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. This is the first office action on the merits and is responsive to the papers filed 09/0 1/2023 . Claims 1-1 7 are currently pending and examined below. Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements submitted by Applicant are in compliance with the provision of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609. They have been placed in the application file and the information referred to therein has been considered as to the merits. 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 1-7, 12, 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being FILLIN "Insert either—clearly anticipated—or—anticipated—with an explanation at the end of the paragraph." \d "[ 3 ]" anticipated by Mayer et al. (US 20190064323 A1, “Mayer”). Regarding claim 1, Mayer teaches a measuring instrument for coordinative measuring of object surface points of an object (Claim 15), the measuring instrument being embodied as a measuring head of a coordinate measuring machine, of an unmanned ground or aerial vehicle or of an articulated arm or embodied as a handheld measuring probe of a measuring system having a surveying station, in particular a laser tracker, or embodied as a 6-DoF- handheld measuring instrument with an IMU (Mayer teaches a measuring device for optical surveying with scanning functionality in which the spatial position of a surface point is acquired by measuring the distance to the targeted surface point and linking the distance with angle information of the laser emission, thereby determining the surface-point position and generating a point cloud ([0001]–[0003]). Mayer further teaches that such scanning measuring devices are used in airborne lidar, terrestrial lidar, autonomous-vehicle lidar, and total-station surveying contexts (Mayer, [0004]–[0008]; FIGS. 1a-1d), whereby the measuring instrument comprises a scanning absolute distance meter with a light source (Mayer teaches a radiation source for generating transmitted radiation, such as pulsed laser measuring radiation ([0029], [0109])), a transmission channel for emitting light from the light source as a measurement beam along a targeting axis towards the object (Mayer teaches a transmitting channel for emitting at least part of the transmitted radiation, and teaches that the transmitted radiation is emitted in a transmission direction which is chronologically varied by the beam-deflection element ([0029], [0109]. See also, Claim 15.), a scanning unit, in particular a beam deflection unit, for scanning steering of the targeting axis (Mayer teaches a beam deflection element in the transmitting channel configured to deflect transmitted radiation and set a chronologically varying transmission direction, and teaches sweeping scanning based on continuous actuation of the beam deflection element (Mayer, [0029], [0106], [0109], [0111]. See also, Claim 15.), a receiver channel for receiving at least part of the measurement beam reflected from the object surface (Mayer teaches a receiving channel comprising a receiver configured to acquire a reception signal based on returning transmitted radiation / received radiation ([0029], [0109]–[0112]). See also, Claim 15.), an opto-electronic detector for detection of the received measurement beam and outputting an according detection signal (Mayer teaches that the receiver has an optoelectronic sensor based on an assembly of microcells , such as SPAD microcells, with the sensor having a plurality of microcells that can be read out individually and/or in groups, and that the sensor outputs signals used for determining runtime / distance (Mayer, [0030]–[0031], [0111]–[0112]). See also, Claim 15.), and an evaluation unit for determination of a coordinate of a surface point based on the actual targeting axis and on an absolute distance derived from the detector's detection signal (Mayer teaches a computer unit for deriving distance measurement data based on the reception signal, together with an angle determining unit for angle data with respect to transmission direction, and teaches that the spatial position of a measured point is determined from distance plus angle / direction information ([0029], [0090], claim 15). Regarding claim 2, Mayer teaches the measuring instrument according to claim 1 wherein the beam deflection unit comprises position measuring means for measuring of the actual targeting axis (Mayer teaches an angle determining unit for acquiring angle data with respect to the transmission direction of the transmitted radiation ([0029]). Mayer further teaches that the angle data may be derived on the basis of control signals for actuation of the beam deflection element and/or based on angle measurement data provided by one or more angle meters present in the measuring device [0064], claim 15).). Regarding claim 3, Mayer teaches the measuring instrument according to claim 1wherein the beam deflection unit is designed for variable scanning deflection of the targeting axis, in particular according to a 1D/line-scanning mode and a 2D-scanning mode (Mayer teaches that the beam deflection element may vary the transmission direction with respect to one or more independent spatial directions ([0008], [0019], [0114], claim 15). Mayer also teaches one-dimensional movement of the active receiving section