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
Double Patenting
The non-statutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A non-statutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a non-statutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 1-9 are rejected under the judicially created doctrine of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 1-5, 8, 12-13, 15, 18 of U.S. Patent 12,251,272 (hereinafter ‘272). This is a non-provisional double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have issued to patent. Claims 1, 2, 5 of the instant application are each rejected in view of Claims 1-4 of ‘272. Claims 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9 of the instant application are rejected in view of Claims 5, 8, 12, 13, 15, 18, respectively, of ‘272. Although the conflicting claim limitations are not recited identically, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they claim the same invention.
Claims 10, 14, 19-23 are rejected under the judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 1-2, 8, 10-11, 15-16, 18-20 of U.S. Patent 11,690,696 (hereinafter ‘696) in view of SARKIENEN et al. (Pub. No.: US 2003-0037953) in view of COLVIN et al (Pub. No.: US. 2010-0073669). This is a non-provisional double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have issued to patent. Claims 10, 19 of the instant application are each rejected in view of Claims 1+8 of ‘696. Claim 14 of the instant application is rejected in view of Claims 2+11 of ‘696. Claims 20 and 21 of the instant application are rejected in view of Claims 10 and 18, respectively, of ‘696. Claim 22 of the instant application is rejected in view of Claims 15+16 of ‘696. Claim 23 of the instant application is rejected in view of Claims 19+20 of ‘696. Although the conflicting claim limitations are not recited identically, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they claim the same invention except for the following:
As per Claims 10, 14, 19-23, ‘696 does not claim but SARKIENEN discloses a
removeable and replaceable cable assembly (cable group assembly- gets
tangled remove and replace [0052]); separated from the baseplate in a tools free, reproducible manner (in at least Fig. 13 quick and easy removing of baseplate - no tools required [0061])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to include b) a removeable and
replaceable cable assembly; separated from the baseplate in a tools-free,
reproducible manner as taught by SARKIENEN into the system of ‘696
because of the benefit taught by SARKIENEN to disclose including a cable
replaceable assembly as an added convenience component as well as the added convenience of an easy release device mechanism to improve upon the user of
‘696 by adding related convenience features.
‘696 does not claim and SARKIENEN do not disclose but COLVIN discloses a sensor cap assembly (affixed/assembled [0059])
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 sensor cap assembly
as taught by COLVIN into the system of ‘696 and SARKIENEN because
of the benefit taught by COLVIN to disclose a further additional related
component to protect sensor exposure that would aid the components of said
related systems.
Allowable Subject Matter
REASONS FOR ALLOWANCE
As per Claims 1-9, the following is an Examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance, but for the outstanding double patenting rejections contained herein: the closest prior art obtained from an Examiner’s search (GROSSMAN, Pub. No: US 2011-0127405; SARKIENEN, Pub. No.: US 2003-0037953; COLVIN, Pub. No.: US. 2010-0073669; COCKER, Pub. No.: US 2015-0309295; ZHONG (Pub. No.: US 2013-0087517; GHOSH, Pub. No.: US 2013-0260382) does not teach nor suggest in detail the limitations:
“An imaging device, comprising: a) a baseplate configured to be attached to a subject having a target region to be imaged; b) a removeable and replaceable cable assembly; and c) a device body having a sensor cap assembly that comprises an image sensor configured to image the target region when the sensor cap assembly is connected to the device body, wherein the device body is connected to and separated from the baseplate in a tools-free reproducible manner, and wherein the device body comprises one or more V-grooves complementary to one or more bumps in the baseplate configured to have the device body be connected to and separated from the baseplate via kinematic coupling of the device body and the baseplate wherein the baseplate and device body comprise corresponding mating surfaces that mechanically prevent at least one of a rotational movement and an axial movement between the baseplate and the device body when the device body is attached to the baseplate”
as well as the combination of all the limitations within the independent claims and the enabling portions of the specification.
The closest prior art of record GROSSMAN does not teach or suggest in detail at least a removeable and replaceable cable assembly, or sensor cap assembly, or a device body that can be connected to and separated from the baseplate in a tools-free, reproducible manner. The prior art is also silent as to V-grooves complementary to one or more bumps in a baseplate, or a device body separated from the baseplate via kinematic coupling of the device body and the baseplate as presented by the Applicant.
GROSSMAN only discloses a microscope system for simultaneous imaging and stimulation of tissue within a subject that includes an optical assembly comprising with an illumination optical path of a light-emitting element that directs imaging light to tissue within a specified field-of-view. The prior art also discloses a stimulation optical path comprising one or more light-emitting elements that directs stimulation light to tissue within said field-of-view iii as well as disclosing an imaging optical path comprising one or more image sensors and configured to receive light reflected, scattered, or emitted by the tissue to generate an image of the tissue within said field-of-view. Finally, the prior art teaches a baseplate, wherein the baseplate is configured to be mounted on the subject in a fixed position and to receive the optical assembly. The closest NPL XU (XU, “Water-level vacuum packaging of micromachines thermoelectric IR sensors”, 2010) discusses generally a microscope assembly that is mountable and removable and contains a sensor cap but is silent as to at least a device body connected to and separated from the baseplate in a tools-free, reproducible manner, or V-grooves, or kinematic coupling as claimed by the Applicant.
