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 .
This office action is in response to applicant’s communication of 9/19/2024. Currently claims 1-20 are pending and rejected below.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8-9, 12-17, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Heeren et al. (US 2017/0326000 A1).
Heeren discloses a method for controlling a surgical system (100 figure 1), comprising: providing an ophthalmic surgical system comprising: a phacoemulsification probe having a needle (121) at a distal end and an ultrasonic transducer (110), wherein the needle is configured to be inserted into an eye of a patient (figure 3); an aspiration line (112), wherein the aspiration line is fluidly coupled with the needle; an aspiration pump (210); a control device (204) configured for a user to control the aspiration pump; and a processor(204 processors); obtaining a value of intraocular pressure (IOP) within the eye (see para [0010]-[0011]); receiving a trigger from a user of the ophthalmic surgical system; and in response to receiving the trigger, operating the aspiration pump at a higher aspiration rate, for a period of time, wherein the period of time is determined in accordance with the value of the IOP (see para [0077]-[0078]).
Concerning claim 2 and the aspiration pump is a Progressive Cavity Pump (PCP) (see para [0033]).
Concerning claim 3 and the higher aspiration rate is a maximal aspiration rate of the aspiration pump (see para [0063]-0066]).
Concerning claim 4 and the value of the IOP used for determining the period of time is taken at a predetermined time prior to operating the aspiration pump at the higher aspiration rate (see para [0063]-0067]).
Concerning claim 5 and the trigger comprises a press on a pedal of the system, the press exceeding a predetermined speed or force (note pedal 108)
Concerning claim 6 and the trigger comprises yawing a dual linear foot pedal to the left or right, or pressing a button on a foot pedal (again note pedal 108).
Concerning claim 8 and the limited period of time is determined to limit the IOP to a minimal acceptable value (see para [0057]-0067]).
Concerning claim 9 and the limited period of time is longer for a higher value of IOP, and shorter for a lower value of IOP (see para [0057]-0067]).
Concerning claim 12 and Heeren discloses a phacoemulsification system (figure 1), comprising: a phacoemulsification probe having a needle (121) at a distal end, and an ultrasonic transducer (110), wherein the needle is configured to be inserted into an eye of a patient; an aspiration line (112), wherein the aspiration line is fluidly coupled with the needle; an aspiration pump (210); a control device (204) configured for a user to control the aspiration pump; and a processor, configured to: obtaining a value of intraocular pressure (IOP) within the eye; receiving a trigger from a user of the ophthalmic surgical system; and in response to receiving the trigger, operating the aspiration pump at a higher aspiration rate, for a period of time, wherein the period of time is determined in accordance with the value of the IOP (see para [0063]-0067]).
Concerning claim 13 and the aspiration pump is a PCP (see para [0033]).
Concerning claim 14 and the higher aspiration rate is a maximal aspiration rate of the aspiration pump (see para [0063]-0066]).
Concerning claim 15 and the trigger comprises at least one item selected form the group consisting of: a press on a pedal of the system, the press exceeding a predetermined speed or force; yawing a dual linear foot pedal to the left or right; a press of a button on a foot pedal; and a vocal trigger (see pedal 108).
Concerning claim 16 and the limited period of time is determined to limit the IOP to a minimal acceptable value (see para [0057]-0067]).
Concerning claim 17 and the limited period of time is longer for a higher value of IOP, and shorter for a lower value of IOP (see para [0057]-0067]).
Concerning claim 20 Heeren discloses a computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer readable storage medium (204 figure 2-7) retaining program instructions configured to cause a processor (204) to perform actions, which program instructions implement: providing an ophthalmic surgical system (figure 1) comprising: a phacoemulsification probe (121) having a needle at a distal end and an ultrasonic transducer (110), wherein the needle is configured to be inserted into an eye of a patient; an aspiration line (112), wherein the aspiration line is fluidly coupled with the needle; an aspiration pump (210); a control device configured for a user to control the aspiration pump; and a processor (204); obtaining a value of intraocular pressure (IOP) within the eye; receiving a trigger from a user of the ophthalmic surgical system; and in response to receiving the trigger, operating the aspiration pump at a higher aspiration rate, for a period of time, wherein the period of time is determined in accordance with the value of the IOP (see para [0057]-0067]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 7, and 10-11, and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heeren et al. (US 2017/0326000 A1).
Concerning claim 7 and the trigger is a vocal trigger.
Heeren discloses the claimed invention except for the trigger being a vocal trigger rather than a pedal trigger. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the trigger an vocal trigger or a input via an audible trigger, since it has been held that broadly providing a mechanical or automatic means to replace manual activity which has accomplished the same result involves only routine skill in the art. In re Venner, 120 USPQ 192 (CCPA 1958). Voice activation for manual tasks is a well known modification to make for a PHOSITA to make in order to provide a hands free or tactile free operation.
Concerning claims 10-11 and 18-19 and wherein for IOP of about 90mmHg the limited period of time is about 5 seconds; or for IOP of about 40mmHg the limited period of time is about 0.5 seconds.
Heeren discloses the claimed invention except for IOP of about 90mmHg the limited period of time is about 5 seconds; or for IOP of about 40mmHg the limited period of time is about 0.5 seconds. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to for IOP of about 90mmHg the limited period of time is about 5 seconds; or for IOP of about 40mmHg the limited period of time is about 0.5 seconds, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Although the prior art does not disclose the specific values it is examiner’s position that a PHOSITA would have the values of for IOP of about 90mmHg the limited period of time is about 5 seconds; or for IOP of about 40mmHg the limited period of time is about 0.5 seconds since these are well known parameters of the device and would not be unknown to a PHOSITA to operate the device at.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILLIP A GRAY whose telephone number is (571)272-7180. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5 EST (FLEX).
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, Michael Tsai can be reached at (571)270-5246. 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.
PHILLIP A. GRAY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3783
/PHILLIP A GRAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights