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 statement (IDS) submitted on 12/14/2023 being considered by the examiner. A copy of initialed form is attached for Applicant’s record.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim recites “the conjugate plane” on line 5. There is lack of antecedent basic. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Klaus (WO 2008/116270 A1 of record).
Regarding claim 1, Klaus discloses a system for measurement of peripheral aberration of a human eye (see reference number 80 in fig. 6 and page 16, lines 31-3), the system comprising: a multifaced mirror or a mirror moved between different locations (see reference number 88 in fig. 6 and page 17, lines 10-11. Although Klaus does not disclose a multifaced mirror, the claim specifies a mirror movable between different locations as an alternative to the multifaced mirror. As claim 1 does not set any further requirement as to how the mirror is to be moved, the mirror 88 of fig. 6 which is movable along beam path 82 fully falls under the scope of claim 1);
a scanner operably coupled to the multifaced mirror (see reference number 80 in fig. 6 and page 17, lines 9-10);
one or more wavefront sensors mounted on the conjugate plane of a measured human eye entrance pupil plane (see reference number 90 in fig. 6 and page 17, lines 10-12 and lines 28-30);
a computing device operably coupled to the wavefront sensor and the multifaced mirror, the computing device configured to receive a plurality of inputs from the wavefront sensor and to alter the orientation of the scanner (see reference number 49 in fig. 3 and page 17, lines 28-30);
wherein each face of the multifaced mirror is distributed along an elliptical contour with the center of an entrance pupil of the human eye located at the focal point of the ellipse (this last feature only refers to the case, where the claimed device comprises a multifaced mirror, that is, the first alternative of the second feature of claim 1. A movable mirror does not have to fulfil this requirement, therefore the movable mirror 88 of Klaus fully falls under the scope of the present claim 1).
Regarding claim 5, Klaus discloses the system as claimed in any of the preceding claims, wherein the computing device further comprises a user interface configured to display: a plurality of spot field images; a plurality of real time reconstructed multi-dimensional wavefront images; a plurality of real time images of the pupil of the human eye; Fourier optometric coefficients at different visual angles; and Zernike coefficients at different visual angles (see page 2, line 32 to page 3, line 25).
Regarding claim 6, Klaus discloses the system as claimed in claim 5, wherein the user interface is further configured to enable multiple modes for measurement of peripheral aberration (see page 15, line 23 to page 16, line 19).
Regarding claim 7, Klaus discloses the system as claimed in any of the preceding claims, further comprising one or more infrared light sources and an image capturing means, operably coupled to the computing device (see page 3, lines 4-6).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-12 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: (claim 10) a multifaced mirror for measurement of peripheral aberration of a human eye, wherein each face of the multifaced mirror is distributed along an elliptical contour; and the length of the multifaced mirror is equal to the length of a line segment formed between the intersections of a plurality of tangents drawn at each intersection of the elliptical contour and a plurality of rays, the plurality of rays extending from a focal point at the center of the entrance pupil towards a plurality of the other focal point, wherein each ray has a predetermined difference in gradient with respect to each other adjacent ray, and wherein the center of the entrance pupil is located at one of the two focal points of the elliptical contour, and the normal to any point on the elliptical contour bisects an angle formed by the point and the line connecting the two focal points of the elliptical contour.
Claims 2-4, 8 and 9 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: (claim 2) wherein the length of the multifaced mirror is equal to the length of a line segment formed between the intersections of a plurality of tangents drawn at each intersection of the elliptical contour and a plurality of rays, the plurality of rays extending from a focal point at the center of the entrance pupil to a plurality of other focal points at the center of the entrance pupil; (claim 8) wherein the multifaced mirror is alternated by one or more rotatable mirrors operably movable along an elliptical trajectory or scanners operably movable along an elliptical trajectory; (claim 9) wherein the multifaced mirror is alternated by one or more scanners operably movable along an elliptical trajectory.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUYEN TRA whose telephone number is (571)272-2343. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6.
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.
/TUYEN TRA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872