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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yuasa et al. US 2011/0234786.
Regarding claim 1, Yuasa teaches an apparatus for scanning an eye (see para 0051: an optical tomographic imaging apparatus used to observe the retina of an eye), comprising:
a scanning device with a reflection surface (para 0051: that the measurement light are moved to scan by a scanning optical system 105 formed by using a Galvano scanner),
at least two light sources, each of which emits a primary light beam (para 0072: teaches in Example 4 that the light source includes three SLD light sources 510a, 510b and 510c, further states that two or more beam can be used), such that at least two spaced apart, incident light beams are deflectable onto the reflection surface;
at least one beam splitter, wherein each primary light beam emitted by the respective
light source passes through at least one beam splitter as a respective incident light beam onto the reflection surface (para 0061: teaches that each of three lights is divided into a measurement light and a reference light by cubic beam splitter 401, and the measurement light are then scanned by scanning optical system 105);
wherein the incident light beams are aligned in parallel but spaced apart from one
another and intersect on the reflection surface (paras. 0051-0052: teaches that the measurement lights are made to proceed in parallel with each other by fiber collimators 104, and para 0051 further states that measurement lights are moved/scanned by scanning optical system 105, thus measurement beams are incident on/intersect the reflective surface of the Galvano scanner);
wherein the scanning device is configured to pivot a light beam reflected by the
reflection surface over an angular range (see para 0051: teaches that the scanning optical system 105 uses a Galvano scanner, and the measurement lights are moved to scan a predetermined region of the retina), such that at least two reflected light beams are
pivotable over an angular range in each case, the reflected light beams being guided to the eye (see paras. 0042,0051-0052: that a plurality of measurement lights are scanned and irradiate different spot positions on the retina of the eye), and light beams returning from the eye returning along a same optical path as the respective incident light beam (see para 0042: the return lights produced by the object as a result of reflection or scattering come back to the fiber couples by way of the same optical system); and
wherein each returning light beam is deflected at the at least one beam splitter into a
detector beam directed at a detector assigned thereto (see paras. 0044, 0053-0054 and 0062: that the measurement lights reflected or scattered by the object return to the fiber couplers are combined with corresponding reference lights, and the resulting interference signals are detected respectively by interference signal detecting units 110).
Regarding claim 3, Yuasa teaches the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein a first reflected light beam sweeps over a first angular range while a second reflected light beam sweeps over a second angular range at the same time, with the result that an overall angular range is rendered scannable or detectable overall (see paras. 0010, 0015 and 0020: teaches scanning a predetermined region of the object with spots of a plurality of measurement light in the same direction by way of a scanning optical system, thereby irradiating different positions of the object with different spot of the plurality of measurement lights).
Regarding claim 4, Yuasa teaches the apparatus as claimed in claim 3, wherein the angular ranges overlap (see para 0046, 0057: that the scanning lines are substantially laid one on the other in a direction perpendicular to the scanning direction).
Regarding claim 5, Yuasa teaches the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein a respective distinct detector is provided for each incident, returning and/or reflected light beam (see para 0044: interference signals produced from the measurement lights reflected or scattered by the object and the corresponding reference lights are detected respectively by interference signal detecting units 110).
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 EPHREM ZERU MEBRAHTU whose telephone number is (571)272-8386. The examiner can normally be reached 10 am -6 pm (M-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, 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.
/EPHREM Z MEBRAHTU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
