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 .
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract is over 150 words. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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 5 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 5 recites the limitation "the laser beam" in lines 3, 4, and 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claims 1-3, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by anticipated by Weick (US PGPUB 2014/0042133 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Weick discloses a laser processing machine (Fig. 1) comprising:
a lens (7, 7a) for condensing a laser beam (2)
an actuator (12) changing a relative position ([0043], “a displacement device in the form of a linear motor) between the lens and a workpiece (3) to change a focal position (F, F’) of the laser beam with respect to the workpiece;
a protective glass (4, [0039], Fig. 1 disposed between the lens and the workpiece; a detector (6) detecting a focal position of the laser beam (8a, 8b); and
a controller (11) configured to control the actuator, the controller configured to obtain a current deviation amount of the focal position from a target position using the detector (Fig. 2a, 2b, [0043]), the controller configured to obtain a relationship data (9, “image evaluation device”, [0045]), wherein the relationship data indicates relationship between a deviation (F’ -> F) amount of the focal position from the target position and a spot diameter ([0048]-[0049] discusses target position, Fig. 2a, and spot diameter, Fig. 2b) of the laser beam on a surface of the workpiece (3a) when contaminant adheres the protective glass ([0047] discusses contamination as changing the focal points of the laser), the controller configured to estimate a current spot diameter of the laser beam on the surface using the current deviation amount and the relationship data ([0043]), the controller configured to control the actuator to correct the current spot diameter using the current deviation amount and an estimated current spot diameter ([0029], “The difference of the two focal positions or the difference of the size of beam spots on the detector is therefore a measure for the thermal influence of the optical element and typically increases as the contamination increases. Of course, the information relating to the conditions above the optical element and the portions which are added due to a contamination of the optical element, can be evaluated in an appropriate manner depending on the objective of the process monitoring.”).
Regarding claim 2, Weick discloses all of claim 1 as above, wherein the relationship data represents that the spot diameter increases as the deviation amount increases from the workpiece toward the lens ([0029]).
Regarding claim 3, Weick discloses all of claim 1 as above, wherein the controller is configured to control the actuator so that the focal position moves a total distance of a first distance and a second distance to correct the current spot diameter ([0029]), wherein the first distance is a distance for moving the focal position so that the current deviation amount to be zero, wherein the second distance is a distance for moving the focal position from the position where the current deviation amount is zero so that the spot diameter on the surface to be a target diameter ([0030], “desired distance to the workpiece”).
Regarding claim 5, Weick discloses a method of correcting a spot diameter of a laser processing machine (10), the laser processing machine including a protective glass (4) for protecting a lens (7, 7a), the method comprising:
obtaining a current deviation (F’-> F) amount of a focal position (F or F’) of the laser beam from a target position (Fig. 2a, 2b, [0043]), wherein the laser beam is irradiated on a surface (3a) of a workpiece (3) through the lens and the protective glass (Fig. 1);
estimating a current spot diameter of the laser beam on the surface ([0048]-[0049] discusses target position, Fig. 2a, and spot diameter, Fig. 2b) using the current deviation amount and a relationship data ([0043]), wherein the relationship data indicates the relationship between the deviation amount and the spot diameter when contaminant adheres the protective glass ([0047] discusses contamination as changing the focal points of the laser); and
changing a relative position between the lens and the workpiece using the current deviation amount and the estimated current spot diameter to correct the current spot diameter ([0045], 12, 12a).
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 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weick (US PGPUB 2014/0042133 A1) in view of Walde et al. (WO 2022/243569 A1)
Regarding claim 4, Weick discloses all of claim 1 as above.
However, Weick does not explicitly disclose, “wherein the detector includes a photodetector for receiving the laser beam reflected from the workpiece, the controller is configured to obtain the current deviation amount using intensity of the laser beam measured by the photodetector.”
While the Examiner asserts that Weick uses a detector to determine the focal point and diameter of the laser beam incident on the workpiece, they however use a small percentage of the light reflecting from the protective glass and not “receiving the laser beam reflected from the workpiece”.
PNG
media_image1.png
446
460
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Walde et al. teaches in the field of laser machining, a measuring device (300) for measuring reflected light from the workpiece W (Pg. 22:4-8) for assessing the laser machining process.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the laser processing system of Weick to include a measuring device for measuring reflected light from the work piece to control or regulate the laser process on the basis of the data evaluation (Pg. 22:10-19) and one of ordinary skill would appreciate that, “The laser processing system 500 can include a measuring device 300. The measuring device 300 can be set up for process monitoring or set up to record a parameter for assessing the laser machining process.
The measuring device 300 can comprise a camera or one or more photodiodes or one or more sensors. A process radiation of the laser machining process is preferably coupled into the measuring device 300 and recorded in the measuring device. The process radiation can include radiation reflected from the workpiece W, plasma radiation and/or thermal radiation. The measuring device 300 can include or be a sensor module or an optical coherence tomography module. (Pg. 21:29-22:2)”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
PNG
media_image2.png
634
520
media_image2.png
Greyscale
WO 2022/209929 A1 discloses a laser processing head and laser processing system.
PNG
media_image3.png
404
554
media_image3.png
Greyscale
JP 2019/038000 A discloses a laser processing method for adjusting focal shift according to kind and level of contamination in external optical system before laser processing.
PNG
media_image4.png
406
522
media_image4.png
Greyscale
US PGPUB 2019/0076959 A1 discloses a laser machining device for adjusting focus shift based on contamination level of optical system during laser machining.
PNG
media_image5.png
250
206
media_image5.png
Greyscale
CN 107138854 A discloses a laser processing head with a light spot diameter and focal position can be adjusted and its control method.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN C CLARK whose telephone number is (571)272-2871. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 0730-1730, Alternate Fridays 0730-1630.
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, Courtney D Heinle can be reached at (571)-270-3508. 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.
/RYAN C CLARK/Examiner, Art Unit 3745