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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 26 September 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-13 remain pending in the application. Claims 10-13 are new. Applicant’s amendments to Claims 1-9 have overcome each and every claim interpretation previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed on 30 June 2025. However, Applicant’s amendments to Claims 1-9 do not overcome the U.S.C. 103 rejections.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 26 September 2025, with respect to the U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 1-9 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection has newly cited references teaching the amended claim.
Claim Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 8, “the reflected the Rayleigh” should be corrected to say -- the reflected Rayleigh--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 of this title, 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.
PNG
media_image1.png
1099
1100
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Seed Co. Ltd. Fig. 1
PNG
media_image2.png
1218
745
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Ozaki Fig. 6
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seed Co. Ltd. (WO2020195199A1) in view of Munger et al. (US20100245764A1), hereinafter Munger, further in view of Marcus et al. (US20090219525A1), hereinafter Marcus.
As to claims 1, 4 and 7, Seed Co. Ltd. teaches a light intensity measurement system and method [claims 1 and 7] / a Raman scattered light spectroscopic measurement system [claim 4] ([0001]; aqueous humor Raman spectroscopic measurement system and method) comprising:
a light source configured to emit coherent light to aqueous humor of a subject eye (fig. 1; [0057]; first light source unit 21 emits excitation light L1 for spectroscopically measuring Raman scattered light in the aqueous humor 12 of the eye 10 to be inspected);
and a spectrometer configured to measure light intensity of scattered light of the coherent light in the aqueous humor (fig. 1; [0065]; the spectrometer 29 spectrally measures the light that has passed through the filter 25).
However, Seed Co. Ltd.does not explicitly disclose a polarization controller that is arranged between the light source and the subject eye, and configured to control a polarization state of the coherent light to maximize light intensity of Rayleigh scattered light.
Munger, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches a polarization controller that is arranged between the light source and the subject eye, and configured to control a polarization state of the coherent light ([0067]; Light from the light source is polarized as it is transmitted thought the illumination path. Means for transforming unpolarized light into polarized light are well known and can include, for example, a polarizing filter, a polarization beam splitter (linear polarization) and/or a quarter or half wave plate (circularly polarized light)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Seed Co. Ltd. to incorporate the teachings of Munger to include a polarization controller that is arranged between the light source and the subject eye, and configured to control a polarization state of the coherent light; for the advantage of more detailed measurements, e.g. of diffuse reflection (Munger [0067]).
Still lacking the limitation such as maximizing light intensity of Rayleigh scattered light.
Marcus, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches maximizing light intensity of Rayleigh scattered light (Marcus [0028]; optics or other computers are adjusted to find a signal maxima which includes the Rayleigh scattered light at the wavelength of the excitation source).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Seed Co. Ltd. in view of Munger to incorporate the teachings of Marcus to include maximizing light intensity of Rayleigh scattered light; for the advantage of auto-focusing (Marcus [0028]).
As to claims 2, 5 and 8, Seed Co. Ltd. does not explicitly disclose wherein the polarization controller includes any one of a plurality of wave plates, a Babinet-Soleil compensator, and an acousto-optical element.
Munger, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein the polarization controller includes any one of a plurality of wave plates, a Babinet-Soleil compensator, and an acousto-optical element ([0067]; Means for transforming unpolarized light into polarized light are well known and can include, for example, a quarter or half wave plate (circularly polarized light)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Seed Co. Ltd. to incorporate the teachings of Munger to include wherein the polarization controller includes any one of a plurality of wave plates, a Babinet-Soleil compensator, and an acousto-optical element, for the advantage of more detailed measurements, e.g. of diffuse reflection (Munger [0067]).
Claims 3, 6 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seed Co. Ltd. in view of Munger and Marcus, and further in view of Ozaki et al. (US5754289A), hereinafter Ozaki.
