Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/070,539

FUNDUS PHOTOGRAPHING APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Nov 29, 2022
Examiner
DINH, JACK
Art Unit
2872
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Nidek Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
555 granted / 652 resolved
+17.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+5.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
26 currently pending
Career history
678
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.8%
-36.2% vs TC avg
§103
26.2%
-13.8% vs TC avg
§102
38.9%
-1.1% vs TC avg
§112
24.1%
-15.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 652 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1, 2 and 4-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Satake et al. (US 2015/0272434). Regarding claim 1, Satake (figure 2) discloses a fundus photographing apparatus 200 comprising a photographing unit including a front photographing optical system 100 that forms, on a pupil of an examinee's eye E, an illuminating light projection region and an illuminating light receiving region next to each other in a first direction 50-53, the front photographing optical system scanning a fundus of the examinee's eye with illuminating light to acquire a two-dimensional reflection image of the fundus, a driver (operation input unit, mouse, keyboard, [0130]) that moves the photographing unit relative to the examinee's eye, and a processor 90 that switches, between a first alignment mode (arrow direction in the region near reference 30) and a second alignment mode (arrow direction in the region near reference 45/46), a control 74 of guiding a positional relation (movement of the joystick 74a) between the examinee's eye and the photographing unit, the positional relation being guided to a first alignment state (arrow direction in the region near reference 30) in a predetermined positional relationship in the first alignment mode, and being guided to a second alignment state (arrow direction in the region near reference 45/46) displaced at least in a direction crossing the first direction from the first alignment state in the second alignment mode ([0041]-[0042]). Regarding claim 2, Satake (figure 2) further discloses wherein the light projection region and the light receiving region formed next to each other in the first direction are non-concentrically arranged in line (see region 50-53). Regarding claim 4, Satake (figure 2) further discloses wherein the processor acquires pupil information as information regarding a pupil region of the examinee's eye, and guides the positional relation in consideration of the pupil information ([0139]). Regarding claim 5, Satake (figure 2) further discloses wherein the processor acquires, as the pupil information, information regarding a pupil size of the examinee's eye, and according to the pupil size, changes the control of guiding the positional relation based on a fundus observation image which is the two- dimensional reflection image ([0139]). Regarding claim 6, Satake (figure 2) further discloses wherein the photographing unit further includes an OCT optical system 200 that obtains, by photographing, OCT data on the fundus based on an optical interference principle ([0036)], and the processor obtains, by photographing, the OCT data on the fundus and the two-dimensional reflection image of the fundus in the second alignment state in the second alignment mode ([0041)]. Regarding claim 7, Satake (figure 2) further comprising an observing optical system 11 that projects observation light which is infrared light onto the fundus of the examinee's eye and receives the observation light from the examinee's eye to acquire a fundus observation image which is a two-dimensional reflection image based on the observation light, wherein the processor guides, based on the fundus observation image, the positional relation between the examinee's eye and the photographing unit to the second alignment state in the second alignment mode ([0113)]. Regarding claim 8, Satake (figure 2) further discloses wherein the photographing unit further includes a target projecting optical system that projects, onto the fundus, a target light flux for adjusting a photographing condition for the front photographing optical system, and the processor detects a target image formed on the fundus observation image based on the target light flux, and guides the positional relation based on the target image ([0113)]. 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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Satake et al. (US 2015/0272434), as applied to claim 1. Regarding claim 3, Satake (figure 2) further discloses wherein the processor acquires information regarding the examinee's eye, and based on the information, selectively sets any of the first alignment mode and the second alignment mode ([0139]). Satake discloses all the claimed limitations except that the information is opacity information which is information regarding opacity in optic media of the examinee's eye. Although Satake generally discloses without going into deep details that the information is depth data of the examinee’s eye, the opacity would have been well within the knowledge of one skilled in the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to select the opacity information for selective purpose. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACK DINH whose telephone number is (571)272-2327. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am-5pm. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, 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. /JACK DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 3/15/26
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 29, 2022
Application Filed
Mar 15, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12582311
OPHTHALMIC APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12569136
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR AUTOMATING OPTHALMIC DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12562003
PUPIL ASSESSMENT USING MODULATED ON-AXIS ILLUMINATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12557986
Eye Examination Method and System
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12554109
ZOOM LENS AND IMAGING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

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

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+5.7%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 652 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month