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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claim 12 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention (the Applicant elected Specie I), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on.
Regarding Applicant’s argument on page 1 “The indicia to select a subspecies is not appropriate as the cavity support ring of Figure 4A and Figure 4B rests on top of the cavity support structure base of Figure 5 and so one cannot select between the cavity support ring and the cavity support structure base”. The Examiner agrees with the Applicants argument. Therefore, the restriction for subspecies A-B from the restriction mailed on 01/15/2026 is been now withdraw.
The restriction for species I-II mailed on 01/15/2026 remains in place because Specie I comprises a picomotor actuator while Specie II a PZT actuator. Therefore, claim 12 was not examined for being a non-elected specie.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/08/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims.
The “mounting legs” (Figure 1 shows cavity support structures 106, 104 and 124; however, claim 1 and 25 use “mounting legs” which it seems to refer to cavity support structures 106, 104 and 124 but it is not clear).
The “discrete resonator rotational orientation positions”.
The “discrete mount rotational orientation positions”.
The “first discrete resonator rotational orientation position”
The “first discrete mount rotational orientation position”
Therefore, the elements described above must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 17-20 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 17 recites the limitation "the clamp" in page 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 18-20 rejected due to their dependency with claim 17.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 21-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hagemann (NPL "Ultra-Stable Laser Based on a Cryogenic Single-Crystal Silicon Cavity", February 2013; cited in the IDS) in the view of McManamon (US Patent US-20220350136-A1), hereinafter McManamon.
Regarding claim 1, Hagemann teaches a system (Fig. 4.1 & 4.2 laser system, page 35), comprising:
an optical resonator (Fig. 4.2 silicon cavity is an optical resonator),
wherein the optical resonator (Fig. 4.2 silicon cavity) is comprised of a material (annotated Fig. 3.5 support ring below) with a horizontal plane symmetry (Annotated Fig. 3.5 Horizontal Plane below),
wherein the optical resonator (Fig. 4.2 silicon cavity) includes a horizontal plane protrusion (Annotated Fig. 3.5 Protrusion which is on the horizontal plate) for mounting (annotated Figs. 3.5-3.6 protrusion is used for mounting the silicon cavity on the “support”), and
wherein the horizontal plane protrusion (annotated Figs. 3.5 protrusion) includes discrete resonator rotational orientation positions (annotated Figs. 3.8 protrusion includes a circular area for different positions);
a mount (annotated Fig. 3.6 support),
wherein the mount (annotated Fig. 3.6 support) comprises mounting legs (annotated Fig. 3.6 Support comprising plurality of legs) compatible with the horizontal plan symmetry (annotated Fig. 3.6 plurality of legs are compatible to the horizontal plane),
and wherein the mount (annotated Fig. 3.6 Support) includes discrete mount rotational orientation positions (Fig. 3.7 shows 3 support points corresponding to the support on the annotated Fig. 3.6) that correspond to the discrete resonator rotation orientation positions at a plurality of rotational angles (Fig. 3.7 shows 3 support points overlaps to positions of the protrusion of the support ring as seen in annotated Fig. 3.5).
PNG
media_image1.png
743
1177
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Hagemann fails to teach a fastener, wherein the fastener secures the horizontal plane protrusion of the optical resonator to the mount, wherein the fastener comprises a plurality of clamp bars corresponding to the mounting legs, and wherein the fastener comprises a linear actuator.
However, McManamon teaches a fastener (Fig. 26-28 linear actuator 318; lens 306 held by actuators 318, see [0120]), wherein the fastener (Fig. 26-28 linear actuator 318) comprises a plurality of clamp bars (Fig. 26-28 linear actuator 118 comprises a plurality of actuators with a bar shape that holds lens 306), and wherein the fastener comprises a linear actuator (Fig. 26-28 linear actuator 318).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Hagemann with a fastener (e.g. having linear actuators at the legs of the support from Hagemann) as taught by McManamon because it would provide steering capabilities to each movement direction and/or steering axis (from McManamon, see [0057]).
Regarding claim 2, Hagemann modified device teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the material of the optical resonator comprises a crystalline material (from Hagemann Fig. 3.8 Silicon cavity; Section 3.3.3. pages 28-29 states that silicon cavity is a crystalline material).
Regarding claim 3, Hagemann modified device teaches the system of claim 2, wherein the material with the horizontal plane symmetry comprises one of the following: single crystal silicon (from Hagemann Fig. 3.8 Silicon cavity; page 19 states is a silicon single crystal) with a 3-fold symmetry (from Hagemann page 25 states “The <111> axis of the crystal was selected to be the optical axis of the silicon cavity”; therefore the silicon cavity exhibits a 3-fold symmetry) or sapphire with a 3-fold symmetry about the c-axis.
Regarding claim 4, Hagemann modified device teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the horizontal plane symmetry comprises one of the following: a two-fold symmetry, a three-fold symmetry (from Hagemann page 25 states “The <111> axis of the crystal was selected to be the optical axis of the silicon cavity”; therefore the silicon cavity exhibits a 3-fold symmetry), or a four-fold symmetry.
Regarding claim 5, Hagemann modified device teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the mount (from Hagemann annotated Fig. 3.6 in claim 1 support) comprising mounting legs (annotated Fig. 3.6 Support comprising plurality of legs) compatible with the horizontal plane symmetry (from Hagemann annotated Fig. 3.6 plurality of legs are compatible to the horizontal plane) comprises a plurality of mounting legs (from Hagemann annotated Fig. 3.6 Support comprising plurality of legs) arranged to have a rotational symmetry equivalent to the horizontal plane symmetry (from Hagemann Fig. 3.7 depicts the support points equivalent to the horizontal plane symmetry) or an integer multiple of the horizontal plane symmetry
Regarding claim 21, Hagemann modified device teaches the system of claim 1, further comprising one or more passive thermal shields (from Hagemann page 37 paragraph 5 states “The additional, passive copper shield prevents radiative heat transfer between the outer shield and the silicon cavity.”; Fig. 4.2 passive shield).
Regarding claim 22, Hagemann modified device teaches the system of claim 1, further comprising one or more active thermal shields (from Hagemann page 34 paragraph 4“The cavity is surrounded by two massive, cylindrical, gold-plated copper shields of which the outer one provides the cryogenic environment. Cooling of this shield is accomplished evaporating liquid nitrogen from a dewar using a resistor for heating”; therefore gold-plated copper shields are active shields).
Regarding claim 23, Hagemann modified device teaches the system of claim 1, the system of claim 1, wherein a passive thermal shields of the one or more passive thermal shields is separated from an active thermal shield using three thermal insulator supports (from Hagemann Fig. 4.2 passive shield is separated from the cryogenic shield; page 34 paragraph 4 cryogenic shield comprises an active gold-plated copper shields; hence, the passive shield is separated from the active shield as seen from the figure).
Regarding claim 24, Hagemann modified device teaches the system of claim 1, further comprising an active baseplate (from Hagemann Fig. 4.2 vibration isolation platform).
Regarding claim 25, Hagemann teaches a method, comprising:
providing an optical resonator (Fig. 4.2 silicon cavity is an optical resonator),
wherein the optical resonator (Fig. 4.2 silicon cavity) is comprised of a material (annotated Fig. 3.5 support ring in claim 1) with a horizontal plane symmetry (Annotated Fig. 3.5 in claim 1 Horizontal Plane),
wherein the optical resonator (Fig. 4.2 silicon cavity) includes a horizontal plane protrusion (Annotated Fig. 3.5 Protrusion in claim 1 which is on the horizontal plate) for mounting (annotated Figs. 3.5-3.6 in claim 1 protrusion is used for mounting the silicon cavity on the “support”), and
wherein the horizontal plane protrusion (annotated Figs. 3.5 in claim 1 protrusion) includes discrete resonator rotational orientation positions (annotated Figs. 3.8 protrusion in claim 1 includes a circular area for different positions);
a mount (annotated Fig. 3.6 in claim 1 support),
wherein the mount (annotated Fig. 3.6 in claim 1 support) comprises mounting legs (annotated Fig. 3.6 in claim 1 Support comprising plurality of legs) compatible with the horizontal plan symmetry (from Hagemann annotated Fig. 3.5-3.6 plurality of legs are compatible to the horizontal plane),
and wherein the mount (annotated Fig. 3.6 in claim 1 Support) includes discrete mount rotational orientation positions (Fig. 3.7 shows 3 support points corresponding to the support on the annotated Fig. 3.6 in claim 1) that correspond to the discrete resonator rotation orientation positions at a plurality of rotational angles (Fig. 3.7 shows 3 support points overlaps to positions of the protrusion of the support ring as seen in annotated Fig. 3.5).
Hagemann fails to teach a fastener, wherein the fastener secures the horizontal plane protrusion of the optical resonator to the mount, wherein the fastener comprises a plurality of clamp bars corresponding to the mounting legs, and wherein the fastener comprises a linear actuator.
However, McManamon teaches a fastener (Fig. 26-28 linear actuator 318; lens 306 held by actuators 318, see [0120]), wherein the fastener (Fig. 26-28 linear actuator 318) comprises a plurality of clamp bars (Fig. 26-28 linear actuator 118 comprises a plurality of actuators with a bar shape that holds lens 306), and wherein the fastener comprises a linear actuator (Fig. 26-28 linear actuator 318).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Hagemann with a fastener (e.g. having linear actuators at the legs of the support from Hagemann) as taught by McManamon because it would provide steering capabilities to each movement direction and/or steering axis (from McManamon, see [0057]).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hagemann (NPL "Ultra-Stable Laser Based on a Cryogenic Single-Crystal Silicon Cavity", February 2013; cited in the IDS) in the view of McManamon (US Patent US-20220350136-A1), a per claim 1, in further view of NotCutt (NPL Notcutt et al., "Simple and compact 1-Hz laser system via an improved mounting configuration of a reference cavity", July 15, 2005, Vol. 30, No. 14, Optics Letters; cited in the IDS), hereinafter NotCutt.
Regarding claim 6, Hagemann modified device teaches the system of claim 1; a circular circumference on the horizontal plane protrusion (from Hagemann annotated Fig. 3.8 protusion on the horizontal is circular ).
Hagemann modified device fails to teach wherein the discrete resonator rotational orientation positions are located using a plurality of indexed holes along a circular circumference on the horizontal plane protrusion.
However, Notcutt teaches discrete resonator rotational orientation positions are located using a plurality of indexed holes along a circular circumference on the horizontal plane protrusion (Fig. 1 disk comprises counter bore holes along the disk on the horizontal plane, the disk is a protrusion as seen from the figure).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Hagemann with indexed holes along a circular circumference on the horizontal plane protrusion as taught by Notcutt because it would allow to secure the mount.
PNG
media_image2.png
342
556
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hagemann (NPL "Ultra-Stable Laser Based on a Cryogenic Single-Crystal Silicon Cavity", February 2013; cited in the IDS) in the view of McManamon (US Patent US-20220350136-A1), a per claim 1, in further view of Hsu (US Patent US-6263002-B1), hereinafter Hsu.
Regarding claim 7, Hagemann modified device teaches the system of claim 1 .
Hagemann modified device fails to teach wherein the discrete mount rotational orientation positions are located using a plurality of indexed v-grooves oriented perpendicular to a circular circumference on a surface of the mount.
However, Hsu teaches plurality of v-grooves for alignment (see column 13 lines 21-27).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Hagemann in the view of McManamon with plurality of indexed v-grooves (e.g. having plurality of v-groves on the legs of the support from Hagemann) as taught by Hsu because the indexed v-grooves will be used for alignment method (see column 13 lines 21-27).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hagemann (NPL "Ultra-Stable Laser Based on a Cryogenic Single-Crystal Silicon Cavity", February 2013; cited in the IDS) in the view of McManamon (US Patent US-20220350136-A1), a per claim 1, in further view of Zhang (Foreign Patent CN-110401092-A), hereinafter Zhang.
Regarding claim 8, Hagemann modified device teaches the system of claim 1, wherein a first discrete resonator rotational orientation position of the discrete resonator rotational orientation positions (from Hagemann annotated Fig. 3.5 first position) corresponds to a first discrete mount rotational orientation position of the discrete mount rotational orientation positions (from Hagemann annotated Fig. 3.5 first position corresponds to the positions of the support points In Fig. 3.7 also seen in Fig. 3.6),
Hagemann modified device fails to teach wherein a ball is disposed between the first discrete resonator rotational orientation position and the first discrete mount rotational orientation position.
However, Zhang teaches a ball (Fig. 3 ball 302) disposed between the first discrete resonator rotational orientation position (Fig. 3 mounting part of the fixing laser 2) and the first discrete mount rotational orientation position (Fig. 3 ball 302 is between mounting 2 and base 304).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Hagemann’s device in the view of McManamon with a ball disposed between the first discrete resonator rotational orientation position and the first discrete mount rotational orientation position as taught by Zhang because it would allow adjust the laser projection position (from Zhang page 3 first paragraph of translated document).
Claim(s) 13 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hagemann (NPL "Ultra-Stable Laser Based on a Cryogenic Single-Crystal Silicon Cavity", February 2013; cited in the IDS) in the view of McManamon (US Patent US-20220350136-A1), a per claim 1, in further view of Reference V (Foreign Patent JP-2005525001-A), hereinafter Reference V.
Regarding claim 13, Hagemann modified device teaches the system of claim 1.
Hagemann modified device fails to teach wherein the fastener comprises a motor.
However, reference V teaches a fastener comprises a motor ( Fig. 11E; page 17 paragraph 3 from translated document states “The mirror 305 and the base 306 on which the mirror operates are driven by a pico motor steering unit 307 comprising a pivot ball join”; therefore, the pivot join is a fastener).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Hagemann in the view of McManamon with a fastener comprises a motor as taught by reference V because it would provide provides a tip tilt rotation range of 9 milliradians (from reference V, see page 17 paragraph 3 from translated document).
Regarding claim 14, Hagemann modified device teaches the system of claim 13, wherein the motor comprises a Picomotor (from reference V Fig. 11E picomotor 307).
Claim(s) 15 & 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hagemann (NPL "Ultra-Stable Laser Based on a Cryogenic Single-Crystal Silicon Cavity", February 2013; cited in the IDS) in the view of McManamon (US Patent US-20220350136-A1), a per claim 1, in further view of Kress (US Patent US-20130003764-A1), hereinafter Kress.
Regarding claim 15, Hagemann modified device teaches the system of claim 1.
Hageman modified device fails to teach wherein a clamp bar of the plurality of clamp bars is spring loaded.
However, Kress teaches a clamp bar (Fig. 1 clamp 14a ) is spring loaded (Fig. 1 clamp 14a comprises a spring bar and screws 15a provided to set a uniform pressure of the clamp 14a; therefore clamp 14a is a spring loaded)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Hagemann in the view of McManamon with pluralities of spring loaded clamps (e.g. actuators from McManamon being spring loaded) as taught by Kress because it would allow enable clamping without exerting too much pressure (from Kress [0040]).
Regarding claim 16, Hagemann modified device teaches the system of claim 15, wherein a force associated with a spring for being spring loaded is controlled using a shoulder screw (from Kress Fig. 1 screws 15a are provided to be able to set a uniform pressure of the clamp 14a).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 9, Hagemann modified device in the view of McManamon and Zhang teaches the device in claim 8. Hagemann modified device fails to teach “wherein the ball has at least one hole for venting under vacuum”.
Claims 17-20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 17, Hagemann modified device in the view of McManamon teaches the device in claim 1. Hagemann modified device fails to teach “wherein a first ball separates a first end of the clamp bar from the mount and wherein a second ball separates a second end of the clamp bar from the horizontal plane protrusion”.
Claim 18-20 are dependent of claim 17.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Golda (Foreign Patent TW-201425207-A) teaches a spring loaded clamp.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FERNANDA ADRIANA CAMACHO ALANIS whose telephone number is (703)756-1545. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-5:30pm Friday off.
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, MinSun Harvey can be reached at (571) 272-1835. 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.
/FERNANDA ADRIANA CAMACHO ALANIS/Examiner, Art Unit 2828
/MINSUN O HARVEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Prosecution Insights