DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claims 1-6, 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liang et al. (US 2021/0109340).
Regarding claim 1, Liang (figs. 1-3 and 5, [0069], [0071], whole document) discloses a scanning apparatus OCT comprising a scanner 315, 506, 512 configured to move a scanning spot along a movement path to capture three- dimensional information of a target object ([0066]), the movement path including a plurality of b-scan paths (each one of the circular loops in fig. 2B) performed along a c-scan path (horizontal direction in fig. 2B), and a processing circuit 308/314 configured as a controller 312 to control the movement path of the scanning spot ([0069]), wherein an area of the target object covered by the movement path is independent of a length of the b-scan path. Liang discloses all the claimed limitations except to control an inter-scan time by varying a length of each of the b-scan paths and maintaining a sampling step less than a spot size. However, it is well within the knowledge of one skilled in the art to control the scanning’s speed, time interval, sampling rate, path, direction, number of times, etc. depending on the specific application. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to control the scanning time for application-specific purpose.
Regarding claim 2, Liang (figs. 1-3 and 5, [0069], [0071], whole document) further discloses wherein each of the plurality of b-scan paths has a same shape and size (figs 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 3, Liang (figs. 1-3 and 5, [0069], [0071], whole document) further discloses wherein each of the plurality of b-scan paths is a closed loop that returns to a starting point (figs 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 4, Liang (figs. 1-3 and 5, [0069], [0071], whole document) further discloses wherein each of the plurality of b-scan paths is a circular path (figs 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 5, Liang (figs. 1-3 and 5, [0069], [0071], whole document) further discloses wherein the c-scan path is a spiral (figs 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 6, Liang (figs. 1-3 and 5, [0069], [0071], whole document) further discloses wherein the area of the target object covered by the movement path is increased in each of two dimensions by increasing a length of the c-scan path (figs 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 8, Liang (figs. 1-3 and 5, [0069], [0071], whole document) further discloses wherein the controller is further configured to control the b-scan path to move continuously and with a constant speed in each of x and y directions ([0076]).
Regarding claim 9, Liang (figs. 1-3 and 5, [0069], [0071], whole document) further discloses wherein the controller is further configured to control the scanner to perform multiple b-scan paths in a same location before moving the scanning path to a next position along the c-scan path ([0020-[0023]).
Regarding claim 10, Liang (figs. 2B, 3 and 5, [0069], [0071], whole document) further discloses wherein the c-scan path is a closed shape (figs 1 and 2; [0022]).
Regarding claim 11, Liang (figs. 2B, 3 and 5, [0069], [0071], whole document) further discloses wherein the b-scan path and the c-scan path are each moved through two or three dimensions (figs 1 and 2; [0023]).
Regarding claim 12, Liang (figs. 2B, 3 and 5, [0069], [0071], whole document) further discloses wherein a start of a previous b-scan is at a first angular position with respect to a center of the previous b-scan, a start of a next b-scan is at a second angular position with respect to a center of the next b-scan, and the first angular position is different than the second angular position (figs 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 13, Liang (figs. 1-3 and 5, [0069], [0071], whole document) discloses a scanning method comprising moving a scanning spot along a movement path to capture three-dimensional information of a target object ([0066]), the movement path including a plurality of b-scan paths (each one of the circular loops in fig. 2B) performed along a c- scan path (horizontal direction in fig. 2B), and controlling the movement path of the scanning spot ([0069]), wherein an area of the target object covered by the movement path is independent of a length of the b-scan path. Liang discloses all the claimed limitations except to control an inter-scan time by varying a length of each of the b-scan paths and maintaining a sampling step less than a spot size. However, it is well within the knowledge of one skilled in the art to control the scanning’s speed, time interval, sampling rate, path, direction, number of times, etc. depending on the specific application. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to control the scanning time for application-specific purpose.
Regarding claim 14, Liang (figs. 1-3 and 5, [0069], [0071]) discloses a computer readable medium storing computer instructions that when executed by a computer perform steps comprising controlling movement of a scanning spot along a movement path to capture three- dimensional information of a target object ([0066]), the movement path including a plurality of b-scan paths (each one of the circular loops in fig. 2B) performed along a c-scan path (horizontal direction in fig. 2B), wherein an area of the target object covered by the movement path is independent of a length of the b-scan path. Liang discloses all the claimed limitations except to control an inter-scan time by varying a length of each of the b-scan paths and maintaining a sampling step less than a spot size. However, it is well within the knowledge of one skilled in the art to control the scanning’s speed, time interval, sampling rate, path, direction, number of times, etc. depending on the specific application. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to control the scanning time for application-specific purpose.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims 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.
Conclusion
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 JACK DINH whose telephone number is (571)272-2327. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am-5pm.
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 at 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.
/JACK DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 7/29/26
Prosecution Insights