 nm).
Regarding Claim 9, Dacosta teaches compensating the output of the RGB sensor, based on an analysis of a wavelength response of the RGB sensor (para 082 teaches RGB cmos sensor).
Regarding Claim 10, Dacosta teaches that the compensating identifies peak sensitivities for red, green, and blue sensing for the RGB sensor (para 0186 and 0187 teaches sensitive cameras).
Regarding Claim 11, Dacosta teaches using thermal imaging of the material sample to augment the generating (para 0278 teaches thermal imaging).
Regarding Claim 12, Dacosta teaches that using depth imaging of the material sample to augment the generating (para 081 teaches depth imaging).
Regarding Claim 13, Dacosta teaches that the indication enables skin assessment (para 083-085 teaches skin assessment).
Regarding Claim 14-16, Dacosta teaches that the skin assessment includes wound assessment (para 083-085 teaches wound assessment).
Regarding Claim 17-20, Dacosta teaches that the wound assessment includes infection detection (para 083-085 and 0107-0108 teaches infection detection).
Regarding Claim 21, Dacosta teaches that the temporal change occurs over two or more healthcare clinical sessions (para 0186 teaches temporal change).
Regarding Claim 22, Dacosta teaches that at least one of the two or more healthcare clinical sessions is self-administered (para 056 teaches self-administered session).
Regarding Claim 25, Dacosta teaches that the RGB sensor and the additional RGB sensor provide a left and a right stereoscopic sensor image (para 082 teaches multiple cmos sensors, capable of generating stereoscopic images).
Regarding Claim 26, Dacosta teaches that the RGB sensor and the additional RGB sensor are each polarized using polarization filters (para 085 teaches polarization filters).
Regarding Claim 27, Dacosta teaches performing feature matching of the material sample (para 0258 teaches identification, which is feature matching of material sample).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANJAY CATTUNGAL whose telephone number is (571)272-1306. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Keith Raymond can be reached at 571-270-1790. 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.
/SANJAY CATTUNGAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3798
Prosecution Insights