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 .
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.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/16/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/16/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 7-9 of the response, applicant contends the amended language overcomes the previous rejection. The claim has been amended to recite “modulate the pulse inversely to a size of the index bubble, wherein as the size of the index bubble is increasing the pulse power is reduced and as a size of the index bubble is decreasing the pulse power is increased.” Applicant notes that similar language was previously used in now cancelled claims 5 and 18. Applicant has not cancelled claim 5. Specifically, applicant contends that “the intensity of the emission in the first and fourth periods is increasing while bubble B is increasing in size” and “during the second and third periods the intensity is decreasing while the size of the bubble is decreasing.” The Office believes this is an incomplete description of what is actually shown in Fig. 7. In a section of the third time period, the bubble B increases in size while the intensity of the pulse is decreasing (See annotated Fig. 7 below). Additionally, Fig. 7 also indicates that the intensity increases at least for a period between the formation of BB and the collapse of BB (See annotated Fig. 7 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
462
708
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Accordingly, Fig. 7 does show modulating the pulse inversely to a size of the index bubble, wherein as the size of the index bubble is increasing the pulse power is reduced and as the size of the index bubble is decreasing the pulse power is increased. The Office notes that Fig. 7 also shows other modulation, such as the fourth period where intensity is increasing while the bubble size is increasing. However, applicant’s claim uses the transitional phrase “comprising” which allows other types of modulating. The Office notes that applicant describes the inverse modulation scheme as the V-shaped pulse modulation in the specification to form additional bubbles to approach the target (See, e.g., [0077] of the Pre-grant publication of this application). The Office notes that the first and third period of Fig. 7 appear to have a V-shape as described by applicant in the specification.
On page 8, applicant attempts to distinguish modulating power based on the size of the bubble versus the formation of the bubble binding body. However, the bubble binding body is created by the size of the bubble. The Office notes that even if multiple bubbles are formed separately, which is not shown in Fig. 7, once the multiple bubbles connect they form a single bubble. Accordingly, Takata modulates the power in order to achieve the desired bubble binding body size.
The rejection has been modified based on applicant’s amendments.
Priority
This application claims priority to 63/118,117 filed on 11/25/2020, 63/118,857 filed on 11/27/2020, and 63/252,830 filed on 10/06/2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/08/2025 was filed after the mailing date of the RCE on 10/16/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4-6, 8-12, 14, 16, 17, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Takata (US20220296300A1), hereafter Takata.
Regarding claims 1, 11, and 17, Takata discloses a system (Fig. 1), comprising: a fiber laser (Fig. 1 element 21; [0049]); and a controller comprising a processor and memory (Fig. 1 elements 9, 11, 13, 15, and 27; Abstract), the memory comprising instructions that when executed by the processor cause the processor to: identify a distance between a tip of the fiber laser and a target (Table 2 and 3), wherein a liquid is located between the tip of the fiber laser and the target (Fig. 1 element W); determine a pulse energy for the fiber laser based on the distance ([0134], [0145], [0148], Fig. 7, Table 1); set an initial pulse power for the modulation scheme to generate an index bubble in the liquid based on the distance and pulse energy ([0134]; [0145], [0148], Fig. 7); set an initial pulse power to generate an index bubble in the liquid (Fig. 7 “Third period”), wherein the initial pulse power is set based on the distance and the pulse energy ([0134], [0145], [0148]), initiate a pulse based on the initial pulse power (Fig. 7 “Third period”); and modulate the pulse inversely to a size of the index bubble (See annotated Fig. 7 below), wherein as the size of the index bubble is increasing the pulse power is reduced (See annotated Fig. 7 below) and as the size of the index bubble is decreasing the pulse power is increased (See annotated Fig. 7 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
462
708
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 2 and 12, Takata further discloses the modulation scheme increases power of the pulse to a maximal system power level at a time estimated for the index bubble to reach maximal size (Fig. 7 element “First Period” and BB).
Regarding claims 4 and 14, Takata further discloses the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to: identify an updated distance between the tip of the fiber laser and the target (Fig. 18); and further modulate the pulse based on the updated distance ([0145]).
Regarding claim 5, Takata further discloses modulating the pulse inversely to the size of the index bubble comprises modulating pulse power down during expansion of the index bubble and modulating pulse power up during collapse of the index bubble (Fig. 7 shows expanding bubble B and decreasing power during the third period and increasing the power in the first period at bubble B’s collapse; See annotated Fig.7 above).
Regarding claim 6, Takata further discloses the modulation scheme comprises an initial modulation frequency ([0063]) and the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to determine the initial modulation frequency based on a time to collapse of the index bubble ([0065]), a time for the index bubble to reach maximum size ([0065] and Fig. 7), and a time from lasing initiation to start of bubble formation (Fig. 7 Fourth period).
Regarding claims 8 and 16, Takata further discloses the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to integrate the power of the pulse with respect to time and terminate the pulse when the integral of the power of the pulse with respect to time equals the pulse energy (Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 9 and 19, Takata further discloses the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to classify the target as distant target based on the distance and set the initial pulse power to a maximal system power level based on classification of the target as distant (Table 3; Fig. 10).
Regarding claims 10 and 20, Takata further disclose the modulation scheme is configured obtain a resonant effect by cycling at periods between 0.7 and 1.3 times a time from start to collapse of the index bubble (Fig. 7 shows cycling periods corresponding to 1 times a time from a start to collapse of the index bubble).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takata.
Regarding claims 3 and 13, Takata further discloses the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to determine the time the index bubble takes to reach a maximal size based (Fig. 15) on the initial pulse power and an absorption coefficient of the liquid at a wavelength of the fiber laser (Fig. 7 time axis; [0148] discussing the absorption of the energy of the laser pulse). Takata does not explicitly disclose that the processor estimates the time. However, the Office takes Official notice that estimating the time, such as by extrapolation, is a well known data processing method in order to grant greater flexibility in using the system in different fluids and different wavelengths. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Takata with estimating the time, since extrapolation is a well-known data processing technique that provides greater flexibility in using the system in different environments.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached Notes of References cited. US20150100048 Fig. 2D; US20220302667 Figs. 3A-3D; US9895196 Fig. 1A and 1B; US20170036253A1 Fig. 8B.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA KING whose telephone number is (571)270-1441. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 10am-5pm MT.
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, Min Sun Harvey can be reached on (571) 272-1835. 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.
/Joshua King/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828 12/27/2025
Prosecution Insights