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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 6/5/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
This Office action is in response to Applicant’s response of 6/5/2026. In that response, Applicant amended claims 1, 10, 16, 32, 71.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: “302” in Fig. 3A.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
The objection to claims 10 and 16 has been overcome.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The rejection of claim 32 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) has been overcome.
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.
Claims 1, 10, 12, 14-18, 23, 25-26, 28, 30, 33-35, 71, 209 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brenan et al. (US 2019/0227342, hereinafter, “Brenan”) in view of Holden et al. (US 2015/0316788, hereinafter, “Holden”).
Regarding claim 1, Brenan discloses an ophthalmic lens 500 configured to correct or treat at least one condition of the eye (Fig. 5A, 5B, [0083]) comprising:
a central optical zone 506 about and including an optical axis of the ophthalmic lens, the central optical axis having a first power profile 802 across the central optical zone (Fig. 5A, 8A, [0083], [0098]);
a peripheral optical zone 508 (Fig. 5A, [0083]);
a plurality of annular concentric optical zones in the peripheral optical zone selected to modify the base power profile and to form one or more off-axis focal points 948, 949 in front of, on, or behind a retinal image plane and reduce a focal point energy level at one or more image planes (Fig. 9D, [0083], [0087]-[0090], [0098], [0104]). Here, because the focal points are away (i.e., in front) of the retinal image plane, the energy level at the retinal image plane is reduced);
wherein the plurality of annular concentric optical zones are located on a front surface or a back surface of the peripheral optical zone (Fig. 5B);
wherein each annular concentric optical zone comprises a cyclical power profile, and the cyclical power profile includes oscillations (Fig. 8A, [0098], different concentric zones in the treatment zone 804 comprise (under the reasonable interpretation principle) optical power with cyclic/oscillatory changes where the power increases and decreases along the peripheral zone).
Brenan does not disclose a base power profile to correct distance refractive error of the eye; wherein the first power profile of the central optical zone is different to the base power profile; and
each annular concentric optical zone comprises a cyclical power profile and the cyclic power profile includes oscillations incorporating
a "m" component that is relatively more negative in power than a most negative power of the base power profile and relatively more negative in power than a most negative power of the first power profile; and
a "p" component that is relatively more positive in power than a most positive power of the base power profile and relatively more positive in power than a most positive power of the first power profile of the ophthalmic lens.
Holden discloses an ophthalmic lens comprising a central zone 511 and a peripheral zone 110 (Fig. 6, [0048]). In Holden, the central zone has a first power profile 102, 104. The lens also has a base power profile 101 that corrects distance refractive error of the eye. The first power profile 102, 104 is different than the base profile 101. Moreover, the power profile of the peripheral zone has a p component 118 that is more positive than a most positive value 1.00 of the first power profile and a most positive value 117 of the base power profile.
Both Brenan and Holden disclose ophthalmic lenses.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the present application to modify Brenan so that the optical zone of the central zone has a first power profile different than a base power profile of the lens, as taught by Holden, for correcting the refractive error of the eye by changing the base profile and the profile of the central zone according to desired requirements.
In the above modified Brenan/Holden lens, each annular concentric optical zone of the peripheral zone has a "m" component (i.e., 804) that is relatively more negative in power than a most negative power of the first power profile (Fig. 8A in Brenan, the corrective zones 804 have power profiles more negative than the power profile 802 of the central zone).
Brenan/Holden does not disclose that the corrective zones 804 have power profiles more negative than the base power profile.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the present application to modify Brenan/Holden so that the corrective zones 804 have power profiles more negative than the base power profile, for correcting the refractive error of the eye according to desired requirements.
Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the present application to modify Brenan/Holden so that corrective annular zones 804 have power profiles more positive than the base power profile and the first power profile of the central optical zone, as taught by Holden, for correcting the refractive error of the eye according to desired requirements.
Regarding claim 10, Brenan/Holden discloses the ophthalmic lens of claim 1, wherein
each annular concentric optical zone comprises a line curvature (Fig. 5B in Brenan, the treatment zone 508 comprises a line curvature).
Regarding claim 12, Brenan/Holden discloses the ophthalmic lens of claim 1 comprising annular concentric optical zones (Fig. 5A in Brenan).
Brenan/Holden doers not disclose each of the zones is between 20-2000 μm wide.
However, Brenan/Holden discloses diameters of the central zone 506, and the treatment
zone 508 ([0083] in Brenan).
The parameter of the width of the annular zones is a result-effective variable, i.e., it is recognized to achieve a recognized result, for example, effecting the power profile, which effects the optical performance, see Fig. 8A in Brenan.
Brenan/Holden discloses the claimed invention except for the range for the width of the annular zone.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the present application to modify Brenan/Holden so that the width of the annular zone lies within the claimed range, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A. 1955).
In the current instance, the width of the annular zone is an art recognized result-effective variable in that it effects the optical performance of the lens.
Thus, one would have been motivated to optimize the width of the annular zone because it is an art-recognized result-effective variable and it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP §2144.05(II)(B) “after KSR, the presence of a known result-effective variable would be one, but not the only, motivation for a personal of ordinary skill in the art to experiment to reach another workable product or process”.
Regarding claim 14, Brenan/Holden discloses the ophthalmic lens of claim 1, wherein
a net resultant power profile of the plurality of annular concentric optical zones of the peripheral optical zone is at least one of relatively more positive in power than the first power profile, relatively more negative in power than the first power profile, or the same power as the first power profile (Fig. 8A in Brenan).
Regarding claim 15, Brenan/Holden discloses the ophthalmic lens of claim 1, wherein
each annular concentric optical zone is with an adjacent annular concentric optical zone (Fig. 5B in Brenan).
Regarding claim 16, Brenan/Holden discloses the ophthalmic lens of claim 1, wherein
each annular concentric optical zone is spaced apart from one another so as to create an alternating pattern where the base power profile alternates with each annular concentric optical zone (Fig. 15B in Brenan).
Regarding claim 17, Brenan/Holden discloses the ophthalmic lens of claim 1, wherein
the plurality of annular concentric optical zones are configured so that the innermost and outermost portions of at least one of the annular concentric optical zones is geometrically normal to the front surface (Fig. 5B in Brenan) or the back surface and provides a lateral separation of the off-axis focal points formed by the annular concentric optical zones from the optical axis (Fig. 9C, [0083] in Brenan).
Regarding claim 18, Brenan/Holden discloses the ophthalmic lens of claim 1, wherein
the light energy image quality formed by the plurality annular concentric optical zones is substantially similar or dissimilar (Fig. 5B, the annular zones form a focal ring which means the energy created at the focal points from the annular zones is similar, [0030] in Brenan).
Regarding claim 23, Brenan/Holden discloses the ophthalmic lens of claim 1, wherein
an interference from light rays created by the plurality of annular concentric optical zones increases or decreases from an anterior most image plane from the retina to a posterior most image plane or decreases from the retinal image plane or another image plane to at least one of the anterior most image plane and at least one of the posterior most image plane (Fig. 10A, 10B in Brenan, the interference of rays from the annular zones increases from the anterior most image plane from retina to the posterior most).
Regarding claim 25, Brenan/Holden discloses the ophthalmic lens of claim 1, wherein
any combination of one or more of the number of annular concentric optical zones or width or sagittal power profile and/or tangential power profile and/or boundary power profile or m:p ratio or P-to-V value or surface curvature or lateral separation or spacing or surface location of the annular concentric optical zones are used to provide a condition to extend depth of focus, to reduce focal point energy levels, to reduce/minimize light interference on in-focus images by out-of-focus images or to reduce, mitigate, or prevent one or more night vision disturbances (the width, separation, curvature of the optical zones is used to reduce myopia, Fig. 8A, 8B, [0098], [0099], [0143] in Brenan).
Regarding claim 26, Brenan/Holden discloses the ophthalmic lens of claim 1, wherein
the ophthalmic lens provides, at least in part, an extended depth of focus within the useable vergence ranges encountered by a user of the ophthalmic lens (Fig. 9C, 9D, focal points are extended in front of retina, [0103], [0104] in Brenan).
Regarding claim 28, Brenan/Holden discloses the ophthalmic lens of claim 1, wherein
the ophthalmic lens is configured to provide a low light energy formed on the retina (Fig. 9D in Brenan, the one on-axis focal point 944 formed on the retina has a low light energy due to the existence of additional ring focal points 948, 949. The light energy transmitted through the annular zones is distributed to a plurality of spots).
Regarding claim 30, Brenan/Holden discloses the ophthalmic lens of claim 1, wherein
the ophthalmic lens has a uniform light ray intensity distribution across a retinal spot diagram (Fig. 9D, [0104] in Brenan, a single focal point 944 is formed at the retina).
Regarding claim 33, Brenan/Holden discloses the ophthalmic lens of claim 1.
Brenan/Holden does not disclose wherein the central optical zone has a half-chord diameter of 5 mm, 4 mm, 3 mm, 2 mm, 1.75 mm, 1.5 mm, 1.25 mm, 1.0 mm, 0.5 mm, 0.25 mm, 0.1 mm or less.
However, Brenan/Holden discloses that the diameter of the central zone 506 may be 4 mm ([0083] in Brenan).
