DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-21 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s argument has been fully considered but it is moot in light of a new ground of rejection. See discussion below.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sramek (US 20190224043 A1, 2019-07-25) in view of Charles (US 20090093798 A1, 2009-04-09) and Rubinfeld et al. (US 20150126921 A1, 2015-05-07) (hereinafter “Rubinfeld”).
Regarding claims 1-20, Sramek teaches a laser apparatus for providing a treatment laser beam for photothermal ophthalmic treatment, the laser apparatus comprising: wherein the laser apparatus (e.g., [0003]-[0004], 110) is configured to selectively suppress a set of wavelength components of the laser beam generated by the treatment light source (e.g., [0018]), and wherein the laser apparatus is further configured to output the treatment laser beam. See, e.g., Fig. 1 and associated text.
Note that Sramek also teaches use of optical fibers (e.g., [0016]), coated mirrors (e.g., [0018]), slit-lamps (e.g., [0002], [0034]), head-mounted displays (e.g., [0015], [0035]), and microscope (e.g., [0002]). Sramek also teaches use of different laser parameters (e.g., [0026]).
Sramek does not expressly teach wherein the laser apparatus is configured to selectively suppress a set of wavelength components of the laser beam generated by the treatment light source to create a treatment laser beam. However, Sramek teaches use of filters (e.g., [0018]).
Charles teaches wherein the laser apparatus is configured to selectively suppress a set of wavelength components of the laser beam generated by the treatment light source to create a treatment laser beam. See, e.g., [0020]. Note that Charles teaches use of different laser wavelengths and power (e.g., [0016], [0030]), and various optical components such as high reflective coated mirrors and turning mirrors (e.g., [0017]-[0022]) and safety filters (e.g., [0016]).
Rubinfeld teaches use of band-pass filters. See, e.g., [0041].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Charles with the invention taught by Sramek such that the invention further comprises a treatment light source configured to generate a laser beam having a first target wavelength range and having a first output power; wherein the laser apparatus is configured to selectively suppress a set of wavelength components of the laser beam generated by the treatment light source to create a treatment laser beam, the set of wavelength components having wavelengths within a first and/or second suppressing wavelength range, the first and/or second suppressing wavelength ranges being located on respective sides of the first target wavelength range, and wherein the laser apparatus is further configured to output the treatment laser beam (as recited in claim 1); wherein the first output power is between 100 mW - 3 W (as recited in claim 2); wherein the second output power of the aiming light source is between 1 µW and 1 mW (as recited in claim 3); wherein the treatment light source comprises one or more direct diode lasers for generating the treatment laser beam (as recited in claim 4); wherein the laser apparatus comprises an optical system for delivering the treatment laser beam and the aiming beam to an optical fiber (as recited in claim 5); wherein the optical system comprises one or more mirrors, and at least one of the one or more mirrors are coated with a coating such that light having the first target wavelength is reflected by the at least one mirror, and light having wavelengths within the first and second suppressing wavelength ranges is transmitted by the at least one mirror (as recited in claim 6); wherein the reflectivity coefficient of the at least one coated mirror at the first target wavelength is more than 90%, preferably more than 95%, most preferably more than 97%, and the reflectivity coefficient of the at least one coated mirror within the first and second suppressing wavelength ranges is 20% or less (as recited in claim 7); wherein the one or more coated mirrors is a turning mirror (as recited in claim 8); wherein the laser apparatus comprises one or more filters to suppress light within the first and/or second wavelength ranges (as recited in claim 9); wherein the first target wavelength range is between 512-580nm (as recited in claim 10); wherein the first target wavelength range is between 512-535 nm (as recited in claim 11); wherein the first suppressing wavelength range is at least 10 nm wide and has an upper bound within a wavelength interval between 10-20nm lower than a target wavelength of the first target wavelength range (as recited in claim 12); wherein the second suppressing wavelength range is at least 10 nm wide and has a lower bound within a wavelength interval between 10-20nm higher than a target wavelength of the first target wavelength range (as recited in claim 13); wherein the laser apparatus is an ophthalmic apparatus that is configured to be attachable to a slit lamp or slit-lamp adapter (as recited in claim 14); wherein the laser apparatus is configured to be attachable to, or integrated in, a head-mounted ophthalmic treatment device (as recited in claim 15); wherein the coated mirror(s) or filter is placed as part of the delivery optics that directs the treatment laser light towards the eye of the patient (as recited in claim 16); a photothermal ophthalmic treatment system comprising: a laser apparatus comprising a treatment light source configured to generate a laser beam having a first target wavelength and having a first output power, an aiming light source configured to generate an aiming light beam having a second target wavelength and having a second output power lower than the first output power; a microscope; and a safety filter placed in the optical path of the treatment beam; wherein the laser apparatus is configured to selectively suppress a set of wavelength components of the laser beam generated by the treatment light source to create a treatment laser beam, the set of wavelength components having wavelengths within a first and/or second suppressing wavelength range, the first and/or second suppressing wavelength ranges being located on respective sides of the first target wavelength, and wherein the laser apparatus is further configured to output the treatment laser beam (as recited in claim 17); wherein the safety filter blocks light within a wavelength range of between 25-35nm and a center wavelength between 515-535nm (as recited in claim 18); wherein the microscope is part of a slit lamp (as recited in claim 19); wherein the microscope is part of a head-mounted device (as recited in claim 20); wherein the first suppressing wavelength range is located on a first side of the sides of the first target wavelength range toward an end thereof and/or wherein the second suppressing wavelength range is located on a second side toward of the sides of the second target wavelength range toward an end thereof (as recited in claim 21) in order to satisfy the particular requirements of various procedures with a more integrated device.
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SCOTT T LUAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1860. The examiner can normally be reached on 9am-5pm, M-F (generally).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Gary Jackson, can be reached on 571-272-4697. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Scott Luan, Ph.D.
/SCOTT LUAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792