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 Objections Claim 13 objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 13 recites “A method for machining a workpiece a laser beam” this should be –A method for machining a workpiece by a laser beam-- . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. Claim(s) 1-8, 11, and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moser ( US 2020 / 0262004 A1 ) in view of Good (US 2009 / 0072037 A1) and Boehmer (US 2019 / 0310463 A1) . Claim 1. Moser discloses a laser machining head for machining a workpiece by a laser beam (laser machining system with a head, abstract, Fig. 3) , comprising: a scanning device for directing said laser beam at a plurality of positions on a workpiece surface (beam deflection unit which can be a galvanoscanner , par. 81) ; an image acquisition device for acquiring an image of said workpiece surface (image acquisition unit 152, Fig. 3) , said image acquisition device comprising an objective with a lens having an adjustable focal length ; and a control configured to adjust a focal length of said lens based on a measurement value (distance between workpiece to be machined and end portion of the machine head can be measured, par. 57) . Moser does not disclose said image acquisition device comprising an objective with a lens having an adjustable focal length and the control configured to adjust a focal length of said lens based on a measurement value. Good discloses a liquid lens for focusing a camera (par. 35) wherein the detected distance is used to perform quick autofocus (par. 10). Boehmer discloses a laser machining device wherein a camera is coaxial with the laser beam’s path (Fig. 1) and the camera’s focal length is set and adjusted in each case so that the working area is imaged in sharp focus on the camera chip (par. 97) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Moser to incorporate the teachings of Good and Boehmer and have a liquid lens for focusing the camera. Doing so would have the benefit of a fast acting autofocus liquid lens (par. 7, Good) that is able to image the laser’s working area for process efficiency and reliability (par. 34, Boehmer). Claim 13. Moser discloses a method for machining a workpiece a laser beam via a laser machining head (laser machining system with a head, abstract, Fig. 3) with an image acquisition device (image acquisition unit 152, Fig. 3) , which includes an objective with a lens having an adjustable focal length , said method comprising: acquiring a measurement value (distance between workpiece to be machined and end portion of the machine head can be measured, par. 57) ; adjusting the focal length of said lens based on the measurement value ; and acquiring an image of said workpiece surface by means of said image acquisition device with the adjusted focal length. Moser does not disclose an objective with a lens having an adjustable focal length. Good discloses a liquid lens for focusing a camera (par. 35) wherein the detected distance is used to perform quick autofocus (par. 10). Boehmer discloses a laser machining device wherein a camera is coaxial with the laser beam’s path (Fig. 1) and the camera’s focal length is set and adjusted in each case so that the working area is imaged in sharp focus on the camera chip (par. 97) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Moser to incorporate the teachings of Good and Boehmer and have a liquid lens for focusing the camera. Doing so would have the benefit of a fast acting autofocus liquid lens (par. 7, Good) that is able to image the laser’s working area for process efficiency and reliability (par. 34, Boehmer). Claim 2. Moser in view of Good and Boehmer discloses the laser machining head according to claim 1, wherein said lens is a liquid lens (liquid lens, abstract, Good) and/or has a focal length range between -500 mm and +500 mm, between -500 mm and +333 mm or between -100 mm and +100 mm. Claim 3. Moser in view of Good and Boehmer discloses the laser machining head according to claim 1, wherein said image acquisition device comprises a camera (camera, par. 65) or a gray image camera. Claim 4. Moser in view of Good and Boehmer discloses the laser machining head according to claim 1, wherein a beam path of said image acquisition device extends at least partially coaxially with said beam path of said laser beam (camera 152 is coaxial with the laser beam’s path, Fig. 3) . Claim 5. Moser in view of Good and Boehmer discloses the laser machining head according to claim 4, wherein said scanning device is arranged in an area in which said beam path of said image acquisition device extends coaxially with said beam path of said laser beam (par. 81) . Moser does not explicitly disclose a scanner that is coaxial with the image acquisition device and beam path of the laser beam. Boehmer discloses a laser processing machine wherein the scanner (26, Fig. 1) is arranged in an area in which said beam path of said image acquisition device (30) extends coaxially with said beam path of said laser beam (12, Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Moser in view of Good and Boehmer to incorporate the teachings of Boehmer and place the galvanometer along the same path as the laser beam and image acquisition unit. Doing so would have the benefit of being simultaneous move the imaging portion along with the laser beam so that the camera is viewing the same area that is being irradiated by the laser beam. Claim 6. Moser in view of Good and Boehmer discloses the laser machining head according to claim 1, wherein the measurement value is a distance measurement value of a distance between said laser machining head and said workpiece surface (distance between workpiece to be machined and end portion of the machine head can be measured, par. 57) . Claim 7. Moser in view of Good and Boehmer discloses the laser machining head according to claim 6, further comprising: a distance measuring device for measuring the distance value (measuring device 128, par. 60) . Claim 8. Moser in view of Good and Boehmer discloses the laser machining head according to claim 7, wherein said distance measuring device comprises at least one of the following devices: an optical coherence tomography (OCT) device (measuring device may comprise a coherence tomograph, par. 60) , a lidar device, a ladar device, a ToF device, a conoscopy device, a light section device, a triangulation measuring device and a capacitive distance measuring device. Claim 11. Moser in view of Good and Boehmer discloses the laser machining head according to claim 1, wherein: said control is configured to adjust the focal length of said lens in such a way that an area of said workpiece surface in which the measurement value was acquired lies in the focal plane of said image acquisition device; and/or said control is configured to control said image acquisition device in order to carry out an autofocus function (autofocus lens, par. 7, Good) . Claim 14. Moser in view of Good and Boehmer discloses the method according to claim 13, further comprising: acquiring the measurement value at a position on said workpiece surface which is to lie in the focal plane of said image acquisition device (the combined art takes the distance from the workpiece to the machine head to focus the camera onto the workpiece, i.e. focus the focal plane onto the workpiece) . Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moser in view of Good and Boehmer as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kawakatsu (US 2020 / 0361026 A1 ). Claim 9. Moser in view of Good and Boehmer does not disclose the laser machining head according to claim 1, wherein the measurement value is a contrast value of an image of said workpiece surface acquired by said image acquisition device. Kawakatsu discloses laser processing machine wherein a camera 40 is used to obtain images of the workpiece (fig. 1) wherein the contrast value in the images determine how focused the images are (par. 104) and the associated lens position is recorded (par. 104). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Moser in view of Good and Boehmer to incorporate the teachings of Kawakatsu and use an image’s contrast to find the sharpest focus. Doing so would have the benefit of obtaining the lens position for the most focused image. Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moser in view of Good, Boehmer, Kawakatsu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Emtman (US 2022/0101511 A1 ). Claim 10. Moser in view of Good, Boehmer, Kawakatsu does not disclose the laser machining head according to claim 9, wherein said control is configured to determine a distance value of said laser machining head to said workpiece surface from the contrast value of the acquired image and a focal length set when acquiring the image. Emtman discloses a metrology method for contrast based autofocus wherein by finding the image with the highest overall contrast, which corresponds to a focus position of when the image was acquired, an indication/measurement of the relative Z-position (i.e., autofocus height) of a surface point can be obtained (par. 139) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Moser in view of Good, Boehmer, Kawaktsu to incorporate the teachings of Emtman and find the ZL height of the surface point. Emtman demonstrates that it is well-known in contrast-based autofocus to obtain the focus height from the contrast images. Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moser in view of Good and Boehmer as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kawakatsu (US 2020 / 0361026 A1) and Nomaru (US 2007 / 0119835 A1) . Claim 12. Moser in view of Good and Boehmer discloses the laser machining head according to claim 1, further comprising: a collimating optics for collimating said laser beam (collimator optics 130, Fig. 3) ; and a focusing optics for focusing said laser beam (focusing 124, Fig. 3) ; wherein at least a part of the focusing optics and/or the collimating optics is displaceable by means of an actuator (focus position may be controlled); and wherein said control is configured to adjust a focal position of said laser beam based on the measurement value by controlling the actuator . Moser in view of Good and Boehmer does not disclose wherein at least a part of the focusing optics and/or the collimating optics is displaceable by means of an actuator; and Kawakatsu discloses a laser processing machine with an imaging part 40 that is coaxial with the laser beam (20, Fig. 1) wherein the condensing lens 24 is actuated by a motor 70 (par. 90) to focus the laser beam. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Moser in view of Good and Boehmer to incorporate the teachings of Kawakatsu and have an actuator move the focusing optic. Doing so would have the benefit of being able to focus the laser beam. Moser in view of Good, Boehmer, and Kawakatsu does not explicitly disclose said control is configured to adjust a focal position of said laser beam based on the measurement value by controlling the actuator. However , it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to take the distance between the workpiece and machine head to focus the laser beam, as demonstrated by Nomaru . Such methods of focusing a laser beam are well known in the art. Nomaru discloses a laser processing device wherein a height detection means is used to detect the height of the workpiece so that the focal point of the laser beam can be controlled accordingly (par. 9). Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moser in view of Good and Boehmer as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Nomaru (US 2007 / 0119835 A1) Claim 15. Moser in view of Good and Boehmer discloses the method according to claim 13, wherein acquiring a measurement value comprises: acquiring a distance measurement value, wherein the focal length of said lens is adjusted based on the acquired distance measurement value (camera’s focal length is set and adjusted in each case so that the working area is imaged in sharp focus on the camera chip, par. 97, Boehmer) ; and/or acquiring a contrast value in an image of said workpiece surface, wherein the focal length of said lens is adjusted based on the acquired contrast value. Moser in view of Good and Boehmer does not explicitly disclose said control is configured to adjust a focal position of said laser beam based on the measurement value by controlling the actuator. However , it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to take the distance between the workpiece and machine head to focus the laser beam, as demonstrated by Nomaru . Such methods of focusing a laser beam are well known in the art. Nomaru discloses a laser processing device wherein a height detection means is used to detect the height of the workpiece so that the focal point of the laser beam can be controlled accordingly (par. 9). Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moser in view of Good and Boehmer as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Unrath (US 2010/0301024 A1) Claim 16. Moser in view of Good and Boehmer discloses the method according to claim 13, further comprising: evaluating the acquired image and determining a machining position on the workpiece surface for said laser beam. Unrath discloses a laser processing machine wherein the captured images of the workpiece are evaluated to determine the position of the laser beam relative to the alignment target (par. 14). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Moser in view of Good and Boehmer to incorporate the teachings of Unrath and determine the location of the laser beam. Doing so would have the benefit aligning the laser beam to workpiece features with high accuracy (par. 65, Unrath ). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT SIMPSON A CHEN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-6422 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Mon-Fri 8-5 . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Steven Crabb can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 270-5095 . 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. /SIMPSON A CHEN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3761 /ELIZABETH M KERR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761