The parameter of the width of the central zone is a result-effective variable, i.e., it is recognized to achieve a recognized result, for example, effecting the power profile, which effects the optical performance, see Fig. 8A in Brenan.
Brenan/Holden discloses the claimed invention except for the range for the width of the central zone.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the present application to modify Brenan/Holden so that the width of the central zone lies within the claimed range, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A. 1955).
In the current instance, the width of the central zone is an art recognized result-effective variable in that it effects the optical performance of the lens.
Thus, one would have been motivated to optimize the width of the central zone because it is an art-recognized result-effective variable and it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP §2144.05(II)(B) “after KSR, the presence of a known result-effective variable would be one, but not the only, motivation for a personal of ordinary skill in the art to experiment to reach another workable product or process”.
Regarding claim 34, Brenan/Holden discloses the ophthalmic lens of claim 1, wherein
the plurality of annular concentric zones are configured to reduce, mitigate or prevent one or more night vision disturbances ([0082] in Brenan).
Regarding claim 35, Brenan/Holden discloses the ophthalmic lens of claim 1, wherein
the ophthalmic lens is one of a contact lens, an intraocular lens, and/or a spectacle lens ([0001] in Brenan).
Regarding claim 71, Brenan discloses an ophthalmic lens 500 comprising:
a front surface (Fig. 5B, [0083]);
a back surface (Fig. 5B, [0083]);
a central optical zone 506 about and including an optical axis of the ophthalmic lens (Fig. 5A, [0083]);
an annular peripheral optical zone 508 surrounding the central optical zone 506 (Fig. 5B, [0083]); and
an optical design formed on at least one of the front surface or the back surface of the ophthalmic lens (Fig. 5B, [0083]);
wherein the optical design comprises a first power profile 802 across the central optical zone that forms at least one focal point along the optical axis (Fig. 8A, 9A, [0098], [0101]), and
wherein the optical design comprises a second power profile 804 in the annular peripheral optical zone comprising at least one or more annular conjoined optical zones that have a cyclical power profile, the cyclical power profile including oscillations incorporating a "m" component that is relatively more negative in power than the first power profile 802 of the ophthalmic lens (Fig. 8A, [0098], different concentric zones in the treatment zone 804 comprise (under the reasonable interpretation principle) optical power with cyclic/oscillatory changes where the power increases and decreases along the peripheral zone), and
form one or more off-axis focal points 948, 949 (Fig. 9D, [0083], [0087]-[0090], [0098], [0104]).
Brenan doers not disclose a base power profile to correct distance refractive error of the eye, the base power profile being different than the first power profile; and
the optical design comprises a second power profile in the annular peripheral optical zone comprising at least one or more annular conjoined optical zones that have a cyclical power profile, the cyclical power profile including oscillations incorporating a p component that is relatively more positive in power than a most positive power within the first power profile of the ophthalmic lens.
Holden discloses an ophthalmic lens comprising a central zone 511 and a peripheral zone 110 (Fig. 6, [0048]). In Holden, the central zone has a first power profile 102, 104. The lens also has a base power profile 101 that corrects distance refractive error of the eye. The first power profile 102, 104 is different than the base profile 101. Moreover, the power profile of the peripheral zone has a p component 118 that is more positive than a most positive value 1.00 of the first power profile and a most positive value 117 of the base power profile.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the present application to modify Brenan so that the optical zone of the central zone has a first power profile different than a base power profile of the lens, as taught by Holden, for correcting the refractive error of the eye by changing the base profile and the profile of the central zone according to desired requirements.
Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the present application to modify Brenan/Holden so that corrective annular zones 804 have power profiles more positive than the base power profile and the first power profile of the central optical zone, as taught by Holden, for correcting the refractive error of the eye according to desired requirements.
Regarding claim 209, Brenan/Holden discloses the ophthalmic lens of claim 1,
wherein a power range between an absolute power of the "m" component and an absolute power of the "p" component of the cyclical power profile are constant in at least one direction across at least two or more of the plurality of annular concentric optical zones (Fig. 6 in Holden discloses the power across the peripheral optic zone from the center, implying that a difference between p and m peaks is the same across multiple zones along a particular direction from the center).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brenan/Holden in view of Bakaraju et al. (US 2014/0104563, hereinafter, “Bakaraju”).
Regarding claim 5, Brenan/Holden discloses the ophthalmic lens of claim 1.
Brenan/Holden does not disclose the ophthalmic lens provides a through focus retinal image quality (RIQ) with one or more independent peaks and wherein there is at least one or more independent peaks.
Bakaraju discloses an ophthalmic lens for treating a refractive error (Abstract). In one embodiment, Bakaraju discloses that a through focus retinal image quality (RIQ) is evaluated using the visual Strehl ratio (as in the present application), [0200]], which may comprise one peak (Fig. 27, [0258]).
Both Brenan and Bakaraju disclose ophthalmic optical lenses.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the present application to modify Brenan/Holden so that the RIQ comprises at least one peak, as taught by Bakaraju, for achieving a desired correction of the refractive error.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brenan, Holden in view of Weeber (US 2021/0286196, hereinafter, “Weeber”).
Regarding claim 9, Brenan/Holden discloses the ophthalmic lens of claim 1.
Brenan/Holden does not disclose the frequency of the cyclical power profile is 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, 20, 50 or 100 cycles/mm.
Weeber discloses an ophthalmic lens 20 configured to correct or treat at least one condition of the eye (Fig. 2A, 2B, [0055]) comprising: a central optical zone round optic axis 24 (Fig. 2A, [0067]); a peripheral optical zone 23 (Fig. 2A, [0068]). In one embodiment, Weeber discloses several cycles per mm in the cyclical power profile (Fig. 8 in Weeber).
Both Brenan and Weeber disclose ophthalmic lenses.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the present application to modify Brenan/Holden so that the cyclical power profile has a particular frequency, as taught by Bakaraju, for achieving a desired correction of the refractive error.
Brenan/Holden discloses the claimed invention except for the claimed range for the frequency of the cyclical power profile.
The parameter of the frequency of the cyclical profile is a result-effective variable, i.e., it is recognized to achieve a recognized result, for example, effecting the power profile, which effects the optical performance, see Fig. 8A in Brenan.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the present application to modify Brenan/Holden so that the frequency of the cyclical power profile lies within the claimed range, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A. 1955).
In the current instance, the frequency of the cyclical profile is an art recognized result-effective variable in that it effects the optical performance of the lens.
Thus, one would have been motivated to optimize the frequency of the cyclical power profile because it is an art-recognized result-effective variable and it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP §2144.05(II)(B) “after KSR, the presence of a known result-effective variable would be one, but not the only, motivation for a personal of ordinary skill in the art to experiment to reach another workable product or process”.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 4, 7, 8, 31, 32 are 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 any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 3, Brenan or Holden is silent as to disclosing an ophthalmic lens with a focus retinal image quality (RIQ) with the claimed maximum value within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 4, Brenan or Holden is silent as to disclosing an ophthalmic lens with a RIQ with the claimed area of one or more of the independent peaks.
Regarding claim 7, Brenan or Holden is silent as to disclosing an ophthalmic lens with the peak-to-valley power range between the absolute powers of the “m” and “p” component of the cyclical power profile in the sagittal direction being in the claimed region.
Regarding claim 8, Brenan or Holden is silent as to disclosing an ophthalmic lens with the peak-to-valley power range between the absolute powers of the “m” and “p” component of the cyclical power profile in the tangential direction being in the claimed region.
Regarding claim 31, Brenan or Holden is silent as to disclosing an ophthalmic lens with the claimed distribution of the total enclosed energy that results at the retinal image plane at the retinal spot diagram.
Regarding claim 32, Brenan or Holden is silent as to disclosing an ophthalmic lens with the particular characteristics of the average slope of the total enclosed energy that results at the retinal image plane.
Response to Applicant’s Arguments
Regarding independent claim 1 (similarly for independent claim 71), Applicant has amended said claim to recite, in part, “ a central optical zone about and including an optical axis of the ophthalmic lens, the central optical zone having a first power profile across the central optical zone the cyclical power profile includes oscillations incorporating a "m" component that is relatively more negative in power than a most negative power of the base power profile and relatively more negative in power than a most negative power of the first power profile and a "p" component that is relatively more positive in power than a most positive power of the base power profile and relatively more positive in power than a most positive power of the first power profile of the ophthalmic lens”, and stated that “The Holden reference does not disclose and therefore does not remedy the deficiencies of Brenan not disclosing at least these features of claim 1 as amended. Similar features are recited in amended independent claim 71”. See pp. 1-2 of the remarks.
Applicant's above argument has been fully considered but it is not persuasive. As explained in detail above, the combination of Brenan and Holden discloses an ophthalmic lens with a central zone with a first power profile, a base power profile different than the first power profile and a peripheral zone with a power profile having positive and negative peaks larger than the respective peaks of the first power profile and the base power profile.
The rejection of claims 1 and 71 and their dependents is maintained.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEONIDAS BOUTSIKARIS whose telephone number is (703)756-4529. The Examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fr. 9.00-5.00.
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 on 571-272-2334. 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.
/L.B./
Patent Examiner, AU 2872
/STEPHONE B ALLEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights