DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11/04/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
3. Applicant's arguments (see Remarks filed 11/04/2025) regarding claims 1-8 and 10-16 have been considered, but are moot because of the new grounds of rejection.
Claim Objections
4. Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 (line 21) and claim 14 (line 19) should each be amended to read “detachably and selectivelyholding”
Claim 14 (third-to-last line) should be amended to read “respective peak
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
6. Claims 1-3, 11, and 14 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al. (US 8280142 B2, of record) in view of Horiba (“XGT-7200 catalog,” of record), and further in view of Takeuchi (US 7729048 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Suzuki discloses a microscope (column 16 line 10) for magnifying observation of an observation target (Fig. 25, S), the microscope comprising:
a placement stage on which the observation target is placed (Fig. 25, 7b);
an observation optical system (Fig. 25, 101) including a first objective lens (Fig. 25, 2) that collects light from the observation target placed on the placement stage (Fig. 25, 2 collects light from S placed on 7b), and a camera that detects a light reception amount of the light from the observation target received through the first objective lens (Fig. 25, 3) to capture an image of the observation target (column 36 lines 32-34);
an observation unit (Fig. 25, 101 and 102a) accommodating the observation optical system which includes the first objective lens (Fig. 25, 101 includes 3);
an analysis optical system (Fig. 25, 1 and 4) including an electromagnetic wave emitter that emits an electromagnetic wave (Fig. 25, 4), a second objective lens (Fig. 25, 1) that collects an electromagnetic wave from the observation target generated in response to irradiation of the electromagnetic wave (Fig. 25, 1 collects an EM wave from S);
an analysis unit (Fig. 25, 100a) in which the analysis optical system is accommodated (Fig. 25, 1 and 4 are accommodated in 100a);
a horizontal drive mechanism which moves relative positions of the observation optical system accommodated in the observation unit and the analysis optical system accommodated in the analysis unit with respect to the placement stage along a horizontal direction such that the capturing of the observation target by the observation optical system and the irradiation of the first electromagnetic wave by the analysis optical system are executable on an identical point in the observation target (Fig. 25, 8); and
a controller electrically connected to the observation optical system and the analysis optical system (Fig. 25, 9 & PC1),
wherein the controller is configured to generate image data of the observation target based on the light reception amount of the light from the observation target (columns 36-37).
Suzuki fails to explicitly disclose an electromagnetic wave to separate an electron from an atomic nucleus for performing an elemental analysis of the observation target;
collecting an electromagnetic wave from the observation target generated by separating the electron from the atomic nucleus in response to irradiation of the electromagnetic wave;
a detector that generates an intensity distribution spectrum which is an intensity distribution for each wavelength obtained by acquiring reception intensity for each wavelength of the electromagnetic wave generated on the observation target and collected by the second objective lens; and
wherein the controller is configured to determine identities of a plurality of elements that are components contained in the observation target by identifying respective peak positions of the intensity distribution spectrum, and estimate a composition of the observation target by identifying the plurality of the elements corresponding to the peak positions and comparing magnitudes of the respective peak positions.
However, Horiba teaches an XRF microscope, and discloses an electromagnetic wave emitter that emits an electromagnetic wave (Comparison with SEM/EDX section of page 3, the emitter emits the “X-ray” of the XGT diagram; Mono-capillary section of page 5, “(XGT) provides X-ray beams”) to separate an electron from an atomic nucleus for performing an elemental analysis of an observation target (Comparison with SEM/EDX, “Fluorescence X-ray” of the XGT diagram);
a detector (Specification of XGT-7200V section of page 8, “Detector”) that generates an intensity distribution spectrum which is an intensity distribution for each wavelength obtained by acquiring reception intensity for each wavelength of the electromagnetic wave generated on the observation target and collected by a lens (Hyperspectral imaging section of page 4); and
wherein a controller is configured to determine identities of a plurality of elements that are components contained in the observation target by identifying respective peak positions of the intensity distribution spectrum (Seamless transition from optical visualization to element distribution section of page 2), and estimate a composition of the observation target by identifying the plurality of the elements corresponding to the peak positions and comparing magnitudes of the respective peak positions (SmartMap section of page 6, “Spectra from different regions can be compared in order to identify their differences in elemental composition”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Suzuki and Horiba such that elements contained in a target were determined by identifying peak positions of an intensity distribution spectrum, motivated by the analyses of such spectra allowing for accurate determinations to be made.
Modified Suzuki fails to explicitly disclose a unit coupler attached to the analysis unit in which the analysis optical system is accommodated, and detachably and selectively holds any one of a plurality of types of observation units, which are mutually different, laterally adjacent to the analysis unit such that an optical axis of the observation optical system and an optical axis of the analysis optical system are arranged side-by-side, the observation unit being one of the plurality of types of observation units.
However, Takeuchi teaches a similar microscope comprising lenses and a drivable placement stage (Abstract), and discloses a unit coupler (Fig. 9, 8) attached to an analysis unit (column 11 lines 60-61, units 101, 202, and 300 taken together) in which an analysis optical system is accommodated (column 11 line 61, 202), and detachably (column 11 lines 65-66, “arm portion 9 and the bracket portion 10 can be detached from each other”) and selectively holds any one of a plurality of types of observation units (column 2 lines 49-50, “objective lenses 6 with varying powers of magnification are mounted at a nosepiece 8”), which are mutually different (column 2 lines 49-50, “varying powers of magnification”; [0140] of applicant’s spec likewise defines “mutually different” as “refer[ring] to optical systems in which the magnification…[is] different”), laterally adjacent to the analysis unit such that an optical axis of the observation optical system and an optical axis of the analysis optical system are arranged side-by-side (Fig. 9, lenses 6), the observation unit being one of the plurality of types of observation units (Fig. 9, 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine modified Suzuki and Takeuchi such that a unit coupler was attached to the analysis unit and detachably held observation units, motivated by allowing for parts of the device to be replaced.
Regarding claim 2, modified Suzuki discloses a stand to which the placement stage, the observation optical system, and the analysis optical system are attachable (Takeuchi - column 11 lines 63-64, “stand unit 11 of the stand unit 201 can be detachably mounted”).
Regarding claim 3, modified Suzuki discloses wherein an optical axis of the first objective lens and an optical axis of the second objective lens are provided so as to be parallel to each other (Suzuki - Fig. 25, axes of 2 and 1), and the capturing of the observation target by the observation optical system and the irradiation of the first electromagnetic wave by the analysis optical system are executed on the identical point from an identical direction before and after the movement by moving the relative position in the horizontal direction by the horizontal drive mechanism (Suzuki - Fig. 25, when S and 7b are moved by 8).
Regarding claim 11, modified Suzuki discloses wherein the electromagnetic wave emitter includes a laser light source that emits laser light as the first electromagnetic wave (Suzuki - column 36 lines 54-55; Horiba - Mono-capillary section of page 5, “X-ray beams”).
Regarding claim 14, Suzuki discloses a microscope (column 16 line 10) for magnifying observation of an observation target (Fig. 25, S), the microscope comprising:
a placement stage on which the observation target is placed (Fig. 25, 7b);
an observation optical system (Fig. 25, 101) including a first objective lens (Fig. 25, 2) that collects light from the observation target placed on the placement stage (Fig. 25, 2 collects light from S placed on 7b), and a camera that detects a light reception amount of the light from the observation target received through the first objective lens (Fig. 25, 3) to capture an image of the observation target (column 36 lines 32-34);
an observation unit (Fig. 25, 101 and 102a) accommodating the observation optical system which includes the first objective lens (Fig. 25, 101 includes 3);
an analysis optical system (Fig. 25, 1 and 4) including an electromagnetic wave emitter that emits an electromagnetic wave (Fig. 25, 4), a second objective lens (Fig. 25, 1) whose optical axis is parallel to an optical axis of the first objective lens (Fig. 25, axes of 2 and 1 are parallel), that guides the electromagnetic wave to the observation target (Fig. 25);
an analysis unit (Fig. 25, 100a) in which the analysis optical system is accommodated (Fig. 25, 1 and 4 are accommodated in 100a);
a horizontal drive mechanism which moves relative positions of the observation optical system accommodated in the observation unit and the analysis optical system accommodated in the analysis unit with respect to the placement stage along a horizontal direction such that the capturing of the observation target by the observation optical system and the irradiation of the first electromagnetic wave by the analysis optical system are executable on an identical point in the observation target (Fig. 25, 8); and
a controller electrically connected to the observation optical system and the analysis optical system (Fig. 25, 9 & PC1),
wherein the controller is configured to generate image data of the observation target based on the light reception amount of the light from the observation target (columns 36-37).
Suzuki fails to explicitly disclose an electromagnetic wave to separate an electron from an atomic nucleus for performing an elemental analysis of the observation target;
a detector that generates an intensity distribution spectrum which is an intensity distribution for each wavelength obtained by acquiring reception intensity for each wavelength of the electromagnetic wave generated on the observation target and collected by the second objective lens; and
wherein the controller is configured to determine identities of a plurality of elements that are components contained in the observation target by identifying respective peak positions of the intensity distribution spectrum, and estimate a composition of the observation target by identifying the plurality of the elements corresponding to the peak positions and comparing magnitudes of the respective peak positions.
However, Horiba teaches an XRF microscope, and discloses an electromagnetic wave emitter that emits an electromagnetic wave (Comparison with SEM/EDX section of page 3, the emitter emits the “X-ray” of the XGT diagram; Mono-capillary section of page 5, “(XGT) provides X-ray beams”) to separate an electron from an atomic nucleus for performing an elemental analysis of an observation target (Comparison with SEM/EDX, “Fluorescence X-ray” of the XGT diagram);
a detector (Specification of XGT-7200V section of page 8, “Detector”) that generates an intensity distribution spectrum which is an intensity distribution for each wavelength obtained by acquiring reception intensity for each wavelength of the electromagnetic wave generated on the observation target and collected by a lens (Hyperspectral imaging section of page 4); and
wherein a controller is configured to determine identities of a plurality of elements that are components contained in the observation target by identifying respective peak positions of the intensity distribution spectrum (Seamless transition from optical visualization to element distribution section of page 2), and estimate a composition of the observation target by identifying the plurality of the elements corresponding to the peak positions and comparing magnitudes of the respective peak positions (SmartMap section of page 6, “Spectra from different regions can be compared in order to identify their differences in elemental composition”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Suzuki and Horiba such that elements contained in a target were determined by identifying peak positions of an intensity distribution spectrum, motivated by the analyses of such spectra allowing for accurate determinations to be made.
Modified Suzuki fails to explicitly disclose a unit coupler attached to the analysis unit in which the analysis optical system is accommodated, and detachably and selectively holds any one of a plurality of types of observation units, which are mutually different, laterally adjacent to the analysis unit such that an optical axis of the observation optical system and an optical axis of the analysis optical system are arranged side-by-side, the observation unit being one of the plurality of types of observation units.
However, Takeuchi teaches a similar microscope comprising lenses and a drivable placement stage (Abstract), and discloses a unit coupler (Fig. 9, 8) attached to an analysis unit (column 11 lines 60-61, units 101, 202, and 300 taken together) in which an analysis optical system is accommodated (column 11 line 61, 202), and detachably (column 11 lines 65-66, “arm portion 9 and the bracket portion 10 can be detached from each other”) and selectively holds any one of a plurality of types of observation units (column 2 lines 49-50, “objective lenses 6 with varying powers of magnification are mounted at a nosepiece 8”), which are mutually different (column 2 lines 49-50, “varying powers of magnification”; [0140] of applicant’s spec likewise defines “mutually different” as “refer[ring] to optical systems in which the magnification…[is] different”), laterally adjacent to the analysis unit such that an optical axis of the observation optical system and an optical axis of the analysis optical system are arranged side-by-side (Fig. 9, lenses 6), the observation unit being one of the plurality of types of observation units (Fig. 9, 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine modified Suzuki and Takeuchi such that a unit coupler was attached to the analysis unit and detachably held observation units, motivated by allowing for parts of the device to be replaced.
7. Claims 4-7 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki in view of Horiba and Takeuchi, and further in view of Ito (US 6317260 B1, of record).
Regarding claim 4, modified Suzuki fails to explicitly disclose wherein the unit coupler comprises a lens barrel holder which fixes the observation unit with respect to the analysis optical system to fix a relative position of an optical axis of the second objective lens with respect to an optical axis of the first objective lens.
However, Ito teaches a microscope including at least two optical systems (Fig. 10), comprising a lens barrel holder (Fig. 10, 10) which fixes an observation unit with respect to an analysis optical system to fix a relative position of an optical axis of a second objective lens with respect to an optical axis of a first objective lens (Fig. 10, 10 fixes 3 with respect to analysis optical system 2, to fix a relative position of Ax3 with respect to Ax2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine modified Suzuki and Ito such that a lens barrel holder was to fix optical components in place, motivated providing stability for the optical system.
Regarding claim 5, modified Suzuki discloses wherein the respective optical axes of the observation optical system and the analysis optical system are arranged so as to intersect the horizontal direction as the lens barrel holder holds the observation unit (Suzuki - Fig. 25, the axes of 4 and 2 intersect the horizontal direction; Ito - 10 holds 3).
Regarding claim 6, modified Suzuki discloses an analysis housing that accommodates the analysis optical system (Ito - Fig. 10, analysis housing 2a accommodates 2), wherein the lens barrel holder in a state of holding the observation unit is arranged outside the analysis housing (Ito - Fig. 10, 10 is arranged outside 2a).
Regarding claim 7, modified Suzuki discloses wherein the lens barrel holder is configured to selectively hold any one of the plurality of types of observation units accommodating the observation optical system different from each other (Ito - Fig. 10, 10 is configured to selectively hold a plurality of different types of observation units 3, e.g., observation units made of different materials; Sukekawa - Fig. 10 & claims 2-3).
8. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki in view of Horiba and Takeuchi, and further in view of Georges (US 4248498 A, of record).
Regarding claim 8, modified Suzuki fails to disclose wherein the horizontal drive mechanism is operated to switch between a first mode in which the first objective lens faces the observation target and a second mode in which the second objective lens faces the observation target, and image generation of the observation target by the observation optical system and the irradiation of the first electromagnetic wave by the analysis optical system are performed on the identical point from an identical direction at timings before and after the switching between the first mode and the second mode.
However, Georges teaches a similar microscope (Abstract), wherein a horizontal drive mechanism is operated to switch between a first mode in which the first objective lens faces the observation target and a second mode in which the second objective lens faces the observation target (Abstract, when switching between two different Z-positions, wherein a Z-axis defines a distance between a sample to the microscope lens), and image generation of the observation target by the observation optical system and the irradiation of the electromagnetic wave by the analysis optical system are performed on the identical point from an identical direction at timings before and after the switching between the first mode and the second mode (Abstract, the sample can be analyzed at an identical point from an identical direction, before and after moving Z-axis positions).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine modified Suzuki and Georges such that a horizontal drive mechanism was operated to switch between two modes, motivated by allowing a microscope sample to be observed from different perspectives.
9. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki in view of Horiba and Takeuchi, and further in view of Ito and Toshimitsu et al. (US 6133561 A, of record).
Regarding claim 10, modified Suzuki fails to disclose wherein the unit coupler comprises a lens barrel holder which fixes the observation unit with respect to the analysis optical system to fix a relative position of an optical axis of the second objective lens with respect to an optical axis of the first objective lens, wherein the lens barrel holder is configured to selectively hold any one of the plurality of types of the observation units accommodating the observation optical system different from each other and the controller identifies at least a type of the first objective lens corresponding to the observation unit fixed to the analysis optical system by the lens barrel holder, and executes processing related to the capturing of the observation target based on the identification result.
However, Ito teaches a microscope including at least two optical systems (Fig. 10), comprising: a lens barrel holder (Fig. 10, 10) which fixes the observation unit with respect to an analysis optical system to fix a relative position of an optical axis of a second objective lens with respect to an optical axis of the first objective lens (Fig. 10, 10 fixes 3 with respect to analysis optical system 2, to fix a relative position of Ax3 with respect to Ax2), wherein the lens barrel holder is configured to selectively hold any one of thr plurality of types of the observation units accommodating the observation optical system different from each other (Fig. 10, 10 is configured to selectively hold a plurality of different types of observation units 3, e.g., observation units made of different materials).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine modified Suzuki and Ito such that that a lens barrel holder was to fix optical components in place, motivated providing stability for the optical system.
Modified Suzuki fails to disclose wherein the controller identifies at least a type of the first objective lens corresponding to the observation unit fixed to the analysis optical system by the lens barrel holder, and executes processing related to the capturing of the observation target based on the identification result.
However, Toshimitsu teaches a microscope device, wherein the controller identifies at least a type of a first objective lens (column 13 lines 29-30, controller BIO), and executes processing related to the capturing of the observation target based on the identification result (column 13 lines 33-40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine modified Suzuki and Toshimitsu such that the controller was to identify at least a type of the first objective lens corresponding to the observation unit fixed to the analysis optical system by the lens barrel holder, and was to execute processing related to the capturing of the observation target based on the identification result, motivated by processing capturing of observation targets in a way that corresponds to a type of lens used.
10. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki in view of Horiba and Takeuchi, and further in view of Liu et al. (CN 108828756 A, of record).
Regarding claim 12, modified Suzuki discloses wherein the detector generates an intensity distribution spectrum which is an intensity distribution for each wavelength of the electromagnetic wave generated on the observation target and collected by the second objective lens (Suzuki - column 36 lines 23-36, an image generated by 3).
Modified Suzuki fails to disclose wherein the second objective lens collects plasma light generated from the observation target in response to the irradiation of the laser light emitted by the electromagnetic wave emitter, and the detector generates an intensity distribution spectrum which is an intensity distribution for each wavelength of the plasma light generated on the observation target and collected by the second objective lens.
However, Liu teaches a microscopic imaging device which comprises a camera, and includes a laser capable of generating surface plasma on an observation target (Abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine modified Suzuki and Liu such that the second objective lens was to collect plasma light generated from the observation target in response to the irradiation of the laser light emitted by the electromagnetic wave emitter, and the detector was to generate an intensity distribution spectrum which is an intensity distribution for each wavelength of the plasma light generated on the observation target and collected by the second objective lens, motivated by the generation of surface plasma allowing for enhanced imaging resolution.
11. Claim 13 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki in view of Horiba and Takeuchi, and further in view of Ishikawa et al. (US 11513332 B2, of record).
Regarding claim 13, modified Suzuki fails to disclose a tilting mechanism that tilts the analysis optical system and the observation optical system together with respect to a predetermined reference axis perpendicular to an upper surface of the placement stage.
However, Ishikawa teaches a microscope comprising at least two optical systems (Abstract, illumination optical system & observation optical system), comprising a tilting mechanism that tilts the two optical systems together (Abstract, tilting section) with respect to a predetermined reference axis perpendicular to an upper surface of an observation target (Figs. 11-14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine modified Suzuki and Ishikawa such that the microscope was to comprise a tilting mechanism that tilts the analysis optical system and the observation optical system together with respect to a predetermined reference axis perpendicular to an upper surface of the placement stage, motivated by allowing for different angles of an observation target to be imaged.
12. Claims 15-16 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki in view of Horiba and Takeuchi, and further in view of Tokunaga et al. (US 7130116 B2, of record).
Regarding claim 15, modified Suzuki fails to explicitly disclose a sensor that detects the type of the observation unit held by the unit coupler; and a head drive that moves the observation optical system and the analysis optical system with respect to the placement stage along a vertical direction, wherein the controller acquires a working distance of the observation unit held by the unit coupler, and controls the head drive based on the acquired working distance of the observation unit held by the unit coupler.
However, Tokunaga teaches a similar microscope (Abstract), and discloses wherein a sensor detects the distance between the tip of a particular lens objective and a microscope sample (column 4 lines 17-22), and a head drive that moves the optical system with respect to the placement stage along a vertical direction (claim 4, moving mechanism), wherein a controller acquires a working distance of the optical system, and controls the head drive based on the acquired working distance of the optical unit (claim 4, control unit).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine modified Suzuki and Tokunaga such that a head drive was to move microscope optics with respect to a placement stage, motivated by improving the image clarity of an imaged sample.
Regarding claim 16, modified Suzuki discloses wherein the unit coupler attached to the analysis unit includes a first type of unit coupler configured to hold a first type of the observation unit (Fig. 10), and a second type of unit coupler configured to hold a second type of the observation unit (Fig. 8) whose working distance is longer than that of the first type of the observation unit (columns 6-9, depending on the zoom settings used).
Modified Suzuki fails to explicitly disclose wherein the first type of unit coupler and the second type of unit coupler are designed so that a first distance between the observation target and the first type of the observation unit held by the first type of unit coupler and a second distance between the observation target and the second type of the observation unit held by the second type of unit coupler differ based on a difference in working distance between the first type of the observation unit and the second type of the observation unit.
However, Tokunaga teaches a similar microscope (Abstract), and discloses wherein the optical system is designed so that a first distance between an observation target and the first type of observation unit held and a second distance between the observation target and the second type of observation united held differ based on a difference in working distance between the first type of observation unit and the second type of observation unit (claim 4, control unit).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine modified Suzuki and Tokunaga such that a distance differed based on optical components used, motivated by improving the image clarity of an imaged sample.
Conclusion
13. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daniel Jeffery Jordan whose telephone number is 571-270-7641. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30a-6:00p.
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, Stephone Allen can be reached at 571-272-2434. 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.
/D. J. J./Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/STEPHONE B ALLEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights