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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/19/2026 was considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 8 and 9 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claims 8 and 9, “the optical frequency shifter” should read “the adjustable optical frequency shifter” as recited in claim 1 in order to maintain consistency.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “data processing unit” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites “data processing unit” which uses the generic placeholder “unit” that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Accordingly, the limitation on “data processing unit” is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) as corresponding to a processor or equivalent.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 10, the claim recites “further comprising a radio frequency driver arranged to drive the acousto-optic modulator or electro-optic modulator”. It appears from the applicant’s specification that the radio frequency driver is the frequency shift controller recited in claim 1 ([0065] the frequency shift controller 80-1 is a radio frequency driver; [0106]). However, from the claim alone, it is not clear that these are the same elements, which is not consistent with the specification as there does not appear to be any embodiment where the radio frequency driver is not the frequency shift controller. Further, “electro-optic modulator” should read “the electro-optic modulator”. For the purposes of examination, the claim is interpreted as “wherein the frequency shift controller is a radio frequency driver arranged to drive the acousto-optic modulator or the electro-optic modulator”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20220218196A1 by Preciado et al. (hereinafter " Preciado"; cited in the IDS) in view of US20230032722A1 by Mazlin et al. (hereinafter "Mazlin") and US20220142471A1 by Ashok et al. (hereinafter "Ashok").
Regarding claim 1, Preciado teaches an optical coherence tomography instrument (at least Fig. 1 and 5) arranged to acquire a B-scan representing a section of a sample ([0006] axial depth profile to be obtained for each of a plurality of points across the surface of the sample such that a two- or three-dimensional depth profile of the sample can be obtained; [0024] interferogram representing a depth structure at the retina; wherein the retina is a section of the eye which is a sample; see applicant specification [0006] two-dimensional depth profile is a B-scan), wherein the sample in the section is inclined with respect to a plane normal to an axial direction along which depth information of the B-scan is acquired (Fig. 1 shows the sample S or retina is curved which matches the applicant's description in [0085] " adjoining sections of the retina may have gradually varying inclinations relative to a plane normal to the axial direction"), the optical coherence tomography instrument comprising:
an optical coupler ([0046] optical beam splitter OBS which acts as an optical coupler) arranged to accept light from a swept narrowband light source ([0046] swept light source SLS, narrowband light from light source SLS)and to split the light into at least signal light and reference light ([0046]);
a reference optical system arranged to return the reference light ([0052] reference optical system ROS);
a front-end optical system arranged to scan the signal light across a plurality of scan locations along the section of the sample ([0049]-[0050] sample optical system SOS may include one or more scanners arranged to scan the beam in one or more directions across the retina; [0003] sample optical system, sometimes termed a front-end optical system), and to return signal light reflected from the sample (Fig. 5; [0047]) ;
an adjustable optical frequency shifter ([0010] adjustable optical frequency shifter) arranged to generate a sideband light by adjustably increasing or decreasing an optical frequency of one of the returned reference light or the returned signal light ([0014] the reference light passes by way of the optical frequency shifter in forward and reverse directions; [0059] OFS; [0066] Due to the presence of two sidebands, an optical frequency shift which is an upshift or downshift can be obtained)
a detector unit ([0053] DET) arranged to sample, for each of the scan locations, a respective time-varying interference signal resulting from an interference between the sideband light and the other of the returned reference light or the returned signal light ([0053] samples a time-varying interference signal between the returning reference light and the returning signal light);
a data processing unit arranged to generate the B-scan based on the sampled time-varying interference signals ([0053] data processing unit DPU to generate an axial depth profile using time-varying interference signal; [0094]); and
a frequency shift controller ([0061] frequency shift controller FSC) arranged to control the adjustable optical frequency shifter to vary the optical frequency during the scan ([0061]; [0063] a radio-frequency driver arranged to apply a variable radio-frequency electric signal ).
Preciado further teaches a function of the optical frequency shift is to bring high-frequency interference components within the lower-frequency detection bandwidth ([0075]).
