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 . Claims 1-20 are pending and examined below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 7-9 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 7, where applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp., 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The term “web” in claim 7 is used by the claim to mean “interlocking pieces, or complementary pieces,” while the accepted meaning is “a network of fine threads.” The term is indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine the term.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "the gas" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as there is no mention of a gas recited in the claim language.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by US 11,672,650 B2 (hereinafter, “Dudee2023”)
In regards to claim 15, Dudee2023, discloses an accommodating intraocular optic assembly (Fig. 13, accommodating intraocular lens, 10i, col. 24, lines 8-15) comprising:
an optic (Fig. 1, positive power lens, 38 col. 18 lines 1-7);
and at least one stanchion (Fig. 13, stanchion, 12i, col. 24, lines 10-16)
extending a length (see below, annotated Fig. 15, L1, see also col. 24, lines 10-16)
between a base end (Fig. 13, base end, 14i, col. 24, lines 10-16)
and a distal end (Fig. 13, distal end, 16i, col. 24, lines 10-16),
said distal end operably engaged (Fig. 13, lens, 38, in combination with ring member 46, and distal end 16, col. 18 lines 9-14)
with said optic one of directly and indirectly (Fig. 15, col. 18 lines 9-14),
wherein said at least one stanchion (Fig. 13, stanchion, 12i, col. 24, lines 10-16)
is formed from a first material (col. 28 line 65- col. 29 line 9) that becomes stiffer (col. 28 line 65- col. 29 line 9, states that the stanchion could be made of material that allows for post insertion modification of at least one mechanical property) when inserted in the eye.
PNG
media_image1.png
339
555
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 16, Dudee2023 further discloses wherein said first material becomes stiffer (col. 28 line 65- col. 29 line 9)
when inserted in the eye because of body temperature (col. 41 lines 20-24).
In regards to claim 17, Dudee2023 further discloses wherein first material that becomes stiffer (col. 28 line 65- col. 29 line 9)
when inserted in the eye because of body temperature (col. 41 lines 20-24, temperature change to control the unfolding process within the eye)
because of hydration (col. 41 lines 20-24, hydration to control the unfolding process within the eye) of the stanchion (Fig. 13, stanchion, 12i, col. 24, lines 10-16)
from exposure to aqueous humor of the eye (col. 41 lines 20-24, it is understood in the art the location and high water concentration of the aqueous humor).
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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,672,650 B2 (hereinafter, “Dudee2023”) and US 11,129,709 B2 (hereinafter “Dudee2021”).
In regards to claim 1, Dudee2023, discloses an accommodating intraocular optic assembly (Fig. 13, accommodating intraocular lens, 10i, col. 24, lines 8-15) comprising:
an optic (Fig. 1, positive power lens, 38 col. 18 lines 1-7)
and at least one stanchion (Fig. 13, stanchion, 12i, col. 24, lines 10-16)
extending a length (see below, Annotated Fig. 15, L1, see also col. 24, lines 10-16)
between a base end (Fig. 13, base end, 14i, col. 24, lines 10-16)
and a distal end (Fig. 13, distal end, 16i, col. 24, lines 10-16),
said distal end operably engaged (Fig. 13, lens, 38, in combination with ring member 46, and distal end 16, col. 18 lines 9-14)
with said optic one of directly and indirectly (Fig. 13, lens, 38, in combination with ring member 46, and distal end 16, col. 18 lines 9-14),
However, Dudee2023 does not explicitly disclose an outer sleeve defining a through-aperture and at least one inner member positioned within said through-aperture.
Dudee2021 teaches an optic ( Fig. 1, forward optic, 30 col. 12, lines 6-8); and including:
an outer sleeve (Fig. 6, outer arcuate surface, 104, col. 17 lines 25-30)
defining a through-aperture (see below, annotated Fig. 6, A1, col. 17, lines 19-30),
and at least one inner member (Fig. 6, bands, 110, col. 17 lines 34-45)
positioned within said through-aperture (Fig. 6, bands, 110 in combination with inner arcuate surface, 102, col. 17 lines 31-37).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the accommodating intraocular optic assembly of Dudee2023 to include an outer sleeve with a through-aperture and inner member of Dudee2021 in order to maintain the shape of the stanchion and adjust the extent of the movements in the optics (Dudee2021, col. 17, lines 35-45).
