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 .
Claims 1-6, 13-18, and 45-53 are pending. Claims 1-6, 46, and 50-53 are withdrawn due from consideration. Only claims 13 -18, 45, 47 – 48 are examined.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species II (claims 13 -18 and 45, 47-48) in the reply filed on 3/30/2026 is acknowledged.
Additionally claim 46 recited polarized beams. It should be examined with species I or III. Therefore, claim 46 is further restricted.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13-17 are allowed. Claim 18 is objected to, but would be allowable if rewritten to correct a minor informality.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 13, prior art of record, alone or as combined, fails to teach the specifics of a first beam combiner to combine and align two non-polarized laser beams with different water absorption coefficient, a second beam combiner to further incorporate two more lasers beam comprising an aiming beam and treatment beams, as in the context of all other remaining limitations of the claim.
Claims 14-18 have allowable subject matter due to claim dependency.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed 1/7/2026, 8/27/2025, and 7/15/2022 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Priority
The following claimed benefit is acknowledged:
17793273 filed 07/15/2022 is a national stage entry of PCT/IL2021/050050, with an international filing date of 01/15/2021;
PCT/IL2021/050050 claims priority from provisional application 62962001, filed 01/16/2020;
PCT/IL2021/050050 claims priority from provisional application 63118857, filed 11/27/2020.
Drawings
The drawings filed 07/15/2022 are accepted by the Examiner.
Specification
The specification filed 7/15/2022 is accepted by the Examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 18, 45, and 47-48 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 18, line 2, “comprises” should be –comprise--.
Regarding claim 45, line 2 from the bottom, “a water absorption coefficients” appears to be – water absorption coefficients –
Claims 47-48 are objected due to claim dependency.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 of this title, 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.
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 45 and 47 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seibel et al., US 20080058629 A1 (“Seibel”), and further in view of Christian Keyser, US 20200249355 A1 (“Keyser”).
Regarding claim 45, Seibel teaches a method of estimating distance between a fiber end and a target (Fig. 7, [0057]), the method comprising:
providing a Light Emitting, Transmitting and Detecting (LETD) system comprising a plurality of laser light sources having a plurality of wavelengths and a plurality of light detectors ([0057] one or more laser sources producing light at one or more wavelengths);
providing a processing unit (control system 134, [0055]);
receiving, by the processing unit, measured intensities of light beams of reflected light of at least two of the plurality of wavelengths ([0057]), from the LETD system, wherein the LETD system is configured to:
(i) illuminate a target with incident laser light beams of the plurality of wavelengths, via an optical fiber, using at least one of the plurality of laser light sources ([0057]); and
(ii) measure intensities of the light beams of the reflected light of each of the plurality of wavelengths; and estimating, by the processing unit, a distance between a distal end of the optical fiber and the target based on the measured intensities ([0055], “SFE probe 131 and external control system 134 are generally configured as described below to determine a distance between the probe and tissue at an internal site 140, as a function of specular reflections from the surface of the tissue.”).
However, Seibel fails to teach estimating, by the processing unit, a distance between a distal end of the optical fiber and the target based on the measured intensities, a water absorption coefficient of the respective plurality of wavelengths, and a target reflection coefficient.
On the other hand, in the same field of endeavor, Keyser teaches estimating distance based on intensities, and media absorption coefficient of two different wavelengths (Abstract, Fig. 7, [0057], [0060]), and a target reflection coefficient (claim 1 last two sentences, the reflectivity of the two wavelengths approximately similar).
It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Siebel’s device, in view of Keyser’s teaching, to perform the distance estimation using intensity, a relevant (e.g. water) absorption coefficient of the respective plurality of wavelengths, and a target reflection coefficient in order to improve accuracy of distance measurement. One of ordinary skill in the art would apply a known technique to a known device to yield a predictable result.
Regarding claim 47, Seibel, as modified in view of Keyser, teaches the method of claim 45, further comprises indicating, by an indicator associated with the processing unit, the estimated distance between the distal end of the optical fiber and the target, wherein the indicator comprises at least one of a visual indicator, an audio indicator and a haptic indicator (Seibel, Fig. 9, [0056], display distance measure and image data).
Claim 48 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seibel and Keyser as applied to claim 45, and further in view of the examiner’s Official Notice.
Regarding claim 48, Seibel, as modified in view of Keyser, teaches the method of claim 45. However, the combination does not teach measuring, by a power detector, an optical power of the laser light beams generated by the plurality of laser light sources.
However, the examiner is taking an official notice that using a power detector to monitor the power level of laser light source is well-known in the art. One skilled in the art would have done so for safety and signal quality reason.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YUQING XIAO whose telephone number is (571)270-3603. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-5PM EST M-F.
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, Joseph Thomas can be reached at (571)272-8004. 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.
/YUQING XIAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights