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 .
1. This is the initial office action based on application number 17/970,131 with an effective filling date of 10/21/2021. Claims 1-8, 12-15, 18, 19, 21, 22, 27-30 are currently pending and have been considered below
Election/Restrictions
2. Claim 30 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on September 22, 2025.
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.
3. Claims 6, 7, and 8 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 pointing out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 6 recites the term 'negative pressure'. This is indefinite as negative pressure does not have a clear definition in the specification nor the reference point or a range value. For the interest of compact prosecution, the term “negative pressure” in claim 6 is examined as reciting “a pressure below ambient atmosphere”.
Claim 7 and 8 depend on claim 6.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
4. Claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jacoby et al. (US 20210026044 A1)
Regarding Claim 1: Jacoby et al. teach an apparatus for filling a lens with fluid [fig 5]. The apparatus is comprised of a source of fluid (15) (optical liquid) stored in tank (51) (dispenser), a fill port assembly (20) [fig 6a], needle subassembly (28) (all of which corresponds to dispensing system). A fluid pump (43) is provided to supply fluid (15) through a fluid line (53) to optical device (10) via a needle subassembly (28) secured to the end of the fluid line (53). The needle (23) (filling needle) injects fluid (15), through fill port (21) (injection zone) into enclosure (16) (internal chamber). [para 79-81; fig 5, 6a, 6b]
The apparatus also includes a vacuum chamber (52), which is connected to a vacuum pump (42) (venting system). [Fig 5]
The apparatus further includes lens meter (40a, 40b) (measurement system) that measures the optical power of membrane (11) (lens zone). [para 0089; Fig. 6c, 6d, 6e]
Jacoby et al. further teach that the lens assembly (10) has a distensible tensioned membrane (11) which is held around its perimeter by a support structure (lens fixture) which comprised of a resiliently bendable support ring (12) (corresponds to holding system) [para 76, 85; Fig 4b, 4c, 4d 6a]. The lens assembly is positioned in such a way that needle (23) can be used to inject fluid and measure optical power of the membrane (11) using the lens meter. [para 89; Fig 6c, 6d, 6e]
Regarding Claim 2: Jacoby et al. teaches vacuum pump (42) is connected to internal chamber through passageway (135) [fig 5, 7b]. Jacoby et al. also teach that the lens enclosure (16) fills with fluid (15), and the displaced air escapes the lens through channel (132) into vacuum space (60) of vacuum chamber (52). The vacuum pump (42)-which is connected to vacuum chamber (60)-is configured to degas chamber (52). [para 96; fig 7b].
Regarding Claim 5: Jacoby et al. disclose vacuum chamber (52) and the optical device/lens assembly (10) including the support structure (holding system) and filling arrangement is spaced inside vacuum space (60) in fig 5.
Regarding Claim 6: Jacoby et al. show in fig. 5 that lens assembly/optical device (10) (lens device) is disposed within a vacuum chamber (52) during filling under vacuum. [claims- claim 14 Jacoby et al.]. Something under vacuum refers to a pressure lower than ambient.
Regarding Claim 7: Jacoby et al. disclose in fig 5 that the lens assembly/optical device (10) (lens device) is located inside vacuum chamber (52). When optical device is located inside a vacuum chamber during operation, the optical device, in which the enclosure (16) (internal chamber) is located, will inherit the same vacuum pressure as the vacuum chamber. [claim 14 Jacoby et al.]
Regarding Claim 8: Jacoby et al. disclose that vacuum chamber (52) and the optical device (10) including the support structure and filling arrangement is spaced inside vacuum space (60) in fig 5. The needle subassembly (28) including needle (23) (filling needle; part of the dispensing system), which penetrates fluid (15) into enclosure (16), is also inside the vacuum chamber (52). [fig 5]
Regarding Claim 15: Jacoby et al. discloses lens meter (40a, 40b) (measurement system) that measures the optical power of membrane (11) (lens zone). [para 0089; Fig. 6c, 6d, 6e]
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.
5. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jacoby et al. (US 20210026044 A1) as applied to claims 1 above, and further in view of Doud et al. (US 20180243130 A1).
Regarding Claim 3: Jacoby et al. disclose a lens filling apparatus as described above in paragraph 4. Jacoby et al. do not the distal end of the vent needle penetrates into the inside of the internal chamber of the device.
However, Doud et al. teach a fluid exchange apparatus that is comprised of a syringe including a needle (vent needle) which is positioned inside a chamber (440) (internal chamber). Syringe (300) draws fluid from chamber (440) through needle (330) by extending into chamber (440) [para 0206; fig 23A]. Doud et al. also suggest that the syringe (300) can be used to inject fluid as well [para 0129]. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to fluidly couple the syringe including the needle into the vacuum pump of Jacoby et al. and place it inside the lens enclosure taught by Jacoby et al. because Doud et al. teach that the needle assists in displacing fluid from receiver container and injecting fluids depending on the needs as shown below in annotated Fig 23A [para 0206, 0129].
PNG
media_image1.png
601
628
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Diagram 1
6. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jacoby et al. (US 20210026044 A1) as applied to claims 1 above, and further in view of Andino et al. (US2005/0200034A1) Regarding Claim 3: Jacoby et al. disclose a lens filling apparatus as described above in paragraph 4. Jacoby et al. do not disclose a limitation or a similar structural feature of the filling apparatus that is being claimed in claim 3.
However, Andino et al. teach a mold apparatus that is comprised of a vent needle (42) where one part of the needle is extended into cavity (35) (internal chamber) through an opening (38) and other part of the needle is connected to a vacuum source (vacuum pump) [para 66; fig 1B]. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include the vent needle into the lens filling apparatus Jacoby et al. because Andino et al. teach that vent needle assists in forming haptic bore. [para 66]
7. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jacoby et al. (US 20210026044 A1) as applied to claim 3 above and further in view of Prentice et al. (US 2021/0329820 A1).
Regarding Claim 4: Jacoby et al. and Doud et al. disclose a lens filling apparatus as described above in paragraph 5. However, the combination of Jacoby et al. and Doud et al. do not teach a gantry system. Prentice et al. disclose a dispensing system comprised of a gantry system (44). The gantry system is coupled to a nozzle to apply viscous material to substrate. [claim 1; para 003]. The gantry system can move along X, Y, and Z axes [para 003]. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to couple a gantry into the syringe taught by Doud et al. and include the combination into the invention of Jacoby et al. because Prentice et al. teach that gantry system can move along X, Y, and Z axes [para 003]
8. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jacoby et al. (US 20210026044 A1) in view of Andino et al. (US2005/0200034A1) as applied to claim 3 above and further in view of Prentice et al. (US 2021/0329820 A1).
Regarding Claim 4: Jacoby et al. and Andino et al. disclose a lens filling apparatus as described above in paragraph 6. However, the combination of Jacoby et al. and Andino et al. do not teach a gantry system. Prentice et al. disclose a dispensing system comprised of a gantry system (44). The gantry system is coupled to a nozzle to apply viscous material to substrate. [claim 1; para 003]. The gantry system can move along X, Y, and Z axes [para 003]. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to couple a gantry into the syringe taught by Andino et al. and include the combination into the invention of Jacoby et al. because Prentice et al. teach that gantry system can move along X, Y, and Z axes [para 003]
9. Claims 12, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jacoby et al. (US 20210026044 A1) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Prentice et al. (US 2021/0329820 A1).
Regarding Claim 12: Jacoby et al. disclose a lens filling apparatus as described above in paragraph 4. Jacoby et al. do not teach a gantry system.
However, Prentice et al. disclose a dispensing system comprised of a gantry system (44). The gantry system (44) is coupled to a nozzle/dispensing system (40) to apply viscous material to substrate [claim 1; para 003; para 070; fig 2, 3]. The gantry system can move along X, Y, and Z axes [para 003]. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include a gantry system into the needle (filling needle) taught by Jacoby et al. because Prentice et al. teach that gantry system can move along X, Y, and Z axes [para 003]
Regarding Claim 13: Jacoby et al. disclose a lens filling apparatus as described above in paragraph 4. Jacoby et al. do not teach a gantry system.
However, Prentice et al. disclose a dispensing system comprised of a gantry system (44). The gantry system (44) is coupled to a nozzle/dispensing system (40) to apply viscous material to substrate [claim 1; para 003; para 070; fig 2, 3]. The gantry system can move along X, Y, and Z axes [para 003]. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include a gantry system into the needle disclosed by Jacoby et al. so that the filling needle could be used to penetrate the lens as shown in the diagram below in order to have flexibility during filling because Prentice et al. teach that gantry system can move along X, Y, and Z axes. The gantry system can be included into the invention of Jacoby et al. to penetrate enclosure and support the needle subassembly by attaching it on top of needle subassembly (28) as shown in the annotated figures 6(b) and (c) below.
PNG
media_image2.png
641
883
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
205
650
media_image3.png
Greyscale
10. Claims 14, 27, 28, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jacoby et al. (US 20210026044 A1) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Hoffmann (DE 102016001188 A1).
Regarding claim 14: Jacoby et al. disclose a lens filling apparatus as described above in paragraph 4. The apparatus is comprised of a valve (54) connected between fluid (15) and needle subassembly (28) to control the flow of the fluid being injected into optical device (10) [fig 5]. Jacoby et al. do not teach a needle valve.
However, Hoffmann teaches a coating applicator that is comprised of a needle valve to control delivery of application material (optical material) through outlet nozzle. The valve needle is moved to the left (for closing) and right (for opening) by pneumatically driven piston (14). [para 39-43; fig 4]. When needle valve is opened material flows through outlet nozzle (15). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to substitute a needle valve with the valve taught by Jacoby et al. and position the needle valve between the optical fluid and the needle because Hoffman teaches that closing the valve at the tip of the nozzle would prevent forming leftovers when nozzle stops dispensing. [para 0023]
Regarding claim 27, 28, and 29: Jacoby et al. disclose a lens filling apparatus as described above in paragraph 4. The apparatus is comprised of a valve (54) connected to fluid chamber (51) (dispenser) with fluid (15) (source of fluid) and needle subassembly (28) to control the flow of the fluid being injected into optical device (10) [fig 5]. Vacuum pump (42) creates vacuum in chamber 52. Jacoby et al. do not teach a needle valve connected to fluid dispenser and to the source of optical fluid.
However, Hoffmann teaches a coating applicator that is comprised of a pneumatically triggered needle valve to control delivery of application material through outlet nozzle [para 39-43; fig 4]. When the valve needle is moved to a left direction, in regards to fig 4, by pneumatically driven piston the valve gets to a closed configuration and stops material flow [para 0042]. Hoffmann further teaches that the valve needle is moved to the right, for opening, by pneumatically driven piston (14) which leads to material flow [para 0041; fig 4]. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to substitute a needle valve with the valve taught by Jacoby et al. and connect the needle valve to chamber 52 because Hoffman teaches that the needle valve controls flow of material [para 0002].
11. Claim 15, 18, 19, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jacoby et al. (US 20210026044 A1) as applied to claim 1 and further in view Neal et al. (US20040041978A1)
Regarding Claim 15, 18 and 19: Jacoby et al. disclose a lens filling apparatus as described above in paragraph 4. The apparatus is comprised of lens meter (40a, 40b) (measurement system) to measure the optical power of a lens. Jacoby et al. do not specifically teach the measurement system measures a radius of curvature, the measurement system being a moveable a non-contact probe, and the measurement system is a confocal sensor or a Shack-Hartmann wavefront sensor.
Neal et al. teach a wavefront analysis system (100) (measurement system) to measure an optical power, and radius of curvature of a lens/SUT (140) [para 86, and claim 33]. The measurement system comprised of a light source (110) with a moveable platform (120) (moveable stage), an objective lens (150), an eyepiece lens (170), a processor (190) and a Shack-Hartman Sensor (180). [para 0041-0048; Fig 1]. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include a moveable platform and assemble it into the Shack-Hartmann sensor and further include the combination into the lens filling apparatus of Jacoby et al. because Neal et al. teach that the moveable platform helps adjusts positioning relative to lens or the holder of the lens SUT and a Shack-Hartman sensor has a greater dynamic range [para 45-46] and provides accurate measurements [para 11-15]
Regarding Claim 21: Jacoby et al. disclose an apparatus to fill a lens as described above in paragraph 4. The apparatus is comprised of lens meter (40a, 40b) (measurement system) to measure the optical power of a lens. Jacoby et al. do not specifically teach that the measurement system is configured to monitor the lens zone of the lens device simultaneously and in real-time during filling of the internal chamber with the filling needle.
However, Neal et al. teach a wavefront analysis system (100) (measurement system) comprised of a Shack-Hartmann sensor. The sensor continuously tracks (monitoring) focal spot positions across different frames to measure changes of wavefront shapes when a component changes optical characteristics (filling lens with liquid enlarges a lens) such as material heating or deformation. Neal et al. also teach that tracking is frequently performed when frames are taken frequently, thereby establishes real time monitoring of a lens [para 15-19]. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include a wavefront analysis system into the invention of Jacoby et al. because Neal et al. teach that the wavefront analysis system is configured to determine focal length of a lens/SUT [para 60].
12. Claim 22 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Jacoby et al. (US 20210026044 A1) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Ben Nun (US 20070244561A1).
Regarding Claim 22: Jacoby et al. disclose a lens filling apparatus as described above in paragraph 4. Jacoby et al. do not specifically teach a AIOL assembly having a recess and a central aperture.
However, Ben Nun discloses an Accommodating Intraocular Lens (AIOL), and AIOL assemblies. The AIOL assembly includes a central aperture (73) and grooves (63) (recess). The groove (63) is structured in a way such that lens (74) can fit into the assembly (33). Fig 5 depicts the expanded view of different parts that can fit within the AIOL assembly. Fig 5 also suggests that lens (74) will be positioned over the central aperture (73). Fig 11 shows when every element of fig 5 is assembled together. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to substitute the AIOL assembly with the lens assembly of Jacoby et al. for the purpose of alignment and secure position of a lens while providing access to the enclosure of the lens for filling or measuring through central aperture. (In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982); MPEP 2143(I)(B) and 2144.06)
The simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Wasiqul Haq whose telephone number is (571)272-9973. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9am-5pm ET.
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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at (571) 272-1295. 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.
/WASIQUL HAQ/Examiner, Art Unit 1717
/Dah-Wei D. Yuan/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1717