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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 04/25/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3, 4, 6-25 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 8, 10, 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang, C.-Y. US 20110267616 A1 (hereinafter Yang) and further in view of Mitsui, M., US 20140078285 A1 (hereinafter Mitsui).
Regarding claim 1, Yang teaches an optical scanning apparatus (See Fig. 2, paragraph [0018].) comprising: a) an objective lens (See Fig. 2 element 20, paragraph [0019].) configured to receive a reflectance spectrum from a sample (See paragraph [0004].); b) a spectral detector (See Fig. 2 element 30, paragraph [0019].) configured to detect a first path of the reflectance spectrum (The first path of the reflectance spectrum corresponds to the light going to element 30.) and output a spectral response (Element 30 produced the output a spectral response, see paragraph [0004].); c) an imaging detector (See Fig. 2 element 10, paragraph [0019].) configured to detect a second path of the reflectance spectrum (See Fig. 2. The light that interacts with element 11 in Fig. 2 pertains to a second path of the reflectance spectrum.) and output an image response (Element 10 outputs an image response.); d) a beam splitter (See Fig. 2 element 50, paragraph [0019].) located between the objective lens (See Fig. 2 element 20, paragraph [0019].) and the corresponding spectral detector (See Fig. 2 element 30, paragraph [0019].) and imaging detector (This is shown in Fig. 2.), wherein the beam splitter splits the reflectance spectrum into the first path and the second path (This is shown in Fig. 2.).
Yang does not teach e) a subdividable field stop positioned between the beam splitter and the spectral detector to produce a subdivided field of view for the spectral detector, wherein the subdivided field of view of the spectral detector has dimensions that are less than or equal to dimensions of a field of view of the imaging detector, wherein the spectral detector is configured to analyze the reflectance spectrum of all or a subset of the subdivided field of view.
Mitsui, from the same field of endeavor as Yang, teaches e) a subdividable field stop (Fig. 8 element 127, para [0066] lines 7-13) positioned between the beam splitter (this corresponds to Fig. 8 “106”, para [0049] lines 3-7) and the spectral detector (Fig. 8 “124”, para [0066] lines 1-3) to produce a subdivided field of view for the spectral detector (“124” has a variable aperture mechanism; para [0049] lines 3-7), wherein the subdivided field of view of the spectral detector has dimensions that are less than or equal to dimensions of a field of view of the imaging detector (para [0066] last sentence, the shooting field is the imaging detector), wherein the spectral detector is configured to analyze the reflectance spectrum of all or a subset of the subdivided field of view (para [0070] last sentence; decreasing the diameter of the field stop in order to decrease the influence of the foreign object).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Mitsui to Yang to have e) a subdividable field stop positioned between the beam splitter and the spectral detector to produce a subdivided field of view for the spectral detector, wherein the subdivided field of view of the spectral detector has dimensions that are less than or equal to dimensions of a field of view of the imaging detector, wherein the spectral detector is configured to analyze the reflectance spectrum of all or a subset of the subdivided field of view in order to optimize the accuracy of the spectral information of the original sample (para [0070] last sentence).
Regarding claim 3, Yang does not teach the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with claim 1 further comprising a field integration element located between the field stop and the spectral detector, wherein the field integration element integrates the first path of the spectral response for each subdivision of the subdivided field of view to form a uniform plane of illumination which is an average of the first path of the spectral response, wherein the uniform plane of illumination is projected into the spectral detector.
Mitsui, from the same field of endeavor as Yang, teaches the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with claim 1 further comprising a field integration element (Fig. 8 “126”, para [0067] lines 1-6) “located between the field stop and the spectral detector” (this is shown in Fig. 8), “wherein the field integration element integrates the first path of the spectral response for each subdivision of the subdivided field of view to form a uniform plane of illumination which is an average of the first path of the spectral response” (para [0067] lines 10-16, para [0050] last sentence), wherein the uniform plane of illumination is projected into the spectral detector (para [0050] last sentence).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Mitsui to Yang to have the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with claim 1 further comprising a field integration element located between the field stop and the spectral detector, wherein the field integration element integrates the first path of the spectral response for each subdivision of the subdivided field of view to form a uniform plane of illumination which is an average of the first path of the spectral response, wherein the uniform plane of illumination is projected into the spectral detector in order to uniformly mixed the overall light within the measurement field of the spectroscopic sensor (para [0067] lines 10-16, para [0050] last sentence) in order to optimize the accuracy of the spectral information of the original sample (para [0070] last sentence).
