DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on April 22, 2026 has been entered. Claims 25-50 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claim objections previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed February 26, 2026 have overcome each and every rejection.
Response to Arguments
35 U.S.C. § 103
Applicant’s arguments filed April 22, 2026 with respect to a lack of prima facie case of anticipation in claims 25-50 have been considered but are moot because of the new ground of rejection. The below response addresses arguments still relevant to the new ground of rejections set forth.
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 25-50 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ----Al-Qaisi et. al, (US 20210186753 A1, published 06/24/2021, hereinafter known as Al-Qaisi) in view of Van de Velde (US 6789900 B2, published 09/14/2004) and further in view of Yang (US 20170188822 A1, published 07/06/2017).
Regarding claims 25, 38, and 50 Al-Qaisi discloses an imaging and treatment system for imaging and treating an eye condition (“laser treatment system includes an optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging system” [0006]) comprising:
a scanning based imager arranged to image at least a portion of a patient's eye (“OCT imaging system may include OCT scanner” [0040]);
a treatment laser arranged to treat a patient's eye with a laser pulse (“laser system may use an ultra-short pulse laser to at least partially remove the media opacity” [0027]);
a controller (“OCT imaging system may include OCT scanner and OCT controller” [0040]) configured to:
capture image frames (“sensors may capture a digital image of eye” [0030]), using the scanning based imager ([0040]), as a plurality of subsequently captured image strips (“digital images captured by sensors and may be processed by image processing system” [0032]);
perform image strip tracking (“new OCT images are acquired, processed, and transmitted at a rate of at least 30 frames per second and displayed at about 60 frames per second” [0044]) to determine a movement of at least one feature in a most recently captured image strip relative to at least one corresponding feature in a corresponding image strip of a previously captured image frame (“processor may receive and process profile depth scans generated by OCT imaging system…processor may detect the position, the volume, or a combination thereof, of media opacity based on the profile depth scans” [0047]).
However, Al-Qaisi does not disclose preventing the treatment laser from treating the patient's eye when the determined movement of the at least one feature exceeds a safety threshold.
Van de Velde teaches a combination of a confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscope and external laser sources used for microphotocoagulation purposes (Abstract). Other elements in the optical construction of the therapeutic laser include a safety shutter, stop apertures at the end of the fiber optic, various filters and the modulating devices allowing specific pulsating patterns of energy (Col. 11, lines 47-51).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the safety shutter feature of Van de Velde with the imaging and treatment system of Al-Qaisi because this enhances safety measures and lowers the likelihood of errors and potentially dangerous scenarios during treatment.
However, Al-Qaisi in view of Van de Velde does not disclose determining if a current image frame being captured is complete;
when it is determined that the current image frame is not complete:
perform the image strip tracking to determine a relative frame transformation of the current image frame for transforming locations in the current image frame to corresponding locations in the previously captured image frame; and
set a current transformation based on a combination of the relative frame transformation of the current image frame and an absolute frame transformation of the previously captured image frame transforming locations in the previously captured image frame to corresponding locations in an initial image frame; and when it is determined that the current image frame is complete:
determine an absolute frame transformation of the current image frame for transforming locations in the current image frame to corresponding locations in the initial image frame; and
set the current transformation based on the absolute frame transformation of the current image frame.
Yang teaches systems and methods for real-time eye tracking using a SLO or other imaging device (Abstract). One element of the imaging apparatus and method is a robust tracking algorithm that is used to distinguish true eye motions from artifacts, i.e., a complete image frame [0063]. When these motion artifacts are treated by the system as actual tracking signals, the tracking mirror is moved unnecessarily, i.e., it jitters, which results in tracking failure, i.e., an incomplete image frame [0063]. Target frame m has to be updated as a new reference frame, then the future frame n will cross correlate with this frame m [0074]. Each AOSLO video has a unique WFSLO (wide FOV SLO) image to record its imaging position and size of FOV…the WFSLO notifies its tracking status to the AOSLO (adaptive optics scanning light ophthalmoscope), e.g., microsaccade, blink, or tracking failure…the WFSLO eye-tracking updates a new reference frame when the fixation target changes to a new location, i.e., relative frame transformation [0075]. The GPU then performs all required processing in parallel, and returns only three parameters from the GPU to the host PC: the correlation coefficient and translations x and y [0088].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the determination of a complete image and subsequent frame transformations of Yang with the retinal imaging and treatment system of Al-Qaisi in view of Van de Velde because frame transformations help produce easily understandable results from the raw data that was collected.
Regarding claims 26 and 39, Al-Qaisi, Van de Velde and Yang teach the method of imaging and treatment of claims 25 and 38 as described above, wherein Al-Qaisi further teaches the controller is further configured to: adjust a treatment location of the treatment laser within the patient's eye based on the movement of the at least one feature [“real time feedback may include signals about the position…the surgeon may update the treatment plan in real time…”, 0065].
However, Al-Qaisi does not teach the adjustment of the treatment location when the movement of the at least one feature does not exceed the safety threshold.
Van de Velde teaches other elements in the optical construction of the therapeutic laser include a safety shutter, which is a fail-safe mechanism that blocks the laser beam, if necessary, (Col. 11, lines 48-50).
Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the safety mechanism of Van de Velde with the method of imaging and treatment of Al-Qaisi because this allows for specific pulsating patterns of energy with safer constraints (Van de Velde, Col. 11, lines 50-52).