As to claims 3, 6 and 9, Seed Co. Ltd. teaches a notch filter configured to selectively block light with a wavelength component of the Rayleigh scattered light (fig. 1; [0061]; the notch filter 25 blocks the Rayleigh scattered light and transmits the Raman scattered light);
and inserting and removing the notch filter into and from between the subject eye and the spectrometer ([0061]; fig. 31; The filter 25 may be any filter that performs the same basic function but for different specific wavelengths, for example, a bandpass filter can be used. Filters that respectively transmit different wavelengths may be used when Stokes Raman scattering or anti-Stokes Raman scattering is measured. Because different filters are used, inserting and removing the different filters is necessary. Thus, the notch filter 25 can be inserted and removed from the embodiment between the eye 10 and the spectrometer 29);
wherein, in the measurement step, the spectrometer measures a spectrum of Raman scattered light of the coherent light in the aqueous humor [claim 9] (fig. 1; [0061]; [0065]; The spectrometer 29 spectrally measures the Raman scattered light that has passed through the filter 25 from the aqueous humor 12 of the eye 10. Thus, a spectrum of Raman scattered light of the coherent light is measured).
However, Seed Co. Ltd. in view of Munger and Marcus does not explicitly disclose a driver configured to insert and remove the notch filter.
Ozaki, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches a driver configured to insert and remove the notch filter (Ozaki fig. 6; col. 7 lines 41-46; col. 8 lines 30-35; The system controller controls an operation of switching the filter 6. A plurality of filters 6a having different transmission wavelengths are arranged on the circumference of a discoidal support plate 6b in the bandpass filter 6, and the support plate 6b is rotated by a stepping motor 6c for positioning a desired filter 6a on the optical path of the scattered light).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Seed Co. Ltd. in view of Munger and Marcus to incorporate the teachings of Ozaki to include a driver configured to insert and remove the notch filter; for the advantage of more control over light transmission (Ozaki col. 8 lines 25-29).
PNG
media_image3.png
635
488
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Seed Co. Ltd. Fig. 31
Claims 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seed Co. Ltd. in view of Munger and Marcus, and further in view of Furusawa (US 6161035 A).
As to claims 10 and 12, Seed Co. Ltd. teaches a notch filter arranged between the subject eye and the spectrometer (fig. 31; [0093]; the filter 25 is in the embodiment located between the eye 10 and the spectrometer 29), the notch filter being configured to selectively block light with a wavelength component of the Rayleigh scattered light (fig. 1; [0061]; the notch filter 25 blocks the Rayleigh scattered light and transmits the Raman scattered light):
a reflecting mirror arranged between the subject eye and the notch filter, the reflecting mirror being configured to reflect the Rayleigh scattered light in the aqueous humor (fig. 31; [0061]; [0093]; the half mirror 23 is between the eye 10 and the filter 25, and reflects the Rayleigh scattered light in the aqueous humor 12 of the eye 10).
However, Seed Co. Ltd. in view of Munger does not explicitly disclose a photodetector configured to detect light intensity of the reflected the Rayleigh scattered light; and a slide box configured to insert and remove the reflecting mirror into and from between the subject eye and the notch filter.
Marcus, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches a photodetector configured to detect light intensity of the reflected [[the]] Rayleigh scattered light (Marcus [0018]; [0028]; A photodetector is coupled to the Raman spectrometer 102 such that an image of the specimens is formed. The signal includes the Rayleigh scattered light at the wavelength of the excitation source. Thus, the photodetector is configured to detect light intensity of the reflected Rayleigh scattered light).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Seed Co. Ltd. in view of Munger to incorporate the teachings of Marcus to include a photodetector configured to detect light intensity of the reflected [[the]] Rayleigh scattered light; for the advantage of more data in picture-form (Marcus [0018]).
Still lacking the limitation such as a slide box configured to insert and remove the reflecting mirror into and from between the subject eye and the notch filter.
Furusawa, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches a slide box configured to insert and remove the reflecting mirror into and from between the subject eye and the notch filter (Furusawa col. 6 ln. 34-37; the mirror box 50 is disposed so as to be slidably moved by a manual operation in place and out of place, inherently into and from between the eye 10 and the filter 25 of Seed Co. Ltd.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Seed Co. Ltd. in view of Munger and Marcus to incorporate the teachings of Furusawa to include a slide box configured to insert and remove the reflecting mirror into and from between the subject eye and the notch filter; for the advantage of more control over reflection percentage (Furusawa col. 6 ln. 46-59).
Claims 11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seed Co. Ltd. in view of Munger and Marcus, further in view of Fujiwara et al. (US 20160195473 A1), hereinafter Fujiwara, and further in view of Furusawa (US 6161035 A).
As to claims 11 and 13, Seed Co. Ltd. teaches a notch filter arranged between the subject eye and the spectrometer (fig. 31; [0093]; the filter 25 is in the embodiment located between the eye 10 and the spectrometer 29), the notch filter being configured to selectively block light with a wavelength component of the Rayleigh scattered light (fig. 1; [0061]; the notch filter 25 blocks the Rayleigh scattered light and transmits the Raman scattered light).
However, Seed Co. Ltd. in view of Munger does not explicitly disclose a photodetector arranged between the subject eye and the notch filter and tilted with respect to an optical axis of the subject eye to prevent return light returning to the subject eye from a surface of the photodetector; the photodetector being configured to detect light intensity of the Rayleigh scattered light in the aqueous humor; a light absorber configured to absorb light from a surface of the photodetector and a slide box configured to insert and remove the photodetector into and from between the subject eye and the notch filter.
Munger, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches a photodetector arranged between the subject eye and the notch filter and tilted with respect to an optical axis of the subject eye to prevent return light returning to the subject eye from a surface of the photodetector (Munger fig. 3; [0062]; [0065]; the detector 73 can be an avalanche photodiode, which is a type of photodetector, arranged between the eye and the filters in the detection pathways).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Seed Co. Ltd. to incorporate the teachings of Munger to include a photodetector arranged between the subject eye and the notch filter and tilted with respect to an optical axis of the subject eye to prevent return light returning to the subject eye from a surface of the photodetector; for the advantage of more detailed measurements, e.g. of diffuse reflection (Munger [0062]).
Still lacking the limitations such as the photodetector being configured to detect light intensity of the Rayleigh scattered light in the aqueous humor; a light absorber configured to absorb light from a surface of the photodetector and a slide box configured to insert and remove the photodetector into and from between the subject eye and the notch filter.
Marcus, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches the photodetector being configured to detect light intensity of the Rayleigh scattered light in the aqueous humor (Marcus [0018]; [0028]; A photodetector is coupled to the Raman spectrometer 102 such that an image of the specimens is formed. The signal includes the Rayleigh scattered light at the wavelength of the excitation source. Thus, the photodetector is configured to detect light intensity of the reflected Rayleigh scattered light).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Seed Co. Ltd. in view of Munger to incorporate the teachings of Marcus to include the photodetector being configured to detect light intensity of the Rayleigh scattered light in the aqueous humor; for the advantage of more data in picture-form (Marcus [0018]).
Still lacking the limitations such as a light absorber configured to absorb light from a surface of the photodetector and a slide box configured to insert and remove the photodetector into and from between the subject eye and the notch filter.
Fujiwara, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches a light absorber configured to absorb light from a surface of the photodetector (Fujiwara [0245]; The light absorber positioning is set and the photodiodes produced the detection values in relation to the light absorber. Thus, the light absorber absorbs light from the photodiodes).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Seed Co. Ltd. in view of Munger and Marcus to incorporate the teachings of Fujiwara to include a light absorber configured to absorb light from a surface of the photodetector; for the advantage of higher accuracy of detection (Fujiwara [0068]-[0069]).
Still lacking the limitation such as a slide box configured to insert and remove the photodetector into and from between the subject eye and the notch filter.
Furusawa, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches a slide box configured to insert and remove the reflecting mirror into and from between the subject eye and the notch filter (Furusawa col. 6 ln. 34-37; the mirror box 50 is disposed so as to be slidably moved by a manual operation in place and out of place, inherently into and from between the eye 10 and the filter 25 of Seed Co. Ltd.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Seed Co. Ltd. in view of Munger, Marcus and Fujiwara to incorporate the teachings of Furusawa to include a slide box configured to insert and remove the reflecting mirror into and from between the subject eye and the notch filter; for the advantage of more control over reflection percentage (Furusawa col. 6 ln. 46-59).
PNG
media_image4.png
520
879
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Munger Fig. 3
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEMAYA NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-9078. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30 am - 5:00pm ET.
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, Tarifur Chowdhury can be reached on (571) 272-2287. 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.
/KEMAYA NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/TARIFUR R CHOWDHURY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877