in a “rolling shutter window” fashion ([0097], [0118]–[0119]) and teaches two-dimensional movement / scanning paths, including two-dimensional movement of the active section synchronized with scanning in a 2D path (Mayer, [0121]–[0123]). Mayer also teaches scanning grids and patterns such as zig-zag and circular / Palmer scanning ([0088]–[0091]). Thus Mayer teaches a beam deflection unit designed for variable scanning deflection including 1D and 2D scanning.). Regarding claim 4, Mayer teaches the measuring instrument according to claim 1 wherein the beam deflection unit comprises a polygonal wheel, rotating mirror, MEMS-mirror, galvo- mirror, acousto-optic modulator, electro-optic modulator, liquid lens, liquid-filled variable wedge, KTN crystal, phased array and/or Risley -prism, in particular whereby in case of a MEMS-mirror, the MEMS-mirror is designed for beam deflection by oscillation with resonance frequency (Mayer teaches a moving mirror and other elements suitable for controlled angular deflection of optical radiation, including pivotable prisms , refractive optical elements , deformable optical components , MOEMS components , liquid lenses , and polygons (prisms or mirrors) / MEMS deflection means ([0019], ([0060], [0100], [0106], [0114]).). Regarding claim 5, Mayer teaches the measuring instrument according to claim 1 wherein the transmission channel comprises a focusing optics for, in particular adaptive, focusing the measurement beam on the object surface (Mayer teaches optical components and imaging/focus considerations associated with the receiving / imaging path, including a defined fixed focus optical unit and estimating beam shape / location based thereon ([0067], [0069], claim 33. See also, FIG. 2, [0108]- [0111]). Regarding claim 6, Mayer teaches the measuring instrument according to claim 1 wherein the absolute distance meter is designed for determining a distance based on the principle of time- of-flight, frequency comb principle, frequency modulated continuous wave principle, Fizeau principle and/or phase difference measurement principle (Mayer teaches that distance may be determined based on runtime / pulse runtime of the transmitted radiation, and also teaches sampling and determining the signal in terms of shape and/or phase ([0009], [0013]–[0017], [0111]). Mayer further teaches waveform digitization (WFD) of the reception signal for precise runtime determination ([0014]). See also, [0058]). Regarding claim 7, Mayer teaches the measuring instrument according to claim 1 wherein the measuring instrument is designed for point measurement rates of above 100k points/sec (Mayer teaches operation at very high distance measuring rates of greater than 1 MHz ([0123]).). 1 MHz = 1,000 kHz = 1,000,000 points/sec or 1M points/sec. Regarding claim 12, Mayer teaches the measuring instrument according to claim 1 wherein the evaluation unit is designed to determine an intensity value of the detected measurement beam (Mayer teaches sampling with respect to amplitude of the received signal (Mayer, [0015]) and explains that SPAD-array output amplitude is related to the number of acquired photons, with signal amplitude behavior described over a wide dynamic range ([0048], [0053]–[0057]). Thus, Mayer teaches determining an intensity / amplitude value of the detected measurement beam.). Regarding claim 14, Mayer teaches the measuring instrument according to claim I wherein the measuring instrument comprises a sensor for determination of a position and/or orientation of the measuring instrument, in particular an Inertial Measurement Unit (Mayer teaches that the scanning measuring device may use inertial sensors / an inertial measuring system (IMU) to acquire data relating to the intrinsic movement of the measuring device ([0004], [0089]). Mayer also teaches an inertia meter configured to acquire inertia data with respect to intrinsic movement such as displacement and/or tilt of the measuring device ([0061], [0063]).). 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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mayer in view of Eckelkamp -Baker et al. (US 20020145102 A1,” Eckelkamp -Baker”). Regarding claim 8, Mayer fails to explicitly teach the measuring instrument according to claim 1 wherein the measuring instrument comprises a targeting axis stabilization. However, Eckelkamp -Baker teaches a system for “pointing and stabilizing an optical axis of an optical system” ([0001]; claim 1). Eckelkamp -Baker further teaches that vibrational forces impose jitter on the optical system axis and that, in a lasing system, such motion “disturbs its pointing direction” ([0002]) and explains that the optical line of sight / optical bore sight should be maintained stable so that the pointing position of the laser transmission system remains stable ([0004]). To accomplish this, Eckelkamp -Baker provides a jitter rejection mirror that is positioned in response to a detected misalignment and displaced to oppose apparent changes in the optical boresight due to jitter ([0007]), with a reference beam and auto-alignment sensor generating the correction signal used to cancel jitter ([0008], [0023], [0038], claim 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the targeting-axis stabilization of Eckelkamp -Baker into the Mayer measuring instrument in order to reduce vibration- or motion-induced pointing jitter of the emitted measurement beam, thereby improving beam-direction stability and measurement reliability in the known portable optical surface-measurement system. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mayer in view of David S. Hall (US 20110216304 A1). Regarding claim 9, Mayer fails to explicitly teach the measuring instrument according to claim 1 wherein the measuring instrument comprises a feedback loop for control of the intensity of the emitted measurement beam based on the detection signal. However, Hall teaches a feedback-based control of emitted laser intensity using the detected return . Hall teaches that, through DSP control , a dynamic power feature allows the system to increase the intensity of the laser emitters if a clear terrain reflection is not obtained by the photodetectors and to reduce power to the laser emitters if a strong reflection signal is detected by the photodetectors . Hall also teaches that the processor causes the laser emitters to emit pulses of a reduced power level when a detector detects a return signal above a threshold ([0031]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the feedback-based beam-intensity control of Hall into Mayer’s optical measuring instrument in order to automatically adapt the emitted measurement-beam intensity to the detected return signal , thereby keeping the received signal within a desirable operating range, improving signal quality , and reducing errors caused by weak returns from low-reflectivity surfaces or saturation from strong returns from high-reflectivity surfaces . Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mayer in view of Goldring et al. (US 20220011162 A1, “Goldring”). Regarding claim 10, Mayer fails to explicitly teach the measuring instrument according to claim 1 wherein the measuring instrument comprises means for emitting an indicator light, in particular as an indicator beam coaxially to the measurement beam. However, Goldring teaches a measuring instrument comprising means for emitting an indicator light by expressly disclosing a visible aiming beam that allows the user to determine the measured region of the object and visualize the area of the sample being measured ([0009], [0100]–[0101]). Goldring further teaches that the indicator beam is coaxial to the measurement beam , stating that the measurement beam and aiming beam may be arranged in a coaxial configuration in which they extend together along a shared optical axis ([0009], [0017]–[0018], [0104], [0166]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Mayer’s optical surveying / scanning measuring device with the visible aiming beam arrangement of Goldring in order to give the user a visual indication of the active measurement area , thereby improving aiming, positioning, and measurement accuracy . It also would have been obvious to arrange the aiming beam coaxially with the measurement beam so that the location visually indicated to the user corresponds accurately to the actual measured location. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mayer in view of Stutz et al. (US 20190196017 A1, “Stutz”). Regarding claim 11, Mayer fails to explicitly teach the measuring instrument according to claim 1 wherein the measuring instrument comprises means for speckle reduction. However, Stutz teaches that coherent measurement radiation causes speckles , which lead to variation of the reception signal and corresponding measurement inaccuracies ([0009], [0043]–[0044]). Stutz further teaches a diffractive optical element (DOE) arranged in the beam path such that the emitted measurement beam is homogenized before emission ([0014]–[0016], [0049]–[0051]). The DOE may be embodied as an optical diffuser and/or hologram ([0024]), and may be moved, vibrated, or rotated to produce additional mixing and blurring of speckle effects ([0017], [0061]–[0063]). It would have been obvious to incorporate the DOE-based speckle-reduction arrangement of Stutz into Mayer’s optical measuring instrument in order to reduce speckle-induced measurement error and improve the accuracy and reliability of distance and target measurements, especially in coherent laser-based measurement systems. Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mayer in view of Zhang et al. (US 20190235083 A1, “Zhang”). Regarding claim 13, Mayer fails to explicitly teach the measuring instrument according to claim 12 whereby the evaluation unit is designed to generate a colorized point cloud based on the determined coordinates and the intensity values and/or to derive a property of the measured surface from the intensity value. However, Zhang teaches that the point cloud includes reflective intensity data for each feature, and that one or more points in the point cloud may be displayed with a color corresponding to a parameter of the acquired data, such as an intensity parameter. Zhang further teaches that this colorization of the point cloud helps analyze features of the environment ([0149]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the point-cloud display technique of Zhang with Mayer’s scanning measuring instrument in order to present the measured coordinate data in a more informative and analyzable form that may help users to better understand and analyze elements or features of the environment in which the scanning measuring instrument is operating (Zhang, ([0149], claim 13). Claims 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mayer in view of Bridges et al. (US 20150130906 A1, “Bridges”). Regarding claim 15, Mayer teaches the measuring instrument according to claim1 wherein the measuring instrument comprises a camera for imaging at least part of the object surface. Mayer teaches that, during optical surveying of an environment by a scanning measuring device, an image recording by a camera is often also carried out , which provides additional information regarding surface texture and a visual overall view of the surface ([0002]). Bridges further teaches a portable articulated arm coordinate measuring machine having a probe end with a noncontact 3D measuring device including a projector and a scanner camera , wherein the scanner camera receives light reflected from the object and generates image data of the object surface ([0007]–[0008], [0070]–[0072], [0075]). Accordingly, the combination teaches or at least suggests that the measuring instrument comprises a camera for imaging at least part of the object surface. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the explicit camera implementation of Bridges into Mayer’s scanning measuring device because Mayer already recognizes the benefit of using a camera in parallel with the scanning measurement to obtain additional information such as surface texture and a visual overall view of the measured surface. Bridges provides a known, predictable way of implementing such camera-based surface imaging at the probe end of a noncontact measuring instrument. Regarding claim 16, Mayer in view of Bridges, teaches the measuring instrument according to claim 15 whereby the camera is arranged in a defined and known spatial relationship to the targeting axis, in particular is an on-axis camera, and/or to a reference point of the absolute distance meter and/or the beam deflection unit is controllable in such a way that the targeting axis is automatically aligneable to a feature of the object surface detected by image evaluation of an image captured with the camera and/or the evaluation unit is designed to determine a thermal emissivity of the object surface based on a camera image and/or measured intensity value of the reflected measurement beam and/or the evaluation unit is designed to provide an augmented image of the object with a graphical overlay of nominal object data and/or of a feature to be measured. Bridges teaches that the projector and camera are arranged at a known angle relative to one another and that the baseline distance D between projector and camera is known and used in triangulation calculations ([0071], [0075]–[0078]). Bridges also teaches that the device is substantially fixed relative to the probe tip / AACMM probe end, and that the position and orientation of the device relative to the AACMM may be ascertained ([0071], [0075]). Mayer teaches the targeting axis / transmission direction of the emitted measurement beam via its beam deflection element and angle-determining unit ([0029], [0064]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to arrange the camera of the combined Mayer/ Bridges measuring instrument in such a defined and known spatial relationship so that the camera image data could be spatially correlated with the scanner’s distance and angle measurement data in a common coordinate framework, thereby improving feature identification, measurement registration, and coordinate determination for the noncontact measuring instrument. Regarding claim 17, Mayer fails to explicitly teach the measuring instrument according to claim 1 wherein the measuring instrument comprises a sensor for measuring a temperature of the object surface, in particular an infrared sensor. However, Bridges teaches that a removable accessory device at the probe end of the AACMM may include a temperature sensor or a thermal scanner ([0039]), and that such probe-end devices communicate with the AACMM electronics as part of the measurement system ( [0044], [0066]). It would have been obvious to include the known temperature-sensing accessory of Bridges at the measuring head / probe end of Mayer’s measuring instrument in order to provide additional information about the measured object surface during measurement. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Burkhard Bockem (US 20140373369 A1), teaches laser tracker with a target sensing unit for target tracking and orientation detec tion Steffey et al. (US 20170343673 A1), teaches combination scanner and tracker device having a focusing mechanism Jokinen et al. (US 20060232786 A1), teaches Three-dimensional Measuring Apparatus For Scanning An Object And A Measurement Head Of A Three-dimensional Measuring Apparatus And Method Of Using The Same Luthi et al. (US 20210025978 A1), teaches coordinate measuring device having automatic target object recognition Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEMPSON NOEL whose telephone number is (571) 272-3376. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00. 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 on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /JEMPSON NOEL/ Examiner, Art Unit 3645 /YUQING XIAO/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645