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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on December 17, 2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on December 17, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1, 12, and 18 have been amended in the present application. Claims 1-20 are pending in the present application.
Response to Arguments
Regarding Applicant’s arguments on pages 10-12 that Ragatz fails to teach “the angled flange extends at a non-right angle relative to the moveable carrier,” Examiner respectfully disagrees.
As evidenced by Figures 1B, 1D, and 3, the optical members FRONT and REAR are angled and supported by filter holding component 18 ([0030] and [0036]). Although the outside of filter holding component 18 is perpendicular to the moveable carrier 14 (Figure 1D) as discussed by the Applicant, the filters (optical members FRONT and REAR) are angled relative to the moveable carrier. Furthermore, “a plurality of mounts or pockets are provided on or formed in filter holding component 18 to hold optical filter elements” ([0036]). Under BRI a mount satisfies the definition of a flange as a rim for guiding or attachment to another object. Since the filters are angled the mount would also be angled to support the angled filter and thus satisfies an angled flange extending at a non-right angle relative to the moveable carrier. Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive and Examiner maintains the 103 rejection of claims 1, 12, and 18.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 12, and 18 regarding the amended limitation “a planar surface of at least one of the first and second optical members is arranged parallel to a planar surface of the angled flange” have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 1-2, 5-6, 9, 11-13, and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Svilans (U.S. Patent No. 6,542,534) in view of Forster (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0215920) and in further view of Ragatz et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0149957 – hereinafter referred to as “Ragatz”) and further in view of Stegmann et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0382287 – hereinafter referred to as “Stegmann”)..
Regarding claim 1, Svilans teaches a switching mechanism (Figure 1 microcartridge 60) for a multispectral laser transmitter (Figure 1 laser assembly 20), the switching mechanism, comprising: a first optical member (Figure 1 wavelength selective element 64, Column 7 lines 24-52); and a second optical member (Figure 1 wavelength selective element 64, Column 7 lines 24-52).
Svilans fails to teach a moveable carrier, the first and second optical members supported by the moveable carrier, and wherein the moveable carrier is operable to selectively move the first optical member into alignment with a laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter and to selectively move the second optical member into alignment with the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter. However, Forster teaches a moveable carrier (Figure 1 filter interchanger 102, [0080]), the first and second optical members supported by the moveable carrier (Figures 1 and 2 filters 131, 133, and 135 [0081]), and wherein the moveable carrier is operable to selectively move the first optical member into alignment with a laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter and to selectively move the second optical member into alignment with the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter ([0078]-[0080]). Forster is analogous art because Forster teaches a device for switching optical elements. Forster further teaches the moveable carrier is space-saving ([0023]) and allows for quick change of filters ([0021]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the moveable carrier taught by Forster to the switching mechanism taught by Svilans in order to save space and allow for quick change of filters (Forster [0021] and [0023]).
Svilans and Forster fail to teach the first and second optical members are supported by an angled flange of the moveable carrier wherein the angled flange extends at a non-right angle relative to the moveable carrier. However, Ragatz teaches a moveable carrier for switching optical components (Figure 1A) with optical members supported by an angled flange of the moveable carrier (Figures 1A,B optical members FRONT and REAR are angled on the wheel assembly 10 , [0030] filters are angled relative to the axis, [0036] mounts or pockets of filter holding component 18 that hold optical members FRONT and REAR can be considered to be flanges since they hold onto the optical members are attached to filter holding component 18) wherein the angled flange extends at a non-right angle relative to the moveable carrier ([0030] and [0036] since optical members FRONT and REAR are angled relative to the moveable carrier the mounts or pockets of filter holding component 18 would also be angled in order to support the optical members). Ragatz further teaches angling the filters is beneficial for different imaging modes ([0041]). Furthermore, angling the filters relative to the incident laser would back reflection of the laser. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical switching mechanism taught by Svilans and Forster by adding an angled flange to the moveable carrier that extends at a non-right angle relative to the moveable carrier to support optical components as taught by Ragatz as angling filters is beneficial for different imaging modes (Ragatz [0041]) and would help prevent back reflection of the laser.
Svilans, Forster, and Ragatz fail to explicitly teach a planar surface of at least of the of the first and second optical members is arranged parallel to a planar surface of the angled flange. However, Stegmann teaches an optical switching mechanism (Figure 4a) wherein a planar surface of at least of the of the first and second optical members (Figure 3 flat surface 13 of divider 12, [0037]; Abstract divider 12 is an optical component) is arranged parallel to a planar surface of the angled flange (Figure 3 flat surface 13 of divider 12 rests on and is parallel to bearing surface of carrier 1, [0037]-[0038]). Stegmann further teaches using planar parallel surface of the flange to support the optical component, [0037]-[0038]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical switching mechanism taught by the combination of Svilans, Forster, and Ragatz by having a planar surface of the optical components be parallel to a planar surface of the angled flange as taught by Stegmann in order to allow the optical components to rest on the flange and provide proper support for the optical component (Stegmann [0037]-[0038]).
Regarding claim 2, Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann teach all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Svilans fails to teach the moveable carrier is supported by and rotatable about an axle. However, Forster teaches the moveable carrier is supported by and rotatable about an axle (Figure 1 rotation axle 113, [0078]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the moveable carrier switching mechanism taught by the combination of Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann be rotatable about an axle in order to allow for quick change of filters (Forster [0021]).
Regarding claim 5, Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann teach all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Svilans fails to teach the moveable carrier further comprises:
a first stop surface that interfaces with a first stop when the first optical member is in alignment with the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter, and
a second stop surface that interfaces with a second stop when the second optical member is in alignment with the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter; and
an actuator is controlled by a controller operable to cause the actuator to move the moveable carrier such that the first stop surface comes into contact with the first stop to align the first optical member with the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter, and to cause the actuator to move the moveable carrier such that the second stop surface comes into contact with the second stop to align the second optical member with the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter.
However, Forster teaches the moveable carrier (Figure 1 filter interchanger 102, [0080]) further comprises:
a first stop surface (Figures 6 and 8 stop lever 144, [0086]) that interfaces with a first stop (Figure 6 stop pin 149, [0086]) when the first optical member is in alignment with the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter ([0086]), and
a second stop surface (Figures 6 and 8 stop lever 144, [0086]) that interfaces with a second stop (Figure 6 stop pin 149, [0086]) when the second optical member is in alignment with the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter ([0086]); and
an actuator ([0079] electric motor is an actuator) is controlled by a controller operable to cause the actuator to move the moveable carrier ([0046]) such that the first stop surface comes into contact with the first stop to align the first optical member with the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter, and to cause the actuator to move the moveable carrier such that the second stop surface comes into contact with the second stop to align the second optical member with the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter ([0092]-[0094]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the stops, controller, and actuator taught by Forster to the switching mechanism taught by the combination of Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann in order to allow quick and precise alignment of the desired filter (Forster [0046] and [0051]).
Regarding claim 6, Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 5. Svilans fails to teach when the first stop surface comes into contact with the first stop, the controller is operable to cause the actuator to maintain a force on the moveable carrier to bias the first stop surface against the first stop, and wherein, when the second stop surface comes into contact with the second stop, the controller is operable to cause the actuator to maintain a force on the moveable carrier to bias the second stop surface against the second stop. However, Forster teaches the first stop surface (Figures 6 and 8 stop lever 144, [0086]) comes into contact with the first stop (Figure 6 stop pin 149, [0086]), the controller ([0046]) is operable to cause the actuator to maintain a force on the moveable carrier to bias the first stop surface against the first stop, and wherein, when the second stop surface (Figures 6 and 8 stop lever 144, [0086]) comes into contact with the second stop (Figure 6 stop pin 149, [0086]), the controller ([0046]) is operable to cause the actuator ([0079] electric motor is an actuator) to maintain a force on the moveable carrier to bias the second stop surface against the second stop. Since Forster teaches all of the structural elements of the claim, the moveable carrier taught by Forster would be capable maintaining a biasing force to maintain contact between the stops and stop surfaces. Moreover, Forster teaches maintaining positioning of the filter wheel ([0051]) and identifying and correcting positioning errors ([0049] and [0097]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the switching mechanism taught by the combination of Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann to have the controller direct the actuator to maintain a biasing force between the stops and stop surfaces as taught by Forster to in order maintaining positioning of the filter wheel (Forster [0051]) and identifying and correcting positioning errors (Forster [0049] and [0097]).
Regarding claim 9, Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann teach all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Svilans further teaches the first optical member comprises a first filter that filters light at a first wavelength (Column 7 lines 25-47), and wherein the second optical member comprises a second filter that filters light at a second wavelength (Column 7 lines 25-47).
Regarding claim 11, Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Svilans, Forster, and Ragatz fail to teach at least one of the first optical member or the second optical member comprises a polarizer. However, Stegmann teaches a polarizer ([0002] various optical components including polarizers). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have on the optical members of the switching mechanism taught by Svilans, Forster, and Ragatz be a polarizer in order to achieve a laser beam with the desired polarization. Furthermore, polarizers are well known in the art and would have been an obvious optical member to use.
Regarding claim 12, Svilans teaches a modular optical switching system (Figure 1 microcartridge 60) for a multispectral laser transmitter (Figure 1 laser assembly 20), the system comprising: a modular housing (Figure 1 microcartridge 60 Column 6 line 50 - Column 7 line 23); a first optical member (Figure 1 wavelength selective element 64, Column 7 lines 24-52); and a second optical member (Figure 1 wavelength selective element 64, Column 7 lines 24-52).
Svilans fails to teach a moveable carrier connect to and disposed within the modular housing, the first and second optical members supported by the moveable carrier, and wherein the moveable carrier is operable to selectively move the first optical member into alignment with a laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter and to selectively move the second optical member into alignment with the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter. However, Forster teaches a moveable carrier (Figure 1 filter interchanger 102, [0080]), the first and second optical members supported by the moveable carrier (Figures 1 and 2 filters 131, 133, and 135 [0081]), and wherein the moveable carrier is operable to selectively move the first optical member into alignment with a laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter and to selectively move the second optical member into alignment with the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter ([0078]-[0080]). Forster further teaches the moveable carrier is space-saving ([0023]) and allows for quick change of filters ([0021]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the moveable carrier taught by Forster to the modular housing taught by Svilans in order to save space and allow for quick change of filters (Forster [0021] and [0023]).
Svilans and Forster fail to teach the first and second optical members are supported by an angled flange of the moveable carrier wherein the angled flange extends at a non-right angle relative to the moveable carrier. However, Ragatz teaches a moveable carrier for switching optical components (Figure 1A) with optical members supported by an angled flange of the moveable carrier (Figures 1A,B optical members FRONT and REAR are angled on the wheel assembly 10 , [0030] filters are angled relative to the axis, [0036] mounts or pockets of filter holding component 18 that hold optical members FRONT and REAR can be considered to be flanges since they hold onto the optical members are attached to filter holding component 18) wherein the angled flange extends at a non-right angle relative to the moveable carrier ([0030] and [0036] since optical members FRONT and REAR are angled relative to the moveable carrier the mounts or pockets of filter holding component 18 would also be angled in order to support the optical members). Ragatz further teaches angling the filters is beneficial for different imaging modes ([0041]). Furthermore, angling the filters relative to the incident laser would back reflection of the laser. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical switching mechanism taught by Svilans and Forster by adding an angled flange to the moveable carrier that extends at a non-right angle relative to the moveable carrier to support optical components as taught by Ragatz as angling filters is beneficial for different imaging modes (Ragatz [0041]) and would help prevent back reflection of the laser.
Svilans, Forster, and Ragatz fail to explicitly teach a planar surface of at least of the of the first and second optical members is arranged parallel to a planar surface of the angled flange. However, Stegmann teaches an optical switching mechanism (Figure 4a) wherein a planar surface of at least of the of the first and second optical members (Figure 3 flat surface 13 of divider 12, [0037]; Abstract divider 12 is an optical component) is arranged parallel to a planar surface of the angled flange (Figure 3 flat surface 13 of divider 12 rests on and is parallel to bearing surface of carrier 1, [0037]-[0038]). Stegmann further teaches using planar parallel surface of the flange to support the optical component, [0037]-[0038]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical switching mechanism taught by the combination of Svilans, Forster, and Ragatz by having a planar surface of the optical components be parallel to a planar surface of the angled flange as taught by Stegmann in order to allow the optical components to rest on the flange and provide proper support for the optical component (Stegmann [0037]-[0038]).
