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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of claims 1-5, 17-18, 20 and 29 in the reply filed on 06/14/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Claims 1-3 are interpreted to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a phase initialization module”, “a wavefront synthesis module”, “a Fourier transform module”, “a mask processing module”, “a backward propagation calculation module”, “a phase extraction module”, “an iterative algorithm module”, and “a final wavefront synthesis module”, in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. Original specifications pg. 2 lines 1-25 discloses computing unit microcontroller equivalent to hardware structure to execute functions of modules.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 4 recite limitations -- “a phase initialization module for initializing phase information; a wavefront synthesis module for synthesizing a plurality of wavefront of an image; a Fourier transform module for performing Fourier transform on an image domain; a mask processing module for designing and generating a plurality of masks required; a backward propagation calculation module for computing a backward propagation; a phase extraction module for extracting phase information from the backward propagation; an iterative algorithm module for iterative calculation; and a final wavefront synthesis module for generating a final image wavefront” and “initializing phase; synthesizing a plurality of wavefronts; performing Fourier transform; designing and generating a plurality of masks; calculating backward propagation; extracting phase information; performing iterative calculation; and synthesizing a final image wavefront”, appears to apply specific techniques to an image to obtain synthesized image. However, the steps recited lack antecedent basis to refer any of previously recited steps and therefore present ambiguity in scope of claims. There is lack of interface between previous and next limitations to derive precise interpretations. For example, performing transform on an image domain and generating plurality of masks required and computing backward propagation all appears to be standalone features and do not interlink with previous and current or later limitations.
Therefore, Examiner suggests amending claims in order to explicitly define features to render the claims definite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(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.
Claims 1-5, 17-18, 20 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(1)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Cotte et al. (US Pub No. 20130057869 A1).
Regarding Claim 1,
Cotte discloses An image reconstruction system, characterized in that the system comprises: a phase initialization module for initializing phase information; (Cotte, [0045], discloses it is demonstrated in the present invention that a method based on the information content available from the phase as well as from the amplitude of the complex field scattered by the observed specimen, can deliver super-resolution microscopic images of a specimen, i.e. images with a resolution beyond the Rayleigh limit of the microscope. These assertion is demonstrated by developing the theory and giving the experimental evidence that such a resolution improvement can be achieved on an optical microscope specially adapted or modified to measure the complex wavefield of the wave radiated by the specimen, and where the wavefront is reconstructed according to the any methods developed to achieve quantitative phase microscopy: defocused imaging, modified DIC, Shack-Hartmann wavefront analyzer or any analyzer derived from a similar principle, such as multi-level lateral shearing interferometers or common-path interferometers, or devices that convert stacks of intensity images (transport intensity techniques: TIT) into quantitative phase image, provided that the said quantitative phase microscopy deliver a comprehensive measure of the complex wavefield scattered by the specimen; phase information process in initiated)
a wavefront synthesis module for synthesizing a plurality of wavefront of an image; (Cotte, [0045], discloses it is demonstrated in the present invention that a method based on the information content available from the phase as well as from the amplitude of the complex field scattered by the observed specimen, can deliver super-resolution microscopic images of a specimen, i.e. images with a resolution beyond the Rayleigh limit of the microscope. These assertion is demonstrated by developing the theory and giving the experimental evidence that such a resolution improvement can be achieved on an optical microscope specially adapted or modified to measure the complex wavefield of the wave radiated by the specimen, and where the wavefront is reconstructed according to the any methods developed to achieve quantitative phase microscopy: defocused imaging, modified DIC, Shack-Hartmann wavefront analyzer or any analyzer derived from a similar principle, such as multi-level lateral shearing interferometers or common-path interferometers, or devices that convert stacks of intensity images (transport intensity techniques: TIT) into quantitative phase image, provided that the said quantitative phase microscopy deliver a comprehensive measure of the complex wavefield scattered by the specimen; wavefront analyzer analyzes the wavefront image)
a Fourier transform module for performing Fourier transform on an image domain; (Cotte, [0112], fields of the test target have been recorded for all .eta. of FIG. 1 and processed according to the procedure indicated in a previous section. As an illustration, FIGS. 6 (a) and (b) (.eta.=400 nm) show the complex field spectrum {tilde over (G)} calculated by Fourier transforming the reconstructed complex image field U; Fourier transform is applied to image to derive Fourier transformed image)
a mask processing module for designing and generating a plurality of masks required; (Cotte, [0119] The choice of correct mask radius k.sub.max is crucial to avoid cutting information or adding noise. The mask radius can be chosen based on the minimal structure d.sub.min to be resolved which must fulfill at least k.sub.max.ltoreq.k.sub.c. It is not trivial, though, to decide to which extend the filter's diameter can be enlarged; different size radius mask are generated to apply to the image)
a backward propagation calculation module for computing a backward propagation; (Cotte, [0071], discloses the scattered field U.sup.(s), recorded at plane z.+-., is filtered by an ideal Ewald half sphere (nm: refractive index of mounting medium), and propagated by the latest term as known by the filtered back propagation algorithm of conventional diffraction tomography. In our case, by division through the 3D CTF, the spectrum is inverse filtered by the experimental Ewald sphere. Moreover, the field propagation is intrinsically included through z-dependent pre-factor in the reconstruction. Therefore, it may be approximated; backward propagation is computed)
a phase extraction module for extracting phase information from the backward propagation; (Cotte, [0071], [0189], discloses connects three-dimensional coherent image formation and diffraction theory, and results in a model for object scattering reconstruction by inverse filtering. This approach is experimentally complimented by the ability to characterize the DHM setup by the pure APSF thanks to the use of a complex point source. The physical importance of the realistic 3D CTF is demonstrated and applied to experimental images for the effective correction of background illumination, diffraction pattern, aberrations and non-ideal experimental imaging conditions. Moreover, the regularization of the three-dimensional deconvolution of complex fields is shown to yield for the phase as well as the complex domain. Depending on the thresh-old, phase de-blurring or optical sectioning is demonstrated with RBC measurements. Most essentially, the importance of complex deconvolution for correct phase reconstruction is evaluated and the capability of scattered field extraction is experimentally presented; the scattered field U.sup.(s), recorded at plane z.+-., is filtered by an ideal Ewald half sphere (nm: refractive index of mounting medium), and propagated by the latest term as known by the filtered back propagation algorithm of conventional diffraction tomography. In our case, by division through the 3D CTF, the spectrum is inverse filtered by the experimental Ewald sphere; phase information is extracted using backward propagation)
an iterative algorithm module for iterative calculation; (Cotte, [0002], [0012-0014], discloses extension of the significant spectrum in the spatial frequency domain depends both on the spectrum of the specimen itself and on the transfer function of the instrument or microscope, which in general constitutes the limiting factor to image resolution. Techniques have been developed to restore the spectrum of the specimen complex wavefield from the specimen wavefield intensity in the space domain: the problem consists in making a "guess" on the complex wavefield and adjusting the propagated intensity to the actual measured intensity. RMSE minimization scheme are developed to solve this task. In particular, iterative algorithms have been proposed for phase retrieval from intensity data {Fienup}. preferred embodiment, the disclosed method teaches a strategy to improve the efficiency of the complex deconvolution method based on a fine tuning of the Synthetic Coherent Transfer Function SCTF is disclosed, which is based on the definition of well defined criteria: 1) Criteria based on one side on the quality of the fit of the physical model for CTF to the experimental CTF measured with the instrument. 2) On the .my posteriory evaluation of the quality of the deconvolved image which is the base of an iterative technique consisting in adjusting the SCTF parameters on the basis of criteria about the physical reality of the deconvolved image. In particular, the so-called Phase flattening postulates the constancy of the phase of the deconvolved phase image, outside the specimen image; iterative algorithm is applied) and
a final wavefront synthesis module for generating a final image wavefront. (Cotte, [0105], discloses complex deconvolution process by the experimental CTF: c.sub.exp ought to be compared to a reference system. This system is based on a synthetic CTF: SCTF. c.sub.syn transformed from a synthetic APSF. The APSF represents a synthesis since the scalar Debye theory is computed with experimentally assessed parameters of the optical imaging system; synthesis technique is applied)
Regarding Claim 2,
Cotte further discloses the mask processing module is used to process the masks during image reconstruction to accelerate a convergence speed. (Cotte, [0119], discloses choice of correct mask radius k.sub.max is crucial to avoid cutting information or adding noise. The mask radius can be chosen based on the minimal structure d.sub.min to be resolved which must fulfill at least k.sub.max.ltoreq.k.sub.c. It is not trivial, though, to decide to which extend the filter's diameter can be enlarged; mask is processed to improve speed).
Regarding Claim 3,
Cotte further discloses a convergence evaluation method module used to evaluate a convergence, wherein the convergence evaluation method evaluates the convergence based on mean square error (MSE). (Cotte, [0088] The results are summarized Tab. 1. .theta..sub.i is measured as a function of r.sub.i for several phase contours (N=12) with a reading precision .DELTA..theta..sub.i. for each ctc-distance. The associated hole distances d.sub.i are calculated by Eq. (40) and their uncertainties s.sub.d,i are determined according to the error propagation of .DELTA..theta..sub.i. Tab. 1 indicates the mean values with a precision of the error in the mean. Therefore, .DELTA..theta. indicates the visibility of the phase singularities whereas s.sub.d shows how much the deduced distance is sensitive to variations of .theta; mean square error is calculated).
Claims 4 and 5 recite method with steps corresponding to the method steps recited in Claim 11. Therefore, the recited steps of the method claims 4 and 5 are mapped to the proposed combination in the same manner as the corresponding elements of Claims 1 and 2 respectively.
Regarding Claim 17,
Cotte discloses A high throughput lensless imaging method, comprising steps of:
a. inputting an optical diffraction signal to form an optical image; (Cotte, [0059], discloses coverslip is mounted on a custom diffraction tomography microscope based on sample rotation and transmission DHM. The sample rotation by .theta., introduces non-design MO conditions of imaging. In order to demonstrate the importance of the proposed technique to diffraction tomography by sample rotation, experimental holograms are recorded for tilt positions as well; diffraction optical image is obtained by inputting diffraction signal)
b. setting standardized parameters for the optical image; (Cotte, [0005-0007], discloses high-resolution three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction of weakly scattering objects is of great interest for biomedical research. Diffraction tomography has been demonstrated to yield for 3D refractive index (RI) distributions of biological samples. For the use of such techniques in the field of virology and cancerology, a spatial resolution in the sub-200 nm domain is required. Consequently, experimental setups must shift to shorter wavelengths, higher numerical apertures (NA) and steeper illumination and/or sample rotation angles. However, the scaling of resolution to high-NA systems introduces strong diffraction and aberration sensitivity. The use of MO under non-design rotation conditions introduces additional experimental aberrations that may further degrade resolution. Unfortunately, the theory of diffraction tomography cannot correct for these conditions since it is based on direct filtering by an ideal Ewald sphere; we present a new approach that effectively reconstructs the object scattered field with high-NA and under non-design imaging conditions. Opposed to classical reconstruction methods like filtered back projection, we suggest an inverse filtering by a realistic coherent transfer function (CTF), namely 3D complex deconvolution; as described previously, the capability of new phase microscopy, QPM and DHM in particular to image simultaneously amplitude and quantitative phase measurements makes it an attractive research tool in many fields, in particular biological research since it is marker free, non-invasive regards the light intensity and only camera shutter time limited. This innovation field in microscopy strongly motivates a revision of the concept of resolution limit in microscopy; parameters are standardized such as light intensity for reconstructing the image)
c. reconstructing the optical image; (Cotte, [0005-0007], discloses high-resolution three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction of weakly scattering objects is of great interest for biomedical research. Diffraction tomography has been demonstrated to yield for 3D refractive index (RI) distributions of biological samples. For the use of such techniques in the field of virology and cancerology, a spatial resolution in the sub-200 nm domain is required. Consequently, experimental setups must shift to shorter wavelengths, higher numerical apertures (NA) and steeper illumination and/or sample rotation angles. However, the scaling of resolution to high-NA systems introduces strong diffraction and aberration sensitivity. The use of MO under non-design rotation conditions introduces additional experimental aberrations that may further degrade resolution. Unfortunately, the theory of diffraction tomography cannot correct for these conditions since it is based on direct filtering by an ideal Ewald sphere; we present a new approach that effectively reconstructs the object scattered field with high-NA and under non-design imaging conditions. Opposed to classical reconstruction methods like filtered back projection, we suggest an inverse filtering by a realistic coherent transfer function (CTF), namely 3D complex deconvolution; as described previously, the capability of new phase microscopy, QPM and DHM in particular to image simultaneously amplitude and quantitative phase measurements makes it an attractive research tool in many fields, in particular biological research since it is marker free, non-invasive regards the light intensity and only camera shutter time limited. This innovation field in microscopy strongly motivates a revision of the concept of resolution limit in microscopy; parameters are standardized such as light intensity for reconstructing the image and image is reconstructed)
d. optimizing and compensating the optical image; (Cotte, [0174-0176], discloses transparent sample images are recorded with the incident light o.sup.(i) in direction of k.sub.0. According Fig. 18, a DC value is added to the APSF to compensate for o(i) well seen by reduced back-ground haze in FIG. 21 ROI-1 in amplitude. Similarly, the removed background results in full 2.pi.-dynamical range as shown in FIG. 21 ROI-3. Finally, the object ROI-2 in FIG. 21 includes improved contrast since the objects' edges are sharpened by the complex deconvolution; Diffraction Pattern Suppression; second motivation consists in correcting the diffraction pattern of the MO's APSF. This correction is in particular required for high-NA imaging systems since the APSF diffraction pattern may result in incorrect tomographic reconstruction in the near resolution limit range. The diffraction pattern can be observed to be well suppressed by comparing ROI-1 in FIG. 21. As a result, the diffraction pattern of the refractive index mismatched sphere becomes apparent in ROI-2 of Fig. 21; optical image is compensated) and e. outputting the optical image. (Cotte, Abstract, discloses a method to improve the image resolution of a microscope. This improvement is based on the mathematical processing of the complex field computed from the measurements with a microscope of the wave emitted or scattered by the specimen. This wave is, in a preferred embodiment, electromagnetic or optical for an optical microscope, but can be also of different kind like acoustical or matter waves. The disclosed invention makes use of the quantitative phase microscopy techniques known in the sate of the art or to be invented. In a preferred embodiment, the complex field provided by Digital Holographic Microscopy (DHM), but any kind of microscopy derived from quantitative phase microscopy: modified DIC, Shack-Hartmann wavefront analyzer or any analyzer derived from a similar principle, such as multi-level lateral shearing interferometers or common-path interferometers, or devices that convert stacks of intensity images (transport if intensity techniques: TIT) into quantitative phase image can be used, provided that they deliver a comprehensive measure of the complex scattered wavefield. The hereby-disclosed method delivers superresolution microscopic images of the specimen, i.e. images with a resolution beyond the Rayleigh limit of the microscope. It is shown that the limit of resolution with coherent illumination can be improved by a factor of 6 at least. It is taught that the gain in resolution arises from the mathematical digital processing of the phase as well as of the amplitude of the complex field scattered by the observed specimen. In a first embodiment, the invention teaches how the experimental observation of systematically occurring phase singularities in phase imaging of sub-Rayleigh distanced objects can be exploited to relate the locus of the phase singularities to the sub-Rayleigh distance of point sources, not resolved in usual diffraction limited microscopy. In a second, preferred embodiment, the disclosed method teaches how the image resolution is improved by complex deconvolution. Accessing the object's scattered complex field--containing the information coded in the phase--and deconvolving it with the reconstructed complex transfer function (CTF) is at the basis of the disclosed method. In a third, preferred embodiment, it is taught how the concept of "Synthetic Coherent Transfer Function" (SCTF), based on Debye scalar or Vector model includes experimental parameters of MO and how the experimental Amplitude Point Spread Functions (APSF) are used for the SCTF determination. It is also taught how to derive APSF from the measurement of the complex field scattered by a nanohole in a metallic film. In a fourth embodiment, the invention teaches how the limit of resolution can be extended to a limit of .lamda./6 or smaller based angular scanning. In a fifth embodiment, the invention teaches how the presented method can generalized to a tomographic approach that ultimately results in super-resolved 3D refractive index reconstruction; improved resolution image is displayed on microscope as output image).
Regarding Claim 18,
Cotte further discloses wherein in the step of b, the standardized parameters include brightness, contrast, intensity distribution, noise reduction, edge enhancement for image signal processing. (Cotte, [0005-0007], discloses high-resolution three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction of weakly scattering objects is of great interest for biomedical research. Diffraction tomography has been demonstrated to yield for 3D refractive index (RI) distributions of biological samples. For the use of such techniques in the field of virology and cancerology, a spatial resolution in the sub-200 nm domain is required. Consequently, experimental setups must shift to shorter wavelengths, higher numerical apertures (NA) and steeper illumination and/or sample rotation angles. However, the scaling of resolution to high-NA systems introduces strong diffraction and aberration sensitivity. The use of MO under non-design rotation conditions introduces additional experimental aberrations that may further degrade resolution. Unfortunately, the theory of diffraction tomography cannot correct for these conditions since it is based on direct filtering by an ideal Ewald sphere; we present a new approach that effectively reconstructs the object scattered field with high-NA and under non-design imaging conditions. Opposed to classical reconstruction methods like filtered back projection, we suggest an inverse filtering by a realistic coherent transfer function (CTF), namely 3D complex deconvolution; as described previously, the capability of new phase microscopy, QPM and DHM in particular to image simultaneously amplitude and quantitative phase measurements makes it an attractive research tool in many fields, in particular biological research since it is marker free, non-invasive regards the light intensity and only camera shutter time limited. This innovation field in microscopy strongly motivates a revision of the concept of resolution limit in microscopy; parameters are standardized such as light intensity for reconstructing the image and image is reconstructed).
Regarding Claim 29,
Cotte further discloses wherein in the step of c, the reconstruction includes a Fourier transform to reconstruct the optical image. (Cotte, [0112], fields of the test target have been recorded for all .eta. of FIG. 1 and processed according to the procedure indicated in a previous section. As an illustration, FIGS. 6 (a) and (b) (.eta.=400 nm) show the complex field spectrum {tilde over (G)} calculated by Fourier transforming the reconstructed complex image field U; Fourier transform is applied to image to derive Fourier transformed image).
Regarding Claim 20,
Cotte further discloses wherein the step of d utilizes backpropagation method. [0071], discloses the scattered field U.sup.(s), recorded at plane z.+-., is filtered by an ideal Ewald half sphere (nm: refractive index of mounting medium), and propagated by the latest term as known by the filtered back propagation algorithm of conventional diffraction tomography. In our case, by division through the 3D CTF, the spectrum is inverse filtered by the experimental Ewald sphere; phase information is extracted using backward propagation).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US-20150029326-A1 (Backman et al., methods, systems, and apparatuses to achieve high throughput and high speed acquisition of partial wave spectroscopic (PWS) microscopic images. In particular, provided herein are high-throughput, automated partial wave spectroscopy (HT/A-PWS) instruments and systems capable of rapid acquisition of PWS Microscopic images and clinical, diagnostic, and research applications thereof, Abstract)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PINALBEN V PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-5872. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 10am - 8pm.
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, Chineyere Wills-Burns can be reached at 571-272-9752. 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.
/Pinalben Patel/Examiner, Art Unit 2673
Prosecution Insights