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. Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. DE10 2020 209 700.3, filed on 0 7 / 31 /20 20 . Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Claim Objections Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 4, last line, “bridged gapbased on the additional evaluation”, should have a space between “gap” and “based”. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claims 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mori et al. (JP 2000271768 A, hereinafter Mori) in view of Haag (DE 10243005 A1) and Shirk (US 5651903 A1). Regarding claim 1, Mori discloses a method for monitoring a laser welding process (Abstract, “ a monitoring method of the quality for a YAG laser beam welded part capable of forecasting/discriminating welded part quality ”) for welding two workpieces using a laser wavelength (Page 7, Para. 3, “ gap between the workpieces 5 have been described as typical welding parameters ”, and Page 5, Para. 2, “ a YAG laser weld according to the present invention. ”, where laser welding would use a laser wavelength to weld the two workpieces together) , in which a laser beam is directed into the workpieces so as to melt a melting volume in a region of an interface of the two workpieces in order to produce a weld seam (Page 3, Para. 2, “ YAG reflection light from inside the keyhole of the welded portion ”, where the weld seam is implied through the keyhole creation melting the material of both workpieces to create a weld seam to join the pieces together) , an intensity of a process radiation emitted by the melting volume being detected (Abstract, “ The emission intensity of a visible light beam (plasma light beam) from a YAG welded part as well as the intensity of a reflection light beam of the YAG laser beam are respectively detected by sensors 6a, 6b arranged to upper/lower two places ”) , the method comprising: evaluating a detected intensity profile with regard to at least one of the following features: a depth of an intensity decrease (Page 2, last Para., “ The intensity of the reflected light of the laser is individually measured, and a low frequency component (DC component) of about 100 Hz or less as a frequency component included in these detection signals, and a large time up to about 10 kHz based on the DC component intensity. When the intensities of both of the high-frequency components (AC components) accompanied by the fluctuations are detected, respectively, these four types of signal information, namely, the DC component and AC component of the plasma emission intensity, and the DC component and AC component signal information of the YAG reflected light are obtained. ”, where the intensity profile waveform is evaluated, Page 3, Para. 1, “ The intensity of the reflected light of the YAG laser is detected, and as the frequency components of these detection signals, the intensities of both a low-frequency component below an arbitrary frequency between 50 and 200 Hz and a high-frequency component exceeding the arbitrary frequency are obtained. The quality of the welded portion is determined based on the configuration ”; where the entire intensity waveform is evaluated and Fig. 4C shows the gap to reflected light intensity, where the intensity decreases for the 10 deg curve ) , and a renewed increase in intensity after an intensity decrease (T he intensity profile waveform is evaluated, Page 3, Para. 1, “ The intensity of the reflected light of the YAG laser is detected, and as the frequency components of these detection signals, the intensities of both a low-frequency component below an arbitrary frequency between 50 and 200 Hz and a high- frequency component exceeding the arbitrary frequency are obtained. The quality of the welded portion is determined based on the configuration ”; where the entire intensity waveform is evaluated and Fig. 4C shows the gap to reflected light intensity, where the intensity increases after an intensity decrease for the 10 deg curve ) , determining whether or not a gap between the two workpieces was bridged during the laser welding process based on the evaluation (Page 7, Para. 4 from end, “ FIG. 4A is a graph showing the relationship between the overlapping gap of the work and the DC component of the plasma emission intensity. (B) A graph showing the relationship between the overlapping gap of the work and the AC component of the plasma emission intensity. (C) A graph showing the relationship between the overlap gap of the work and the DC component of the YAG reflected light intensity. (B) is a graph showing the relationship between the overlapping gap of the work and the AC component of the YAG reflected light intensity. ”, where a gap can be determined based on the relationship between the intensity profile vs gap graphs) . Mori does not disclose: wherein the two workpieces are transparent to the laser wavelength, in which a pulsed laser beam is directed into the workpieces to create a weld seam; a duration of an intensity decrease is evaluated. However, Haag discloses, in the similar field of YAG lasers for welding ( Page 2, Para. 4 from end, “ Nd: YAG laser typically used for the laser transmission welding process ” ), where two workpieces are transparent to the laser wavelength ( Page 5, Para. 5, “ The method according to the invention can thus be carried out using a first thermoplastic workpiece part made of a material that is largely transparent at 1064 nm and largely absorbent at 532 nm. Such a material can be, for example, a conventional thermoplastic material that is at least partially colored with a dye that is transparent at 1064 nm and absorbent at 532 nm. The second workpiece part is in accordance with the requirements ” , where each workpiece can have a transparent and absorbent part to the wavelength, Page 5, Para. 5, “ Nd: YAG laser with a welding wavelength of 1064 nm ” ) and where a pulsed laser beam creates a weld seam ( Page 4, Para. 2 from end, “ By stimulating the active medium 46 in the radiation source 40 becomes a pulsed laser beam 16 generated. ”, and Page 4, Para. 4 from end, “ The corresponding melting ranges merge under further pressure 18 . 