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 filed 06/29/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues, that “However, the image construction device 220 of Kobayashi does not analyze still images included in a moving image generated by the surgical microscope. Therefore, it would not have been obvious to have combined that feature of Kobayashi with the other cited references to have obtained that claimed feature of the invention.”.
The Examiner disagrees. Applicant is reminded that Kobayashi teaches an analyzing processor (image construction device and data processor 230, in conjunction with information generator 231, and main controller 211) configured to sequentially analyze a plurality of still images included in the moving image generated by the surgical microscope being moved relative to the subject’s eye (“The image construction device 220 constructs an image based on the output from the DAQ 130 (that is, based on the sampling result of detection signals). For example, as in the conventional swept source OCT, the image construction device 220 applies signal processing to the spectral distribution formed from the sampling result for each A-line to form the reflection intensity profile for each A-line. Then, the image construction device 220 creates a plurality of pieces of image data from the reflection intensity profiles for a plurality of A-lines and arranges the plurality of pieces of image data along a scan line.”, a moving image is a concatenation of still images or a frame rate of still images, thus analyzing pieces of image data is analyzing a plurality of still images from a moving image) [Par 53]. Further, in response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Applicant also argues, “Fukuma fails to teach or suggest that the brightness corresponds to a brightness of images of a predetermined site sequentially detected from a moving image generated by a surgical microscope. In addition, in the Auto-Z function of Fukuma, the optical path length difference is adjusted based on a displacement between a depth-direction position of a predetermined tissue in an OCT tomographic image and a target region. The adjustment is not based on a change in brightness of images sequentially detected by an analyzing processor.”
The Examiner disagrees and points applicant to Fukuma which states: “…the same positions of the fundus Ef are repeatedly scanned… the depth wise position (position in the z-direction (depth wise direction)) in the frame at which the image of a prescribed tissue (e.g. the surface of the fundus, a layer tissue with high brightness) of the fundus Ef is depicted… Furthermore, the information determining part 214 calculates the displacement between the specified depthwise position and the target area. The main controller 211 adjusts the difference of the optical path length between the signal light LS and the reference light LR such that the calculated displacement is cancelled, that is, such that the image of the prescribed tissue is depicted in the target area.”, in other words determine part 214 performs brightness based A-scan evaluations while simultaneously repeatedly scanning the fundus to located the changing location of a specific high brightness layer tissue, and thus a change in brightness of certain image regions, to control the “auto-z function” which calculates and performs path length adjustment to cancel the displacement or change in said scans to the keep said high brightness tissue in the target area, ) [Par 125-129].
Applicant also argues, “Further, Fukuma fails to teach or suggest determining a direction or amount of movement based on a change in brightness of images.
Also, even in Fukuma's position matching using a moving image of the anterior eye
segment or a front image, the control is based on a displacement between the eye and the optical system or on a user-designated position. The position matching of Fukuma is not based on a change in brightness.”.
The Examiner again disagrees, and points to where Fukuma discloses, “…the depth wise position (position in the z-direction (depth wise direction)) in the frame at which the image of a prescribed tissue (e.g. the surface of the fundus, a layer tissue with high brightness) of the fundus Ef is depicted… Furthermore, the information determining part 214 calculates the displacement between the specified depthwise position and the target area. The main controller 211 adjusts the difference of the optical path length between the signal light LS and the reference light LR such that the calculated displacement is cancelled, that is, such that the image of the prescribed tissue is depicted in the target area.” [Par 127]. In other words, the displacement of the prescribe tissue is being determined by the change in location of the high brightness layer tissues. Thus “brightness” is an identifiable factor for calculating said displacement because brightness is a function of contrast and is necessary for any structure identification in visual images.
Applicant also argues, “Fukuma describes an optical-path-length
changing part 41 that is an internal component for changing the length of the OCT measurement optical path. However, the optical-path-length changing part 41 of Fukuma is not a movement mechanism configured to move a surgical microscope relative to a subject's eye.”
