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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 5 is misnumbered as claim 4. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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, 3, 4-6, 27, 29 and 30-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mason (US PG Pub 2018/0107017).
Regarding claim 1, Mason discloses: a method for controlling a center wavelength for an imaging operation, the method comprising: estimating a center wavelength error ([0097], [0116]); determining a first actuation amount for a first actuator (actuating system for any of the prisms 305, 310, 315) controlling movement of a first prism (any of the prisms 305, 310, 315) based on the estimated center wavelength error (Fig. 3A, [0038], [0052]-[0057]); actuating the first actuator based on the first actuation amount (Fig. 3A, [0038], [0052]-[0057]); determining whether the first prism is off-center (Fig. 3A, [0045], [0052], [0053], [0062], [0071]); in response to determining that the first prism is off-center, determining a second actuation amount for the first actuator (the rapid actuation system 420A includes a position monitor 424A that is configured to detect a position of the rotational shaft 422A of the rotary stepper motor 421A. The error between the measured position of the rotational shaft 422A and the expected or target position of the rotational shaft 422A correlates directly with the error in the position of the prism 420 and thus, this measurement can be used to determine the rotational error of the prism 420 (that is, the difference between actual rotation and commanded rotation) and to correct for this error during operation) ([0067]).
Mason does not disclose in Fig. 3A: determining a third actuation amount for a second actuator for controlling movement of a second prism; and actuating the first actuator and the second actuator based on the second and third actuation amounts, respectively.
However, Mason discloses in Fig. 6A: and determining a third actuation amount for a second actuator (secondary actuator 660A is physically coupled to the prism 620 that is farthest from the grating 600. The secondary actuator 660A is configured to rotate the prism 620 about an axis AH that lies in the XY plane and also lies in the plane of a hypotenuse H of the prism 620) for controlling movement of a second prism (prism 620) (Fig. 6A, [0082], [0083], [0084]). 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 device of Mason (Fig. 3A) by adding the secondary actuator 660A coupled to the prism 320 in order to more finely adjust the light beam. The device as modified disclose: actuating the first actuator and the second actuator based on the second and third actuation amounts, respectively.
PNG
media_image1.png
390
708
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 3A of Mason
PNG
media_image2.png
574
768
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 6A of Mason
Regarding claim 3, Mason as modified disclose: wherein the determining the first actuation amount comprises: determining a difference between a target center wavelength and the estimated center wavelength; and determining the first actuation amount based on the difference between the target center wavelength and the estimated center wavelength ([0117]).
Regarding claim 4, Mason as modified disclose: wherein the determining the difference between the target center wavelength and the estimated center wavelength comprises determining the difference using a digital circuit ([0109]).
Mason as modified do not disclose: a digital filter.
The examiner takes official notice that a digital filter was well known in the art before the time of filing. For example, see Kameyama et al. (US PG Pub 2007/0215795) ([0051]). 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 device of Mason as modified by using a digital filter to determine the difference between the target center wavelength and the estimated center wavelength because digital circuits offer easy programmability.
Regarding claim 5, Mason as modified disclose: wherein the determining the third actuation amount for the second actuator is based on a position of the first prism after actuating the first actuator based on the second actuation amount ([0067]).
Regarding claim 6, Mason as modified disclose: wherein the determining the third actuation amount further comprises determining the third actuation amount to reduce the difference between the target center wavelength and the estimated wavelength ([0084]).
Regarding claim 27, Mason discloses: a first actuator (actuating system for any of the prisms 305, 310, 315) configured to control movement of a first prism (any of the prisms 305, 310, 315) (Fig. 3A, [0038], [0052]-[0057]); and a controller configured to: estimate a center wavelength error ([0097], [0116]); determine a first actuation amount for the first actuator based on the estimated center wavelength error (Fig. 3A, [0038], [0052]-[0057]); cause the first actuator to actuate based on the first actuation amount; determine whether the first prism is off-center; in response to determining that the first prism is off-center, determine a second actuation amount for the first actuator (the rapid actuation system 420A includes a position monitor 424A that is configured to detect a position of the rotational shaft 422A of the rotary stepper motor 421A. The error between the measured position of the rotational shaft 422A and the expected or target position of the rotational shaft 422A correlates directly with the error in the position of the prism 420 and thus, this measurement can be used to determine the rotational error of the prism 420 (that is, the difference between actual rotation and commanded rotation) and to correct for this error during operation) ([0067]).
Mason does not disclose in Fig. 3A: a second actuator configured to control movement of a second prism; and determine a third actuation amount for the second actuator; and cause the first and second actuators to actuate based on the second and third actuation amounts, respectively.
However, Mason discloses in Fig. 6A: determining a third actuation amount for a second actuator (secondary actuator 660A is physically coupled to the prism 620 that is farthest from the grating 600. The secondary actuator 660A is configured to rotate the prism 620 about an axis AH that lies in the XY plane and also lies in the plane of a hypotenuse H of the prism 620) for controlling movement of a second prism (prism 620) (Fig. 6A, [0082], [0083], [0084]). 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 device of Mason (Fig. 3A) by adding the secondary actuator 660A coupled to the prism 320 in order to more finely adjust the light beam. The device as modified disclose: cause the first and second actuators to actuate based on the second and third actuation amounts, respectively.
Regarding claim 29, Mason as modified disclose: wherein to determine the first actuation amount, the controller is further configured to: determine a difference between a target center wavelength and the estimated center wavelength; and determine the first actuation amount based on the difference between the target center wavelength and the estimated center wavelength ([0117]).
Regarding claim 30, Mason as modified disclose: wherein to determine the difference between the target center wavelength and the estimated center wavelength, the controller is further configured to determine the difference using a digital circuit ([0109]).
Mason as modified do not disclose: a digital filter.
The examiner takes official notice that a digital filter was well known in the art before the time of filing. For example, see Kameyama et al. (US PG Pub 2007/0215795) ([0051]). 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 device of Mason as modified by using a digital filter to determine the difference between the target center wavelength and the estimated center wavelength because digital circuits offer easy programmability.
Regarding claim 31, Mason as modified disclose: wherein the third actuation amount for the second actuator is based on a position of the first prism after actuating the first actuator based on the second actuation amount ([0067]).
Regarding claim 32, Mason as modified disclose: wherein, to determine the third actuation amount, the controller is further configured to determine the third actuation amount to reduce the difference between the target center wavelength and the estimated wavelength ([0084]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8, 11, 14, 15, 34, 35 and 43 are allowed.
Claims 2, 7, 28 and 33 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 2 is allowable as the prior art fails to anticipate or render obvious the claimed limitations including “…wherein the estimating the center wavelength error comprises: calculating a first average of a center wavelength at odd bursts and a second average of the center wavelength at even bursts; and determining an average of the first and second averages, wherein the center wavelength error is based on the average of the first and second averages.”
Claim 7 is allowable as the prior art fails to anticipate or render obvious the claimed limitations including “…wherein the imaging operation comprises a multi-focal imaging operation, and the method further comprises operating a light source in a two-color mode, wherein operating the light source in the two-color mode includes: generating, using a first laser chamber module, a first beam of laser radiation at a first wavelength; generating, using a second laser chamber module, a second beam of laser radiation at a second wavelength; and combining, using a beam combiner, the first and second laser radiations along a common output beam path, wherein the estimating a center wavelength error comprises estimating a center wavelength error of the first beam of laser radiation.”
Claim 8 is allowable as the prior art fails to anticipate or render obvious the claimed limitations including “…in response to determining that the wavelength error is less than the first threshold value: determining an average wavelength error; determining whether the average wavelength error is greater than a second threshold value different than the first threshold value; in response to determining that the average wavelength error is greater than the second threshold value, moving the first actuator a second step size and enabling a low pass filter; and in response to determining that the average wavelength error is less than the second threshold value, enabling the low pass filter, updating a voltage applied to a second actuator, and moving the first actuator a third step size”.
Claim 28 is allowable as the prior art fails to anticipate or render obvious the claimed limitations including “…wherein, to estimate the center wavelength error, the controller is further configured to: calculate a first average of a center wavelength at odd bursts and a second average of the center wavelength at even bursts; and determine an average of the first and second averages, wherein the center wavelength error is based on the average of the first and second averages.”
Claim 33 is allowable as the prior art fails to anticipate or render obvious the claimed limitations including “…a multi-focal imaging operation, the system further comprises a light source operating in a two-color mode, the controller is further configured to operate the light source in the two-color mode by: generating, using a first laser chamber module, a first beam of laser radiation at a first wavelength; generating, using a second laser chamber module, a second beam of laser radiation at a second wavelength; and combining, using a beam combiner, the first and second laser radiations along a common output beam path, wherein the estimating a center wavelength error comprises estimating a center wavelength error of the first beam of laser radiation.”
Claim 34 is allowable as the prior art fails to anticipate or render obvious the claimed limitations including “…in response to determining that the wavelength error is less than the first threshold value: determine an average wavelength error; and determine whether the average wavelength error is greater than a second threshold value different than the first threshold value; in response to determining that the average wavelength error is greater than the second threshold value, cause the first actuator to move a second step size and enable a low pass filter; and in response to determining that the average wavelength error is less than the second threshold value, enable the low pass filter, update a voltage applied to a second actuator, and cause the first actuator to move a third step size.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Spangler et al. (US PG Pub 2002/0006149) disclose: an electric discharge laser with fast wavelength correction. Fast wavelength correction equipment includes at least one piezoelectric drive and a fast wavelength measurement system and fast feedback response times. In a preferred embodiment, equipment is provided to control wavelength on a slow time frame of several milliseconds, on a intermediate time from of about one to three millisecond and on a very fast time frame of a few microseconds. Techniques include a combination of a relatively slow stepper motor and a very fast piezoelectric driver for tuning the laser wavelength using a tuning mirror. A preferred control technique is described (utilizing a very fast wavelength monitor) to provide the slow and intermediate wavelength control and a piezoelectric load cell in combination with the piezoelectric driver to provide the very fast (few microseconds) wavelength control (Abstract). Trintchouk et al. (US PG Pub 2006/0114958) disclose: a gas discharge laser system bandwidth control mechanism and method of operation for controlling bandwidth in a laser output light pulse generated in the gas discharge laser system is disclosed which may comprise a bandwidth controller which may comprise an active bandwidth adjustment mechanism; a controller actively controlling the active bandwidth adjustment mechanism utilizing an algorithm implementing bandwidth thermal transient correction based upon a model of the impact of laser system operation on the wavefront of the laser light pulse being generated and line narrowed in the laser system as it is incident on the bandwidth adjustment mechanism. The controller algorithm may comprises a function of the power deposition history in at least a portion of an optical train of the gas discharge laser system, e.g., a linear function, e.g., a combination of a plurality of decay functions each comprising a respective decay time constant and a respective coefficient (Abstract). Miyamoto et al. (US PG Pub 2021/0367396) disclose: a laser apparatus includes an output coupling mirror; a grating that constitutes an optical resonator together with the output coupling mirror; a laser chamber in an optical path of the optical resonator; at least one prism in an optical path between the laser chamber and the grating; a rotary stage including an actuator that rotates the prism to change an incident angle of a laser beam from the laser chamber on the grating; a wavelength measuring unit that measures a central wavelength of the laser beam from the laser chamber through the output coupling mirror; an angle sensor that detects a rotation angle of the prism; a first control unit that controls the actuator at a first operation frequency; and a second control unit that controls the actuator at a second operation frequency (Abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XINNING(TOM) NIU whose telephone number is (571)270-1437. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:30am-6:00pm.
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.
/XINNING(Tom) NIU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828