Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/211,486

HAND-HELD, MULTI-BAND IMAGING PEN

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Jun 19, 2023
Examiner
BOLER, RYNAE E
Art Unit
3795
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Micronvision Corp.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
4y 0m
To Grant
69%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
300 granted / 485 resolved
-8.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+7.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 0m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
519
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
53.0%
+13.0% vs TC avg
§102
22.8%
-17.2% vs TC avg
§112
21.6%
-18.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 485 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: in the fifteenth line of the claim “while light” should be changed to -- white light --. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: in the second line of the claim “finger-operate” should be changed to -- finger-operated --. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: in the sixth line of the claim “image date” should be changed to -- image data --. Appropriate correction is required. 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 2-3, 1-7, 9-14 and 16-17 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. The claims in the application are numbered 1-3 and 1-17 (see published application). The claim set has two claims numbered 1 (one independent and one dependent on itself), two claims numbered 2 (both dependent on claim 1), and two claims numbered 3 (one dependent on claim 2 and one dependent on claim 1). Claims 2 and 1-7 all depend from claim 1. It is unclear from which claim 1 that claims 2 and 1-7 depend. It is unclear how dependent claim 1 depends from both itself and independent claim 1. Further, it is unclear from which dependent claim 2 that claim 3 depends. Accordingly, 2 and 1-7 are rejected as being indefinite. For purposes of examination, claims 2 and 1-7 are interpreted as each depending from independent claim 1. Claims 9-12 and 14 each depend from dependent claim 11. However, dependent claim 11 depends from itself. Thus, it is unclear from which claim 9-12 and 14 depend. Furthermore, dependent claim 13 depends from claim 15. However, claim 13 is an apparatus claim, whereas claim 15 is a method claim. It is unclear how apparatus claim 13 depends from method claim 15. Accordingly, 9-14 are rejected as being indefinite. For purposes of examination, claims 9-13 are interpreted as each depending from independent claim 8, and claim 4 is interpreted as depending from claim 12. Finally, claims 16 and 17 depend from claim 18. However, the claim set does not include a claim 18. The claim(s) from which claims 16 and 17 depend is unclear. Accordingly, 16-17 are rejected as being indefinite. For purposes of examination, claims 16-17 are interpreted as each depending from independent claim 15. Claims 1-3 and 1-14 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. Independent claims 1 and 8 each recite a hand-held imaging pen comprising “a display wirelessly coupled to the transmitter and configured to display image data transmitted thereto by the transmitter”. However, the preambles of the claims are directed to an imaging pen. As disclosed in the specification, the display is a separate component from the pen (see par. [0080] of the published application). As is clear, the display is not part of the imaging pen itself, but rather, part of the imaging system. It is unclear how Applicant considers the display to be a component of the imaging pen, when it is explicitly disclosed as being physically separate from the pen. Accordingly, the claims are rendered indefinite. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph: Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. Claims 9-12, 14 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claims 9-12 and 14 are all dependent claims that depend from claim 11. However, dependent claim 11 depends from itself. Claims 16-17 each depend from claim 18. However, the claim set does not include claim 18. Accordingly, claims 9-12 and 14 are rejected for being in improper dependent for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. 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. Claim(s) 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wright et al. (US 2020/0260935 A1). Regarding claim 8, Wright discloses a hand-held imaging pen (Fig. 2) comprising: an elongated, pen-shaped housing that is shaped and dimensioned for holding as a pen and configured for directing a distal end thereof in or at a body opening or surface (Fig. 2; par. [0029]); a first light source (par. [0023] and [0029]) selectively emitting light in a first wavelength range from the housing to illuminate a first field of view (FOV) (par. [0023] and [0029]); a first image sensor (234; par. [0025] and [0030]) configured to image light in said first wavelength range from said first FOV and produce first image data (par. [0030]); a wireless transmitter (236; Fig. 2; par. [0030]) in the housing, configured to receive said first image data and transmit the received first image data (par. [0030]); a display (226; Fig. 2; par. [0030]) wirelessly coupled to the transmitter (236) and configured to display image data transmitted thereto by the transmitter (par. [0030]); a power source (238; Fig. 2; par. [0030]-[0031]) in said housing selectively powering said first light source and first image sensor and said wireless transmitter (par. [0031]); and a tactile control interface (240; par. [0031]; Fig. 2) mounted to the housing and operatively coupled with said first light source and sensor, and wireless transmitter for selective operation thereof (par. [0031]). Regarding claim 9, Wright discloses the hand-held imaging pen as in claim 11, in which said first wavelength range corresponds to white light (par. [0023]). 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. Claim(s) 1-3, 4, 10-12 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wright et al. (US 2020/0260935 A1) in view of Ouyang (US 2019/0216325 A1). Regarding claim 1, Wright discloses a hand-held imaging pen (Fig. 2) comprising: an elongated, pen-shaped housing that is shaped and dimensioned for holding as a pen and configured for directing a distal end thereof in or at a body opening or surface (Fig. 2; par. [0029]); a first light source (par. [0023] and [0029]) selectively emitting white light from the housing to illuminate a first field of view (FOV) (par. [0023] and [0029]); a first multi-pixel, two-dimensional (2D) image sensor (234; par. [0025] and [0030]) in the housing, configured to image white light from said first FOV and produce white light image data (par. [0030]); a wireless transmitter (236; Fig. 2; par. [0030]) in the housing, configured to receive said while (interpreted as white) image data and transmit the received image data (par. [0030]); a display (226; Fig. 2; par. [0030]) wirelessly coupled to the transmitter (236) and configured to display image data transmitted thereto by the transmitter (par. [0030]); a power source (238; Fig. 2; par. [0030]-[0031]) in said housing selectively powering said first light source and first image sensor and said wireless transmitter (par. [0031]); and a tactile control interface (240; par. [0031]; Fig. 2) mounted to the housing and operatively coupled with said first light source and sensor, and wireless transmitter for selective operation thereof (par. [0031]). Although Wright discloses its hand-held imaging pen comprising light sources of various wavelengths and sensors that are sensitive to particular wavelengths, fluorescence for example (par. [0023]), it does not specifically disclose the pen comprising a second source selectively emitting non-white light from the housing to illuminate a second field of view (FOV); a second multi-pixel, two-dimensional (2D) image sensor in the housing, configured to image non-white light from said second FOV and produce non-white light image data. Ouyang teaches an analogous imaging instrument having a first light source (834) that emits white light (par. [0079]; Fig. 8); a second source (832) selectively emitting non-white light (par. [0079]; Fig. 8) from the housing to illuminate a second field of view (FOV); a first image sensor (810; par. [0079]; Fig. 8) configured to image white light and produce white light image data (par. [0079]); and a second multi-pixel, two-dimensional (2D) image sensor (812; par. [0079]; Fig. 8)in the housing, configured to image non-white light from said second FOV and produce non-white light image data (par. [0079]). Ouyang teaches creating both white light images and non-white light images to provide improved visualization of tissue (par. [0061]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to include a second non-white light source and a second non-white image sensor in order to capture both white light images and non-white light images in order to provide improved visualization of tissue, as taught by Ouyang. Regarding claim 2, Wright in view of Ouyang disclose the hand-held, multi-band imaging pen of claim 1, in which said first (par. [0023] and [0029]; Ouyang: 834) and second light sources (Ouyang: 832) emit light from a single distal end of the housing (Fig. 2; Ouyang: Fig. 8). Regarding claim 3, Wright in view of Ouyang disclose the hand-held, multi-band imaging pen of claim 2, in which said first and second FOVs at least partly overlap (Ouyang: Fig. 8). Regarding claim 4, Wright in view of Ouyang disclose the hand-held, multi-band imaging pen of claim 1, in which said tactile control interface (240) comprises a finger-operate button mounted to and accessible from outside said housing (par. [0031]; Fig. 2). Regarding claim 10, Wright in view of Ouyang disclose the hand-held imaging pen as in claim 11 (interpreted as claim 8), but does not specifically disclose in which said first wavelength range corresponds to infrared light. Ouyang teaches an analogous imaging instrument having a first light source (834) that emits white light (par. [0079]; Fig. 8) and a second source (832) selectively emitting non-white light (par. [0079]; Fig. 8). Ouyang teaches creating both white light images and non-white light images to provide improved visualization of tissue (par. [0061]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to include a second non-white light source and a second non-white image sensor in order to capture both white light images and non-white light images in order to provide improved visualization of tissue, as taught by Ouyang. Additionally, at the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use a light source emitting light in a wavelength that corresponds to infrared light because Applicant has not disclosed that using infrared light provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. Applicant discloses that light source “emits non-white light such as infrared light, or near infrared (NIR) light, or light in another non-white range such as blue light” (par. [0082]). One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Wright’s imaging pen, and applicant’s invention, to perform equally well with either the light source taught by modified Wright or the claimed infrared light source because both light sources would perform the same function of imaging tissues responsive to non-white light. Regarding claim 11, Wright in view of Ouyang disclose the hand-held imaging pen as in claim 11 (interpreted as claim 8), but does not specifically disclose in which said first selected wavelength range corresponds to blue light. Ouyang teaches an analogous imaging instrument having a first light source (834) that emits white light (par. [0079]; Fig. 8) and a second source (832) selectively emitting blue light (par. [0079]; Fig. 8). Ouyang teaches creating both white light images and non-white light images to provide improved visualization of tissue (par. [0061]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to include a blue light source and a second blue light image sensor in order to capture both white light images and non-white light images in order to provide improved visualization of tissue, as taught by Ouyang. Regarding claim 12, Wright in view of Ouyang disclose the hand-held imaging pen as in claim 11. Although Wright discloses its hand-held imaging pen comprising light sources of various wavelengths and sensors that are sensitive to particular wavelengths, fluorescence for example (par. [0023]), it does not specifically disclose it further including a second light source selectively emitting light from the housing in a second wavelength range different from the first wavelength range to illuminate a second FOV and a second image sensor configured to image light in said second wavelength range from said second FOV and produce second image data. Ouyang teaches an analogous imaging instrument having a first light source (834) that emits white light (par. [0079]; Fig. 8); a second source (832) selectively emitting light (par. [0079]; Fig. 8) from the housing in a second wavelength range to illuminate a second field of view (FOV); a first image sensor (810; par. [0079]; Fig. 8) configured to image white light and produce white light image data (par. [0079]); and a second image sensor (812; par. [0079]; Fig. 8)in the housing, configured to image light in said second wavelength range from said second FOV and produce second image data (par. [0079]). Ouyang teaches creating both white light images and non-white light images to provide improved visualization of tissue (par. [0061]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to include a second non-white light source and a second non-white image sensor in order to capture both white light images and non-white light images in order to provide improved visualization of tissue, as taught by Ouyang. Additionally, such modification provides a configuration wherein said transmitter (236) is further configured to receive said second image data and transmit the received second image data to the display (par. [0030]) and said second light source and second image sensor are operatively coupled to said power source (238) and control interface (240). Regarding claim 14, Wright in view of Ouyang disclose the hand-held, multi-band imaging pen of claim 11 (interpreted as claim 12), in which the first (par. [0023] and [0029]; Ouyang: 834) and second light sources (Ouyang: 832) are at a single longitudinal end of the housing (Fig. 2; Ouyang: Fig. 8). Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wright in view of Ouyang as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Baumann et al. (US 2021/0044754 A1). Regarding claim 1, Wright in view of Ouyang disclose the hand-held, multi-band imaging pen of claim 1, but does not specifically disclose in which the second light source comprises a source of near infrared light (NIR) and at least one of the first and second imaging sensors comprises a light sensor having spatial resolution of at least 2000 pixels in at least one dimension. Baumann teaches that imaging sensors are capable of providing HD resolution (e.g., 1280×720 pixels), FullHD resolution (e.g., 1920×1080 pixels), 2K resolution (e.g., 2048×1536 pixels), and even 4K resolution (e.g., 4096×3072 pixels) (see par. [0044]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use a 2K resolution or 4K resolution imaging sensor to provide a high image resolution thereby improving visualization of the target area. Additionally, at the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use a light source emitting light in a wavelength that corresponds to near infrared light because Applicant has not disclosed that using near infrared light provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. Applicant discloses that light source “emits non-white light such as infrared light, or near infrared (NIR) light, or light in another non-white range such as blue light” (par. [0082]). One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Wright’s imaging pen, and applicant’s invention, to perform equally well with either the light source taught by modified Wright or the claimed near infrared light source because both light sources would perform the same function of imaging tissues responsive to non-white light. Regarding claim 2, Wright in view of Ouyang disclose the hand-held, multi-band imaging pen of claim 1, in which the second light source comprises a source of blue light (Ouyang: 832; par. [0079]), but does not specifically disclose at least one of the first and second imaging sensors comprises a light sensor having spatial resolution of at least 2000 pixels in at least one dimension. Baumann teaches that imaging sensors are capable of providing HD resolution (e.g., 1280×720 pixels), FullHD resolution (e.g., 1920×1080 pixels), 2K resolution (e.g., 2048×1536 pixels), and even 4K resolution (e.g., 4096×3072 pixels) (see par. [0044]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use a 2K resolution or 4K resolution imaging sensor to provide a high image resolution thereby improving visualization of the target area. Regarding claim 3, Wright in view of Ouyang disclose the hand-held, multi-band imaging pen of claim 1, but does not specifically disclose in which each of sadi first and second image data has spatial resolution of at least 2000 pixels in at least one dimension. Baumann teaches that imaging sensors are capable of providing HD resolution (e.g., 1280×720 pixels), FullHD resolution (e.g., 1920×1080 pixels), 2K resolution (e.g., 2048×1536 pixels), and even 4K resolution (e.g., 4096×3072 pixels) (see par. [0044]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use a 2K resolution or 4K resolution imaging sensor to provide a high image resolution thereby improving visualization of the target area. Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wright in view of Ouyang as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Levy et al. (US 2021/0121045 A1). Regarding claim 6, Wright in view of Ouyang disclose the hand-held, multi-band imaging pen of claim 1, but does not specifically disclose further including a third light source emitting light from the housing to illuminate a third FOV and a third multi-pixel, 2D image sensor configured to image light from said third light source within said third FOV and produce third image data, and said wireless transmitter is further configured to receive said third image data and transmit the received third image date to the display. Levy teaches an analogous imaging instrument comprising a third light source (see Figs. 1C-1F; par. [0418]-[0423]) emitting light from the housing to illumination a third FOV and a third multi-pixel 2D image sensor (par. [0418]-[0423]; Figs. 1C-1F) configured to image light from said third light source within said third FOV and produce third image data. Levy teaches incorporation of multiple light sources and image sensors in order to provide a broader field of view of the target areas to the operator (abstract). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide a third light source and third image sensor to the pen of Wright in order to provide a broader field of view of the target areas to the operator, as taught by Levy. Additionally, such a modification provides a configuration wherein the wireless transmitter (236) can receive and transmit third image data to the display. Claim(s) 5, 13 and 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wright et al. (US 2020/0260935 A1) in view of Ouyang (US 2019/0216325 A1) in view of Ouyang et al. (US 2017/0188793 A1). Regarding claim 5, Wright in view of Ouyang disclose the hand-held, multi-band imaging pen of claim 1, but does not specifically disclose in which said tactile control interface comprises plural buttons mounted to and accessible from outside said housing and configured to operate respective functions of said light sources, image sensors and wireless transmitter. Ouyang et al. teaches an analogous imaging instrument (100; Fig. 9) wherein the housing includes a tactile control interface (Fig. 9) comprises plural buttons (160 and 162; Fig. 9; par. [0065]) mounted to and accessible from outside said housing and configured to operate respective functions of said light sources, image sensors and wireless transmitter (par. [0065]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to include buttons for power and image capture on the housing of Wright in order to allow the operator to preserve battery life and control image capture. Regarding claim 13, Wright in view of Ouyang disclose the hand-held, multi-band imaging pen of claim 15 (interpreted as claim 8), but does not specifically disclose in which said tactile control interface comprises plural buttons mounted to and accessible from outside said housing and configured to operate respective functions of said light sources, image sensors and wireless transmitter. Ouyang et al. teaches an analogous imaging instrument (100; Fig. 9) wherein the housing includes a tactile control interface (Fig. 9) comprises plural buttons (160 and 162; Fig. 9; par. [0065]) mounted to and accessible from outside said housing and configured to operate respective functions of said light sources, image sensors and wireless transmitter (par. [0065]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to include buttons for power and image capture on the housing of Wright in order to allow the operator to preserve battery life and control image capture. Regarding claim 15, Wright disclose a method of imaging a field of view (FOV) within or at a body, comprising: illuminating the FOV with a first light source (par. [0023] and [0029]) emitting light from an elongated, pen-shaped housing that is shaped and dimensioned for holding as a pen (Fig. 2); wherein the first light source (par. [0023] and [0029]) emits light in a first wavelengths range; sensing light within said FOV and within the first wavelength range by a first image sensor (234; par. [0025] and [0030]) to produce respective multi-pixel, two-dimensional image data of light from the first light source; controlling operation of said first light source and image sensor with a button (240; par. [0030]-[0031]) mounted to said housing; wirelessly transmitting (via 236; Fig. 2; par. [0030]) said image data to a display outside the housing (226; par. [0030]); and powering said light source, image sensor, and wireless transmitter with a power source inside the housing (via 238; par. [0030]-[0031]). Although Wright discloses its hand-held imaging pen comprising light sources of various wavelengths and sensors that are sensitive to particular wavelengths, fluorescence for example (par. [0023]), it does not specifically disclose the pen comprising a second source emitting light in a second wavelength different from the first wavelength; sensing light with the second wavelength range by a second image sensor to produce respective multi-pixel, two-dimensional image date of light from the second light source. Ouyang teaches an analogous imaging instrument having a first light source (834) that emits white light (par. [0079]; Fig. 8); a second source (832) emitting non-white light (par. [0079]; Fig. 8) in a second wavelength different from the first wavelength; a first image sensor (810; par. [0079]; Fig. 8) configured to image white light and produce white light image data (par. [0079]); and a second multi-pixel, two-dimensional (2D) image sensor (812; par. [0079]; Fig. 8) in the housing, configured to image non-white light from said second FOV and produce non-white light image data (par. [0079]). Ouyang teaches creating both white light images and non-white light images to provide improved visualization of tissue (par. [0061]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to include a second non-white light source and a second non-white image sensor in order to capture both white light images and non-white light images in order to provide improved visualization of tissue, as taught by Ouyang. However, Wright does not specifically teach more than one button on the housing for controlling operations of the light sources and image sensors. Ouyang et al. teaches an analogous imaging instrument (100; Fig. 9) wherein the housing includes a tactile control interface (Fig. 9) comprises plural buttons (160 and 162; Fig. 9; par. [0065]) mounted to and accessible from outside said housing and configured to operate respective functions of said light sources, image sensors and wireless transmitter (par. [0065]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to include buttons for power and image capture on the housing of Wright in order to allow the operator to preserve battery life and control image capture. Regarding claim 16, Wright in view of Ouyang in view of Ouyang et al. disclose the method of claim 18 (interpreted as claim 15), in which said first wavelength range corresponds to white light (par. [0023] and [0029]). At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use a light source emitting light in a wavelength that corresponds to infrared light because Applicant has not disclosed that using infrared light provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. Applicant discloses that light source “emits non-white light such as infrared light, or near infrared (NIR) light, or light in another non-white range such as blue light” (par. [0082]). One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Wright’s imaging pen, and applicant’s invention, to perform equally well with either the light source taught by modified Wright or the claimed infrared light source because both light sources would perform the same function of imaging tissues responsive to non-white light. Regarding claim 17, Wright in view of Ouyang disclose the method of claim 18 (interpreted as claim 15), wherein the first (par. [0023] and [0029]; Ouyang: 834) and second light sources (Ouyang: 832) are at a single longitudinal end of the housing (Fig. 2; Ouyang: Fig. 8). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 7 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The prior art of record does not specifically disclose, or otherwise render obvious, a hand-held, multi-band imaging pen in which the first light source is at one longitudinal end of the housing and the second light source is at an opposite longitudinal end of the housing, in combination with the other elements of the claim. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYNAE E BOLER whose telephone number is (571)270-3620. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00-5:00. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anhtuan Nguyen can be reached at 571-272-4963. 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. /RYNAE E BOLER/Examiner, Art Unit 3795 /ANH TUAN T NGUYEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795 11/10/2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 19, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 10, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599292
AN ARTICULATED BENDING SECTION BODY FOR AN INSERTION ENDOSCOPE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593965
ENDOSCOPE WITH A THREE-WIRE STEERING MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588802
CONNECTION JOINT, ENDOSCOPE, AND METHOD OF CONNECTING TUBE AND CONNECTION JOINT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582295
ENDOSCOPE TUBULAR CONNECTOR AND ENDOSCOPE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582489
MOUNTING AN ENDOSCOPE TO A SURGICAL ROBOT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
62%
Grant Probability
69%
With Interview (+7.3%)
4y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 485 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