PNG
media_image1.png
339
555
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
358
491
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 2, Dudee2023 discloses the accommodating intraocular optic assembly (Fig. 13, accommodating intraocular lens, 10i, col. 24, lines 8-15) of claim 1,
comprising rachet teeth (Fig. 45B, sawtooth profiles, 198d and 200d, col. 52 lines 20-25).
However Dudee2023, does not explicitly disclose at least one inner member.
Dudee2021 further teaches a stanchion that includes said at least one inner member (Fig. 6, bands, 110, col. 17 lines 34-45)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the accommodating intraocular optic assembly of Dudee2023 with ratchet teeth in view of the inner member of Dudee2021 in order to prevent lateral shifting between the inner member (Dudee2023, col. 52, lines 23-25).
In regards to claim 3, Dudee2023 discloses the accommodating intraocular optic assembly (Fig. 13, accommodating intraocular lens, 10i, col. 24, lines 8-15) of claim 2,
which includes:
a first elongate member (Fig. 45B, space occupying element, 188c in combination with first opposite end, 198c, col. 52, lines 9-16)
defining a first set of rachet teeth (Fig. 45B, sawtooth profiles, 198d col. 52 lines 23-25);
and a second elongate member (Fig. 45B, space occupying element, 188c, adding an additional member would be a design choice) in combination with second opposite end, 200c, col. 52 lines 9-16)
defining a second set of rachet teeth (Fig. 45B, sawtooth profiles, 200d, col. 52 lines 22-25),
wherein said first elongate member (Fig. 45B, space occupying element, 188c, col. 52, lines 9-14 Fig. 45B, first opposite end, 198c, col. 52 lines 14-16)
and said second elongate member (Fig. 45B, space occupying element, 188c, col. 52, lines 9-14)(Fig. 45B, second opposite end, 200c, col. 52 lines 14-16)
are configured to slide across one another (see below, annotated Fig. 45C, slide direction, col. 52, lines 10-15)
when said at least one stanchion (Fig. 13, stanchion, 12i, col. 24, lines 10-16) bends in a first direction (col. 19, lines 47-53, reference arcuate profile denoting bending) (see below, annotated Fig. 45A, 1st direction),
wherein said first set of rachet teeth (Fig. 45B, sawtooth profiles, 198d, col. 52 lines 21-25) and said second set of rachet teeth (Fig. 45B, sawtooth profiles, 200d, col. 52 lines 21-25)
are configured to slide across one another (see below, annotated Fig. 45C, col. 52, lines 10-15) when said at least one stanchion bends in the first direction (see below, annotated Fig. 45A)
and are configured to lock together (Fig. 45B, combination of sawtooth profiles, 198d and 200d, col. 52 lines 21-25)
when said at least one stanchion bends in a second direction (see below, annotated Fig. 45A, 2nd direction) that is opposite to the first direction (see below, annotated Fig. 45A, 1st direction in combination with 2nd direction).
However Dudee2023, does not explicitly disclose at least one inner member. Dudee2021 further teaches a stanchion that includes said at least one inner member (Fig. 6, bands, 110, col. 17 lines 34-45)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the accommodating intraocular optic assembly of including elongate member with ratchet teeth of Dudee2023 with the inner member of Dudee2021 since doing so merely involves combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results (see MPEP 2143).
PNG
media_image3.png
325
534
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
270
522
media_image4.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 4, The accommodating intraocular optic assembly (Fig. 13, accommodating intraocular lens, 10i, col. 24, lines 8-15) of claim 1.
However, Dudee2023 does not explicitly disclose wherein said through-aperture has a first cross-sectional profile shape and said at least one inner member has a second cross-sectional profile shape that is different than said first cross-sectional profile shape.
Dudee2021 further discloses, wherein said through-aperture (Fig. 7, aperture, 112, col. 17, lines 46-55)
has a first cross-sectional profile shape (Fig.6, col. 17, lines 5-10, cross section is described as U or C shaped)
and said at least one inner member (Fig. 6, bands, 110, col. 17 lines 34-45)
has a second cross-sectional profile shape (col. 17, lines 25-27, cross section is defined as crescent shaped)
that is different than said first cross-sectional profile shape (col. 17, lines 5-27).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the accommodating intraocular optic assembly of Dudee2023 with the through-aperture with a first and second cross-sectional profile shape of Dudee2021 in order to maintain a specific shape for the stanchion adjusting the movement of the optic and the extent of contraction for the ciliary muscles (Dudee2021, col. 17 lines -38-45).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,672,650 B2 (hereinafter, “Dudee2023”) and US 12,171,652 B2 (hereinafter “Dudee2024”).
In regards to claim 5, Dudee2023 discloses the accommodating intraocular optic assembly (Fig. 13, accommodating intraocular lens, 10i, col. 24, lines 8-15) of claim 4,
wherein said first cross-sectional profile shape is constant along said length (col. 3, lines 34-40). However Dudee2023, does not disclose where the first cross sectional profile is circular and said second cross-sectional profile shape is elliptical.
Dudee2024 discloses an ocular prosthesis (Fig. 1, exemplary prosthesis, col. 4, lines 6-9), analogous in the art, including a circular (see below, Annotated Fig. 20, CS1, col. 9 lines 52-55)
and said second cross-sectional profile shape is elliptical (see below, annotated Fig. 20, ECS1, col. 9 lines 52-55).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the accommodating intraocular optic assembly of Dudee2023 with the cross sections as described in Dudee2024 to allow for multiple material layering within an implant (Dudee2024, col. 9 lines 55-56).
PNG
media_image5.png
314
474
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claims 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,672,650 B2 (hereinafter, “Dudee2023”) and US 11,129,709 B2 (hereinafter “Dudee2021”) as applied to claims above, and further in view of US 2013/0304203 A1 (hereinafter "Beer").
In regards to claim 6, Dudee2023 discloses the accommodating intraocular optic assembly (Fig. 13, accommodating intraocular lens, 10i, col. 24, lines 8-15) of claim 1.
However, Dudee2023 does not explicitly disclose wherein said at least one inner member.
Dudee2021 teaches an optic ( Fig. 1, forward optic, 30 col. 12, lines 6-8);
with at least one inner member (Fig. 6, bands, 110, col. 17 lines 34-45).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the accommodating intraocular optic assembly of Dudee2023 to include an inner member of Dudee2021 in order to maintain the shape of the stanchion and adjust the extent of the movements in the optics (Dudee2021, col. 17, lines 35-45).
However, modified Dudee2023 does not teach that the inner member comprises a flexible cruciate cross section with that cruciate leaves that are elastically foldable whereby said at least one inner member is flattenable.
Beer teaches an accommodating intraocular lens (Fig. 1, AD-IOL system, 100, para 0082)
that comprises a flexible (para 0091) cruciate cross section (see below, annotated Fig. 9B, CCS1, cross member 910 in combination with extended arm 905, para 0116)
with that cruciate leaves (Fig. 9B, cross member, 910, para 0116)
that are elastically foldable whereby said at least one inner member is flattenable (para 0121, the haptics are flattenable therefore the inner member would be as well).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the accommodating intraocular optic assembly of Dudee2023 to include the cruciate shape of Beer in order to position lock the member of the stanchion (para 0116).
PNG
media_image6.png
268
217
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claims 7, 10-12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,672,650 B2 (hereinafter, “Dudee2023”) and US 11,129,709 B2 (hereinafter “Dudee2021”) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of US 2003/0130732 A1 (hereinafter, “Sarfarazi”).
In regards to claim 7, modified Dudee2023 discloses the accommodating intraocular optic assembly (Fig. 13, accommodating intraocular lens, 10i, col. 24, lines 8-15)
with at least one inner member (Fig. 6, bands, 110, col. 17 lines 34-45).
However it does not teach a plurality of body segments interconnected by webs.
Sarfarazi discloses an intraocular lens system (Fig. 2, intraocular lens system 40, para 0113)
with a plurality of body segments (see below, SB, annotated Fig. 40D, para 0160)
interconnected by webs (see below, annotated Fig. 40B, W1, para 0158)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the accommodating intraocular optic assembly of Dudee2023 with the plurality of body segments of Sarfarazi since doing so merely involves combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results (see MPEP 2143).
PNG
media_image7.png
162
199
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
120
294
media_image8.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 10, modified Dudee2023 discloses the accommodating intraocular optic assembly (Fig. 13, accommodating intraocular lens, 10i, Dudee2023, col. 24, lines 8-15)
with at least one inner member (Fig. 6, bands, 110, col. 17 lines 34-45)
with a plurality of links (Fig. 40A, haptic hinges, 164A, Sarfarazi, para 0157).
Sarfarazi further discloses the links are pivotally interconnected (Fig. 40A, haptic 162A, in combination with 164A, haptic hinges, para 0157) with one another.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the accommodating intraocular optic assembly of Dudee2023 with the pivotal haptic connection of Sarfarazi in order to so that certain points may move in relation to the eye but provide fixation once implanted (Dudee2021, col. 21, lines 14-19).
In regards to claim 11, modified Dudee2023 discloses the accommodating intraocular optic assembly (Fig. 13, accommodating intraocular lens, 10i, Dudee2023, col. 24, lines 8-15) of claim 10,
with at least one inner member (Fig. 6, bands, 110, Dudee2021, col. 17 lines 34-45)
with a plurality of links (Fig. 40A, haptic hinges, 164A, Sarfarazi, para 0157).
where the ends are configured to slide across one another (see below, annotated Fig. 45C, Dudee2023, col. 52, lines 10-15)
when said at least one stanchion (Fig. 13, stanchion, 12i, Dudee2023, col. 24, lines 10-16) bends in the first direction (see below, annotated Fig. 45A).
However, modified Dudee2023 does not discloses a first inner member having a first plurality of links pivotally interconnected with one another; a second inner member having a second plurality of links pivotally interconnected with one another, said first inner member and said second inner member.
Sarfarazi further discloses having a first plurality of links (Fig. 40A, haptic hinges, 164A, para 0157)
pivotally interconnected (Fig. 40A, haptic 162A, in combination with 164A, haptic hinges, para 0157) with one another;
a second inner member (Fig. 6, bands, 110, col. 17 lines 34-45, Dudee2021 teaches the presence of multiple inner members)
having a second plurality of links (Fig. 40A, haptic hinges, 164A, para 0157)
pivotally interconnected (Fig. 40A, haptic 162A, in combination with 164A, haptic hinges, para 0157)
with one another, said first inner member (Fig. 6, bands, 110, col. 17 lines 34-45) and said second inner member (Fig. 6, bands, 110, col. 17 lines 34-45, Dudee2021 teaches the presence of multiple inner members).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the accommodating intraocular optic assembly of modified Dudee2023 with inner members configured to slide across when bent in the first direction since doing so merely involves combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results (see MPEP 2143).
PNG
media_image3.png
325
534
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
270
522
media_image9.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 12 and 14, Dudee2023 discloses the accommodating intraocular optic assembly (Fig. 13, accommodating intraocular lens, 10i, col. 24, lines 8-15). However, it does not explicitly teach wherein said outer sleeve comprises: a plurality of sleeve portions connected to one another and moveable relative to one another.
Dudee2021 further discloses an outer sleeve (Fig. 6, outer arcuate surface, 104, col. 17 lines 25-30) comprising a plurality of sleeve portions (Fig. 6, outer arcuate surface, 104, col. 17 lines 25-30, a plurality of the sleeve portions would be considered a design choice).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the accommodating intraocular optic assembly of Dudee2023 to include an outer sleeve since doing so merely involves combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results (see MPEP 2143).
However modified Dudee2023 does not disclose that the portions connected to one another and moveable relative to one another.
Sarfarazi further discloses that the portions are connected to one another (Fig. 40A, haptic hinges, 164A, para 0157)
and moveable relative to one another (Fig. 40A, haptic 162A, in combination with 164A, haptic hinges, para 0157, the hinge connection of the recited inner member would encompass a segment sleeve portion as well).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the accommodating intraocular optic assembly of Dudee2023 with the pivotal haptic connection of Sarfarazi so that certain points may move in relation to the eye but provide fixation once implanted (Dudee2021, col. 21, lines 14-19).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,672,650 B2 (hereinafter, “Dudee2023”) and US 11,129,709 B2 (hereinafter “Dudee2021”) as applied to claims 7 and 9 above, and further in view of US 2003/0130732 A1 (hereinafter, "Sarfarazi") and further in view of US 9,427,312 B2 (hereinafter, "DeBoer").
In regards to claim 8, modified Dudee2023, as referenced in claim 7, discloses the accommodating intraocular optic assembly (Fig. 13, accommodating intraocular lens, 10i, Dudee2023, col. 24, lines 8-15) and at least one inner member (Fig. 6, bands, 110, Dudee2021, col. 17 lines 34-45) However it does not disclose wherein: each of said plurality of body segments includes opposite side surfaces, said side surfaces contacting one another when said at least one inner member is in a straight configuration and spaced from one when said at least one inner member is bent into an arcuate configuration; and said at least one inner member further comprises adhesive positioned on at least some of said opposite side surfaces.
Sarfarazi discloses an intraocular lens system (Fig. 2, intraocular lens system 40, para 0113) wherein:
each of said plurality of body segments (see below, annotated Fig. 40D, SB, para 0160)
includes opposite side surfaces (see below, annotated Fig. 40D, S1, para 0160)
said side surfaces contacting one another when said at least one inner member is in a straight configuration (see below, annotated Fig. 40B, SB, para 0158 )
and spaced from one when said at least one inner member is bent into an arcuate configuration (see below, annotated Fig. 40D, para 0160).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the accommodating intraocular optic assembly of Dudee2023 with the plurality of body segment and bending of Sarfarazi in order to maintain haptic flexibility and simultaneously preserve the stiffness enough to support the lens and alignment of the optic system (Sarfarazi, para 0014).
However, Sarfarazi does not disclose that said at least one inner member further comprises adhesive positioned on at least some of said opposite side surfaces.
DeBoer teaches an accommodating intraocular lens (Fig. 2A, AIOL, 200, col. 5 lines 14-20)
that uses adhesive (Fig. 3C, adhesive layer, 338, col. 8, lines 51-63) positioned on at least some of said opposite side surfaces.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the accommodating intraocular optic assembly of Dudee2023 with the adhesive layer as taught by DeBoer to enhance the mechanical coupling of the segments (DeBoer col. 8 lines 61-63)
PNG
media_image7.png
162
199
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image10.png
120
294
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,672,650 B2 (hereinafter, “Dudee2023”) and US 11,129,709 B2 (hereinafter “Dudee2021”) as applied to claims 7 and 8 above, and further in view of US 2003/0130732 A1 (hereinafter, "Sarfarazi") and further in view of US 2022/0183819 A1 (hereinafter, "Mueller").
In regards to claim 9, modified Dudee2023 discloses the limitations as referenced in claim 8, discloses the accommodating intraocular optic assembly wherein each of said plurality of body segments includes opposite side surfaces, said side surfaces contacting one another when said at least one inner member is in a straight configuration spaced from one another when said at least one inner member is bent into an arcuate configuration.
However it does not disclose wherein: said at least one inner member further comprises at least one protuberance and at least one aperture configured to mate with another and respectively defined in two of said opposite side surfaces.
