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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because
each partial view must be identified by the same number followed by a capital letter (37 CFR 1.84(u)). For instance, instant “A”, “B” and “C” under Fig.12 should labeled as Fig. 12A, Fig. 12B and Fig. 12C, respectively;
numbers and letters identifying the view must be larger than the numbers used for reference characters (37 CFR 1.84(u)). For instance, identifier “FIG. 13 A” is not larger than the letters and numbers in the drawing. This applies to Figs.13A-13B, Figs.14A-14D, Figs.16A-16D, and Figs.20A-20B.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The first paragraph of the specification under Cross-Reference to Related Applications requires updating as to the status of the parent application (i.e. patent number).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“optical element” in claim 1;
“optical element” in claim 5.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 5-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tsuruta et al. (US 2018/0199801, hereinafter “Tsuruta”).
As to claim 5, Tsuruta discloses an endoscope system capable of operating in a normal observation mode for irradiating a biological tissue with white light to obtain a first image and a special observation mode for irradiating the biological tissue with light of a specific wavelength band to obtain a second image, comprising:
a lamp (xenon lamp 71, Fig.1B) that irradiates the biological tissue with illumination light ([0034]);
an optical element (beam splitter 23, Figs.1,2) that includes a layer of an optical filter instead of a beam splitting film (beam splitter includes a filter surface layer, [0053]), transmits a first wavelength band light (passes a visible light band, [0053],[0086]), which is light of a predetermined wavelength band group in the reflected light from the biological tissue generated by irradiating the biological tissue with the illumination light (visible light is part of light coming from object surface 61, Fig.2, [0083]), through the layer of the optical filter, reflects a second wavelength band light (reflects wavelength bands other than visible band, [0053],[0086], which is light of a wavelength group other than the predetermined wavelength band group on the layer of the optical filter (other wavelength bands S Excitation light , S Fluorescence light and L Fluorescence light, Fig.2), and outputs the first wavelength band light and the second wavelength band light (visible light leaves beam splitter 23 toward image sensor 25, Fig.2 and other bands leaves beam splitter toward image sensor 26);
a first image sensor (image pickup device 25) that generates first image data corresponding to light of the predetermined wavelength band group based on the first wavelength band light ([0050]);
a second image sensor (image pickup device 26) that generates second image data corresponding to light of a wavelength group other than the predetermined wavelength band group based on the second wavelength band light ([0050]);
an image processor (image processing section 46) that performs predetermined image processing based on the first image data and the second image data ([0057]); and
a display processor (part of image processing section 46) that outputs a calculation result of the image processor (outputs processed images to monitor 5, [0057]).
As to claim 6, wherein the first wavelength band light and the second wavelength band light are lights having a complementary relationship with respect to a wavelength group (with respect to the wavelength group of all wavelengths, the first wavelength band (visible band) and second wavelength band (near-infrared band) have a complementary relationship so as to form the entire wavelength group when combined, Fig.3).
As to claim 7, wherein the optical filter has a characteristic of transmitting light of 452±3 nm to 502±3 nm, light of 524±3 nm to 582±3nm, and light of 630±3 nm to 700±3 nm (transmits visible wavelengths of 400-700 nm, Fig.3)
As to claim 8, Tsuruta further discloses a correction optical filter (filter 24, Fig.2) that transmits a part of the second wavelength band light (blocks part of the second wavelengths, Fig.2, [0053]), wherein the second image sensor generates the second image data based on the light that has been transmitted through the correction optical filter (image sensor 26 generates and image of only light transmitted through filter 24, [0050][0053]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 1-4 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Claim 1 recites a combination of elements including a lamp that irradiates the biological tissue with illumination light, an optical element that divides reflected light from the biological tissue generated by irradiating the biological tissue with the illumination light, and outputs at least a first reflected light and a second reflected light, a first optical filter that transmits light of a wavelength band of a first group in the first reflected light, a second optical filter that transmits light of a wavelength band of a second group containing a part of wavelength band of the first group, a first image sensor that generates first image data corresponding to light of a predetermined wavelength band based on light of the wavelength band of the first group, a second image sensor that generates second image data corresponding to light of a wavelength band, which is contained in the predetermined wavelength band and narrower than the predetermined band, based on light of the wavelength band of the second group, an image processor that calculates a feature of a spectral characteristic of the biological tissue in the wavelength band narrower than the predetermined wavelength band by dividing the first image data by the second image data. and a display processor that outputs a calculation result of the image processor, wherein an exposure time of the second image sensor is set to be longer than an exposure time of the first image sensor. Although the prior art of record discloses an endoscope system that filters reflected light into overlapping wideband and narrowband images for obtaining a ratio (e.g. dividing) between such images (see for example, US 2002/0177780 to Sendai et al., [0008],[0146]), and discloses different exposure times for images obtained for different wavelength bands (see for example, US 2023/0408806, Fig.7A, [0229]), the prior art of record, even taken in combination, would not make obvious setting the exposure time of the second image sensor (forming the narrower band image) to be longer than an exposure time of the first image sensor (forming the wider band image). This is because it is the intensity ratio that is being sought as a useable parameter in the prior art, and setting a longer exposure time for the second image sensor, and thus increasing the intensity of the sensed image, will obviate the reason for obtaining the ratio between the two images. Since the prior art of record does not explicitly teach or fairly suggest, alone or in combination, each and every feature recited in claim 1, claim 1 is allowable over the prior art of record.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references cited on attached PTO-892, and not applied in this Office Action are cited as being relevant to certain claim features individually, or relevant to purpose being accomplished by the disclosed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN P LEUBECKER whose telephone number is (571)272-4769. The examiner can normally be reached Generally, M-F, 5:30-2:00.
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 T 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.
/JOHN P LEUBECKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3795