The Examiner disagrees and points to Kobayashi already teaching the limitation of a movement mechanism configured to move a surgical microscope relative to a subject's eye (“OCT focus driver 43A moves the OCT focusing lens 43, the reference driver 114A moves the corner cube 114, and the movement mechanism 150 moves the fundus camera unit 2 in a three dimensional manner.”) [Par 44 and 79]. Applicant is reminded that one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Applicant also argues, that “Additionally, the optical-path-length change of Fukuma does not include an ability to move a microscope in a determined direction (which is one of any possible directions) and a determined amount with respect to a position of a subject's eye. Further, Fukuma fails to suggest determining such a direction based on brightness of sequentially detected images.”.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Kobayashi already teaches the movement of the microscope relative to the subject’s eye in any of three directions [Par 44 and 79], and Fukuma does in fact teach, “the depth wise position (position in the z-direction (depth wise direction)) in the frame at which the image of a prescribed tissue (e.g. the surface of the fundus, a layer tissue with high brightness) of the fundus Ef is depicted… Furthermore, the information determining part 214 calculates the displacement between the specified depthwise position and the target area. The main controller 211 adjusts the difference of the optical path length between the signal light LS and the reference light LR such that the calculated displacement is cancelled, that is, such that the image of the prescribed tissue is depicted in the target area.” [Par 127]. In other words, the displacement of the prescribe tissue is being determined by the change in location of the high brightness layer tissues. Thus “brightness” is an identifiable factor for calculating said displacement because brightness is a function of contrast and is necessary for any structure identification in visual images.
Applicant is reminded that one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Thus the previous rejections are sustained.
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) 1-16, 18-19, and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi (US 20190076012 A1), in view of Fukuma (US 20140300863 A1).
Re Claim 1 Kobayashi discloses on Fig. 1, and 3-5, an ophthalmic observation apparatus for observing a subject's eye, comprising: a surgical microscope (ophthalmic apparatus of Fig. 1) including an objective lens (objective lens 22) [Par 22] configured to generate a moving image by illuminating and photographing the subject's eye [Par 20]; a movement mechanism (movement mechanism 150 and focus optical system 60) configured to move the surgical microscope relative to the subject’s eye (“movement mechanism 150 moves the fundus camera unit 2 in a three dimensional manner” and “The focus optical system 60 is moved along the optical path of the illumination optical system 10 (called the illumination optical path)” which are all relative to the eye E in Fig. 1) [Par 44];
an analyzing processor (image construction device and data processor 230, in conjunction with information generator 231, and main controller 211) configured to sequentially analyze a plurality of still images included in the moving image generated by the surgical microscope being moved relative to the subject’s eye (“The image construction device 220 constructs an image based on the output from the DAQ 130 (that is, based on the sampling result of detection signals). For example, as in the conventional swept source OCT, the image construction device 220 applies signal processing to the spectral distribution formed from the sampling result for each A-line to form the reflection intensity profile for each A-line. Then, the image construction device 220 creates a plurality of pieces of image data from the reflection intensity profiles for a plurality of A-lines and arranges the plurality of pieces of image data along a scan line. “) [Par 53],
by the movement mechanism to sequentially detect images of a predetermined site of the subject's eye (“For example, the data processor 230 executes construction of three dimensional image data (e.g., stack data, volume data) from raster scan data, rendering of three dimensional image data, image correction, image analysis according to analysis application software. “) [Par 54-55];
and a first controller circuit (main controller 211) configured to control the movement mechanism to move the surgical microscope in a movement amount and direction to change a position of the surgical microscope relative to the subject’s eye (controller 211 controls focus optical system 30 which can be seen in Fig. 1 moving in a focusing direction, wherein the definition of focus that the lens system is at an optimal focal length and thus moved a specific amount, and movement mechanism 150, it can be seen in Fig. 1 that any movement by lens system 30 would be relative to the subject’s eye E, further in related to Fig. 1-3a : “OCT focus driver 43A moves the OCT focusing lens 43, the reference driver 114A moves the corner cube 114, and the movement mechanism 150 moves the fundus camera unit 2 in a three dimensional manner.”) [Par 44 and 79],
the movement direction being any one or more of a vertical direction, a horizontal direction, and a front/back direction with respect to the subject's eye (“The OCT focusing lens 43 is moved along the optical path of the measurement light LS in order to adjust the focus of the OCT optical system. The movement of the photography focusing lens 31, the movement of the focus optical system 60, and the movement of the OCT focusing lens 43 can be controlled in an interlocking manner.”...“OCT focus driver 43A moves the OCT focusing lens 43, the reference driver 114A moves the corner cube 114, and the movement mechanism 150 moves the fundus camera unit 2 in a three dimensional manner.”) [Par 31, 44, and 79],
as determined by the image detected by the analyzing processor (“Two alignment bright spot images are depicted in the observation image. The examiner (or the ophthalmologic apparatus 1) adjusts the position of the main body of the apparatus in such a manner that the two alignment bright spot images overlap with each other and are depicted within a target area (defined by brackets, for example) displayed at the center of the frames.”… “The main controller 211 controls the focus optical system 60 to project the split indicator. The examiner (or the ophthalmologic apparatus 1) performs the optical path length adjustment (e.g., the adjustment of at least one of the position of the optical path length changing device 41 and the position of the corner cube 114), the polarization adjustment (e.g., the control of at least one of the polarization controllers 103 and 118), the light amount adjustment (e.g., the control of the attenuator 120), the focus adjustment (e.g., the adjustment of the position of the OCT focusing lens 43), and other adjustments.)[Par 78-79].
But Kobayashi does not explicitly disclose, controlling the movement mechanism based on a change in brightness of the images sequentially detected by the analyzing processor, wherein the first controller circuit controls the movement mechanism to move the surgical microscope in the movement amount and the movement direction to change the position of the surgical microscope relative to the subject's eye based on the change in the brightness of the images sequentially detected by the analyzing processor, as determined based on the change in the brightness of the images sequentially detected by the analyzing processor.
However, within the same field of endeavor, Fukuma teaches, on Fig. 1 and 3, that it is desirable in ophthalmologic apparatuses to include controlling the movement mechanism (optical path length changing part 41) [Par 281] based on a change in brightness of the images sequentially detected by the analyzing processor controlling the movement mechanism based on a change in brightness of the images sequentially detected by the analyzing processor, wherein the first controller circuit controls the movement mechanism to move the surgical microscope in the movement amount and the movement direction to change the position of the surgical microscope relative to the subject's eye based on the change in the brightness of the images sequentially detected by the analyzing processor (information determining part 214 uses brightness of sequential images, which correspond to scanning positions to determine and change position of length changing part 41, and since the patients eye E can be seen in Fig. 1, any movement by element 41 would be relative the patients eye E, further:
“The information determining part 214 analyzes respective A-scan images included in a cross sectional image to calculate an evaluation value of image quality, and compares this evaluation value with a threshold. When the evaluation value is equal to or less than the threshold, the information determining part 214 determines that this A-scan image is not appropriate. The information determining part 214 carries out this process for all A-scan images, thereby obtaining the distribution of A-scan images (that is, scanning positions) determined to be appropriate and A-scan images (that is, scanning positions) determined to be not appropriate… It should be noted that this threshold may be defined in advance, or set in the determination process… For example, it is possible to obtain the evaluation value based on distribution of brightness in an A-scan image… Another example of a process carried out by the information determining part 214 is explained… the same positions of the fundus Ef are repeatedly scanned… the depth wise position (position in the z-direction (depth wise direction)) in the frame at which the image of a prescribed tissue (e.g. the surface of the fundus, a layer tissue with high brightness) of the fundus Ef is depicted… Furthermore, the information determining part 214 calculates the displacement between the specified depthwise position and the target area. The main controller 211 adjusts the difference of the optical path length between the signal light LS and the reference light LR such that the calculated displacement is cancelled, that is, such that the image of the prescribed tissue is depicted in the target area.”, in otherwords determing part 214 performs brightness based A-scan evaluations while simultaneously repeatedly scanning the fundus to located the changing location of a specific high brightness layer tissue to control the “auto-z function” which calculates and performs path length adjustment to cancel the displacement or change in said scans to the keep said high brightness tissue in the target area ) [Par 125-129]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify the system of Kobayashi with Fukuma, so that the image of the prescribed tissue is depicted in the target area, as taught by Fukuma [Par 127].
Re Claim 2, Kobayashi in view of Fukuma discloses, the ophthalmic observation apparatus according to claim 1, and Kobayashi further discloses on Fig. 1, and 3-5, wherein the first controller circuit (Controller 211) is configured to control the movement mechanism to stop movement of the surgical microscope when the brightness of the images sequentially detected by the analyzing processor satisfies a first condition (automatic alignment based on split indicator, would inherently stop microscope alignment of focus optical system 60 once it’s aligned, based on a focus parameter) [Par 26].
Re Claim 3, Kobayashi in view of Fukuma discloses, the ophthalmic observation apparatus according to claim 2, and Fukuma further discloses on Fig. 1, wherein the first condition includes a condition that the brightness is equal to or larger than a first threshold value (“…compares this evaluation value with a threshold. When the evaluation value is equal to or less than the threshold, the information determining part 214 determines that this A-scan image is not appropriate.”, thus above the threshold is appropriate ) [Par 123-125].
Re Claim 4, Kobayashi in view of Fukuma discloses, the ophthalmic observation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the first controller circuit (controller 211) is configured to control the movement mechanism to start movement of the surgical microscope when brightness of the images sequentially detected by the analyzing processor satisfies a condition (automatic alignment based on split indicator, would inherently stop microscope alignment of focus optical system 60 once it’s aligned) [Par 26], the processor satisfies a second condition (below the threshold is not appropriate ) [Par 123]
Re Claim 5, Kobayashi in view of Fukuma discloses, the ophthalmic observation apparatus according to claim 4, and Fukuma further discloses, wherein the second condition includes a condition that the brightness is smaller than a second threshold value (“…equal to or below the threshold is not appropriate”) [Par 123].
Re Claim 6, Kobayashi in view of Fukuma discloses, the ophthalmic observation apparatus according to claim 1, and Kobayashi further discloses on Fig. 1, and 3-5. wherein the first controller circuit (Controller 211) is configured to determine a movement direction of the surgical microscope based on the change in brightness and perform a control of the movement mechanism based on the movement direction determined (automatic alignment based on split indicator, would inherently stop microscope alignment of focus optical system 60 once it’s aligned, based on a focus parameter) [Par 26].
Re Claim 7, Kobayashi in view of Fukuma discloses, the ophthalmic observation apparatus according to claim 1, and Kobayashi further discloses on Fig. 1, and 3-5, wherein the surgical microscope is configured to generate a moving image of an anterior eye segment of the subject's eye (infrared moving image, and image F1 and F2) [Par 20 and Par 51-52], and the predetermined site includes a pupil [Par 30 and 58].
Re Claim 8, Kobayashi in view of Fukuma discloses, the ophthalmic observation apparatus according to claim 1, and Kobayashi further discloses on Fig. 1, and 3-5, wherein the surgical microscope is configured to generate a moving image [Par 20] of a posterior eye segment of the subject's eye (funds Ef by way of fundus camera 2) [Par 18-20], and the predetermined site includes an optic nerve head (fundus image includes the optic nerve head) [Par 18-20].
Re claim 9, Kobayashi in view of Fukuma discloses, the ophthalmic observation apparatus according to claim 1, and Kobayashi further discloses on Fig. 1, and 3-5, wherein the control of the movement mechanism performed by the first controller circuit can be activated and inactivated (manual alignment of focus optical system 60 indicates the change in focus detected, thus split indicator image does not automatically control the movement mechanism to bring the image into focus) [Par 26].
Re Claim 10, Kobayashi in view of Fukuma discloses, the ophthalmic observation apparatus according to claim 1, and Kobayashi further discloses, comprising an informing unit (display 241 that receives split indicator image and alignment indicator produced by alignment optical system 50) [Par 23-26] configured to perform informing when brightness of the images sequentially detected by the analyzing processor satisfies a condition (automatic alignment can be performed) [Par 25], wherein the informing unit includes at least a a light source (“The alignment optical system 50 generates an alignment indicator used for the alignment of the optical system with respect to the subject's eye E. The alignment light output from the LED 51”) [Par 25].
But Kobayashi in view of Fukuma does not explicitly disclose, wherein a image parameter of the images sequentially detected by the analyzing processor satisfies a third condition.
Note that the Court has held that mere duplication of parts has not patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced; In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). The use of at least one optical condition (auto focus alignment would inherently require a condition of the object being in focus) [Par 26] and the auto adjustment of other quantities, like optical path length, polarization adjustment, and light amount adjustment [Par 79], indicates the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art to include conditions in the movement mechanisms, and the expected result of further controlling alignment of optical focus system.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify Kobayashi inv view of Fukuma, such that the processor satisfies a third condition, in order to further control the alignment of the focus system.
Re Claim 11, Kobayashi in view of Fukuma discloses, the ophthalmic observation apparatus according to claim 10, and Kobayashi further discloses on Fig. 1, and 3-5, further comprising a response receiving (user interface 240) [Par 75] unit that includes a user operation device (touch panel) [Par 75] or a voice recognition device configured to receive a response of the user to the informing, wherein the first controller circuit is configured to perform a control of the movement mechanism based on the response received by the response receiving unit (auto or manual adjustments, and user interface)[Par 75 and 79].
Re Claim 12, Kobayashi in view of Fukuma discloses, the ophthalmic observation apparatus according to claim 1, and further discloses on Fig. 1, further comprising a determining processor (information determining part 214) [Par 125] configured to perform determination of whether or not to perform the control of the movement mechanism based on the change in brightness of the images sequentially detected by the analyzing processor (information determining part 214 uses brightness of images to determine and change position of length changing part 41) [Par 125-129].
The teaching of Kobayashi would inherently comprise, a determining processor, this being reasonably assumed from the disclosure of an automatic alignment based on a split image indicator would require some computational device to process the split indicator and inform the controller to perform the alignment [Par 26].
Re Claim 13, Kobayashi in view of Fukuma discloses, the ophthalmic observation apparatus according to claim 12, and Kobayashi further discloses on Fig. 1, and 3-5, wherein a determining processor is configured to perform the determination based on a image (Split indicator determines auto alignment) [Par 26] and the apparatus captures a moving image [Par 20]
But modified Kobayashi does not disclose, wherein the determining processor is configured to perform the determination based on the moving image generated by the surgical microscope.
However, since Kobayashi does teach a determining processor that is informed by a split indicator image, and the capture of a moving image, as described above, it is within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art to perform movement determination based on still images, and the collection of said still images as moving images. Further one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to use a moving image, to cancel the positional difference between two images [Par 70-71].
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the filing date of the invention to further modify Kobayashi in view of Fukuma such that, the determining processor is configured to perform the determination based on the moving image generated by the surgical microscope, for the benefit of canceling the positional difference between two images.
Re Claim 14, Kobayashi in view of Fukuma discloses, the ophthalmic observation apparatus according to claim 13.
But Kobayashi in view of Fukuma does not explicitly disclose, whether the determining processor is configured to determine whether or not a treatment on the subject's eye is being performed based on the moving image generated by the surgical microscope, and determine not to perform the control of the movement mechanism when it is determined that the treatment is being performed.
However, modified Kobayashi does disclose a determiner (2322) which determines if an error occurs during the comparison of two image pupil, for example the patient’s eyelid is half closed, and compares other parameters between images F1 and F2 [Par 61-62]. One of ordinary skill in the art would be able to utilize Kobayashi’s error determination to also determine if surgery is actively being performed. Further, Kobayashi also discloses auto alignment and movement of optical focus system (60), based on a split indicator image [Par 26]. Thus, it would be within the ability of one of ordinary skill to use Kobayashi’s moving images F1 and F2 and error determination to identify if surgery is actively being performed, and use the results similarly to Kobayashi’s split indicator image, to control autofocus alignment (or to not perform any autofocus. Further one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to use a moving image, to cancel the positional difference between two images [Par 70-71].
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the filing date of the invention to further modify Kobayashi in view of Fukuma such that, wherein the determining processor is configured to determine whether or not a treatment on the subject's eye is being performed based on the moving image generated by the surgical microscope, and determine not to perform the control of the movement mechanism when it is determined that the treatment is being performed, for the benefit of canceling the positional difference between two images.
Re Claim 15, Kobayashi in view of Fukuma discloses, the ophthalmic observation apparatus according to claim 1, and Kobayashi further discloses on Fig. 1, and 3-5, further comprising a second controller circuit (Main control 211 controls separate mechanisms which would comprise separate circuits) configured to perform increasing in an illumination light amount (Turning on and adjusting light amount) [Par 78-79].
Re Claim 16, Kobayashi in view of Fukuma discloses, the ophthalmic observation apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising a third controller circuit configured to decrease an illumination light amount by the surgical microscope (controller 211 comprises multiple circuits related to polarization, focus, and light amount adjustment) [Par 78-79]
But Kobayashi in view of Fukuma does not explicitly disclose wherein the decrease in illumination light is based on a condition that the brightness is included in a predetermined range after the control of the movement mechanism based on the change in a image parameter.
However Kobayashi also discloses, the use of split indicator images for informing autofocus alignment, which would require some form of focus based parameter in the image [Par 26]. Thus it is within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art to utilized image parameters [Par 26] to control movement mechanisms, and use controllers to adjust the amount of light [Par 78-79] in a system, and one of ordinary skill would be able to combine these image parameters, movement control, and light adjustment controls, in the way claimed. Further, one of ordinary skill would be motivated to do so, in order to control the focusing movement [Par 26], relative to the amount of light in the image [Par 78-79].
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kobayashi in view of Fukuma such that, a controller circuit is configured to decrease an illumination light amount by the surgical microscope on condition that a image parameter is included in a predetermined range after the control of the movement mechanism based on the change in brightness, for the benefit of controlling focusing movement based on light amount adjustment.
Re Claim 18, Kobayashi discloses, a method of controlling an ophthalmic observation apparatus including an optical system for observing a subject's eye (ophthalmic system 1) and a processor (processor 230) , the method comprising: causing the ophthalmic observation apparatus to perform movement of the optical system relative to the subject’s eye (movement mechanism 150 and focus optical system 60, “movement mechanism 150 moves the fundus camera unit 2 in a three dimensional manner” and “The focus optical system 60 is moved along the optical path of the illumination optical system 10 (called the illumination optical path)” which are all relative to the eye E in Fig. 1) [Par 26 and 44] and generation of a moving image of the subject's eye (images F1 and F2) [Par 20 and 51-54] by the optical system in parallel; causing the processor to sequentially analyze a plurality of still images included in the moving image [Par 54] to sequentially detect images of a predetermined site of the subject's eye (anterior Ea and funds Ef by way of OTC unit 100 and fundus camera unit 2) [Par 20-25 and 37],
causing the processor (main controller 211) to perform movement of the optical system configured to control the movement mechanism to move the surgical microscope in a movement amount and direction to change a position of the surgical microscope relative to the subject’s eye (controller 211 controls focus optical system 30 which can be seen in Fig. 1 moving in a focusing direction, wherein the definition of focus that the lens system is at an optimal focal length and thus moved a specific amount, and movement mechanism 150, it can be seen in Fig. 1 that any movement by lens system 30 would be relative to the subject’s eye E, further in related to Fig. 1-3a : “OCT focus driver 43A moves the OCT focusing lens 43, the reference driver 114A moves the corner cube 114, and the movement mechanism 150 moves the fundus camera unit 2 in a three dimensional manner.”) [Par 44 and 79],
the movement direction being any one or more of a vertical direction, a horizontal direction, and a front/back direction with respect to the subject's eye (“The OCT focusing lens 43 is moved along the optical path of the measurement light LS in order to adjust the focus of the OCT optical system. The movement of the photography focusing lens 31, the movement of the focus optical system 60, and the movement of the OCT focusing lens 43 can be controlled in an interlocking manner.”...“OCT focus driver 43A moves the OCT focusing lens 43, the reference driver 114A moves the corner cube 114, and the movement mechanism 150 moves the fundus camera unit 2 in a three dimensional manner.”) [Par 31, 44, and 79],
as determined by the image detected by the analyzing processor (“Two alignment bright spot images are depicted in the observation image. The examiner (or the ophthalmologic apparatus 1) adjusts the position of the main body of the apparatus in such a manner that the two alignment bright spot images overlap with each other and are depicted within a target area (defined by brackets, for example) displayed at the center of the frames.”… “The main controller 211 controls the focus optical system 60 to project the split indicator. The examiner (or the ophthalmologic apparatus 1) performs the optical path length adjustment (e.g., the adjustment of at least one of the position of the optical path length changing device 41 and the position of the corner cube 114), the polarization adjustment (e.g., the control of at least one of the polarization controllers 103 and 118), the light amount adjustment (e.g., the control of the attenuator 120), the focus adjustment (e.g., the adjustment of the position of the OCT focusing lens 43), and other adjustments.)[Par 78-79].
But Kobayashi does not explicitly disclose, controlling the movement mechanism based on a change in brightness of the images sequentially detected by the analyzing processor, wherein the first controller circuit controls the movement mechanism to move the surgical microscope in the movement amount and the movement direction to change the position of the surgical microscope relative to the subject's eye based on the change in the brightness of the images sequentially detected by the analyzing processor, as determined based on the change in the brightness of the images sequentially detected by the analyzing processor.
