DETAILED ACTION
This is the first office action on the merits. Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2/24/2023 and 8/24/2023 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-3 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by De Groot et al., US 20070171425 A1 (“De Groot”).
Regarding claim 1, De Groot discloses an optical interferometric range sensor, comprising: a light source configured to emit light with a changing wavelength (Fig. 14A, SD unit 1410, Paragraph [0127], [0137]-[0139]; See also Paragraph [0098]); a plurality of interferometers configured to receive the light emitted from the light source (Fig. 14A, sensors 1420, Paragraph [0127]; See also Fig. 3, sensor 110, Paragraph [0101], [0105]), each of the plurality of interferometers being configured to generate interference light based on measurement light and reference light (Fig. 3, sensor 110, beam 331, Paragraph [0105]), the measurement light being light reaching a measurement target and reflected from the measurement target (Fig. 3, sensor 110, target 210, beam 331, Paragraph [0105]), the reference light being light traveling on an optical path at least partially different from an optical path of the measurement light (Fig. 3, sensor 110, transmissive reference flat 320, Paragraph [0105]); optical couplers in a plurality of stages, each of the optical couplers being configured to receive the light emitted from the light source from an optical coupler in a preceding stage to split the light to be incident on a corresponding interferometer of the plurality of interferometers and an optical coupler in a subsequent stage (Fig. 14A, configuration of sensors 1420, Paragraph [0127]; Fig. 14C, couplers 1452, Paragraph [0130]); a light receiver configured to receive the interference light from each of the plurality of interferometers to convert the interference light to an electric signal (Fig. 3, optical sensor 220, Paragraph [0105]; Fig. 14C, detectors 1450, Paragraph [0103]); and a processor configured to perform operations comprising calculating a distance to the measurement target based on the electric signal resulting from conversion performed by the light receiver (Paragraph [0036], [0144]), wherein the light received by each of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages is split based on a first split ratio for a corresponding interferometer and a second split ratio for an optical coupler in a subsequent stage subsequent to a stage comprising the optical coupler receiving the light (Fig. 14A, configuration of sensors 1420, Paragraph [0127]; Fig. 14C, couplers 1452, Paragraph [0130], [0166]), and the first split ratio and the second split ratio are set at least based on the first split ratio of the optical coupler receiving the light and a product of a first split ratio and a second split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage (Fig. 14A, light travels from SD unit 1410 to sensors 1420 in series, Paragraph [0127]; Paragraph [0166]: couplers used can have different split ratios to compensate for differential loss along the two legs).
Regarding claim 2, De Groot discloses the optical interferometric range sensor according to claim 1, wherein the first split ratio of each of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages is set to 0.5 to 2 times the product of the first split ratio and the second split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage (Fig. 14A, light travels from SD unit 1410 to sensors 1420 in series, Paragraph [0127]; Paragraph [0166]: couplers used can have different split ratios to compensate for differential loss along the two legs. However, using the disclosed 50/50 splitting ratio for each coupler satisfies the limitation “the first split ratio of each of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages is set to 2 times the product of the first split ratio and the second split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage”).
Regarding claim 3, De Groot discloses the optical interferometric range sensor according to claim 1, wherein the first split ratio of each of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages is set to be substantially equal to the product of the first split ratio and the second split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage (Fig. 14A, light travels from SD unit 1410 to sensors 1420 in series, Paragraph [0127]; Paragraph [0166]: couplers used can have different split ratios to compensate for differential loss along the two legs with example of coupler with 90/10 splitting ratio).
Regarding claim 8, De Groot discloses the optical interferometric range sensor according to claim 2, wherein the first split ratio of each of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages is set to be substantially equal to the product of the first split ratio and the second split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage (Fig. 14A, light travels from SD unit 1410 to sensors 1420 in series, Paragraph [0127]; Paragraph [0166]: couplers used can have different split ratios to compensate for differential loss along the two legs).
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 4-7, and 9-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Groot in view of Sharma et al., US 20130010302 A1 (“Sharma”).
Regarding claim 4, De Groot discloses the optical interferometric range sensor according to claim 1.
De Groot does not teach: further comprising: a reducer configured to reduce light transmitted from an optical coupler in a preceding stage to an optical coupler in a subsequent stage of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages.
However, Sharma discloses a variable attenuator between two 15/85 fiber couplers (Fig. 9, variable attenuator, 15/85 coupler 903, 15/85 coupler 903, Paragraph [0053]-[0054])
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified De Groot’s interferometers by adding a variable attenuator between the interferometer couplings, which is disclosed by Sharma. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce noise in the system, as suggested by Sharma (Paragraph [0012]).
Regarding claim 5, De Groot, as modified in view of Sharma, discloses the optical interferometric range sensor according to claim 4, wherein the reducer has a predetermined transmittance for light transmitted from an optical coupler in a preceding stage to an optical coupler in a subsequent stage of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages (Sharma, Fig. 9, variable attenuator, 15/85 coupler 903, 15/85 coupler 903, Paragraph [0053]-[0054]), and the first split ratio and the second split ratio of each of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages is set based on the first split ratio of the optical coupler and a product of the first split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, the second split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, and the predetermined transmittance for light from the optical coupler to the optical coupler in the subsequent stage (Sharma, Equation 5, Paragraph [0053]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified De Groot’s interferometers by adding a variable attenuator between the interferometer couplings, which is disclosed by Sharma. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce noise in the system, as suggested by Sharma (Paragraph [0012]).
Regarding claim 6, De Groot, as modified in view of Sharma, discloses the optical interferometric range sensor according to claim 5, wherein the first split ratio of each of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages is set to 0.5 to 2 times the product of the first split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, the second split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, and the predetermined transmittance for light from the optical coupler to the optical coupler in the subsequent stage (De Groot, Fig. 14A, light travels from SD unit 1410 to sensors 1420 in series, Paragraph [0127]; Paragraph [0166]: couplers used can have different split ratios to compensate for differential loss along the two legs; Sharma, Equation 5, Paragraph [0053]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified De Groot’s interferometers by adding a variable attenuator between the interferometer couplings, which is disclosed by Sharma. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce noise in the system, as suggested by Sharma (Paragraph [0012]).
Regarding claim 7, De Groot, as modified in view of Sharma, discloses the optical interferometric range sensor according to claim 5, wherein the first split ratio of each of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages is set to be substantially equal to the product of the first split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, the second split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, and the predetermined transmittance for light from the optical coupler to the optical coupler in the subsequent stage (De Groot, Fig. 14A, light travels from SD unit 1410 to sensors 1420 in series, Paragraph [0127]; Paragraph [0166]: couplers used can have different split ratios to compensate for differential loss along the two legs e.g. 90/10 coupler; Sharma, Equation 5, Paragraph [0053]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified De Groot’s interferometers by adding a variable attenuator between the interferometer couplings, which is disclosed by Sharma. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce noise in the system, as suggested by Sharma (Paragraph [0012]).
Regarding claim 9, De Groot discloses the optical interferometric range sensor according to claim 2.
De Groot does not teach: further comprising: a reducer configured to reduce light transmitted from an optical coupler in a preceding stage to an optical coupler in a subsequent stage of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages.
However, Sharma discloses a variable attenuator between two 15/85 fiber couplers (Fig. 9, variable attenuator, 15/85 coupler 903, 15/85 coupler 903, Paragraph [0053]-[0054])
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified De Groot’s interferometers by adding a variable attenuator between the interferometer couplings, which is disclosed by Sharma. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce noise in the system, as suggested by Sharma (Paragraph [0012]).
Regarding claim 10, De Groot discloses the optical interferometric range sensor according to claim 3.
De Groot does not teach: further comprising: a reducer configured to reduce light transmitted from an optical coupler in a preceding stage to an optical coupler in a subsequent stage of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages.
However, Sharma discloses a variable attenuator between two 15/85 fiber couplers (Fig. 9, variable attenuator, 15/85 coupler 903, 15/85 coupler 903, Paragraph [0053]-[0054])
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified De Groot’s interferometers by adding a variable attenuator between the interferometer couplings, which is disclosed by Sharma. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce noise in the system, as suggested by Sharma (Paragraph [0012]).
Regarding claim 11, De Groot discloses the optical interferometric range sensor according to claim 8.
De Groot does not teach: further comprising: a reducer configured to reduce light transmitted from an optical coupler in a preceding stage to an optical coupler in a subsequent stage of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages.
However, Sharma discloses a variable attenuator between two 15/85 fiber couplers (Fig. 9, variable attenuator, 15/85 coupler 903, 15/85 coupler 903, Paragraph [0053]-[0054])
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified De Groot’s interferometers by adding a variable attenuator between the interferometer couplings, which is disclosed by Sharma. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce noise in the system, as suggested by Sharma (Paragraph [0012]).
Regarding claim 12, De Groot, as modified in view of Sharma, discloses the optical interferometric range sensor according to claim 9, wherein the reducer has a predetermined transmittance for light transmitted from an optical coupler in a preceding stage to an optical coupler in a subsequent stage of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages (Sharma, Fig. 9, variable attenuator, 15/85 coupler 903, 15/85 coupler 903, Paragraph [0053]-[0054]), and the first split ratio and the second split ratio of each of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages is set based on the first split ratio of the optical coupler and a product of the first split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, the second split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, and the predetermined transmittance for light from the optical coupler to the optical coupler in the subsequent stage (Sharma, Equation 5, Paragraph [0053]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified De Groot’s interferometers by adding a variable attenuator between the interferometer couplings, which is disclosed by Sharma. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce noise in the system, as suggested by Sharma (Paragraph [0012]).
Regarding claim 13, De Groot, as modified in view of Sharma, discloses the optical interferometric range sensor according to claim 10, wherein the reducer has a predetermined transmittance for light transmitted from an optical coupler in a preceding stage to an optical coupler in a subsequent stage of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages (Sharma, Fig. 9, variable attenuator, 15/85 coupler 903, 15/85 coupler 903, Paragraph [0053]-[0054]), and the first split ratio and the second split ratio of each of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages is set based on the first split ratio of the optical coupler and a product of the first split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, the second split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, and the predetermined transmittance for light from the optical coupler to the optical coupler in the subsequent stage (Sharma, Equation 5, Paragraph [0053]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified De Groot’s interferometers by adding a variable attenuator between the interferometer couplings, which is disclosed by Sharma. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce noise in the system, as suggested by Sharma (Paragraph [0012]).
Regarding claim 14, De Groot, as modified in view of Sharma, discloses the optical interferometric range sensor according to claim 11, wherein the reducer has a predetermined transmittance for light transmitted from an optical coupler in a preceding stage to an optical coupler in a subsequent stage of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages (Sharma, Fig. 9, variable attenuator, 15/85 coupler 903, 15/85 coupler 903, Paragraph [0053]-[0054]), and the first split ratio and the second split ratio of each of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages is set based on the first split ratio of the optical coupler and a product of the first split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, the second split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, and the predetermined transmittance for light from the optical coupler to the optical coupler in the subsequent stage (Sharma, Equation 5, Paragraph [0053]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified De Groot’s interferometers by adding a variable attenuator between the interferometer couplings, which is disclosed by Sharma. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce noise in the system, as suggested by Sharma (Paragraph [0012]).
Regarding claim 15, De Groot, as modified in view of Sharma, discloses the optical interferometric range sensor according to claim 12, wherein the first split ratio of each of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages is set to 0.5 to 2 times the product of the first split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, the second split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, and the predetermined transmittance for light from the optical coupler to the optical coupler in the subsequent stage (De Groot, Fig. 14A, light travels from SD unit 1410 to sensors 1420 in series, Paragraph [0127]; Paragraph [0166]: couplers used can have different split ratios to compensate for differential loss along the two legs; Sharma, Equation 5, Paragraph [0053]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified De Groot’s interferometers by adding a variable attenuator between the interferometer couplings, which is disclosed by Sharma. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce noise in the system, as suggested by Sharma (Paragraph [0012]).
Regarding claim 16, De Groot, as modified in view of Sharma, discloses the optical interferometric range sensor according to claim 13, wherein the first split ratio of each of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages is set to 0.5 to 2 times the product of the first split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, the second split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, and the predetermined transmittance for light from the optical coupler to the optical coupler in the subsequent stage (De Groot, Fig. 14A, light travels from SD unit 1410 to sensors 1420 in series, Paragraph [0127]; Paragraph [0166]: couplers used can have different split ratios to compensate for differential loss along the two legs; Sharma, Equation 5, Paragraph [0053]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified De Groot’s interferometers by adding a variable attenuator between the interferometer couplings, which is disclosed by Sharma. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce noise in the system, as suggested by Sharma (Paragraph [0012]).
Regarding claim 17, De Groot, as modified in view of Sharma, discloses the optical interferometric range sensor according to claim 14, wherein the first split ratio of each of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages is set to 0.5 to 2 times the product of the first split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, the second split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, and the predetermined transmittance for light from the optical coupler to the optical coupler in the subsequent stage (De Groot, Fig. 14A, light travels from SD unit 1410 to sensors 1420 in series, Paragraph [0127]; Paragraph [0166]: couplers used can have different split ratios to compensate for differential loss along the two legs; Sharma, Equation 5, Paragraph [0053]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified De Groot’s interferometers by adding a variable attenuator between the interferometer couplings, which is disclosed by Sharma. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce noise in the system, as suggested by Sharma (Paragraph [0012]).
Regarding claim 18, De Groot, as modified in view of Sharma, discloses the optical interferometric range sensor according to claim 6, wherein the first split ratio of each of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages is set to be substantially equal to the product of the first split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, the second split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, and the predetermined transmittance for light from the optical coupler to the optical coupler in the subsequent stage (De Groot, Fig. 14A, light travels from SD unit 1410 to sensors 1420 in series, Paragraph [0127]; Paragraph [0166]: couplers used can have different split ratios to compensate for differential loss along the two legs; Sharma, Equation 5, Paragraph [0053]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified De Groot’s interferometers by adding a variable attenuator between the interferometer couplings, which is disclosed by Sharma. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce noise in the system, as suggested by Sharma (Paragraph [0012]).
Regarding claim 19, De Groot, as modified in view of Sharma, discloses the optical interferometric range sensor according to claim 15, wherein the first split ratio of each of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages is set to be substantially equal to the product of the first split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, the second split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, and the predetermined transmittance for light from the optical coupler to the optical coupler in the subsequent stage (De Groot, Fig. 14A, light travels from SD unit 1410 to sensors 1420 in series, Paragraph [0127]; Paragraph [0166]: couplers used can have different split ratios to compensate for differential loss along the two legs; Sharma, Equation 5, Paragraph [0053]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified De Groot’s interferometers by adding a variable attenuator between the interferometer couplings, which is disclosed by Sharma. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce noise in the system, as suggested by Sharma (Paragraph [0012]).
Regarding claim 20, De Groot, as modified in view of Sharma, discloses the optical interferometric range sensor according to claim 16, wherein the first split ratio of each of the optical couplers in the plurality of stages is set to be substantially equal to the product of the first split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, the second split ratio of the optical coupler in the subsequent stage, and the predetermined transmittance for light from the optical coupler to the optical coupler in the subsequent stage (De Groot, Fig. 14A, light travels from SD unit 1410 to sensors 1420 in series, Paragraph [0127]; Paragraph [0166]: couplers used can have different split ratios to compensate for differential loss along the two legs; Sharma, Equation 5, Paragraph [0053]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified De Groot’s interferometers by adding a variable attenuator between the interferometer couplings, which is disclosed by Sharma. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce noise in the system, as suggested by Sharma (Paragraph [0012]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Alphonse et al., US 20100053632 A1 discloses multiple interferometers where each interferometer stage is coupled through a coupler.
Nakamura, US 20200309692 A1 discloses multiple interferometers that are used for tomographic imaging.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RACHEL N NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5405. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 5:30 pm ET.
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, Yuqing Xiao can be reached at (571) 270-3603. 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.
/RACHEL NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/YUQING XIAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645