DETAILED ACTION
This is the first office action regarding application number 18/011875, filed on 12/21/2022, which is a 371 of PCT/US2021/037977, filed on 06/18/2021, which claims benefit of U.S. Provisional Application Serial No. 63/043,871 filed on June 25, 2020.
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 15-24 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Groups II, III, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01/21/2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-14 in the reply filed on 01/21/2026 is acknowledged.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show plate 122 in Fig. 3a wherein paragraph [83] in original disclosure cites "In the optical system 100' of FIG. 3A, the vortex phase plate 122 is positioned between a first lens 141 and a second lens 142 of a lens assembly 140" as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 131 in Fig. 3a. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 15-24 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 15-24 are not updated with proper status as set forth in MPEP 714 “In the claim listing, the status of every claim must be indicated after its claim number by using one of the following identifiers in a parenthetical expression: (Original), (Currently amended), (Canceled), (Withdrawn), (Previously presented), (New), and (Not entered).”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites
PNG
media_image1.png
112
622
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It is not clear if there are two transparent workpieces.
Dependent claims 2-14 are rejected based on their dependency on independent claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-9, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Courvoisier et al. , US 20160271727 (Courvoisier).
Regarding claim 1,
A method of laser processing a transparent workpiece, the method comprising: (Paragraph [7] teaches method for drilling through-holes in transparent materials.)
directing a laser beam into a transparent workpiece wherein a portion of the laser beam directed into the transparent workpiece comprises a laser beam focal column ( Cylinder 310 in Fig. 3)
PNG
media_image2.png
556
499
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 3 in Courvoisier
and generates an induced absorption to produce a defect column within the transparent workpiece, (Volume 120 in Fig. 10a)
PNG
media_image3.png
335
428
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fig. 10a in Courvoisier
the laser beam focal column comprising a radius of maximum beam intensity that is variable along a length of the laser beam focal column such that the radius of maximum beam intensity comprises at least two non-zero angles of propagation with respect to a centerline of the laser beam focal column along the length of the laser beam focal column. (The limitation is interpreted as the radius of maximum beam intensity increases and decreases as described in Fig. 5B of original disclosure.
Paragraph [73] teaches “Lastly, variants of the beams of the Bessel-Vortex type may be formed by applying a slight additional deformation to the wavefront. For example, the diameter of the central ‘dark’ region may decrease or increase along the propagation, while at the same time maintaining the property of non-linear quasi-stationarity of the beam,” It is implied that decreasing diameter results in one non-zero angle of propagation, and increasing diameter results in another non-zero angle of propagation.)
Regarding claim 2,
The method of claim 1, further comprising directing the laser beam through a phase altering sub-assembly prior to directing the laser beam into the transparent workpiece, wherein the phase altering sub-assembly comprises one or more optical elements configured to apply an axicon phase modification, a vortex phase modification, and a third phase modification. (Fig. 3 in Courvoisier teaches vortex phase plate, axicon phase plate. Fig. 6 teaches an imaging system 609.)
PNG
media_image4.png
511
781
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Fig. 6 in Courvoisier
Regarding claim 3,
The method of claim 2, wherein the third phase modification is a focusing phase modification. (Fig. 6 teaches microscope lens 609.)
Regarding claim 4,
The method of claim 2, wherein the third phase modification is a radially symmetric Airy phase modification. (Paragraph [100] in Courvoisier teaches “it is also possible to spectrally imprint, for example by means of a DAZZLER®, a phase of the third order, which yields a beam of the Airy type in the time domain, with multiple sub-pulses.”)
Regarding claim 5,
The method of claim 2, wherein: the one or more optical elements of the phase altering sub-assembly comprise an axicon and a vortex phase plate; and the axicon is configured to apply the axicon phase modification and the vortex phase plate is configured to apply the vortex phase modification. (Fig. 3 in Courvoisier teaches vortex phase plate, axicon phase plate.)
Regarding claim 6,
The method of claim 5, further comprising a third optical element configured to apply the third phase modification. (Fig. 6 teaches microscope lens 609.)
Regarding claim 7,
The method of claim 6, wherein the third optical element comprises a radial Airy phase plate. (Paragraph [100] in Courvoisier teaches “it is also possible to spectrally imprint, for example by means of a DAZZLER®, a phase of the third order, which yields a beam of the Airy type in the time domain, with multiple sub-pulses.”)
Regarding claim 8,
The method of claim 6, wherein the third optical element comprises a focusing lens. (Fig. 6 teaches microscope lens 609.)
Regarding claim 9,
The method of claim 5, wherein the axicon is configured to apply the third phase modification. (Paragraph [87] teaches “it is advantageous to be able to form these beams, with identical or slightly different characteristics, in parallel. This may be achieved by virtue of matrices of holographic structures, or of matrices of micro-axicons in particular.”)
Regarding claim 14,
The method of claim 1, wherein the laser beam focal column comprises a uniform maximum intensity in the radius of maximum beam intensity along the length of the laser beam focal column. (Fig. 3 in Courvoisier.)
Claim(s) 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Courvoisier et al. , US 20160271727 (Courvoisier) and as evidenced by Zong et al., US 10942397 (hereafter Zong).
Regarding claim 11,
The method of claim 2, wherein: the one or more optical elements of the phase altering sub-assembly comprise one or more spatial light modulators;
and the one or more spatial light modulators are configured to apply at least one of the axicon phase modification, the vortex phase modification, and the third phase modification. (Paragraph [86] in Courvoisier teaches “a single spatial conditioning element will be used for applying the annular conditioning and the vortex conditioning.” Paragraph [17] teaches “a Bessel-Vortex beam may be obtained from a laser beam by transmission or reflection on a phase plate or a spatial phase modulator.” Here spatial phase modulator is a type of spatial light modulator as evidenced in column 1, lines 40-45 in Zong.)
Regarding claim 12,
The method of claim 11, wherein the one or more spatial light modulators are configured to apply each of the axicon phase modification, the vortex phase modification, and the third phase modification. ( Paragraph [86] in Courvoisier teaches “a single spatial conditioning element will be used for applying the annular conditioning and the vortex conditioning.” Paragraph [17] teaches “a Bessel-Vortex beam may be obtained from a laser beam by transmission or reflection on a phase plate or a spatial phase modulator.” Here spatial phase modulator is a type of spatial light modulator as evidenced in column 1, lines 40-45 in Zong.)
Regarding claim 13,
The method of claim 12, wherein a single spatial light modulator of the one or more spatial light modulators is configured to apply each of the axicon phase modification, the vortex phase modification, and the third phase modification. ( Paragraph [86] in Courvoisier teaches “a single spatial conditioning element will be used for applying the annular conditioning and the vortex conditioning.” Paragraph [17] teaches “a Bessel-Vortex beam may be obtained from a laser beam by transmission or reflection on a phase plate or a spatial phase modulator.” Here spatial phase modulator is a type of spatial light modulator as evidenced in column 1, lines 40-45 in Zong.)
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Courvoisier as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Omatsu et al., JP 2010247230 (hereafter Omatsu).
Regarding claim 10,
The method of claim 5, wherein the phase altering sub-assembly is disposed in an optical system further comprising a lens assembly comprising a first lens and a second lens; and the vortex phase plate is disposed between the first lens and the second lens of the lens assembly. (Primary combination of references is silent about this.
Omatsu teaches an optical system in Fig. 3 wherein spiral phase plate 13 is positioned between lens 6 and lens 12. Here spiral phase plate transforms laser beam 2 into vortex laser beam as taught in page 6, paragraph 2, and thus corresponds to vortex phase plate.)
PNG
media_image5.png
647
510
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Fig. 3 and 4 in Omatsu
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to add lens before and after vortex phase plate as taught in Omatsu to the method in Courvoisier. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to modify the beam size through spiral phase plate. The beam is magnified before spiral phase plate and reduced after conversion into vortex beam to irradiate workpiece in a micron range as taught in page 6, paragraphs 1 and 2 of Omatsu.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20150158120, Fig. 2
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FAHMIDA FERDOUSI whose telephone number is (303)297-4341. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday; 9:00AM-3:00PM; PST.
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, Steven Crabb can be reached at (571)270-5095. 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.
/FAHMIDA FERDOUSI/ Examiner, Art Unit 3761