Regarding claim 8, Yang discloses the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with claim 1 further comprising an image display in communication with one or both of the imaging detector and the spectral detector, wherein the image display displays a visual rendering of the respective image response and/or spectral response (This entire limitation is described in paragraph [0025] lines 1-9.).
Regarding claim 10, Yang teaches the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with claim 1 wherein the objective lens (See Fig. 2 element 20, paragraph [0019].) and the beam splitter (See Fig. 2 element 50, paragraph [0019].) are arranged along a common axis (element 50 is at the common axis as shown in Fig. 4), wherein the imaging detector (Fig. 4 element 10) or the spectral detector is arranged along the common axis (Fig. 4 displays element 10 is in the straight path with element 50), and wherein the other of the imaging detector and the spectral detector (See Fig. 2 element 30, paragraph [0019].) is arranged along a second axis which is different than the common axis (element 30 is in another axis with respect to element 10).
Regarding claim 12, Yang teaches a method of scanning a sample (See Fig. 2, paragraph [0018].), the method comprising: a) providing an optical scanning apparatus comprising an objective lens (See Fig. 2 element 20, paragraph [0019].); a spectral detector (See Fig. 2 element 30, paragraph [0019].); an imaging detector (See Fig. 2 element 100, paragraph [0019].); and a beam splitter (See Fig. 2 element 50, paragraph [0019].) located between the objective lens and the corresponding spectral detector and imaging detector (This is shown in Fig. 2.); b) receiving, via the objective lens, a reflectance spectrum of the sample (This is shown in Fig. 2. See paragraph [0004].); c) detecting, via the spectral detector, a first path of the reflectance spectrum (This is shown in Fig. 2.); d) outputting, via the spectral detector, a spectral response (Element 30 produced the output a spectral response, see paragraph [0004].); e) detecting, via the imaging detector, a second path of the reflectance spectrum (See Fig. 2. The light that interacts with element 11 in Fig. 2 pertains to a second path of the reflectance spectrum.); and f) outputting, via the imaging detector, an image response (Element 10 outputs an image response.).
However, Yang fails to teach a subdividable field stop positioned between the beam splitter and the spectral detector to produce a subdivided field of view for the spectral detector, wherein the subdivided field of view of the spectral detector has dimensions that are less than or equal to dimensions of a field of view of the imaging detector, wherein the spectral detector is configured to analyze the reflectance spectrum of all or a subset of the subdivided field of view.
Mitsui, from the same field of endeavor as Yang, teaches a subdividable field stop (Fig. 8 element 127, para [0066] lines 7-13) positioned between the beam splitter (this corresponds to Fig. 8 “106”, para [0049] lines 3-7) and the spectral detector to produce a subdivided field of view for the spectral detector (Fig. 8 “124”, para [0066] lines 1-3), wherein the subdivided field of view of the spectral detector has dimensions that are less than or equal to dimensions of a field of view of the imaging detector (para [0066] last sentence, the shooting field is the imaging detector), wherein the spectral detector is configured to analyze the reflectance spectrum of all or a subset of the subdivided field of view (para [0070] last sentence; decreasing the diameter of the field stop in order to decrease the influence of the foreign object).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Mitsui to Yang to have a subdividable field stop positioned between the beam splitter and the spectral detector to produce a subdivided field of view for the spectral detector, wherein the subdivided field of view of the spectral detector has dimensions that are less than or equal to dimensions of a field of view of the imaging detector, wherein the spectral detector is configured to analyze the reflectance spectrum of all or a subset of the subdivided field of view in order to optimize the accuracy of the spectral information of the original sample (para [0070] last sentence).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang and Mitsui as applied to claim 1 above, and in view of Lu, L., et al., US 20150355082 A1 (hereinafter Lu).
Regarding claim 4, the modified device of Yang does not teach the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with claim 3 wherein the field integration element is a Kohler illumination lens or an integrating rod.
Lu, from the same field of endeavor as Yang, teaches the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with claim 3 wherein the field integration element is a Kohler illumination lens (Fig. 3 “335”, “355”, para [0042] lines 15-24) or an integrating rod.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Lu to the modified device of Yang to have the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with claim 3 wherein the field integration element is a Kohler illumination lens or an integrating rod in order to increase the output signal stability of the device (para [0042] last sentence).
Claim(s) 6, 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang and Mitsui as applied to claim 1 above, and in view of Lewis, E. et al. US 20060282223 A1 (hereinafter Lewis).
Regarding claim 6, the modified device of Yang does not teach the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with claim 1 wherein the spectral detector detects one or more of the ultraviolet (UV) spectrum, visible spectrum, near infrared (NIR) spectrum and infrared (IR) spectrum. Regarding claim 7, Yang does not teach the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with claim 1 wherein the imaging detector detects one or more of the ultraviolet (UV) spectrum, visible spectrum, near infrared (NIR) spectrum, and infrared (IR) spectrum.
Lewis, from the same field of endeavor as Yang, teaches the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with claim 1 wherein the spectral detector (See Fig. 3 element 54.) detects infrared (IR) spectrum (See Fig. 3 and claim 59.). Further, Lewis discloses the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with claim 1 wherein the imaging detector (See Fig. 3 element 52, paragraph [0060].) detects one or more of the ultraviolet (UV) spectrum and visible spectrum (See paragraph [0060].).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Lewis to the modified device of Yang to have the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with claim 1 wherein the spectral detector detects one or more of the ultraviolet (UV) spectrum, visible spectrum, near infrared (NIR) spectrum, and infrared (IR) spectrum and wherein the imaging detector detects one or more of the ultraviolet (UV) spectrum, visible spectrum, near infrared (NIR) spectrum and infrared (IR) spectrum in order to allow information about the physical makeup of a pharmaceutical mixture to be obtained quickly and inexpensively (See paragraph [0020] lines 1-4.).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang and Mitsui as applied to claim 1 above, and in view of Desmarais, L. et al. US 20140354868 A1 (hereinafter Desmarais).
Regarding claim 9, the modified device of Yang does not disclose the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with claim 1 further comprising a wireless communication module communicatively coupled to one or both of the imaging detector and the spectral detector, wherein the wireless communication module is configured to communicate the respective image response and/or spectral response to a computing device.
Desmarais, from the same field of endeavor as Yang, teaches the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with claim 1 further comprising a wireless communication module communicatively coupled to one or both of the imaging detector and the spectral detector, wherein the wireless communication module is configured to communicate the respective image response and/or spectral response to a computing device (This entire limitation is disclosed in paragraph [0032-0033]. Paragraph [0032-0033] state that the spectral detector can be removed to the computing device and connected through a wireless connection.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Desmarais to the modified device of Yang to have the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with claim 1 further comprising a wireless communication module communicatively coupled to one or both of the imaging detector and the spectral detector, wherein the wireless communication module is configured to communicate the respective image response and/or spectral response to a computing device in order to maintain a data connection between the mobile display device and hyperspectral camera (See paragraph [0033] lines 6-13.) in order to measure the spectral features of objects in real-world scenes (See paragraph [0004]).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang and Mitsui as applied to claim 1 above, and in view of Allen, Ashley, and S. Michael Angel. "Miniature spatial heterodyne spectrometer for remote laser induced breakdown and Raman spectroscopy using Fresnel collection optics." Spectrochimica Acta Part B: Atomic Spectroscopy 149 (2018): 91-98 (hereinafter Allen).
Regarding claim 11, the modified device of Yang fails to teach the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with claim 1 wherein ambient light is sampled by the spectral detector along an axis of the beam splitter that differs from the objective lens.
Allen, from the same field of endeavor as Yang, teaches the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with claim 1 wherein ambient light not coming from the sample (See p. 96 column 1 paragraph 1 lines 2-10.) is sampled by the spectral detector (See Fig. 3A element “SHS”.) along an axis of the beam splitter (See Fig. 1A element “BS”.) that differs from the objective lens (See Fig. 3 element FL, which is a Fresnel lens.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Allen to the modified device of Yang to have the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with claim 1 wherein ambient light not coming from the sample is sampled by the spectral detector along an axis of the beam splitter that differs from the objective lens in order to determine the quality of the Raman spectra (See p. 93 column 2 last paragraph.).
Claim(s) 13, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang and Mitsui as applied to claim 12 above, and in view of Matsuda, K. US 20130010294 A1.
Regarding claim 13, the modified device of Yang does not teach the method in accordance with claim 12 further comprising: comparing the spectral response with standardized spectral responses stored within a database. Regarding claim 14, the modified device of Yang does not teach the method in accordance with claim 13 wherein the step of comparing the spectral response includes pattern matching with the standardized spectral responses.
Matsuda, from the same field of endeavor as Yang, teaches the method in accordance with claim 12 further comprising: comparing the spectral response with standardized spectral responses stored within a database (See paragraph [0096].). Further, Matsuda discloses the method in accordance with claim 13 wherein the step of comparing the spectral response includes pattern matching with the standardized spectral responses (See paragraph [0096]. The paragraph [0096] indicates that Matsuda teaches “the method in accordance with claim 11 wherein the step of comparing the spectral response includes pattern matching with the standardized spectral responses”.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Matsuda to the modified device of Yang to have the method in accordance with claim 12 further comprising: comparing the spectral response with standardized spectral responses stored within a database and wherein the step of comparing the spectral response includes pattern matching with the standardized spectral responses in order to improve the analysis accuracy (See Abstract lines 1-3.).
Claim(s) 15, 17, 19, 20, 21, 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang, view of in Mitsui, and further in view of Chang, S.-H. et al. US 5394237 A (hereinafter Chang).
Regarding claim 15, Yang teaches an optical scanning device comprising: the optical scanning apparatus (See Fig. 2, paragraph [0018].) comprising: i) a first objective lens (See Fig. 2 element 20, paragraph [0019].) configured to receive a reflectance spectrum from a sample (See paragraph [0004].); ii) a first spectral detector (See Fig. 2 element 30, paragraph [0019].) configured to detect a first path of the reflectance spectrum (The first path of the reflectance spectrum corresponds to the light going to element 30.) and output a first spectral response (Element 30 produced the output a spectral response, see paragraph [0004].); iii) a first imaging detector (See Fig. 2 element 10, paragraph [0019].) configured to detect a second path of the reflectance spectrum (See Fig. 2. The light that interacts with element 11 in Fig. 2 pertains to a second path of the reflectance spectrum.) and output an image response (Element 10 outputs an image response.); iv) a beam splitter (See Fig. 2 element 50, paragraph [0019].) located between the first objective lens and each of the first spectral detector and imaging detector (This is shown in Fig. 2.), wherein the beam splitter splits the reflectance spectrum into the first path and the second path (This is shown in Fig. 2.);
However, Yang is silent with respect a) a housing; b) an optical scanning apparatus within the housing, v) a subdividable field stop positioned between the beam splitter and the spectral detector to produce a subdivided field of view for the spectral detector, wherein the subdivided field of view of the spectral detector has dimensions that are less than or equal to dimensions of a field of view of the imaging detector, wherein the spectral detector is configured to analyze the reflectance spectrum of all or a subset of the subdivided field of view c) a shutter actuatable between an open position and a closed position, wherein the reflectance spectrum is split by the beam splitter only when the shutter is in the open position; and d) a trigger to selectively actuate the shutter to the open position.
Mitsui, from the same field of endeavor as Yang, teaches a) a housing (the housing is the body of camera in Fig. 1 as shown in Fig. 1); and b) an optical scanning apparatus within the housing (Fig. 8 the apparatus “100C” is inside in the camera), and v) a subdividable field stop (Fig. 8 element 127, para [0066] lines 7-13) positioned between the beam splitter (this corresponds to Fig. 8 “106”, para [0049] lines 3-7) and the spectral detector to produce a subdivided field of view for the spectral detector (Fig. 8 “124”, para [0066] lines 1-3), wherein the subdivided field of view of the spectral detector has dimensions that are less than or equal to dimensions of a field of view of the imaging detector (para [0066] last sentence, the shooting field is the imaging detector), wherein the spectral detector is configured to analyze the reflectance spectrum of all or a subset of the subdivided field of view (para [0070] last sentence; decreasing the diameter of the field stop in order to decrease the influence of the foreign object).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Mitsui to Yang to have a) a housing; b) an optical scanning apparatus within the housing, v) a subdividable field stop positioned between the beam splitter and the spectral detector to produce a subdivided field of view for the spectral detector, wherein the subdivided field of view of the spectral detector has dimensions that are less than or equal to dimensions of a field of view of the imaging detector, wherein the spectral detector is configured to analyze the reflectance spectrum of all or a subset of the subdivided field of view in order to optimize the accuracy of the spectral information of the original sample (para [0070] last sentence).
Yang, when modified by Mitsui, fails to teach c) a shutter actuatable between an open position and a closed position, wherein the reflectance spectrum is split by the beam splitter only when the shutter is in the open position; and d) a trigger to selectively actuate the shutter to the open position.
Chang, from the same field of endeavor as Yang, teaches c) a shutter (See Fig. 1 element 31.) actuatable between an open position and a closed position (See column 5 lines 54-59.), wherein the reflectance spectrum is split by the beam splitter only when the shutter is in the open position (This is shown in Fig. 1 and see column 5 lines 54-59.); and d) a trigger (This pertains to “control circuit 58”, see column 5 lines 54-59.) to selectively actuate the shutter to the open position (See column 5 lines 54-59.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Chang to Yang when modified by Mitsui to have c) a shutter actuatable between an open position and a closed position, wherein the reflectance spectrum is split by the beam splitter only when the shutter is in the open position; and d) a trigger to selectively actuate the shutter to the open position in order to improve the signal recovery and to obtain an average intensity reading (See column 5 lines 41-46.).
Regarding claim 17, Yang teaches to teach the optical scanning device in accordance with claim 15 wherein the housing is configured as a portable device (para [0018] last sentence).
Regarding claim 19, the modified device of Yang does not teach the optical scanning device in accordance with claim 15 further comprising an additional spectral detector which is selectively interchangeable with the first spectral detector. Regarding claim 20, the modified device of Yang does not teach the optical scanning device in accordance with claim 15 further comprising an additional imaging detector which is selectively interchangeable with the first imaging detector.
MPEP 2144.04 B. Duplication of Parts, In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960), states that the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the optical scanning device in accordance with claim 15 further comprising an additional spectral detector which is selectively interchangeable with the first spectral detector and the optical scanning device in accordance with claim 15 further comprising an additional imaging detector which is selectively interchangeable with the first imaging detector in order to serve as a spare part and thus improve efficiency.
Regarding claim 21, Yang teaches the optical scanning device in accordance with claim 15 further comprising an image display in communication with one or both of the first imaging detector and the first spectral detector (See paragraph [0025] lines 1-9.), wherein the image display displays a visual rendering of the respective image response and/or first spectral response (See paragraph [0025] lines 1-9.).
Regarding claim 24, Yang teaches the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with claim 1 wherein the beam splitter is a dichroic divider (see claim 7, a beam splitter filter is a dichroic divider) configured to split the reflectance spectrum in a first set of wavelengths along the first path (beam splitter filter transmits a first set of wavelengths) and a second set of wavelengths along the second path beam splitter filter reflects a second set of wavelengths), and wherein the first set of wavelengths is different than the second set of wavelengths (the sets of wavelengths are different).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang, Mitsui, and Chang as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Martinez, O. et al. US 20110096343 A1 (hereinafter Martinez).
Regarding claim 16, the modified apparatus of Yang does not teach the optical scanning device in accordance with claim 15 wherein ambient light spectrum is directed to the spectral detector only when the shutter is in the open position.
Martinez, from the same field of endeavor as Yang, teaches the optical scanning device in accordance with claim 15 (Yang teaches the limitation “the optical scanning device”.) wherein ambient light spectrum is directed to the spectral detector only when the shutter is in the open position (See p. 3 paragraph [0023] lines 2-4.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Martinez to the modified apparatus of Yang to have the optical scanning device in accordance with claim 15 wherein ambient light spectrum is directed to the spectral detector only when the shutter is in the open position in order to optimize color reproduction of a printer (See paragraph [0001] lines 6-8.).
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang, Mitsui, and Chang as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Hayashi, T. US 5235465 A (hereinafter Hayashi).
Regarding claim 18, the modified apparatus of Yang fails to teach the optical scanning device in accordance with claim 15 further comprising an additional objective lens which is selectively interchangeable with the first objective lens.
Hayashi, from the same field of endeavor as Yang, teaches the optical scanning device in accordance with claim 15 further comprising an additional objective lens which is selectively interchangeable with the first objective lens (See column 10 claim 2 lines 28-33.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Hayashi to the modified apparatus of Yang to have the optical scanning device in accordance with claim 15 further comprising an additional objective lens which is selectively interchangeable with the first objective lens in order to change the magnification of the image (See column 2, lines 44-45.) in order to employ the use of ultraviolet range, in particular, in the far ultraviolet range as the light source (See column 1 lines 9-10.) in order to obtain stronger fluorescent signals from the sample (See column 1 lines 19-23.).
Claim(s) 22, 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang, Mitsui, and Chang as applied to claim 15 above, and in further view of Desmarais, L. et al. US 20140354868 A1 (hereinafter Desmarais).
Regarding claim 22, the modified apparatus of Yang does not teach the optical scanning device in accordance with claim 15 further comprising a wireless communication module communicatively coupled to one or both of the first imaging detector and the first spectral detector, wherein the wireless communication module is configured to communicate the respective image response and/or first spectral response to a computing device. Regarding claim 23, the modified apparatus of Yang does not teach the optical scanning device in accordance with claim 22 wherein the computing device is remotely located from the housing.
Desmarais, from the same field of endeavor as Yang, teaches the optical scanning device in accordance with claim 15 further comprising a wireless communication module communicatively coupled to one or both of the first imaging detector and the first spectral detector, wherein the wireless communication module is configured to communicate the respective image response and/or first spectral response to a computing device (This entire limitation is disclosed in paragraph [0032-0033]. Paragraph [0032-0033] state that the spectral detector can be removed to the computing device and can be connected through a wireless connection.). Further, Desmarais, from the same field of endeavor as Yang, teaches the optical scanning device in accordance with claim 22 wherein the computing device is remotely located from the housing (See paragraph [0033] lines 6-12. The fact the computing device can be decoupled from the camera means that it can be moved to a remote location.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Desmarais to the the modified apparatus of Yang to have the optical scanning device in accordance with claim 15 further comprising a wireless communication module communicatively coupled to one or both of the first imaging detector and the first spectral detector, wherein the wireless communication module is configured to communicate the respective image response and/or first spectral response to a computing device and the optical scanning device wherein the computing device is remotely located from the housing in order to maintain a data connection between the mobile display device and hyperspectral camera (See paragraph [0033] lines 6-13.) in order to measure the spectral features of objects in real-world scenes (See paragraph [0004]).
Claim(s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang and Mitsui as applied to claim 24 above, and in view of Lewis.
Regarding claim 25, the modified apparatus of Yang does not teach the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with claim 24 wherein the first set of wavelengths includes one or more of the ultraviolet (UV) spectrum, near infrared (NIR) spectrum, and infrared (IR) spectrum, and wherein the second set of wavelengths includes the visible spectrum.
Lewis, from the same field of endeavor as Yang, teaches the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with claim 24 wherein the first set of wavelengths is an infrared (IR) spectrum (See Fig. 3 and claim 59.), and wherein the second set of wavelengths includes the visible spectrum (See paragraph [0060].).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Lewis to the modified apparatus of Yang to have the optical scanning apparatus in accordance with claim 24 wherein the first set of wavelengths includes one or more of the ultraviolet (UV) spectrum, near infrared (NIR) spectrum, and infrared (IR) spectrum, and wherein the second set of wavelengths includes the visible spectrum in order to allow information about the physical makeup of a pharmaceutical mixture to be obtained quickly and inexpensively (See paragraph [0020] lines 1-4.).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERTO FABIAN JR whose telephone number is (571)272-3632. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (8-12, 1-5).
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.
/ROBERTO FABIAN JR/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/Kara E. Geisel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877