Regarding claim 13, Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann teach all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 12. Svilans further teaches the modular housing comprises a connecting flange operable to mount the modular housing to a housing of the multispectral laser transmitter (Figure 1 cover 62, Column 9 lines 20-65).
Regarding claim 16, Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann teach all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 12. Svilans fails to teach an axle mounted to the modular housing and the moveable carrier is supported by and rotatable about an axle. However, Forster teaches the moveable carrier is supported by and rotatable about an axle (Figure 1 rotation axle 113, [0078]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the moveable carrier switching mechanism taught by the combination of Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann be rotatable about an axle in order to allow for quick change of filters (Forster [0021]).
Regarding claim 17, Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann teach all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 16. Svilans fails to teach a controller; a first stop; and a second stop; wherein the moveable carrier further comprises: a first stop surface that interfaces with the first stop when the first optical member is in alignment with the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter, and a second stop surface that interfaces with the second stop when the second optical member is in alignment with the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter, wherein the controller is operable to cause an actuator to move the moveable carrier such that the first stop surface comes into contact with the first stop to align the first optical member with the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter and to cause the actuator to move the moveable carrier such that the second stop surface comes into contact with the second stop to align the second optical member with the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter, and wherein when the first stop surface comes into contact with the first stop, the controller is operable to cause the actuator to maintain a force on the moveable carrier to bias the first stop surface against the first stop, and wherein when the second stop surface comes into contact with the second stop, the controller is operable to cause the actuator to maintain a force on the moveable carrier to bias the second stop surface against the second stop.
However, Forster teaches a controller ([0046]); a first stop (Figure 6 stop pin 149, [0086]); and a second stop (Figure 6 stop pin 149, [0086]); wherein the moveable carrier further comprises: a first stop surface (Figures 6 and 8 stop lever 144, [0086]) that interfaces with the first stop (Figure 6 stop pin 149, [0086]) when the first optical member is in alignment with the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter ([0086]), and a second stop surface (Figures 6 and 8 stop lever 144, [0086]) that interfaces with the second stop (Figure 6 stop pin 149, [0086]) when the second optical member is in alignment with the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter ([0086]), wherein the controller ([0046]) is operable to cause an actuator ([0079] electric motor is an actuator) to move the moveable carrier such that the first stop surface (Figures 6 and 8 stop lever 144, [0086]) comes into contact with the first stop (Figure 6 stop pin 149, [0086]) to align the first optical member with the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter ([0092]-[0094]), and to cause the actuator ([0079] electric motor is an actuator) to move the moveable carrier such that the second stop surface (Figures 6 and 8 stop lever 144, [0086]) comes into contact with the second stop (Figure 6 stop pin 149, [0086]) to align the second optical member with the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter ([0092]-[0094]), and wherein when the first stop surface (Figures 6 and 8 stop lever 144, [0086]) comes into contact with the first stop (Figure 6 stop pin 149, [0086]), the controller ([0046]) is operable to cause the actuator ([0079] electric motor is an actuator) to maintain a force on the moveable carrier to bias the first stop surface (Figures 6 and 8 stop lever 144, [0086]) against the first stop (Figure 6 stop pin 149, [0086]), and wherein when the second stop surface (Figures 6 and 8 stop lever 144, [0086]) comes into contact with the second stop (Figure 6 stop pin 149, [0086]), the controller ([0046]) is operable to cause the actuator ([0079] electric motor is an actuator) to maintain a force on the moveable carrier to bias the second stop surface (Figures 6 and 8 stop lever 144, [0086]) against the second stop (Figure 6 stop pin 149, [0086]). Since Forster teaches all of the structural elements of the claim, the moveable carrier taught by Forster would be capable maintaining a biasing force to maintain contact between the stops and stop surfaces. Moreover, Forster teaches maintaining positioning of the filter wheel ([0051]) and identifying and correcting positioning errors ([0049] and [0097]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the stops, controller, and actuator taught by Forster to the switching mechanism taught by the combination of Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann in order to allow quick and precise alignment of the desired filter (Forster [0046] and [0051]) and have the switching mechanism taught by the combination of Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann have the controller direct the actuator to maintain a biasing force between the stops and stop surfaces as taught by Forster to in order maintaining positioning of the filter wheel (Forster [0051]) and identifying and correcting positioning errors (Forster [0049] and [0097]).
Regarding claim 18, Svilans teaches method for refining a laser beam from a multispectral laser transmitter comprising: attaching a modular housing of a switching system (Figure 1 microcartridge 60 ) to a laser housing of the multispectral laser transmitter (Figure 1 laser assembly 20, Column 6 line 50 - Column 7 line 23) and a first and second optical member (Figure 1 wavelength selective element 64, Column 7 lines 24-52).
Svilans fails to teach a moveable carrier, the first and second optical members supported by the moveable carrier, and moving the moveable carrier to align the first optical member with a laser beam transmitted from the multispectral laser transmitter; and moving the moveable carrier to align the second optical member with the laser beam transmitted from the multispectral laser transmitter. However, Forster teaches a moveable carrier (Figure 1 filter interchanger 102, [0080]), the first and second optical members supported by the moveable carrier (Figures 1 and 2 filters 131, 133, and 135 [0081]), and moving the moveable carrier to align the first optical member with a laser beam transmitted from the multispectral laser transmitter ([0078]-[0080]); and moving the moveable carrier to align the second optical member with the laser beam transmitted from the multispectral laser transmitter ([0078]-[0080]). Forster further teaches the moveable carrier is space-saving ([0023]) and allows for quick change of filters ([0021]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the moveable carrier taught by Forster to the switching mechanism taught by Svilans in order to save space and allow for quick change of filters (Forster [0021] and [0023]).
Svilans and Forster fail to teach the first and second optical members are supported by an angled flange of the moveable carrier wherein the angled flange extends at a non-right angle relative to the moveable carrier. However, Ragatz teaches a moveable carrier for switching optical components (Figure 1A) with optical members supported by an angled flange of the moveable carrier (Figures 1A,B optical members FRONT and REAR are angled on the wheel assembly 10 , [0030] filters are angled relative to the axis, [0036] mounts or pockets of filter holding component 18 that hold optical members FRONT and REAR can be considered to be flanges since they hold onto the optical members are attached to filter holding component 18) wherein the angled flange extends at a non-right angle relative to the moveable carrier ([0030] and [0036] since optical members FRONT and REAR are angled relative to the moveable carrier the mounts or pockets of filter holding component 18 would also be angled in order to support the optical members). Ragatz further teaches angling the filters is beneficial for different imaging modes ([0041]). Furthermore, angling the filters relative to the incident laser would back reflection of the laser. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical switching mechanism taught by Svilans and Forster by adding an angled flange to the moveable carrier that extends at a non-right angle relative to the moveable carrier to support optical components as taught by Ragatz as angling filters is beneficial for different imaging modes (Ragatz [0041]) and would help prevent back reflection of the laser.
Svilans, Forster, and Ragatz fail to explicitly teach a planar surface of at least of the of the first and second optical members is arranged parallel to a planar surface of the angled flange. However, Stegmann teaches an optical switching mechanism (Figure 4a) wherein a planar surface of at least of the of the first and second optical members (Figure 3 flat surface 13 of divider 12, [0037]; Abstract divider 12 is an optical component) is arranged parallel to a planar surface of the angled flange (Figure 3 flat surface 13 of divider 12 rests on and is parallel to bearing surface of carrier 1, [0037]-[0038]). Stegmann further teaches using planar parallel surface of the flange to support the optical component, [0037]-[0038]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical switching mechanism taught by the combination of Svilans, Forster, and Ragatz by having a planar surface of the optical components be parallel to a planar surface of the angled flange as taught by Stegmann in order to allow the optical components to rest on the flange and provide proper support for the optical component (Stegmann [0037]-[0038]).
Regarding claim 19, Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann teach all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 18. Svilans further teaches the first optical member comprises a first wavelength filter and, when the first optical member is moved to align with laser beam transmitted from the multispectral laser transmitter, the method comprises outputting a first output beam having a first wavelength (Figure 1 wavelength selective element 64, Column 7 lines 24-52), and the second optical member comprises a second wavelength filter and, when the second optical member is moved to align with laser beam transmitted from the multispectral laser transmitter, the method comprises outputting a second output beam having a second wavelength (Figure 1 wavelength selective element 64, Column 7 lines 24-52).
