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 § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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, 5-9, 15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fujiwara (US 2015/0116478), of record.
Regarding claim 1, Fujiwara discloses a microscope (500, Figs. 1-2) for examining a sample (S), the microscope comprising a microscope stage (140) for receiving the sample to be examined and further comprising a microscope housing (101) enclosing the microscope stage,
wherein the microscope housing comprises a hinged door (102, 103) and an opening (OP1, OP2), the hinged door, in a closed state, covering the opening and comprising an inner surface and an outer surface (Figs. 1-2), and, in an opened state, the inner surface (of 103) or the outer surface (of 102) becomes a top surface of an essentially horizontal work surface that is of a horizontal orientation with respect to the microscope stage (140) (Fig. 2; upon rotating 90 degrees at the hinge to open).
Regarding claim 2, Fujiwara discloses wherein the hinged door (102, 103), in the opened state, provides access to the microscope stage (140) through the opening (OP1, OP2) (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 3, Fujiwara discloses wherein the microscope (500) further comprises a second door (102 or 103) arranged in or at the opening (OP1, OP2) of the microscope housing (101) and wherein the hinged door (other of 102 and 103), in the opened state, provides access to the microscope stage (140) through the second door (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 5, Fujiwara discloses wherein the hinged door (102, 103) is attached to a hinged lid (e.g., top part of 102) of the microscope housing (101), which, in an opened state of the hinged lid, provides access to the microscope stage (140) (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 6, Fujiwara discloses wherein the microscope (500) further comprises a second door (e.g., side part of 102) arranged in or at the opening (OP1, OP2) of the microscope housing (101) and wherein the hinged door (103), in the opened state, provides access to the microscope stage (140) through the second door (side part of 102), and wherein the opening including the second door forms a part of the hinged lid (top part of 102) of the microscope housing (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 7, Fujiwara discloses wherein the opening (OP1, OP2) is formed in a front panel (101a, 101e) of the microscope housing (101) (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 8, Fujiwara discloses wherein the hinged door (103) is mounted to the hinged lid (top part of 102) of the microscope housing (101) by a hinge mechanism (102H, 103H) comprising at least one hinge (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 9, Fujiwara discloses wherein the hinge mechanism (102H, 103H) comprises a stop (e.g., bottom side part of 101) being configured to stop an opening movement of the hinged door (103) (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 15, Fujiwara discloses wherein the hinged door (102, 103), in the closed state, is embodied as at least a part of a front cover (101a, 101e) of the microscope housing (101) (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 17, Fujiwara discloses wherein the microscope (500) further comprises a second door (102 or 103) arranged in the opening (OP1, OP2) of the microscope housing (101) and wherein the hinged door (other of 102 and 103), in the opened state, provides access to the microscope stage (140) through the second door (Fig. 2), and wherein the second door is behind the hinged door in the closed state (Fig. 2; 103 is behind 102 in top to bottom direction of Fig. 2, or 102 is behind 103 in bottom to top direction of Fig. 2).
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 4 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujiwara (US 2015/0116478), as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Kawanabe et al. (US 2007/0081237) of record.
Regarding claim 4, Fujiwara discloses the limitations of claims 1 and 3 above, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the second door is a sliding door.
However, Kawanabe discloses a microscope (Fig. 1), wherein the second door (1202, Fig. 12) is a sliding door (Fig. 12; para. [0114]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate wherein the second door is a sliding door, as in Kawanabe, into the microscope of Fujiwara for easy access.
Regarding claim 18, Fujiwara discloses the limitations of claims 1 and 3 above, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the second door is at least partially transparent.
However, Kawanabe discloses a microscope (Fig. 1), wherein the second door (1202, Fig. 12) is at least partially transparent (paras. [0008-0009, 0114]; “window” is considered transparent).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate wherein the second door is at least partially transparent, as in Kawanabe, into the microscope of Fujiwara to allow for viewing inside the microscope while in a closed state.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujiwara (US 2015/0116478), as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Kashiwabara of Keyence Co Ltd (JP 2006-162764), of record.
Regarding claim 10, Fujiwara discloses the limitations of claims 1, 5, 6 and 8 above, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the hinge mechanism includes a cable and a cable brake, the cable being mounted to the cable brake configured to damp an opening movement of the hinged door and/or to define an opening angle of the hinged door.
However, Keyence Co Ltd discloses a microscope (Figs. 1-34),wherein the hinge mechanism (68, Figs. 12-13) includes a cable and a cable brake (69, Figs. 12-13), the cable being mounted to the cable brake configured to damp an opening movement of the hinged door (64, Figs. 11-14) and/or to define an opening angle of the hinged door (Figs. 13-14; para. [0033]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate wherein the hinge mechanism includes a cable and a cable brake, the cable being mounted to the cable brake configured to damp an opening movement of the hinged door and/or to define an opening angle of the hinged door, as in Keyence Co Ltd, into the microscope of Fujiwara to gently open and close the door as desired.
Claims 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujiwara (US 2015/0116478), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bausch (US 658,611), of record.
Regarding claim 11, Fujiwara discloses the limitations of claim 1 above, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the hinged door comprises a door locking mechanism configured to lock the hinged door in its closed state and to unlock the hinged door upon a user operation.
However, Bausch discloses a microscope (Figs. 1-4), wherein the hinged door (2, Fig. 4) comprises a door locking mechanism (45) configured to lock the hinged door in its closed state and to unlock the hinged door upon a user operation (Fig. 4; p. 1, lines 57-86).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate wherein the hinged door comprises a door locking mechanism configured to lock the hinged door in its closed state and to unlock the hinged door upon a user operation, as in Bausch, into the microscope of Fujiwara to secure the device within the housing.
Regarding claim 12, Fujiwara discloses wherein the opening (OP1, OP2) is formed in a front panel (101a, 101e) of the microscope housing (101) (Fig. 2).
Fujiwara fails to explicitly disclose wherein the door locking mechanism is configured to lock the hinged door, in its closed state, with the front panel.
However, Bausch discloses wherein the door locking mechanism (45) is configured to lock the hinged door (2), in its closed state, with the front panel (e.g., side with handle 3, Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate wherein the door locking mechanism is configured to lock the hinged door, in its closed state, with the front panel, as in Bausch, into the microscope of Fujiwara to conveniently access the lock near the front of the housing.
Regarding claim 13, Fujiwara discloses the microscope (500) further comprising illumination optics (120) for illuminating the sample (S) to be examined (Fig. 2), wherein an illumination of the sample by the illumination optics can only be started when the hinged door (102, 103) is in the closed state and locked with the front panel (101a, 101e) (paras. [0076, 0174-0175]). Bausch further discloses the door locking mechanism (45, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 14, Fujiwara discloses the microscope (500) further comprising an internal illumination (130) of the interior of the microscope housing (101), which is configured to be automatically switched on when the hinged door (102, 103) is unlocked or opened (para. [0174]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 16 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 16, Fujiwara, along with the other cited prior art, fails to explicitly disclose wherein the hinged lid of the microscope housing comprises a lid interlocking mechanism, and a door locking mechanism is configured as a door interlocking mechanism, the lid interlocking mechanism and the door interlocking mechanism being configured to lock the hinged door in its closed state if the hinged lid is opened, and to allow an opening of the hinged door only if the hinged lid is in a closed state, along with the other limitations of claims 1 and 5.
Therefore, claim 16 would be allowable.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed December 19, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant has amended claim 1 to further define “an essentially horizontal work surface that is of a horizontal orientation with respect to the microscope stage,” and has argued that this distinguishes over Fujiwara. However, upon further consideration of Fujiwara, each of the doors 102 and 103 form a horizontal surface upon opening by rotating 90 degrees at the hinges 102H and 103H, respectively (Fig. 2). Therefore, the previous ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) over Fujiwara has been maintained and modified as necessary due to the amendments to the claims.
Conclusion
Applicant’s amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 PAISLEY L WILSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5023. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00am-5:00pm ET.
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, MICHAEL CALEY can be reached at 571-272-2286. 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.
/PAISLEY L WILSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871