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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 9 September 2025 has been entered.
Applicant’s amendments have provided new grounds for Drawings and Specification objections.
Applicant’s amendments have voided interpretation under 35 USC 112(f). The 35 USC 112(f) Claim Interpretation section has been removed from the present Office action.
Applicant’s amendments to the Claims have overcome every Claim objection. The Claim objections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments have overcome the previous 35 USC 112 rejections. However, Applicant’s amendments have grounds for additional 35 USC 112 rejections.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 9 September 2025, with respect to the rejection of claims under 35 USC § 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. However, after conducting an updated search, an additional reference was identified, which teaches the amended portions of the claims. Therefore, the grounds of rejection under 35 USC § 103 still stand.
Status of the Claims
In the amendment dated 9 September 2025, the status of the claims is as follows: Claims 1-9 have been amended. Claims 10-18 are new.
Claims 1-18 are pending.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “first lens group” and the “second lens group” of claims 1 and 10 as well as the “third lens group” of claim 10 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: the limitations from the claims reciting a “first lens group,” a “second lens group,” and a “third lens group” lack antecedent basis in the Specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "to guide the light beam from the light emitter" in lines 14-15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if the “light emitter” refers to the “first outer light emitter” or the “first center light emitter.” This limitation appears to be already recited in lines 7-8 of the claim. For the purpose of the examination, this limitation will be interpreted as “to guide each light beam from each set of light emitters."
Claims 1 and 5-8 recites the limitation "the set of light emitters.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear which set is being referenced from the “plurality of sets of light emitters” that are recited in claim 1. For the purpose of the examination, the limitations will be interpreted as “each set of light emitters.”
Claims 5 and 7-8 recite “…the first lens group…” However, claim 1 establishes that “a plurality of optical units each including a first lens group.” Because there is a plurality of optical units, there must be a plurality of first lens groups. It is unclear if the limitations in claims 5 and 7-8 apply to just one of the first lens groups or to each of the first lens groups. For the purpose of the examination, the limitation will be interpreted as “…each first lens group…”
Claims 2-4 and 9 are rejected based on their dependency to claim 1. These new rejections have been added based on the amended portions of the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 7, 10, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sipes (US-20080101429-A1) in view of Wakabayashi et al. (US-20210247573-A1, effective filing date of 23 Aug 2018, cited in 892 form filed 9 June 2025).
Regarding claim 1, Sipes teaches a beam coupling device (figs. 11a-b) comprising:
a light source (stacked array 140, figs. 11a-b) that includes a plurality of sets of light emitters (diode bars 120, fig. 11a) with each set including a plurality of light emitters (each bar 120 includes emitters 100, fig. 11b) arranged in a first direction (vertical direction, fig. 11b; depth (not shown) direction, fig. 11a) and with the plurality of sets arranged in a second direction (vertical direction, fig. 11a; depth (not shown) direction, fig. 11b; “FIGS. 11( a) and 11(b) shows the fast and slow axis views,” para 0041; construed as views that are perpendicular), to emit a plurality of light beams (parallel beams 210, fig. 11a) having a light ray direction (horizontal left-right direction, figs. 11a-11b) from each of the light emitters (each of the diodes 100 are construed as emitting a light beam 210 in the horizontal direction, figs. 11a-11b; para 0028), wherein the first direction and the second direction intersect each other (the vertical directions for figs. 11a and 11b are construed as being perpendicular to each other because each figure represents either a fast axis or slow axis “view,” para 0041; these long-axis and short-axis views are shown three-dimensionally as being perpendicular to each other in fig. 1a) and the light ray direction intersects the first and second directions (horizontal direction in figs. 11a-b intersects with the vertical directions of figs. 11a-b at 90 degrees; see also fig. 1a, which has a 3D orientation and shows how the beam projects forth at an orientation that is perpendicular to the fast and slow axes);
a plurality of optical units (lenses 180, figs. 11a-b) each including a first lens group (there is one lens 180 for each diode bar 120, fig. 11a) arranged to guide each light beam for each set of light emitters arranged in the first direction (vertical direction, fig. 11b) in the light source (lenses 180 is arranged with respect to a vertical direction in fig. 11b guide the beams from the each emitter 100 that in the corresponding bar 120, fig. 11b); and
a coupling optical system including a second lens group (cylindrical optical assembly 230, fig. 11a) arranged to couple the plurality of light beams (beams 210, fig. 11a) guided by each of the optical units (lenses 180, fig. 11a).
Sipes, figs. 11a-b
PNG
media_image1.png
1341
1891
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Sipes does not explicitly disclose wherein each of the plurality of optical units is arranged to direct, outward in the first direction, the light ray direction of the light beam emitted by a first outer light emitter with respect to the light ray direction of the light beam emitted by a first center light emitter, to guide each light beam from each set of light emitters into the coupling optical system, the first outer light emitter being a light emitter in each set of light emitters and located outward of the first center light emitter in the first direction, and the first center light emitter being a light emitter in each set of light emitters and located at center in the first direction.
However, in the same field of endeavor of beam coupling devices, Wakabayashi teaches wherein each of the plurality of optical units (collimating lenses 2a, 2b, and 2c, fig. 4; construed as one first lens group or one optical unit) is arranged to direct, outward in the first direction (vertical direction, fig. 4), the light ray direction (“BM2,” fig. 4) of the light beam emitted by a first outer light emitter (laser diode 1b, fig. 4) with respect to the light ray direction (“BM1,” fig. 4) of the light beam emitted by a first center light emitter (diode 1a, fig. 4), to guide each light beam from each set of light emitters (the collimating lenses 2a, 2b, and 2c guide each light beam from diodes 1a, 1b, and 1c, fig. 4) into the coupling optical system (reduction optical system 3 and focusing lens 4, fig. 4), the first outer light emitter (diode 1b, fig. 4) being a light emitter in each set of light emitters (diodes 1a, 1b, and 1c, fig. 4) and located outward of the first center light emitter (diode 1a, fig. 4) in the first direction, and the first center light emitter (diode 1a, fig. 4) being a light emitter in each set of light emitters (diodes 1a, 1b, and 1c, fig. 4) and located at center in the first direction (diode 1a is in the center in a vertical direction, fig. 4).
Wakabayashi, fig. 4
PNG
media_image2.png
1187
594
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Sipes, in view of the teachings of Wakabayashi, by directing the outside emitters 100 in each diode bar 120, as taught by Sipes, outwards relative to the center emitters, as taught by Wakabayashi, instead of in a parallel direction, as taught by Sipes, because an optical coupling device causes spherical aberrations when the beams are focused onto a fiber, but these spherical aberrations can be suppressed by diverging the outside beams relative to parallel light, for the advantage of improving the fiber coupling efficiency (Wakabayashi, paras 0003, 0006, 0060, and 0063).
Regarding claim 7, Sipes teaches the invention as described above but does not explicitly disclose in the fig. 11 embodiment, wherein each first lens group includes a beam twister unit arranged to rotate each light beam from each set of light emitters, and the beam twister unit is arranged at a rotation angle with respect to each set of the light emitters, the rotating angle directing outward the light ray direction of the light beam emitted by the light emitter located outside in the first direction.
However, in a different embodiment, Sipes teaches wherein each first lens group (lenses 180, fig. 4b) includes a beam twister unit (rotational array 188 is construed as being a beam twister unit because it “produces a 90 degree image rotation for each beam,” para 0044; multiple arrays 188 are shown in fig. 5; construed as one array 188 for each lens 180 taught in fig. 11) arranged to rotate each light beam from each set of light emitters (para 0044; beams 186, fig. 5), and the beam twister unit (array 188, figs. 4a-b) is arranged at a rotation angle (“90 degree image rotation,” para 0044) with respect to each set of the light emitters (emitters 100, figs. 4a-b), the rotating angle directing outward the light ray direction of the light beam emitted by the light emitter (the array 188 directs outwards the top beam 186 toward the lens 194, fig. 4b) located outside in the first direction (vertical direction 4b).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the embodiment of fig. 11, in view of the teachings of fig. 4, by using a rotational array 188, as taught in fig. 4, instead of a polarization assembly 159, as taught in fig. 11, because this amounts to a simple substitution of one array known in the art for another with predictable results (using a rotational array instead of a polarization array will still accomplish the 90 degree rotation required for the beams) (Sipes, paras 0039 and 0044).
Regarding claim 10, Sipes teaches a beam coupling device (figs. 11a-b) comprising:
a light source (stacked array 140, figs. 11a-b);
a first optical unit (lens 180, figs. 11a-b);
a second optical unit (lens 184, figs. 11a-b); and
a coupling optical system (cylindrical optical assembly 230, fig. 11a),
wherein:
the light source includes a first light array (top bar 120, fig. 11a) and a second light array (middle bar 120, fig. 11a);
the first light array and the second light array are arranged in a second direction (vertical direction, fig. 11a);
the first light array includes first light emitters (emitters 100, fig. 11b) that are arranged in a first direction (vertical direction, fig. 11b);
the second light array includes second light emitters (emitters 100, fig. 11b) that are arranged in the first direction (vertical direction, fig. 11b; each of the diode bars 120 in fig. 11a have emitters 100 as shown in fig. 11b);
the first light emitters are configured to emit first light beams (top beams, fig. 11a), respectively;
the first light beams have respective light ray directions that intersect the first direction and the second direction (the beams intersect and are coupled together at the fiber 168, figs. 11a-b);
the second light emitters are configured to emit second light beams (middle beams, fig. 11a), respectively;
the second beams have respective light ray directions that intersect the first direction and the second direction (the beams intersect and are coupled together at the fiber 168, figs. 11a-b);
the first direction and the second direction intersect each other (the vertical directions for figs. 11a and 11b are construed as being perpendicular to each other because each figure represents either a fast axis or slow axis “view,” para 0041; these long-axis and short-axis views are shown three-dimensionally as being perpendicular to each other in fig. 1a);
the first optical unit (lens 180, figs. 11a-b) includes a first lens group (lens 180 is a group of lenses, fig. 11a) configured to guide the first light beams (lens 180 guides the top beams, fig. 11a; para 0044);
the second optical unit (lens 184, figs. 11a-b) includes a second lens group (lens 184 is a group of lenses, fig. 11b) configured to guide the second light beams (middle beams, fig. 11a; para 0044);
the coupling optical system (cylindrical optical assembly 230, fig. 11a) includes a third lens group (lenses 214, 218, 222, and 165, figs. 11a-b) configured to couple the first light beams and the second light beams (“coupling,” para 0044; the coupling occurs at the entrance to the fiber 168, fig. 11a);
the first light emitters include a first outer light emitter (top emitter 100, fig. 11b) and a first center light emitter (middle emitter 100, fig. 11b);
the first center light emitter (middle emitter 100, fig. 11b) is located at a center in the first direction (center of fig. 11b);
the first outer light emitter (top emitter 100, fig. 11b) is located outward of the first center light emitter in the first direction (top of fig. 11b); and
the first optical unit (lens 180, figs. 11a-b) is configured to: (ii) guide the first light beams from the first light emitters into the coupling optical system (lens 180 guides the top beams into the assembly 230, fig. 11a; para 0044).
Sipes does not explicitly disclose the first optical unit is configured to: (i) direct, outward in the first direction, the light ray direction of the first light beam emitted by the first outer light emitter with respect to the light ray direction of the first light beam emitted by the first center light emitter.
However, in the same field of endeavor of beam coupling devices, Wakabayashi teaches the first optical unit (collimating lenses 2a, 2b, and 2c, fig. 4; construed as one first lens group or one optical unit) is configured to: (i) direct, outward in the first direction, the light ray direction of the first light beam (top beam, “BM2,” fig. 4) emitted by the first outer light emitter (laser diode 1b, fig. 4) with respect to the light ray direction of the first light beam (middle beam, “BM1,” fig. 4) emitted by the first center light emitter (diode 1a, fig. 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Sipes, in view of the teachings of Wakabayashi, by directing the outside emitters 100 in each diode bar 120, as taught by Sipes, outwards relative to the center emitters, as taught by Wakabayashi, instead of in a parallel direction, as taught by Sipes, because an optical coupling device causes spherical aberrations when the beams are focused onto a fiber, but these spherical aberrations can be suppressed by diverging the outside beams relative to parallel light, for the advantage of improving the fiber coupling efficiency (Wakabayashi, paras 0003, 0006, 0060, and 0063).
Regarding claim 16, Sipes teaches the invention as described above but does not explicitly disclose in the fig. 11 embodiment, wherein the first lens group includes a beam twister unit configured to rotate the first light beams, and the beam twister unit is arranged at a rotation angle with respect to the first light emitters, for directing outward the light ray direction of the first light beam emitted by the first outer light emitter.
However, in a different embodiment, Sipes teaches wherein the first lens group (lenses 180, fig. 4b) includes a beam twister unit (rotational array 188 is construed as being a beam twister unit because it “produces a 90 degree image rotation for each beam,” para 0044; multiple arrays 188 are shown in fig. 5; construed as one array 188 for each lens 180 taught in fig. 11) configured to rotate the first light beams (para 0044; top beam 186, fig. 5), and the beam twister unit (array 188, figs. 4a-b) is arranged at a rotation angle (“90 degree image rotation,” para 0044) with respect the first light emitters (emitters 100, figs. 4a-b), for directing outward the light ray direction of the first light beam emitted by the first outer light emitter (the array 188 directs outwards the top beam 186 toward the lens 194, fig. 4b).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the embodiment of fig. 11, in view of the teachings of fig. 4, by using a rotational array 188, as taught in fig. 4, instead of a polarization assembly 159, as taught in fig. 11, because this amounts to a simple substitution of one array known in the art for another with predictable results (using a rotational array instead of a polarization array will still accomplish the 90 degree rotation required for the beams) (Sipes, paras 0039 and 0044).
Claims 2-3, 5-6, 11-12, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sipes (US-20080101429-A1) in view of Wakabayashi et al. (US-20210247573-A1, effective filing date of 23 Aug 2018, cited in 892 form filed 9 June 2025) as applied to claims 1 and 10 above and further in view of Anikitchev et al. (US-20040067016-A1).
Regarding claim 2, Sipes teaches the invention as described above but does not explicitly disclose in the fig. 11 embodiment wherein the coupling optical system has a positive refractive power in the first direction larger than a positive refractive power in the second direction, and the plurality of optical units are arranged to direct: inward in the second direction, the light ray direction of the light beam emitted by a second outer light emitter with respect to the light ray direction of the light beam emitted by a second center light emitter, the second outer light emitter being a light emitter in the plurality of sets of light emitters and located outward of the second center light emitter in the second direction, and the second center light emitter being a light emitter in the plurality of sets of light emitters and located at center in the second direction.
However, in the fig. 6 embodiment, Sipes teaches the plurality of optical units (lenses 180, fig. 6a) are arranged to direct: inward in the second direction (directed inward towards the middle in a vertical direction, fig. 6a), the light ray direction of the light beam emitted by a second outer light emitter (an emitter in the top bar 120, fig. 6a) with respect to the light ray direction of the light beam emitted by a second center light emitter (an emitter in the middle bar 120, fig. 6), the second outer light emitter (emitter in the top bar 120, fig. 6a) being a light emitter in the plurality of sets of light emitters (bars 120, fig. 6a) and located outward of the second center light emitter (emitter in the middle bar 120, fig. 6a) in the second direction, and the second center light emitter (emitter in the middle bar 120, fig. 6a) being a light emitter in the plurality of sets of light emitters (bars 120, fig. 6a) and located at center in the second direction (center in a vertical direction, fig. 6a).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the fig. 11 embodiment, in view of the teachings of the fig. 6 embodiment, by arranging the diode bars 120, as taught in fig. 11, in the arrangement, as taught in fig. 6, in order to arrange the diode bars such that they each have a common radius R, for the advantage of matching the focal lengths of the diode bars such that all the focal lengths are equal and the brightness of the Symmetric Brightness Unit uses a simple 1:1: ratio (Sipe, paras 0029 and 0035-0036).
Sipes does not explicitly disclose wherein the coupling optical system has a positive refractive power in the first direction larger than a positive refractive power in the second direction.
However, in the same field of endeavor of beam coupling devices, Anikitchev teaches wherein the coupling optical system (cylindrical lens 66, fig. 4B) has a positive refractive power in the first direction (“positive optical power in the Y-axis,” para 0040) larger than a positive refractive power in the second direction (“zero optical power in the other,” para 0031).
Anikitchev, fig. 4B
PNG
media_image3.png
974
404
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Sipes to include, wherein the coupling optical system has a positive refractive power in the first direction larger than a positive refractive power in the second direction, in view of the teachings of Anikitchev, by substituting a cylindrical lens 66, as taught by Anikitchev, with the cylindrical lens 165, as taught by Sipes, in order to use a cylindrical lens with a positive optical power in the fast-axis and zero power in the slow-axis, for the advantage of accurately aligning the beams in the fast-axis direction after the beams have been rotated from a slow-axis alignment to a fast-axis alignment, for the advantage of optimizing the coupling into a circular core optical fiber such that the combined beams are equal in both the fast and slow axes (Anikitchev, paras 0012-0013 and 0031).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Sipes in view of Wakabayashi and Anikitchev as set forth above regarding claim 2 partially teaches the invention of claim 3. Specifically, Anikitchev teaches a cylindrical lens (cylindrical lens 66, fig. 4B) having a positive refractive power in the first direction (“positive optical power in the Y-axis,” para 0040; vertical direction, fig. 4B).
Sipes teaches the invention as described above but does not explicitly disclose in the fig. 11 embodiment, wherein the second lens group of the coupling optical system includes an axially symmetric condenser lens and a cylindrical lens.
However, in the fig. 4 embodiment, Sipes teaches wherein the second lens group of the coupling optical system (lenses 194, 202, 198, and 206, figs. 4a-4b) includes an axially symmetric condenser lens (lens 206 “focuses the slow axis direction…to match the multimode fiber 208,” para 0044; because lens 206 focuses along a central axis where the beams are symmetrical, fig. 4b, it is construed as being an “axially symmetric condenser lens”) and a cylindrical lens (cylindrical lens 194, figs. 4a-b).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the embodiment of fig. 11, in view of the teachings of fig. 4, by using an additional lens 206, as taught in fig. 4, in the embodiment, as taught in fig. 11, in order to use an additional lens that focuses the slow axis direction to the appropriate beam size to match the multimode fiber (Sipes, para 0044).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Sipes in view of Wakabayashi and Anikitchev as set forth above regarding claim 2 teaches the invention of claim 5. Specifically, Sipes teaches wherein each first lens group (lenses 180, figs. 11a-b) of each of the plurality of optical units includes a collimator lens (collimating cylindrical lens 180, figs. 11a-b) arranged to collimate each light beam from the set of light emitters in the second direction (“fast axis” direction, para 0042; fast axis 118 or vertical direction, fig. 11a). Additionally, Sipes teaches the collimator lens of an outside optical unit (lens 180 of top bar 120, fig. 6a) is arranged at a position at which an incident light beam is directed inward (beam from the top bar is directed inwards, fig. 6a), the outside optical unit (top bar 120, fig. 6a) being an optical unit in the plurality of optical units (bars 120, fig. 6a) and located outside in the second direction (fast axis direction 118, fig. 6a; vertical direction, fig. 6a).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Sipes in view of Wakabayashi and Anikitchev as set forth above regarding claim 2 teaches the invention of claim 6. Specifically, Sipes teaches an outside optical unit (lens 180 of top bar 120, fig. 6a) is arranged to direct inward orientation for emitting the light beam incident from the light source (beam from the top bar is directed inwards, fig. 6a), the outside optical unit (top bar 120, fig. 6a) being an optical unit in the plurality of optical units (bars 120, fig. 6a) and located outside in the second direction (fast axis direction 118, fig. 6).
Regarding claim 11, Sipes does not explicitly disclose wherein: the coupling optical system has a first positive refractive power in the first direction and a second positive refractive power in the second direction; the first positive refractive power is larger than the second positive refractive power; the second light array is located at a center in the second direction; the first light array is located outward of the second light array in the second direction; and the first optical unit is configured to direct, inward in the second direction, the light ray direction of one of the first light beams emitted by the first light array with respect to the light ray direction of one of the second light beams emitted by second light array.
However, in the fig. 6 embodiment, Sipes teaches the second light array (middle bar 120, fig. 6a) is located at a center in the second direction (center in a vertical direction, fig. 6a); the first light array (top bar 120, fig. 6a) is located outward of the second light array in the second direction (above the middle bar 120 in a vertical direction, fig. 6a); and the first optical unit (lens 180, fig. 6a) is configured to direct, inward in the second direction (directed inward towards the middle in a vertical direction, fig. 6a), the light ray direction of one of the first light beams emitted by the first light array (top beams, fig. 6a) with respect to the light ray direction of one of the second light beams emitted by second light array (top beams are directed inward relative to the middle beams, fig. 6a).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the fig. 11 embodiment, in view of the teachings of the fig. 6 embodiment, by arranging the diode bars 120, as taught in fig. 11, in the arrangement, as taught in fig. 6, in order to arrange the diode bars such that they each have a common radius R, for the advantage of matching the focal lengths of the diode bars such that all the focal lengths are equal and the brightness of the Symmetric Brightness Unit uses a simple 1:1: ratio (Sipe, paras 0029 and 0035-0036).
Sipes does not explicitly disclose wherein: the coupling optical system has a first positive refractive power in the first direction and a second positive refractive power in the second direction; the first positive refractive power is larger than the second positive refractive power.
However, in the same field of endeavor of beam coupling devices, Anikitchev teaches wherein: the coupling optical system (cylindrical lens 66, fig. 4B) has a first positive refractive power in the first direction (“positive optical power in the Y-axis,” para 0040) and a second positive refractive power in the second direction (“zero optical power in the other,” para 0031); the first positive refractive power is larger than the second positive refractive power (a positive value is greater than zero).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Sipes, in view of the teachings of Anikitchev, by substituting a cylindrical lens 66, as taught by Anikitchev, with the cylindrical lens 165, as taught by Sipes, in order to use a cylindrical lens with a positive optical power in the fast-axis and zero power in the slow-axis, for the advantage of accurately aligning the beams in the fast-axis direction after the beams have been rotated from a slow-axis alignment to a fast-axis alignment, for the advantage of optimizing the coupling into a circular core optical fiber such that the combined beams are equal in both the fast and slow axes (Anikitchev, paras 0012-0013 and 0031).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Sipes in view of Wakabayashi and Anikitchev as set forth above regarding claim 11 partially teaches the invention of claim 12. Specifically, Anikitchev teaches a cylindrical lens (cylindrical lens 66, fig. 4B) having the first positive refractive power in the first direction (“positive optical power in the Y-axis,” para 0040; vertical direction, fig. 4B).
Sipes teaches the invention as described above but does not explicitly disclose in the fig. 11 embodiment, wherein the third lens group includes an axially symmetric condenser lens and a cylindrical lens.
However, in the fig. 4 embodiment, Sipes teaches wherein the third lens group (lenses 194, 202, 198, and 206, figs. 4a-4b) includes an axially symmetric condenser lens (lens 206 “focuses the slow axis direction…to match the multimode fiber 208,” para 0044; because lens 206 focuses along a central axis where the beams are symmetrical, fig. 4b, it is construed as being an “axially symmetric condenser lens”) and a cylindrical lens (cylindrical lens 194, figs. 4a-b).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the embodiment of fig. 11, in view of the teachings of fig. 4, by using an additional lens 206, as taught in fig. 4, in the embodiment, as taught in fig. 11, in order to use an additional lens that focuses the slow axis direction to the appropriate beam size to match the multimode fiber (Sipes, para 0044).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Sipes in view of Wakabayashi and Anikitchev as set forth above regarding claim 11 teaches the invention of claim 14. Specifically, Sipes teaches wherein the first lens group (lenses 180, figs. 11a-b) includes a collimator lens (collimating cylindrical lens 180, figs. 11a-b) configured to collimate the first light beam (top light beams, fig. 11a) from the set of light emitters in the second direction (“fast axis” direction, para 0042; fast axis 118 or vertical direction, fig. 11a). Additionally, Sipes teaches the first optical unit (lens 180 of top bar 120, fig. 6a) is located outward in the second direction (fast axis direction 118, fig. 6a; vertical direction, fig. 6a) and the collimator lens is arranged at a position at which one of the first light beams incident from the light source (beams from top bar 120, fig. 6a) is directed inward (beam from the top bar is directed inwards, fig. 6a).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Sipes in view of Wakabayashi and Anikitchev as set forth above regarding claim 11 teaches the invention of claim 14. Specifically, Sipes teaches wherein the first optical unit (lens 180 of top bar 120, fig. 6a) is located outward in the second direction (top of fig. 6a) and configured to direct inward orientation for emitting the first light beams incident from the light source (beam from the top bar is directed inwards, fig. 6a).
Claims 4 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sipes (US-20080101429-A1) in view of Wakabayashi et al. (US-20210247573-A1, effective filing date of 23 Aug 2018, cited in 892 form filed 9 June 2025) and Anikitchev et al. (US-20040067016-A1) as applied to claims 1-3 and 10-12 above and further in view of Kobayashi et al. (US-20200028332-A1).
Regarding claim 4, Sipes teaches the invention as described above as well as each first lens group of each of the plurality of optical units (lenses 180, figs. 11a-b). Sipes does not explicitly disclose wherein the cylindrical lens has a focal length shorter than a distance to the cylindrical lens from a position at which an extension line of an optical axis of the condenser lens intersects another extension line obtained by extending a chief ray toward the light source, the chief ray corresponding to the light beam directed outward by an optical unit in the plurality of optical units.
However, in the same field of endeavor of beam coupling devices, Kobayashi teaches wherein the cylindrical lens (convex lens 43, fig. 13; para 0031 explains how convex lenses have “positive power”) has a focal length (“focal length f3,” para 0073) shorter than a distance (distance L4 and S, fig. 13; “L4>f3+f4,” para 0073; f4 is a “focal length” and a positive number, para 0073; thus, L4>f3; S is also a positive number because “S>L4−f3,” para 0073 and L4>f3; thus, L4+S>f3) to the cylindrical lens (lens 43, fig. 13) from a position (left surface of mirror 5, fig. 13) at which an extension line of an optical axis of the condenser lens (horizontal line that coincides with the solid-line central ray with the arrows, fig. 13) intersects another extension line (top ray that passes through lens 44 and that has a dotted line, fig. 13) obtained by extending a chief ray (top ray 6a between the LD bar 1 and the focusing element 2, fig. 13) toward the light source (LD bar 1, fig. 13), the chief ray (top ray 6a, fig. 13) corresponding to the light beam directed outward by an optical unit in the plurality of optical units (focusing element 2, fig. 13; although Kobayashi’s focusing element is different from Sipes’ lenses 180, Sipes lenses construed as being in the position of focusing element 2 in fig. 13; similar to what is taught by Sipes and what is disclosed in the Specification, the chief rays 6a disperse or diffuse outwards from the laser diode, fig. 13).
Kobayashi, fig. 13
PNG
media_image4.png
464
794
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Sipes, in view of the teachings of Kobayashi, by using the relationships between the lengths L and S relative to the focal length of lens 43, as taught by Kobayashi, for the distance between lens 214 and 222 and the distance between lens 222 and fiber 168 relative to the focal distance of lens 214, as taught by Sipes, in order to position the two lenses such that the focal distance of the first lens is greater than the second lens, for the advantage of reducing cross-coupling oscillation without having to increase the size of the combining laser apparatus (“f3>f4,” para 0073 of Kobayashi; motivation comes from para 0074 of Kobayashi).
Regarding claim 13, Sipes does not explicitly disclose wherein: the cylindrical lens has a focal length which is shorter than a distance to the cylindrical lens from a position at which a first extension line of an optical axis of the axially symmetric condenser lens intersects a second extension line defined by extending a chief ray toward the light source; and the chief ray corresponds to the first light beam emitted by the first outer light emitter which is directed outward by the first optical unit.
However, in the same field of endeavor of beam coupling devices, Kobayashi teaches wherein: the cylindrical lens (convex lens 43, fig. 13; para 0031 explains how convex lenses have “positive power”) has a focal length (“focal length f3,” para 0073) which is shorter than a distance (distance L4 and S, fig. 13; “L4>f3+f4,” para 0073; f4 is a “focal length” and a positive number, para 0073; thus, L4>f3; S is also a positive number because “S>L4−f3,” para 0073 and L4>f3; thus, L4+S>f3) to the cylindrical lens (lens 43, fig. 13) from a position (left surface of mirror 5, fig. 13) at which a first extension line of an optical axis of the axially symmetric condenser lens (horizontal line that coincides with the solid-line central ray with the arrows, fig. 13) intersects a second extension line (top ray that passes through lens 44 and that has a dotted line, fig. 13) defined by extending a chief ray (top ray 6a between the LD bar 1 and the focusing element 2, fig. 13) toward the light source (LD bar 1, fig. 13); and the chief ray (top ray 6a, fig. 13) corresponds to the first light beam (top beam is construed as the “first light beam”) emitted by the first outer light emitter which is directed outward by the first optical unit (focusing element 2, fig. 13; although Kobayashi’s focusing element is different from Sipes’ lenses 180, Sipes lenses construed as being in the position of focusing element 2 in fig. 13; similar to what is taught by Sipes and what is disclosed in the Specification, the chief rays 6a disperse or diffuse outwards from the laser diode, fig. 13).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Sipes, in view of the teachings of Kobayashi, by using the relationships between the lengths L and S relative to the focal length of lens 43, as taught by Kobayashi, for the distance between lens 214 and 222 and the distance between lens 222 and fiber 168 relative to the focal distance of lens 214, as taught by Sipes, in order to position the two lenses such that the focal distance of the first lens is greater than the second lens, for the advantage of reducing cross-coupling oscillation without having to increase the size of the combining laser apparatus (“f3>f4,” para 0073 of Kobayashi; motivation comes from para 0074 of Kobayashi).
Claims 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sipes (US-20080101429-A1) in view of Wakabayashi et al. (US-20210247573-A1, effective filing date of 23 Aug 2018, cited in 892 form filed 9 June 2025) as applied to claims 1 and 10 above and further in view of Holmgren et al. (US-20130112667-A1).
Regarding claim 8, Sipes teaches the invention as described above but does not explicitly disclose wherein each first lens group includes an optical element comprising a plurality of lens portions corresponding to each light emitter in the set of light emitters, in the optical element, the plurality of lens portions are arranged in the first direction to be inclined with respect to the second direction, and the optical element comprises both side surfaces with a pitch at which the plurality of lens portions are arranged in one surface from which the plurality of light beams from the set of light emitters is emitted being larger than a pitch in which the plurality of lens portions are arranged in another surface on which the plurality of light beams is incident.
However, in the same field of endeavor of beam coupling devices, Holmgren teaches wherein each first lens group (fig. 5A) includes an optical element (microlens array homogenizer 500, fig. 5A) comprising a plurality of lens portions (individual lenses of the lenses 503 and 505, fig. 5A, e.g., lens 503a and 503b) corresponding to each light emitter in the set of light emitters (“the output beams from the light source, i.e., the laser diode bar array 202, …. entered the microlens array homogenizer 500,” para 0036), in the optical element (microlens array homogenizer 500, fig. 5A), the plurality of lens portions are arranged in the first direction (depth direction or fast axis “FA,” fig. 5a; in claim 1, the vertical direction of fig. 4B taught by Sipes was construed as the “first direction” which was oriented along the fast axis 118 after passing through the array 188) to be inclined with respect to the second direction (the cylindrical lenses are inclined with respect to the vertical direction or “SA,” fig. 5A; fig. 5B shows a close-up of how the lenses are inclined with respect to the slow-axis direction; para 0036), and the optical element comprises both side surfaces (left side of array 502 and right side of array 504, fig. 5A) with a pitch (pitch of array 504, fig. 5A; “290 um,” para 0037) at which the plurality of lens portions are arranged in one surface (right surface of array 504, fig. 5A) from which the plurality of light beams from the set of light emitters is emitted (emitted towards the right in the Z direction, fig. 5A) being larger than a pitch (pitch of array 502, fig. 5A; “275 um,” para 0037) in which the plurality of lens portions are arranged in another surface on which the plurality of light beams is incident (left surface of array 502, fig. 5A; para 0037).
Holmgren, fig. 5A
PNG
media_image5.png
490
574
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Sipes, in view of the teachings of Holmgren, by using the microlens array homogenizer, as taught by Holmgren, after the beams pass through the polarization array 159, as taught by Sipes, because the raw output beams from each discrete diode bar is highly divergent and asymmetric, which can be prevented by using a microlens array that ensures sufficient spatial coherence (as opposed to divergence) of the beams, and for the advantage of using a microlens array with different pitches, which reduces the frequency interference between the two lens arrays that occurs when the two pitches are identical (Holmgren, paras 0027 and 0037).
Regarding claim 17, Sipes teaches the invention as described above but does not explicitly disclose wherein: the first lens group includes an optical element including lens portions corresponding to the first light emitters, respectively; the lens portions are arranged in the first direction to be inclined with respect to the second direction; the optical element includes side surfaces with a first pitch at which the lens portions are arranged in a first surface from which the first light beams are emitted; and the first pitch is larger than a second pitch in which the lens portions are arranged in a second surface on which the first light beams are incident.
However, in the same field of endeavor of beam coupling devices, Holmgren teaches wherein: the first lens group (fig. 5A) includes an optical element (microlens array homogenizer 500, fig. 5A) including lens portions (individual lenses of the lenses 503 and 505, fig. 5A, e.g., lens 503a and 503b) corresponding to the first light emitters (“the output beams from the light source, i.e., the laser diode bar array 202, …. entered the microlens array homogenizer 500,” para 0036), respectively; the lens portions are arranged in the first direction (depth direction or fast axis “FA,” fig. 5a; in claim 1, the vertical direction of fig. 4B taught by Sipes was construed as the “first direction” which was oriented along the fast axis 118 after passing through the array 188) to be inclined with respect to the second direction (the cylindrical lenses are inclined with respect to the vertical direction or “SA,” fig. 5A; fig. 5B shows a close-up of how the lenses are inclined with respect to the slow-axis direction; para 0036); the optical element includes side surfaces (left side of array 502 and right side of array 504, fig. 5A) with a first pitch (pitch of array 504, fig. 5A; “290 um,” para 0037) at which the lens portions are arranged in a first surface (right surface of array 504, fig. 5A) from which the first light beams are emitted (emitted towards the right in the Z direction, fig. 5A); and the first pitch is larger than a second pitch (pitch of array 502, fig. 5A; “275 um,” para 0037) in which the lens portions are arranged in a second surface on which the first light beams are incident (left surface of array 502, fig. 5A; para 0037).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Sipes, in view of the teachings of Holmgren, by using the microlens array homogenizer, as taught by Holmgren, after the beams pass through the polarization array 159, as taught by Sipes, because the raw output beams from each discrete diode bar is highly divergent and asymmetric, which can be prevented by using a microlens array that ensures sufficient spatial coherence (as opposed to divergence) of the beams, and for the advantage of using a microlens array with different pitches, which reduces the frequency interference between the two lens arrays that occurs when the two pitches are identical (Holmgren, paras 0027 and 0037).
Claims 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sipes (US-20080101429-A1) in view of Wakabayashi et al. (US-20210247573-A1, effective filing date of 23 Aug 2018, cited in 892 form filed 9 June 2025) as applied to claims 1 and 10 above and further in view of Watanabe et al. (JP-2017135146-A, referencing foreign version for drawings and provided English translation for written description).
Regarding claim 9, Sipes teaches the beam coupling device according to claim 1 (figs. 11a/b; please see claim 1 rejection above). Sipes does not explicitly disclose a laser processing machine comprising: the beam coupling device; and a