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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 1-9 and 18-25 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected Groups I and III, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on April 13th, 2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II (Claims 10-17) in the reply filed on April 13th, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claims 10, 14, and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 10 recites “the SPAD sensor” in line 15, but should read “the SPAD image sensor”
Claim 10 recites “the SPAD sensor” in line 19, but should read “the SPAD image sensor” Claim 10 recites “the SPAD sensor” in line 22, but should read “the SPAD image sensor”
Claim 14 recites “the SPAD sensor” in line 3, but should read “the SPAD image sensor”
Claim 17 recites “instrument of claim 10” in line 1, but should read “instrument for performing time of flight surface mapping and fluorescent depth estimation of claim 10”
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 10-17 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.
Claim 10 recites “one of” in line 11. Further in line 12, Claim 10 recites “and”. These two terms conflict one another. Examiner cannot definitively ascertain whether this is an alternative limitation or if both limitations are required. The Examiner will interpret the claim as in the alternative.
Claim 10 recites “a plurality of SPAD images of the tissue taken at time increments of the SPAD sensor gate time resolution” in lines 21-22. It is unclear as to whether this limitation is referring to the previously introduced “a plurality of SPAD images of the tissue taken at time increments of the SPAD sensor gate time resolution” from lines 18-20, or a separate element.
Claim 10 recites “one of” in line 25. Further in line 26, Claim 10 recites “and”. These two terms conflict one another. Examiner cannot definitively ascertain whether this is an alternative limitation or if both limitations are required. The Examiner will interpret the claim as in the alternative.
Claim 11 recites “at least one efferent optical fiber” in line 3. It is unclear as to whether this limitation is referring to the previously introduced “efferent optical fiber” from Claim 10, or a separate element.
Claim 11 recites “a dispersive lens configured to illuminate the tissue with light” in lines 3-4. It is unclear as to whether this limitation is referring to the previously introduced “dispersive lens” from Claim 10, or a separate element.
Claim 12 recites “the efferent optical fiber” in line 4. It is unclear as to whether this limitation is referring to the previously introduced “efferent optical fiber” from Claim 10, “at least one efferent optical fiber” from Claim 11, or a separate element.
Claim 13 recites “an optical microscopy optical system” in line 3. It is unclear as to whether this limitation is referring to the previously introduced “microscope optical system” from Claim 10, or a separate element.
Claim 14 recites “the coherent fiber bundle” in line 3. It is unclear as to whether this limitation is referring to the previously introduced “a coherent fiber bundle” from Claim 11, “a second coherent fiber bundle” from Claim 12, or a separate element.
Claim 17 recites “time gate resolution” in line 1. It is unclear as to whether this limitation is referring to the previously introduced “SPAD sensor gate time resolution” from Claim 10, or a separate element.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Leblond et al (U.S. Publication No. 2011/0275932; cited by Applicant) teaches a tomographic fluorescent imaging device for imaging fluorophores in biological tissues comprising: a scanned laser for scanning the tissue and a camera for receiving light from the biological tissue at an angle to the beam at a second wavelength ten or more nanometers greater in wavelength than the wavelength of the laser, and furthermore uses differences in intensity of fluorescent radiation from tissue as observed at different wavelengths to determine depth of fluorophore in tissue.
Dinten et al (U.S. Publication No. 2013/0162793) teaches a system for reconstructing optical properties of a diffusing medium, the reconstruction system comprising: at least one pulsed radiation source capable of illuminating the diffusing medium, at least one first detector of a first type, capable of receiving a signal emitted by the medium, the or each first detector being a time-resolved detector, and means for processing, for at least one source—first detector pair, a time distribution of the signal received by the corresponding first detector.
Herve (U.S. Publication No. 2013/0158926) teaches a method for reconstructing the optical properties of a medium using a reconstruction system having a radiation source illuminating a medium and a detector receiving a signal emitted by the medium, wherein the detector comprises a single-photon avalanche photodiode (SPAD). The method further includes establishing, for a source-detector pair, a first distribution of a signal received by the detector for a reference medium, the received signal emitted by the reference medium subsequent to the illumination of the medium by the source, determining, for the source-detector pair, a first modeling function of a light scattering signal between the source and the detector in the reference medium, establishing, for the source-detector pair, a second distribution of a signal received by the detector for the medium, the received signal being emitted by the medium to be characterized subsequent to illumination of said medium by the source, and computing a signal corrected as a function of the first modeling function and of the second distribution.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHANEL J YOON whose telephone number is (571) 272-2695. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:00AM-5:00PM.
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, Alexander Valvis can be reached on 571-272-4233. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/CHANEL J YOON/Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights