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. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 5 and 16 are 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Lind et al. does not expressly disclose wherein the deployable leg comprises a torsional spring that rotates along an axis during the transition to the second configuration to thread the leg through the iris and wherein the deployable portion comprises a torsional spring and a hooked end that rotates along an axis during the transition to the second configuration to thread the hooked end through the iris. 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. Claim(s) 1- 4, 6 , 10, 12-15 and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Lind et al. U.S. Publication 2014/0107459 A1 . Regarding Claim 1, Lind et al. discloses an intraocular implant 200 comprising: an intraocular device 215 operable to detect a characteristic of an eye (paragraphs [0024-0025], [0033]) ; and an attachment mechanism 225a, 225b coupled to the intraocular device 215 (as seen in Figure 2-3 and paragraph [0036]) , the attachment mechanism 225a, 225b operable to transition between a first configuration (as seen in Figures 5 and 8, compressed configuration) and a second configuration to secure the intraocular device to the eye (as seen in Figures 6, 7 and 9-10, expanded configuration and paragraph [0037]) . Regarding Claim 2, Lind et al. discloses wherein the intraocular device 215 comprises an intraocular pressure sensor 220 (paragraph s [0027] , [0033] and [00 57 ]) . Regarding Claim 3, Lind et al. discloses wherein the attachment mechanism 225a, 225b comprises a deployable leg (as seen in Figures 5-10) . Regarding Claim 4, Lind et al. discloses wherein the deployable leg 225a, 225b transitions between the first configuration in which the deployable leg is compressed (as seen in Figures 5 and 8, compressed configuration) and the second configuration in which the deployable leg is extended to secure the intraocular device to an iris of the eye (as seen in Figures 6, 7 and 9-10, expanded configuration and paragraph [0037]). Regarding Claim 6, Lind et al. discloses wherein the intraocular device 215 and the attachment mechanism are coplanar (as seen in Figure 3 and paragraph [0040] ) . Regarding Claim 10, Lind et al. discloses wherein the attachment mechanism comprises a first structure 225a extending form one side of a body portion and operable to be inserted into a tissue of the eye and a second structure 225b extending from an opposite side of the body portion and operable to be inserted into the tissue of the eye (as seen in Figures 5-7 and paragraphs [0045-0047]) . Regarding Claim 12, Lind et al. discloses wherein the second structure comprises a different structure than the first structure (different because the curve of 225b is opposite of the curve of 225a and as seen in Figures 2, 7 and 10) . Regarding Claim 13, Lind et al. discloses an intraocular implant 200 comprising: an intraocular device 215 coupled to an attachment mechanism 225a, 225b (as seen in Figure 2-3 and paragraphs [0024-0025], [0027], [0033] , [0036] and [003 8 ]) operable to transition between a first configuration (as seen in Figures 5 and 8, compressed configuration) and a second configuration to secure the intraocular device to an eye (as seen in Figures 6, 7 and 9-10, expanded configuration and paragraph [0037]) ; and a delivery device 600 operable to deliver the intraocular device 215 to the eye and manipulate the attachment mechanism to transition between the first configuration and the second configuration (as seen in Figures 5-10 and paragraphs [0037], [0052] and [0054]) . Regarding Claim 14, Lind et al. discloses wherein the intraocular device 215 comprises an intraocular pressure sensor 220 (paragraphs [0027], [0033] and [0057] and as seen in Figures 2 and 10 ) . Regarding Claim 15, Lind et al. discloses wherein the attachment mechanism comprises a deployable portion that is manipulated by the delivery device (the tubular housing 602 compresses the “legs” 225a, 225b inside) transition between the first configuration in which the deployable portion is compressed and the second configuration in which the deployable portion is extended to secure the intraocular device to an iris of the eye (the translation of the “legs”225a, 225b out of the tubular housing 602 allows the transition to a second configuration in which the “legs” are expanded, paragraphs [0037] and [0049-0054]) . Regarding Claim 17, Lind et al. discloses wherein the intraocular device 215 and the attachment mechanism (“legs” 225a, 225b) are coplanar (as seen in Figure 3 and paragraph [0040] ) . Regarding Claim 19, Lind et al. discloses wherein the attachment mechanism comprises a first structure operable to be inserted into a tissue of the eye and a second structure different from the first structure (different because the curve of 225b is opposite of the curve of 225a) that is operable to be inserted into the tissue of the eye (paragraphs [0036 ]) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness . Claim(s) 7-9 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lind et al. U.S. Publication 2014/0107459 A1 in view of Lepe et al. WO 2022/035889 A1. Regarding Claim s 7, 8, 9, Lind et al. discloses wherein the intraocular device 215 and the attachment mechanism are coplanar (as seen in Figure 3 and paragraph [0040]). However, Lind et al. does not expressly disclose wherein the attachment mechanism comprises a planar substrate having a first gripping portion and a second gripping portion that are manipulated by the delivery device to open to define a gap in the first configuration and close to grip a tissue within the gap in the second configuration to secure the intraocular device to the eye and wherein the first gripping portion and the second gripping portion move within a plane of the device to open and close the gap and wherein the first gripping portion and the second gripping portion are a first pair of gripping portions, and the attachment mechanism further comprises a second pair of gripping portions having a first gripping portion and a second gripping portion . Lepe et al. teaches an implant 300 for measuring intraocular device 310 comprising an intraocular pressure sensor 608 (housing 310 includes a pressure sensor 608, see paragraphs [0098-0100]) and an attachment mechanism 330 coupled to the intraocular device 310 (see Figure 3A-3B and paragraphs [0089-0090]), wherein the attachment mechanism comprises a planar substrate having a pairs of first gripping portion and a second gripping portion (portions 344 that forms the two ends/walls of the C shaped attachment mechanism are formed on both sides of the intraocular device 310 forming said pairs), wherein Lepe et al. teaches the gripping portions are manipulated during the delivery process to have a gap 342 in the first configuration (as seen in Figure 3A , paragraphs [0090-0091] ) and is closed to grip tissue in the second configuration to position the device within the eye tissue (as seen in Figure 3B, paragraphs [0089-009 1 ]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lind’s attachment mechanism to further include a planar substrate having a first pair of gripping portions and a second pair of gripping portions as taught by Lepe et al. for the purpose of having a support clamp that can be manipulated during the delivery process to form a gap in the first configuration and is closed in the second configuration to grip eye tissue and secure the device within the eye tissue. Regarding Claim 18, Lind et al. discloses wherein the intraocular device 215 and the attachment mechanism are coplanar (as seen in Figure 3 and paragraph [0040]). However, Lind et al. does not expressly disclose wherein the attachment mechanism comprises a planar substrate having a first gripping portion and a second gripping portion that are manipulated by the delivery device to open to define a gap in the first configuration and close to grip a tissue within the gap in the second configuration to secure the intraocular device to the eye. Lepe et al. teaches an implant 300 for measuring intraocular device 310 comprising an intraocular pressure sensor 608 (housing 310 includes a pressure sensor 608, see paragraphs [0098-0100]) and an attachment mechanism 330 coupled to the intraocular device 310 (see Figure 3A-3B and paragraphs [0089-0090]), wherein the attachment mechanism comprises a planar substrate having a first gripping portion and a second gripping portion (portion s 344 that forms the two ends/walls of the C shaped attachment mechanism) , wherein Lepe et al. teaches the gripping portions are manipulated during the delivery process to have a gap 342 in the first configuration (as seen in Figure 3A) and is closed to grip tissue n the second configuration to position the device within the eye tissue (paragraphs [0089-009 1 ]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lind’s attachment mechanism to further include a planar substrate having a first gripping portion and a second gripping portion as taught by Lepe et al. for the purpose of having a support clamp that can be manipulated during the delivery process to form a gap in the first configuration and is closed in the second configuration to grip eye tissue and secure the device within the eye tissue. Claim(s) 11 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lind et al. U.S. Publication 2014/0107459 A1 in view of De Juan et al. WO 2015/148673 A1 . Regarding Claims 11, 20, Lind et al. does not expressly disclose wherein the first structure comprises a beveled blade edge. De Juan et al. teaches an intraocular implant 100 as seen in Figures 2A-2H in the same field of endeavor for implantation in the eye to replace a diseased natural lens, wherein the intraocular device 105 coupled to an attachment mechanism 115 having a first structure 135 extending form one side of a body portion and operable to be inserted into a tissue of the eye 18 and a second structure 135 extending from an opposite side of the body portion and operable to be inserted into the tissue of the eye 18 (as seen in Figures 2E, 2H and see Figures 6-8B showing the attachment of attachment mechanism 115 having the beveled edge 135 to the eye 18), wherein the first structure 135 comprises a beveled sharpened edge for the purpose of having surface features that improve contact and interdigitation with the eye tissue without causing damage (paragraph [0101]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lind’s first structure to further include a beveled sharpened edge as taught by De Juan et al. for the purpose of having surface features that improve contact and interdigitation with the eye tissue without causing damage. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEEMA MATHEW whose telephone number is (571) 270-1452. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9 am – 5 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, please contact the examiner’s supervisor, SPE, Melanie Tyson at ( 571 ) 272-9062. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov . 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. /SEEMA MATHEW/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3774