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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 03/13/2025, 01/28/2026, 04/08/2026, 06/30/2026, and 07/29/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Acknowledgement is made of the preliminary amendment filed on 12/14/2023 in which claims 1-50 and 69-214 were canceled, therefore claims 51-68 are pending for examination below.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 51, 55-57, 60, and 64-66 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Gupta et al. [US 2018/0243083].
With respect to claims 51 and 60, Gupta discloses an intraocular pressure (IOP) sensing [par. 0021,0043] system comprising: an IOP sensing implant configured to be implanted into a patient's eye [par. 0001,0040], the IOP sensing implant including a supercapacitor for supplying at least a portion of operating power for the IOP sensing implant [par. 0049-0053]; and an external charging device [par. 0004-0005, 0023-0027] configured to charge the IOP sensing implant, the external charging device including an output device for providing a prompt to the patient to carry out a charging interaction between the external device and the IOP sensing implant [par. 0040].
With respect to claims 55-57 and 64-66, Gupta further discloses wherein the storage capacity of the storage capacitor is at least 1 micro amp-hour (which is inclusive of being greater than both 0.1 and 0.01 micro amp-hours) [par. 0050-0053; which discloses the device draws 120 microwatts and therefore a minimum storage of 1 micro Ah would run a matter of minutes, so at minimum, even needing charged 6 times a day, the storage would be at smallest an order of magnitude around 22 micro watt hours, standard operating voltages of supercapacitors being 2.7V yields 8 micro amp hours and even assuming a large voltage of 5V still yields 4.5 micro Ah, four times greater than claimed].
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.
Claim(s) 52 and 61 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta et al. [US 2018/0243083] as applied above, and further in view of Youker [US 7,917,207].
With respect to claims 52 and 61, Gupta discloses battery and capacitor being used as detail above but fails to explicitly disclose the combination. Utilizing a combination of batteries and capacitors for power storage is well-known in the art to take advantage of the implicit features presented by each storage. Batteries provide higher energy density and capacitors provide faster output and lack the reactive chemicals used in batteries. For example, Youker relates to an implantable device and teaches wherein the implant further includes both a capacitor and a battery for supplying at least a portion of the operating power for the IOP sensing implant [Fig. 1 and 5].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to modify Gupta to utilize the battery/capacitor combo for the benefit of making implantable electronic devices physically smaller in an efficient manner as suggested by Youker.
Claim(s) 53-54 and 62-63 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta et al. [US 2018/0243083] as applied above.
With respect to claims 53-54 and 62-63, Gupta further discloses wherein the external charging device is configured to output the prompt at charging interaction times [par. 0040; i.e. notify that it is time to recharge], while also disclosing specific power draw and storage capabilities of batteries and capacitors [par. 0050-0053] that suggest the storage capacity of the supercapacitor is greater than the expected energy usage of the IOP sensing implant between charging interaction times [i.e. use of a battery type material with more energy density] and suggests wherein the storage capacity of the supercapacitor is less than the expected energy usage of the IOP sensing implant between charging interaction times [i.e. use of a capacitor that needs recharged “6 times per day”]. While it is not explicitly disclosed by Gupta that the storage is exactly less or more that an expected energy usage it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to modify Gupta to use the storage type that is either less than or more than the expected energy usage [i.e. battery or capacitor] design constraints listed (more energy density versus safety versus size versus weight at detailed by Gupta). The benefit of having more capacity provides less user interruption requiring recharging and the benefit of having less capacity provides a more stabile storage type and smaller size.
Claim(s) 58-69 and 67-68 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta et al. [US 2018/0243083] as applied above, and further in view of Bell et al. [US 10,170,917].
With respect to claims 58-59 and 67-68, Gupta discloses communicating with external user devices including prompts to carry out charging as detailed above, but fails to explicitly disclose prompting/sending additional data to synchronize a timekeeping device onboard the IOP sensing implant and download measurement data from the IOP sensing implant.
Sending multiple messages is known in the art, for example, Bell relates to a system for managing wireless power and teaches a power transmitter enabled to send multiple messages including status and data [col. 30 lines 5-40].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to modify Gupta to further send coinciding messages/prompts relating to timekeeping and downloading to the user for the benefit of ensuring the user sees all relevant information regarding the devices during times when the user is known to be using and looking at the device (recharging operation where the user aligns the wireless coils within range).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANIEL R PELTON whose telephone number is (571)270-1761. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 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, Julian Huffman can be reached at 571-272-2147. 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.
/NATHANIEL R PELTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