Preciado does not explicitly teach the frequency shift controller arranged to control the adjustable optical frequency shifter to vary the optical frequency during the scan to compensate for the inclination of the sample in the section, such that an image of the sample in the B-scan has less of an inclination relative to a lateral direction in the B-scan than would be present in a B-scan of the section of the sample acquired by the optical coherence tomography instrument without the control by the frequency shift controller.
However, Mazlin does address this limitation. Mazlin and Preciado are considered to be analogous to the present invention as they are in the same field of optical coherence tomography.
Mazlin teaches an example, in Fig. 8, of an arrangement for implementing the FFOCT imaging method, wherein the optical curvature compensator is an optical plate 120 arranged in the reference arm 108. The optical plate 120 is arranged on the reference optical path between the beam splitter 103 and the reflector 112. The optical plate 120 curves the transverse variation distribution profile travelled by the reference light, so that the reference optical path length travelled by the reference light incident on the imager 114 and the second optical path length travelled by the interest light incident to the imager 114 have a same profile of transverse variation distribution. ([0082]). The features of the optical curvature compensator 112 are chosen to compensate the optical curvature of the layer of interest 115. The optical curvature of the layer of interest 115 can be known, for example radius of curvature of the anterior cornea of an eye ([0085]). Further, this technique allows for imaging over a larger field of view compared to optical systems that do not compensate for the curvature ([0103] Fig. 13 a,b; [0015]).
Thus Mazlin teaches a technique to compensate for the inclination of the sample in the section, such that an image of the sample in the B-scan (bidimensional image [0019]) has less of an inclination relative to a lateral direction in the B-scan than would be present in a B-scan of the section of the sample acquired by the optical coherence tomography instrument without the optical curvature compensator.
It would have been well known to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to compensate for the inclination of the sample in the section. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Preciado to include a step to compensate for the inclination of the sample in the section, such that an image of the sample in the B-scan has less of an inclination relative to a lateral direction in the B-scan than would be present in a B-scan of the section of the sample acquired by the optical coherence tomography instrument without the control of an optical curvature compensator in order to image a curved sample over a larger field of view (Mazlin [0103]; [0015] addresses the problem of the useful field of view of the layer of interest being restricted because of the curved nature of the sample).
However, Preciado modified by Mazlin does not teach that the optical curvature compensator is a frequency shift controller which varies the optical frequency during the scan.
Further, Ashok does address this limitation. Ashok and Preciado are considered to be analogous to the present invention as they are in the same field of optical coherence tomography.
Ashok teaches that the curvature of an imaging target can be indicated by a frequency component ([0054] the frequency component determination module 4 determines a second frequency component of the variation, which is indicative of the curvature of the retina). Further, the second frequency component corresponding to the curvature of the retina may be removed in order to determine a corrected variation of indicators ([0058])
It would have been well known to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the curvature or inclination of a sample can be represented by a frequency component when imaging the sample. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Preciado to use the frequency shift controller to vary the optical frequency during the scan to compensate for the inclination of the sample in the section such that an image of the sample in the B-scan has less of an inclination relative to a lateral direction in the B-scan than would be present in a B-scan of the section of the sample acquired by the optical coherence tomography instrument without the control by the frequency shift controller as suggested by Ashok in order to correct for the curvature or inclination thus improving the measurement (Ashok [0058]).
Regarding claim 2, Preciado modified by Mazlin and Ashok teach the optical coherence tomography instrument according to claim 1, and Preciado is silent as to wherein the frequency shift controller is arranged to control the adjustable optical frequency shifter to vary the optical frequency during the scan to compensate for the inclination of the sample in the section using one of: a pre-stored estimate of the inclination of the sample in the section; or pre-stored calibration data which is indicative of a measured inclination of the sample in the section.
However, Preciado teaches introducing a predetermined amount of frequency upshift or downshift to the light in the sample arm or reference arm ([0061]) and the predetermined frequency shift is associated with the driving frequency supplied by frequency shift controller FSC ([0078]). Further, an optical frequency shift is introduced/applied by the optical frequency shifter (e.g., optical frequency shifter OFS) to light in the sample or reference arm, depending on predetermined operating criteria and the amount of optical frequency shift is adjusted until the interferogram between light reflected from the retina and the reference light lies within the detection bandwidth ([0091]).
