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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
As required by M.P.E.P. 609, the applicant’s submissions of the Information Disclosure Statement dated 1/31/2025 is acknowledged by the examiner and the cited references have been considered in the examination of the claims now pending.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it uses legalese - i.e. it is an almost verbatim copy of claim 1. Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words. The form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as "means" and "said," should be avoided. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, "The disclosure concerns," "The disclosure defined by this invention," "The disclosure describes," etc.
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 8-11 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.
With respect to Claim 8-11, the term “predetermined pattern” in claims 8-11 is a relative term which render the claims indefinite. The term “predetermined pattern” 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. Thus, the elements that are displayed on the display screen in the claims have been rendered indefinite by the use of these terms.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Palanker 20150201832.
Regarding claim 1, Palanker discloses a computer-implemented method ([0028], interactive computer-guided test) comprising: displaying a neuro-ophthalmic examination pattern comprising a plurality of segments (Fig 2A - Fig 2G, [0029], whole field in this test, various segments of the grid can generally be presented in a sequence; in this mapping procedure the size of the grid segments presented on the screen), wherein each of the plurality of segments is displayed at a time offset and at a discrete location of a display screen compared to other segments of the plurality of segments (Fig 2A – Fig 2G, [0029], number of steps in this mapping procedure the size of the grid segments presented on the screen can decrease as the test progresses); receiving user input during a time period which a given segment of the plurality of segments is displayed on the display screen (Fig 2A- Fig 2G, [0051], testing methods disclosed herein can detect changes in visual distortion over time using a relatively small number of steps; Periodic testing (i.e., daily or weekly or on a set schedule or frequency) can be used to track changes in the user's visual acuity over time); and generating a neuro-ophthalmic examination report based on the displaying the neuro-ophthalmic examination pattern and the received user input ([0045], program can take into account patient data when determining what areas of the grid to display to patients; tailor the test based on the patient disease type, previous patient testing data (e.g. location or size of previous distortion and/or rate of change of the distortion size)).
Regarding claim 2, Palanker discloses wherein the neuro-ophthalmic examination pattern comprises an Amsler grid ([0020], methods can include displaying a fixation point and an Amsler Grid).
Regarding claim 3, Palanker discloses wherein the user input is received via a computer mouse, a touchscreen, a microphone, a keyboard, a video camera, or a combination thereof ([0040], user can input the yes/no response to the test by touching the screen, by voice, by touching the screen with an object such as a stylus, or by other means).
Regarding claim 4, Palanker discloses wherein the received user input is indicative of a distortion of the given segment when viewed by a user via the display screen ([0030], if the patient looking at the fixation target sees no distortion, he responds by touching an area on the screen, such as a NO button (or any other label indicating the lack of distortion), or by a voice command and the test is completed).
Regarding claim 5, Palanker discloses wherein the neuro-ophthalmic examination report comprises an assessment of a user's peripheral vision ([0039], change in the distortion area for the patient can be tracked over time to see how the patient's vision is changing and to determine whether treatment is effective or if additional treatment may be needed).
Regarding claim 6, Palanker discloses wherein the neuro-ophthalmic examination report is indicative of macular degeneration, glaucoma, macular edema, chorioretinopathy, optic neuritis, ocular hypertension, optic neuropathy, or a combination thereof ([0011], method of testing distortions can be designed to test for metamorphopsia).
Regarding claim 7, Palanker discloses wherein each segment of the plurality of segments comprises a grid segment (Fig 2A – Fig 2G, [0029], mapping the whole field in this test, various segments of the grid can generally be presented in a sequence).
Regarding claim 8, Palanker discloses wherein the displaying is implemented in a predetermined pattern ([0020], methods can also include repeating steps (a)-(d) until the segments of a predetermined minimum size are analyzed).
Regarding claim 9, Palanker discloses wherein the predetermined pattern (Fig 2A – Fig 2B, [0035], a complete test grid 202 showing a sample distorted area 204) comprises a helical pattern beginning from a center point of the display screen and spanning outwardly (Fig 2A – 2F, [0037], resolution of the distorted space is desired then additional testing can be performed to further determine the shape of the distortion).
Regarding claim 10, Palanker discloses wherein the predetermined pattern (Fig 2A – Fig 2B, [0035], a complete test grid 202 showing a sample distorted area 204) comprises a helical pattern beginning from an edge of the display screen and spanning inwardly (Fig 2A – 2F, [0037], resolution of the distorted space is desired then additional testing can be performed to further determine the shape of the distortion).
