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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2/05/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amended claims on 1/26/2026 has been entered. The Applicant amended independent claims 1 and 10. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 1/26/2026 have been fully considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the combination of the new references being used in the current rejection. Applicant arguments directed to the newly added claim limitations that were not previously rejected under art.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 1-5, 9-15 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solomon (US 2006/0142877, of record) in view of Non-Patent Literature: HAMELICK, R. F. M. M et al. ("Adaptive deformable mirror: based on electromagnetic actuators.", Eindhoven University of Technology, research.tue.nl, (2010), Of Record, Applicant provided a copy with IDS dated 9/20/2024), and further in view of Best (US 2020/0158599).
Regarding claim 1, Solomon teaches a deformable mirror system (refer to US 2006/0142877) comprising: a deformable mirror surface (A deformable mirror (DM) system 7 comprises a DM assembly 10 having a DM mirror 16, [0063], surface of DM mirror 16, Fig. 1; [0065]); a plurality of actuators (Fig. 2, actuators 70a..70n, [0206], Fig. 4, DM actuator array 70a…70n, also see Fig. 18) coupled to the mirror surface to deform the mirror surface (array of actuators 70 that deform the DM mirror 16; [0206]); and a detector coupled to each of the plurality of actuators to detect, for each actuator, an output signal from a driver of the actuator (DM driver electronics 40, [0066-0068]); and a controller coupled to each of the plurality of actuators (DM assembly 10 comprises a plurality of actuators 70a, 70b, . . . , 70n. The actuators in the DM actuator array 70 have signal electrodes 161 and reference electrodes 164. Via the reference electrodes 164, the actuators in the DM actuator array 70 are electrically coupled to respective switches 50a, 50b, . . . , 50n. Via the signal electrodes 161, the actuators in the DM actuator array 70 are electrically coupled to the output of the high voltage amplifier 58. Via the reference electrodes 164, the actuators in the DM actuator array 70 are electrically coupled to the switches in the switch array 50, [0088]; Software may be employed to control the operation of the DM driver … software provides power usage control by allowing an external source or internal timing mechanism to switch the electronics into a low power mode, [0206]; see [0013], [0015], [0264]; Figs. 1-4, 20B).
Solomon doesn’t explicitly teach the controller is configured, for each actuator, to: add a test signal to an input signal to form a modified input signal; send the modified input signal to the actuator; receive an indication of the output signal from the driver; determine when a test signal portion of the output signal satisfies an error condition; and in response to the test signal portion satisfying the error condition, determine that the actuator is disconnected, wherein the deformable mirror system is configured to detect the disconnected actuator in real time, while the deformable mirror system is operating to correct optical distortions.
Solomon and Hamelinck are related as deformable mirrors.
Hamelinck in a Non-Patent Literature “Adaptive deformable mirror: based on electromagnetic actuators”, teaches a detector coupled to each of the plurality of actuators (deformable mirror face sheet, [Fig. 3.21], plurality of actuators, [Fig. 1.12; 2.9-12]; More than 80 of such actuator modules are needed for a DM with 5000 actuators. Figure 2.12 shows the mirror face sheet with the mirror-actuator connections, [paragraph 2.5.2]; Fig. 4.5 shows actuator coupled to DM, [page 80]; In page 201 and paragraph “Coil integrity check”, detector, “FPGA to perform the coil integrity check to determine whether the actuator coil conducts electricity or not. PWM C signal that is directly provided by the FPGA is set to high, Fig 3.4, and the course PWM signals are disabled. If the actuator coil does not conduct, e.g. because of a broken wire, this will charge capacitor C; Fig. 3.3, and build up a capacitor voltage. Otherwise, the actuator coil will prevent this build-up and the voltage will quickly drop to zero when PWM C is disabled. This behavior can be checked by reversing the directionality of the FPGA pin corresponding to the PWM C signal and using it to measure the capacitor voltage, [page 201]), the controller (FPGA) is configured, for each actuator [page 201], to: add a test signal (PWM C signal, [page 201]) to an input signal (course PWM signals, [paragraph Coil integrity check, page 201] to form a modified input signal; send the modified input signal to the actuator (actuator coil); receive an indication of the output signal from the driver (measures the capacitor voltage, [page 201]); determine when a test signal portion of the output signal satisfies an error condition (voltage is “high”); and in response to the test signal portion satisfying the error condition, determine that the actuator is disconnected (If the voltage is zero, the actuator coil is fine and if its high, it does not conduct electricity, i.e. malfunctioning actuator coil, [paragraph Coil integrity check, page 