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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 10/20/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under 37 C.F.R. 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Kangas (US20180238794).
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Freudiger (US20160238532), in view of, Kangas (US20180238794).
Freudiger teaches:
In regards to claim 1, Freudiger teaches a system for controlling molecules, the system comprising: (abstract, ‘multi-photon imaging using a fiber optic laser two-photon excitation or multi-color-two-photon fluorescence’; fig. 4, ‘1st and 2nd input train of pulses multi-photon microscopy (MPM)’)
a first light source; (fig. 4, ‘1st and 2nd input train of pulses multi-photon microscopy (MPM)’)
a second light source; fig. 4, ‘1st and 2nd input train of pulses multi-photon microscopy (MPM)’)
receive a signal from the first light source that is interrogating a location in a sample that may contain a target molecule; (para [0006] fig(s) 17(A-B), ‘molecules are excited by scattering of an excitation photon while exciting a molecular vibration’)
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention for freudiger to provide a accurate method for performing multi-photon imaging using a fiber laser.
Freudiger shows that the invention is capable of modulating a pulse train, however, it does not specifically suggest exceeding a preset signal.
Freudiger does not teach:
an acousto-optic modulator (AOM) coupled to the second light source; and control circuitry configured to:
compare the signal received from the first light source to a preset signal; and
in the event that the signal received from the first light source meets or exceeds the preset signal, then the target molecule is present at the location in the sample and the control circuitry causes the AOM to activate the second light source to transmit light onto the location in the sample that contains the target molecule.
Kangas teaches:
an acousto-optic modulator (AOM) coupled to the second light source; and control circuitry configured to: (334 fig 3, ‘chopper/AOM’; para [0120], ‘. In some examples, the system can include one or more modulating elements, such as micromirrors, acousto-optic modulators, or electro-optic modulators.’; ‘the illustration of the embodiment of fig 3 employs one modulator in the reference path as shown in the application but there can be many modifications or additions made.’ ; para [0055] ‘Light 654 can transmit through chopper 634, where chopper 634 can modulate the intensity of light 654 ‘)
compare the signal received from the first light source to a preset signal; and (para [0047], ‘ the signal of the reference at 322 can be a predetermined or known value.’)
in the event that the signal received from the first light source meets or exceeds the preset signal, then the target molecule is present at the location in the sample and the control circuitry causes the AOM to activate the second light source to transmit light onto the location in the sample that contains the target molecule. (para [0078], ‘The light source can be turned on or activated to emit light (step 1102 of process 1100). In a first time period, the choppers along both light paths (e.g., choppers 634 and 636) can be off allowing unmodulated light’; ‘The detector can measure and generate a first set of electrical signals indicative of the unmodulated light transmitted through the sample and through the reference (step 1106 of process 1100). In a second time, the choppers located along both light paths can be turned on or activated such that the choppers are modulating light (step 1108 of process 1100). The detector can measure and generate a second set of electrical signals indicative of the modulated light not absorbed by the sample and the reference (step 1110 of process 1100). If the absorbance from the unmodulated light is close to (e.g., within 10%) or the same as absorbance from the modulated light (step 1112 of process 1100), then the system can increase or continue to increase the properties of light.’)
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention for Kangas to implement methods to control desired levels of a light by implementing a preset signal for performing multi-photon imaging using a fiber laser and the like.
In regards to claim 2, Freudiger & Kangas teach a system of claim 1, (Freudiger: see claim rejection 1) wherein the first light source and the second light source are each lasers. (fig. 4, ‘1st and 2nd input train of pulses multi-photon microscopy (MPM)’)
In regards to claim 3, Freudiger & Kangas teach a system of claim 2, (Freudiger: see claim rejection 2) wherein the first light source is configured for scanning. (fig(s) 23(A-B), 24; para(s) [0012, 0032, 0035], ‘beam scanning unit’)
In regards to claim 4, Freudiger & Kangas teach a system of claim 1, (see claim rejection 1) wherein for each location, the compare process and the activate process occur within 30 nano-seconds of the receive process. (Freudiger: para(s) [0041], para(s) [0129], 'The systems and methods disclosed herein may be configured with different laser pulse durations for one or more trains of laser pulses, which may alternatively be specified in terms of the corresponding full width at half maximum (FWHM) for the one or more trains of laser pulses.')
In regards to claim 5, Freudiger & Kangas teach a system of claim 1, (see claim rejection 1) wherein in the event that the signal received from the first light source does not meet or exceed the preset signal, then the target molecule is not present at the location in the sample and the control circuitry causes the AOM to turn-off the second light source and no light is transmitted onto the location in the sample as the location does not contains the target molecule. (Kangas: para [0078], ‘The light source can be turned on or activated to emit light (step 1102 of process 1100). In a first time period, the choppers along both light paths (e.g., choppers 634 and 636) can be off allowing unmodulated light’; ‘The detector can measure and generate a first set of electrical signals indicative of the unmodulated light transmitted through the sample and through the reference (step 1106 of process 1100). In a second time, the choppers located along both light paths can be turned on or activated such that the choppers are modulating light (step 1108 of process 1100). The detector can measure and generate a second set of electrical signals indicative of the modulated light not absorbed by the sample and the reference (step 1110 of process 1100). If the absorbance from the unmodulated light is close to (e.g., within 10%) or the same as absorbance from the modulated light (step 1112 of process 1100), then the system can increase or continue to increase the properties of light.’)
In regards to claim 6, Freudiger & Kangas teach a system of claim 1, (see claim rejection 1) wherein control circuity is configured to cause the acousto-optic modulator to operate in at least one mode selected from the group consisting of: AOM constantly on, AOM constantly off, and AOM control triggered by the compare step. (Kangas: 330, 340 fig. 3, ‘detector’, ‘controller’; 334 fig 3, ‘chopper/AOM’; para [0120], ‘. In some examples, the system can include one or more modulating elements, such as micromirrors, acousto-optic modulators, or electro-optic modulators.’; ‘the illustration of the embodiment of fig 3 employs one modulator in the reference path as shown in the application but there can be many modifications or additions made.’ ; para [0055] ‘Light 654 can transmit through chopper 634, where chopper 634 can modulate the intensity of light 654 ‘)
In regards to claim 7, Freudiger & Kangas teach a system of claim 1, (see claim rejection 1) wherein the pre-set signal is a voltage threshold and the signal received from the first light source is converted into a sample voltage. (Kangas: 154, 158, 168 fig. 1, ‘light beams’, ‘electrical signals’; fig. 3)
In regards to claim 8, Freudiger & Kangas teach a system of claim 7, (see claim rejection 7) wherein when the sample voltage meets or exceeds the voltage threshold, the control circuity then causes the AOM to activate the second light source to transmit light onto the location in the sample that contains the molecule. (Kangas: para [0078], ‘The light source can be turned on or activated to emit light (step 1102 of process 1100). In a first time period, the choppers along both light paths (e.g., choppers 634 and 636) can be off allowing unmodulated light’; ‘The detector can measure and generate a first set of electrical signals indicative of the unmodulated light transmitted through the sample and through the reference (step 1106 of process 1100). In a second time, the choppers located along both light paths can be turned on or activated such that the choppers are modulating light (step 1108 of process 1100). The detector can measure and generate a second set of electrical signals indicative of the modulated light not absorbed by the sample and the reference (step 1110 of process 1100). If the absorbance from the unmodulated light is close to (e.g., within 10%) or the same as absorbance from the modulated light (step 1112 of process 1100), then the system can increase or continue to increase the properties of light.’)
In regards to claim 9, Freudiger & Kangas teach a system of claim 7, (see claim rejection 7) wherein when the sample voltage does not meet or exceed the voltage threshold, the control circuity then causes the AOM to turn-off the second light source and no light is transmitted onto the location in the sample as that location does not contains the molecule (Kangas: para [0078], ‘The light source can be turned on or activated to emit light (step 1102 of process 1100). In a first time period, the choppers along both light paths (e.g., choppers 634 and 636) can be off allowing unmodulated light’; ‘The detector can measure and generate a first set of electrical signals indicative of the unmodulated light transmitted through the sample and through the reference (step 1106 of process 1100). In a second time, the choppers located along both light paths can be turned on or activated such that the choppers are modulating light (step 1108 of process 1100). The detector can measure and generate a second set of electrical signals indicative of the modulated light not absorbed by the sample and the reference (step 1110 of process 1100). If the absorbance from the unmodulated light is close to (e.g., within 10%) or the same as absorbance from the modulated light (step 1112 of process 1100), then the system can increase or continue to increase the properties of light.’)
In regards to claim 10, Freudiger & Kangas teach a system of claim 1, (see claim rejection 1) wherein each location is a pixel and the light from the second laser can be focused to solely the pixel that has been determined to contain the target molecule. (Kangas: 330 fig. 3, ‘detector’; fig(s) 1, 6, 8, 13-19)
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 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.
Claim(s) 11-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Freudiger (US20160238532), in view of, Kangas (US20180238794).
Freudiger teaches:
In regards to claim 11, Freudiger teaches a method for controlling a molecule, the method comprising: (abstract, ‘multi-photon imaging using a fiber optic laser two-photon excitation or multi-color-two-photon fluorescence’; fig. 4, ‘1st and 2nd input train of pulses multi-photon microscopy (MPM)’)
receiving, to control circuitry, a signal from a first light source that is interrogating a location in a sample that may contain a target molecule; (para [0006] fig(s) 17(A-B), ‘molecules are excited by scattering of an excitation photon while exciting a molecular vibration’)
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention for freudiger to provide an accurate method for performing multi-photon imaging using a fiber laser.
Freudiger shows that the invention is capable of modulating a pulse train, however, it does not specifically suggest exceeding a preset signal.
Freudiger does not teach:
comparing, via the control circuity, the signal received from the first light source to a preset signal; and
in the event that the signal received from the first light source meets or exceeds the preset signal, then the target molecule is present at the location in the sample and causing, via the control circuitry, and causing an acousto-optic modulator (AOM) that is coupled to a second light source to activate the second light source to transmit light onto the location in the sample that contains the target molecule, wherein the light from the second light source controls the target molecule.
Kangas teaches:
comparing, via the control circuity, the signal received from the first light source to a preset signal; (para [0047], ‘ the signal of the reference at 322 can be a predetermined or known value.’)
in the event that the signal received from the first light source meets or exceeds the preset signal, then the target molecule is present at the location in the sample and causing, via the control circuitry, and causing an acousto-optic modulator (AOM) that is coupled to a second light source to activate the second light source to transmit light onto the location in the sample that contains the target molecule, wherein the light from the second light source controls the target molecule. (Kangas: para [0078], ‘The light source can be turned on or activated to emit light (step 1102 of process 1100). In a first time period, the choppers along both light paths (e.g., choppers 634 and 636) can be off allowing unmodulated light’; ‘The detector can measure and generate a first set of electrical signals indicative of the unmodulated light transmitted through the sample and through the reference (step 1106 of process 1100). In a second time, the choppers located along both light paths can be turned on or activated such that the choppers are modulating light (step 1108 of process 1100). The detector can measure and generate a second set of electrical signals indicative of the modulated light not absorbed by the sample and the reference (step 1110 of process 1100). If the absorbance from the unmodulated light is close to (e.g., within 10%) or the same as absorbance from the modulated light (step 1112 of process 1100), then the system can increase or continue to increase the properties of light.’)
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention for Kangas to implement methods to control desired levels of a light by implementing a preset signal for performing multi-photon imaging using a fiber laser and the like.
In regards to claim 12, Freudiger & Kangas teach a method of claim 11, wherein the first light source and the second light source are each lasers. (Freudiger: fig. 4, ‘1st and 2nd input train of pulses multi-photon microscopy (MPM)’)
In regards to claim 13, Freudiger & Kangas teach a method of claim 12, (see claim rejection 12) wherein the first light source is configured for scanning. (Freudiger: fig(s) 23(A-B), 24; para(s) [0012, 0032, 0035], ‘beam scanning unit’)
In regards to claim 14, Freudiger & Kangas teach a method of claim 11, (see claim rejection 11) wherein for each location, the comparing step and the activating step occur within 30 nano-seconds of the receiving step. (Freudiger: para(s) [0041], para(s) [0129], 'The systems and methods disclosed herein may be configured with different laser pulse durations for one or more trains of laser pulses, which may alternatively be specified in terms of the corresponding full width at half maximum (FWHM) for the one or more trains of laser pulses.')
In regards to claim 15, Freudiger & Kangas teach a method of claim 11, (see claim rejection 11) wherein in the event that the signal received from the first light source does not meet or exceed the preset signal, then the target molecule is not present at the location in the sample and the control circuitry causes the AOM to turn-off the second light source and no light is transmitted onto the location in the sample as the location does not contains the target molecule. (Kangas: para [0078], ‘The light source can be turned on or activated to emit light (step 1102 of process 1100). In a first time period, the choppers along both light paths (e.g., choppers 634 and 636) can be off allowing unmodulated light’; ‘The detector can measure and generate a first set of electrical signals indicative of the unmodulated light transmitted through the sample and through the reference (step 1106 of process 1100). In a second time, the choppers located along both light paths can be turned on or activated such that the choppers are modulating light (step 1108 of process 1100). The detector can measure and generate a second set of electrical signals indicative of the modulated light not absorbed by the sample and the reference (step 1110 of process 1100). If the absorbance from the unmodulated light is close to (e.g., within 10%) or the same as absorbance from the modulated light (step 1112 of process 1100), then the system can increase or continue to increase the properties of light.’)
In regards to claim 16, Freudiger & Kangas teach a method of claim 11, (see claim rejection 11) wherein control circuity is configured to cause the acousto-optic modulator to operate in at least one mode selected from the group consisting of: AOM constantly on, AOM constantly off, and AOM control triggered by the compare step. (Kangas: para [0078], ‘The light source can be turned on or activated to emit light (step 1102 of process 1100). In a first time period, the choppers along both light paths (e.g., choppers 634 and 636) can be off allowing unmodulated light’; ‘The detector can measure and generate a first set of electrical signals indicative of the unmodulated light transmitted through the sample and through the reference (step 1106 of process 1100). In a second time, the choppers located along both light paths can be turned on or activated such that the choppers are modulating light (step 1108 of process 1100). The detector can measure and generate a second set of electrical signals indicative of the modulated light not absorbed by the sample and the reference (step 1110 of process 1100). If the absorbance from the unmodulated light is close to (e.g., within 10%) or the same as absorbance from the modulated light (step 1112 of process 1100), then the system can increase or continue to increase the properties of light.’)
In regards to claim 17, Freudiger & Kangas teach a method of claim 11, (see claim rejection 11) wherein the pre-set signal is a voltage threshold and the signal received from the first light source is converted into a sample voltage. (Kangas: 154, 158, 168 fig. 1, ‘light beams’, ‘electrical signals’; fig. 3)
In regards to claim 18, Freudiger & Kangas teach a method of claim 17, (see claim rejection 17) wherein when the sample voltage meets or exceeds the voltage threshold, the control circuity then causes the AOM to activate the second light source to transmit light onto the location in the sample that contains the molecule. (Kangas: para [0078], ‘The light source can be turned on or activated to emit light (step 1102 of process 1100). In a first time period, the choppers along both light paths (e.g., choppers 634 and 636) can be off allowing unmodulated light’; ‘The detector can measure and generate a first set of electrical signals indicative of the unmodulated light transmitted through the sample and through the reference (step 1106 of process 1100). In a second time, the choppers located along both light paths can be turned on or activated such that the choppers are modulating light (step 1108 of process 1100). The detector can measure and generate a second set of electrical signals indicative of the modulated light not absorbed by the sample and the reference (step 1110 of process 1100). If the absorbance from the unmodulated light is close to (e.g., within 10%) or the same as absorbance from the modulated light (step 1112 of process 1100), then the system can increase or continue to increase the properties of light.’)
In regards to claim 19, Freudiger & Kangas teach a method of claim 17, (see claim rejection 17) wherein when the sample voltage does not meet or exceed the voltage threshold, the control circuity then causes the AOM to turn-off the second light source and no light is transmitted onto the location in the sample as that location does not contains the molecule. (Kangas: para [0078], ‘The light source can be turned on or activated to emit light (step 1102 of process 1100). In a first time period, the choppers along both light paths (e.g., choppers 634 and 636) can be off allowing unmodulated light’; ‘The detector can measure and generate a first set of electrical signals indicative of the unmodulated light transmitted through the sample and through the reference (step 1106 of process 1100). In a second time, the choppers located along both light paths can be turned on or activated such that the choppers are modulating light (step 1108 of process 1100). The detector can measure and generate a second set of electrical signals indicative of the modulated light not absorbed by the sample and the reference (step 1110 of process 1100). If the absorbance from the unmodulated light is close to (e.g., within 10%) or the same as absorbance from the modulated light (step 1112 of process 1100), then the system can increase or continue to increase the properties of light.’)
In regards to claim 20, Freudiger & Kangas teach a method of claim 11, (see claim rejection 11) wherein each location is a pixel and the light from the second laser can be focused to solely the pixel that has been determined to contain the target molecule. (Kangas: 330 fig. 3, ‘detector’; fig(s) 1, 6, 8, 13-19)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references cited Everly (WO 2025/096054), Wang (CN 115963514), and Anhut (DE102010047353) references further describe methods of controlling molecules, and imaging in vivo specimens as described by the claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN C BUTLER whose telephone number is (571)270-3973. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5.
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, Stephanie E Bloss can be reached at (571)272-3555. 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.
/K.C.B/Examiner, Art Unit 2852
/STEPHANIE E BLOSS/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852