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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The instant application having Application No. 18892995 filed on 09/23/2024 is presented for examination by the examiner.
Election/Restriction
Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Claims 1-9, drawn to an imaging camera system, classified in A61B 3/14, A61B 3/152,.
II. Claims 10-15, drawn to a method for adjusting an illumination intensity of an imaging system, classified in A61B1/06, A61B1/07, G03B 15/05, A61B 3/0008.
The inventions are independent or distinct, each from the other because:
Inventions I and II are related as product and process of use. The inventions can be shown to be distinct if either or both of the following can be shown: (1) the process for using the product as claimed can be practiced with another materially different product or (2) the product as claimed can be used in a materially different process of using that product. See MPEP § 806.05(h). In the instant case the imaging camera system of invention I can be used for imaging of objects through the lightguide, where the focusing can be adjusted and set given the object characteristics, distance from the lightguide and other optical features, and thus different from the method of determining and adjusting light intensity. In addition the method for adjusting an illumination intensity can be employed with an imaging system with a e.g. photographic film, plate or solid state detector, other than a camera system of invention I.
Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply:
(a) the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification;
(b) the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art due to their recognized divergent subject matter;
(c) the inventions require a different field of search (for example, searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search queries);
(d) the prior art applicable to one invention would not likely be applicable to another invention;
(e) the inventions are likely to raise different non-prior art issues under 35 U.S.C. 101 and/or 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph.
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of an invention to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected invention.
The election of an invention may be made with or without traverse. To reserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
During a telephone conversation with Christopher Thomas, attorney of record, reg. # 72265 on 06/09/2026 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention I, claims 1-9, drawn to an imaging camera system. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claims 10-15 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
The examiner has required restriction between product or apparatus claims and process claims. Where applicant elects claims directed to the product/apparatus, and all product/apparatus claims are subsequently found allowable, withdrawn process claims that include all the limitations of the allowable product/apparatus claims should be considered for rejoinder. All claims directed to a nonelected process invention must include all the limitations of an allowable product/apparatus claim for that process invention to be rejoined.
In the event of rejoinder, the requirement for restriction between the product/apparatus claims and the rejoined process claims will be withdrawn, and the rejoined process claims will be fully examined for patentability in accordance with 37 CFR 1.104. Thus, to be allowable, the rejoined claims must meet all criteria for patentability including the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 101, 102, 103 and 112. Until all claims to the elected product/apparatus are found allowable, an otherwise proper restriction requirement between product/apparatus claims and process claims may be maintained. Withdrawn process claims that are not commensurate in scope with an allowable product/apparatus claim will not be rejoined. See MPEP § 821.04. Additionally, in order for rejoinder to occur, applicant is advised that the process claims should be amended during prosecution to require the limitations of the product/apparatus claims. Failure to do so may result in no rejoinder. Further, note that the prohibition against double patenting rejections of 35 U.S.C. 121 does not apply where the restriction requirement is withdrawn by the examiner before the patent issues. See MPEP § 804.01.
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Priority
As required by e M.P.E.P. 201.04, 210, 214.03, acknowledgement is made of applicant’s claim for priority based on provisional application US 63/540272, filed on 09/25/2023.
Drawings
The applicant’s drawings submitted are acceptable for examination purposes.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 4 of claim 1, i.e. “a light guide configured to provide light to the light box:” ends with an “:”, however, it seems that the line should end with a semicolon i.e. “;”. Appropriate correction is suggested.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng et al. (hereafter Zheng, where English language translation is referenced) CN 202776263 U in view of Mita US 20060165347 A1.
In regard to independent claim 1, Zheng teaches (see Figs. 1-3) an imaging camera system (i.e. as slit lamp illuminating device for a microscope photography, see abstract, paragraphs [02-08,11-22]) comprising:
a light box comprising an outer surface (i.e. as lamp holder mount 1, also with condenser lens holder 2, either with an outer surface, e.g. paragraphs [08,19-22], Figs. 2-3);
a light guide configured to provide light to the light box (i.e. as optical fiber 10, e.g. paragraphs [08,19-22], Figs. 2-3);
a focus assembly including a focus lens disposed at a distal end of the light guide (i.e. condenser lens holder 2 with lens 3 and grating plate 6, at distal end of 10, e.g. paragraphs [08,19-22], Figs. 2-3); and
a collar disposed on the focus assembly (i.e. as adjustment seat 4 disposed on condenser lens holder 2, e.g. paragraphs [08,19-22], Figs. 2-3), wherein the collar comprises:
a main body comprising a front face and a rear face (as 4 with main body and front and rear faces, e.g. paragraphs [08,19-22], Figs. 2-3); and
one or more set screws disposed on the main body (i.e. as rotating pin screw 5, cooperating with grating pin/waist-shaped groove 7 of grating plate 6, e.g. paragraphs [08,19-22], Figs. 2-3);
wherein the collar is configured to slide along the focus assembly and can be secured to a position along a length of the focus assembly via the set screws (i.e. as adjustment seat slides with 6, rotates along 2 and can be secured along 2 using pin 5 cooperating with 6 and 7, e.g. paragraphs [08,19-22], Figs. 2-3).
