Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/583,074

METHOD FOR PROVIDING CONTROL DATA FOR A PROCESSING DEVICE, METHOD FOR CONTROLLING A PROCESSING DEVICE, CONTROL DEVICE, PROCESSING DEVICE, COMPUTER PROGRAM AND COMPUTER-READABLE MEDIUM

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 21, 2024
Examiner
SAHAND, SANA
Art Unit
3796
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Schwind Eye-Tech-Solutions GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 9m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
191 granted / 308 resolved
-8.0% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+26.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 9m
Avg Prosecution
76 currently pending
Career history
384
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
14.9%
-25.1% vs TC avg
§103
47.1%
+7.1% vs TC avg
§102
10.2%
-29.8% vs TC avg
§112
22.3%
-17.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 308 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. 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) 1-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP4079267A1 to Rathjen et al. (Rathjen - IDS) in view of DE102021210661A1 to Bublitz (Bublitz IDS). Regarding claim 1. (Currently Amended) Rathjen discloses a method for providing control data for a processing device [[(1)]] with at least one laser [[(2)]] and with at least one focusing optics [[(6)]], wherein the method comprises the following steps performed by a control device [[(3)]] (para 0001, 0008): [[-]] receiving a specification [[(10)]] for processing a material [[(9)]] of an object in at least one preset separation point [[(S)]] in a respective, preset separation depth [[(zs)]] of the material [[(9)]] (para 0011 “electronic circuit is configured to control the scanner system to move the focal spot inside the cornea to generate an ablated first part of the void volume by ablating cornea tissue”), [[-]] ascertaining a respective focusing depth [[(ZF)]] of a focusing point [[(F)]] to be adjusted in the focusing optics [[(6)]] of the processing device [[(1)]] for separating the material [[(9)]] in the respective, at least one preset separation point [[(S)]] in the preset separation depth [[(zs)]] of the material [[(9)]] (para 0032, 0034 “The focusing optical module 12 is configured to focus the pulsed laser beam B or the laser pulses, respectively, in the cornea 20 onto a focal spot S… a focus adjustment device for setting the focal depth of the focal spot S,”), and [[-]] providing the control data, wherein the control data is configured for controlling the focusing optics [[(6)]] of the processing device [[(1)]] for focusing at least one laser pulse [[(7)]] on the at least one focusing point [[(F)]] in the focusing depth [[(ZF)]] of the material [[(9)]] to be adjusted and for controlling the laser [[(2)]] of the processing device [[(1)]] for outputting the at least one laser pulse [[(7)]] to the at least one focusing point [[(F)]] (para 0034 “The focusing optical module 12 is configured to focus the pulsed laser beam B or the laser pulses, respectively, in the cornea 20 onto a focal spot S”, para 0045 “The ophthalmological device 1 further comprises an electronic circuit 10 for controlling the laser source 11 and the scanner system 13. The electronic circuit 10 implements a programmable control device and comprises e.g. one or more processors 100 with program and data memory and programmed software modules for controlling the processors 100”), wherein [[-]] the focusing depth [[(ZF)]] is selected such that the ascertained breakthrough parameter threshold [[(Eth)]]is exceeded by a breakthrough parameter [[(E)]] of the at least one laser pulse [[(7)]] in the preset separation depth [[(zs)]] (para 0059 “the parameters of the pulsed laser beam B are set to keep the energy density below the optical breakdown threshold of the tissue for ablation”). But fails to disclose the limitation of characterized in that [[-]] the focusing depth [[(ZF)]] to be adjusted is adjusted according to a predetermined adaptation method depending on a breakthrough parameter threshold [[(Eth)]], from which a breakthrough reaction of the material [[(9)]] begins, at least one laser parameter [[(11)]] and/or at least one material parameter [[(12)]]. Bublitz, from a similar field of endeavor teaches focusing depth is set as a function of a laser parameter, laser intensity and a material parameter, treatment depending on the type of vitreous opacities (para 0009, 0012). It would have been obvious prior to filing date of the claimed invention to modify the disclosure of Rathjen with the teachings of Bublitz to provide the predictable result of additional controlling parameters to provide treatment at the correct location and avoid damage to non-target area. Regarding claim 2. (Currently Amended) Rathjen as modified by Bublitz renders obvious the method according to claim 1, wherein the material [[(9)]] is a cornea of a human or animal eye (para 0001). Regarding claim 3. (Currently Amended) Rathjen as modified by Bublitz renders obvious the method according to claim 1, wherein the focusing depth [[(ZF)]] is selected such that the focusing depth [[(ZF)]] is different from the separation depth [[(zs)]], and the breakthrough parameter [[(E)]] of the at least one laser pulse [[(7)]] in the preset separation depth [[(zs)]] is identical to the ascertained breakthrough parameter threshold [[(Eth)]] (para 0026, 0046). Regarding claim 4. (Currently Amended) Rathjen as modified by Bublitz renders obvious the method according to claim 1, wherein the breakthrough parameter threshold [[(Eth)]] is ascertained according to a threshold value ascertaining method depending on the at least one preset laser parameter [[(11)]] and/or the at least one material parameter [[(12)]] (para 0026, 0046). Regarding claim 5. (Currently Amended) Rathjen as modified by Bublitz renders obvious the method according to claim 1, wherein the breakthrough parameter [[(E)]] describes a local power of the at least one laser pulse and the breakthrough parameter threshold [[(Eth)]] describes a power threshold of the at least one laser pulse [[(7)]], from which the breakthrough reaction of the material [[(9)]] begins (Bublitz, para 0049). Regarding claim 6. (Currently Amended) Rathjen as modified by Bublitz renders obvious the method according to claim 1, wherein the breakthrough parameter [[(E)]] describes a local power density of the at least one laser pulse [[(7)]] and the breakthrough parameter threshold [[(Eth)]] describes a power density threshold of the at least one laser pulse [[(7)]], from which the breakthrough reaction of the material [[(9)]] begins (Bublitz, para 0049). Regarding claim 7. (Currently Amended) Rathjen as modified by Bublitz renders obvious the method according to claim 1, wherein the breakthrough parameter [[(E)]] describes a local energy of the at least one laser pulse [[(7)]] and the breakthrough parameter threshold [[(Eth)]] describes an energy threshold of the at least one laser pulse [[(7)]], from which the breakthrough reaction of the material [[(9)]] begins (para 0029). Regarding claim 8. (Currently Amended) Rathjen as modified by Bublitz renders obvious the method according to claim 1, wherein the breakthrough parameter [[(E)]] describes a local energy density of the at least one laser pulse 7 and the breakthrough parameter threshold [[(Eth)]] describes an energy density threshold of the at least one laser pulse [[(7)]], from which the breakthrough reaction of the material [[(9)]] begins (para 0059). Regarding claim 9. (Currently Amended) Rathjen as modified by Bublitz renders obvious the method according to claim 1, wherein the at least one laser parameter [[(11)]] of the at least one laser pulse [[(7)]] includes an energy of the at least one laser pulse [[(7)]] (para 0029). Regarding claim 10. (Currently Amended) Rathjen as modified by Bublitz renders obvious the method according to claim 1, wherein the at least one laser parameter [[(11)]] of the at least one laser pulse [[(7)]] includes a numerical aperture of the at least one laser pulse [[(7)]] (para 0032). Regarding claim 11. (Currently Amended) Rathjen as modified by Bublitz renders obvious the method according to claim 1, wherein the at least one laser parameter [[(11)]] of the at least one laser pulse [[(7)]] includes a wavelength of the at least one laser pulse [[(7)]] (Bublitz, para 0111). Regarding claim 12. (Currently Amended) Rathjen as modified by Bublitz renders obvious the method according to claim 1, wherein the at least one laser parameter [[(11)]] of the at least one laser pulse [[(7)]] includes a pulse duration of the at least one laser pulse [[(7)]] (para 0024). Regarding claim 13. (Currently Amended) Rathjen as modified by Bublitz renders obvious the method according to claim 1, wherein the at least one laser parameter [[(11)]] of the at least one laser pulse [[(7)]] includes a pulse frequency of [[the]] consecutive laser pulses [[(7)]] (Bublitz, para 0047). Regarding claim 14. (Currently Amended) Rathjen as modified by Bublitz renders obvious the method according to claim 1, wherein the at least one material parameter [[(12)]] includes an absorption coefficient of the material [[(9)]] (Bublitz, para 0047). Regarding claim 15. (Currently Amended) Rathjen as modified by Bublitz renders obvious the method according to claim 1, wherein the predetermined adaptation method includes ascertaining the focusing depth [[(ZF)]] of the respective focusing point [[(F)]] by a conversion table. Regarding claim 16. (Currently Amended) The method according to claim 1, wherein the predetermined adaptation method includes ascertaining the focusing depth [[(ZF)]] of the respective focusing point [[(F)]] by a fit function. Regarding claim 17. (Currently Amended) Rathjen as modified by Bublitz renders obvious the method according to claim 1, wherein the predetermined adaptation method includes ascertaining the focusing depth [[(ZF)]] of the respective focusing point [[(F)]] by a model (the claim does not provide any details of the model, therefore any operation of the method is understood to be based on or with respect to a model). Regarding claim 18. (Currently Amended) Rathjen as modified by Bublitz renders obvious a method for controlling [[a]] the processing device [[(1)]] according to claim 1,wherein the method further comprises the following steps:[[-]] transferring the provided control data to a processing device [[(1)]] with at least one laser [[(2)]] and at least one focusing optics [[(6)]] (the claim does not provide any details of the processing device, under its BRI, it is understood to be any device, including the same device; see fig. 1). Regarding claim 19. (Currently Amended) Rathjen as modified by Bublitz renders obvious a control device [[(3)]], which is formed to perform a respective method according to claim 1 (the claim does not provide any details of the processing device, under its BRI, it is understood to be any device, including the same device; see fig. 1). . Regarding claim 20. (Currently Amended) Rathjen as modified by Bublitz renders obvious a processing device [[(1)]] with at least one laser [[(2)]] and at least one focusing optics [[(6)]] for the separation of a material volume with predefined interfaces of an object by photo-disruption, and at least one control device [[(3)]] according to claim 19 (para 0012, 0032, the claim does not provide any details of the processing device, under its BRI, it is understood to be any device, including the same device; see fig. 1). Regarding claim 21. (Currently Amended) Rathjen as modified by Bublitz renders obvious a non-transitory computer-readable medium configured for storing a computer program, the computer program including commands[[,]] which cause [[the]] a control device [[(3)]] according to claim 19 to execute [[a]] the method according to claim 1 (para 0027). 22. (Cancelled). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANA SAHAND whose telephone number is (571)272-6842. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8:30 am -5:30 pm; F 9 am-3 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, Jennifer S McDonald can be reached at (571) 270- 3061. 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. /SANA SAHAND/Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 21, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599335
DETECTION AND MONITORING OF SLEEP APNEA CONDITIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12588865
ELECTRONIC DEVICE PROVIDING EXERCISE GUIDE BASED ON EXERCISE CAPACITY AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588958
POSITION TRACKING DEVICE ASSEMBLIES AND COMPONENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12575743
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ASSESSING HEART AND RESPIRATORY DISORDERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575807
REINFORCEMENT LAYER FOR INTRALUMINAL IMAGING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
62%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+26.7%)
3y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 308 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month