DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 1 and 7-9 in the reply filed on 11/8/2024 is acknowledged.
Claims 2-6 and 10-14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected subcombinations, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant reserves the right of rejoinder and to pursue non-elected (non-allowed) claims in related applications.
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 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borremans (US PG Publication 2021/0372853 A1) in view of Yasuda (JP 2011150821 A).
Regarding Claim 1, Borremans (US 20210372853 A1) discloses an interference filter (interference filters include Fabry-Perot filters [0068]), comprising:
a first reflective layer having a first surface on which light is incident and a second surface opposite to the first surface (note, fabry-perot interference filters by definition are made of first and second mirrors with a cavity between them; upper mirror [0064]);
and a second reflective layer having a third surface facing the second surface (lower mirror [0064]) at a distance (cavity thickness [0064]) and a fourth surface opposite to the third surface from which light is emitted (lower mirror [0064]), wherein the interference filter is configured such that a sum of values obtained by multiplying a thickness (a filter present at the edge of the sensor may be used with a cavity thickness with, for example, a few nm greater thickness [0069]) and a refractive index (refractive index of the cavity [0059]) of all media including the plurality of dielectric layers (inherent: regardless of the number of layers in each of the Fabry-perot reflectors, the sum of the thickness times the refractive index of each layer in the reflector is a property that exists and can be computed) on a virtual path parallel to an optical axis (normal angle to the filter [0098]) between the first surface of the first reflective layer (upper mirror [0064]) and the fourth surface of the second reflective layer (lower mirror [0064]; regardless of the number of layers in each of the Fabry-perot reflectors, the sum of the thickness times the refractive index of each layer in the fabr-perot filter is a property that exists and can be computed) become greater as the distance from the optical axis increases (a filter with increased cavity thickness on the outer edges [0069], Fig. 4E—note the thickness of the entire filter is increased as a result, as shown in Fig. 4E; for a filter with a desired 850 nm center wavelength, a filter with increased cavity thickness may, for collimated input light, have a larger center wavelength, such as 868 nm. In the example, for the higher CRA of 20 degrees at the edge of a sensor (due to the higher CRA) lens properties), the center wavelength will shift to 850 nm in a gradated fashion).
Borremans does not disclose, but Yasuda (JP 2011150821 A) teaches wherein at least one of the first reflective layer and the second reflective layer includes a plurality of dielectric layers (first and second reflecting mirrors of fabry perot resonator 19 can be … a dielectric multilayer film, p.2).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to implement the first or second reflectors of the Fabry-Perot resonator of Borremans as a multi-layer dielectric stack because Fabry-Perot reflectors are commonly implemented as a dielectric stack, therefore it would have been obvious to implement and would have had a predictable result.
bottom), resulting in a filter that is adaptable to varying conditions and needs, improving on the prior art.
Claim(s) 7, 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borremans (US PG Publication 2021/0372853 A1) in view of Yasuda (JP 2011150821 A) and Yoshida (US PG Publication 2008/0251726).
Regarding Claim 7, Borremans (US 20210372853 A1) discloses a wide-angle spectral imaging device, comprising:
an optical receiver configured to receive light from a subject (spectral sensor [0051]);
and an interference filter disposed in front of the optical receiver (with filters provisioned across the sensor array [0051]), wherein the interference filter is an interference filter according to claim 1 (grounds in claim 1).
Borremans does not disclose, but Yoshida (US PG Publication 2008/0251726) teaches an optical distance adjusting mechanism (electrodes 35,36 [0030]) configured to adjust an optical distance (displace mirror [0030]) parallel to an optical axis direction (see plates moving in optical axis direction in Fig. 3) between a first reflective layer and a second reflective layer (adjusting gap distance D [0030]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to design the Fabry-Perot filter of Borremans using the electrodes of Yoshida because Yoshida teaches that, using the electrodes, the mirror spacing in the filter can be dynamically tuned ([0030]), resulting in a filter that is adaptable to varying conditions and needs, improving on the prior art.
Regarding Claim 9, Borremans (US 20210372853 A1) discloses the wide-angle spectral imaging device of claim 7.
Borremans does not disclose, but Yoshida (US PG Publication 2008/0251726) teaches wherein the optical distance adjusting mechanism (electrodes 35,36 [0030]) is a distance adjusting mechanism (adjusting gap distance D [0030]) configured to relatively move the first reflective layer with respect to the second reflective layer (displace mirror [0030]) along an optical axis direction (see plates moving in optical axis direction in Fig. 3).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to design the Fabry-Perot filter of Borremans using the electrodes of Yoshida because Yoshida teaches that, using the electrodes, the mirror spacing in the filter can be dynamically tuned ([0030]), resulting in a filter that is adaptable to varying conditions and needs, improving on the prior art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s remarks filed 7/18/2025 have been considered. Applicant’s arguments are persuasive regarding the amended limitation, “wherein at least one of the first reflective layer and the second reflective layer includes a plurality of dielectric layers.” Examiner concedes that Borremans does not expressly disclose that the Fabry-Perot mirrors are dielectric stacks—but instead is ambiguous because Fig. 4E clearly shows that the filter is composed of layers.
Yasuda has been cited to demonstrate implementing the Fabry-Perot mirrors as dielectric stacks, and examiner notes that before the application was filed, Fabry-Perot reflectors were commonly implemented as dielectric stacks, and this itself is not new in the art.
Regarding Applicant’s argument that only the cavity thickness of Borremans increases and the layers themselves remain constant in thickness—this fact is simply immaterial: the claims do not recite that any of the dielectric layers in the reflector increase in thickness. Instead, the claims recite that the overall thickness of all media in the filter increases, and Borremans discloses this. Note that Applicant does not argue that the cavity is not media in the filter; but that the dielectric layers are also media in the filter.
Examiner also notes that the sum of thickness-times-refractive-index of all layers in a filter is a natural property of all filters, regardless of the actual number of layers in a filter. As a result, Borremans inherently discloses this natural property, even if it does not expressly disclose the number layers in the reflectors. Regarding the inequality, however, that sum of thickness-times-refractive-index increases radially, Borremans discloses this in paragraph [0069], as the resulting compensation for blue-shift caused by the increasing incidence angle of light proves that the inequality is satisfied.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20150277001 A1
US 20150377706 A1
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHADAN E HAGHANI whose telephone number is (571)270-5631. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM - 5PM.
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, Jay Patel can be reached at 571-272-2988. 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.
/SHADAN E HAGHANI/ Examiner, Art Unit 2485