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 .
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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendment to claim 1 overcomes the rejection of claim 1 as previously outlined. However, applicant does not address Abe, which was previously applied to teach the excitation light source emitting light responsive to an electrical current. Accordingly, the rejection of claim 1 has been updated based on the previously cited references.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-12, 15, 18-20, 23, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spariosu et al. (US20040218652A1), hereafter Spariosu, in view of Hartke et al. (DE102010061891A1), hereafter Hartke, in further view of Abe et al. (US20070217473A1), hereafter Abe.
Regarding claim 1, Spariosu discloses a laser device (Title), comprising: an excitation light source (Fig. 5 element Yb:YAG) having a first reflective layer with respect to a first wavelength ([0045] “A first dielectric coating that is transmissive at the pumplight wavelength (940 nanometers) and reflective at the Yb:YAG laser wavelength (1 micron) is disposed on the end of the Yb:YAG medium adjacent to diode bar 54.”); a laser medium (Fig. 5 element Er:Crystal) having a second reflective layer with respect to a second wavelength on a first surface facing to the excitation light source (Fig. 5 element 62; [0045] “Similarly, a third reflective coating that is transmissive at the Yb:YAG laser wavelength (1 micron) and reflective at the Er:Crystal wavelength (1.6 micron) is disposed between the Yb:YAG medium 50 and the Er:Crystal medium 56.”) and a third reflective layer with respect to the first wavelength on a second surface opposite to the first surface (Fig. 5 element 64; [0045] “A second dielectric coating that is reflective at the Yb:YAG laser wavelength (1 micron) and transmissive at the Er:Crystal laser wavelength (1.6 micron) is disposed between the Er:Crystal medium and the Co:Crystal Q-switch.”), wherein the first surface is between the first reflective layer and the third reflective layer (See annotated Fig. 5 below); and a saturable absorber (Fig. 5 element 58); wherein an order of components along an axis of propagation of light of the laser device (Fig. 5 element 60) includes at least the first reflective layer (See annotated Fig. 5 below), the light source (Fig. 5 element 50), the second reflective layer (See annotated Fig. 5 below), the laser medium (Fig. 5 element 56), the third reflective layer (See annotated Fig. 5 below), the saturable absorber (Fig. 5 element 58).
PNG
media_image1.png
318
608
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Spariosu does not explicitly disclose the saturable absorber having a fourth reflective layer with respect to the second wavelength on a third surface opposite to the laser medium on the propagation direction of the laser device. However, Hartke discloses the saturable absorber (Figs. 8 and 10 element 120) having a fourth reflective layer (Fig. 8 element 112a; Fig. 10 element 112b) with respect to the second wavelength on a third surface opposite to the laser medium (Fig. 8 element 112a; Fig. 10 element 112b) on the propagation direction of the laser device (Fig. 10 element 112b is on element 120 on the emission direction). An advantage, as is known in the art, is to help control the saturation fluence of the saturable absorber. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Spariosu with the saturable absorber having a fourth reflective layer with respect to the second wavelength on a third surface opposite to the laser medium on the propagation direction of the laser device as disclosed by Hartke in order to help control the saturation fluence of the saturable absorber. Spariosu in view of Hartke do not explicitly disclose the excitation light source emits light responsive to an electrical current passing through the excitation light source. However, Abe discloses the excitation light source emits light responsive to an electrical current passing through the excitation light source ([0041]). An advantage, as is known in the art, is to use an excitation light source that can be electrically pumped. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Spariosu in view of Hartke with the excitation light source emits light responsive to an electrical current passing through the excitation light source as disclosed by Abe in order to use an excitation light source that can be electrically pumped.
Regarding claim 2, Spariosu further discloses the first wavelength is a wavelength of the excitation light generated by the excitation light source (Fig. 5 element 1µm) and at least a part of a fourth surface facing to the laser medium of the excitation light source is an exit surface of the excitation light (Fig. 5 element Yb:YAG surface nearest Er:CRYSTAL; the fourth surface is considered an exit surface, because light is emitted from the surface and enters element 56).