201]), wherein the deformable mirror system (Fig. 2.12 shows deformable mirror system using actuators, page 30) is configured to detect the disconnected actuator in real time, while the deformable mirror system is operating to correct optical distortions (in real time means instantaneously or with no noticeable delay between an action and its effect, rather than processing it later; Hamelinck performs a coil integrity check, where the driver electronics provide currents through the coils of the variable reluctance actuators. In the actuator, the current converts into forces that deform the mirror face sheet, [paragraph 5.2]; each actuator requires FPGA connections, [para 5.4.2]; The FPGA slaves can be put into test-mode [FPGA slave into test mode, not the mirror system] to perform the coil integrity check. This can be used to determine whether the actuator coil conducts electricity or not. First, the fine PWM C signal that is directly provided by the FPGA is set to high and the course PWM signals are disabled. If the actuator coil does not conduct (e.g. because of a broken wire), this will charge capacitor Cl and build up a capacitor voltage. Otherwise, the actuator coil will prevent this build-up and the voltage will quickly drop to zero when PWM C is disabled. This behavior can be checked by reversing the directionality of the FPGA pin corresponding to the PWM C signal and using it to measure the capacitor voltage. If the voltage is zero, the actuator coil is fine and if it’s high, it does not conduct electricity [Coil integrity check, page 201]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the mirror system of Solomon to include a controller configured, for each actuator, to: add a test signal to an input signal to form a modified input signal; send the modified input signal to the actuator; receive an indication of the output signal from the driver; determine when a test signal portion of the output signal satisfies an error condition; and in response to the test signal portion satisfying the error condition, determine that the actuator is disconnected, wherein the deformable mirror system is configured to detect the disconnected actuator in real time, while the deformable mirror system is operating to correct optical distortions, as taught by Hamelinck, for the predictable advantage of checking the actuator integrity, [page 201], with the advantage of low costs, low driving voltages and negligible hysteresis and drift. The actuators are free from mechanical hysteresis, friction and play and therefore have a high positioning resolution with high reproducibility [page 183], as taught by Hamelinck in pages 183 and 201.
Hamelinck teaches monitor integrity to detect the disconnected actuator in real time in page 201 under the heading “Coil integrity check”. The FPGA slaves can be put into test-mode to perform the actuator coil integrity check. In that paragraph Hamelinck disclosed the test sequence and at the end of the process measuring the capacitor voltage which will the actuator coil integrity (see page 201 under the heading “Coil integrity check”). Solomon teaches measurement circuitry may be coupled to measurement nodes, e.g., signal and reference electrodes of one or more actuators, continuously or non-continuously via switches, as determined/controlled by the DM processor, [0178].
However, modified Solomon doesn’t explicitly disclose the system configured to continuously monitoring the actuator.
Solomon and Best are related as actuator system and measurements.
Best teaches the system configured to continuously monitoring actuator (present disclosure actively detects .. the mechanical power application through continuous monitoring and measuring of actuator movement information while continuously comparing these values to baseline information [0028]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the mirror system of modified Solomon to continuously monitoring the actuator, as taught by Hamelinck, for the predictable advantage of validating the mechanical integrity of the actuator system to insure the system is continuing to perform within a tolerance value set within the controller, as Best teaches in [0028].
Regarding claim 2, the modified Solomon teaches the deformable mirror system according to claim 1 (see above), DM driver electronics 40, [0066]. Hamelinck further teaches, wherein the test signal (PWM C signal, [page 201]) is added to the input signal of the driver, and wherein the error condition comprises an amplitude of the test signal portion of the output signal exceeding a threshold amplitude (Disable the test-mode by setting test mode bits, bit 11, of the global settings registers to zero. The results of the voltage measurements can now be found in the coil integrity control registers. These should be zero for conducting actuator coils and one for malfunctioning ones (paragraph Coil integrity check; page 201).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the mirror modified system of Solomon to provide a test signal added to the input signal of the driver, and wherein the error condition comprises an amplitude of the test signal portion of the output signal exceeding a threshold amplitude, as taught by Hamelinck for the predictable advantage of determining whether the actuator coil conducts electricity or not., as taught by Hamelinck in page 201.