Regarding claims 27 and 40, Al-Qaisi, Van de Velde and Yang teach the method of imaging and treatment of claims 26 and 39 as described above, wherein Al-Qaisi further teaches the treatment location is specified in a treatment plan that is registered to a captured image frame of the patient's eye [“a treatment plan may be based on…an OCT image provided during treatment”, 0064].
Regarding claims 28 and 41, Al-Qaisi, Van de Velde and Yang teach the method of imaging and treatment of claims 25 and 38 as described above, wherein Al-Qaisi further teaches tracking motion of at least one structures based on the determined movement of the at least one feature, the at least one structures comprising at least one of: an eye; a retina; a floater; a pupil; a lens; a sclera; and a cornea [“methods by using OCT to identify a vitreous floater”, 0026].
Regarding claims 29 and 42, Al-Qaisi, Van de Velde and Yang teach the method of imaging and treatment of claims 25 and 38 as described above, wherein Al-Qaisi further teaches the at least one feature comprises at least one stationary feature within the patient's eye [0060].
Regarding claims 30 and 43, Al-Qaisi and Van de Velde do not teach that the controller is further configured to stabilize a plurality of captured image frames based on the at least one stationary feature.
However, Yang teaches systems and methods for real-time eye tracking using a SLO (scanning laser ophthalmoscopy) or other imaging device. Image registration can also be performed in real-time, wherein features on target images are continuously mapped or registered to the reference image as each target image is being produced, but eye motion in the subject can interfere with or prevent accurate image tracking [0036].
Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the image registration and avoidance of eye motion of Yang with the method of imaging and treatment of Al-Qaisi and Van de Velde because accurate real-time image registration in ophthalmoscopy is significantly more difficult than off-line registration for a number of reasons, and this method helps alleviate that difficulty (Yang, [0036]).
Regarding claims 31 and 44, Al-Qaisi, Van de Velde and Yang teach the method of imaging and treatment of claims 30 and 43 as described above, wherein Al-Qaisi further teaches tracking movement of a floater across the stabilized plurality of captured image frames [0026].
Regarding claims 32 and 45, Al-Qaisi and Van de Velde do not teach determining the movement of the at least one feature comprises determining a translation of the at least one feature.
Yang teaches the at least one output parameter is an x translation or a y translation, [0012].
Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the output parameter being a translation of Yang with the method of imaging and treatment of Al-Qaisi and Van de Velde because this approach enables the WFSLO (wide FOV FSLO) to continuously track eye location, so that AOSLO (adaptive optics scanning light ophthalmoscope) imaging becomes efficient in steering its FOV (field of view) to any ROI (region of interest) as along as it is in the steering range (Yang, [0060]).
Regarding claims 33 and 46, Al-Qaisi in view of Van de Velde do not teach the corresponding image strip has a same or similar size and location in the previously captured image frame as the most recently captured image strip in a current image frame being captured.
However, Yang teaches a 520×544 image can be divided into 34 strips, each with a size of 520×16 pixels [0071].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the consistent size and location of the image strips of Yang with the retinal imaging and treatment system of Al-Qaisi in view of Van de Velde because this consistency can be used to perform fast, real-time image registration by dramatically improving processing speed over currently known approaches (Yang, [0086]).
Regarding claims 34 and 47, Al-Qaisi and Van de Velde do not teach the relative frame transformation comprises one or more translations and the absolute frame transformation comprises one or more translations and rotations.
Yang teaches the at least one output parameter is an x translation or a y translation, [0012]. The location of AOSLO imaging FOV is passed to the WFSLO and recorded on a WFSLO image. Each AOSLO video has a unique WFSLO image to record its imaging position and size of FOV [0075].
Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the output parameter being a translation and recording the transformation of imaging position and size of Yang with the method of imaging and treatment of Al-Qaisi and Van de Velde because this approach enables the WFSLO to continuously track eye location, so that AOSLO imaging becomes efficient in steering its FOV to any ROI as along as it is in the steering range (Yang, [0060]).
Regarding claims 35 and 48, Al-Qaisi, Van de Velde and Yang teach the method of imaging and treatment of claims 34 and 38 as described above, wherein Al-Qaisi further teaches registering a treatment plan comprising one or more treatment locations of the patient's eye with the initial image frame [0027]; applying the current transformation to a next treatment location of the treatment plan to provide an adjusted next treatment location [“updating the treatment plan in real time”, 0009]; and treating the next treatment location according to the treatment plan [0009].
Regarding claim 36, Al-Qaisi, Van de Velde and Yang teach the method of imaging and treatment of claim 25 as described above, wherein Al-Qaisi further teaches the scanning based imager comprises at least one of: a scanning laser ophthalmoscopy (SLO) imager [0047]; and an optical coherence tomography (OCT) imager [0027].
Regarding claims 37 and 49, Al-Qaisi, Van de Velde and Yang teach the method of imaging and treatment of claims 25 and 38 as described above, wherein Al-Qaisi further teaches an eye condition treated using the imaging and treatment system comprises one or more of: symptomatic vitreous opacities (SVO); floaters; age-related macular degeneration (AMD); vitreomacular traction syndrome (VTS); diabetic retinopathy; cataracts; choroidal neovascularization; micro-aneurysm; glaucoma; epiretinal membrane (ERM); retinal tears and detachments; and central or branch vein occlusions (“methods by using OCT to identify a vireous floater”, Al-Qaisi, [0026]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 FIONA M KOWALKOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-2790. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-5:00pm.
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, Unsu Jung can be reached at 571-272-8506. 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.
/F.M.K./Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3792
/ALLEN PORTER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Prosecution Insights