Regarding claim 3, Hartke further discloses the excitation light source includes a fifth reflective layer with respect to the first wavelength on the fourth surface (Fig. 8 element 134d), and the fifth reflective layer transmits a part of the first wavelength ([0069]). An advantage is to exceed the laser threshold more quickly ([0068]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Spariosu with the excitation light source includes a fifth reflective layer with respect to the first wavelength on the fourth surface, and the fifth reflective layer transmits a part of the first wavelength as disclosed by Hartke in order to exceed the laser threshold more quickly.
Regarding claim 4, Hartke further discloses the excitation light source is a surface emitting semiconductor laser with an active layer including a quantum well (Figs. 8 and 10 elements 134a, 134d, 130, and 132; [0057]). Abe further discloses discloses a surface emitting semiconductor laser (Fig. 7; Fig. 8) including a p-type semiconductor multilayer reflective layer (Figs. 7 and 8 element 113), an n-type semiconductor multilayer reflective layer (Figs. 7 and 8 element 115), an active layer including a quantum well (Figs. 7 and 8 element 114), a positive electrode in contact with the p-type semiconductor multilayer reflective layer (Figs. 7 and 8 element 117), and a negative electrode in contact with the n-type semiconductor multilayer reflective layer (Figs. 7 and 8 element 118).
Regarding claim 5, Hartke further discloses transmittance of the fifth reflective layer with respect to the first wavelength is higher than that of the first reflective layer (Fig. 8 element 134d vs 134a with respect to 808 nm).
Regarding claim 6, Hartke further discloses reflectance of the first reflective layer with respect to the first wavelength is higher than that of the fifth reflective layer (Fig. 8 element 134d vs 134a with respect to 808 nm).
Regarding claim 7, Spariosu does not explicitly disclose the third reflective layer transmits a part of the first wavelength. However, Hartke discloses reflective layers that both transmit and reflect parts of the first wavelength (Fig. 12 element 134d). An advantage is to allow for different cavity configurations. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Spariosu with the third reflective layer transmits a part of the first wavelength as disclosed by Hartke in order to allow different cavity configurations.
Regarding claim 8, Hartke further discloses the fourth reflective layer transmits a part of the second wavelength (Fig. 10 element 112b with respect to 1064 nm).
Regarding claim 9, Spariosu further discloses the second wavelength is an oscillation wavelength of the laser medium (Fig. 5 elements 60 and 62).
Regarding claim 10, Spariosu further discloses the film between the excitation light source and the laser medium does not reflect with respect to the first wavelength ([0045]). Spariosu in view of Hartke do not explicitly disclose a first anti-reflective film with respect to the first wavelength. However, the Office takes Official Notice that separate reflection and anti-reflection films are well known in the art. An advantage, as is known in the art, is ease of manufacturing. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Spariosu in view of Hartke with a first anti-reflective film with respect to the first wavelength, since it is known in the art to make separate reflection and anti-reflection films as is known in the art in order to provide easier manufacturing and since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlicnrnan, 168 USPQ 177, 179.
Regarding claim 11, Spariosu further discloses the film between the laser medium and the saturable absorber does not reflect with respect to the second wavelength ([0045]). Spariosu in view of Hartke do not explicitly disclose a second anti-reflective film with respect to the second wavelength. However, the Office takes Official Notice that separate reflection and anti-reflection films are well known in the art. An advantage, as is known in the art, is ease of manufacturing. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Spariosu in view of Hartke with a second anti-reflective film with respect to the second wavelength, since it is known in the art to make separate reflection and anti-reflection films as is known in the art in order to provide easier manufacturing and since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlicnrnan, 168 USPQ 177, 179.
Regarding claim 12, Hartke further discloses one or more radiator plates arranged on at least one of between the excitation light source and the laser medium, between the laser medium and the saturable absorber, or on the third surface of the saturable absorber (Fig. 8 element 140). An advantage, as is known in the art, is to remove heat from the device. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Spariosu with one or more radiator plates arranged on at least one of between the excitation light source and the laser medium, between the laser medium and the saturable absorber, or on the third surface of the saturable absorber as disclosed by Hartke in order to remove heat from the device.
Regarding claim 15, Spariosu further discloses the laser medium is a laser medium of a four-level system or a three-level system (Fig. 5 element Er:Crystal implicitly discloses the limitations because Er has both three-level and four-level behavior).
Regarding claim 18, Spariosu in view of Hartke do not explicitly disclose a laser apparatus comprising a plurality of laser devices. However, Abe discloses a laser apparatus comprising a plurality of laser devices (Fig. 8)
Regarding claim 19, Abe further discloses the plurality of laser devices are arranged in a one-dimensional array or a two-dimensional array (Fig. 8; Fig. 12).
Regarding claim 20, Abe further discloses a drive circuit configured to supply an electrical signal for driving to at least one of the laser devices ([0110] implicit because an electrically driven laser requires some type of circuit).
Regarding claim 23, Spariosu does not explicitly disclose the excitation light source includes a fourth reflective layer with respect to the first wavelength on the third surface, and the fourth reflective layer transmits a part of the first wavelength. Hartke further discloses the excitation light source includes a fourth reflective layer with respect to the first wavelength on the third surface (Fig. 8 element 134d), and the fourth reflective layer transmits a part of the first wavelength ([0069]). An advantage is to exceed the laser threshold more quickly ([0068]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Spariosu with the excitation light source includes a fourth reflective layer with respect to the first wavelength on the third surface, and the fourth reflective layer transmits a part of the first wavelength as disclosed by Hartke in order to exceed the laser threshold more quickly.
Regarding claim 28, Spariosu further discloses a first resonator generates the light of the first wavelength inside of the excitation light source and absorbs the light of the first wavelength inside the laser medium (Fig. 5 element 64; [0046]), and a second resonator generates pulse light of the second wavelength (Fig. 5 element 62; [0046]) by a Q-switching of the saturable absorber (Fig. 5 element 58; Claim 13). Spariosu does not explicitly disclose the excitation light source includes a semiconductor layer to generate the first light. However, Hartke further disclose the excitation light source includes a semiconductor layer to generate the first light (Figs. 8 and 10 elements 134a, 134d, 130, and 132; [0057]). An advantage is to use a known material to achieve the desired pump wavelength based on the intended use of the device. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Spariosu with the excitation light source includes a semiconductor layer to generate the first light as disclosed by Hartke in order to use a known material to achieve the desired pump wavelength based on the intended use of the device and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spariosu in view of Hartke in further view of Abe, as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Fulbert et al. (US5832010), hereafter Fulbert.
Regarding claim 13, Spariosu in view of Hartke in further view of Abe do not explicitly disclose a wavelength conversion material arranged between the second reflective layer and the fourth reflective layer. However, Fulbert discloses a wavelength conversion material arranged between the second reflective layer and the fourth reflective layer (Fig. 7 element 78 is between elements 68 and 70). An advantage is to achieve the desired wavelength (Abstract). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Spariosu in view of Hartke in further view of Abe with a wavelength conversion material arranged between the second reflective layer and the fourth reflective layer as disclosed by Fulbert in order to achieve the desired wavelength.
Regarding claim 14, Fulbert further discloses the wavelength conversion material includes a sixth reflective layer with respect to a wavelength after conversion by the wavelength conversion material on the fifth surface facing to the excitation light source (Fig. 7 element 70).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached Notice of References Cited.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JOSHUA KING whose telephone number is (571)270-1441. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 10am-5pm MT.
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, Min Sun Harvey can be reached on (571) 272-1835. 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.
/Joshua King/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828 04/04/2026