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 .
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.
Claims 1-3, 5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mertz (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0018940).
Regarding claim 1. Device for controlling the axial position of a laser focal point produced by a microscope objective, comprising:
Mertz discloses Figs. 1 and 10:
a laser source(110, 210) for emitting a laser beam(212),
a deformable mirror(924b, and [0084]) for focusing or defocusing the laser beam axially([0084]),
a microscope objective(246 and [0057]) for focusing the laser beam coming from the deformable mirror on a laser focal point(See Fig. 10, and [0084]), characterized in that it further comprises a system (120 220 920)for passing the laser beam emitted by the laser source several times through the deformable mirror.
Mertz does not disclose:
for passing the laser beam emitted by the laser source several times through the deformable mirror.
However, Mertz discloses that the system includes a reverberation cavity 220. The reverberation cavity divides the pulse into sub pulses which provides a desired quality of output light. It would have been obvious to pass the laser light through the deformable mirror for the obvious benefit of obtaining a desired output of light. Thus, the features of claim 1 would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 2.
Mertz discloses Figs. 1 and 10:
Device according to claim 1, characterized in that the system for passing the laser beam several times through the deformable mirror comprises at least one set of two mirrors for guiding the laser beam between two successive passages of the laser beam on the deformable mirror. (See Fig. 10, 924a and 924c)
Regarding claim 3.
Mertz discloses Figs. 1 and 10:
Device according to claim 1, characterized in that the system for passing the laser beam several times through the deformable mirror comprises between two consecutive passages of the laser beam through the deformable mirror an optical relay system (f1, f2; f3, f4; f5, f6) for conjugating the deformable mirror plane with the next deformable mirror plane between said two consecutive passages. (See Fig. 10, 924a 924b 924c 926b 926a and 922 and [0084]-[0087])
Regarding claim 5.
Mertz discloses Figs. 1 and 10:
Device according to claim 1, characterized in that it comprises a 2D planar scanning system for controlling the planar (X, Y) position of the laser focal point. (240 and [0057])
Regarding claim 8.
Mertz discloses Figs. 1 and 10:
Device according to claim 1, characterized in that the device is an optical manipulation device, a two-photon polymerization device, a confocal microscopy device, a two-photon microscopy device or an optogenetics device. ([0043])
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mertz (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0018940) in view of Matsubara (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0168614)
Regarding claim 4.
Mertz discloses all of the features of claim 3. Mertz does not disclose:
Device according to claim 3, characterized in that the optical relay system (f1, f2; f3, f4; f5, f 6) comprises an afocal system with two positive lenses or one negative and one positive lens.
In related art, Matsubara discloses:
Device according to claim 3, characterized in that the optical relay system (f1, f2; f3, f4; f5, f 6) comprises an afocal system with two positive lenses or one negative and one positive lens.([0079]). Matsubara discloses that the recited features provide the benefit of providing a desired output of light. It would have been obvious to provide the afocal system to the device of Mertz for the benefit of obtaining a desired light output.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mertz (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0018940) in view of Stumbo (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2001/0033381)
Regarding claim 6.
Mertz disclose all of the features of claim 5.
Mertz does not disclose:
Device according to claim 5, characterized in that the planar scanning system is a galvanometer mirror.
In related art, Stumbo discloses:
Device according to claim 5, characterized in that the planar scanning system is a galvanometer mirror. ([0031]). Stumbo discloses that the recited features provide the benefit of providing a good scanning property, and a provides good quality scanning. As such, the recited features would have been obvious.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mertz (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0018940) in view of Ehsani (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0122109)
Regarding claim 7.
Mertz discloses all of the features of claim 1.
Mertz does not disclose:
Device according to claim 5, characterized in that it comprises a first optical relay system (f.sub.7, f.sub.8) placed between the deformable mirror and the planar scanning mirror and a second optical relay system (f.sub.9, f.sub.10) placed between the planar scanning mirror and the microscope objective, for conjugating the deformable mirror and the planar scanning mirror with the entrance aperture of the microscope objective.
In related art, Ehsani discloses using a first and second optical system to obtain a desired light output. See [0054]-[0057]. It would have been obvious to provide the optical systems of Ehsani into the device of Mertz to obtain a desired light output as recited. As such, the recited features would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT G BACHNER whose telephone number is (571)270-3888. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 10-6 EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Leonard Chang can be reached at (571) 270-3691. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/ROBERT G BACHNER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2898