CTNF 18/846,495 CTNF 82530 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/12/2024 has been considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA) 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-2, 5, 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Catanzariti et al. (US 2015/0131055) . Regarding claim 1 , Catanzariti discloses, an examination system (Figs. 1b-3 and 8) comprising: a measurement unit (0201) that is movable to change an angle relative to an eyeball of a subject (Para. 0048 and see 0202; note, discloses an adjustable position) and rotatably moved around an eye axis of the eyeball as a rotation axis (Para. 0048 and see 0202, 0702); an illumination unit (see 0305 and 0306) that is mounted on the measurement unit to irradiate the eyeball; a first camera unit (0301) that is mounted on the measurement unit to image the eyeball; and a second camera unit (0302) that is mounted on the measurement unit to image the eyeball, wherein the first camera unit and the second camera unit are independently movable on the measurement unit to change angles relative to the eyeball (Para. 0041 and 0092; note, discloses an adjustable field of view). Regarding claim 2 , Catanzariti discloses, in a state where the first camera unit and the second camera unit are arranged on opposite sides across the illumination unit (see Figs. 1b-3 and 8), the measurement unit is moved to change the angle relative to the eyeball (Para. 0041, 0092 and see 0702; note, discloses a manipulator that adjusts a position), and the first camera unit and the second camera unit image an anterior segment of the eyeball (Para. 0071; note, discloses capturing images of the corneal and scleral regions of the anterior surface). Regarding claim 5 , Catanzariti discloses, in a state where the illumination unit is arranged in front of the eyeball (see Figs. 1b-3 and 8), and where the first camera unit and the second camera unit are arranged on opposite sides across the illumination unit to have angles of the same magnitude relative to the eyeball (see Figs. 1b-3 and 8), the measurement unit rotationally moves around the eye axis of the eyeball as the rotation axis (Para. 0041, 0048, 0092 and see 0202 and 0702), and the first camera unit and the second camera unit image a cornea of the eyeball (Para. 0071). Regarding claim 12 , Catanzariti discloses, in a state where a fixation target (603, 607, 611 of Fig. 6) for guiding an orientation of the eyeball is presented to the subject (Para. 0040 and 0046), the illumination unit illuminates the eyeball, and at least one of the first camera unit and the second camera unit images the eyeball (Para. 0040 and 0046). Regarding claim 14 , Catanzariti discloses, the illumination unit irradiates the eyeball with illumination light (0305 and 0306), and the illumination light includes slit lamp light (Para. 0007 and 0039) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA) 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 3-4 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Catanzariti et al. (US 2015/0131055) as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Palanker et al. (US 2008/0167642) . Catanzariti remains as applied to claim 1 above . Furthermore, Catanzariti discloses, the illumination unit (0305 and 0306) and the at least one of the first (0301) and second camera units (0302), the measurement unit rotationally moves around the eye axis of the eyeball as the rotation axis (Para. 0041, 0048, 0092 and see 0202 and 0702), and the at least one of the first and second camera units images an angle region of the eyeball (Para. 0041, 0048, 0092 and see 0202 and 0702). the measurement unit rotationally moves around the eye axis of the eyeball as the rotation axis, and the at least one of the first and second camera units images the angle region of the eyeball. Catanzariti does not disclose a gonioscope unit that is movable between a position between the eyeball, and the illumination unit and at least one of the first camera unit and the second camera unit, and another position, wherein in a state where the gonioscope unit is arranged at a position between the eyeball. Palanker teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in an examination system (Fig. 2) that it would have been desirable to include a gonioscope unit (80) that is movable between a position between the eyeball (see Fig. 2), and the illumination unit (32, 44 and 46) and at least one of the first camera unit and the second camera unit (74), and another position (Para. 0032-0033), wherein in a state where the gonioscope unit (80) is arranged at a position between the eyeball (Figs. 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a gonioscope unit that is movable between a position between the eyeball, and the illumination unit and at least one of the first camera unit and the second camera unit, and another position, wherein in a state where the gonioscope unit is arranged at a position between the eyeball as taught by the examination system of Palanker in the examination system of Catanzariti since Palanker teaches it is known to include these features in an examination system for the purpose of providing an examination system that allows accurate and effective diagnosis, prevention and treatment of refractive errors. Regarding claim 4 , Catanzariti in view of Palanker discloses and teaches as set forth above, and Catanzariti further discloses, the illumination unit (0305 and 0306) and the at least one of the first (0301) and second camera units (0302), the measurement unit rotationally moves around the eye axis of the eyeball as the rotation axis (Para. 0041, 0048, 0092 and see 0202 and 0702), and the at least one of the first and second camera units images an angle region of the eyeball (Para. 0041, 0048, 0092 and see 0202 and 0702). Palanker further teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in an examination system (Fig. 2) that it would have been desirable to include a reflective optical system (63) unit that is movable between a position between the gonioscope unit (80), and the illumination unit (32, 44 and 46) and at least one of the first camera unit and the second camera unit (74), and another position (Para. 0032-0033), wherein in a state where the reflective optical system unit is arranged at a position between the gonioscope unit (see Fig. 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the above mentioned limitations as taught by the examination system of Palanker in the examination system of Catanzariti since Palanker teaches it is known to include these features in an examination system for the purpose of providing an examination system that allows accurate and effective diagnosis, prevention and treatment of refractive errors. Regarding claim 11 , Catanzariti in view of Palanker discloses and teaches as set forth above, and Catanzariti further discloses, the at least one of the first and second camera units, each of the illumination unit and the at least one of the first and second camera units is arranged at a position where an angle relative to the eyeball is smaller than an angle of a configuration without the reflector unit (Para. 0041, 0048, 0092 and see 0202 and 0702). Catanzariti does not disclose a reflector unit that is movable between a position between the eyeball, and, the illumination unit and at least one of the first camera unit and the second camera unit, and another position, wherein in a state where the reflector unit is arranged at a position between the eyeball, and the illumination unit. Palanker teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in an examination system (Fig. 2) that it would have been desirable to include a reflector unit (63) that is movable between a position between the eyeball (Para. 0032-0033), and, the illumination unit and at least one of the first camera unit and the second camera unit, and another position, wherein in a state where the reflector unit is arranged at a position between the eyeball, and the illumination unit (Para. 0032-0033). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the above mentioned limitations as taught by the examination system of Palanker in the examination system of Catanzariti since Palanker teaches it is known to include these features in an examination system for the purpose of providing an examination system that allows accurate and effective diagnosis, prevention and treatment of refractive errors . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Catanzariti et al. (US 2015/0131055) as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Razaei (JP 2021521935) . Catanzariti remains as applied to claim 1 above . Furthermore, Catanzariti discloses, in a state where the illumination unit is arranged at a position where the illumination unit has an angle relative to the eyeball (Para. 0048 and see 0202 and 0702), the measurement unit rotationally moves around the eye axis of the eyeball as the rotation axis (Para. 0048 and see 0202 and 0702). Catanzariti does not disclose the first camera unit and the second camera unit image a crystalline lens of the eyeball. Razaei teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in an examination system that it would have been desirable to make the first camera unit and the second camera unit image a crystalline lens of the eyeball (Para. 0047 and see 207a, b of Fig. 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the first camera unit and the second camera unit image a crystalline lens of the eyeball as taught by the examination system of Razaei in the examination system of Catanzariti since Razaei teaches it is known to include this feature in an examination system for the purpose of providing an accurate and effective examination system that with improved diagnosis, prevention and treatment of refractive error correction. Regarding claim 7 , Catanzariti discloses, the illumination unit is also independently movable on the measurement unit to change an angle relative to the eyeball, as in the first camera unit and the second camera unit (Para. 0041, 0048, 0092 and see 0202 and 0702), and in a state where the illumination unit is arranged at a position where the illumination unit has an angle relative to the eyeball (see Figs. 1b-3 and 8), the illumination unit, the first camera unit, and the second camera unit move together to change angles relative to the eyeball while maintaining a positional relationship between the illumination unit and the first and second camera units (Para. 0041, 0048, 0092 and see 0202 and 0702). Catanzariti does not disclose the first camera unit and the second camera unit image a crystalline lens of the eyeball. Razaei teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in an examination system that it would have been desirable to make the first camera unit and the second camera unit image a crystalline lens of the eyeball (Para. 0047 and see 207a, b of Fig. 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the first camera unit and the second camera unit image a crystalline lens of the eyeball as taught by the examination system of Razaei in the examination system of Catanzariti since Razaei teaches it is known to include this feature in an examination system for the purpose of providing an accurate and effective examination system that with improved diagnosis, prevention and treatment of refractive error correction. Regarding claim 8 , Catanzariti discloses, the measurement unit further rotationally moves around the eye axis of the eyeball as the rotation axis (Para. 0041, 0048, 0092 and see 0202 and 0702). Catanzariti does not disclose the first camera unit and the second camera unit image a crystalline lens of the eyeball. Razaei teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in an examination system that it would have been desirable to make the first camera unit and the second camera unit image a crystalline lens of the eyeball (Para. 0047 and see 207a, b of Fig. 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the first camera unit and the second camera unit image a crystalline lens of the eyeball as taught by the examination system of Razaei in the examination system of Catanzariti since Razaei teaches it is known to include this feature in an examination system for the purpose of providing an accurate and effective examination system that with improved diagnosis, prevention and treatment of refractive error correction . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 9 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Catanzariti et al. (US 2015/0131055) as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Endo (EP 3491996) . Catanzariti remains as applied to claim 1 above . Furthermore, Catanzariti discloses, in a state where the illumination unit, and at least one of the first camera unit and the second camera unit are arranged at positions where the illumination unit (see Figs. 1b-3 and 8) and the at least one of the first and second camera units have angles relative to the eyeball, the measurement unit rotationally moves around the eye axis of the eyeball as the rotation axis (Para. 0041, 0048, 0092 and see 0202 and 0702). Catanzariti does not disclose the at least one of the first and second camera units images Zinn's zonule of the eyeball. Endo teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in an examination system that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the at least one of the first and second camera units images Zinn's zonule of the eyeball (Para. 0123 and 0147). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the at least one of the first and second camera units images Zinn's zonule of the eyeball as taught by the examination system of Endo in the examination system of Catanzariti since Endo teaches it is known to include this feature in an examination system for the purpose of providing an examination system that allows accurate and effective diagnosis, prevention and treatment of refractive errors. Regarding claim 15 , Catanzariti in view of Endo discloses and teaches as set forth above, and Endo further teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in an examination system (Fig. 1) that it would have been desirable to include a processing unit (80) that calculates shapes (Para. 0123 and 0147) of regions of the eyeball (“E’) based on an image of the eyeball imaged by at least one of the first camera unit and the second camera unit (35), wherein the processing unit calculates a shape of a region of the regions of the eyeball, positioned in front (Para. 0123 and 0147), and based on ray tracing in consideration of refraction of a ray of light passing through the calculated shape (Para. 0123 and 0147), calculates a shape of a portion positioned in back of the region in front (Para. 0123 and 0147). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the above mentioned limitations as taught by the examination system of Endo in the examination system of Catanzariti since Endo teaches it is known to include this feature in an examination system for the purpose of providing an examination system that allows accurate and effective diagnosis, prevention and treatment of refractive errors. Regarding claim 16 , Catanzariti in view of Endo discloses and teaches as set forth above, and Endo further teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in an examination system (Fig. 1) that it would have been desirable to make the processing unit (80) sequentially calculates a shape of an anterior surface of cornea of the eyeball (Para. 0123 and 0147), a shape of a posterior surface of cornea of the eyeball (Para. 0123 and 0147), a shape of an anterior lens capsule of the eyeball (Para. 0123 and 0147), and a shape of a posterior lens capsule of the eyeball to calculate a shape of a crystalline lens of the eyeball (Para. 0123 and 0147). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the above mentioned limitations as taught by the examination system of Endo in the examination system of Catanzariti since Endo teaches it is known to include this feature in an examination system for the purpose of providing an examination system that allows accurate and effective diagnosis, prevention and treatment of refractive errors . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Catanzariti et al. (US 2015/0131055) as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Shimizu et al. (US 2015/0327763) . Catanzariti remains as applied to claim 1 above . Furthermore, Catanzariti discloses, a first camera unit (0301), a second camera unit (0302), and, the first camera unit images an entire cornea of the eyeball (Para. 0071; note, discloses capturing images of the corneal and scleral regions of the anterior surface), the measurement unit moves to change an angle relative to the eyeball, and the measurement unit rotationally moves around the eye axis of the eyeball as the rotation axis (Para. 0041, 0048, 0092 and see 0202 and 0702). Catanzariti does not disclose the camera units includes an objective zoom optical system, in a state where the illumination unit is arranged at a position where the illumination unit has an angle relative to a line normal to a corneal endothelium as a target to be imaged in the eyeball, where the first camera unit is arranged in front of the corneal endothelium as the target to be imaged, and where the second camera unit is arranged on a side opposite from the illumination unit across the line normal to the corneal endothelium as the target to be imaged, axially symmetrically the second camera unit images corneal endothelial cells of the eyeball. Shimizu teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in an examination system that it would have been desirable to make the camera units includes an objective zoom optical system (Para. 0030), in a state where the illumination unit is arranged at a position where the illumination unit has an angle relative to a line normal to a corneal endothelium as a target to be imaged in the eyeball (Para. 0008, 0029-0030 and see Figs. 7 and 9), where the first camera unit is arranged in front of the corneal endothelium as the target to be imaged (Para. 0008, 0029-0030 and see Figs. 7 and 9), and where the second camera unit is arranged on a side opposite from the illumination unit across the line normal to the corneal endothelium as the target to be imaged, axially symmetrically the second camera unit images corneal endothelial cells of the eyeball (Para. 0008, 0029-0030 and see Figs. 7 and 9). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the camera units includes an objective zoom optical system, in a state where the illumination unit is arranged at a position where the illumination unit has an angle relative to a line normal to a corneal endothelium as a target to be imaged in the eyeball, where the first camera unit is arranged in front of the corneal endothelium as the target to be imaged, and where the second camera unit is arranged on a side opposite from the illumination unit across the line normal to the corneal endothelium as the target to be imaged, axially symmetrically the second camera unit images corneal endothelial cells of the eyeball as taught by the examination system of Shimizu in the examination system of Catanzariti since Shimizu teaches it is known to include these features in an examination system for the purpose of providing an examination system that allows effective disease detection/diagnosis and treatment of refractive errors . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Catanzariti et al. (US 2015/0131055) as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Minato (US 6,039,447) . Catanzariti remains as applied to claim 1 above . Catanzariti does not disclose a base unit that is movable forward and backward, leftward and rightward, and vertically, relative to the eyeball, wherein the measurement unit is mounted on the base unit. Minato teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in an examination system that it would have been desirable to include a base unit that is movable forward and backward, leftward and rightward, and vertically, relative to the eyeball, wherein the measurement unit is mounted on the base unit (Col. 6, lines 57-67, Col. 7, lines 1-3 and see Fig. 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a base unit that is movable forward and backward, leftward and rightward, and vertically, relative to the eyeball, wherein the measurement unit is mounted on the base unit as taught by the examination system of Minato in the examination system of Catanzariti since Minato teaches it is known to include these features in an examination system for the purpose of providing an examination system that is effectively and accurately positioned . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Catanzariti et al. (US 2015/0131055) as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Fujeida (US 2008/0079899) . Catanzariti remains as applied to claim 1 above . Catanzariti does not disclose the processing unit calculates an opacity distribution in the crystalline lens of the eyeball. Fujeida teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in an examination system that it would have been desirable to make the processing unit calculates an opacity distribution in the crystalline lens of the eyeball (Para. 0006 and 0028). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the processing unit calculates an opacity distribution in the crystalline lens of the eyeball as taught by the examination system of Fujeida in the examination system of Catanzariti since Fujeida teaches it is known to include this feature in an examination system for the purpose of providing an examination system that allows effective disease detection/diagnosis and treatment of refractive errors . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Schruder (US 6,613,041), Rathjen (US 7,434,933) and Muller et al. (US 8,057,041) discloses an examination system that includes a measurement unit, an illumination unit, a first camera unit, and a second camera unit . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAWAYNE A PINKNEY whose telephone number is (571)270-1305. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5. 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, Pinping Sun can be reached at 571-270-1284. 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. /DAWAYNE PINKNEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 05/27/2026 Application/Control Number: 18/846,495 Page 2 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/846,495 Page 3 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/846,495 Page 4 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/846,495 Page 5 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/846,495 Page 6 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/846,495 Page 7 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/846,495 Page 8 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/846,495 Page 9 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/846,495 Page 10 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/846,495 Page 11 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/846,495 Page 12 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/846,495 Page 13 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/846,495 Page 14 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/846,495 Page 15 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/846,495 Page 16 Art Unit: 2872
Prosecution Insights