Further, Ashok does address this limitation.
Ashok teaches the frequency range of second frequency component of the variation that is indicative of the curvature of the retina may be determined empirically based on an expected curvature of the retina ([0057]). Further, Mazlin teaches optical curvature of the layer of interest 115 can be known, for example radius of curvature of the anterior cornea of an eye ([0085]).
It would have been well known to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a pre-stored value to vary the optical frequency. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Preciado to further include wherein the frequency shift controller is arranged to control the adjustable optical frequency shifter to vary the optical frequency during the scan to compensate for the inclination of the sample in the section using one of: a pre-stored estimate of the inclination of the sample in the section; or pre-stored calibration data which is indicative of a measured inclination of the sample in the section as suggested by Ashok in order to compensate and correct for the curvature of the sample (Ashok [0058]).
Regarding claim 3, Preciado modified by Mazlin and Ashok teach the optical coherence tomography instrument according to claim 1, and Preciado further teaches wherein the sample comprises one of a retina of an eye of a subject ([0047] a sample S, such as, by example only, a retina) or an anterior chamber of the eye of the subject.
Regarding claim 4, Preciado modified by Mazlin and Ashok teach the optical coherence tomography instrument according to claim 1, and Preciado further teaches wherein the reference optical system comprises a reflector arranged to reflect the reference light to return the reference light ([0011]; Fig. 5 mirror M; [0059]).
Regarding claim 5, Preciado modified by Mazlin and Ashok teach the optical coherence tomography instrument according to claim 4, and Preciado further teaches wherein the reflector is fixed relative to the optical coupler ([0012]; Fig. 5 mirror M; [0059]).
Regarding claim 6, Preciado modified by Mazlin and Ashok teach the optical coherence tomography instrument according to claim 1, and although Preciado does not teach wherein the reference optical system comprises an optical loop to return the reference light, the optical loop optionally having a fixed optical path length in the first embodiment, Preciado does address this limitation in a separate embodiment.
Preciado teaches, in an alternate embodiment, wherein the reference optical system comprises an optical loop to return the reference light, the optical loop optionally having a fixed optical path length (Fig. 9; [0013]; [0083] the reference optical system ROS is included in a loop optical system between an output of optical beam splitter OBS and one of the two optical inputs of detector DET).
It would have been well known to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a loop optical system. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the first embodiment of Preciado to include wherein the reference optical system comprises an optical loop to return the reference light, the optical loop optionally having a fixed optical path length as suggested by the alternate embodiment in order to employ balanced detection ([0083]).
Regarding claim 7, Preciado modified by Mazlin and Ashok teach the optical coherence tomography instrument according to claim 1, and Preciado further teaches wherein the reference light passes by way of the adjustable optical frequency shifter in forward and reverse directions ([0014]; Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 8, Preciado modified by Mazlin and Ashok teach the optical coherence tomography instrument according to claim 1, and although Preciado does not teach wherein the signal light passes by way of the optical frequency shifter in forward and reverse directions in the first embodiment, Preciado does address this limitation in a separate embodiment.
Preciado teaches, in an alternate embodiment, wherein the signal light passes by way of the optical frequency shifter in forward and reverse directions ([0015]; [0060] the optical frequency shifter may be arranged between the optical beam splitter OBS and the reference optical system ROS; Fig. 14). Further, Preciado teaches the arrangement is equivalent to the first embodiment ([0060]).
It would have been well known to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that placing the frequency shifter in the sample optical system would cause the signal light to pass through in forward and backward directions. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the first embodiment of Preciado to include wherein the signal light passes by way of the optical frequency shifter in forward and reverse directions as suggested by the alternate embodiment as it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. See MPEP 2144.04 Sec. V. C. One would arrange the components in the most efficient configuration for the space.
Regarding claim 9, Preciado modified by Mazlin and Ashok teach the optical coherence tomography instrument according to claim 1, and Preciado further teaches wherein the optical frequency shifter includes an acousto-optic modulator ([0062]) or an electro-optic modulator ([0064]).
Regarding claim 10, Preciado modified by Mazlin and Ashok teach the optical coherence tomography instrument according to claim 9, and Preciado further teaches further comprising a radio frequency driver ([0063] the frequency shift controller FSC is a radio-frequency driver arranged to apply a variable radio-frequency electric signal; see 112b interpretation) arranged to drive the acousto-optic modulator or electro-optic modulator to obtain a predetermined optical frequency shift ([0061] predetermined amount of frequency upshift or downshift ).
Regarding claim 11, Preciado modified by Mazlin and Ashok teach the optical coherence tomography instrument according to claim 1, and Preciado further teaches further comprising the swept narrowband light source, wherein the swept narrowband light source is arranged to emit the light to the optical coupler, and the light is narrowband light ([0046]swept light source SLS, narrowband light from light source SLS).
Regarding claim 12, Preciado modified by Mazlin and Ashok teach the optical coherence tomography instrument according to claim 11, and Preciado further teaches wherein the swept narrowband light source comprises a swept vertical cavity surface emitting laser ([0045] tuneable vertical cavity surface-emitting laser (VCSEL)).
Regarding claim 13, Preciado modified by Mazlin and Ashok teach the optical coherence tomography instrument according to claim 11, and Preciado further teaches wherein the swept narrowband light source is configured to periodically vary an optical frequency of the light emitted thereby ([0045] tuneable vertical cavity surface-emitting laser (VCSEL); [0044] periodic frequency sweep ).
Regarding claim 14, Preciado modified by Mazlin and Ashok teach the optical coherence tomography instrument according to claim 1, and Preciado further teaches wherein the detector unit includes one of a photodetector or a balanced photodetector ([0052] photodetector; [0023]).
Regarding claim 15, Preciado teaches a method of acquiring (Fig. 12), by an optical coherence tomography instrument (at least Fig. 1 and 5), a B-scan representing a section of a sample ([0006] axial depth profile to be obtained for each of a plurality of points across the surface of the sample such that a two- or three-dimensional depth profile of the sample can be obtained; [0024] interferogram representing a depth structure at the retina; wherein the retina is a section of the eye which is a sample), wherein the sample in the section is inclined with respect to a plane normal to an axial direction along which depth information of the B-scan is acquired (Fig. 1 shows the sample S or retina is curved which matches the applicant's description in [0085] " adjoining sections of the retina may have gradually varying inclinations relative to a plane normal to the axial direction"), the method comprising:
splitting light from a swept narrowband light source ([0046]swept light source SLS, narrowband light from light source SLS) into at least signal light propagating to the sample along a sample arm of an interferometer of the optical coherence tomography instrument ([0049]-[0050] sample optical system SOS, and reference light propagating along a reference arm of the interferometer ([0052] reference optical system ROS; [0089]);
scanning the signal light across a plurality of scan locations along the section of the sample, and receiving, via the sample arm, return signal light reflected from the sample ([0049]-[0050] sample optical system SOS may include one or more scanners arranged to scan the beam in one or more directions across the retina; Fig. 5; [0047]);
generating a sideband light by adjustably increasing or decreasing an optical frequency of a part of one of the return signal light or reference light which has been returned by the reference arm ([0091]; [0010] adjustable optical frequency shifter; [0014] the reference light passes by way of the optical frequency shifter in forward and reverse directions; [0059] OFS; [0066] Due to the presence of two sidebands, an optical frequency shift which is an upshift or downshift can be obtained);
sampling, for each of the scan locations, a respective time-varying interference signal resulting from an interference between the sideband light and the other of the returned signal light or the returned reference light ([0090]; [0053] samples a time-varying interference signal between the returning reference light and the returning signal light);
generating the B-scan based on the sampled time-varying interference signals ([0053] data processing unit DPU to generate an axial depth profile using time-varying interference signal; [0094]); and
controlling the optical frequency during the scan ([0061]; [0063] frequency shift controller FSC is a radio-frequency driver arranged to apply a variable radio-frequency electric signal ).
Preciado further teaches a function controlling the optical frequency is to bring high-frequency interference components within the lower-frequency detection bandwidth ([0075]).
Preciado does not explicitly teach controlling the optical frequency during the scan to compensate for the inclination of the sample in the section, such that an image of the sample in the B-scan has less of an inclination relative to a lateral direction in the B-scan than would be present in a B-scan of the section of the sample acquired by the optical coherence tomography instrument without the controlling of the optical frequency.
However, Mazlin does address this limitation. Mazlin and Preciado are considered to be analogous to the present invention as they are in the same field of optical coherence tomography.
Mazlin teaches an example, in Fig. 8, of an arrangement for implementing the FFOCT imaging method, wherein the optical curvature compensator is an optical plate 120 arranged in the reference arm 108. The optical plate 120 is arranged on the reference optical path between the beam splitter 103 and the reflector 112. The optical plate 120 curves the transverse variation distribution profile travelled by the reference light, so that the reference optical path length travelled by the reference light incident on the imager 114 and the second optical path length travelled by the interest light incident to the imager 114 have a same profile of transverse variation distribution. ([0082]). The features of the optical curvature compensator 112 are chosen to compensate the optical curvature of the layer of interest 115. The optical curvature of the layer of interest 115 can be known, for example radius of curvature of the anterior cornea of an eye ([0085]). Further, this technique allows for imaging over a larger field of view compared to optical systems that do not compensate for the curvature ([0103] Fig. 13 a,b; [0015]).
Thus Mazlin teaches a technique to compensate for the inclination of the sample in the section, such that an image of the sample in the B-scan (bidimensional image [0019]) has less of an inclination relative to a lateral direction in the B-scan than would be present in a B-scan of the section of the sample acquired by the optical coherence tomography instrument without the optical curvature compensator.
It would have been well known to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to compensate for the inclination of the sample in the section. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Preciado to include a step to compensate for the inclination of the sample in the section, such that an image of the sample in the B-scan has less of an inclination relative to a lateral direction in the B-scan than would be present in a B-scan of the section of the sample acquired by the optical coherence tomography instrument without the control of an optical characteristic in order to image a curved sample over a larger field of view (Mazlin [0103]; [0015] addresses the problem of the useful field of view of the layer of interest being restricted because of the curved nature of the sample).
However, Mazlin does not teach that the optical curvature compensator controls the optical frequency during the scan.
Further, Ashok does address this limitation. Ashok and Preciado are considered to be analogous to the present invention as they are in the same field of optical coherence tomography.
Ashok teaches that the curvature of an imaging target can be indicated by a frequency component ([0054] the frequency component determination module 4 determines a second frequency component of the variation, which is indicative of the curvature of the retina). Further, the second frequency component corresponding to the curvature of the retina may be removed in order to determine a corrected variation of indicators ([0058]).
It would have been well known to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the curvature or inclination of a sample can be represented by a frequency component, when imaging the sample. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Preciado to include controlling the optical frequency during the scan to compensate for the inclination of the sample in the section, such that an image of the sample in the B-scan has less of an inclination relative to a lateral direction in the B-scan than would be present in a B-scan of the section of the sample acquired by the optical coherence tomography instrument without the controlling of the optical frequency as suggested by Ashok in order in order to correct for the curvature or inclination thus improving the measurement (Ashok [0058]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20060232783 A1 by Chroma (cited in the IDS) teaches resolving a complex conjugate ambiguity in an Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) interferogram. A reference light signal is propagated along a reference path. A sample light signal is impinged on a sample reflector. The reference light signal is frequency shifted with respect to the sample light signal to thereby separate a positive and a negative displacement of a complex conjugate component of the OCT interferogram. (Abstract). Further, The positive and negative displacement components may thus be distinguished from each other, and are also separated from the autocorrelation and spectral artifact components which may then be identified and reduced or removed from the interferogram ([0025]). This appears to address the same problem described in the applicant’s specification [0007]-[0009].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAITLYN E KIDWELL whose telephone number is (703)756-1719. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. ET.
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, Tarifur Chowdhury can be reached at 571-272-2287. 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.
/KAITLYN E KIDWELL/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/TARIFUR R CHOWDHURY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights