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 .
This is a second non-final due to claim features not showing in the drawings.
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,
Claim 1 requires “an emission optical system ([0136], i.e., optical elements. Fig.1 shows 10, 20, 30 as optical elements), a protective member (70), galvano scanner including a mirror”.
However, embodiment fig.1 does not have the galvanometer.
Embodiment fig.6 discuss about replaced the optical elements with the galvano (i.e., [0218] The laser irradiation apparatus according to the 6th embodiment of the present invention includes a galvano scanner (galvanometer scanner) in place of the wedge prism 20, the rotating tube 40, and the motor 50 etc. of the 1st embodiment).
Embodiment fig.10 discuss about an operation of the protective member of the 6th embodiment at the time of laser irradiation. [0229] and the protective member 120 rotates around the central axis in synchronization with the oscillation of the mirror constituting the galvano scanner [0232]. As noted above, the galvano scanner “in place of” the optical elements (20, 40, 50 etc.). This suggest that in when embodiment fig.10 uses galvano scanner, there is no optical elements. (as noted in 6th embodiment). That is, there is no single embodiment teach or suggest that there is a galvano scanner and an emission optical system (hence, optical elements) in combination with a protective member. Claim 10 is objected for the same reason (hence, i.e., the emission optical system has a galvano scanner).
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.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 8-11, 13-17 and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
(1) “Claims 1 and 8-9 recites “the irradiation object side” should be changed to “an irradiation object side”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“an airflow generating portion for generating an airflow for discharging foreign substances during operation thereof” in claim 13.
“a purge gas introducing part for introducing a purge gas into a region of the protective member opposite to the irradiation object side” in claim 17.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
“an airflow generating portion” (claim 13) is interpreted as “fins 82 and 83” (para.0164 of instant publication application).
“a purge gas introducing part” (claim 17) is interpreted as “[0044] According to a 17th aspect of the present invention, there is provided a laser irradiation apparatus according to any one of the 1st to 16th aspects, further comprising a purge gas introduction section for introducing a purge gas into a region of the protective member opposite to the irradiation object side. [0454] of instant publication application, i.e., The assist gas supply pipe 270 spouts the various kinds of gases containing, assist gas, such as oxygen, or purge gas such as air and inactive gas (nitrogen gas, argon gas, etc.), according to a purpose as assist gas, purge gas, etc. which remove foreign substances from an irradiated part.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 10-11, 13-17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites “an emission optical system … a protective member … a galvano scanner …”. Claim 1 requires “an emission optical system ([0136], i.e., optical elements. Fig.1 shows 10, 20, 30 as optical elements), a protective member (70), galvano scanner including a mirror”. However, embodiment fig.1 does not have the galvanometer. Embodiment fig.6 discuss about replaced the optical elements with the galvano ([0218] The laser irradiation apparatus according to the 6th embodiment of the present invention includes a galvano scanner (galvanometer scanner) in place of the wedge prism 20, the rotating tube 40, and the motor 50 etc. of the 1st embodiment).
Embodiment fig.10 discuss about an operation of the protective member of the 6th embodiment at the time of laser irradiation. [0229] and the protective member 120 rotates around the central axis in synchronization with the oscillation of the mirror constituting the galvano scanner [0232]. As noted above, the galvano scanner “in place of” the optical elements (20, 40, 50 etc.). This suggest that in when embodiment fig.10 uses galvano scanner, there is no emission optical system (i.e., optical elements). (as noted in 6th embodiment). That is, there is no single embodiment teach or suggest that there is a galvano scanner and an emission optical system (i.e., optical elements) in combination with a protective member in one embodiment. Claims 10-11 are rejected for the same reason.
Claim 14 recites “a plurality of protective members 70 and 80” which directed to embodiment fig.5. However, nothing in the specification teach or suggest that use a plurality of protective members in combination of protective member with slits (claim 1 and fig.9).
Claim 15 recites “three or more protective members” which directed to fig.18. However, nothing in the specification teach or suggest that use three or more protective members in combination of protective member with slits (claim 1 and fig.9). Claim 16 is rejected for the same reason based on its dependency.
Claim 17 recites “a purge gas introducing part for introducing a purge gas” is interpreted as “A purge gas is introduced from a gas supply unit (not shown)” (para.0131 of instant publication application). As described above, the disclosure does not provide adequate structure to perform the claimed function of introducing a purge gas. The specification does not demonstrate that applicant has made an invention that achieves the claimed function of “for introducing a purge gas” because the invention is not described with sufficient detail that one of ordinary skill in the art can reasonably conclude that the inventor has possession of the claimed invention. In this case, the invention is not described with sufficient detail with respect to “a gas supply unit”.
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, 8-11, 13-17 and 19 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 “a protective member which is provided between the emission optical system and the beam spot, and which suppresses an arrival of foreign substances scattered from the irradiation object side to the emission optical system, and which has an aperture through which the beam passes, and which moves in connection with a change in at least one of an irradiation direction and an optical path position of the beam … and which has a second slit extending in the direction”.
It is unclear what structure(s) contain “which suppresses an arrival of foreign substances scattered from the irradiation object side to the emission optical system, and which has an aperture through which the beam passes, and which moves in connection with a change in at least one of an irradiation direction and an optical path position of the beam”. For example: does that mean the protective member or aperture moves in connection with a change in at least one of an irradiation direction and an optical path position of the beam.
Claim 8 recites “a protective member which is provided between the emission optical system and the beam spot, and which suppresses an arrival of foreign substances scattered from the irradiation object side to the emission optical system, and which has an aperture through which the beam passes, and which moves in connection with a change in at least one of an irradiation direction and an optical path position of the beam so that a position of the aperture is positioned on a path of the beam, wherein the emission optical system has a rotary optical system which gives at least one of a deflection angle and a shift amount to the beam, and which rotates around a predetermined rotation center axis so as to turn the beam spot, wherein the protective member is fixed to a holding member which holds the rotary optical system, and wherein the protective member is formed as a cylindrical body arranged along the rotation center axis, and the aperture is provided on a peripheral surface of the cylindrical body”. It is unclear what structure(s) refers to which suppresses, which moves, which has an aperture and which rotates.
Claim 9 recites “a protective member which is provided between the emission optical system and the beam spot, and which suppresses an arrival of foreign substances scattered from the irradiation object side to the emission optical system, and which has an aperture through which the beam passes, and which moves in connection with a change in at least one of an irradiation direction … and which suppresses an arrival of foreign substances scattered from the irradiation object side to the emission optical system, and which has an aperture through which the beam passes, and which moves in connection with a change in at least one of an irradiation direction”. It is unclear what structure(s) refers to which suppresses, which has an aperture, which moves, and which suppresses.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY CHOU whose telephone number is (571)270-7107. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached at (571) 272-9059. 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.
/JIMMY CHOU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761