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 .
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 1-17 and 19-21 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the laser" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 1 also recites “the eye,” which also lacks antecedent basis.
Claims 2-17 and 19-21 are rejected due to their dependency from claim 1.
Regarding claim 3, the claim recites, “…wherein the virtual irradiation mask is bounded by at least one closed boundary line, and the at least one boundary line comprises at least one vertex…”. It is unclear how the virtual irradiation mask can be only one boundary line and comprise one vertex. A vertex requires at least two lines. Additionally, no other lines are mentioned that could form a vertex with the boundary line. Therefore, the claim is indefinite since it recites at least one vertex with at least one boundary line when at least two lines are necessary for a vertex.
Regarding claim 13, the claim recites “has to be confirmed.” This is indefinite language and does not clearly set forth a step in the method.
Regarding claim 14, the claim recites “a position course of the treated eye us ascertained during the irradiation of the area to be irradiated.” It is unclear how a position course is ascertained if no previous steps are provided regarding the determination of a position course. Further, the claim recites that the position course is ascertained during the irradiation of the area, but then recites “to be irradiated.” It is unclear if the ascertaining occurs during or before the irradiation of the area. The lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite. For examination purposes, the claim will be interpreted as ascertaining the position of the irradiation at any time during the irradiation of an area.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the irradiation" in line 2 and 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Lastly, claim 14 recites, “….the irradiation position of the laser...” There is lack of antecedent basis for this claim. It is unclear what the irradiation position of the laser is referring to since it could be the laser, or the area the laser is irradiating.
Regarding claim 17, the phrase "in particular" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 1-14 and 16, 17, and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed inventions are directed towards an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1- Is the claim to a statutory category of invention?
Independent claim 1 is directed to a method (i.e., a process). Therefore, the claims are to a statutory category of invention.
Step 2A, prong 1- Does the claim recite a judicial exception?
Claim 1 recites, “…setting an area to be irradiated on or in the cornea of the eye to be treated for performing an irradiation treatment with the laser, setting a virtual irradiation mask in a mask plane….”. The recitation of claim 1 is an abstract idea mental process. Steps of setting an area for irradiation and setting a virtual mask are abstract idea mental processes in that they could be performed in one’s head. One of ordinary skill in the art, such as an ophthalmologist, could make the determination of what area should be irradiated based on observations, and then determine which parts of the cornea are masked and treated.
Step 2A, prong 2- Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a
practical application?
Claim 1 recites “A method for providing control data for an ophthalmological laser of a treatment apparatus for treating a human or animal eye, wherein the method comprises the following steps performed by the control device.” The recitation is the preamble of the claim and merely defines the field of use for the device. The recitation of the method’s use in treating an eye does not amount to integration into a practical application.
“[W]herein the area to be irradiated is situated within the virtual irradiation mask in a perpendicular projection onto the mask plane…” further limits the abstract idea mental process step by defining where the area is located.
“[P]roviding control data for the laser by the control device […] during the treatment” is insignificant extra-solution activity of outputting the information to the device.
As recited, the additional limitations of claim 1 do not integrate the abstract idea mental processes into a practical application.
Step 2B- Do the additional elements add significantly more to the judicial exception?
Claim 1 recites “A method for providing control data for an ophthalmological laser of a treatment apparatus for treating a human or animal eye, wherein the method comprises the following steps performed by the control device.” The recitation is the preamble of claim 1 and merely defines the field of use for the device. The recitation of using the method for treating an eye does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
“[W]herein the area to be irradiated is situated within the virtual irradiation mask in a perpendicular projection onto the mask plane…” further limits the abstract idea mental process step.
“[P]roviding control data for the laser by the control device…” is insignificant pre-solution activity data gathering.
“[W]herein the control data includes coordinates of the area to be irradiated, such that the laser emits pulses to the area to be irradiated during treatment” recites a limitation that only further defines the type of data being transferred.
As recited, the additional limitations of claim 1 do not amount to more than the abstract idea mental processes.
Dependent claims
The claims 2-11, 12, 13, 14, and 20 further limit the abstract idea of “setting” the area and the virtual irradiation mask, but do not do so in a way that integrates the abstract idea mental process into a practical application, or in a way that amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Claims 12 and 21 further define the field of use for the method of claim 1.
Claims 16 and 19 recite generic computer structure for executing the method of claim 1 while defining the field of use for the device and methods.
Claim 17 defines the field of use for implementing the abstract ideas of claim 1, but does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea since the claims are merely reciting the general use of the apparatus as treating the cornea.
In summary, claims 1-14, 16, 17, and 18-21 are rejected under 35 USC 101 for being directed to a judicial exception.
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 1-8, 10, 12, 13, 16, and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rathjen (US 20100256965 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Rathjen teaches a method for providing control data for an ophthalmological laser of a treatment apparatus for treating a human or animal eye, wherein the method comprises the following steps performed by the control device (para. [0014]: "the computer-aided system comprises a mask selector, which is configured to determine, based on user instructions, a projection mask to be positioned in front of the eye when executing the tissue cuts and to check, based on the determined projection mask and a beam cone defined by focused radiation of the femtosecond laser pulses, whether the cut surfaces of the tissue cuts defined in the three-dimensional cut pattern can be generated without shadowing by the projection mask. Hence, the mask selector allows a plausibility check of the cut pattern in relation to an undesired shadowing of cut surfaces by a selected projection mask."): setting an area to be irradiated on or in the cornea of the eye (Fig. 1; cornea 21) to be treated for performing an irradiation treatment with the laser (Fig. 1; laser device 3; para. [0014]: "whether the cut surfaces of the tissue cuts defined in the three-dimensional cut pattern can be generated without shadowing by the projection mask. Hence, the mask selector allows a plausibility check of the cut pattern in relation to an undesired shadowing of cut surfaces by a selected projection mask."; This shows the cut pattern generates a projection of where the laser will irradiate to cut the tissue.) setting a virtual irradiation mask in a mask plane, (para. [0067]: "the user interface allows the user to flexibly select, position, and change projection masks 33 in the virtual space visualized by graphics."), wherein the area to be irradiated is situated within the virtual irradiation mask (Fig. 1; projection mask 33; para. [0014]: “the computer-aided system comprises a mask selector, which is configured to determine, based on user instructions, a projection mask to be positioned in front of the eye when executing the tissue cuts and to check, based on the determined projection mask and a beam cone defined by focused radiation of the femtosecond laser pulses.") in a perpendicular projection onto the mask plane, and (Fig. 1; cornea 21 is shown with laser device 3, where the beam cone 32 directs the laser to be applied in a direction perpendicular to the projection mask 33). providing control data for the laser by the control device (Fig. 1; control module 10), wherein the control data includes coordinates (para. [0061]: “spherical coordinates”) of the area to be irradiated such that the laser emits pulses to the area to be irradiated during treatment. (para. [0061]: "…the reference generator 13 additionally generates construction grids, which are for example imaged on surfaces of eye structures, and/or discretized volumes. Height and width lines, polar and spherical coordinate grids, and also hexagonal grids are listed here as examples. The geometric reference(s) is (are) stored in the data storage and displayed in the three-dimensional model of the eye on the display 17 by means of the visualization module 13."; para. [0098]: " the three-dimensional cut pattern comprises pulse grid instructions for controlling the laser device 3 for each cut surface. Along with the cut pattern data of a defined cut pattern, the (manually or automatically) defined geometric references are also transferred to the laser device 3.").
Regarding claim 2, Rathjen teaches the method according to claim 1 (see above), wherein the mask plane represents a plane (Fig. 1; the surface of projection mask 33 is considered a plane), which is perpendicular to an irradiation direction of the laser (Fig. 1; laser device 3) to the cornea (Fig. 1; cornea 21) in a rest position of a beam deflection device (Fig. 1; beam cone 32 functions as a deflector for focusing the laser pulses) of the laser (Fig. 1 shows the cornea in a rest position; the laser is perpendicular to the cornea, and not angled. Therefore, it is in rest position.)
Regarding claim 3, Rathjen teaches the method according to claim 1 (see above), wherein the virtual irradiation mask is bounded by at least one closed boundary line (Fig. 15; cut pattern 5 for pockets 52 shows 4 boundary lines (4 sides of the rectangle 52)), and the at least one closed boundary line comprises at least one vertex (Fig. 15; cut pattern 5 for 52 has 4 sides, and the corners of the lines for this pocket are the vertex of the boundary lines) or at least two differently curved sections.
Regarding claim 4, Rathjen teaches the method according to claim 1 (see above), wherein the virtual irradiation mask is bounded by at least two boundary lines (Fig. 15; multiple boundary lines shown for pockets 51 and 52), which are each closed and spaced apart from each other. (Fig. 15; 51 and 52 are separate, closed shapes having gaps between the lines of each shape).
Regarding claim 5, Rathjen teaches the method according to claim 1 (see above), wherein the virtual irradiation mask is selected from a plurality of preset geometric shapes (para. [0075]: "FIGS. 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 illustrate further examples of cut patterns or defined cut surfaces in a plan view of the cornea 21."; A plurality of different shapes can be shown for figures 13-17).
Regarding claim 6, Rathjen teaches the method according to claim 1 (see above), wherein the virtual irradiation mask is set such that it includes predetermined regions (Fig. 12; cut patterns (or the pockets) 51 and 52) of the cornea (Fig. 12; cut patterns 51 and 52 on the cornea 21) in a perpendicular projection of the cornea onto the mask plane (para. [0074]: "The cut pattern editor 11 or the cut surface editor 114 positions the cut pattern 5 in relation to the preferred or assigned geometric reference (default positioning)."; para. [0074] of Rathjen shows that the cut pattern is a projection on the surface plane of the cornea. The regions of the projection mask are predetermined before the cut is implemented).
Regarding claim 7, Rathjen teaches the method according to claim 1 (see above), wherein the virtual irradiation mask is set depending on preset patient data (para. [0047]: "A medical practitioner 84 controls the diagnosis system 81, which generates diagnosis data for the computer system 1 based on measurements and data on or from a patient 80. The diagnosis data is stored in the database 82 and supplied to the computer system 1 for generating a three-dimensional cut pattern.")
Regarding claim 8, Rathjen teaches the method according to claim 1 (see above), wherein the virtual irradiation mask (para. [0067]: "projection mask 33") is set depending on a preset map of the eye (para. [0067]: "three-dimensional model of the eye"), wherein map positions (para. [0067]; "relative positioning of the selected mask projection"), having an associated map value greater than a value of a reference function at those map positions, (para. [0011] discloses a “geometric reference” and outlines the comparison between the reference data, cut surfaces, and projected cut patterns in the model and deformed state. This is broadly considered to be reference values. The instant specification discloses the reference function can be an eye model (para. [0024]), which is what Rathjen discloses), are associated with a virtual irradiation mask (para. [0067]: “The mask selector 111 is additionally designed to accept instructions by the user via the input elements 16 for the relative positioning of the selected projection mask 33 in relation to the three-dimensional model of the eye, i.e. for the virtual positioning in front of the eye 2.”)
Regarding claim 10, Rathjen discloses the method according to claim 1 (see above), wherein the virtual irradiation mask is set depending on an image feature in an image captured by a camera. (para. [0045]: "The data structures for storing the eye data 181 moreover comprise optional data structures for storing external measurement data and image data, which are for example imported from external measurement equipment or imaging equipment via a communication channel or are entered via the user interface 171 and are assigned to an eye 2 of a patient. In particular, the image data also comprises obfuscations and inclusions, which are superposed visually and are used for defining geometric references."; para. [0058]: "During the visualization, features defined by the above-mentioned measurement data and/or image data are preferably also superposed onto the three-dimensional model of the eye." para. [0051]: "The eye data 181 is imported as available eye files or is defined via the user interface 171, for example in the form of measured values as eye parameters.")
Regarding claim 12, Rathjen discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the irradiation treatment of the eye includes treatment for removing dystrophy (para. [0037]: “FIG. 17 schematically shows a plan view of a cornea with a cut pattern for local keratoplasty.”; Keratoplasty is considered to be a dystrophy that is removed by irradiation; Additionally, since no additional steps are provided for treatment of dystrophy, Rathjen’s method would inherently be able to treat dystrophy. Citing MPEP 2111.04 (I): wherein claim does not limit the process claim since the clause does not change the steps of the method, but rather defines the intended use (i.e., the treatment types in which the method is used.)
Regarding claim 13, Rathjen teaches the method according to claim 1 (see above), wherein the virtual irradiation mask is set by an operating terminal or the set virtual irradiation mask has been confirmed by the user of the treatment apparatus. (para. [0067]: “Thus, the user interface allows the user to flexibly select, position, and change projection masks 33 in the virtual space visualized by graphics… the mask selector 111 automatically generates (e.g. following an appropriate user instruction) a corrected projection mask 33.”)
Regarding claim 16, Rathjen teaches a control device (Fig. 1; control module 10), which is configured to perform the method according to claim 1 (see above).
Regarding claim 19, Rathjen teaches a computer readable medium for storing a computer program or product thereon, the computer program product comprising commands which cause a treatment apparatus to execute the method according to claim 1 (para. [0044]: "The functional modules 1' are preferably designed as programmed software modules, which are stored on a computer-readable data storage medium, which, fixedly or removably, is connected to the computer system 1, and comprise computer program code for controlling the processors of the computer 15 such that said computer executes the subsequently described functions.")
Regarding claim 20, Rathjen discloses the method according to claim 1 (see above). Since Rathjen discloses being able to set the mask to include predetermined regions of the cornea (see claim 6 rejection), then it would be inherent that Rathjen could also not include predetermined regions of the cornea. Inevitably, by choosing some predetermined regions, Rathjen is choosing to not include some predetermined regions of the cornea. Therefore, Rathjen meets the limitation: wherein the virtual irradiation mask is set such that it does not include predetermined regions of the cornea in a perpendicular projection of the cornea onto the mask plane.
Regarding claim 21, Rathjen discloses a method of treating a human or animal eye. Although Rathjen doesn’t specifically disclose the treatment types in which the method could be incorporated, it would be inherent that Rathjen’s disclosed methods could perform the dystrophy treatment types since the claims do not detail limiting steps involved in the dystrophy treatment types. Citing the MPEP 2111.04 (I); wherein claim does not limit the process claim since the clause does not change the steps of the method, but rather defines the intended use (i.e., the treatment types in which the method is used. Since Rathjen discloses the methods of claim 1, it would be inherent that the methods of Rathjen could perform the treatment for the treatment types of claim 12 (dystrophy) and 21. Therefore, Rathjen discloses the limitation of claim 21: wherein the treatment for removing dystrophy includes treatment of epithelial, dystrophy of Bowman's membrane, and/or dystrophy of stroma.
