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 Examiner acknowledges the amending of claim 1 and cancellation of claim 4.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/04/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant has argued (Remarks, pg.4-5) that Droz teaches multiple loops rather than a single detection pattern as currently claimed.
The Examiner does not agree. Droz specifically notes the detection means shown in fig.8 makes use of “a single feedback trace 820” (col.25 lines 47-48). The trace of Droz is a single pattern. The single pattern is a meandering line in which multiple loops/coils are formed around the multiple diode circuits. The argument is therefore not persuasive as the claim language is not found to clearly distinguish from Droz.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1/2 as being anticipated by Droz et al. (US 9784835).
With respect to claim 1, Droz discloses a laser light emitting device (fig.5a-c/8; note fig.8 contains multiple instances of the drive circuit shown in fig.5a-c) comprising: a plurality of laser light emitters each including a laser diode (fig.5a-c #508), a drive circuit configured (fig.5a-b #510) to drive the laser diode by controlling supply of a drive current to the laser diode (col.18 lines 31-33), and a drive line through which the drive current flows from the drive circuit to the laser diode (fig.5a-c line shown connecting laser to transistor switch) ; and a light emission detector (fig.5c/fig.8 #560/562/564/566) including a single detection pattern (fig.5c/fig.8 #560/#820) placed so as to cause an electromagnetically induced current to flow in response to a drive current flowing through each drive line when the corresponding laser light emitter emits light (fig.8 via #824/826/828; col.25 line 65 – col.26line 18), the light emission detector configured to detect light emission from a driven laser diode by using a combination of a direction and a magnitude the current flowing in the detection pattern (col.25 line 65 – col.26 line 18; note that the direction and magnitude are necessarily used as each determines the amount and direction of flux which is made use of to induce the current/voltage within the detecting means of Droz, col.19 line 58- col.20 line 18), wherein the single detection pattern is disposed between the drive lines of the plurality of laser light emitters (fig.8, detection pattern formed by #820 disposed between the driving lines of each of the multiple driver circuits), and the detection pattern is a loop coil shaped pattern (fig.8 #820 forms coils/loops around each circuit).
With respect to claim 2, Droz discloses the plurality of laser light emitters emit light in turn (col.26 lines 10-12).
With respect to claim 3, Droz discloses the drive lines of the plurality of laser light emitters are positioned so as to have different positional relationships with the detection pattern (fig.8; firing circuit 1 with its drive line is closer to top of pattern, near leads #821/822, as compared to firing circuit 3 with its drive line, for example).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Please see the previous pto892 form which contains a list of related references using current sensors for laser diode feedback.
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 TOD THOMAS VAN ROY whose telephone number is (571)272-8447. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8AM-430PM.
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, MinSun Harvey can be reached at 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.
/TOD T VAN ROY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828