Regarding claim 3, the modified Solomon teaches the deformable mirror system according to claim 1 (see above), wherein the test signal is added to the common connection of the plurality of actuators (Fig.4, actuators 70a..70n and the common connection from address control 46), and wherein the error condition comprises an amplitude of the test signal portion of the output signal being below a threshold amplitude (Hamelinck teaches test signal, PWM C signal, [page 201] and an error condition, voltage is “high”);
Regarding claim 4, the modified Solomon teaches the deformable mirror system according to claim 1 (see above), drivers (processor 49, address control 46, and switches 50n; Fig. 4, [0088]) of the plurality of actuators (70a…70n), Hamelinck teaches, wherein the error condition is detected based on synchronous detection of the test signal in respective test signal portions of respective output signals of respective drivers of the plurality of actuators (operations are controlled via specific bits of the global settings registers, test signal PWM C signal, condition, voltage is “high”; [paragraph “Coil integrity check”], page 201);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the mirror modified system of Solomon wherein the error condition is detected based on synchronous detection of the test signal in respective test signal portions of respective output signals of respective drivers of the plurality of actuators, as taught by Hamelinck for the predictable advantage of determining whether the actuator coil conducts electricity or not., as taught by Hamelinck in page 201.
Regarding claim 5, the modified Solomon teaches the deformable mirror system according to claim 1 (see above), wherein the test signal comprises a periodic wave (refreshing actuators periodically, randomly, pseudo-randomly, or by external command, [0268]).
Regarding claim 9, the modified Solomon teaches the deformable mirror system according to claim 1 (see above), Hamelinck teaches wherein the controller is further to output an indication of the disconnected actuator, the indication comprising one or more of: a notification to an external computing device; an alert at an output device of the deformable mirror system; and actuator adjustment data defining new positions of one or more of the actuators in view of an executed shutdown sequence, the actuator adjustment data for further processing (dynamic measurements were performed on the single actuator prototypes using a Siglab system, the setup depicted in Figure 5.11 will be used for testing and model validation of the grid actuators, The LVDS bridge then converts the packets into LYDS packets to be sent to the electronics module corresponding to the targeted actuator. Both the position and velocity response of the actuator are measured using a polytec laser vibrometer. This outputs the measurements as analog voltages that are fed back to the xPC target using a National Instruments Analog to Digital Convertor, [paragraph 5.6.3, Actuator System Validation], page 134).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the mirror modified system of Solomon wherein the controller is further to output an indication of the disconnected actuator, the indication comprising one or more of: a notification to an external computing device; an alert at an output device of the deformable mirror system; and actuator adjustment data defining new positions of one or more of the actuators in view of an executed shutdown sequence, the actuator adjustment data for further processing, as taught by Hamelinck for the predictable advantage of dynamic testing and validation of actuators, as taught by Hamelinck in paragraph actuator validation, page 134.
Regarding claim 10, Solomon teaches a method in a controller of a deformable mirror system (refer to US 2006/0142877), the method comprising: for each actuator in a plurality of actuators of the deformable mirror system (Fig. 2, actuators 70a..70n, [0206], Fig. 4, deformable mirror actuator array 70a…70n, also see Fig. 18; array of actuators 70 that deform the DM mirror 16; [0206]); a driver of the actuator (DM driver electronics 40, [0066-0068]; the actuators in the DM actuator array 70 are electrically coupled to the switches in the switch array 50, [0088]; Software may be employed to control the operation of the DM driver … software provides power usage control by allowing an external source or internal timing mechanism to switch the electronics into a low power mode, [0206]).
Solomon doesn’t explicitly teach adding a test signal to an input signal to form a modified input signal; sending the modified input signal to the actuator; receiving an indication of an output signal of a driver of the actuator; determining whether a test signal portion of the output signal satisfies a error condition; and in response to the test signal portion satisfying the error condition, determining that the actuator is disconnected, thereby detecting the disconnected actuator in real time, while the deformable mirror system is operating to correct optical distortions.
Solomon and Hamelinck are related as deformable mirrors.
Hamelinck in a Non-Patent Literature “Adaptive deformable mirror: based on electromagnetic actuators”, teaches adding a test signal to an input signal to form a modified input signal (PWM C signal, [page 201], to an input signal (course PWM signals, [paragraph “Coil integrity check”, page 201]); sending the modified input signal to the actuator (actuator coil); receiving an indication of an output signal of a driver of the actuator (measures the capacitor voltage, [page 201]); determining whether a test signal portion of the output signal satisfies a threshold condition (voltage is “high”);; and in response to the test signal portion satisfying the threshold condition, determining that the actuator is disconnected (If the voltage is zero, the actuator coil is fine and if its high, it does not conduct electricity, i.e. malfunctioning actuator coil, [paragraph Coil integrity check, page 201]), thereby detecting the disconnected actuator in real time, while the deformable mirror system is operating to correct optical distortions (Fig. 2.12 shows deformable mirror system using actuators, [page 30], detecting the disconnected actuator in real time, while the deformable mirror system is operating to correct optical distortions, in real time means instantaneously or with no noticeable delay between an action and its effect, rather than processing it later; to detect the disconnected actuator Hamelinck performs a coil integrity check, where the driver electronics provide currents through the coils of the variable reluctance actuators. In the actuator, the current converts into forces that deform the mirror face sheet, [paragraph 5.2]; each actuator requires FPGA connections, [para 5.4.2]; The FPGA slaves can be put into test-mode [FPGA slave into test mode, not the mirror system in the Test mode] to perform the coil integrity check. This can be used to determine whether the actuator coil conducts electricity or not. First, the fine PWM C signal that is directly provided by the FPGA is set to high and the course PWM signals are disabled. If the actuator coil does not conduct (e.g. because of a broken wire), this will charge capacitor Cl and build up a capacitor voltage. Otherwise, the actuator coil will prevent this build-up and the voltage will quickly drop to zero when PWM C is disabled. This behavior can be checked by reversing the directionality of the FPGA pin corresponding to the PWM C signal and using it to measure the capacitor voltage. If the voltage is zero, the actuator coil is fine no broken wire and if it’s high, it does not conduct electricity [Coil integrity check, page 201]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the mirror system of Solomon to add a test signal to an input signal to form a modified input signal; sending the modified input signal to the actuator; receiving an indication of an output signal of a driver of the actuator; determining whether a test signal portion of the output signal satisfies a error condition; and in response to the test signal portion satisfying the error condition, determining that the actuator is disconnected, thereby detecting the disconnected actuator in real time, while the deformable mirror system is operating to correct optical distortions, as taught by Hamelinck, for the predictable advantage of checking the actuator integrity, [page 201], with the advantage of low costs, low driving voltages and negligible hysteresis and drift. The actuators are free from mechanical hysteresis, friction and play and therefore have a high positioning resolution with high reproducibility [page 183], as taught by Hamelinck in pages 183 and 201.
Hamelinck teaches monitor integrity to detect the disconnected actuator in real time in page 201 under the heading “Coil integrity check”. The FPGA slaves can be put into test-mode to perform the actuator coil integrity check. In that paragraph Hamelinck disclosed the test sequence and at the end of the process measuring the capacitor voltage which will the actuator coil integrity (see page 201 under the heading “Coil integrity check”). Solomon teaches measurement circuitry may be coupled to measurement nodes, e.g., signal and reference electrodes of one or more actuators, continuously or non-continuously via switches, as determined/controlled by the DM processor, [0178].
However, modified Solomon doesn’t explicitly disclose the controller configured to continuously monitoring the actuator.
Solomon and Best are related as actuator system and measurements.
Best teaches the controller configured to continuously monitoring actuator (present disclosure actively detects .. the mechanical power application through continuous monitoring and measuring of actuator movement information while continuously comparing these values to baseline information … [0028]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the mirror system of modified Solomon to continuously monitoring the actuator, as taught by Hamelinck, for the predictable advantage of validating the mechanical integrity of the actuator system to insure the system is continuing to perform within a tolerance value set within the controller, as Best teaches in [0028].
