DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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 Arguments
2. Applicant’s arguments (see Remarks dated 05/15/2026) with respect to claims 1, 3, 5, 11-15, 17, and 20 are rejected over Benson have been considered, but they are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Objections
3. Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 6 should read “topography
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
5. Claims 1, 3-5, 7, 10-15, 17, 20-22, 25, and 27-29 are rejected under 35 USC 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dick et al. (US 20180206718 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Dick discloses a computer-based method, comprising:
obtaining an optical coherence tomography (OCT) dataset for an OCT scan ([0039], “IOLMaster® 700 by Zeiss…collects…a data set”) of a cornea and a sclera of an eye, wherein the OCT dataset includes scans that extend across the cornea and a limbus of the eye, from one part of the sclera to another part of the sclera ([0083], “it is possible to represent OCT scans in the form of a dense network not only the entire corneal surface but to expand the scans, for example, beyond the limbus to the sclera.”); and
generating one or more topography maps of the limbus based on the OCT dataset ([0003], “topography of an eye involves…a map of the surface”; [0039], “IOLMaster® 700…collects…a data set for surface topography”).
Regarding claim 3, Dick discloses wherein the scans comprise radial scans that intersect at a center of the cornea ([0021], “multiple radial OCT scan patterns centered on the cornea”).
Regarding claim 4, Dick discloses wherein the scans comprise a three-dimensional (3D) scan ([0017], C-scan).
Regarding claim 5, Dick discloses wherein the generating of the one or more topography maps comprises locating a limbal junction between the cornea and the sclera ([0064], “points regarding eye position are provided from…the OCT image, for example, the limbus”) based on central moments of the scans ([0055]).
Regarding claim 7, Dick discloses generating a metric of limbal ellipticity ([0021], “circular OCT scan patterns”; [0055], “circular scans”) and toricity ([0074], “gradients of the elevation profile…for toric surfaces”) using a decomposition of a topographic limbus deviation from a best-fit limbal circle ([0064], “points regarding eye position are provided from the keratometric image and the OCT image, for example, the limbus”).
Regarding claim 10, Dick discloses displaying the one or more topography maps or measuring one or more topographic parameters based on a coordinate system referenced to a best-fit topographic limbal circle ([0021], [0083]).
Regarding claim 11, Dick discloses a computer-based method, comprising:
obtaining a three-dimensional (3D) volumetric scan of an eye ([0017], C-scan), wherein the volumetric scan corresponds to a corneal region and a scleral region of the eye ([0083], “it is possible to represent OCT scans in the form of a dense network not only the entire corneal surface but to expand the scans, for example, beyond the limbus to the sclera”); and
locating at least one of a limbal junction or an external topographical limbus based on the 3D volumetric scan ([0064], “points regarding eye position are provided from…the OCT image, for example, the limbus”), wherein the locating the at least one of the limbal junction or the external topographical limbus comprises:
determining a conjunctival surface in the scleral region outside the limbal junction ([0083], “data for scleral curvature” approximates the shape of the conjunctival surface);
determining a surface of the corneal region inside the limbal junction ([0083], “entire corneal surface”); and
determining an intersection of the conjunctival surface and the surface of the corneal region ([0064], limbus).
Regarding claim 12, Dick discloses wherein the 3D volumetric scan is an optical coherence tomography (OCT) scan ([0017], C-scan).
Regarding claim 13, Dick discloses wherein the OCT scan uses radial scan lines that each extend from the scleral region, across the limbal junction, to the corneal region ([0021], “multiple radial OCT scan patterns centered on the cornea“; [0083], “expand the scans…beyond the limbus to the sclera”).
Regarding claim 14, Dick discloses wherein the 3D volumetric scan covers an area of at least 14 millimeters by 14 millimeters ([0083], “data of up to app. 16 mm diameter can be collected”).
Regarding claim 15, Dick discloses wherein the limbal junction is located ([0064], “points regarding eye position are provided from…the OCT image, for example, the limbus”) based on central moments of axial scans of the 3D volumetric scan ([0055]).
Regarding claim 17, Dick discloses a system, comprising:
an optical coherence tomography (OCT) system to acquire an OCT dataset of an eye ([0039], “IOLMaster® 700 by Zeiss…collects…a data set”);
a logic subsystem ([0039], within IOLMaster® 700); and
a data holding subsystem comprising non-transitory machine-readable instructions stored thereon ([0039], within IOLMaster® 700) that are executable by the logic subsystem to:
obtain, via the OCT system, an OCT dataset for an OCT scan of a cornea and a sclera of the eye, wherein the OCT dataset includes scans that extend across a cornea and a limbus of the eye, from one part of a sclera of the eye to another part of the sclera ([0083], “it is possible to represent OCT scans in the form of a dense network not only the entire corneal surface but to expand the scans, for example, beyond the limbus to the sclera.”); and
generate one or more topography maps of the limbus based on the OCT dataset ([0003], “topography of an eye involves…a map of the surface”; [0039], “IOLMaster® 700…collects…a data set for surface topography”).
Regarding claim 20, Dick discloses wherein the instructions are further executable by the logic subsystem to locate a limbal junction between the cornea and the sclera ([0064], “points regarding eye position are provided from…the OCT image, for example, the limbus”) based on profiles of central moments of the scans ([0055]).
Regarding claim 21, Dick discloses wherein the instructions are further executable by the logic subsystem to:
determine a conjunctival surface over the sclera, outside the limbal junction ([0083], “data for scleral curvature” approximates the shape of the conjunctival surface);
determine a surface of the cornea, inside the limbal junction ([0083], “entire corneal surface”); and
determine an intersection of the conjunctival surface and the surface of the cornea ([0064], limbus).
Regarding claim 22, Dick discloses wherein the instructions are further executable by the logic subsystem to generate a metric of limbal ellipticity ([0021], “circular OCT scan patterns”; [0055], “circular scans”) and toricity ([0074], “gradients of the elevation profile…for toric surfaces”) using a decomposition of a topographic limbus deviation from a best-fit limbal circle ([0064], “points regarding eye position are provided from the keratometric image and the OCT image, for example, the limbus”).
Regarding claim 25, Dick discloses wherein the generating of the one or more topography maps comprises:
determining an external surface of a conjunctiva over the sclera outside the limbal junction ([0083], “data for scleral curvature” approximates the shape of the conjunctival surface);
determining an external surface of the cornea inside the limbal junction ([0083], “entire corneal surface”); and
determining an intersection of the external surface of the conjunctiva and the external surface of the cornea ([0064], limbus).
Regarding claim 27, Dick discloses wherein the generating the one or more topography maps comprises determining an external topographical limbus corresponding to the intersection of the of the external surface of the conjunctiva and the external surface of the cornea ([0064], limbus).
Regarding claim 28, Dick discloses wherein the 3D scan is re-sampled to detect the limbus ([0003], “topography of an eye involves…a map of the surface”; forming a map from data points involves re-sampling data), and the limbus is detected ([0083]) along radial scan lines ([0074]).
Regarding claim 29, Dick discloses wherein the scans comprise radial scan lines ([0074]) that extend from the sclera at one side of the cornea to the sclera at an opposing side of the cornea ([0083]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
7. Claims 6, 9, 16, 23, and 26 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Dick in view of Shen et al. (CN 111820862 A).
Regarding claim 6, Dick discloses locating an external topographic limbus ([0064]) using curve fitting of a conjunctival surface in the sclera ([0083], “data for scleral curvature” approximates the shape of the conjunctival surface) and a corneal surface in the cornea based on one or more topographical maps ([0003], “topography of an eye involves…a map of the surface”; [0039], “data set for surface topography”).
Dick fails to explicitly disclose curve fitting of the conjunctival surface in the sclera to locate the external topographic limbus.
However, Shen teaches a similar OCT imaging system (Abstract), and discloses wherein “whole eye model by obtaining the lens front eye surface map, through Zernike polynomial fitting to obtain the surface three-dimensional shape of the function expression” is established by modeling software (page 2 lines 13-16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Dick and Shen such that curve fitting of the conjunctival surface in the sclera was used, motivated by the process of capturing data for scleral curvature allowing “for a more precise contact lens adaptation” (Dick - [0083]).
Regarding claim 9, Dick discloses wherein the one or more topography maps include a conjunctival surface elevation map ([0071], [0083]).
Dick fails to disclose generating supplemental data for the OCT dataset using polynomial fitting of the conjunctival surface elevation map in a region of the sclera.
However, Shen teaches a similar OCT imaging system (Abstract), and discloses wherein “whole eye model by obtaining the lens front eye surface map, through Zernike polynomial fitting to obtain the surface three-dimensional shape of the function expression” is established by modeling software (page 2 lines 13-16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Dick and Shen such that curve fitting of the conjunctival surface in a region of the sclera was used, motivated by the process of capturing data for scleral curvature allowing “for a more precise contact lens adaptation” (Dick - [0083]).
Regarding claim 16, Dick fails to discloses wherein:
the determining of the conjunctival surface in the scleral region outside the limbal junction comprises fitting one or more curves to the conjunctival surface; and
the determining the surface of the corneal region inside the limbal junction comprises fitting one or more curves to the surface of the corneal region.
However, Shen teaches a similar OCT imaging system (Abstract), and discloses wherein “whole eye model by obtaining the lens front eye surface map, through Zernike polynomial fitting to obtain the surface three-dimensional shape of the function expression” is established by modeling software (page 2 lines 13-16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Dick and Shen such that curve fitting of the conjunctival surface and cornea was used, motivated by the process of capturing data for scleral curvature allowing “for a more precise contact lens adaptation” (Dick - [0083]).
Regarding claim 23, Dick discloses wherein the one or more topography maps include a conjunctival surface elevation map ([0071], [0083]).
Dick fails to disclose generating supplemental data for the OCT dataset using polynomial fitting of the conjunctival surface elevation map in a region of the sclera.
However, Shen teaches a similar OCT imaging system (Abstract), and discloses wherein “whole eye model by obtaining the lens front eye surface map, through Zernike polynomial fitting to obtain the surface three-dimensional shape of the function expression” is established by modeling software (page 2 lines 13-16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Dick and Shen such that supplemental data for the OCT dataset was generated using polynomial fitting of the conjunctival surface elevation map in a region of the sclera, motivated by the process of capturing data for scleral curvature allowing “for a more precise contact lens adaptation” (Dick - [0083]).
Regarding claim 26, Dick fails to disclose wherein:
the determining of the external surface of the conjunctiva outside the limbal junction comprises fitting one or more curves to the external surface of the conjunctiva outside the limbal junction; and
the determining the external surface of the cornea inside the limbal junction comprises fitting one or more curves to a surface of the cornea inside the limbal junction.
However, Shen teaches a similar OCT imaging system (Abstract), and discloses wherein “whole eye model by obtaining the lens front eye surface map, through Zernike polynomial fitting to obtain the surface three-dimensional shape of the function expression” is established by modeling software (page 2 lines 13-16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Dick and Shen such that curve fitting of the conjunctival surface was used, motivated by the process of capturing data for scleral curvature allowing “for a more precise contact lens adaptation” (Dick - [0083]).
Conclusion
8. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daniel Jeffery Jordan whose telephone number is 571-270-7641. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30a-6:00p.
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, Stephone Allen can be reached at 571-272-2434. 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.
/D. J. J./Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/STEPHONE B ALLEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
