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
Claims 12-15 and 20-31 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II and III respectively, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01/30/2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Claims 1-11 (Group I) in the reply filed on 01/30/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: There is a period at the end of “laser energy exiting the optical relay system”, which should be a comma instead. Such as, “laser energy exiting the optical relay system, wherein the first lens…”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“optical relay system” in Claim 1
The generic placeholder is “optical relay system” and the functional language attributed the “optical relay system” includes: “configured to relay the pivot point to the scan lens”.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Reference is made to the Specification filed on 05/08/2023.
Regarding the optical relay system, on Page 19, “The optical relay 200 further includes an optical input 206, an optical output 208, a first reflector 212a having a first reflective surface 204a and a second reflector 212b having a second reflective surface 204b. The optical relay 200 further includes a first lens 202a mounted in the optical input 206 and a second lens 202b mounted in the optical output 208.”, where the optical relay 200 is assumed to have optical devices that allow for an optical input travel to an optical output
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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, 3-5, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sawabe et al. (JP 2010099667 A, hereinafter Sawabe).
Regarding claim 1, Sawabe discloses a system (Abstract, “practical optical system”), comprising:
a first positioner configured to deflect a beam of laser energy about a pivot point (Page 8, Para. 4 from end, “The laser beam emitted from the laser head 1 travels in the X2 direction through a reflection mirror group (mirrors 48a, 48b, 48c, etc.)”, where the first positioner is the mirror 48a, where Fig. 4 shows that mirror 48a deflects the laser energy about a pivot point in order to change the direction of the laser beam);
a scan lens movable relative to the first positioner (Page 8, Para. 3, “the objective lens 33 are fixed to the slider 44.”, where the objective lens 33 is construed as the scan lens and it is movable relative to the first positioner as it is attached to a slider 44 that moves about an x-axis, Page 8, Para. 2, “The slider 44 is moved in the X direction along the guide rail 43 by a moving means (not shown) made of a motor or the like.”); and
an optical relay system configured to relay the pivot point to the scan lens in correspondence with movement of the scan lens (Page 7, Para. 5, “optical system 12”, and Page 7, last Para., “In the second embodiment, when the mirror 29 moves in the X direction, the optical path length in the X direction varies by the amount of movement. This amount of variation is comparable to the amount of movement of the fourth mirror 24 in the first embodiment. That is, for example, if the unit moves in the X2 direction, “−1” is obtained. In the second embodiment, similarly to the first embodiment, when the objective lens 33 moves in the X direction, the optical path length is increased or decreased by the same amount as the movement amount by the optical path length adjustment optical path between the first mirrors 21. Occurs. For this reason, the optical path length from the laser head 1 to the objective lens 33 is kept constant.”, where the optical system 12 is similar to the optical system 11 that keeps the optical path length constant even when the scan lens is moved, Page 7, Para. 3, “By providing the optical system 11, in the laser processing apparatus shown in FIG. 1, the optical path length of the optical system 11 is always kept constant even when the objective lens 33 is scanned in the X direction.”, where the optical system 11 and 12 both relay the laser beam from the pivot point to the scan lens in correspondence with the movement of the scan lens through adjusting the optical path so that it is constant).
Regarding claim 3, Sawabe teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses wherein the scan lens is movable relative to the optical relay system (Page 3, Para. 5, “Alternatively, the mirror is a first mirror that reflects the light at a reflection angle of 30 °, and the optical system re-directs the light reflected by the first mirror in the optical path length adjusting optical path. The first mirror includes a second mirror that guides the mirror so as to reflect at an angle of reflection of 30 °, and the first mirror moves integrally with the movable optical component.”, where the optical system 12 for Fig. 4 includes mirrors 21 and 22A that comprise the optical system and where the scan lens or objective lens 33 moves relative to the optical system’s mirror 22A).