Regarding claim 11, The modified Solomon teaches the method according to claim 10 (see above), further comprising: obtaining deformation data defining a mapping of a target deformation of a mirror surface of the deformable mirror system; and generating respective input signals for each of the plurality of actuators according to the deformation data (controlling deformation of a structure includes (i) applying a command signal at a first signal level to a first electrode of at least one actuator mechanically coupled to a structure, the first signal level known to produce an energy level in the actuator(s) substantially the same as an energy level currently stored by the actuator(s); (ii) electrically coupling an electrical reference to a second electrode of the actuator(s) to enable the actuator(s) to respond in an electromechanical manner to the command signal at the first signal level, the actuator(s) having a substantially negligible electromechanical response to the command signal at the first signal level; (iii) driving the command signal from the first signal level to a second signal level, the actuator(s) changing in at least one dimension in an electromechanical manner as a function of the command signal, resulting in a corresponding deformation of the structure; and (iv) electrically decoupling the electrical reference from the second electrode of the actuator(s), resulting in maintaining deformation of the structure defined by energy stored in the actuator(s),[0015-0016]; command signal being driven from the first signal level to the second signal level, resulting in a corresponding deformation of the structure corresponding to the multiple actuators. [claim 4]).
Regarding claim 12, The modified Solomon teaches the method according to claim 10 (see above).
Hamelinck further teaches, wherein the test signal (PWM C signal, [page 201]) is added to the input signal of the driver, and wherein the error condition comprises an amplitude of the test signal portion of the output signal exceeding a threshold amplitude (Disable the test-mode by setting test mode bits, bit 11, of the global settings registers to zero. The results of the voltage measurements can now be found in the coil integrity control registers. These should be zero for conducting actuator coils and one for malfunctioning ones (paragraph Coil integrity check, page 201).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the mirror modified system of Solomon to provide a test signal added to the input signal of the driver, and wherein the error condition comprises an amplitude of the test signal portion of the output signal exceeding a threshold amplitude, as taught by Hamelinck for the predictable advantage of determining whether the actuator coil conducts electricity or not., as taught by Hamelinck in page 201.
Regarding claim 13, The modified Solomon teaches the method according to claim 10 (see above), wherein the test signal is added to the common connection of the plurality of actuators (Fig.4, actuators 70a..70n and the common connection from address control 46), and wherein the error condition comprises an amplitude of the test signal portion of the output signal being below a threshold amplitude (Hamelinck teaches test signal, PWM C signal, [page 201] and an error condition, voltage is “high”);
Regarding claim 14, The modified Solomon teaches the method according to claim 10 (see above), the drivers (processor 49, address control 46, and switches 50n; Fig. 4, [0088]) of the plurality of actuators (70a…70n), Hamelinck teaches, wherein the error condition is detected based on synchronous detection of the test signal in respective test signal portions of respective output signals of respective drivers of the plurality of actuators (operations are controlled via specific bits of the global settings registers,test signal PWM C signal, condition, voltage is “high”; [paragraph “Coil integrity check”], page 201);
Regarding claim 15, The modified Solomon teaches the method according to claim 10 (see above), wherein the test signal comprises a periodic wave (refreshing actuators periodically, randomly, pseudo-randomly, or by external command, [0268]).
Regarding claim 19, The modified Solomon teaches the method according to claim 10 (see above).
Hamelinck teaches further comprising outputting an indication of the disconnected actuator, (dynamic measurements were performed on the single actuator prototypes using a Siglab system, the setup depicted in Figure 5.11 will be used for testing and model validation of the grid actuators, The LVDS bridge then converts the packets into LYDS packets to be sent to the electronics module corresponding to the targeted actuator. Both the position and velocity response of the actuator are measured using a polytec laser vibrometer. This outputs the measurements as analog voltages that are fed back to the xPC target using a National Instruments Analog to Digital Convertor, [paragraph 5.6.3, Actuator System Validation; page 134]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the mirror modified system of Solomon wherein the outputting an indication of the disconnected actuator, as taught by Hamelinck for the predictable advantage of dynamic testing and validation of actuators, as taught by Hamelinck in paragraph actuator validation, page 134.
