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
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 1, claims 1-12 in the reply filed on December 28, 2025 is acknowledged.
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 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Beresnev et al US 2014/0231618, herein after Beresnev ‘618.
Regarding claim 11, Beresnev ‘618 discloses a method for generating measurement signals related to a plurality of phase differences between neighboring output beams of an optical beam generator, comprising: projecting a plurality of output beams (Shown in Figure 4), each output beam emanating from an associated output beam source (fiber lasers 100-1, 100-2, 100-3, Figure 4); tailoring a collimation state of the plurality of output beams by a plurality of lenses in a lens array (200-1, 200-2, 200-3, Figure 4, [0042]); forming a plurality of sampling regions on an output window (mirror 400-123, [0048], Figures 4 and 11); directing, by the sampling regions, the plurality of output beams to a detector (500-123, Figure 4 [0043]) producing an optical sample signal ([0045 and 0053]) associated with the plurality of output beams([0051-0052], Figures 4, 7, 11).
Regarding claims 12, Beresnev ‘618 further discloses that an optical path length from the sampling regions to the detector is substantially the same between each pair of beams (Shown in Figures 4, 7 and 11).
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 1-4 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beresnev et al US 2014/0231618, herein after Beresnev ‘618 in view of Brosnan US 6366356, herein after Brosnan ‘356.
Regarding claim 1, Beresnev ‘618 discloses a method for coherently combining a plurality of beams (Title, Abstract, Figures 4, 7-8, 11 and 14), comprising: projecting a plurality of output beams (Shown in Figure 4), each output beam emanating from an associated output beam source (fiber lasers 100-1, 100-2, 100-3, Figure 4); tailoring a collimation state of the plurality of output beams by a plurality of lenses in a lens array (200-1, 200-2, 200-3, Figure 4, [0042]); forming a plurality of sampling regions on an output window (mirror 400-123, [0048], Figures 4 and 11); directing, by the sampling regions, a sample of neighboring beam pairs back through the plurality of lenses to form a focused pair of beams ([0051-0052], Figures 4, 7, 11); producing, by a detector (500-123, Figure 4 [0043]), an optical sample signal of the focused pair of beams ([0045 and 0053]), generating a phase estimate ([0042]) and generating phase command signals configured to modulate the phase of a beam sample at a channel control ([0042]).
Beresnev ‘618 does not specifically disclose the steps of demodulating a time series of subsequent optical sample signals to determine phase difference measurements; unwrapping the phase difference measurements to generate the phase estimate; adding the phase estimate to a beam steering or beam pattern phase offset to generate an error signal; and generating, specifically by passing the error signal through an actuator filter and control block, phase command signals configured to modulate the phase of a beam sample at a channel control.
In the same field of endeavor, Brosnan ‘356 teaches the steps of demodulating a time series of subsequent optical sample signals to determine phase difference measurements (Column 5, lines 3-18); unwrapping the phase difference measurements to generate the phase estimate (Column 5, lines 18-35); adding the phase estimate to a beam steering or beam pattern phase offset to generate an error signal (Column 5, lines 36-58); and generating, specifically by passing the error signal through an actuator filter (68) and control block (processor 66, Figure 1), phase command signals configured to modulate the phase of a beam sample at a channel control (Column 5, lines 36-58).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Brosnan ‘356 with the method of Beresnev ‘618 to control the state of phase of each individual fiber in the fiber lens array (Column 2, lines 46-49-Bersenev ‘618).
Regarding claim 2, Beresnev ‘618 further discloses that an optical path length from the sampling regions to the detector is substantially the same between each pair of beams (Shown in Figures 4, 7 and 11).
Regarding claim 3, Beresnev ‘618 further discloses providing an aperture at a focus of the focused pair of beams to form a sample of the focused pair of beams ([0043], Figures 3b, 4, 7).
Regarding claim 4, Beresnev ‘618 further discloses that the detector (500-123) is located after the aperture (Figure 4) and further comprising measuring, by the detector, the sample of the focused pair of beams ([0045 and 0053]).
Regarding claim 8, Beresnev ‘618 further discloses combining the plurality of output beams into a spatially combined projected beam ([0003], Figures 4, 7, 11).
Regarding claim 9, Brosnan ‘356 further teaches that the actuator filter and control block adds the phase command signals to a control output in accordance with timing signals (Column 5, line 35-Column 6, line 9).
Regarding claim 10, Brosnan ‘356 further teaches that the actuator filter and control block comprise one or more of a pure integrator, a proportional-integral controller, a leaky integrator controller, and a proportional-integral-derivative controller (Column 7, line 64-Column 8, line 11).
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beresnev et al US 2014/0231618, in view of Brosnan ‘356 and further in view of Rothenberg US 2011/0032602, herein after Rothenberg ‘602.
Regarding claims 5-7, Beresnev ‘618 as modified does not disclose an optical capture device, specifically a single mode waveguide or optical fiber, is located at the focus of the focused pair of beams and further comprising directing, by the optical capture device, the sample of the focused pair of beams to the detector.
In the same field of endeavor, Rothenberg ‘602 teaches of optical capture device, specifically a single mode waveguide or optical fiber, is located at the focus of the focused pair of beams and further comprising directing, by the optical capture device, the sample of the focused pair of beams to the detector (Paragraphs 81-83 and Figures 27-29).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Rothenberg ‘602 with the method of Beresnev ‘618 as modified guiding the beams in a using well known beam control devices.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA S MANNO whose telephone number is (571)272-2339. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Kiesha Bryant can be reached at 571-272-3606. 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.
/JESSICA S MANNO/SPE, Art Unit 2898
Prosecution Insights