DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1 through 19 originally filed 7 July 2023. Claims 1 through 19 are addressed by this 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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 7 July 2023 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Specifically, no copy has been filed for NPL document 1 of this IDS.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The disclosure includes an obvious typographical error in which the word "sensor" is misspelled as "senor" in ¶71 of the pre-grant publication.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.83(a).
The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the "grating lens" must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). While Figure 4A includes grating 402, this grating is reflective and cannot be construed as a grating lens. No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(1).
The view numbers within Figures 4A, 4B, 5A, and 5B include brackets. View numbers must not be used in association with brackets or inverted commas, or enclosed within outlines.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4).
The description uses the reference characters "106" and "520" to refer to more than one part each. The same reference character must never be used to designate different parts.
In the present case, these reference characters or similar numbers appear in the following locations: "106" is mentioned in ¶44 and ¶50 and "520" is mentioned in ¶61, ¶62, and ¶63.
The drawings refer to more than one part each with the reference character "192". The same part of an invention must be designated with the same reference character throughout the drawings.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5).
The drawings include the reference character "556" which does not appear in the description. Reference characters not mentioned in the description must not appear in the drawings.
The description includes the reference characters "107" and "108" which do not appear in the drawings. Reference characters mentioned in the description must appear in the drawings.
In the present case, these reference characters or similar numbers appear in the following locations: "107" is mentioned in ¶50 and "108" is mentioned in ¶50.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(u)(1).
Figures 7 includes multiple views that are not separately labeled. Each view must be individually labeled.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as "amended." If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either "Replacement Sheet" or "New Sheet" pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 4 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 4 refers to the "MEMS optical switch", but no such element has been introduced in either this claim or parent claims thereof. As such, antecedent basis for this element has not been properly established. This recitation within this claim is understood as an introduction of this element within this claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 17, this claim requires performance of the steps of claim 18 in an additional context. However, claim 18 recites no steps. As such, this claim is indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. For the remainder of this action, this claim will be interpreted as depending on and referring to claim 16.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Regarding claim 17, this claim requires performance of the steps of claim 18 in an additional context. However, claim 18 recites no steps. Since claim 18 lacks steps, the requirement that these steps also are performed in an additional context imposes no further limitation on the device of claim 18. As such, this claim is of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Volz et al. (Volz, US Patent 6,501,773).
Regarding claim 16, Volz discloses, "Wherein the high-power laser system comprises a plurality of diode lasers" (col. 2-3, lines 66-3 and Fig. 1A, pt. 102). "A controller" (col. 3, lines 29-38 and Fig. 1A, pts. 102 and 116). "Wherein the plurality of diode lasers are configured to generate a plurality of laser beams" (col. 2-3, lines 66-3 and Fig. 1A, pts. 102, 104, and 106). "Each diode laser comprises a temperature control device" (col. 4, lines 10-12). "Wherein the controller comprises a wavelength sensor" (col. 3, lines 29-38 and Fig. 1A, pts. 110, 112, 116, 118, and 120). "Collecting a light sample from a first laser beam in the plurality of laser beams" (col. 3, lines 29-38 and Fig. 1A, pts. 110, 112, 116, 118, and 120). "Wherein the first laser beam is generated by a first diode laser" (col. 2-3, lines 66-3 and Fig. 1A, pts. 102 and 106). "Detecting, by the wavelength sensor, a wavelength deviation in the first laser beam from a desired wavelength" (col. 3, lines 29-38 and Fig. 1A, pts. 102 and 116). "Determining, by the controller, a temperature adjustment based on the wavelength deviation" (col. 3, lines 29-38 and Fig. 1A, pts. 102 and 116). "Controlling the temperature control device to adjust a temperature of the first diode laser based on the temperature adjustment" (col. 4, lines 10-12). "Outputting the first laser beam by the first diode laser with a wavelength corrected by the wavelength deviation" (col. 3, lines 29-38 and Fig. 1A, pts. 102 and 116).
Regarding claim 17, Volz discloses, "Performing the steps… for each diode laser in the plurality of diode lasers in a time sequence" (col. 3, lines 29-38 and Fig. 1A, pts. 110, 112, 116, 118, and 120). "[Performing the steps for each diode laser] to align the plurality of laser beams to the desired wavelength" (col. 3, lines 29-38 and Fig. 1A, pts. 102 and 116, where the reduction in detected errors aligns the emission wavelengths of each laser to the desired wavelength for each laser).
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, 14, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Volz in view of Alcock et al. (Alcock, US Pub. 2007/0098028).
Regarding claim 1, Volz discloses, "A plurality of diode lasers" (col. 2-3, lines 66-3 and Fig. 1A, pt. 102). "[The diode lasers] configured to generate an output laser beam" (col. 2-3, lines 66-3 and Fig. 1A, pts. 102, 104, and 106). "A controller, configured to tune each diode laser in the plurality of diode lasers" (col. 3, lines 29-38 and Fig. 1A, pts. 102 and 116). "[The controller configured to] to align a wavelength of each output laser beam in the plurality of output laser beams" (col. 3, lines 29-38 and Fig. 1A, pts. 102 and 116, where the reduction in detected errors aligns the emission wavelengths of each laser to the desired wavelength for each laser). "A fiber switch configured to collect a light sample from each diode laser" (col. 5, lines 1-6 and Fig. 6B). "[The switch configured to] output the collected light sample from each diode laser in a time sequence" (col. 4, lines 39-45 and Figs. 1A and 3B, pts. 102, 108, and 310). "A wavelength sensor configured to receive the collected light sample of each diode laser from the… switch in the time sequence" (col. 3, lines 29-38 and Fig. 1A, pts. 110, 112, 116, 118, and 120). "[The wavelength sensor configured to] measure a wavelength deviation for each diode laser" (col. 3, lines 29-38 and Fig. 1A, pts. 110, 112, 116, 118, and 120). "A control processor configured to control each diode laser in the plurality of diode lasers" (col. 3, lines 29-38 and Fig. 1A, pts. 102 and 116). "[The control processor controls] based on the wavelength deviation measured by the wavelength sensor" (col. 3, lines 29-38 and Fig. 1A, pts. 102 and 116). "[The control processor configured] to adjust the wavelength of each output laser beam in the plurality of output laser beams" (col. 3, lines 29-38 and Fig. 1A, pts. 102 and 116). Volz does not explicitly disclose, "A fiber beam combiner, configured to output a combined laser beam by combining a plurality of output laser beams generated by the plurality of diode lasers." Alcock discloses, "A fiber beam combiner, configured to output a combined laser beam by combining a plurality of output laser beams generated by the plurality of diode lasers" (p. [0107] and Fig. 5A, pts. 37.2, 37.3, and 40.1). 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 teachings of Volz with the teachings of Alcock. In view of the teachings of Volz regarding a frequency locked laser array producing multiple outputs, the alternate switching and combining mechanism as taught by Alcock would enhance the teachings of Volz by allowing the light to be selected from the emitted beams while also providing a single fiber for delivery of the combined beam.
Regarding claim 2, Volz does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the fiber beam combiner includes multiple input ports." "Each input port is coupled with a diode laser of the plurality of diode lasers." "Wherein an output power of the laser system is a combination of an output power of each diode laser." Alcock discloses, "Wherein the fiber beam combiner includes multiple input ports" (p. [0104] and Fig. 5A, pts. 38.2 and 38.3, where steering devices 38.2 and 38.3 are the second and third from the left elements collectively labeled 38.1 to 38.6). "Each input port is coupled with a diode laser of the plurality of diode lasers" (p. [0104] and Fig. 5A, pts. 37.2, 37.3, 38.2, and 38.3, where steering devices 38.2 and 38.3 are the second and third from the left elements collectively labeled 38.1 to 38.6). "Wherein an output power of the laser system is a combination of an output power of each diode laser" (p. [0107] and Fig. 5A, pts. 37.2, 37.3, and 40.1, where the output along fiber 40.1 is a combination of lights from the lasers). 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 teachings of Volz with the teachings of Alcock for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, Volz discloses, "A collimator configured to collimate the plurality of input light beams" (col. 5, lines 1-5 and Fig. 6B, pt. 608). "An optical switch" (col. 5, lines 1-5 and Fig. 6B, pt. 614). "A focusing lens" (col. 5, lines 1-5 and Fig. 6B, where the unlabeled lens focuses light 616 into fiber 618). "Wherein the optical switch is configured to select an input beam from the plurality of input light beams after being collimated" (col. 5, lines 1-5 and Fig. 6B, pts. 608 and 614). "[The optical switch directs] the selected input beam towards the focusing lens sequentially" (col. 4, lines 39-45, col. 5, lines 1-5, and Fig. 6B, pt. 608). "Wherein the time distributed fiber switch generates an output light beam derived from each input port in a time distributed manner" (col. 4, lines 39-45, col. 5, lines 1-5, and Fig. 6B, pts. 608 and 618). Volz does not explicitly disclose, "A plurality of input ports for receiving a plurality of input light beams." Alcock discloses, "A plurality of input ports for receiving a plurality of input light beams" (p. [0104] and Fig. 5A, pts. 38.2 and 38.3, where steering devices 38.2 and 38.3 are the second and third from the left elements collectively labeled 38.1 to 38.6). 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 teachings of Volz with the teachings of Alcock for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 18, Volz discloses, "A plurality of diode lasers" (col. 2-3, lines 66-3 and Fig. 1A, pt. 102). "[The diode lasers] configured to generate an output laser beam" (col. 2-3, lines 66-3 and Fig. 1A, pts. 102, 104, and 106). "A controller, configured to tune each diode laser in the plurality of diode lasers" (col. 3, lines 29-38 and Fig. 1A, pts. 102 and 116). "[The controller configured] to align a wavelength of each output laser beam in the plurality of output laser beams" (col. 3, lines 29-38 and Fig. 1A, pts. 102 and 116, where the reduction in detected errors aligns the emission wavelengths of each laser to the desired wavelength for each laser). Volz does not explicitly disclose, "A fiber beam combiner, configured to output a combined laser beam by combining a plurality of output laser beams generated by the plurality of diode lasers." Alcock discloses, "A fiber beam combiner, configured to output a combined laser beam by combining a plurality of output laser beams generated by the plurality of diode lasers" (p. [0107] and Fig. 5A, pts. 37.2, 37.3, and 40.1). 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 teachings of Volz with the teachings of Alcock for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Claims 3 through 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Volz, in view of Alcock, and further in view of Cayrefourcq et al. (Cayrefourcq, US Pub. 2001/0050928).
Regarding claim 3, The combination of Volz and Alcock does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the fiber switch comprises a micro-electro-mechanical systems (MEMS) optical switch." Cayrefourcq discloses, "Wherein the fiber switch comprises a micro-electro-mechanical systems (MEMS) optical switch" (p. [0027] and Fig. 2, pt. 216). 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 teachings of the combination of Volz and Alcock with the teachings of Cayrefourcq. In view of the teachings of Volz regarding a frequency locked laser array producing multiple outputs and the teachings of Alcock regarding an alternate switching and combining mechanism, the alternate use of MEMS mirrors within the switching device as taught by Cayrefourcq would enhance the teachings of Volz and Alcock by providing a suitably alternate mechanism by which the mirrors may be switched in the required manner
Regarding claim 4, The combination of Volz and Alcock does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the MEMS optical switch is configured to transmit… the collected light sample from a diode laser of the plurality of diode lasers." "[The MEMS optical switch transmits] to the wavelength sensor in a time-distributed period in the time sequence." "Wherein the collected light sample from each of the plurality of diode lasers is transmitted in the time sequence to the wavelength sensor." Cayrefourcq discloses, "Wherein the MEMS optical switch is configured to transmit… the collected light sample from a diode laser of the plurality of diode lasers" (p. [0027] and Fig. 2, pt. 216, where use of this MEMS switch in the configuration of Volz produces this configuration). "[The MEMS optical switch transmits] to the wavelength sensor in a time-distributed period in the time sequence" (p. [0027] and Fig. 2, pt. 216, where use of this MEMS switch in the configuration of Volz produces this configuration). "Wherein the collected light sample from each of the plurality of diode lasers is transmitted in the time sequence to the wavelength sensor" (p. [0027] and Fig. 2, pt. 216, where use of this MEMS switch in the configuration of Volz produces this configuration). 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 teachings of the combination of Volz and Alcock with the teachings of Cayrefourcq for the reasons provided above regarding claim 3.
Regarding claim 5, Volz discloses, "Wherein the fiber switch further comprises collimators and lenses to control a path of the collected light sample from each diode laser" (col. 5, lines 1-5 and Fig. 6B, pt. 608).
Regarding claim 15, The combination of Volz and Alcock does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the optical switch is a MEMS." Cayrefourcq discloses, "Wherein the optical switch is a MEMS" (p. [0027] and Fig. 2, pt. 216). 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 teachings of the combination of Volz and Alcock with the teachings of Cayrefourcq for the reasons provided above regarding claim 3.
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Volz, in view of Alcock, and further in view of Rakuljic et al. (Rakuljic, US Patent 5,691,989).
Regarding claim 6, The combination of Volz and Alcock does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein each diode laser comprises a volume Bragg grating (VBG) device." "Wherein the VBG device is characterized by a Bragg wavelength." "[The VBG device] is configured to selectively amplify a light beam inside the diode laser at the Bragg wavelength to lock the diode laser at the Bragg wavelength." Rakuljic discloses, "Wherein each diode laser comprises a volume Bragg grating (VBG) device" (col. 13, lines 42-46, col. 16, lines 33-42, and Fig. 19, pts. 77a and 77b). "Wherein the VBG device is characterized by a Bragg wavelength" (col. 13, lines 42-46, col. 16, lines 33-42, and Fig. 19, pts. 77a and 77b). "[The VBG device] is configured to selectively amplify a light beam inside the diode laser at the Bragg wavelength to lock the diode laser at the Bragg wavelength" (col. 13, lines 42-46, col. 16, lines 33-42, and Fig. 19, pts. 77a, 77b, and 78). 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 teachings of the combination of Volz and Alcock with the teachings of Rakuljic. In view of the teachings of Volz regarding a frequency locked laser array producing multiple outputs, the alternate construction of the laser device as a laser including a volume Bragg grating as well as the alternate configuration of the lasers to each provide an output of the same wavelength as taught by Rakuljic would enhance the teachings of Volz and Alcock by allowing the laser wavelengths to be very narrowly controlled as well as by allowing the arrangement to provide high power output at a single wavelength for high power applications such as solid state laser pumping.
Regarding claim 7, The combination of Volz and Alcock does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the VBG device is configured to reflect back the light beam at the Bragg wavelength and filter out other wavelengths." Rakuljic discloses, "Wherein the VBG device is configured to reflect back the light beam at the Bragg wavelength and filter out other wavelengths" (col. 13, lines 42-46, col. 16, lines 33-42, and Fig. 19, pts. 77a, 77b, and 78). 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 teachings of the combination of Volz and Alcock with the teachings of Rakuljic for the reasons provided above regarding claim 6.
Claims 8, 9, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Volz, in view of Alcock, in view of Rakuljic, and further in view of Ma et al. (Ma, CN 114188824 A).
Regarding claim 8, The combination of Volz and Alcock does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the Bragg wavelength is temperature-sensitive." Rakuljic discloses, "Wherein the Bragg wavelength is temperature-sensitive" (col. 13, lines 50-65 and Fig. 19, pts. 77a and 77b). 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 teachings of the combination of Volz and Alcock with the teachings of Rakuljic for the reasons provided above regarding claim 6.
The combination of Volz, Alcock, and Rakuljic does not explicitly disclose, "The VBG device comprises a heater controlled by the controller to adjust a temperature of the VBG device." Ma discloses, "The VBG device comprises a heater controlled by the controller to adjust a temperature of the VBG device" (p. [0069]). 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 teachings of the combination of Volz, Alcock, and Rakuljic with the teachings of Ma. In view of the teachings of Volz regarding a frequency locked laser array producing multiple outputs as well as the teachings of Rakuljic regarding configuration of the laser to include a volume Bragg grating, the alternate control of the grating element through the use of a heater as taught by Ma would enhance the teachings of Volz, Alcock, and Rakuljic by providing a suitably alternate manner for controlling the temperature of the volume Bragg grating.
Regarding claim 9, Volz discloses, "Wherein the controller is configured to tune each diode laser in the plurality of diode lasers" (col. 3, lines 29-38 and Fig. 1A, pts. 102 and 116). "[The controller is configured] to align a wavelength of each output laser beam in the plurality of output laser beams" (col. 3, lines 29-38 and Fig. 1A, pts. 102 and 116, where the reduction in detected errors aligns the emission wavelengths of each laser to the desired wavelength for each laser).
The combination of Volz and Alcock does not explicitly disclose, "[The controller is configured to adjust] the temperature of the VBG device in each diode laser." "Each diode laser is locked to an approximately same wavelength." Rakuljic discloses, "[The controller is configured to adjust] the temperature of the VBG device in each diode laser" (col. 13, lines 50-65 and Fig. 19, pts. 77a and 77b). "Each diode laser is locked to an approximately same wavelength" (col. 16, lines 12-29). 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 teachings of the combination of Volz and Alcock with the teachings of Rakuljic for the reasons provided above regarding claim 6.
Regarding claim 19, Volz discloses, "Wherein the controller is configured to tune each diode laser in the plurality of diode lasers" (col. 3, lines 29-38 and Fig. 1A, pts. 102 and 116). "[The controller aligns] a wavelength of each output laser beam in the plurality of output laser beams" (col. 3, lines 29-38 and Fig. 1A, pts. 102 and 116). "[The controller adjusts] the temperature of the VBG device in each diode laser" (col. 3, lines 29-38 and Fig. 1A, pts. 102 and 116).
The combination of Volz and Alcock does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein each diode laser comprises a volume Bragg grating (VBG) device." "Wherein the VBG device locks a Bragg wavelength of the diode laser." "Wherein the Bragg wavelength is temperature-sensitive." "Each diode laser locks at an approximately same wavelength." Rakuljic discloses, "Wherein each diode laser comprises a volume Bragg grating (VBG) device" (col. 13, lines 42-46, col. 16, lines 33-42, and Fig. 19, pts. 77a and 77b). "Wherein the VBG device locks a Bragg wavelength of the diode laser" (col. 13, lines 42-46, col. 16, lines 33-42, and Fig. 19, pts. 77a and 77b). "Wherein the Bragg wavelength is temperature-sensitive" (col. 13, lines 50-65 and Fig. 19, pts. 77a and 77b). "Each diode laser locks at an approximately same wavelength" (col. 16, lines 12-29). 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 teachings of the combination of Volz and Alcock with the teachings of Rakuljic for the reasons provided above regarding claim 6.
The combination of Volz, Alcock, and Rakuljic does not explicitly disclose, "The VBG device comprises a heater controlled by the controller to adjust a temperature of the VBG device." Ma discloses, "The VBG device comprises a heater controlled by the controller to adjust a temperature of the VBG device" (p. [0069]). 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 teachings of the combination of Volz, Alcock, and Rakuljic with the teachings of Ma for the reasons provided above regarding claim 8.
Claims 10 through 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Volz, in view of Alcock, in view of Rakuljic, in view of Ma, in view of Yang et al. (Yang, US Pub. 2004/0105144), and further in view of Yanagawa (US Patent 5,287,367).
Regarding claim 10, The combination of Volz, Alcock, Rakuljic, and Ma does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the wavelength sensor comprises a collimator, a diffraction grating lens and a focusing lens." "Wherein the collected light sample from each diode laser passes through the collimator, the diffraction grating lens and the focusing lens." "[The collected light sample] is focused on a position sensor." "Wherein the position sensor detects a position of the focused light." Yang discloses, "Wherein the wavelength sensor comprises a collimator, a diffraction grating lens and a focusing lens" (p. [0034] and Fig. 4, pts. 430, 440, and 460). "Wherein the collected light sample from each diode laser passes through the collimator, the diffraction grating lens and the focusing lens" (p. [0034] and Fig. 4, pts. 430, 440, and 460, where employing this sort of sensor for the wavelength discriminator of Volz results in this arrangement). "[The collected light sample] is focused on a position sensor" (p. [0034] and Fig. 4, pt. 470). "Wherein the position sensor detects a position of the focused light" (p. [0034] and Fig. 4, pt. 470). 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 teachings of the combination of Volz, Alcock, Rakuljic, and Ma with the teachings of Yang. In view of the teachings of Volz regarding a frequency locked laser array producing multiple outputs, the alternate use of a frequency detection mechanism in which the operational frequency is determined by the position of the emitted beam on a detection plane as taught by Yang would enhance the teachings of Volz, Alcock, Rakuljic, and Ma by providing a suitably alternate mechanism for providing frequency detection.
The combination of Volz, Alcock, Rakuljic, Ma, and Yang does not explicitly disclose, "The wavelength deviation is determined based on a position deviation of the focused light." Yanagawa discloses, "The wavelength deviation is determined based on a position deviation of the focused light" (col. 6, lines 26-41 and Fig. 6, pts. 431b and 434). 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 teachings of the combination of Volz, Alcock, Rakuljic, Ma, and Yang with the teachings of Yanagawa. In view of the teachings of Volz regarding a frequency locked laser array producing multiple outputs as well as the teachings of Yang regarding an alternate frequency detection mechanism, the alternate construction of the detector plane to discern the operational frequency on the basis of position along a line sensor as taught by Yanagawa would enhance the teachings of Volz, Alcock, Rakuljic, Ma, and Yang by allowing for detection of frequency over a continuum.
Regarding claim 11, The combination of Volz and Alcock does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the controller is configured to determine a temperature adjustment of the VBG device in each diode laser based on the wavelength deviation." Rakuljic discloses, "Wherein the controller is configured to determine a temperature adjustment of the VBG device in each diode laser based on the wavelength deviation" (col. 13, lines ). 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 teachings of the combination of Volz and Alcock with the teachings of Rakuljic for the reasons provided above regarding claim 6.
Regarding claim 12, Volz discloses, "Wherein the temperature adjustment is proportional to the wavelength deviation" (col. 13, lines 50-65 and Fig. 19, pts. 77a and 77b, where performing this adjustment to compensate for the error in Volz requires this manner of adjustment).
Regarding claim 13, The combination of Volz, Alcock, Rakuljic, Ma, and Yang does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the position sensor is configured to mark a central position that corresponds to a locked wavelength." "[The position sensor measures] a distance between the central position and the position of the focused light." "[The position sensor converts] the measured distance into the wavelength deviation." Yanagawa discloses, "Wherein the position sensor is configured to mark a central position that corresponds to a locked wavelength" (col. 6, lines 26-41 and Fig. 6, pts. 431b and 434). "[The position sensor measures] a distance between the central position and the position of the focused light" (col. 6, lines 26-41 and Fig. 6, pts. 431b and 434). "[The position sensor converts] the measured distance into the wavelength deviation" (col. 6, lines 26-41 and Fig. 6, pts. 431b and 434). 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 teachings of the combination of Volz, Alcock, Rakuljic, Ma, and Yang with the teachings of Yanagawa for the reasons provided above regarding claim 10.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sean P Hagan whose telephone number is (571)270-1242. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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, MinSun Harvey can be reached at 571-272-1835. 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.
/SEAN P HAGAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Prosecution Insights