Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/622,133

Ophthalmic Lenses and Methods for Correcting, Slowing, Reducing, and/or Controlling the Progression of Myopia

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Dec 22, 2021
Examiner
FISSEL, TRAVIS S
Art Unit
2872
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Brien Holden Vision Institute Limited
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
408 granted / 538 resolved
+7.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
572
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.4%
-38.6% vs TC avg
§103
51.0%
+11.0% vs TC avg
§102
22.6%
-17.4% vs TC avg
§112
20.6%
-19.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 538 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/18/2025 has been entered. 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 1 and 43-63 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 1, the applicant claims “…within 1.00D of the first image plane or retinal plane is < 10%, or < 20%, or <30% or < 50% of the total light in front of the first image plane or retinal plane.” The applicant’s claim of a series of ranges for one particular feature is unclear. For the purposes of this action the office will interpret the claim such that the plane is 0 to 50% of the total light. Please review the advisory action dated 10/6/2025 for additional information. Claims 51-52, 54-55 and 63 each have a similar issue of a lack of clarity due to the claim of a series of ranges for one particular feature. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 44 and 61 would be 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 overcoming the 112 rejection above. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim(s) 1, 45-60 and 62-63 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guillot et al. (PGPUB 20210080750) in view of Newman et al. (PGPUB 20170184875, of record). Regarding claim 1, Guillot discloses an ophthalmic lens comprising: a base lens with a first refractive power configured to direct light to at least a first image plane or a retinal plane (10 and [0036]); and a plurality of lenslets or other light modulating cells (14) positioned in at least one array on a surface of, or in, the base lens in one or more of a central optical zone, a mid-peripheral optical zone and a peripheral optical zone (Fig. 1a), wherein the ophthalmic lens is a spectacle lens ([0016]); and wherein the TFLD anterior to the first image plane or retinal plane and within 1.00D of the first image plane ([0096]) or retinal plane is < 10%, or < 20%, or <30% or < 50% of the total light in front of the first image plane or retinal plane. Guillot does not explicitly disclose wherein that direct light to one or more planes anterior to the first image plane or retinal plane, resulting in a through focus light distribution (TFLD) anterior to the first image plane or retinal plane. However, Newman teaches a similar lens design for treating myopia that comprises a plurality of light modulating zones (36) that are configured to direct light to one or more planes located posteriorly to the first image plane and one or more planes located anteriorly to the first image plane resulting in a through focus light distribution (TFLD) anterior to the first image plane or retinal plane ([0062]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine Guillot and Newman such that the modulating zones directed lights both in front of and behind the retina focus zone of the base lens motivated by treating eye conditions ([0061]). Regarding claim 45, modified Guillot discloses wherein the plurality of lenslets or other light modulating cells include lenslets that abut one another (Fig. 1a). Regarding claim 46, modified Guillot discloses wherein the central optical zone is circular in shape and has a radius in a range of 1.5 mm to 5 mm that is devoid of lenslets ([0088]). Regarding claim 47, modified Guillot discloses wherein the plurality of lenslets or other light modulating cells comprise lenslets arranged in two or more concentric rings or annular zones (Fig. 1a). Regarding claim 49, modified Guillot discloses wherein the two or more concentric rings or annular zones have aligned geometric centres (Fig. 1a). Regarding claim 50, modified Guillot discloses wherein a first lenslet of the plurality of lenslets or other light modulating cells refracts light anterior to the first image plane by a first extent, and a second lenslet of the plurality of lenslets or other light modulating cells refracts light anterior to the first image plane by a second extent, greater than the first extent ([0030]-[0031] and/or [0096]-[0097]). Regarding claim 51, as best understood, modified Guillot discloses wherein the ophthalmic lens refracts light so as to be spread across 3 or more image planes, 4 or more image planes, 5 or more image planes, 6 or more image planes, 7 or more image planes, 8 or more image planes, 9 or more image planes, or 10 or more image planes ([0030]-[0031] and/or [0096]-[0097] and see at least [0010] of Newman). Regarding claim 52, as best understood, modified Guillot discloses wherein each of one or more of the plurality of lenslets or other light modulating cells refract light so as to be spread across 3 or more image planes, 4 or more image planes, 5 or more image planes, 6 or more image planes, 7 or more image planes, 8 or more image planes, 9 or more image planes, or 10 or more image planes ([0030]-[0031] and/or [0096]-[0097] and see at least [0010] of Newman). Regarding claim 53, modified Guillot discloses wherein each of one or more of the plurality of lenslets or other light modulating cells refract light so as to be spread across a plurality of image planes, at least one image plane anterior to the first image plane and at least one image plane posterior to the first image plane ([0030]-[0031] and/or [0096]-[0097] and see at least [0010] of Newman). Regarding claim 54, modified Guillot discloses wherein all lenslets or other light modulating cells of the ophthalmic lens have a refractive power that is more positive relative to the first refractive power by at least 0.5D, or at least 1D, or at least 1.5D, or at least 2D, or at least 2.5D, or at least 3D, or at least 3.5D, or at least 4D, or at least 4.5D or 5D ([0030]-[0031]). Regarding claim 55, modified Guillot discloses wherein the plurality of lenslets or other light modulating cells comprise at least one higher order aberration or spherical aberration (a natural property of all non-idealized, i.e. manufactured, lenses is that they have some amount of higher aberrations since they may not be perfectly created). Regarding claim 56, as best understood, modified Guillot discloses wherein for light passing through a light modulating zone in which the plurality of lenslets or other light modulating cells are located a proportion of light directed to image planes in hyperopic defocus is at least 25% or at least 30% or at least 35% ([0011] where hyperopia is treated and [0099] where the percent of lens area used for modulation is 20-70%). Regarding claim 57, modified Guillot discloses wherein the first refractive power is a power for correcting myopia ([0070]). Regarding claim 58, modified Guillot discloses wherein the TFLD anterior to the first image plane or retinal plane and within 1.00D of the first image plane or retinal plane comprises at least a portion with a non-zero amplitude ([0030]-[0031]). Regarding claim 59, modified Guillot discloses wherein the TFLD anterior to the first image plane or retinal plane has a variable amplitude (Figs. 5 or 7a-c). Regarding claim 60, modified Guillot discloses wherein the TFLD, at least in part, forms an aperiodic and non-monotonic amplitude of myopically defocused light (Figs. 5 or 7a-c). Regarding claim 62, modified Guillot discloses wherein the plurality of lenslets or other light modulating cells positioned in the at least one array direct light to one or more planes posterior to the first image plane or retinal plane, resulting in a through focus light distribution (TFLD) posterior to the first image plane or retinal plane ([0011]). Regarding claim 63, modified Guillot discloses wherein the TFLD posterior to the first image plane or retinal plane and within 1.00D of the first image plane or retinal plane is < 10%, or < 20%, or <30% or < 50% of the total light behind the first image plane or retinal plane ([0030]-[0031]). Claim(s) 43 and 48 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guillot in view of Newman and further in view of Lau et al. (PGPB 20180275427). Regarding claim 43, modified Guillot discloses herein the spectacle lens has a central optical zone that is circular in shape and has a radius in a range of 1.5 mm to 5 mm and a peripheral zone ([0088]). Guillot teaches a difference of the optical power of greater than 0.5D ([0030]-[0031]), but does not disclose image planes formed by at least one of the lenslets or other light modulating cells located within a region of the peripheral zone correspond to a variation in power of more than 3D. However, Lau teaches a lens having a plurality of lenslets (1210) wherein the lensless have a variation of power greater than 3 diopters ([0016]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine modified Guillot and Lau such that the peripheral zone variation of power was at least 3D motivated by reducing myopic growth ([0017]). Regarding claim 48, modified Guillot does not explicitly disclose wherein the plurality of lenslets or other light modulating cells have a shape corresponding to a circle and a diameter that is in a range from 1 mm to 1.5 mm. However, Lau teaches a lens having a plurality of lenslets (1210) wherein the diameter of the lenslets includes 1 mm ([0018]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to combine modified Guillot and Lau such that the lenslet diameter was within 1 mm to 1.5 mm motivated by reducing myopic growth ([0017]). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 43-63 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRAVIS S FISSEL whose telephone number is (313)446-6573. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM. 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. /TRAVIS S FISSEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 22, 2021
Application Filed
Aug 09, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Dec 16, 2024
Response Filed
Mar 18, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Sep 16, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 29, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 18, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 22, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 31, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599302
Volumetric OCT Image Data Processing
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601899
DISPLAY DEVICE FOR IMAGING AND DISPLAYING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601898
IMAGING LENS AND IMAGING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593119
SLIM POP-OUT WIDE CAMERA LENSES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582287
MEDICAL DEVICE, ACCESSORIES FOR USE THEREWITH, AND METHODS OF USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+11.3%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 538 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month