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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/18/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that “Akbari does not disclose "a light source configured to generate a spatially-distributed illumination beam of temporally-varying light, but rather multiple beams, each of which may be either temporally or spatially modulated”, the fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985).
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-13, 16-19, and 21-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Akbari et al. (Pub. No.: US 2021/0338092).
Consider claims 1, 17, Akbari discloses an optical imaging system (paragraph [0142], Spatial Frequency Domain Imaging (SFDI) and Laser Speckle Imaging (LSI)), comprising:
a light source configured to generate a spatially-distributed illumination beam of temporally-varying light (paragraph [0068], light sources may be configured to emit modulated light signal including temporal modulation and/or spatial modulation);
a detector configured to detect light resulting from an interaction between the illumination beam and a sample (paragraph [0068], detectors may be configured to detect one or more backscattered light signals to allow for determination of a value of the tissue absorption metric and the tissue scattering metric); and
a processor configured to: determine spatial and temporal characteristics of the detected light (paragraph [0074], frequency-domain diffuse optical spectroscopy (FD-DOS) may be used to separate tissue absorption and scattering coefficients by using modulated light); and
generate a representation of the sample based on the determined spatial and temporal characteristics (paragraph [0068], modulated light signal may allow for measurement of a tissue absorption metric and a tissue scattering metric wherein tissue scattering metrics obtained from frequency domain photon migration (FDPM), see paragraphs [0099] and [0100] [0138]).
Consider claims 2, 18, Akbari discloses wherein the light resulting from the interaction is light transmitted through the sample (paragraph [0121], Illuminate the tissue with the coherent and incoherent light source(s)).
Consider claims 3, 19, Akbari discloses wherein the detected light is diffuse light (paragraph [0148], diffuse reflectance against tissue).
Consider claims 5, 21, Akbari discloses wherein spatial and temporal variations of the illumination beam are according to a modulation function (paragraph [0068], modulated light signal may allow for measurement of a tissue absorption metric and a tissue scattering metric wherein tissue scattering metrics obtained from frequency domain photon migration (FDPM), see paragraphs [0099] and [0100]), and wherein the processor is further configured to demodulate the detected light to determine the characteristics with based on the modulation function (paragraph [0147], demodulation).
Consider claim 6, Akbari discloses wherein the temporal characteristics comprise frequency domain data from the sample, and wherein the processor is further configured to spatially resolve the obtained frequency domain data to generate the representation of the sample (paragraph [0068], modulated light signal may allow for measurement of a tissue absorption metric and a tissue scattering metric wherein tissue scattering metrics obtained from frequency domain photon migration (FDPM), see paragraphs [0099] and [0100]).
Consider claims 7, 23, Akbari discloses wherein the light source comprises a projector configured to project light according to a source pattern to generate a series of spatially- modulated illumination beams (paragraph [0046], Fig. 15, spatial light modulator that acts as a projector).
Consider claims 8, 24, Akbari discloses wherein the detector is a collector configured to collect light from the sample using a detection pattern controlled independently of the source pattern (paragraph [0070], device may comprise two or more detectors with different source-detector separations, and the different source-detector separations may allow the device to distinguish between signals from different depth).
Consider claims 9, 25, Akbari discloses wherein the temporally-varying light comprises intensity-modulated and spatially-modulated light (paragraph [0068]).
Consider claims 10, 11, 26, 27, Akbari discloses wherein the light source comprises a projector configured to project light of at least two fixed wavelengths (paragraph [0046], Fig. 15, SFDI, light-emitting diodes (LEDs) of 655 nm, 730 nm, and 850 nm are sequentially sent into a spatial light modulator that acts as a projector).
Consider claims 12, 28, Akbari discloses wherein the light source is configured to project light of a wavelength associated with detection of a dynamic physiological property of biological tissue (paragraph [0095], delivers light at the higher-energy range of the visible spectrum (e.g., 655 nm) for sensitivity to deoxyhemoglobin, and the other fiber delivers light at the lower-energy range of the near-infrared spectrum (e.g., 850 nm) for sensitivity to oxyhemoglobin).
Consider claims 13, 29, Akbari discloses wherein the wavelength provides for detection of a concentration of at least one of deoxygenated hemoglobin (Hb), oxygenated hemoglobin (HbOz), water (H20), and lipids (paragraph [0065], oxygenated hemoglobin concentration, deoxygenated hemoglobin concentration).
Consider claims 16, 30, Akbari discloses wherein the representation of the sample comprises an absorption map, a scattering map, or a combination thereof (paragraph [0068], modulated light signal may allow for measurement of a tissue absorption metric and a tissue scattering metric wherein tissue scattering metrics obtained from frequency domain photon migration (FDPM), see paragraphs [0099] and [0100]).
Consider claim 22, Akbari discloses wherein the temporal characteristics comprise frequency domain data for the sample, and wherein the method further comprises spatially resolving the obtained frequency domain data with a tomographic reconstruction of the sample to generate the representation of the sample (paragraph [0068], modulated light signal may allow for measurement of a tissue absorption metric and a tissue scattering metric wherein tissue scattering metrics obtained from frequency domain photon migration (FDPM), see paragraphs [0099] and [0100] while using positron emission tomography (PET), see paragraph [0138]).
Claims 4, 14, 15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akbari in view of Krishnaswamy et al. (Pat. No.: US 10,485,425).
Consider claims 4, 20, Akbari discloses does not specifically disclose wherein the spatially-distributed illumination beam comprises a wide-field illumination beam.
Krishnaswamy discloses wherein the spatially-distributed illumination beam comprises a wide-field illumination beam (col. 3, line 61 to col. 4, line 20, spatial frequency domain imaging (SFDI)) is a reflectance-based wide-field imaging modality).
Therefore, in order to reflect light that contains information from different feature scales and sampling volumes, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the same technique as suggested by Krishnaswamy wherein the spatially-distributed illumination beam comprises a wide-field illumination beam, see teaching found in Krishnaswamy, col. 3, line 61 to col. 4, line 20.
Consider claims 14, 15, Akbari does not specifically disclose wherein the detector is a wide-field sensor.
Krishnaswamy discloses wherein the detector is a wide-field sensor (col. 8, lines 17 to 22, illuminate and image the tissue surface with three or more phases of structured light to extract the demodulated response at each pixel of the tissue field).
Therefore, in order to determine biologically interesting results from these ratios as well as the scatter parameters, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the same technique as suggested by Krishnaswamy wherein the detector is a wide-field sensor, see teaching found in Krishnaswamy, col. 7, line 65 to col. 8, line 16.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GERALD JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7685. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm EST.
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, Carey Michael can be reached at (571)270-7235. 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.
/Gerald Johnson/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797