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
This office action is in response to communications filed 11/20/2025 Claims 1, 5, 6, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15 are amended. Claims 2-4, 7-9, 13 are original.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-15 have been considered but 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
Claims 1 and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities: the term “colinear” is misspelled. Should be changed to “collinear”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 and 14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The claimed subject matter “substantially collinear” the limitation is not supported based on the drawings alone. Therefore, the subject matter is not properly described in the application as filed, and consequently raise doubt as to possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing.
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 and 14 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.
The term “substantially collinear” in claims 1 and 14 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
The system appears to track to track the user’s line of sight such that the microscope is directed toward the location at which the user is looking. However, this does not necessarily result in the optical path of the microscope and the user’s gaze direction being collinear. As illustrated in Fig. 2A shown below, the microscope and the user’s gaze may be directed toward the same point on the object, such that the respective lines intersect at that point. Nevertheless, the mere intersection of these lines does not establish collinearity. In geometric terms, two vectors that intersect at a point are not collinear unless the lie along the same line. It is unclear to the examiner what applicant means by “substantially collinear.” Examiner’s BRI includes any system where the microscope tracks the user’s gaze to point at the same part of the object.
PNG
media_image1.png
358
459
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
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, 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.
1. Claim(s) 1-6, 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application 2021/0199940, You et al. (hereinafter You) in view of U.S. Patent Application 2019/0117318 Charron et al. (hereinafter Charron).
2. Regarding Claim 1, You discloses An apparatus for an optical imaging system (Fig. 1; [0030] “The surgical microscope 1 includes a microscope body 3, a housing, microscopy optics 5 including a magnifying zoom lens 7, and two cameras 9.”), comprising one or more processors and one or more storage devices ([0031], “The processing of the images may include any image processing operation…recorded images”), wherein the apparatus is configured to:
obtain position data indicative of a position of a microscope of the optical imaging system relative to a user of the optical imaging system ([0034], “The surgical microscope 1 further includes a sensor 45 allowing the controller to determine a position and orientation of a body portion, such as a head 47 of the user 33, relative to the microscope body 3, relative to the field of view 11 of the cameras 9 or relative to some other suitable position within the operation room.”);
However, You may not explicitly disclose determine direction data indicative of a line-of-sight direction of the user to a sample; and
determine, based on the position data and the direction data, control data for adjusting an optical path of the microscope such that the optical path of the microscope and the line-of-sight direction of the user to the sample are substantially colinear
Charron teaches determine direction data indicative of a line-of-sight direction of the user to a sample ([0065], “on a surgeon or operator-facing side 572 of the unit 505, thereby allowing, in some configurations, for line-of-sight or near line-of-sight imaging of the surgical site (i.e. where the mobile unit 505 is interposed between the surgeon and the surgical site for direct or near direct line-of-sight visibility).”); and
determine, based on the position data and the direction data, control data for adjusting an optical path of the microscope such that the optical path of the microscope and the line-of-sight direction of the user to the sample are substantially colinear ([0009], “reconfigurable imaging sensor optics can be reconfigured to adjust the display between a line-of-sight or near line-of-sight configuration, and an angled or redirected line-of-sight configuration (i.e. where the surgeon's line of sight can be angled relative to an imaging optical axis of the unit).”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the microscope system of You to incorporate the line-of-sight alignment principles taught by Charron so that the microscope optical path is adjusted such that the optical path and the user’s line-of-sight direction to the object are substantially collinear. Such modification improves hand-eye coordination, reduced parallax and enhance accuracy in viewing or manipulating a sample.
3. Regarding Claim 2, You discloses The apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the apparatus is configured to:
obtain the position data by obtaining at least one of a position of a head of the user relative to the microscope ([0034], “The surgical microscope 1 further includes a sensor 45 allowing the controller to determine a position and orientation of a body portion, such as a head 47 of the user 33, relative to the microscope body 3”), a position of eyes of the user (claimed in the alternative) or a position of a sample viewed through the microscope of the optical imaging system (claimed in the alternative).
4. Regarding Claim 3, You discloses The apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the apparatus is configured to:
control, based on the control data ([0034], “The surgical microscope 1 further includes a sensor 45 allowing the controller to determine a position and orientation of a body portion, such as a head 47 of the user 33, relative to the microscope body 3”), an arrangement of the microscope or a part of the microscope ([0022], “surgical microscope includes a controller”, [0031], “The microscope body 3 is carried by a support 17 including a base 19 placed on a floor of an operation room, and plural members 21 connected by joints including actuators 23 controlled by the controller 13 in order to position the microscope body 3 within an accessible region of the operation room. The support 17 is configured to be controlled by the controller 13 such that the microscope body 3 performs both translatory movements in three independent directions and rotatory movements about three independent axes.”).
5. Regarding Claim 4, You discloses The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the apparatus is configured to:
control, based on the control data ([0034], “The surgical microscope 1 further includes a sensor 45 allowing the controller to determine a position and orientation of a body portion, such as a head 47 of the user 33, relative to the microscope body 3”), an arrangement of an optical component along the optical path of the microscope ([0030], “The optics 5 is configured to adjust a distance of the focal plane 11 from the microscope body by operating an actuator (not shown in FIG. 1) controlled by a controller 13 of the surgical microscope 1”) .
6. Regarding Claim 5, You discloses The apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the apparatus is configured to: determine, based on at least one of the position of the head of the user ([0034], “The surgical microscope 1 further includes a sensor 45 allowing the controller to determine a position and orientation of a body portion, such as a head 47 of the user 33) or the position of the eyes of the user, the direction data (claimed in the alternative).
7. Regarding Claim 6, You discloses The apparatus according to claim 5, wherein the apparatus is configured to:
control, based on the control data ([0034], “The surgical microscope 1 further includes a sensor 45 allowing the controller to determine a position and orientation of a body portion, such as a head 47 of the user 33, relative to the microscope body 3”), the adjustment of the optical path of the microscope for decreasing a deviation between the optical path of the microscope and the line-of-sight direction of the user to the sample (Fig. 2: [0037], “A line 111 connects the body portion 101 of the user with point 109.” [0038]-[0043], [0050]-describes detecting gaze direction and head position of the surgeon, then controlling actuators to move the optical axis coincides with the surgeons viewing direction. This directly reduces deviation between the optical path and viewing path).
8. Regarding Claim 10, You discloses The apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the apparatus is configured to:
obtain user position data indicative of a position of the user of the optical imaging system relative to the sample (Fig. 1: 32) viewed through the microscope (Fig. 1; [0029], “microscopy optics 5 including a magnifying zoom lens 7, and two cameras 9”) of the optical imaging system (Fig. 1; [0033], “a sensor 45 allowing the controller to determine a position and orientation of a body portion, such as a head 47 of the user 33, relative to the microscope body 3”)
determine, based on the user position data, orientation data indicative of a desired orientation of the user to view the sample (Fig. 1; [0033], “a sensor 45 allowing the controller to determine a position and orientation of a body portion, such as a head 47 of the user 33, relative to the microscope body 3, relative to the field of view 11 of the cameras 9 or relative to some other suitable position within the operation room.”); and
determine, based on the orientation data, the control data (Fig. 1; [0033]-[0034], “a sensor 45 allowing the controller to determine a position and orientation of a body portion, such as a head 47 of the user 33, relative to the microscope body 3…a sensor 49 allowing the controller 13 to determine a direction of gaze of the user 33.”).
9. Regarding Claim 11, You discloses The apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the apparatus is configured to:
receive sensor data of a position sensor (position sensors to derive position of head/eyes), the sensor data indicative of a position of the user relative to the microscope (Fig. 1; [0033] “a sensor 45 allowing the controller to determine a position and orientation of a body portion, such as a head 47 of the user 33, relative to the microscope body 3”); and
determine, based on the sensor data, the position data ([0033], “a sensor 45 allowing the controller to determine a position and orientation of a body portion, such as a head 47 of the user 33, relative to the microscope body 3, relative to the field of view 11 of the cameras 9”).
10. Regarding Claim 12, You discloses The apparatus according to claim 11, wherein the position sensor (Fig. 1: 45; [0033]-[0034], “The surgical microscope 1 further includes a sensor 45 allowing the controller to determine a position and orientation of a body portion, such as a head 47 of the user 33”) is at least one of an optical sensor (claimed in the alternative), an electromagnetic sensor (claimed in the alternative) or a physical force sensor (Fig. 1: 49; [0034], “The surgical microscope 1 further includes a sensor 49 allowing the controller 13 to determine a direction of gaze of the user 33.” [i.e., physical force sensor])).
You may not explicitly disclose a physical force sensor
Charron teaches a physical force sensor ([0080], pressure sensor(s))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the microscope system of You to incorporate Charron’s pressure/force sensor into the known surgical microscope would have been a predictable variation yielding no unexpected results.
11. Regarding Claim 13, You discloses An optical imaging system (Fig. 1; [0030] “The surgical microscope 1 includes a microscope body 3, a housing, microscopy optics 5 including a magnifying zoom lens 7, and two cameras 9.”), comprising:
the apparatus according to claim 1 (Fig. 1; [0030] “The surgical microscope 1 includes a microscope body 3, a housing, microscopy optics 5 including a magnifying zoom lens 7, and two cameras 9.”).
12. Regarding Claim 14, You discloses A method (Title: “method of operation a surgical microscope”), comprising:
obtaining position data indicative of a position of a microscope of the optical imaging system relative to a user of the optical imaging system ([0034], “The surgical microscope 1 further includes a sensor 45 allowing the controller to determine a position and orientation of a body portion, such as a head 47 of the user 33, relative to the microscope body 3, relative to the field of view 11 of the cameras 9 or relative to some other suitable position within the operation room.”);
However, You may not explicitly disclose determine direction data indicative of a line-of-sight direction of the user to a sample; and
determine, based on the position data and the direction data, control data for adjusting an optical path of the microscope such that the optical path of the microscope and the line-of-sight direction of the user to the sample are substantially colinear
Charron teaches determine direction data indicative of a line-of-sight direction of the user to a sample ([0065], “on a surgeon or operator-facing side 572 of the unit 505, thereby allowing, in some configurations, for line-of-sight or near line-of-sight imaging of the surgical site (i.e. where the mobile unit 505 is interposed between the surgeon and the surgical site for direct or near direct line-of-sight visibility).”); and
determine, based on the position data and the direction data, control data for adjusting an optical path of the microscope such that the optical path of the microscope and the line-of-sight direction of the user to the sample are substantially colinear ([0009], “reconfigurable imaging sensor optics can be reconfigured to adjust the display between a line-of-sight or near line-of-sight configuration, and an angled or redirected line-of-sight configuration (i.e. where the surgeon's line of sight can be angled relative to an imaging optical axis of the unit).”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the microscope system of You to incorporate the line-of-sight alignment principles taught by Charron so that the microscope optical path is adjusted such that the optical path and the user’s line-of-sight direction to the object are substantially collinear. Such modification improves hand-eye coordination, reduced parallax and enhance accuracy in viewing or manipulating a sample.
13. Regarding Claim 15, You in view of Charron discloses the method according to claim 14 ,
Charron discloses A non-transitory computer readable medium including a program code for performing when executed on a processor ([0067], “at least one computer or controller operable by at least one a set of instructions, storable in relation to at least one non-transitory memory device, corresponding to at least one of surgical planning software… the computer comprises at least one of a control unit and a processing unit, such as control and processing unit 300”)
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, 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.
14. Claim(s) 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You in view of Charron as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application 2018/0217368, Hewlett et al. (hereinafter Hewlett).
15. Regarding Claim 7, You discloses The apparatus according to claim 2,
However, You may not explicitly disclose wherein the apparatus is configured to:
determine, based on threshold data, the control data, the threshold data indicative of a desired distance between the head of the user and at least one of the microscope or an optical component along the optical path of the microscope.
Hewlett teaches determine, based on threshold data, the control data, the threshold data indicative of a desired distance between the head of the user (Fig. 1; [0029], “each said lens may also be positioned at an optimal eye relief distance 12”) and at least one of the microscope ([0038], “The eyepieces 2a, 2b may be connected to an optical device such as a microscope”) or an optical component along the optical path of the microscope (Claimed in the alternative).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the gaze/head position tracking as taught in You in view of Charron with the distance-based adjustment as taught in Hewlett to improve usability and comfort, particularly in surgical environments where both alignment of the optical path and maintenance of a safe or comfortable viewing distance are important. Hence, enhancing ergonomics, reduce user fatigue, and ensure reliable viewing conditions.
16. Regarding Claim 8, You in view of Hewlett discloses The apparatus according to claim 7,
Hewlett discloses wherein the apparatus is configured to:
control, based on the threshold data, the adjustment of the optical path of the microscope for complying with the desired distance ([0033], adjustable eye relief mechanism…Figs. 17A-B…the head of each adjustment screw may be accessed by a user and turned to increase or decrease the distance between the mask and the cover... (mechanism moves the eyepiece/user interface to achieve the target eye-relief)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the gaze/head position tracking as taught in You in view of Charron with the distance-based adjustment as taught in Hewlett to improve usability and comfort, particularly in surgical environments where both alignment of the optical path and maintenance of a safe or comfortable viewing distance are important. Hence, enhancing ergonomics, reduce user fatigue, and ensure reliable viewing conditions.
17. Regarding Claim 9, You in view of Hewlett discloses The apparatus according to claim 7,
Hewlett discloses wherein the apparatus is configured to: receive the threshold data from an input device [0033], the desired distance is suppled via user input (turn wheel/screws) i.e., an input device that sets the target distance, see Figs. 11A-Fig. 13; [0048], “a desirable configuration for the pivot may be as shown in FIGS. 8-11 and 13”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the gaze/head position tracking as taught in You in view of Charron with the distance-based adjustment as taught in Hewlett to improve usability and comfort, particularly in surgical environments where both alignment of the optical path and maintenance of a safe or comfortable viewing distance are important. Hence, enhancing ergonomics, reduce user fatigue, and ensure reliable viewing conditions.
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 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMER KHALID whose telephone number is (571)270-5997. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 9am-7pm.
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, John Miller can be reached at (571) 272-7353. 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.
/OMER KHALID/Examiner, Art Unit 2422
/JOHN W MILLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2422