Regarding claim 11, Palanker discloses further comprising: repeating the steps of claim 1 with a second predetermined pattern for displaying the plurality of segments (Fig 3A – Fig 3J, [0049], horizontal line can move horizontally across the test area determined as distorted by previous testing; horizontal mapping could be used to further determine the shape of the distortion).
Regarding claim 12, Palanker discloses wherein each of the plurality of segments is removed from the display screen after expiration of the respective time period ([0033], block 122 the program determines if each segment of the remaining test area has been tested; If all of the segments for the test area have been displayed then the results are analyzed to determine if the distorted area is sufficiently quantified (block 124)).
Regarding claim 13, Palanker discloses wherein each of the plurality of segments is continued to be displayed after expiration of the respective time period ([0033], if all of the segments for the test area have been displayed then the results are analyzed to determine if the distorted area is sufficiently quantified (block 124)).
Regarding claim 14, Palanker discloses a device for generating a neuro-ophthalmic examination report ([0020], hand held computer device), comprising: a display screen ([0004], display); a user input mechanism ([0004], communication capability); and one or more processors ([0011], hand held computer device can include a mobile phone) configured to execute a set of instructions that cause the one or more processors ([0020], hand held computer device) to: display, via the display screen ([0004], display), a neuro-ophthalmic examination pattern comprising a plurality of segments (Fig 2A - Fig 2G, [0029], whole field in this test, various segments of the grid can generally be presented in a sequence; in this mapping procedure the size of the grid segments presented on the screen), wherein each of the plurality of segments is displayed at a time offset and at a discrete location of a display screen compared to other segments of the plurality of segments (Fig 2A – Fig 2G, [0029], number of steps in this mapping procedure the size of the grid segments presented on the screen can decrease as the test progresses); receive, via the user input mechanism, user input during a time period which a given segment of the plurality of segments is displayed on the display screen (Fig 2A- Fig 2G, [0051], testing methods disclosed herein can detect changes in visual distortion over time using a relatively small number of steps; Periodic testing (i.e., daily or weekly or on a set schedule or frequency) can be used to track changes in the user's visual acuity over time); and generate a neuro-ophthalmic examination report based on the displaying the neuro-ophthalmic examination pattern and the received user input ([0045], program can take into account patient data when determining what areas of the grid to display to patients; tailor the test based on the patient disease type, previous patient testing data (e.g. location or size of previous distortion and/or rate of change of the distortion size)).
Regarding claim 15, Palanker discloses a computer-readable medium for generating a neuro-ophthalmic examination report ([0020], hand held computer device), comprising: one or more processors ([0011], hand held computer device can include a mobile phone); memory ([0011], mobile phone); and a set of instructions stored in the memory that, when executed by the one or more processors ([0011], hand held computer device can include a mobile phone), cause the one or more processors ([0020], hand held computer device) to: display, via a display screen ([0004], display), a neuro-ophthalmic examination pattern comprising a plurality of segments (Fig 2A - Fig 2G, [0029], whole field in this test, various segments of the grid can generally be presented in a sequence; in this mapping procedure the size of the grid segments presented on the screen), wherein each of the plurality of segments is displayed at a time offset and at a discrete location of a display screen compared to other segments of the plurality of segments (Fig 2A – Fig 2G, [0029], number of steps in this mapping procedure the size of the grid segments presented on the screen can decrease as the test progresses); receive user input during a time period which a given segment of the plurality of segments is displayed on the display screen (Fig 2A- Fig 2G, [0051], testing methods disclosed herein can detect changes in visual distortion over time using a relatively small number of steps; Periodic testing (i.e., daily or weekly or on a set schedule or frequency) can be used to track changes in the user's visual acuity over time); and generate a neuro-ophthalmic examination report based on the displaying the neuro-ophthalmic examination pattern and the received user input ([0045], program can take into account patient data when determining what areas of the grid to display to patients; tailor the test based on the patient disease type, previous patient testing data (e.g. location or size of previous distortion and/or rate of change of the distortion size)).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Maddalena (7367675), Maddalena (20040105073), Hohla (5941874), and Sinclair (5589897) are examples of a method for testing vision of a human subject.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sharrief I Broome whose telephone number is (571)272-3454. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm, EST.
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, Ricky Mack can be reached at 571-272-2333. 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.
Sharrief I. Broome
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2872
/SHARRIEF I BROOME/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights