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 .
Response to Amendment
This office action is in response to the communication filed 7/29/2025.
Amendments to the specification and claims 1, 4, 6, 9, 12, 14, and 20 filed 7/29/2025 are acknowledged and accepted.
As a result of the amendments, the previous objections to the specification, objections to claims 6 and 14, and rejections of claims 4 and 12 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) are now withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
On pgs. 9-11 of the remarks, Applicant's arguments with respect to rejection of claims 1-5, 9-13, and 17-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but are moot because the Applicant is arguing newly amended claims, filed 7/29/2025, not the Non-Final Rejection filed 5/9/2025. Newly amended claims are argued below.
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.
Claims 1-5, 9-13, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borchers and Hajjar (US 20100020377 A1, hereinafter “Borchers”) in view of Yawn and Hartwig (US 4650997, hereinafter “Yawn”).
Regarding claims 1, 9 and 20, Borchers discloses (see FIGs. 1C, 3, and 4(A, B); ¶s 33, 38-48) a scanner (polygon scanner 350/400 with vertical adjuster 340/480 of laser module 110) of an optical sensing system (see FIGs. 1C and 3. Note also that, while Borchers’s discussion mainly involve scanning display issues and applications, their scanners are not limited to display systems, per ¶ 2. See also ¶ 38, regarding feedback mechanism and optical servo sensors for the system shown in FIG. 1C), comprising:
a polygon scanning mirror (polygon scanner 350/400) with a plurality of facets (polygon facets 410, 420, …, 470) each configured to steer a light beam (scanning beams 120/12; see FIGs. 3, 4B) towards an object (screen 101/1) during a scanning procedure; and
the polygon scanning mirror (polygon scanner 350/400) rotating in a horizontal plane during the scanning procedure (see FIG. 4B and ¶ 47: “polygon scanner 400 rotates… around the vertical rotation axis 401 [i.e. within a horizontal plane] and the incident optical beam… is reflected… as the horizontal scanning beams 12 towards the screen 1”), wherein each of the plurality of facets (polygon facets 410, 420,…, 470) is tilted at a different angle with respect to the horizontal plane (or equivalently, with respect to the rotation axis 401; see ¶ 46).
Further regarding claims 9 and 20, Borchers discloses (see FIG. 3; ¶ 41-42) ) a light emitter (laser array 310) configured to emit a light beam (laser beams 312, generated by laser array 310, are processed by relay optics module 330 “to produce a closely packed bundle of beams 332 for scanning”. Once reflected by polygon scanner 350/400, Borschers refers to them as scanning beams 120/12).
Further regarding claim 9, Borchers discloses a transmitter (laser module 110, including polygon scanner 350/400 with vertical adjuster 340/480 (scanner) and laser array 310 (light emitter); see FIG. 3).
Borchers thus discloses the invention substantially as claimed, though they do not explicitly disclose:
a driver configured to rotate the polygon scanning mirror, or
wherein values of the tilted angles form an arithmetic sequence.
Borchers and Yawn are related as being directed towards optical beam scanning systems which are based on rotating polygon scanners/mirrors.
Yawn discloses (see col. 1 lines 39-59; FIGs. 2 with col 2 lines 23-65; FIG. 7 with col. 9 lines 30-49):
a driver (constant speed motor 27 with drive shafter 23) configured to rotate the polygon scanning mirror (mirror 122), and
wherein values of the tilted angles form an arithmetic sequence (from col. 1: “the polygonal mirror of the present invention employs planar facets having angles with respect to the angle of rotation of the entire mirror which differ by a predetermined incremental angle between adjacent facets”).
It would have therefore been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Borchers with Yawn’s, in order to realize a horizontal/vertical scanning system with a simple design, low cost, and reduced cooling needs (Yawn col. 2 lines 4-24, col. 3 lines 47-68).
Regarding claims 2 and 10, modified Borchers discloses the scanner of claim 1 and the transmitter of claim 9.
Borchers further discloses wherein (see FIGs. 4B, 5) one of the plurality of facets (polygon facets 410, 420, …, 470 – also Facet 1, Facet 2, …, Facet M in FIG. 5) is configured to scan the object (screen 101/1) in the horizontal plane (see ¶ 47: “polygon scanner 400 rotates… around the vertical rotation axis 401 [i.e. within a horizontal plane] and the incident optical beam… is reflected… as the horizontal scanning beams 12 towards the screen 1”) and a vertical plane simultaneously as the polygon scanning mirror rotates (see ¶ 25-26, discussing generally the use of multiple (N) optical beams 12 to produce a set of simultaneous horizontal scanning lines for each facet – the set establishes a vertical plane, as shown in the annotated FIG. 5 below).
Regarding claims 3 and 11, modified Borchers discloses the scanner of claim 1 and the transmitter of claim 9.
Borchers further discloses wherein each of the plurality of facets (Facet 1, Facet 2, …, Facet M in FIG. 5) is configured to scan a horizontal line (horizontal scan(ning) lines) of the object (screen 101/1) at a different vertical position (see annotated FIG. 5 above showing vertically displaced sets of horizontal scan(ning) lines associated with individual facet; see also ¶s 25-26 for associated discussion on such vertical stepping between facets).
PNG
media_image1.png
602
1052
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (FIG. 5 of Borchers is annotated to identify horizontal/vertical planes which are scanned simultaneously (narrative boxes are numbered for convenience).)]
Regarding claims 4 and 12, modified Borchers discloses the scanner of claim 3 and the transmitter of claim 11.
Borchers further discloses wherein each of the plurality of facets (Facet 1, Facet 2, …, Facet M in FIG. 5) is configured to scan the horizontal line of the object across the same horizontal field-of-view. (See FIGs. 3 and 4A, where polygon scanner 350/400 is shown to be regularly octagonal/polygonal from the top view. Each side face or facet is therefore equivalent in length, and will span the same horizontal angle/field-of-view; see also FIGs. 1B and 5, where each facet is scanned across the same horizontal field-of-view.)
Regarding claims 5 and 13, modified Borchers discloses the scanner of claim 1 and the transmitter of claim 9.
PNG
media_image3.png
628
1125
media_image3.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (FIG. 1B of Borchers is annotated to highlight the first/intermediate/second lines at first/second/intermediate vertical positions that are produced by Laser 1.)]Borchers further discloses wherein a first facet (Facet 1) of the plurality of facets (Facet 1, Facet 2, …, Facet M in both FIGs. 5 as well as 1B) is configured to scan a first line at a first vertical position and a second facet (Facet M, for example) of the plurality of facets (Facet 1, Facet 2, …, Facet M) is configured to scan a second line at a second vertical position. (See annotated FIG. 5’s vertically displaced lines scanned associated with individual facet. See also the annotated FIG. 1B below for greater resolution/detail.)
Regarding claim 17, modified Borchers discloses the transmitter of claim 9.
Borchers further discloses wherein the light emitter (laser array 310) includes a plurality of light emitters each oriented at a different position with respect to a vertical axis. (Borchers laser array 310 consists of an array/plurality of laser diodes. Arrays are generally (n>1)-dimensional objects which necessarily have elements (diodes) placed at different positions along at least 2 orthogonal axes – including a “vertical” axis, as Borchers disclosure suggests; see ¶s 41-42 and FIG. 3 annotated below.).
PNG
media_image5.png
732
912
media_image5.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (FIG. 3 of Borchers is annotated to highlight the vertical direction/axis and the light emission from different positions along this vertical axis)]
Regarding claim 18, modified Borchers discloses the transmitter of claim 17.
Borchers further discloses wherein the plurality of light emitters (laser array 310) are configured to emit the light beam (laser beams 312) sequentially (i.e. with vertical displacement; see annotated FIG. 3 above) such that one of the plurality of facets of the polygon scanning mirror (polygon scanner 350/400) scans a plurality of different lines each associated with a different vertical position (See either of FIGs. 1B or 5 annotated above).
Regarding claim 19, modified Borchers discloses the transmitter of claim 17
Borchers further discloses wherein the plurality of light emitters (laser array 310) includes a laser bar or an edge-emitting laser (refer again to ¶s 41-42; Borchers’s laser array 310 uses laser diodes, and laser diode arrays (2-dimensional) generally consist of stacks of laser diode bars (1-dimensional)).
Claims 6-8 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borchers in view of Yawn, as applied to claims 5 and 13 above, in further view of Jeong et al (US 20190212419 A1, hereinafter “Jeong”).
Regarding claims 6 and 14, modified Borchers discloses the scanner of claim 5 and the transmitter of claim 13.
Borchers also discloses the further comprising: a mirror (vertical adjuster 340/480) configured to direct the light beam (laser beams 332 in FIG. 3) towards the first facet (Facet 1) at a plurality of incident angles (Field 1 and Field 2, correspond to different vertical adjuster orientations, or angles of beam incidence; see ¶s 25-26, 46-49) such that the first facet (Facet 1) scans the first line at the first vertical position and at least one intermediate line at one or more intermediate vertical positions between the first vertical position and the second vertical position. (See annotated FIG. 1B above, with scan lines from to a single Laser 1 and two Fields 1 and 2 are shown for Facet 1 and Facet M.)
Modified Borchers does not disclose that the mirror is a microelectricalmechanical (MEMS) mirror.
Borchers and Jeong are related as being directed towards optical beam scanning systems which are based on rotating polygon scanners/mirrors.
Jeong discloses (see FIG. 4, ¶s 223-233) that the mirror (nodding mirror 122) is a microelectricalmechanical (MEMS) mirror (see ¶ 151).
It would have therefore been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify Borchers’s vertical adjuster (a galvo mirror, see ¶ 42) to be a MEMS mirror, as taught by Jeong, for improved speed/precision.
Regarding claims 7 and 15, modified Borchers discloses the scanner of claim 6 and the transmitter of claim 14.
Borchers further discloses wherein: the at least one intermediate line includes a plurality of intermediate lines between the first line and the second line, each of the plurality of intermediate lines is associated with one of the plurality of incident angles (or a plurality of Fields), and each of the plurality of intermediate lines is associated with a different intermediate vertical position between the first vertical position and the second vertical position. (While, in annotated FIG. 1B above, only two Fields – corresponding to two different vertical adjuster orientations, and hence two incidence directions/angles – are explicitly illustrated, vertical adjuster can be used to combine more than two Fields; see ¶s 61-62. This would result in additional intermediate lines at additional intermediate vertical positions between the first and second lines shown in annotated FIG. 1B above.)
Regarding claims 8 and 16, modified Borchers discloses the scanner of claim 6 and the transmitter of claim 14.
Jeong further discloses (see ¶s 223-233) wherein the MEMS mirror (nodding mirror 122) is configured to resonate (“nod at the same angular speed throughout the entire preset angle range”) to direct the light beam towards the first facet (of rotating polygon mirror 127) at the plurality of incident angles (traveling direction of laser light) (annotated FIG. 4 below).
PNG
media_image7.png
538
687
media_image7.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (FIG. 4 of Jeong is annotated to highlight various features)]
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WAI-GA D. HO whose telephone number is (571)270-1624. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 10AM - 6PM E.T..
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.
/W.D.H./Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/STEPHONE B ALLEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872