However, Zhang is silent that a first set of magnets are disposed on the outer surface of the light box (i.e. on lamp mount 1 with holder 2) and a second set of magnets disposed on the rear face of the main body (e.g. on rear face of main body of adjustment seat 4).
However, Mita teaches in the similar field of invention of an optical switch with optical fibers and components being coupled with magnetic blocks (see Figs. 1-3,6-7, title, abstract, paragraphs [07-17,39-45,50-53]) and further teaches a first set of magnets are disposed on the outer surface of the light box (i.e. as stationary magnetic block with magnet 6, 8 on substrate in actuator 10 with movable fibers 2a,b, paragraphs [07-17,39-45,50-53], e.g. Figs. 1-3) and a second set of magnets disposed on the rear face of the main body (e.g. as movable block 5, with magnetic body 5a, including the rear of 5, with fibers 3a,b e.g. paragraphs [07-17,39-45,50-53], e.g. Figs. 1-3, providing sufficient magnetic attraction, provides a high-reliability optical switch by coupling movable optical fibers to the stationary optical fibers, e.g. paragraphs [45,50-50]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt and modify the stationary outer surface of lamp mount with lens holder and rear face of the movable of main body of adjustment seat of Zhang with stationary magnet block with permanent magnet, and movable magnetic block according to teachings of Mita in order to provide sufficient magnetic attraction for high-reliability optical coupling switch for coupling movable optical fibers to the stationary optical components (see Mita paragraphs [45,50-50]).
Regarding claim 2, the Zhang-Mita combination teaches the invention as set forth above, and Zhang teaches (see Figs. 1-3) that the light guide comprises a fiber optic cable (i.e. a light guide is optical fiber 10, paragraphs [08,11,19-22], Fig.2).
Regarding claim 3, the Zhang-Mita combination teaches the invention as set forth above, and Zhang teaches (see Figs. 1-3) that the focus lens of the focus assembly refracts light from the light guide into the light box (i.e. as 3 with 6 in 1, 2 refracts light from 10 to 1, paragraphs [08,11,19-22], Figs. 2-3).
Regarding claim 4, the Zhang-Mita combination teaches the invention as set forth above, and Zhang teaches (see Figs. 1-3) that the first set of magnets on the outer surface of the light box are configured to attach to the second set of magnets on the rear face of the collar (i.e. as per modification with Mita as stationary outer surface of 1 with lens holder 2, and rear face of the movable of main body of 4 of Zhang, paragraphs [08,19-22], Figs. 2-3, modified with stationary magnet block with permanent magnet, and movable magnetic block, see Mita e.g. paragraphs [39-45,50-53], e.g. Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 5, the Zhang-Mita combination teaches the invention as set forth above, and Zhang teaches (see Figs. 1-3) that the main body of the collar comprises at least three sides (as main body of 4 has more than 3 sides, e.g. paragraphs [08,19-22], Figs. 2-3).
Regarding claim 6, the Zhang-Mita combination teaches the invention as set forth above, and Zhang teaches (see Figs. 1-3) the main body ((as main body of 4 has more than 3 sides, e.g. paragraphs [08,19-22], Figs. 2-3) but is silent that it is substantially triangular (i.e. as main body of adjusting seat includes three adjusting rings, while the shape of 4 is not disclosed).
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply triangular shape to the manual adjustment seat main body, since it has been held that a mere change in shape of an element is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art when the change in shape is not significant to the function of the combination, In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). Further, one would have been motivated to select such triangular the shape of manual adjustment seat for the purpose of providing easier hand control for the manual adjustment seat (see Zhang, paragraph [21]).
Regarding claim 7, the Zhang-Mita combination teaches the invention as set forth above, and Zhang teaches (see Figs. 1-3) that the set screws are disposed adjacent the rear face of the main body (i.e. as rotating pin screw 5 with grating pin 7 on rear face of 4, e.g. paragraphs [08,19-22], Fig. 2);
Regarding claim 8, the Zhang-Mita combination teaches the invention as set forth above, and Zhang teaches (see Figs. 1-3) that the front face and the rear face comprise the same shape and are separated by the main body (as front and rear faces of 4 separated by main body of 4, e.g. paragraphs [08,19-22], Figs. 2-3).
Regarding claim 9, the Zhang-Mita combination teaches the invention as set forth above, and Zhang teaches (see Figs. 1-3) that the rear face of the main body is thicker than the front face (as rear face of 4 is thicker than the front face part around the 10 insert, as depicted in e.g. Fig. 2, paragraphs [08,19-22]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hahn et al. CN 102573688 A also disclose certain features of the instant application (see figs 1-2, 9-10 and their descriptions), Ishihara et al. US 20040247268 A1 also disclose certain features of the instant application (see figs 1-2, 6-7 and their descriptions).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIN PICHLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4015. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am -5:00pm.
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, Thomas K Pham can be reached at (571)272-3689. 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.
/MARIN PICHLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights