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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 02/02/2026 is being considered by the examiner.
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, 7-10, 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Diening (US 2011/0069376) in view of Koshimizu (US 2021/0239566).
Regarding claim 1, Diening teaches an electromagnetic radiation system (figs.1-3, paragraphs 0002,0025) for directing an electromagnetic radiation beam at a target comprising:
an electromagnetic radiation source (12 figs.1-3) configured to provide the electromagnetic ration beam (paragraphs 0013-0026; figs.1-3);
a head (22 figs.1-3) operatively connected to the electromagnetic radiation source and configured to project the electromagnetic radiation beam on to the target (paragraphs 0002, 0025); and
an umbilical assembly (14 figs.1-3) operatively connected to the electromagnetic radiation source (12) and the head (22) and configured to transmit the electromagnetic radiation source to the head;
an optical isolator (52 fig.2) positioned between an optical fiber amplifier (42) and the umbilical assembly (14),
at least two head mounting locations for mounting the head, each mounting location being configured to support the head for projecting the electromagnetic radiation beam on to a product provided at a processing location
Diening does not explicitly teaches a mounting structure having at least two head mounting locations for mounting the head, each mounting location being configured to support the head for projecting the electromagnetic radiation beam on to a product provided at a processing location
However, Koshimizu (US 2021/0239566) teaches similar system (fig.1) including a mounting structure having at least two head mounting locations for mounting the head (fig.1, carriages 23 and 22 enables positioning of the head at plurality of locations in X and Y directions), each mounting location being configured to support the head (35) for projecting the electromagnetic radiation beam on to a product (W) provided at a processing location (fig.1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include such mounting structure in the system of Diening based on the teachings of Koshimizu in order to improve head handling in a safe and faster manner.
Regarding claim 5, Diening as modified by Koshimizu further teaches wherein the head (22 figs.1-3 of Diening) comprises a collimator, wherein the collimator (80,72, and/or 86 fig.3 of Diening) is configured to receive electromagnetic radiation from the umbilical assembly (14 of Diening).
Regarding claim 7, Diening as in the alternatives modified by Durkin further teaches wherein the umbilical assembly (14 figs.1-3 of Diening; 2 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin) comprises an optical fiber (16, paragraphs 0018,0019 of Diening; figs. 5,6,12,13, paragraphs 0075,0077,0079 of Durkin) configured to transmit the electromagnetic radiation beam from the electromagnetic radiation source (12 of Diening; 1 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin) to the head (22 of Diening; 51,4 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin).
Regarding claim 8, Diening as in the alternatives modified by Durkin further teaches wherein the optical fiber (16 figs.1-3, paragraphs 0018,0019 of Diening; figs. 5,6,12,13 paragraphs 0075,0077,0079 of Durkin) configured to transmit the electromagnetic radiation beam from the electromagnetic radiation source (12 of Diening; 1 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin) to the head (22 of Diening; 51,4 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin) is a passive fiber configured to transmit the electromagnetic radiation beam from an optical isolator (52 of Diening; 8 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin) to the head (22 of Diening; 51,4 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin) without amplification (paragraphs 0023,0024 of Diening; paragraphs 0020,0073, 0075,0077,0079 of Durkin).
Regarding claim 9, Diening as in the alternatives modified by Durkin further teaches wherein a length of the optical fiber (16 figs.1-3 of Diening; figs. 5,6,12,13 paragraphs 0075,0077,0079 of Durkin) is greater than a length of the umbilical assembly (14 of Diening;2 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin) (fig.3 of Diening; figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin).
Regarding claim 10, Diening as in the alternatives modified by Durkin further teaches wherein the collimator (80,72, and/or 86 fig.3 of Diening; 4,7 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin) is optically coupled to the optical isolator (52 of Diening; 8 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin) by the umbilical assembly (14 of Diening;2 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin).
Regarding claim 13, Diening as in the alternatives modified by Durkin further teaches further comprising a cabinet (housing of 12 figs.1,2, paragraph 0013 of Diening; 50 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin), wherein the electromagnetic radiation source (12 of Diening;1 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin) is configured within the cabinet, and wherein the optical isolator (52 of Diening; 8 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin) is configured within the cabinet.
Claims 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Diening as modified by Koshimizu and further in view of Kawada et al. (JP 2012234978).
Regarding claim 17, Diening as in the alternatives modified by Durkin further teaches a method of manufacturing an electromagnetic radiation system (figs.1-3, paragraphs 0002,0025 of Diening; figs.5,6,12,13 of Durkin), the method comprising:
passing a collimator (80,72, and/or 86 fig.3 of Diening; 4,7 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin) of an optical assembly that includes an optical isolator (52 figs.2 of Diening;8 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin) through an umbilical housing (14 figs.1-3 of Diening; 2 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin) comprising an elongate tube having a first opening at a first end of the elongate tube and a second opening at a second send of the elongate tube, wherein the passing of the collimator comprises passing the collimator from the first opening to the second opening, wherein the optical isolator (52 of Diening;8 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin) is connected to the collimator (80,72, and/or 86 fig.3 of Diening; 4,7 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin) by an optical fiber (16 of Diening; figs. 5,6,12,13 paragraphs 0075,0077,0079 of Durkin); and
configuring the collimator (80,72, and/or 86 fig.3 of Diening;4,7 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin) within a head (22 figs.1-3 of Diening; 51,4 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin) of the electromagnetic radiation system that is operatively connected to an electromagnetic radiation source (12 of Diening; 1 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin) and positioned relative to a target (figs.1-3 of Diening; figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin),
Diening further teaches wherein the electromagnetic radiation system (power amplifier laser system in figs.1-3) is a laser marking system (figs.1-3, paragraphs 0002, 0013,0014,0016-0020,0025, teaches the system in fig.1-3 is a laser system and may be used for instance for laser engraving, laser machining, or laser micromachining operations which are marking operations. Thus, fig.1-3 teaches laser marking system).
However, in case applicant argues that Diening does not teach wherein the electromagnetic radiation system is a laser marking system.
Kawada et al in the alternative teaches similar electromagnetic radiation system (100 figs.1,2,4,16-19), wherein the electromagnetic radiation system (100) is a laser marking system configured to process workpiece (50) such process as laser marking (paragraph 0031). Kawada et al further teaches wherein the electromagnetic radiation system (100 figs.1,2,4,16-19) includes: an electromagnetic radiation source (150) comprising an optical fiber laser comprising an optical fiber amplifier (1), the optical fiber amplifier being a final optical amplification stage of the electromagnetic radiation system (paragraphs 0034,0039,0042); a head (120) operatively connected to the electromagnetic radiation source and positioned relative to the target (50); and an umbilical assembly (130) operatively connected to the electromagnetic radiation source (150) and the head (120) and having a beam transmission path from the electromagnetic radiation source (150) to the head (120); wherein the electromagnetic radiation system further comprises an optical isolator (6) positioned between the optical fiber amplifier (1) and the umbilical assembly (130).
Therefore, in the alternatives it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the electromagnetic radiation system of Diening as a laser marking system based on the teachings of Kawada et al to be able to performing laser marking operations.
Regarding claim 18, Diening as in the alternatives modified by Diening as in the alternatives modified by Durkin and Kawada et al further teaches wherein the optical isolator (52 fig.2 of Diening ;8 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin;6 of Kawada et al), collimator (80,72, and/or 86 fig.3 of Diening; 4,7 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin; 14 of Kawada et al) and optical fiber (16 of Diening; figs. 5,6,12,13 paragraphs 0075,0077,0079 of Durkin; 2 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin; 11A,11B of Kawada et al) are integrally formed.
Regarding claim 19, Diening as in the alternatives modified by Diening as in the alternatives modified by Durkin and Kawada et al further teaches wherein configuring the collimator (80,72, and/or 86 fig.3 of Diening; 4,7 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin; 14 of Kawada et al) within the head comprises fixing the collimator within the head (22 figs.1-3 of Diening; 51,4 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin; 120 of Kawada et al).
Regarding claim 20, Diening as in the alternatives modified by Diening as in the alternatives modified by Durkin and Kawada et al further teaches wherein the electromagnetic radiation source (12 of Diening; 1 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin; 150 of Kawada et al) to the head (22 of Diening; 51,4 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin; 120 of Kawada et al) comprises a fiber laser (16 figs.1-3, paragraphs 0018,0019 of Diening; 2 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin; 11A,11B of Kawada et al).
Claims 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Diening as modified by Koshimizu and further in view of Schmitt (DE10059246).
Regarding claim 15, Diening as modified by Koshimizu substantially teaches the claimed invention including head (22 figs.1-3 of Diening; 51,4 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin) having a housing. It should be noted that a portion of the housing of the head (22 figs.1-3 of Diening; ; 51,4 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin) can be held by the user to move the head relative to the target thus the portion of the housing can be the claimed movable assembly.
However, Diening as in the alternatives modified by Durkin do not explicitly states a moveable assembly, wherein the moveable assembly operatively connected to the head to move the head relative to the target.
Schmitt teaches a moveable assembly (14 and outer body of 1 around button 14 that is to be held by the operator to move the device/head 1 over workpiece 5 in figs.1-5), wherein the moveable assembly operatively connected to the head (1) to move the head relative to the target (5) (paragraphs 0004,0005,0053 teaches the handheld device 1 is guided/moved over workpiece 5 by the operator/personnel).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include movable assembly/structure for holding/handle to the head of the electromagnetic radiation system of Diening based on the teachings of Schmitt for instance to use the device as handheld device that can be easily move around a workpiece by the operator.
It would also have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include handle on the head unit of Diening since it was known in the art that adding a handle on a device enables facilitate easy handling of the device.
Regarding claim 16, Diening as in the alternatives modified by Durkin substantially teaches the claimed invention including head (22 figs.1-3 of Diening; 51,4 figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin) configured to form markings on the target (paragraph 0025 of Diening; figs. 5,6,12,13 of Durkin).
Diening as in the alternatives modified by Durkin do not explicitly discloses a holder, wherein the system is configured to permit use of the head only if the head is held by the holder in a predetermined configuration, the predetermined configuration being determined based upon an interaction between cooperating features of the holder and the head.
However, Schmitt teaches a holder (trigger device 14, sealing element 4 figs.1-5), wherein the system is configured to permit use of the head (1 figs.1-5) only if the head is held by the holder in a predetermined configuration, the predetermined configuration being determined based upon an interaction between cooperating features of the holder (14,4) and the head (1) (paragraphs 0024,0044,0053,0054, teaches if 4 is not in light-tight connection/configuration with workpiece 5 during operation the laser output is switched off by preventing triggering to prevent laser escaping).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include such holder in the electromagnetic radiation system of Diening based on the teachings of Schmitt to provide laser safe device for the operating personnel.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/19/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s attention is respectfully directed to the above new rejections.
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 HENOK D LEGESSE whose telephone number is (571)270-1615. The examiner can normally be reached General Schedule 9:00 am- 5:00 pm, IFP.
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, Douglas Rodriguez can be reached at (571)431-0716. 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.
/HENOK D LEGESSE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853