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 applicant’s amendments were received in the response filed on 5/26/2026. The claims status are as follows:
Claims 1-3 and 5-10 are pending.
Claims 1-3, 5-8 and 10 were amended.
Claim 4 is cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's amendments and arguments/remarks filed on 5/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant has amended claim 1 to include the limitations of previous dependent claim 4 and argued that the Hideshima reference (used as the secondary reference in the 35 USC 103 rejection of claim 4 over Yano in view of Hideshima and in the 35 USC 103 rejection of claim 4 over Dobashi in view of Hideshima) does not teach the limitation that “the processing circuitry increases the second current value in a stepwise manner while the second application processing is being performed.” The examiner finds this argument to be non-persuasive as the examiner contends that Hideshima’s teaching does teach the missing limitation of “increases the second current value in a stepwise manner while the second application processing is being performed.” Specifically, the examiner contends that Hideshima’s process of intensifying/increasing the current as a result of the pressure detector detecting insufficient pressure meets the BRI of the limitation ““the processing circuitry increases the second current value in a stepwise manner while the second application processing is being performed.” The applicant’s argument merely states that Hideshima only indicates a relation between the pressure within a compression chamber and signals produced in several circuits of the control system without addressing how Hideshima does not explicitly disclose the limitation. However, the examiner contends that while Hideshima does disclose the relation between the pressure in a compression chamber and the signals produced in several circuits of the control system, the citation further provides an explanation for how the current is increased in a step-wise manner. The non-final rejection mailed on 2/26/2026 cites column 4, line 39 – column 5, line 31 and figure 2 as the citation for the examiner’s assertion that:
“Hideshima teaches a similar non-contact tonometer which blows air into the eye using a current controller to drive a solenoid to move a piston within a cylinder to drive air out of a nozzle to applanate the eye wherein the system wherein the current control unit can increase the current value in a stepwise manner in order to compensate for changes in the compression chamber and ensure the correct pressure/force is expelled from the nozzle.”
The examiner further notes in the modification of Yano with Hideshima and Dobashi with Hideshima to reject claim 4, the office action states that:
“it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Yano’s [or Dobashi’s] tonometer and current application control unit to include compensation circuitry that causes the increase of the current value in a stepwise manner while measuring intraocular pressure as taught by Hideshima in order to compensate for any changes/irregularities in the compression chamber and ensure proper pressure application.”
The applicant’s argument does not address the office characterization of Hideshima in any detail, only alleging that it does not disclose the claimed limitation. However, the examiner contends that a review of the citation from the office action and the explanation in the rejection does in fact teach the features to which the examiner has relied upon from Hideshima as teaching. In particular, Hideshima specifically discloses the process in which a pressure sensor detects pressure within the compression chamber, compares it to a reference value, and increases/intensifies the current supplied at that time dependent on an error margin representing the difference between measured pressure and expected pressure. In performing this process, the examiner contends that Hideshima does teach increasing the second current value in a stepwise manner while the second application processing is being performed as the current increase/intensification is done in a stepwise manner, wherein the increase/intensification occurs at a time after the pressurization is initialized at the initial current, at which point the pressure is compared to a reference value, and then increased at that point (thus at that point, the current is increased at that point/step which is related to the difference between the reference value and measured pressure), thus exhibiting a stepwise increase in current, as the current was increased at the step/point when the difference is detect. Therefore, the examiner contends that the Yano/Hideshima and Dobashi/Hideshima combinations meet the BRI of the claims as the compensation circuitry from Hideshima would increase the current in a stepwise manner to compensate for differences between the measured and expected pressure within the compression chamber. The examiner concedes that this may be a different process than how they intend their limitation to be interpreted, however that does not change the fact that it meets the broadest reasonable interpretation of the instant claim limitation.
In order to overcome such an interpretation, the examiner encourages the applicant to amend the claim limitation regarding the stepwise increase to include more details from their specification to differentiate from the stepwise increase as taught by Hideshima.
Accordingly, the applicant’s amendments and arguments/remarks have been fully considered but are found to be non-persuasive. The office action as follows updates the rejections to reflect the amendments to the claims but maintains the same thrust of the rejections of previous claim 4 for newly amended claim 1.
Claim Interpretation
The applicant’s amendments to claims 1-3, 5-8 and 10 to recite “processing circuitry” in the place of “current application control unit” takes the claim limitations out of a 35 USC 112(f) means plus function interpretation. Accordingly, this limitation is no longer being interpreted as invoking a 35 USC 112(f) interpretation. The examiner notes that other previously held 35 USC 112(f) interpretations identified in the previous non-final rejection office action are maintained for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3, 5 and 7-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yano (US 5,107,851) in view of Hideshima (US 4,996,990).
Regarding claims 1-3, 5 and 7-9; Yano discloses a contactless ophthalmotonometer, comprising:
a cylinder (elements 33);
a piston (elements 32) movably provided inside the cylinder (column 5, lines 38-44; figures 4 and 6);
an actuator (solenoid; element 31) configured to move the piston (elements 32) inside the cylinder (elements 33) with current applied to the actuator to compress air inside the cylinder with the piston (column 5, lines 38-44; figures 4 and 6);
a nozzle (element 34) in communication with the inside of the cylinder, the nozzle configured to spray the air compressed with the piston to a subject eye (column 5, lines 38-44; figures 4 and 6); and
a processing circuitry (elements 54) configured to apply the current to the actuator (column 5, lines 1-28), wherein the processing circuitry performs first application processing for applying the current of a first current value to the actuator and, when a predetermined switching condition is satisfied while the first application processing is being performed, the first application processing is switched to second application processing for applying the current of a second current value higher than the first current value to the actuator (wherein controller applies a first lower current application, and if applanation is not detecting in applied the pressure range, then system then switches so as to apply a second higher current application than the first to the solenoid in order to explore for applanation at a higher pressure range; column 5, lines 1-37, column 5, line 65 – column 6, line 51, column 7, lines 10-29; figures 3a-6).
However, Yano does not explicitly disclose the processing circuitry increases the second current value in a stepwise manner while the second application processing is being performed.
Hideshima teaches a similar non-contact tonometer which blows air into the eye using a current controller to drive a solenoid to move a piston within a cylinder to drive air out of a nozzle to applanate the eye wherein the system wherein the current control unit can increase the current value in a stepwise manner in order to compensate for changes in the compression chamber and ensure the correct pressure/force is expelled from the nozzle (column 4, line 39 – column 5, line 31; figure 2)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Yano’s tonometer and processing circuitry to include compensation circuitry that causes the increase of the current value in a stepwise manner while measuring intraocular pressure as taught by Hideshima in order to compensate for any changes/irregularities in the compression chamber and ensure proper pressure application.
Further regarding claim 2; Yano further discloses the nozzle (element 34) is in communication with the inside of the cylinder through a chamber in communication with the inside of the cylinder (wherein element 33 can be identified as a cylinder part wherein the piston cannot reach [i.e. top portion of element 33] and a chamber part where the piston operates [lower portion of element 33]), the contactless ophthalmotonometer further comprises a pressure sensor (element 35) configured to detect pressure inside the chamber (column 5, lines 44-45), and the processing circuitry determines whether the switching condition is satisfied or not based on whether the pressure detected by the pressure sensor achieves a predetermined pressure threshold (wherein MPU determines if the switching condition is satisfied if the a IOC is not within the lower measured pressure range [i.e. a predetermined pressure threshold being the upper bound of the range] and switches analog switch element 53 to apply a higher current to the solenoid element 1 to test with a higher pressure range; column 5, lines 1-37, column 5, line 65 – column 6, line 51, column 7, lines 10-29; figures 3a-6). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the Yano/Hideshima combination would also include said features.
Further regarding claim 5; as described in the rejection of claim 2, Yano discloses the nozzle (element 34) is in communication with the inside of the cylinder through a chamber in communication with the inside of the cylinder (wherein element 33 can be identified as a cylinder part wherein the piston cannot reach [i.e. top portion of element 33] and a chamber part where the piston operates [lower portion of element 33]) and the contactless ophthalmotonometer further comprises a pressure sensor (element 35) configured to detect pressure inside the chamber (column 5, lines 44-45). The Yano/Hideshima combination as described in the rejection of claim 1 teaches the processing circuitry increases the second current value in a stepwise manner in accordance with an increase in the pressure detected by the pressure sensor while the second application processing is being performed. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the Yano/Hideshima combination would also include said features.
Further regarding claim 7; Yano discloses the processing circuitry stops the second application processing when a defined period of time determined in advance passes from start of the first application processing (wherein the examiner notes Yano meets the BRI of stopping the second application a period of time determined in advance from the start of the first application processing in that Yano discloses the system automatically changes [step 103] and applies pressure at the higher pressure range using the MPU [step 104] and finishes the second application processing [step 106] when performed on a single eye, thus being the predetermined time it takes for the system to run the loop which is determined by the programming ahead of time). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the Yano/Hideshima combination would also include the same features.
Further regarding claim 8; Yano discloses a projecting optical system (combined element 45, 44, 39) configured to project a luminous flux to the subject eye while the air is being sprayed from the nozzle to the subject eye (column 5, lines 56-59); and a receiving optical system (combined elements 40, 46, 47) configured to receive reflected light of the luminous flux reflected at the subject eye and outputs an applanation signal while the air is being sprayed from the nozzle to the subject eye (column 5, line 59-63), wherein the processing circuitry stops the second application processing when a peak of the applanation signal output from the receiving optical system is detected while the second application processing is being performed (wherein system stops applanation tests after a peak applanation signal is detected; column 6, lines 45-51 and column 7, lines 27-29). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the Yano/Hideshima combination would also include said features.
Further regarding claim 9; Yano discloses the actuator (solenoid element 31) is a rotary actuator configured to cause the piston (element 32) to move inside the cylinder through a crank mechanism (element 2) (wherein examiner notes that although the 2nd embodiment in figures 4 and 6 does not show crank element 2, Yano discloses figure 3A as depicting the second embodiment, where figure 3a depicts the rotary solenoid element 1 which drives piston element 3 via crank element 2; see figure 3a).
Regarding claim 10; Yano discloses a method for actuating a contactless ophthalmotonometer, the contactless ophthalmotonometer including:
a cylinder (elements 33);
a piston (elements 32) movably provided inside the cylinder (column 5, lines 38-44; figures 4 and 6);
an actuator (solenoid; element 31) configured to move the piston (elements 32) inside the cylinder (elements 33) with current applied to the actuator to compress air inside the cylinder with the piston (column 5, lines 38-44; figures 4 and 6);
a nozzle (element 34) in communication with the inside of the cylinder, the nozzle configured to spray the air compressed with the piston to a subject eye (column 5, lines 38-44; figures 4 and 6);
the method including:
performing first application processing for applying the current of a first current value to the actuator when the current is to be applied to the actuator (step of providing a first current value to the solenoid to apply a first lower pressure range; column 5, lines 1-37, column 5, line 65 – column 6, line 51, column 7, lines 10-29; figures 3a-6); and
switching the first application processing to second application processing for applying the current of a second current value higher than the first current value to the actuator when a predetermined switching condition is satisfied while the first application processing is being performed (step of switching to apply a second current value to the solenoid to apply a second higher pressure range when an applanation condition is not met in the lower applied pressure range; column 5, lines 1-37, column 5, line 65 – column 6, line 51, column 7, lines 10-29; figures 3a-6).
However, Yano does not explicitly disclose increasing the second current value in a stepwise manner while the second application processing is being performed.
Hideshima teaches a similar non-contact tonometer which blows air into the eye using a current controller to drive a solenoid to move a piston within a cylinder to drive air out of a nozzle to applanate the eye wherein the system wherein the current control unit can increase the current value in a stepwise manner in order to compensate for changes in the compression chamber and ensure the correct pressure/force is expelled from the nozzle (column 4, line 39 – column 5, line 31; figure 2)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Yano’s tonometer and processing circuitry to include compensation circuitry that causes the increase of the current value in a stepwise manner while measuring intraocular pressure as taught by Hideshima in order to compensate for any changes/irregularities in the compression chamber and ensure proper pressure application.
Claims 1, 3 and 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dobashi (US 2013/0331679 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 3 and 6-9; Dobashi discloses a contactless ophthalmotonometer, comprising:
a cylinder (element 43; figure 2);
a piston (element 40) movably provided inside the cylinder (paragraph [0045]; figure 2);
an actuator (element 42) configured to move the piston (element 40) inside the cylinder (element 43) with current applied to the actuator to compress air inside the cylinder with the piston (paragraphs [0045] and [0056]; figure 2);
a nozzle (element 22) in communication with the inside of the cylinder (via tube element 44), the nozzle configured to spray the air compressed with the piston to a subject eye (paragraph [0039]; figure 2); and
a processing circuitry (elements 301 and 310) configured to apply the current to the actuator, wherein the processing circuitry performs first application processing for applying the current of a first current value to the actuator and, when a predetermined switching condition is satisfied while the first application processing is being performed, the first application processing is switched to second application processing for applying the current of a second current value higher than the first current value to the actuator (wherein a minute current is applied to solenoid element 42 to move the piston element 40 to the desired starting position [i.e. predetermined switching condition] in step S100, and upon reaching the starting position, controller element 301 increases the solenoid drive current measure intraocular pressure by applanation of the eye in step S101; paragraphs [0082]-[0083]; figure 8).
However, Dobashi does not explicitly disclose the processing circuitry increases the second current value in a stepwise manner while the second application processing is being performed.
Hideshima teaches a similar non-contact tonometer which blows air into the eye using a current controller to drive a solenoid to move a piston within a cylinder to drive air out of a nozzle to applanate the eye wherein the system wherein the current control unit can increase the current value in a stepwise manner in order to compensate for changes in the compression chamber and ensure the correct pressure/force is expelled from the nozzle (column 4, line 39 – column 5, line 31; figure 2)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Dobashi’s tonometer and processing circuitry to include compensation circuitry that causes the increase of the current value in a stepwise manner while measuring intraocular pressure as taught by Hideshima in order to compensate for any changes/irregularities in the compression chamber and ensure proper pressure application.
Further regarding claim 3; Dobashi discloses a detection sensor (element 47) configured to detect a displaced amount of the actuator (wherein position of dog element 46 inherently detects the position of the actuator), wherein the processing circuitry determines whether the switching condition is satisfied or not based on whether the displaced amount detected by the detection sensor achieves a predetermined displaced amount threshold (wherein processing circuitry determines switching condition is satisfied when detection switch 47 detects that the piston is in the correction location in order to increase drive current and test intraocular pressure; paragraphs [0046]-[0047] and [0082]-[0083]; figures 6a-c and 8). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the Dobashi/Hideshima combination would also include said features.
Further regarding claim 6; as described in the rejection of claim 3, Dobashi discloses a detection sensor (element 47) configured to detect a displaced amount of the actuator (wherein position of dog element 46 inherently detects the position of the actuator). The Dobashi/Hideshima combination as described in the rejection of claim 1 teaches the processing circuitry increases the second current value in a stepwise manner in accordance with an increase in the pressure detected by the pressure sensor while the second application processing is being performed. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the Dobashi/Hideshima combination would also include said features.
Further regarding claim 7; Dobashi discloses the processing circuitry stops the second application processing when a defined period of time determined in advance passes from start of the first application processing (wherein the current is only applied to drive the solenoid for a predetermined period of time in situations where the eye does not experience applanation, i.e. when the IOC is more than 30, the system stops applying current and resets to do another test, thus meeting the BRI as the controller includes a situation where the second application processing is stopped a defined period of time from the start of the first application processing; paragraphs [0082]-[0089]; figure 8). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the Dobashi/Hideshima combination would also include said features.
Further regarding claim 8; Dobashi discloses a projecting optical system (elements 37, 36, 25) configured to project a luminous flux to the subject eye while the air is being sprayed from the nozzle to the subject eye; and a receiving optical system (elements 34, 33, 32 and 31) configured to receive reflected light of the luminous flux reflected at the subject eye and outputs an applanation signal while the air is being sprayed from the nozzle to the subject eye, wherein the processing circuitry stops the second application processing when a peak of the applanation signal output from the receiving optical system is detected while the second application processing is being performed (wherein drive current to solenoid is interrupted when the corneal shape changing signal measured by optical system is at its first maximum value; paragraphs [0058]-[0059]; figure 5 and 12). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the Dobashi/Hideshima combination would also include said features.
Further regarding claim 9; Dobashi discloses the actuator is a rotary actuator (element 42) configured to cause the piston (element 40) to move inside the cylinder (element 43) through a crank mechanism (element 41) (paragraphs [0045] and [0055]; figures 2, 4a-c, 6a-c). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the Dobashi/Hideshima combination would also include said features.
Further regarding claim 10; Dobashi discloses a method for actuating a contactless opthalmotonometer, the contactless ophthalmotonometer including:
a cylinder (element 43; figure 2);
a piston (element 40) movably provided inside the cylinder (paragraph [0045]; figure 2);
an actuator (element 42) configured to move the piston (element 40) inside the cylinder (element 43) with current applied to the actuator to compress air inside the cylinder with the piston (paragraphs [0045] and [0056]; figure 2);
a nozzle (element 22) in communication with the inside of the cylinder (via tube element 44), the nozzle configured to spray the air compressed with the piston to a subject eye (paragraph [0039]; figure 2); and
the method including:
performing first application processing for applying the current of a first current value to the actuator when the current is to be applied to the actuator (applies minute current to get piston into desired position; step S100; paragraph [0082]); and
switching the first application processing to second application processing for applying the current of a second current value higher than the first current value to the actuator when a predetermined switching condition is satisfied while the first application processing is being performed (switching to measurement mode and increasing the drive current to drive the piston to blow air into the eye in order to measure IOC; step S101; paragraph [0083]).
However, Dobashi does not explicitly disclose increasing the second current value in a stepwise manner while the second application processing is being performed.
Hideshima teaches a similar non-contact tonometer which blows air into the eye using a current controller to drive a solenoid to move a piston within a cylinder to drive air out of a nozzle to applanate the eye wherein the system wherein the current control unit can increase the current value in a stepwise manner in order to compensate for changes in the compression chamber and ensure the correct pressure/force is expelled from the nozzle (column 4, line 39 – column 5, line 31; figure 2)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Dobashi’s tonometer and processing circuitry to include compensation circuitry that causes the increase of the current value in a stepwise manner while measuring intraocular pressure as taught by Hideshima in order to compensate for any changes/irregularities in the compression chamber and ensure proper pressure application.
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 ADAM J EISEMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3818. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (7:00 AM - 4:00 PM).
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, Jacqueline Cheng can be reached at 571-272-5596. 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.
/ADAM J EISEMAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights