DETAILED ACTION
Priority
1. Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a) — (d), which papers have been placed of record in the file. Oath/Declaration
Oath/Declaration
2. Oath and declaration filed on 11/21/2023 is accepted.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The prior art documents submitted by application in the Information Disclosure Statement filed on 11/21/2023 and 2/22/2024 and 4/24/2025 and 9/29/2025 have all been considered and made of record ( note the attached copy of form PTO – 1449).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. 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)(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) 1 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Imamura et al (2019/0274542 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Imamura discloses (refer to figures 10,11,12A,12b) an optical coherence tomographic device comprising: an image capturing unit (101-01; figure 10) configured to capture n tomographic images from a capturing range which is set within a subject eye by executing a capturing process that scans the capturing range with light, the n being an integer of 2 or more (paragraph 0087-0090) ; a generator (101-04 ; figure 10) configured to generate an evaluation index for evaluating an image quality of a tomographic image (paragraph 0087-0090); and a display unit (104, figure 10) configured to display the evaluation index generated by the generator (paragraph 0284-0285, figure 11) , wherein the generator is configured to generate the evaluation index for each of the n tomographic images (paragraph 0176-0278) , figure 11) , and the display unit is configured to simultaneously display the evaluation indexes of the n tomographic images on one screen (paragraph 0285 and figure 12A).
Regarding claim 3, Imamura et al discloses wherein the generator is configured to select m tomographic image(s) from the n tomographic images and further generate an examination report indicating an examination result obtained from the selected tomographic image(s), the m being a natural number smaller than the n, and the display unit is configured to further display the generated examination report (paragraph 0276-0284).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Imamura et al (2019/0274542 A1) in view of Canon kk (2020 058800 A).
Regarding claim 2, depends on claim 1, Imamura discloses all of the claim except evaluation index comprises at least one of a brightness evaluation index and a fixation evaluation index, the brightness evaluation index being for evaluating the image quality based on a brightness of the tomographic image, and the fixation evaluation index being for evaluating a fixation state of the subject eye.
Canon kk (JP 2019-47842 A) discloses evaluation index comprises at least one of a brightness evaluation index and a fixation evaluation index, the brightness evaluation index being for evaluating the image quality based on a brightness of the tomographic image, and the fixation evaluation index being for evaluating a fixation state of the subject eye (paragraphs 0019,paragraph 0035, paragraph 0061-0077).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to provide teaching Cannon kk evaluation index comprises at least one of a brightness evaluation index and a fixation evaluation index, the brightness evaluation index being for evaluating the image quality based on a brightness of the tomographic image, and the fixation evaluation index being for evaluating a fixation state of the subject eye in to the Imamura an optical coherence tomographic device for the purpose of adjust in optical coherence tomography an optical path length difference between measurement light and reference light as taught by Cannon kk (column 2, lines 10-12).
Conclusion
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMED A HASAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2331. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 6 AM -4 PM.
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.
/MOHAMMED A HASAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 11/3/2025
Prosecution Insights