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Svilans (U.S. Patent No. 6,542,534) in view of Forster (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0215920), Ragatz (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0149957), and Stegmann (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0382287) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Janicek (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0021851).
Regarding claim 3, Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann teach all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 2. Svilans fails to teach the first and second optical members are supported along a first side of the moveable carrier and wherein the moveable carrier is rotated about the axle by an actuator. However, Forster teaches the first and second optical members are supported along a first side of the moveable carrier (Figure 2 filters 133 and 131 on the left and bottom sides are on a first side) and wherein the moveable carrier is rotated about the axle by an actuator ([0079] electric motor is an actuator). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the moveable carrier with first and second optical members on a first side of the moveable carrier as taught by Forster to the switching mechanism taught by Svilans in order to save space and allow for quick change of filters (Forster [0021] and [0023])
Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann fail to teach the moveable carrier further comprises a counterweight disposed on a second side of the moveable carrier opposite the first side to balance the moveable carrier about the axle,. However, Janicek teaches counterweight disposed on a second side of the moveable carrier opposite the first side to balance the moveable carrier about the axle (Figure 1 clip 7, [0021]). Janicek further teaches balancing the rotor to minimize the effect of high g-forces and prolong the operational life of the device ([0004]-[0005]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the moveable member taught by Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann by adding the counter weight taught by Janicek in order to balance the rotor to minimize the effect of high g-forces and prolong the operational life of the device (Janicek [0004]-[0005]).
Regarding claim 4, Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, Stegmann, and Janicek teach all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 3. Svilans fails to teach the moveable carrier further comprises a cogged member that interfaces with a gear member, and wherein the actuator comprises a motor operable to drive the gear member. However, Forster teaches the moveable carrier further comprises a cogged member (Figure 1 gear rim 109, [0079]) that interfaces with a gear member (Figure 1 pinion 111, [0079]), and wherein the actuator comprises a motor operable to drive the gear member ([0079] pinion 111 is driven by an electric motor). Forster further teaches using the cogged and gear members to improve the accuracy of movement and to avoid the beam path ([0047]). Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have add the cogged and gear members driven by a motor as taught by Forster to the moveable carrier taught by the combination of Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, Stegmann, and Janicek in order to improve the accuracy of movement and to avoid the beam path (Forster [0047]).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Svilans (U.S. Patent No. 6,542,534) in view of Forster (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0215920), Ragatz (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0149957), and Stegmann (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0382287) as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Nolte et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0147087 – hereinafter referred to as “Nolte”).
Regarding claim 7, Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann teach all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 5. Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann fail to teach the controller is operable to cause the actuator to decelerate the moveable carrier prior to the first stop surface coming into contact with the first stop, and wherein the controller is operable to cause the actuator to decelerate the moveable carrier prior to the second stop surface coming into contact with the second stop. However, Nolte teaches the controller is operable to cause the actuator to decelerate the moveable carrier prior to the first stop surface coming into contact with the first stop ([0033]-[0037]), and wherein the controller is operable to cause the actuator to decelerate the moveable carrier prior to the second stop surface coming into contact with the second stop ([0033]-[0037]). Nolte further teaches slow braking of the moveable carrier in order to reduce electrical and mechanical strain on drive and prevent mechanical vibrations ([0050]-[0056]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have decelerate the moveable carrier of Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann as taught by Nolte in order to reduce electrical and mechanical strain on drive and prevent mechanical vibrations (Nolte [0050]-[0056]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Svilans (U.S. Patent No. 6,542,534) in view of Forster (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0215920), Ragatz (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0149957), and Stegmann (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0382287) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Du (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0102515).
Regarding claim 8, Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann teach all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann fail to teach the moveable carrier further comprises a plurality of detents operable to interface with a spring- loaded ball plunger to stabilize the moveable carrier while a selected one of the first optical member or the second optical member is in alignment with the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter. However, Du teaches a plurality of detents (Figure 9 locking notches 904, [0113]) operable to interface with a spring- loaded ball plunger (Figure 9 locking pin 906 and spring 905 [0113]) to stabilize the moveable carrier while a selected one of the first optical member or the second optical member is in alignment with the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter. Du further teaches using detents and a spring-loaded plunger to securely hold the moveable carrier in position ([0113]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the moveable taught by the combination of Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann with the detents and spring-loaded ball plunger taught by Du in order to secure the rotor (Du [0113]).