Regarding claim 4, Sawabe teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses wherein the optical relay system is movable relative to at least one selected from the scan lens and the first positioner (Page 3, Para. 5, “Alternatively, the mirror is a first mirror that reflects the light at a reflection angle of 30 °, and the optical system re-directs the light reflected by the first mirror in the optical path length adjusting optical path. The first mirror includes a second mirror that guides the mirror so as to reflect at an angle of reflection of 30 °, and the first mirror moves integrally with the movable optical component.”, where the optical system 12 for Fig. 4 includes mirrors 21 and 22A that comprise the optical system and where the scan lens or objective lens 33 moves relative to the optical system’s mirror 22A, where reverse being that the optical system’s mirror 22A also moves relative to the objective scan lens 33 is also true as distance between the two change relative to each other; where the mirror 21 of the optical system 12 moves along the slider 44 and moves relative to the first positioner 48a).
Regarding claim 5, Sawabe teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses wherein the optical relay system includes:
an optical input (Page 8, Para. 3, “In FIG. 7, the first mirror 21 that reflects the laser beam L irradiated in the X2 direction upward at a reflection angle of 60 ° is fixed to the left of the objective lens 33 in the bracket 46.”, where the first mirror 21 of the optical system 12 receives the laser beam and there must be an optical input in the bracket 45 in order to allow the laser beam to pass through and hit the first mirror 21);
a first reflector having a first reflective surface, wherein the first reflector is arranged to receive the beam of laser energy propagating from the first positioner (Page 8, Para. 3, “In FIG. 7, the first mirror 21 that reflects the laser beam L irradiated in the X2 direction upward at a reflection angle of 60 ° is fixed to the left of the objective lens 33 in the bracket 46.”, where the laser beam comes from the first positioner, Page 8, Para. 4 from end, “The laser beam emitted from the laser head 1 travels in the X2 direction through a reflection mirror group (mirrors 48a, 48b, 48c, etc.) and directly reaches the first mirror 21.”);
an optical output (Page 8, Para. 3 from end, “Thereafter, the laser beam is reflected downward by the mirror 29 at an angle of 90 ° toward the objective lens 33, and the laser beam L is focused by the objective lens 33 toward the workpiece W held on the chuck table 5. Thus, a focus is formed on the workpiece W.”, where the optical output is created by the mirror 29 that angles the laser beam downward so that it can output the optical system and enter into the scan lens 33); and
a second reflector having a second reflective surface opposing the first reflective surface (Page 8, Para. 5 from end, “The laser beam L reflected by the first mirror 21 reaches one of the second mirrors 22A, and then the laser beam L is directed at an angle of 90 ° toward the second mirror 22B by the second mirror 22A. Reflects in the Y direction. The laser beam L reaching the second mirror 22B is reflected toward the first mirror 21 at an angle of 90 °.”),
wherein the first reflective surface and the second reflective surface are arranged and configured to relay the beam of laser energy received at the first reflector from the optical input to the optical output (Page 8, Para. 3 from end, “In the second mirrors 22A and 22B, the laser beam L is reflected from the second mirror 22A to the second mirror 22B, whereby the optical path of the laser beam L is shifted in the Y direction. Then, the laser beam L reflected on the second mirror 22A by the second mirror 22B is reflected at an angle of 90 ° toward the first mirror 21, and the angle of 120 ° again by the first mirror 21. Is reflected by the mirror 29. Thereafter, the laser beam is reflected downward by the mirror 29 at an angle of 90 ° toward the objective lens 33, and the laser beam L is focused by the objective lens 33 toward the workpiece W held on the chuck table 5.”, where the first mirror 21 or first reflective surface and the second mirrors 22A and 22B or second reflective surface take the laser beam from the first positioner and reflect it so that it can exit the optical system through hitting the mirror 29).
Regarding claim 10, Sawabe teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses further comprising a second positioner arranged between the optical relay system and the scan lens (Page 8, Para. 3 from end, “Thereafter, the laser beam is reflected downward by the mirror 29 at an angle of 90 ° toward the objective lens 33, and the laser beam L is focused by the objective lens 33 toward the workpiece W held on the chuck table 5. Thus, a focus is formed on the workpiece W.”, where the second positioner is mirror 29 that is located between the reflecting mirrors 21 and 22 of the optical relay system and the scan lens 33).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 2 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sawabe et al. (JP 2010099667 A, hereinafter Sawabe) in view of Filhaber (US 20180203249 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Sawabe teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above.
Sawabe does not disclose:
wherein the first positioner is at least one selected from the group consisting of an AOD system and a galvanometer mirror system.
However, Filhaber discloses, in the similar field of laser systems (Para. 0002, “laser line generation and projection systems, devices and methods”), where a laser positioner can be selected from a group including an AOD system and a galvanometer mirror system (Para. 0040, “Illustratively, the beam deflector 220 can be a microelectromechanical system (MEMS) mirror, galvanometer mirror, acousto-optic modulator (AOM), or other device or material including Lithium Niobate (LiNIBO3) or anything that generates a sweep (double arrow 310 in FIG. 3) of the reflected, output beam (shown at one end of the fan 230 as ray 320) into a planar, fan pattern 230.”, where an AOM and AOD are essentially the same, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acousto-optic_deflector). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the positioner in Sawabe to be selected from an AOD system and a galvanometer mirror system as taught by Filhaber.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to choose a mirror deflector system that is capable of being shifted in direction, where both mirror systems can be controlled to pivot and allow the laser beam to be swept, which provides a user greater flexibility in positioning the laser in a desired location, as stated by Para. 0040, “Illustratively, the beam deflector 220 can be a microelectromechanical system (MEMS) mirror, galvanometer mirror, acousto-optic modulator (AOM), or other device or material including Lithium Niobate (LiNIBO3) or anything that generates a sweep (double arrow 310 in FIG. 3)”.
Regarding claim 11, Sawabe teaches the apparatus according to claim 10, as set forth above.
Sawabe does not disclose:
wherein the second positioner is at least one selected from the group consisting of a galvanometer, an AOD system, a fast steering mirror, and a rotating polygon mirror.
However, Filhaber discloses, in the similar field of laser systems (Para. 0002, “laser line generation and projection systems, devices and methods”), where a laser positioner can be selected from a group including an AOD system and a galvanometer mirror system (Para. 0040, “Illustratively, the beam deflector 220 can be a microelectromechanical system (MEMS) mirror, galvanometer mirror, acousto-optic modulator (AOM), or other device or material including Lithium Niobate (LiNIBO3) or anything that generates a sweep (double arrow 310 in FIG. 3) of the reflected, output beam (shown at one end of the fan 230 as ray 320) into a planar, fan pattern 230.”, where an AOM and AOD are essentially the same, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acousto-optic_deflector). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the positioner in Sawabe to be selected from an AOD system and a galvanometer mirror system as taught by Filhaber.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to choose a mirror deflector system that is capable of being shifted in direction, where both mirror systems can be controlled to pivot and allow the laser beam to be swept, which provides a user greater flexibility in positioning the laser in a desired location, as stated by Para. 0040, “Illustratively, the beam deflector 220 can be a microelectromechanical system (MEMS) mirror, galvanometer mirror, acousto-optic modulator (AOM), or other device or material including Lithium Niobate (LiNIBO3) or anything that generates a sweep (double arrow 310 in FIG. 3)”.
Claims 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sawabe et al. (JP 2010099667 A, hereinafter Sawabe) in view of Hattori et al. (JP 2018055113 A, hereinafter Hattori).
Regarding claim 6, Sawabe teaches the apparatus according to claim 5, as set forth above.
Sawabe does not disclose:
wherein the optical relay system further includes: a first lens arranged and configured to focus the beam of laser energy within the optical relay system; and
a second lens arranged and configured to focus the beam of laser energy exiting the optical relay system,
wherein the first lens and the second lens are configured to magnify the beam of laser energy.
However, Hattori discloses, in the similar field of laser systems (Page 23, Para. Para. 4 from end, “the laser light emitted from the laser light source LS is incident through the wavefront phase modulator 6 of the compensation optical system”), where the optical relay system includes a first lens arranged and configured to focus a beam of laser energy within the optical relay system (Modified Fig. 13, where the first lens is shown to focus laser energy within the optical relay), and a second lens arranged and configured to focus a beam of laser energy exiting the optical relay system (Modified Fig. 13, where the second lens is shown to focus laser energy exiting the optical relay), where the first and second lens magnify the laser energy beam (Page 4, Para. 3 from end, “The relay lenses L1 and L2 are relay optical systems using optical elements having positive refractive power such as convex lenses.”, where convex lens magnify the beam of laser energy). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the optical relay system of Sawabe to further include the features as taught by Hattori.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to use the lens from Hattori to adjust the optical path length, where this can provide a user with more flexibility over the entire laser beam system, as stated by Hattori, Page 14, Para. 4 from end, “In the system shown in FIG. 13, the relay lenses L1 and L2 are movable, and the slide stage 4 on which the folding mirrors M1 and M2 are installed is movable in parallel with the optical axes of incident light and outgoing light. . Thereby, all of the optical path length pl .sub.1 , the optical path length pl .sub.2 and the optical path length pl .sub.3 shown in FIG. 12 can be adjusted.”.
PNG
media_image1.png
674
897
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Modified Figure 13, Hattori
Regarding claim 7, modified Sawabe teaches the apparatus according to claim 6, as set forth above, discloses wherein the first lens is configured to focus the beam of laser energy at a point that is separated from the first reflective surface and the second reflective surface (Teaching from Hattori, modified Fig. 13, where the focal position created by the first lens is located at a point separated from the first and second reflective surfaces, where the potential focal position is shown in modified Fig. 13 to be located past the first mirror; where the focal position can also be moved as the lens can be moved, teaching from Hattori, Page 14, Para. 4 from end, “In the system shown in FIG. 13, the relay lenses L1 and L2 are movable, and the slide stage 4 on which the folding mirrors M1 and M2 are installed is movable in parallel with the optical axes of incident light and outgoing light. . Thereby, all of the optical path length pl .sub.1, the optical path length pl .sub.2 and the optical path length pl .sub.3 shown in FIG. 12 can be adjusted.”).
Regarding claim 8, Sawabe teaches the apparatus according to claim 5, as set forth above, discloses further comprising a stage coupled to the optical relay system, wherein the stage is operative change a position of the optical relay system relative to at least one selected from the scan lens and the first positioner (Page 8, Para. 3, “As shown in FIG. 7, the mirror 29, the first mirror 21, and the objective lens 33 are fixed to the slider 44.”, where the slider is the stage that is coupled to a mirror 21 of the optical relay system, where the optical relay system position then changes relative to the first positioner).
Hattori also discloses where a stage is coupled to an optical relay system to change the position relative to a scan lens and first positioner (Page 14, Para. 4 from end, “the slide stage 4 on which the folding mirrors M1 and M2 are installed is movable in parallel with the optical axes of incident light and outgoing light.”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the optical relay system in Sawabe to include a slider 4 as taught by Hattori.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to move the mirrors of the optical relay system so that they are parallel with incident laser light, as stated by Hattori, Page 14, Para. 4 from end, “the slide stage 4 on which the folding mirrors M1 and M2 are installed is movable in parallel with the optical axes of incident light and outgoing light.”.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN GUANHUA WEN whose telephone number is (571)272-9940 and whose email is kevin.wen@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10:00 am - 6:00 pm.
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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached on 571-270-5569. 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.
/KEVIN GUANHUA WEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
03/03/2026
/IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761