However, within the same field of endeavor, Fukuma teaches, on Fig. 1 and 3, that it is desirable in ophthalmologic apparatuses to include controlling the movement mechanism (optical path length changing part 41) [Par 281] based on a change in brightness of the images sequentially detected by the analyzing processor controlling the movement mechanism based on a change in brightness of the images sequentially detected by the analyzing processor, wherein the first controller circuit controls the movement mechanism to move the surgical microscope in the movement amount and the movement direction to change the position of the surgical microscope relative to the subject's eye based on the change in the brightness of the images sequentially detected by the analyzing processor, as determined based on the change in the brightness of the images sequentially detected by the analyzing processor (information determining part 214 uses brightness of sequential images, which correspond to scanning positions to determine and change position of length changing part 41, and since the patients eye E can be seen in Fig. 1, any movement by element 41 would be relative the patients eye E, further:
“The information determining part 214 analyzes respective A-scan images included in a cross sectional image to calculate an evaluation value of image quality, and compares this evaluation value with a threshold. When the evaluation value is equal to or less than the threshold, the information determining part 214 determines that this A-scan image is not appropriate. The information determining part 214 carries out this process for all A-scan images, thereby obtaining the distribution of A-scan images (that is, scanning positions) determined to be appropriate and A-scan images (that is, scanning positions) determined to be not appropriate… It should be noted that this threshold may be defined in advance, or set in the determination process… For example, it is possible to obtain the evaluation value based on distribution of brightness in an A-scan image… Another example of a process carried out by the information determining part 214 is explained… the same positions of the fundus Ef are repeatedly scanned… the depth wise position (position in the z-direction (depth wise direction)) in the frame at which the image of a prescribed tissue (e.g. the surface of the fundus, a layer tissue with high brightness) of the fundus Ef is depicted… Furthermore, the information determining part 214 calculates the displacement between the specified depthwise position and the target area. The main controller 211 adjusts the difference of the optical path length between the signal light LS and the reference light LR such that the calculated displacement is cancelled, that is, such that the image of the prescribed tissue is depicted in the target area.”, in otherwords determing part 214 performs brightness based A-scan evaluations while simultaneously repeatedly scanning the fundus to located the changing location of a specific high brightness layer tissue to control the “auto-z function” which calculates and performs path length adjustment to cancel the displacement or change in said scans to the keep said high brightness tissue in the target area ) [Par 125-129]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify the system of Kobayashi with Fukuma, so that the image of the prescribed tissue is depicted in the target area, as taught by Fukuma [Par 127].
Re Claim 19, Kobayashi in view of Fukuma discloses the method of claim 18, and Kobayashi further discloses, a computer-readable non-transitory recording medium storing a program configured to cause a computer to execute the method [Par 19].
Re Claim 22, Kobayashi in view of Fukuma discloses, the ophthalmic observation apparatus according to claim I, and Kobayashi further discloses on Fig. 1 and 3a, wherein the surgical microscope includes an illumination optical system (illumination optical system 10) and an observation optical system (photographing optical system 30), and the movement mechanism (movement mechanism 150) is configured to integrally move the first illumination optical system and the observation optical system relative to the subject's eye (movement mechanism 150 moves fundus camera unit 2 which illumination optical system 10 and photographing optical system 30 comprise) [Par 20-22].
Re Claim 23, Kobayashi in view of Fukuma discloses, the ophthalmic observation apparatus according to claim I, and Kobayashi further discloses on Fig. 1 and 3a, wherein the surgical microscope includes a first illumination optical system (photographing light source 15), a second illumination optical system (illumination optical system 10), and an observation optical system (photographing optical system 30), and the movement mechanism (movement mechanism 150) is configured to integrally move the second illumination optical system and the observation optical system relative to the subject's eye (movement mechanism 150 moves fundus camera unit 2 which illumination optical system 10 and photographing optical system 30 comprise) [Par 20-22].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Nakano (US 20140160429 A1) teaches an ophthalmic imaging apparatus.
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 RAY ALEXANDER DEAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4027. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-5:00.
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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571)-272-2713. 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.
/RAY ALEXANDER DEAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/BUMSUK WON/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/
Prosecution Insights