Regarding claim 20, the modified Solomon teaches the method according to claim 10 (see above),
Hamelinck teaches wherein the controller is further to output an indication of the disconnected actuator, the indication comprising one or more of: a notification to an external computing device; an alert at an output device of the deformable mirror system; and actuator adjustment data defining new positions of one or more of the actuators in view of an executed shutdown sequence, the actuator adjustment data for further processing (dynamic measurements were performed on the single actuator prototypes using a Siglab system, the setup depicted in Figure 5.11 will be used for testing and model validation of the grid actuators, The LVDS bridge then converts the packets into LYDS packets to be sent to the electronics module corresponding to the targeted actuator. Both the position and velocity response of the actuator are measured using a polytec laser vibrometer. This outputs the measurements as analog voltages that are fed back to the xPC target using a National Instruments Analog to Digital Convertor, [paragraph 5.6.3, Actuator System Validation], page 134).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the mirror modified system of Solomon wherein the controller is further to output an indication of the disconnected actuator, the indication comprising one or more of: a notification to an external computing device; an alert at an output device of the deformable mirror system; and actuator adjustment data defining new positions of one or more of the actuators in view of an executed shutdown sequence, the actuator adjustment data for further processing, as taught by Hamelinck for the predictable advantage of dynamic testing and validation of actuators, as taught by Hamelinck in paragraph actuator validation, page 134.
Claims 6-8 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solomon (US 2006/0142877, of record) in view of NPL: HAMELICK, R. F. M. M et al. ("Adaptive deformable mirror: based on electromagnetic actuators.", Eindhoven University of Technology, research.tue.nl, (2010), Of Record, Applicant provided a copy with IDS dated 9/20/2024), and Best (US 20200158599), and further in view of, BRUSA, Guido, et al. (NPL: "Engineering aspects of the Large Binocular Telescope Observatory adaptive optics systems." Adaptive Optics Systems V. Vol. 9909. Of Record; Applicant provided a copy with IDS dated 9/20/2024).
Regarding claim 6, the modified Solomon teaches the deformable mirror system according to claim 1 (see above), and in response to the test signal portion satisfying the error condition (If the voltage is zero, the actuator coil is fine and if its high, it does not conduct electricity, i.e. malfunctioning actuator coil, [paragraph Coil integrity check, page 201]).
The modified Solomon doesn’t explicitly teach in response to the test signal portion satisfying the error condition, the controller is further configured to control a subset of adjacent actuators to execute a shutdown sequence.
Solomon and Brusa are related as mirror and actuator system.
Brusa in a Non-Patent Literature "Engineering aspects of the Large Binocular Telescope Observatory adaptive optics systems." teaches in response to the test signal portion satisfying the error condition, the controller is further configured to control a subset of adjacent actuators to execute a shutdown sequence (in “paragraph 3.5, Actuator enabling and disabling”, Brusa teaches when actuator capacitive sensors experiencing sudden position ‘jumps’ of single actuators. The cause of these position jumps is believed to be a change of resistance in the contacts that carry the very small current that runs from the capacitive sensor’s armatures to the read-out electronics, jumps are interpreted by the software as actual deviations from its nominal position, which in turn causes the astronomical observation to stop. A software fix that will determine the nature of these jumps by looking at adjacent actuators and in case of localized ‘jumps’, simply disable the ‘jumping’ actuator. As this ‘jumping’ behavior is temporary the actuator can usually be re-instated. If too many actuators are permanently disabled during the course of time, we have the option of cleaning by shutdown, [“paragraph 3.5, Actuator enabling and disabling”]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the modified deformable mirror system of Solomon to add, in response to the test signal portion satisfying the error condition, the controller is further configured to control a subset of adjacent actuators to execute a shutdown sequence, as taught by Brusa for the predictable advantage of checking if it is a temporary simply disabling the faulty actuators or for the permanent error of the actuator option of shutdown for cleaning their contacts, as taught by Brusa in [paragraph 3.5, Actuator enabling and disabling].
Regarding claim 7, the modified Solomon teaches the deformable mirror system according to claim 6 (see above), wherein the shutdown sequence comprises adjusting respective heights of the subset of adjacent actuators to accommodate for the disconnected actuator (operation, the switches in the switch array 50 are typically opened and closed in a pre-determined sequence. however, the switches may optionally be opened and closed in a pseudo-random sequence, non-sequential order, or other sequence determined during operation by (i) the DM processor 49 employing a custom control process or (ii) the external system 88. If the switch 51a is closed, the actuator 70a changes length in proportion to the difference between the high voltage amplifier output, Va 59, and AGND 85, [0092]; The voltage change causes a length change in the actuator 70a. A length change in the actuator 70a causes a figure change on the DM mirror 16, FIG. 1, [0122]).
Regarding claim 8, the modified Solomon teaches the deformable mirror system according to claim 7 (see above), wherein a rate of descent of the subset of adjacent actuators is selected according to a predefined self-discharge rate of the actuator (the switches may optionally be opened and closed in a pseudo-random sequence, non-sequential order, or other sequence determined during operation by (i) the DM processor 49 employing a custom control process or (ii) the external system 88. If the switch 51a is closed, the actuator 70a changes length in proportion to the difference between the high voltage amplifier output, Va 59, and AGND 85, [0092]; The software accounts for the electrical characteristics of the electronics and actuators and also accounts for electromechanical characteristics of the actuators within the context of the DM assembly 10. As discussed above in reference to the hardware, the actuators are charge storage devices that discharge power in the same manner as capacitors, [0207]).
Regarding claim 16, The modified Solomon teaches the method according to claim 10 (see above), and in response to the test signal portion satisfying the error condition (If the voltage is zero, the actuator coil is fine and if its high, it does not conduct electricity, i.e. malfunctioning actuator coil, [paragraph Coil integrity check, page 201]).
The modified Solomon doesn’t explicitly teach in response to the test signal portion satisfying the error condition, the controller is further configured to control a subset of adjacent actuators to execute a shutdown sequence.
Solomon and Brusa are related as mirror and actuator system.
Brusa in a Non-Patent Literature "Engineering aspects of the Large Binocular Telescope Observatory adaptive optics systems." teaches in response to the test signal portion satisfying the error condition, the controller is further configured to control a subset of adjacent actuators to execute a shutdown sequence (in “paragraph 3.5, Actuator enabling and disabling”, Brusa further teaches when actuator capacitive sensors experiencing sudden position ‘jumps’ of single actuators. The cause of these position jumps is believed to be a change of resistance in the contacts that carry the very small current that runs from the capacitive sensor’s armatures to the read-out electronics, jumps are interpreted by the software as actual deviations from its nominal position, which in turn causes the astronomical observation to stop. A software fix that will determine the nature of these jumps by looking at adjacent actuators and in case of localized ‘jumps’, simply disable the ‘jumping’ actuator. As this ‘jumping’ behavior is temporary the actuator can usually be re-instated. If too many actuators are permanently disabled during the course of time, we have the option of cleaning by shutdown, [“paragraph 3.5, Actuator enabling and disabling”]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the modified deformable mirror system of Solomon to add, in response to the test signal portion satisfying the error condition, the controller is further configured to control a subset of adjacent actuators to execute a shutdown sequence, as taught by Brusa for the predictable advantage of checking if it is a temporary simply disabling the faulty actuators or for the permanent error of the actuator option of shutdown for cleaning their contacts, as taught by Brusa in [paragraph 3.5, Actuator enabling and disabling].
Regarding claim 17, The modified Solomon teaches the method according to claim 16 (see above), wherein the shutdown sequence comprises adjusting respective heights of the subset of adjacent actuators to accommodate for the disconnected actuator (operation, the switches in the switch array 50 are typically opened and closed in a pre-determined sequence. however, the switches may optionally be opened and closed in a pseudo-random sequence, non-sequential order, or other sequence determined during operation by (i) the DM processor 49 employing a custom control process or (ii) the external system 88. If the switch 51a is closed, the actuator 70a changes length in proportion to the difference between the high voltage amplifier output, Va 59, and AGND 85, [0092]; The voltage change causes a length change in the actuator 70a. A length change in the actuator 70a causes a figure change on the DM mirror 16, FIG. 1, [0122]).
Regarding claim 18, The modified Solomon teaches the method according to claim 17 (see above), wherein a rate of descent of the subset of adjacent actuators is selected according to a predefined self-discharge rate of the actuator (the switches may optionally be opened and closed in a pseudo-random sequence, non-sequential order, or other sequence determined during operation by (i) the DM processor 49 employing a custom control process or (ii) the external system 88. If the switch 51a is closed, the actuator 70a changes length in proportion to the difference between the high voltage amplifier output, Va 59, and AGND 85, [0092]; The software accounts for the electrical characteristics of the electronics and actuators and also accounts for electromechanical characteristics of the actuators within the context of the DM assembly 10. As discussed above in reference to the hardware, the actuators are charge storage devices that discharge power in the same manner as capacitors, [0207]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAHMAN ABDUR whose telephone number is (571)270-0438. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 am to 5:30.
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.
/R.A/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/BUMSUK WON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872