Claims 1, 8-11, and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vukelic (US 20220110789 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Rathjen teaches a method for providing control data for an ophthalmological laser of a treatment apparatus for treating a human or animal eye (para. [0017]: “The system includes a light source configured to project light energy pulses onto at least a portion of a cornea and a controller programmed to calculate the pattern and control the light source in accordance with any of embodiments above.”), wherein the method comprises the following steps performed by the control device: setting an area to be irradiated on or in the cornea of the eye (para. [0039]: “The treatment involves applying laser pulses such that the path of the laser follows a zigzag trajectory, thus treating a planar area at a specific depth. The treatment is repeated at different depths, effectively inducing multiple “treatment layers.”) to be treated for performing an irradiation treatment with the laser (para. [0096] As further shown in FIG. 3A, the objective 302 focuses incoming laser light into a focused beam 310 that irradiates a target.”) setting a virtual irradiation mask in a mask plane, wherein the area to be irradiated is situated within the virtual irradiation mask in a perpendicular projection onto the mask plane (para. [0097]: “The light source 316 projects light to mirror 320 and a device, such as a mask, to produce an illumination pattern 322. The illumination pattern 322 guides the cross-linking system 300 to induce cross-linking in specified locations to produce the desired change in the treated tissue.”) , and providing control data for the laser by the control device (Fig. 3A; controls 314), wherein the control data includes coordinates of the area to be irradiated such that the laser emits pulses to the area to be irradiated during treatment. (para. [0098-0099]: Referring still to FIG. 3A, a topography system 312 includes controls 314, which can communicate with controls 308 of the cross-linking system 300. The topography system 312 can include a light source 316 and an imaging device 318, such as a camera. The light source 316 projects light to mirror 320 and a device, such as a mask, to produce an illumination pattern 322. The illumination pattern 322 guides the cross-linking system 300 to induce cross-linking in specified locations to produce the desired change in the treated tissue. Referring to FIG. 3B, additional details of the controls 314 of the topography system 312 are shown. A spatial deformation map 324 spatially defines the deformation of the cornea, which, when considered with the topography map 326 of the cornea, provides information on where to induce cross-linking.”)
Regarding claim 8, Vukelic teaches the method according to claim 1 (see above), wherein the virtual irradiation mask is set depending on a preset map of the eye (para. [0098]: “Referring to FIG. 3B, additional details of the controls 314 of the topography system 312 are shown. A spatial deformation map 324 spatially defines the deformation of the cornea, which, when considered with the topography map 326 of the cornea, provides information on where to induce cross-linking.”), wherein map positions, having an associated map value greater than a value of a reference function at those map positions, are associated with a virtual irradiation mask (para. [0065]: “The cross-linking is performed to achieve a desired level of vision correction and/or the desired level of stiffening of the cornea. The amount of cross-linking is, at least in part, a function of a number of overlapping treatment layers having different z depths at a given coordinate. A treatment layer is a selected depth, measured from the posterior or anterior surface of the cornea, at which treatment light (such as a laser) is focused. It will be understood that the aperture used to focus the treatment light allows definition of such layers within the cornea.”)
Regarding claim 9, Vukelic teaches the method according to claim 1 (see above), wherein the virtual irradiation mask is set depending on a local radius of curvature of the cornea and/or of an epithelial layer, depending on a local radius of curvature gradient of a cornea and/or of the epithelial layer, or depending on the local thickness of the cornea and/or epithelial layer (para. [0004]: “This aspect of the invention can have a variety of embodiments. In some embodiments, the method may include receiving one or more measurements of thickness of the cornea, wherein the amounts of cross-linking are also, at least in part, a function of the thickness of the cornea.”; Additionally, para. [0098] discloses mapping corneal deformation in spatial and topographical images, which define where the lasers induce cross-linking.)
Regarding claim 10, Vukelic teaches the method according to claim 1 (see above), wherein the virtual irradiation mask is set depending on an image feature in an image captured by a camera (para. [0098]: “Referring to FIG. 3B, additional details of the controls 314 of the topography system 312 are shown. A spatial deformation map 324 spatially defines the deformation of the cornea, which, when considered with the topography map 326 of the cornea, provides information on where to induce cross-linking.”; A topography map is a type of image taken with a camera.).
Regarding claim 11, Vukelic teaches the method according to claim 10 (see above), wherein the image includes a result of a measurement of a topography of the cornea and/or the result of an optical coherence tomography measurement. (para. [0098]: “Referring to FIG. 3B, additional details of the controls 314 of the topography system 312 are shown. A spatial deformation map 324 spatially defines the deformation of the cornea, which, when considered with the topography map 326 of the cornea, provides information on where to induce cross-linking.”).
Regarding claim 15, Vukelic teaches the method according to claim 1 (see above), further including the following steps: transferring the provided control data to the laser of the treatment apparatus, and controlling the laser with the control data. (para. [0003]: “An aspect of the invention provides a method of altering curvature of a cornea. The method includes receiving one or more measurements of topography of a cornea, calculating a pattern defining locations and amounts of cross-linking required to achieve a desired level of vision correction, wherein the amounts of cross-linking are, at least in part, a function of a number of overlapping treatment layers having different z depths at a given coordinate, and controlling a light source to apply light energy pulses to the cornea to cross-link collagen in accordance with the pattern.”; The Z-depths at given coordinates are considered to be data sent to control the laser.
Regarding claim 16, Vukelic teaches A control device (para. [0027]: “The system includes: laser modification optics adapted and configured to adjust laser output of the laser system; and a controller programmed to control the laser modification optics as the light source in accordance with any of the methods described herein.”), which is configured to perform the method according to claim 1 (see above).
Regarding claim 17, Vukelic teaches a treatment apparatus with at least one ophthalmological laser for treating the cornea of a human or animal eye (para. [0038]: “FIGS. 3A-3D depict systems (FIG. 3A), topography controls (FIG. 3B), and multiple beam architectures (FIGS. 3C and 3D) for treating a cornea according to embodiments of the invention.”) by cauterization or optical breakdown (para. [0013]: “In some embodiments, the laser is a femtosecond laser.”; A femtosecond laser breaks down optical tissue), and the control device according to claim 16 (see above).
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.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rathjen (US 20100256965 A1) in view of Goos et al. (US 20160374858 A1, “Goos”).
Regarding claim 14, Rathjen discloses the method according to claim 1 (see above). However, Rathjen does not disclose wherein a position course of the treated eye is ascertained during the irradiation of the area to be irradiated, and the irradiation position of the laser is corrected during the irradiation to compensate for a position deviation of the eye.
Goos, in the same field of endeavor of methods for providing laser surgery, discloses a method for tracking the eye during keratectomy procedures. Goos discloses wherein a position course of the treated eye is ascertained during the irradiation of the area to be irradiated, and the irradiation position of the laser is corrected during the irradiation to compensate for a position deviation of the eye. (para. [0023]: “The laser system 10 includes an eye tracker function to compensate for movements of the eye 16 while being bombarded with the pulses of the laser beam 14. The laser module 12 here includes an eye tracker camera 34, which supplies its camera images in the form of corresponding image data to the control unit 18, which analyzes the camera images and detects movements of the eye 16 on the basis of the sequence of camera images. Based on recognized movements of the eye 16, the control unit 18 adapts the x, y shot positions for the radiation pulses of the laser beam 14 accordingly.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include the method of tracking the eye, as disclosed by Goos, and include it in combination with the method of claim 1, as disclosed by Rathjen. Doing so is an obvious improvement to Rathjen’s method of treating the eye. Including the method of tracking the eye would ensure that the laser does not deviate from the intended target. An eye tracking method would allow Rathjen’s method to prevent laser application in unintended areas of the eye. It would have been obvious to include this to improve the accuracy of laser pulse delivery.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OWEN LEWIS MARSH whose telephone number is (571)272-8584. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am – 5pm (M-Th), 8am – 12pm (F).
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, Jennifer McDonald can be reached at (571) 270-3061. 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.
/OWEN LEWIS MARSH/Examiner, Art Unit 3796
/Jennifer Pitrak McDonald/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3796