Mueller discloses an intraocular lens (Fig. 1, intraocular lens, 1, para 0060)
wherein the said inner member further comprises at least one protuberance (Fig. 5, clips, 8 and 14, para 0074)
and at least one aperture (Fig. 5, coupling webs, 19 and 20, para 0074)
configured to mate with another (para 0074, states the coupling webs are set to be received into aforementioned slots within the clips)
and respectively defined in two of said opposite side surfaces.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the accommodating intraocular optic assembly of Dudee2023 with the protuberance and clips and coupling webs of Mueller since doing so merely involves combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results (see MPEP 2143).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,672,650 B2 (hereinafter, “Dudee2023”) and US 11,129,709 B2 (hereinafter “Dudee2021”) as applied to claims above, and further in view of US 2013/0131796 A1 (hereinafter "Mirlay").
In regards to claim 13, Dudee2023 discloses the accommodating intraocular optic assembly (Fig. 13, accommodating intraocular lens, 10i, col. 24, lines 8-15) of claim 1,
and wherein said at least one stanchion (Fig. 13, stanchion, 12i, col. 24, lines 10-16).
However, Dudee2023 does not discloses that the stanchion further comprises: a spring disposed between the said at least one inner member and said outer sleeves.
Dudee2021 teaches an optic ( Fig. 1, forward optic, 30 col. 12, lines 6-8). Dudee2021, further discloses the presence of the said at least one inner member (Fig. 6, bands, 110, col. 17 lines 34-45)
and said outer sleeve (Fig. 6, outer arcuate surface, 104, col. 17 lines 25-30).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the accommodating intraocular optic assembly of Dudee2023 to include an outer sleeve with a through aperture and inner member of Dudee2021 in order to maintain the shape of the stanchion and adjust the extent of the movements in the optics (Dudee2021, col. 17, lines 35-45).
However, modified Dudee2023 does not disclose the presence of spring disposed between the inner and outer member. Mirlay discloses an intraocular lens (Fig. 1A, optics intraocular lens (IOL), para 0053)
with stanchions (Fig. 2, ribs, 102, para 0053) that are connected to spring (Fig. 2, spring, 207, para 0057 -0058)
disposed between (para 0024) anterior and posterior segments.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the accommodating intraocular optic assembly of modified Dudee2023 to include a spring as taught by Mirlay to push the stanchion into the desired position at a resting state (para 0024).
Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,672,650 B2 ("Dudee2023") in view of US 11,938,058 B2 (hereinafter, “Schieber”).
In regards to claim 18, Dudee2023, discloses an accommodating intraocular optic assembly (Fig. 13, accommodating intraocular lens, 10i, col. 24, lines 8-15) comprising:
an optic (Fig. 1, positive power lens, 38 col. 18 lines 1-7);
at least one stanchion (Fig. 13, stanchion, 12i, col. 24, lines 10-16)
extending a length (see below, Annotated Fig. 15, L1, see also col. 24, lines 10-16)
between a base end (Fig. 13, base end, 14i, col. 24, lines 10-16)
and a distal end (Fig. 13, distal end, 16i, col. 24, lines 10-16),
said distal end operably engaged (Fig. 13, lens, 38, in combination with ring member 46, and distal end 16, col. 18 lines 9-14)
with said optic one of directly and indirectly (Fig. 15, col. 18 lines 9-14).
However, Dudee2023 does not explicitly disclose a pressure sensor assembly configured to detect a level of pressure in the eye. Schieber discloses an ocular implant (Fig. 2, ocular implant, 100) in the same field of endeavor which includes:
a pressure sensor assembly (Fig. 10A, pressure sensor, 180, in combination with antenna, 184, col. 16 lines 22-25 and col. 18, lines 25-35)
configured to detect a level of pressure in the eye (col. 16, lines 24-34).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the accommodating intraocular optic assembly of Dudee2023 with the pressure sensor of Schieber in order to detect the level of the pressure in the eye.
PNG
media_image1.png
339
555
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 20, Dudee2023, discloses the accommodating intraocular optic assembly (Fig. 13, accommodating intraocular lens, 10i, col. 24, lines 8-15) of claim 18 which includes an optic (Fig. 1, positive power lens, 38 col. 18 lines 1-7).
However, Dudee2023 does not explicitly disclose a said pressure sensor comprising a plurality of cavities formed in said optic, each cavities containing fluid including a biocompatible dye vaporized within the gas, wherein said biocompatible dye is configured to precipitate in response to changes in pressure. Schieber further teaches wherein said pressure sensor assembly (Fig. 10A, pressure sensor, 180, col. 16 lines 22-25) further comprises:
a plurality of cavities (see below, annotated Fig. 2A, O1, see also col. 2 lines 36-46)
each of said cavities containing fluid including a biocompatible dye (Fig. 31, therapeutic agent, 706, col. 25, lines 10-23)
vaporized within the gas (interpreting gas in accordance with the specification as interchangeable with a fluid),
wherein said biocompatible dye is configured to precipitate in response to changes in pressure (col. 34 line 35 - col. 18 line 2).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the accommodating intraocular optic assembly of Dudee2023 with the system to release a biocompatible therapeutic agent as disclosed by Schieber in order to treat conditions associated with an elevated intraocular pressure (Schieber, Abstract).
PNG
media_image11.png
438
366
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Claims 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,672,650 B2 ("Dudee2023") in view of US 11,938,058 B2 (hereinafter, “Schieber”) as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of US 2019/0254811 A1 (hereinafter, “Emken”).
In regards to claim 19, Dudee2023, discloses the accommodating intraocular optic assembly (Fig. 13, accommodating intraocular lens, 10i, col. 24, lines 8-15) of claim 18.
However, Dudee2023 does not explicitly disclose a pressure sensor assembly. Schieber further discloses wherein said pressure sensor assembly (Fig. 10A, pressure sensor, 180, in combination with antenna, 184, col. 16 lines 22-25 and col. 18, lines 25-35) further comprises:
a radio frequency identification transponder (Fig. 10A, antenna, 184, col. 18, lines 25-35)
and a pressure sensor (Fig. 10A, pressure sensor, col. 16 lines 22-25)
engaged with said radio frequency identification transponder (col. 18, lines 19-24) wherein:
said radio frequency identification transponder (col. 18, lines 19-24) is configured,
in response to the presence of an electromagnetic transceiver field (col. 18 lines 29-35, it is understood that examples of ETFs in the art include Bluetooth®, WiFi®)
to transmit electrical current (col. 17 lines 1-2) to said pressure sensor (Fig. 10A, pressure sensor, col. 16 lines 22-25)
and said pressure sensor, in response to receiving current from said radio frequency identification transponder, is configured to detect pressure within the eye (col. 16, lines 24-34)
and transmit a first signal corresponding to the detected pressure (Fig. 10A, 186, col. 18 lines 19-24) to said radio frequency identification transponder (Fig. 10A, antenna, 184, col. 18, lines 25-35),
wherein said radio frequency identification transponder (Fig. 10A, antenna, 184, col. 18, lines 25-35) is further configured to receive the first signal (Fig. 11, remote device, 192, col.18 lines 34-51)
and transit the first signal outside of the eye (col. 18 lines 49-51).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the accommodating intraocular optic assembly of Dudee2023 to include the pressure sensor assembly of Schieber to allow for the for a pressure reading and transmission of the reading to an external device (Schieber, col. 18 lines 49-51).
However, it does not explicitly teach a source to provide electrical power to the pressure sensor.
Emken discloses an intraocular lens (IOL) (Fig. 1A, 100, IOL, para 0018)
and including electrical power (Fig. 1a, power supply, 111, para 0021) to said pressure sensor (Fig. 1A, electrical transduces, 107, para 0020).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the accommodating intraocular optic assembly of Dudee2023 to include provide electrical power to the pressure sensor to detect mechanical changes in the eye and output an appropriate electrical signal (Emken, Abstract).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, US 4,687,484A Kaplan as teaches the use of a spring connected to a haptic to allow for increased flexibility and fit within the anterior chamber of the eye.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JICHELE MONIQUE SANDERS whose telephone number is (571)272-2240. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thu 6:30-5:15.
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, Jerrah Edwards can be reached at (408) 918-7557. 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.
/JICHELE MONIQUE SANDERS/Examiner, Art Unit 3774
/JERRAH EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3774