DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the feature portion" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-2, and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arikawa (US 2021/0259538) in view of Moon et al. (US 2021/0353141).
Regarding claim 1, Arikawa discloses an ophthalmologic apparatus 1 comprising a main body 6 comprising a measurement optical system 2 that is configured to measure eye characteristics of a subject eye E of a subject in a state where the subject has placed his or her chin on a chin rest 11 (figure 1; [0086]), an anterior ocular segment camera 90/60 that is provided in the main body, the anterior ocular segment camera being configured to acquire an anterior ocular segment image by imaging an anterior ocular segment of the subject ([0085], [0090]), and a controller 70 that is configured to control each element of the apparatus ([0088]), wherein the controller comprises an alignment controller that is configured to perform control to adjust a relative positional relationship between the subject eye and the main body based on the anterior ocular segment image ([0170]-[0171], Step S163: Full-Automatic Alignment), and wherein the alignment controller comprises an imaging start mode controller, the imaging start mode controller being configured, when it is determined that the subject eye does not appear in the anterior ocular segment image in an imaging start mode of the anterior ocular segment by the anterior ocular segment camera ([0151], [0206]), to calculate a predicted position of the subject eye based on image recognition of a face part of the subject appearing in the anterior ocular segment image automatically following the determination ([0151], [0159]) or automatically after performing at least notification following the determination ([0154]-[0155], [0159]-[0161]), and to perform control of movement toward the calculated predicted position of the subject eye ([0157]-[0159], [0166]-[0167], [0207]). Arikawa discloses all the claimed limitations except wherein the imaging start mode controller is configured, when it is determined that the subject eye does not appear in the anterior ocular segment image, to detect a feature portion of a face of the subject from the anterior ocular segment image in which the subject eye does not appear and to calculate a predicted position of the subject eye from a positional relationship between the detected feature portion and the subject eye in an entire face. Within the same field of endeavor, Moon discloses this teaching ([0118]-[0119]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to implement this feature for the purpose of calculating a predicted position of the subject eye from a positional relationship between the detected feature portion and the subject eye in an entire face.
Regarding claim 2, Arikawa further discloses wherein the imaging start mode controller is configured, when the subject eye is detected in the anterior ocular segment image from the anterior ocular segment camera after starting the control of movement toward a predicted presence position of the subject eye, to stop the movement at a stage of the detection and to switch to normal alignment control (figure 11, “YES” branch of steps S1300 and S1700).
Regarding claim 5, Arikawa discloses all the claimed limitations except wherein the imaging start mode controller comprises a learned feature portion detection model that is constructed in advance by execution of machine learning using a large number of generated machine learning data sets of feature portion images and a selected machine learning model, and wherein the imaging start mode controller is configured to detect a feature portion of the face based on image recognition using the anteriorocular segment image in which the subject eye does not appear and the learned feature portion detection model. Within the same field of endeavor, Moon discloses this teaching ([0118]-[0119]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to implement this feature for the purpose of executing of machine learning using a large number of generated machine learning data sets of feature portion images and a selected machine learning model.
Regarding claim 6, Arikawa discloses all the claimed limitations except wherein the imaging start mode controller comprises a learned individual portion detection model for an eyebrow, a contour, a nose, and a mouth constructed in advance by execution of machine learning using a large number of generated machine learning data sets of feature portion images and a selected machine learning model, and wherein a detection order for each of the feature portions is set such that detection of the eyebrow is prioritized over detection of the contour and detection of the nose and the mouth when the feature portion of the face is detected based on the image recognition using the anterior ocular segment image in which the subject eye does not appear and the learned individual portion detection model. Within the same field of endeavor, Moon discloses this teaching ([0118]-[0119]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to implement this feature for the purpose of executing of machine learning using a large number of generated machine learning data sets of feature portion images and a selected machine learning model.
Regarding claim 7, Arikawa discloses all the claimed limitations except wherein the feature portion of the face refers to a part of the face, comprising an eyebrow, a contour, a nose, a mouth, or an ear, from which the position of the subject eye is predicted based on the positional relationship in the entire face image by specifying a partially appearing face part among portions of the face other than the subject eye by image recognition. However, predicting based on the positional relationship with varying degrees is obvious to one skilled in the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to implement this feature for prediction purpose.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arikawa (US 2021/0259538) in view of Moon et al. (US 2021/0353141), and further in view of Topcon (JP 2018/0198967).
Regarding claim 3, Arikawa in view of Moon discloses all the claimed limitations except wherein the imaging start mode controller is configured, when it is determined that the subject eye does not appear in the anterior ocular segment image and a presence position of the subject eye cannot be predicted, to decrease magnification of the anterior ocular segment camera and to acquire the anterior ocular segment image from the anterior ocular segment camera again. Within the same field of endeavor, Topcon discloses this teaching ([0093]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to implement this feature for the purpose of decreasing magnification of the anterior ocular segment camera and acquiring the anterior ocular segment image from the anterior ocular segment camera again.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 2/19/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Arikawa does not perform image recognition of a face part, such as an eyebrow, appearing in the anterior ocular segment image, nor does Arikawa calculate a predicted position of the subject eye based on image recognition of the face part appearing in the anterior ocular segment image when it is determined that the subject eye does not appear in the anterior ocular segment image (when the examinee's eye is not detected). In particular, Arikawa does not disclose a face part appearing in the anterior ocular segment image. As described in item d) above, in Arikawa, when the examinee's eye is not detected, the controller 70 then detects the position of the eye based on the photographed signal from the face photographing part 90. However, the face photographing part 90 photographs the face including at least one of the examinee's left and right eyes ([0085]), and thus, the controller 70 controls the driving part 4 based on the photographed subject eye. Accordingly, Arikawa does not perform control based on a face part nor calculation of a predicted position based on a face part. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The language used in the arguments were not cited in the claims. Therefore, the prior art stills read based on the broadest reasonable interpretations.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any 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 JACK DINH whose telephone number is (571)272-2327. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am-5pm.
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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at 571-272-2713. 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.
/JACK DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 7/29/26
Prosecution Insights