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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kellan (US 6,241,777, hereinafter “Kellan”).
Referring to claim 1, Kellan discloses an intraocular lens (Figs. 1-4, Fig. 1 is reproduced below) comprising: an optical body 12 defining an optical axis “OA” (Fig. 2); a haptic arms 14 attached to said optical body; said haptic arm having a radial cutout (outside surface of portion at lead line 18) formed in a side of said haptic arm, wherein said side is arranged outwards in a radial direction with respect to said optical axis; and, said haptic arm having a radial projection (inside surface of portion at lead line 18) projecting inwards in the radial direction from said haptic arm and which, in a circumferential direction with respect to said optical axis, is arranged in a same region as said radial cutout.
PNG
media_image1.png
668
424
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Referring to claim 11, Kellan discloses the intraocular lens of claim 1, wherein said haptic arm has a curved configuration (Fig. 1 shows haptic arms 14 have 3 curved segments).
Claim(s) 1, 4 and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lindstrom (US 4,711,638, hereinafter “Lindstrom”).
Referring to claim 1, Lindstrom discloses an intraocular lens (Fig. 12, which is reproduced below) comprising: an optical body 202 defining an optical axis; a haptic arms 204, 206 attached to said optical body; said haptic arm having a radial cutout (outside surface of portion at lead lines 212, 216) formed in a side of said haptic arm, wherein said side is arranged outwards in a radial direction with respect to said optical axis; and, said haptic arm having a radial projection (inside surface of portion at lead lines 212, 216) projecting inwards in the radial direction from said haptic arm and which, in a circumferential direction with respect to said optical axis, is arranged in a same region as said radial cutout (“FIG. 12 illustrates a top view of another intraocular lens 200 including a lens optic 202 and haptic loops 204 and 206. Haptic loop 204 includes an end 208, a first outwardly curved segment 210, an inwardly curved segment 212, a second outwardly curved segment 214, another inwardly curved segment 216, another outwardly curved segment 218, a rounded end 220 and a geometrical keyhole 222.” (col. 4, ll 39-51).
PNG
media_image2.png
428
416
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Referring to claim 4, Lindstrom discloses the intraocular lens of claim 1, wherein said haptic arms 204, 206 defines a first axial cutout (key hole 222 as shown in Fig. 12, col. 4, ll 39-51) formed in a first side of said haptic arm; and, said first side is arranged outwards in an axial direction with respect to said optical axis.
Referring to claim 11, Lindstrom discloses the intraocular lens of claim 1, wherein said haptic arm 204, 206 has a curved configuration.
Referring to claim 12, Lindstrom discloses the intraocular lens of claim 1, wherein said haptic arm has a C-shaped configuration or a J-shaped configuration (Fig. 12).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lindstrom in view of Ratner et al. (US 2014/0148900, hereinafter “Ratner”) and Mandell (US 2020/0405538, which is cited in the IDS filed November 6, 2024, hereinafter “Mandell”).
Referring to claims 2-3, Lindstrom discloses the intraocular lens of claim 1 but fails to disclose wherein said intraocular lens has a medicament reservoir which has a medicament and defines a through-hole in which said haptic arm is arranged; and, said medicament reservoir is arranged in said radial cutout (claim 2) and wherein said medicament reservoir is recessed in said radial cutout (claim 3).
Referring again to claims 2-3, however, in the same field of endeavor, which is an intraocular lens, Ratner discloses one or more of drug delivery constructs 20 can be attached to the device’s haptics (Fig. 1A). Ratner further discloses the drug delivery construct can hold sufficient quantities of therapeutic drug compounds, for example, high potency antibiotics to prevent infection (¶ [0052]). Furthermore, in the same field of endeavor, which is an intraocular lens, Mandell discloses a medicament reservoir 100 (Figs. 1A-4B, ¶¶ [0247]-[0250]) can be attached to anywhere on the haptic arm.
Referring still to claims 2-3, in view of Ratner and Mandell teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application, to have provided at least one of drug delivery constructs to each of the haptic of Lindstrom to prevent infection. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to position the drug delivery construct at the locations 212, 216 of the haptic arm.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUAN V NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-5962. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 AM - 5:30 PM.
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, Jackie Ho can be reached at 571-272-4696. 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.
/TUAN V NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Prosecution Insights