Claim 10, 15, and 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Svilans (U.S. Patent No. 6,542,534) in view of Forster (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0215920), Ragatz (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0149957), and Stegmann (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0382287) as applied to claims 1, 12, and 18 above, and further in view of Choi et al. (Korean Publication KR 101187391 – hereinafter referred to as “Choi”).
Regarding claim 10, Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann teach all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Svilans further teaches first optical member comprises a first filter that filters light at a specified wavelength (Column 7 lines 25-47). Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann fail to teach the second optical member comprises a mirror that acts as a shutter and reflects the laser beam. However, Choi teaches a mirror that acts as a shutter and reflects the laser beam (Figure 2 variable shutter 610, [0035]). Choi further teaches using a shutter to reflect the laser beam in order to turn the laser off ([0038]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the second optical member of the switching device taught by Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann be a mirror as taught by Du in order to reflect and turn off the laser beam (Du [0038]).
Regarding claim 15, Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann teach all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 12. Svilans further teaches an output filter window operable to facilitate transmission of an output portion of the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter that passes through the first optical member or the second optical member (Figure 1 retroreflector assembly 34, Column 8 line 65- Column 9 line 6). Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann fail to teach a dump filter window operable to facilitate transmission of a reflected portion the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter that is reflected by the first optical member or the second optical member to a beam dump. However, Du teaches a dump filter window (Figure 2 beam dump 630) operable to facilitate transmission of a reflected portion the laser beam of the multispectral laser transmitter that is reflected by the first optical member or the second optical member (Figure 2 variable shutter 610, [0035] reflects laser) to a beam dump (Figure 2 beam dump 630). Du further teaches reflecting laser light to a beam dump in order to extinguish the laser ([0035]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the beam dump taught by Du to the modular optical switching system taught by Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann in order to extinguish the reflected laser beam (Du [0035]).
Regarding claim 20, Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann teach all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 18. Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann fail to teach the second optical member comprises a mirror that reflects the laser beam to a beam dump. However, Du teaches a mirror that reflects the laser beam (Figure 2 variable shutter 610, [0035] reflects laser) to a beam dump (Figure 2 beam dump 630). Du further teaches reflecting laser light to a beam dump in order to extinguish the laser ([0035]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the beam dump taught by Du to the modular optical switching system taught by Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann in order to extinguish the reflected laser beam (Du [0035]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Svilans (U.S. Patent No. 6,542,534) in view of Forster (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0215920), Ragatz (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0149957), and Stegmann (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0382287) as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Kobayashi et al. (Korean Publication KR 20080086642 – hereinafter referred to as “Kobayashi”).
Regarding claim 14, Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann teach all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 13. Svilans further teaches the connecting flange comprises through holes (Figure 1 matching holes 72a-d) extending through the connection flange operable to receive a fastener (Figure 1 microscrews 70, Column 9 lines 20-65 ) to mount the connecting flange to the housing of the multispectral laser transmitter. Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann fail to teach alignment guides operable to receive alignment pins of the housing of the multispectral laser transmitter to align modular optical switching system with the multispectral laser transmitter; and. However, Kobayashi teaches alignment guides (Figure 4 notches 4D ) operable to receive alignment pins (Figure 4 legs 5B page 5/10 paragraph 2 ) of the housing of the multispectral laser transmitter to align modular optical switching system. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modular optical switching system taught by the combination of Svilans, Forster, Ragatz, and Stegmann with the alignment guides and pins taught by Kobayashi in order to properly align the modular housing with the laser housing (Kobayashi page 5/10 paragraph 2 teaches the notches and pins align the parts in an orthogonal manner).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Lee (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0031125) discloses an optical switching device. Rentzsch (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0061861) discloses an optical switching device using ball springs and notches to align optical members.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX PARK RICKEL whose telephone number is (703)756-4561. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 a.m. - 6 p.m. ET.
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, Bumsuk Won can be reached on (571)272-2713. 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.
Alex Rickel
Examiner
Art Unit 2872
/A.P.R./ Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/BUMSUK WON/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872