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
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/30/2026 has been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-10 in the reply filed on 07/30/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 11-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 07/30/2026.
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 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 4-5, the limitations “about [numerical value]” raises clarity issues. It is unclear how this limitation should be interpreted and it is unclear as to what the metes and bounds of the above claim limitations are and would be needed to meet the above claim limitations.
These limitations are unclear because there are no specific ranges which are defined by “about” and it is therefore unclear whether a numerical value just outside these ranges would read on the limitations or not, and if so, specifically how close the value must be to the given range of “about [numerical value]” to read on the limitation.
For the purposes of examination, examiner suggests and assumes “
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(s) 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alasaarela et al. (US 20180220886 A1), hereinafter Alasaarela, in view of Yamane (US 20210307607 A1).
Regarding independent claim 1, Alasaarela discloses a fundus camera, comprising:
a camera lens (138; Fig. 1; ¶0026);
an imaging sensor (136; Fig. 1; ¶0026) positioned on a first side of the camera lens (138) (Fig. 1);
an ophthalmic lens (104; Fig. 1; ¶0021) positioned on a second side of the camera lens (138) (Fig. 1);
a source (100, 100’, 140; Fig. 1; ¶0021, ¶0034) of linearly polarized input light (¶0034) with a polarization axis in a first direction (¶0036), the source (100, 100’, 140) configured to direct the linearly polarized input light through the ophthalmic lens (104) (Fig. 1) to illuminate a retina (Fig. 1; ¶0021); and
a linear polarizer (142; Fig. 1; ¶0036) disposed between the ophthalmic lens (104) and the camera lens (138) (Fig. 1), the linear polarizer (142) configured to receive depolarized output light reflected or backscattered by the retina and linearly polarized output light reflected by the retina (Fig. 1; ¶0037), and allow polarized output light with a polarization axis in a second direction that is aligned with the linear polarizer (142) (¶0036) to reach the imaging sensor (136) through the camera lens (138) to provide high contrast fundus images of the retina (Fig. 1; ¶0002).
Alasaarela does not disclose a quarter waveplate positioned on a side of the ophthalmic lens opposite the camera lens; resulting in: the source configured to direct the linearly polarized input light to the quarter waveplate through the ophthalmic lens, the quarter waveplate converting the linearly polarized input light to circularly polarized input light that illuminates a retina; the linear polarizer configured to receive linearly polarized output light converted by the quarter waveplate from helically flipped output light reflected by the retina.
However, Yamane teaches a similar fundus camera (Fig. 4) comprising a camera lens (22; Fig. 4; ¶0080); an imaging sensor (21; Fig. 4; ¶0080) positioned on a first side of the camera lens (21) (Fig. 4); an ophthalmic lens (32; Fig. 4; ¶0080) positioned on a second side of the camera lens (22) (Fig. 4); a quarter waveplate (36; Fig. 4; ¶0080) positioned on a side of the ophthalmic lens (32) opposite the camera lens (22) (Fig. 4); a source (11, 12, 13; Fig. 4; ¶0080) of polarized input light (¶0080), the source (11, 12, 13) configured to direct the polarized input light to the quarter waveplate (36) through the ophthalmic lens (32) (Fig. 4), the quarter waveplate (36) converting the polarized input light to circularly polarized input light (¶0086) that illuminates a retina (Fig. 4; ¶0086); and a polarizer (24; Fig. 4; ¶0080) disposed between the ophthalmic lens (32) and the camera lens (22) (Fig. 4), the polarizer (24configured to receive depolarized output light reflected or backscattered by the retina (¶0088) and polarized output light converted by the quarter waveplate (36) from helically flipped output light reflected by the retina (since the circularly polarized light reflects off the eye, it necessary is flipped when it is incident on the quarter wave plate from the eye), and allow polarized output light that is aligned with the polarizer (24) (Fig. 4; ¶0089) to reach the imaging sensor (21) through the camera lens (22) to provide fundus images of the retina (Fig. 4; ¶0003).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Alasaarela to incorporate the quarter wave plate as taught by Yamane for the purpose of blocking unnecessary light included in the reflected light reflected by the eye and suppressing occurrence of ghost flare (¶0090 of Yamane).
Regarding claim 2, Alasaarela in view of Yamane discloses the fundus camera of claim 1, as set forth above. Alasaarela further discloses the linear polarizer (142) simultaneously blocks linearly polarized input light reflected by the ophthalmic lens (104) from reaching the imaging sensor (136) (Fig. 1; ¶0036).
Regarding claim 3, Alasaarela in view of Yamane discloses the fundus camera of claim 1, as set forth above. Alasaarela further discloses the source (100, 100’, 140) of the linearly polarized input light comprises a light source (100, 100’; Fig. 1; ¶0021) and a corresponding linear polarizer (140; Fig. 1; ¶0034) disposed between the light source (100, 100’) and the ophthalmic lens (104) (Fig. 1), the light source (100, 100’) and the camera lens (138) positioned in a common plane (plane of the page; Fig. 1) with the light source (100, 100’) offset from the camera lens (138) by a buffer distance (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 4, Alasaarela in view of Yamane discloses the fundus camera of claim 3, as set forth above. Neither Alasaarela nor Yamane explicitly disclose the buffer distance is about 5 mm.
However, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A. 1955), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Alasaarela in view of Yamane has all the claimed elements of a fundus camera, including a light source, a corresponding linear polarizer, an ophthalmic lens, a quarter wave plate, a linear polarizer, a camera lens, and an imaging sensor, with the light source offset from the camera lens by a buffer distance, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. One would be motivated to have the buffer distance be 5 mm for the purpose of having the optimal size and shape of the optical path to achieve an image that is sharp and evenly illuminated with brightness high enough to overcome noise in detection and with a wide field-of-view (¶0002, ¶0032 of Alasaarela).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the fundus camera of Alasaarela in view of Yamane to have a buffer distance of 5 mm for the purpose of having the optimal size and shape of the optical path to achieve an image that is sharp and evenly illuminated with brightness high enough to overcome noise in detection and with a wide field-of-view (¶0002, ¶0032 of Alasaarela).
Regarding claim 5, Alasaarela in view of Yamane discloses the fundus camera of claim 3, as set forth above. Neither Alasaarela nor Yamane explicitly disclose the light source and the camera lens are positioned in an area of the common plane having a diameter of about 16 mm.
However, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A. 1955), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Alasaarela in view of Yamane has all the claimed elements of a fundus camera, including a light source, a corresponding linear polarizer, an ophthalmic lens, a quarter wave plate, a linear polarizer, a camera lens, and an imaging sensor, with the light source and camera lens in a common plane, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. One would be motivated to have the light source and the camera lens positioned in an area of the common plane having a diameter of about 16 mm for the purpose of having the optimal size and shape of the optical path to achieve an image that is sharp and evenly illuminated with brightness high enough to overcome noise in detection and with a wide field-of-view (¶0002, ¶0032 of Alasaarela).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the fundus camera of Alasaarela in view of Yamane to have the light source and the camera lens positioned in an area of the common plane having a diameter of about 16 mm for the purpose of having the optimal size and shape of the optical path to achieve an image that is sharp and evenly illuminated with brightness high enough to overcome noise in detection and with a wide field-of-view (¶0002, ¶0032 of Alasaarela).
Regarding claim 6, Alasaarela in view of Yamane discloses the fundus camera of claim 3, as set forth above. Alasaarela further discloses the light source (100, 100’) is configured to provide near infrared (NIR) light and visible light (¶0029).
Regarding claim 7, Alasaarela in view of Yamane discloses the fundus camera of claim 6, as set forth above. Alasaarela further discloses the light source (100, 100’) comprises a first light source (110’; Fig. 1; ¶0029) configured to provide 810 nm NIR light (¶0031) and a second light source (110; Fig. 1; ¶0029) configured to provide visible light with a center wavelength of 565 nm (¶0031; 565 nm is known to be approximately the center wavelength of visible light). Alasaarela does not explicitly disclose the light source comprises a first light emitting diode (LED) and a second LED.
However, Yamane teaches the light source (11) comprises an LED (¶0023).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Alasaarela to incorporate the light source being an LED as taught by Yamane to have a first LED configured to provide 810 nm NIR light and a second LED configured to provide visible light with a center wavelength of 565 nm for the purpose of having a fundus examination apparatus having an optical system that appropriately blocks unnecessary light and suppresses occurrence of ghost flare (¶0006 of Yamane).
Regarding claim 8, Alasaarela in view of Yamane discloses the fundus camera of claim 1, as set forth above. Neither Alasaarela nor Yamane explicitly disclose indirect illumination by the source of the linearly polarized input light provides a field of view of 101° eye-angle or 67° visual angle.
However, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A. 1955), see MPEP 2144.05. In this case Alasaarela in view of Yamane has all the claimed elements of a fundus camera, including a light source, a corresponding linear polarizer, an ophthalmic lens, a quarter wave plate, a linear polarizer, a camera lens, and an imaging sensor, fulfilling the general conditions of the claim. One would be motivated to have indirect illumination by the source of the linearly polarized input light provide a field of view of 101° eye-angle or 67° visual angle for the purpose of having a wide enough field of view to capture a large section of the retina (¶0002 of Alasaarela).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the fundus camera of Alasaarela in view of Yamane to have indirect illumination by the source of the linearly polarized input light provide a field of view of 101° eye-angle or 67° visual angle for the purpose of having a wide enough field of view to capture a large section of the retina (¶0002 of Alasaarela).
Regarding claim 9, Alasaarela in view of Yamane discloses the fundus camera of claim 1, as set forth above. Alasaarela discloses linearly polarized input light, as set forth above. Alasaarela does not disclose the quarter waveplate is positioned with its axis 45° angled with a transmission axis of the source of the linearly polarized input light to convert the linearly polarized input light to the circularly polarized input light.
Yamane further teaches the quarter waveplate is positioned to convert the polarized input light to the circularly polarized input light (¶0086). In order for the quarter waveplate of Yamane to be able to act as intended on the linearly polarized light of Alasaarela in the modified fundus camera of Alasaarela in view of Yamane, the quarter waveplate would necessarily need to be positioned with its axis 45° angled with a transmission axis of the source of the linearly polarized input light to convert the linearly polarized input light to the circularly polarized input light.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Alasaarela to incorporate the quarter wave plate as taught by Yamane for the purpose of blocking unnecessary light included in the reflected light reflected by the eye and suppressing occurrence of ghost flare (¶0090 of Yamane).
Regarding claim 10, Alasaarela in view of Yamane discloses the fundus camera of claim 1, as set forth above. Alasaarela further discloses the fundus camera is a portable fundus camera (¶0020).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Alasaarela (US 20240099580 A1) discloses a similar fundus camera comprising a light source that emits visible and near infrared light and uses crossed linear polarizers to suppress reflection artifacts. Yao et al. (US 20200237212 A1) discloses a similar fundus camera comprising a light source and a camera lens in a common plane with a buffer distance. Shibutani et al. (US 20030156259 A1) disclose a similar fundus camera comprising a quarter waveplate between an ophthalmic lens and the eye, and a linear polarizer.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATASHA NIGAM whose telephone number is (571)270-5423. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9-4.
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.
/NATASHA NIGAM/Examiner, Art Unit 2872 August 12th, 2026
/RICKY L MACK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights