DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s amendment filed 9 March 2026.
Notice of 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 .
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 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.
Response to Arguments
In the response filed 9 March 2026, Applicant argues Valle’783 does not teach a plurality of delivery unit latches disposed on opposite sides of the slot facing inwardly towards each other, as required by amended claims 8 and 14. This argument is persuasive. However, upon further consideration, a new reference, Rathert’872, is relied on to reject the claims.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 9 March 2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of US Patent No. 12,144,725 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-7 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Cole (US Patent Publication 2008/0058830) teaches a kit with an IOL deliver unit (18) preloaded with an intraocular lens (IOL) and a handpiece (14). Cole’830 further teaches providing a plurality of handpieces and a plurality of deliver units together or separately (paragraph [0093]) wherein the handpieces can have different characteristics (paragraph [0085]).
However, the prior art does not teach a single delivery unit that is engageable with two different handpieces wherein each handpiece has a receiving interface for engaging with the delivery unit such that the receiving interface on each respective handpiece has a different profile.
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 8-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rathert et al. (GB 2472872; hereafter Rathert’872)
Claim 8: Rathert’872 teaches a system comprising: an intraocular lens (IOL) delivery unit (6) including a pre-loaded IOL (2; the IOL is pre-loaded into the delivery unit 100 before it is attached to the handpiece, such as 500, for delivery) and a mounting interface comprising at least one slot (slot is located between outer parts of the delivery unit, outer parts of the delivery unit are identified in the black rectangles in the annotated copy of Figure 2 below) configured to selectively engage both a first latch on a first IOL insertion handpiece and a second latch on a second IOL insertion handpiece (note: the first and second IOL insertion handpieces are not positively recited; the identified slot is configured to engage a latch on an IOL insertion handpiece because a handpiece could be designed with a latch to engage with this slot);
PNG
media_image1.png
326
536
media_image1.png
Greyscale
the at least one slot (see annotated copy of Figure 1 above) being further configured such that the IOL delivery unit (6) is selectively mountable to both the first IOL insertion handpiece and the second IOL insertion handpiece (the slot is disclosed as being attached to handpiece 33),
wherein the first IOL insertion handpiece has a first configuration comprising at least one of a reusable configuration, a disposable configuration, or a twistable plunger configuration (as discussed above, the IOL insertion handpiece is not a positively recited element),
wherein the second IOL insertion handpiece has a second configuration comprising at least one of a reusable configuration, a disposable configuration, or a twistable plunger configuration (as discussed above, the IOL insertion handpiece is not a positively recited element),
wherein the first configuration is different from the second configuration (the IOL insertion handpiece is not a positively recited element).
wherein the delivery unit (6) comprises a plurality of delivery unit latches (21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26) within the slot. The delivery unit latches (21-26) are disposed on opposite sides of the slot and face inwardly towards each other. The latches are engageable with the IOL handpiece (Figures 7, 8).
Claim 9: Rathert’872 discloses the IOL delivery unit (6) is sterilely pre-packaged separately (Figures 3-5 and page 35 lines 1-27).
Claims 10, 11, 13: The first and second IOL insertion handpieces are not positively recited elements.as discussed in the rejection to claim 1 above. Claims 10-11, 13 do not further limit the invention because they describe elements which are not positively recited.
Claim 12: Rathert’872 discloses the IOL delivery unit (6) comprises a wing section (12, 14) configured to engage with hooks on an IOL handpiece (the first and second handpieces are not positively recited elements of the claims. Elements 12, 14 are capable of engaging with hooks on a handpiece).
Claim 14,18: Rathert’872 discloses a system comprising: an intraocular lens (IOL) delivery unit (6) including a pre-loaded IOL (2; the IOL is pre-loaded into the delivery unit 100 before it is attached to the handpiece, such as 33, for delivery) and a mounting interface comprising at least one slot comprising a slot latch (see the slot and latch identified in the annotated copy of Figure 1 in the rejection to claim 1 above),
the mounting interface further being configured such that the IOL delivery unit is selectively mountable to both (i) a first IOL insertion handpiece comprising a first receiving interface having a first profile and (ii) a second IOL insertion handpiece comprising a second receiving interface having a second profile different than the first profile (note: the first and second IOL insertion handpieces are not positively recited elements; the identified slot and latch is configured to engage a receiving interface on an IOL insertion handpiece because a handpiece could be designed to engage with this slot and latch).
Claim 15: Rathert’872 discloses the IOL delivery unit (6) is sterilely pre-packaged separately (Figures 3-5 and page 35 lines 1-27).
Claims 16, 17, 19, 20: The first and second IOL insertion handpieces are not positively recited elements.as discussed in the rejection to claim 14 above. Claims 16, 17, 19, 20 do not further limit the invention because they describe elements which are not positively recited.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LINDSEY BACHMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-6208. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm and alternating Fridays.
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, Elizabeth Houston can be reached on 571-272-7134. 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.
Lindsey Bachman
/L.B./Examiner, Art Unit 3771 2 June 2026
/ELIZABETH HOUSTON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Prosecution Insights