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 .
Response to the argument
Response to the argument on 102 rejection
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the reference Sorbel but rely on the prior art of Fournier for the amended and argued limitation.
Response to the argument on 103 rejection
AS to the claim 2, applicant argues Sorbel or Fournier does not teach or suggest the inclusion of two or more openings disposed within the enclosure.
However, as shown in the below rejection, Fournier teaches two or more openings disposed within the enclosure (see applicant’s own opening 105 disposed within the enclosure as shown in FIG. 1, that’s exactly disclosed Fournier’s FIG. 4).
Therefore, the argument is not persuasive.
As to the claims 4 and 5, the applicant argues that other prior art used for the claims 4 and 5 do not teach the above argued limitation. However, as discussed before, the prior art of Fournier teaches the limitation.
Therefore, the argument is moot.
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, 2, 3 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sorbel (US 11150135 B1 hereinafter Sorbel) and in view of Fournier et al. (US 20240310617 A1 hereinafter Fournier).
As to claim 1, Sorbel teaches an apparatus (FIG. 5) for measuring the characteristics of a sample (17), comprising:
an enclosure (52) about an interior volume containing the sample, wherein the enclosure has a reflective inner surface (as shown in FIG.5) and at least two openings (top 90 and bottom);
a light source (70) configured to illuminate the sample within the enclosure such that light reflected from the sample and the inner surface of the enclosure passes through the at least two openings to an external environment (FIG. 5);
at least two image sensors (86a-e) configured to generate output data in response to light striking a portion thereof, where the at least two image sensors are positioned to receive light exiting the at least two openings (FIG.5); and
a processor (circuitry 40, col. 8 lines 31-33) configured to receive the output data from the at least two image sensors (86a-e) and generate, using the output data, a bidirectional reflectance distribution function (BRDF) property of the sample (title, FIG. 11 and col. 11 lines 43-60).
However, Sorbel does not explicitly disclose at least two openings disposed within the enclosure.
Fournier teaches at least two openings disposed within the enclosure (FIG.4, 34, 36, 38, 48, various openings are disposed within the enclosure).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of Sorbel by at least two openings disposed within the enclosure for optimal arrangement of optical element for the measurement.
As to claim 2, Sorbel when modified by Fournier teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Sorbel further teaches the processor is further configured output the BRDF value to a device coupled to the processor (col. 8 lines 48 -65), internal storage device accessible by the processor, or remote storage that is remotely accessible by the processor (col. 8 lines 31-34).
However, Sorbel does not explicitly disclose one or more of a display.
Fournier teaches one or more of a display ([0049]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of Sorbel by having display for the benefit including user friendly environments.
As to claims 3, Sorbel when modified by Fournier teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
However, Sorbel does not explicitly disclose the inner surface of the enclosure is a light scattering material.
Fournier teaches the inner surface of the enclosure is a light scattering material ([0057] dome diffuses light).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of Sorbel by having the inner surface of the enclosure is a light scattering material since diffusive surfaces around the sample in BRS helps characterize this complex reflection behavior more accurately.
As to claim 19, Sorbel when modified by Fournier teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Sorbel further teaches an opening is disposed in proximity to a peripheral region of the enclosure (bottom opening in FIG.5).
However, Sorbel does not explicitly disclose two opening is disposed in proximity to a peripheral region of the enclosure.
Fournier teaches two opening is disposed in proximity to a peripheral region of the enclosure (aperture 36 and left side aperture of 42 in FIG. 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of Sorbel by two opening is disposed in proximity to a peripheral region of the enclosure depending on user’s design preference for the optimal measurement arrangement of sample, sensor, light source and other optical element.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sorbel and in view of Fournier and in further view of Ninomiya et al. (US 20110299063 A1 hereinafter Ninomiya).
As to claim 4, Sorbel when modified by Fournier teaches the apparatus of claim 3 and inner surface of enclosure being a diffuse material as shown in the claim 3 rejection.
However, Neither Sorbel nor Fournier explicitly disclose the surface being a white surface.
Ninomiya teaches white surface ([0005]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of Sorbel by having white surface for the benefit including enhanced light distribution by minimizing beam absorption by the surface.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sorbel and in view of Fournier and in further view of Jones et al. (US 20190374207 A1 hereinafter Jones).
As to claim 5, Sorbel when modified by Fournier teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Sorbel further teaches a base (56 as shown and numbered in FIG. 1 and 2, FIG. 5 is more schematic 2 D drawing of the same enclosure of FIG.1, 2 and 4) configured to support the sample and the enclosure (FIG. 5).
However, Sorbel does not explicitly disclose the base is formed of a light absorbing material.
Jones teaches the base is formed of a light absorbing material ([0020]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of Sorbel by having the base is formed of a light absorbing material for the benefit including high SNR.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 17 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
As to claim 17, none of the prior art alone or in combination disclose or teach of the inner surface of the enclosure is configured with a plurality of reflective elements disposed on a light absorbing base for BRDF along with other limitations in the claim.
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 SUNGHEE Y GRAY whose telephone number is (571)270-3211. The examiner can normally be reached on T-R, 8:00 am-4:00 pm and F 8 :00 to 2:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kara Geisel can be reached on (571) 272-2416. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-270-4211.
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.
/SUNGHEE Y GRAY/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2886