20 with each other and thus form a weld seam 22 out. ” ) . It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the workpieces and laser in Mori to have the workpieces be transparent to the wavelength of the laser and to use a pulsed laser beam as taught by Haag. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to weld thermoplastic material together, where this would expand the useability of the laser welding system to other types of materials, as stated by Haag, Page 2, Para. 2, “ a known laser transmission welding method is used to weld a workpiece consisting of at least two thermoplastic workpiece parts ”. Further, Shirk discloses, in the similar field of laser welding (Abstract, “ a weld process in which energy (12) is delivered from a laser source ”), where the laser intensity is monitored in real time to determine if there are defects (Section 1, lines 46-53, “ monitoring a laser process in real time by monitoring levels of light intensity from the weld plasma and temperature of the re-solidified weld puddle. comparing the monitored levels a t common maximum variance locations to values from known process anomalies, and determining acceptability of the weld based on the comparison. ”), where the duration of the laser intensity is measured and evaluated (Section 3, lines 64-66, “ Each of the curves 70, 80 represents a large number of samples by the analog-to- digital converter 42, e.g., 1,410 over a predetermined time interval. ”, and Section 4, lines 4-6, “ Range A is the portion of the weld process where the lase r power and speed is regulated to effect a weld that meets predetermined design penetration requirements. ”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the laser intensity evaluation in modified Mori to include real time analysis of the laser intensity, which would include duration evaluation of the laser intensity as taught by Shirk. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to monitor the laser welding process in real time and alert a user when errors occur, as stated by Shirk, Section 1, lines 46-53, “ monitoring a laser process in real time by monitoring levels of light intensity from the weld plasma and temperature of the re-solidified weld puddle. comparing the monitored levels a t common maximum variance locations to values from known process anomalies, and determining acceptability of the weld based on the comparison. ” . Claims 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mori et al. (JP 2000271768 A, hereinafter Mori) in view of Haag (DE 10243005 A1) and Shirk (US 5651903 A1) in further view of Rathjen (US 9170170 B2). Regarding claim 2, modified Mori teaches the method according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses wherein the evaluating is performed with regard to at least the duration of the intensity decrease (Teaching from Shirk, Section 3, lines 64-66, “ Each of the curves 70, 80 represents a large number of samples by the analog-to-digital converter 42, e.g., 1,410 over a predetermined time interval. ”, and Section 4, lines 4-6, “ Range A is the portion of the weld process where the lase r power and speed is regulated to effect a weld that meets predetermined design penetration requirements. ” ). Modified Mori does not disclose: and further comprising ascertaining a width of the bridged gap based on the evaluated duration of the intensity decrease. However, Rathjen discloses, in the similar field of laser systems (Section 1, lines 20-22, “ device and a method for determining the focus position in the projection direction of the laser beam. ”), where the width of a bridged gap is determined based on the evaluated duration of the intensity decrease ( Section 7, lines 15-18, “ The processing system 5 establishes the time duration Δt t for the decreasing signal edge, the time duration Δt2 for the increasing signal edge and the time Δ t ref passing over the gap 30 or bar with the defined width dREF ”, where the signal comes from a reflected laser beam, Claim 1, “ creating a measurement signal when passing the laser beam along the scanning path over the measurement marking ”, where the duration of the signal intensity decrease is correlated to a gap width, where it is the Examiner’s position that different gap widths could then be correlated to the duration of signal intensity decrease so that the signal intensity decrease can determine specific gap widths ). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the evaluation process of modified Mori to include a duration of signal intensity decrease evaluation as taught by Rathjen, where the system of modified Mori having a bridged gap make that gap non-photoactive in order to undergo the signal evaluation provided by Rathjen. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to use the correlated time duration of the laser intensity with gap width to determine the laser beam profile, which can be advantageous in allowing a user to confirm if the beam profile is correctly set, as stated by Rathjen, Section 7, lines 18-21, “ The processing system 5 uses the defined width dREF and the determined time durations Δt t , Δt2 , and Δ t ref to establish the beam width wl 20 when passing over the exit edge 312 and the beam width w2 ”, and Section 7, lines 5-9, “ beam widths w at these positions are stored in a table over an extended region, said beam widths determining the beam profile P (see FIG. 7) of the laser beam 60, 60a, which beam profile is defined in a beam profile table or as a Gaussian curve function. ”. Claims 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mori et al. (JP 2000271768 A, hereinafter Mori) in view of Haag (DE 10243005 A1) and Shirk (US 5651903 A1) in further view of Pfitzner et al. (US 20140175071 A1, hereinafter Pfitzner). Regarding claim 3, modified Mori teaches the method according to claim 1, as set forth above . Modified Mori does not disclose: wherein the evaluating is additionally performed with regard to a point in time of the intensity decrease and further comprising ascertaining a position of the bridged gap is ascertained based on the additional evaluation. However, Pfitzner discloses, in the similar field of laser welding creating weld seams or gaps (Abstract, “ laser beam along a predefined path over multiple workpieces to be machined so as to generate a weld seam ”), where the laser intensity is measured at a point in time during the decrease to determine the position of a bridged gap (Para. 0026, “ When evaluating the radiation detected in the detection field section, an intensity distribution of the radiation in the detection field section is determined. A minimum intensity area of the liquid weld pool is located and a defect in the weld seam is detected based on the r elative position of the minimum intensity area in the intensity distribution and/or based on the intensity of the located minimum intensity area. ”, where the relative position of the minimum intensity area determines where the bridged gap is; where if there is a minimum intensity value, that would mean that a bridged gap is present, Para. 0030, “ The minimum intensity behind the laser focal spot is indicative of a weld pool deficit due to a gap required between the metal sheets. This wel d pool deficit arises if the initially separate melts of the upper and lower metal sheets combine behind the laser focal spot to form a joint weld pool. The gap is in this case bridged and a material connection is formed between the metal sheets ”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the laser intensity evaluation in modified Mori to include the position of the bridge gap analysis as taught by Pfitzner. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to determine if there are defects present within the weld seam, where the minimum intensity of the laser beam can be used to determine if a bridged gap is present or if a fusion defect is present, as stated by Pfitzner, Para. 0030, “ This weld pool deficit arises if the initially separate melts of the upper and lower metal sheets combine behind the laser focal spot to form a joint weld pool. The gap is in this case bridged and a material connection is formed between the metal sheets. However, if the melts of the upper and lower metal sheets do not combine, the minimum intensity behind the focal spot of the laser beam disappears, indicating a fusion defect. In this case, the individual melts of the upper and lower metal sheets solidify separately and what is known as a "false friend" is produced. ”. Claims 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mori et al. (JP 2000271768 A, hereinafter Mori) in view of Haag (DE 10243005 A1) and Shirk (US 5651903 A1) in further view of Kratzsch et al. (WO 0020158 A1, hereinafter Kratzsch) and Pfitzner et al. (US 20140175071 A1, hereinafter Pfitzner) . Regarding claim 4, modified Mori teaches the method according to claim 1, as set forth above . Modified Mori does not disclose: wherein the evaluating is additionally performed with regard to a point in time of an intensity peak preceding an intensity decrease and further comprising ascertaining a position of a bridged gap or a non- bridged gapbased on the additional evaluation. However, Kratzsch discloses, in the similar field of laser welding (Page 2, Para. 3 from end, “ welding workpieces of unequa l thickness is the lateral offset of the joining edges and the center of the weld seam ”), where the maximum intensity or intensity peak and intensity afterwards are evaluated to determine if a gap will be present (Page 3, Para. 2, “ If the method is carried out in such a way that the material processing is controlled when there are deviations in the shapes of an intensity maximum range leading in the feed direction of a machined workpiece moved relative to the laser radiation and a trailing maximum range of predetermined range shapes. In this way, an improvement in the welding result can be achieved if the values for the joint gap are too large, not only the leading maximum intensity range being evaluated, but also the subsequent maximum range. ”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the laser intensity peak and decrease afterwards evaluation in modified Mori to have the max intensity and subsequent intensity shape evaluated to determine if a gap will be present as taught by Kratzsch. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to implement more detailed defect control and to have adequate welding accuracy , where the laser intensity max shape can be used to determine if a gap will exist, as stated by Kratzsch, Page 3, Para. 3, “ Adequate welding accuracy can also be achieved by controlling the material processing when the shape deviation exceeds a predetermined difference size and / or a predetermined duration. It is therefore necessary for the deviations to be of a predetermined magnitude and to be detected for a predetermined time. ”. Further, Pfitzner discloses where the position of the gap can be determined based on the minimum intensity area of the melt pool ( Para. 0026, “ When evaluating the radiation detected in the detection field section, an intensity distribution of the radiation in the detection field section is determined. A minimum intensity area of the liquid weld pool is located and a defect in the weld seam is detected based on the r elative position of the minimum intensity area in the intensity distribution and/or based on the intensity of the located minimum intensity area. ”, where the relative position of the minimum intensity area determines where the bridged gap is; where if there is a minimum intensity value, that would mean that a bridged gap is present, Para. 0030, “ The minimum intensity behind the laser focal spot is indicative of a weld pool deficit due to a gap required between the metal sheets. This wel d pool deficit arises if the initially separate melts of the upper and lower metal sheets combine behind the laser focal spot to form a joint weld pool. The gap is in this case bridged and a material connection is formed between the metal sheets ” ). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the gap determination evaluation of modified Mori to include the bridged gap position evaluation as taught by Pfitzner. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to use the minimum intensity area to determine a bridged gap location while also using the area to determine if there are any additional weld defects, Para. 0027, “ Further to the small-area minimum intensity existing within the laser focal spot, an additional, comparatively large-area minimum intensity area can be detected which, in relation to the machining direction, lies behind the maximum intensity area of the laser focal spot. It has been determined that weld defects can be inferred from the characteristics of this additional minimum intensity area. ”. Claims 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mori et al. (JP 2000271768 A, hereinafter Mori) in view of Haag (DE 10243005 A1) and Shirk (US 5651903 A1) in further view of Riechel et al. (WO 2019236616 A1, hereinafter Riechel). Regarding claim 5, modified Mori teaches the method according to claim 1, as set forth above . Modified Mori does not disclose: further comprising modulating an average laser power of the pulsed laser beam is modulated. However, Riechel discloses, in the similar field of laser welding (Page 9, last Para., “ laser-processing include via drilling or other hole formation, cutting, perforating, welding, ”), where the average laser power of the pulsed laser beam is modulated (Page 19, Para. 1, “ Accordingly, an AOD system can also be operated to modulate the pulse energy (and, correspondingly, the fluence, peak power, optical intensity, average power, etc.) of laser pulses ultimately delivered to the workpiece 102. ”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the pulsed laser power in modified Mori to have the average power be modulated as taught by Riechel. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to use modulation in laser power, where modulation allows for greater control over the power given by the laser and for a user to have more customization over the laser , where it can be desired that during scanning that different levels of pulse energy are given, as stated by Riechel, Page 72, Para. 3, “ it may be desirable to modulate the pulse energy (e.g., in any manner as discussed above) such that the pulse energy of laser pulses delivered to the workpiece 102 at the beginning of scanning a scan pattern (e.g., any of the scan patterns discussed above) is higher than the pulse energy of laser pulses delivered to the workpiece 102 at the end of scanning the scan pattern. ”. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hierl et al. (EP 1304560 A1, hereinafter Hierl) discloses a similar YAG laser welding process that combines two workpieces that are transparent to the laser wavelength. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT KEVIN GUANHUA WEN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-9940 and whose email is kevin.wen@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday-Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Ibrahime Abraham can be reached on FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-270-5569 . 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. /KEVIN GUANHUA WEN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3761 12/1 9 /2025