Whereas, as stated above, Applicant’s claimed invention recites an imaging device that includes a baseplate attached to a subject having a target region to be imaged, a removeable and replaceable cable assembly, and a device body having a sensor cap assembly that comprises an image sensor configured to image the target region when the sensor cap assembly is connected to the device body, wherein the device body is connected to and separated from the baseplate in a tools-free reproducible manner, and wherein the device body comprises one or more V-grooves complementary to one or more bumps in the baseplate configured to have the device body be connected to and separated from the baseplate via kinematic coupling of the device body and the baseplate wherein the baseplate and device body comprise corresponding mating surfaces that mechanically prevent at least one of a rotational movement and an axial movement between the baseplate and the device body when the device body is attached to the baseplate.
So as indicated by the above statements, Applicant’s arguments and amendment have been considered persuasive, in light of the claim limitations as well as the enabling portions of the specification.
The dependent claims further limit the independent claims and are considered allowable on the same basis as the independent claims as well as for the further limitations set forth.
As per Claims 10-23, the following is an Examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance, but for the outstanding double patenting rejections contained herein: the closest prior art obtained from an Examiner’s search (GROSSMAN, Pub. No: US 2011-0127405; SARKIENEN, Pub. No.: US 2003-0037953; COLVIN, Pub. No.: US. 2010-0073669; COCKER, Pub. No.: US 2015-0309295; ZHONG (Pub. No.: US 2013-0087517; GHOSH, Pub. No.: US 2013-0260382) does not teach nor suggest in detail the limitations:
“An imaging device comprising: a) a baseplate configured to be attached to a subject having a target region to be imaged; b) a removable and replaceable cable assembly; c) a device body that includes a sensor cap assembly containing an image sensor configured to image a target region and that is configured to be connected to and separated from the baseplate in a tools-free reproducible manner; and d) an optical assembly contained in the device body and including: i. a first portion of an illumination optical arm of the imaging device comprising one or more illumination light-emitting elements and configured to direct imaging light along an optical path from the first portion of the illumination optical arm to the target region within a specified field-of-view (FOV); ii. a second portion of a stimulation optical arm of the imaging device comprising one or more stimulation light-emitting elements and configured to direct stimulation light to said target region; and iii. a third portion of an imaging optical arm of the imaging device comprising said image sensor and configured to receive light reflected, scattered, or emitted by said target region along an image collection pathway from the target region to the image sensor”
as well as the combination of all the limitations within the independent claims and the enabling portions of the specification.
The closest prior art of record GROSSMAN does not teach or suggest in detail at least a removeable and replaceable cable assembly, or sensor cap assembly, or a device body that can be connected to and separated from the baseplate in a tools-free, reproducible manner. The prior art is also silent as to V-grooves complementary to one or more bumps in a baseplate, or a device body separated from the baseplate via kinematic coupling of the device body and the baseplate as presented by the Applicant.
GROSSMAN only discloses a microscope system for simultaneous imaging and stimulation of tissue within a subject that includes an optical assembly comprising with an illumination optical path of a light-emitting element that directs imaging light to tissue within a specified field-of-view. The prior art also discloses a stimulation optical path comprising one or more light-emitting elements that directs stimulation light to tissue within said field-of-view iii as well as disclosing an imaging optical path comprising one or more image sensors and configured to receive light reflected, scattered, or emitted by the tissue to generate an image of the tissue within said field-of-view. Finally, the prior art teaches a baseplate, wherein the baseplate is configured to be mounted on the subject in a fixed position and to receive the optical assembly. The closest NPL XU (XU, “Water-level vacuum packaging of micromachines thermoelectric IR sensors”, 2010) discusses generally a microscope assembly that is mountable and removable and contains a sensor cap but is silent as to at least a device body connected to and separated from the baseplate in a tools-free, reproducible manner, or V-grooves, or kinematic coupling as claimed by the Applicant.
Whereas, as stated above, Applicant’s claimed invention recites an imaging device with a baseplate configured to be attached to a subject having a target region to be imaged, a removable and replaceable cable assembly, a device body that includes a sensor cap assembly containing an image sensor configured to image a target region and that is configured to be connected to and separated from the baseplate in a tools-free reproducible manner. The claims further recite an optical assembly contained in the device body and including a first portion of an illumination optical arm of the imaging device comprising one or more illumination light-emitting elements and configured to direct imaging light along an optical path from the first portion of the illumination optical arm to the target region within a specified field-of-view (FOV), a second portion of a stimulation optical arm of the imaging device comprising one or more stimulation light-emitting elements and configured to direct stimulation light to said target region, and a third portion of an imaging optical arm of the imaging device comprising said image sensor and configured to receive light reflected, scattered, or emitted by said target region along an image collection pathway from the target region to the image sensor.
So as indicated by the above statements, Applicant’s arguments and amendment have been considered persuasive, in light of the claim limitations as well as the enabling portions of the specification.
The dependent claims further limit the independent claims and are considered allowable on the same basis as the independent claims as well as for the further limitations set forth.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Claims 1-23 are allowed, but for the outstanding double patenting rejection contained herein.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Eileen Adams whose telephone number is 571-270-3688. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri from 8:30-5:00 EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, William Vaughn can be reached on (571) 272-3922. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-270-4688.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have any questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/EILEEN M ADAMS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2481