DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
2. Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 10, line 4, should be amended to read “light from the array of LED light sources”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 USC 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)(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.
4. Claims 1-3 and 9-17 are rejected under 35 USC 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tyan et al. (US 20220125280 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Tyan discloses a laparoscope ([0066], [0077], [0092]), comprising:
a handle (Fig. 5, to the right of the spot where 533-2 meets 534);
a shaft (Fig. 5, 534) coupled to the handle and defining a tube (Fig. 5);
at least one light source positioned at a tip of the shaft (Fig. 5, 531);
an image sensor (Fig. 5, 532);
a first polarizing film (Fig. 5, 539) positioned adjacent to the at least one light source and configured to polarize light from the at least one light source (Fig. 5); and
a second polarizing film (Fig. 5, 538) configured to polarize light entering the image sensor (Fig. 5), wherein the first polarizing film is rotated with respect to the second polarizing film (Fig.5, motorized polarizer rotators), and wherein the first polarizing film and the second polarizing film are positioned within the tube (Figs. 2A & 5).
Tyan does not explicitly disclose a laparoscope.
However, a reference disclosure can anticipate a claim when the reference describes the limitations but "'d[oes] not expressly spell out' the limitations as arranged or combined as in the claim, if a person of skill in the art, reading the reference, would ‘at once envisage’ the claimed arrangement or combination." Kennametal, Inc. v. Ingersoll Cutting Tool Co., 780 F.3d 1376, 1381, 114 USPQ2d 1250, 1254 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (quoting In re Petering, 301 F.2d 676, 681(CCPA 1962)). See MPEP § 2131.02, subsection III.
In this instance, a PHOSITA would ‘at once envisage’ a laparoscope when considering an “imaging device 102” ([0066]), which “can form part of an endoscope, however embodiments are not so limited” ([0077]), and “which is configured to be inserted into soft tissue and for imaging the soft tissue” ([0092]).
Regarding claim 2, Tyan discloses wherein the at least one light source comprises at least one LED ([0081]).
Regarding claim 3, Tyan discloses wherein the at least one LED comprises an array of LEDs ([0066]).
Regarding claim 9, Tyan discloses wherein the second polarizing film is rotated by about ninety degrees relative to the first polarizing film (Fig. 5, 538).
Regarding claim 10, Tyan discloses a medical borescope ([0066], [0077], [0092]), comprising:
a shaft (Fig. 5, 534);
an array of LED ([0066]) light sources (Fig. 5, 531);
a first polarizer (Fig. 5, 539) configured to polarize light from an array of LED light sources (Fig. 5);
an image sensor (Fig. 5, 532); and
a second polarizer (Fig. 5, 538) configured to polarize reflected light from an ambient light environment that is directed towards the image sensor (Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 11, Tyan discloses wherein the medical borescope comprises a laparoscope ([0066], [0077], [0092]).
Regarding claim 12, Tyan discloses wherein the shaft defines a tube (Fig. 5, 534 defines a tube), and wherein the image sensor and the second polarizer are positioned within the tube (Fig. 5, 532 and 538 are within 534).
Regarding claim 13, Tyan discloses wherein the second polarizer is positioned immediately adjacent to the image sensor (Fig. 5, 538 is adjacent to 532).
Regarding claim 14, Tyan discloses wherein the first polarizer comprises a first polarizing film ([0093]), and wherein the second polarizer comprises a second polarizing film ([0093]).
Regarding claim 15, Tyan discloses wherein the first polarizing film is rotated with respect to the second polarizing film ([0093]).
Regarding claim 16, Tyan discloses wherein the first polarizing film is rotated by ninety degrees with respect to the second polarizing film (Fig. 5, 538).
Regarding claim 17, Tyan discloses wherein either the first polarizing film or the second polarizing film is shaped in at least substantially a ring shape having a central opening (Fig. 5, 538 and 539), and wherein another of the first polarizing film or the second polarizing film is shaped to fit within the ring shape (Fig. 5).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. The following is a quotation of 35 USC 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.
6. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 USC 103 are summarized as follows:
1) Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2) Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3) Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4) Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
7. Claims 4-8 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Tyan in view of Ramanujan et al. (US 20200315444 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Tyan fails to disclose wherein the array of LEDs comprises a ring-shaped LED array.
However, Ramanujan teaches a similar medical borescope device (Abstract), and discloses wherein an array of LEDs comprises a ring-shaped LED array ([0024]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Tyan and Ramanujan such that the array of LEDs was to comprise a ring-shaped LED array, motivated by arranging the LEDs to correspond to a shape of the device upon which they are mounted.
Regarding claim 5, modified Tyan discloses wherein the first polarizing film comprises a ring-shaped polarizing film (Tyan - Fig. 5, 539) that is positioned adjacent to the ring-shaped LED array (Tyan - Fig. 5; Ramanujan - [0024]).
Regarding claim 6, modified Tyan discloses wherein the second polarizing film is positioned adjacent to a central opening of the ring-shaped polarizing film (Tyan - Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 7, modified Tyan discloses wherein the second polarizing film is configured and positioned to avoid direct light from the ring-shaped LED array (Tyan - Fig. 5, 538 avoids light from 531) and to be within a path of reflected light entering the laparoscope from outside of the laparoscope (Tyan - Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 8, modified Tyan discloses wherein the second polarizing film is at least substantially circular shaped (Tyan - Fig. 5, 538).
Regarding claim 19, Tyan fails to disclose wherein each LED light source of the array of LED light sources extends along a ring of LED light sources positioned at a distal end of the shaft.
However, Ramanujan teaches a similar medical borescope device (Abstract), and discloses wherein each LED light source of an array of LED light (Fig. 8E, 250) sources extends along a ring of LED light sources ([0024]) positioned at a distal end of a shaft (Fig. 8E).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Tyan and Ramanujan such each LED light source of the array of LED light sources was to extend along a ring of LED light sources, motivated by arranging the LEDs to correspond to a shape of the device upon which they are mounted.
Regarding claim 20, modified Tyan discloses wherein the first polarizer extends in a ring (Tyan - Fig. 5, 539) at least substantially matching the ring of LED light sources (Ramanujan - Fig. 8E, 250), and wherein the first polarizer is positioned directly adjacent to the ring of LED light sources (Tyan - Fig. 5, 539) at the distal end of the shaft (Tyan - Fig. 5; Ramanujan - Fig. 8E).
8. Claim 18 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Tyan in view of Ouyang et al. (US 20120289858 A1).
Regarding claim 18, Tyan fails to disclose a light shield positioned between the first polarizing film and the second polarizing film, wherein the light shield is configured to prevent light from the array of LED light sources from directly passing through the second polarizing film.
However, Ouyang teaches a similar medical borescope device ([0034], [0039]), and discloses a light shield ([0120], 642) configured to prevent light from an array of LED light sources ([0120], 630 and 632) from directly entering the aperture of a camera ([0120], 640).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Tyan and Ouyang such that a light shield was positioned between the first and second polarizing films, wherein the light shield was configured to prevent light from the array of LED light sources from directly passing through the second polarizing film, motivated by reducing unwanted light within the device.
Conclusion
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daniel Jeffery Jordan whose telephone number is 571-270-7641. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30a-6:00p.
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, Stephone Allen can be reached at 571-272-2434. 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.
/D. J. J./Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/STEPHONE B ALLEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights