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 § 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claims 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), 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 claims 1, 3, and 19: The term “ intersecting an axial direction ” is found in the limitation, “ in a cross section intersecting an axial direction of the first end ,” of claim 1, and is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite because there are many planes at many angles that intersect the axial direction . Based on the specification, it appears that the plane of the cross section intended is a perpendicular cross section of the first end intersecting an axial direction. Further, claim s 1, 3 and 19 introduce “ at least two first input optical fibers that are multi-mode optical fibers ,” but later refer to “ the first input optical fiber ,” without designating which one of the two first input fibers it is a reference to . The examiner cannot ascertain which fiber is the first input optical fiber, as at least two fibers are introduced but only one is referred to in the later limitation. Appropriate correction is required. In general, the mapping between ‘at least two’ input fibers in claim 1 and a ‘first’ input optical fiber is found in subsequent claims many times, and is indefinite, as no fiber in the base claim is designated as the first input optical fiber. For the purposes of examination, a fiber from a plurality of fibers which meets the limitations is deemed sufficient to read on ‘the first’ fiber. Regarding claim 4: The claim recites the limitation “ wherein the boundary has, as the second section , a second section located radially inside with respect to the first section and a second section located radially outside with respect to the first section. ” The examiner cannot ascertain the meaning of “second section” with certainty. Appropriate correction is required. Regarding claims 5 and 6: The claims recite “ further comprising a plurality of first light sourc es,” without establishing a structural relationship with the apparatus of claim 1 , which only establishes “at least one first light source,” later referred to as “the light source” in the same claim . Additionally, it is unclear to the examiner how a plurality of first light sources can be “… the first light source” as claimed. For the purposes of examination, any light sources which emit at the same or different wavelengths are deemed to read on the claims. Regarding claim 7: The claim recites the phrase, “… each of the first light sources ,” in reference to claim 5. However, claim 5 designates “ a plurality of first light sources” as being “ the first light source,” and claim 7 inherits this indefiniteness. For the purpose of examination, any light source which can be switched on and off in the device is deemed fit to read on the claim. Regarding claims 8 and 9: The claims recite the phrase “… radially inside of at least two the first input optical fibers aligned in a circumferential direction ,” which the examiner does not understand as written. For the purposes of examination, the examiner interprets the phrase as a condition on the presence of a fiber located radially inwards of existing circumferential fibers. Regarding claims 2, 10 -18, and 20: Claims 2, 10 -18, and 20 are dependent on claim 1 , 3, or 19, and thus inherit their indefiniteness. 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- 5, 7-11, 13, and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over F2020 (JP 2020183977 A) in view of F2018 (JP 2018190918 A), and further in view of Stork (US 20120188365 A1). Regarding claim 1: F2020 discloses a laser processing apparatus (Figure 4, optical coupler 20 combines a plurality of input fibers 1 which convey laser light , making it part of a ‘laser processing apparatus’ ; Description, “ This optical coupler may be applied to fiber optic lasers and fiber optic amplifiers ”), comprising: at least two first input optical fibers that are multi-mode optical fibers (shown in Figure 4 , the fibers 1a, 1b are explicitly disclosed to be multimode) ; an output optical fiber (Figure 4, output optical fiber 3) that is a multi-mode optical fiber (optical fiber 3 is explicitly multimode) ; a coupler (coupler 20) configured to optically couple a first end of a bundle portion (best seen in Figure 4) in which the at least two first input optical fibers are bundled so as to be aligned in a circumferential direction (Figure 2, Figure 5 show all embodiments of the input fiber bundle having at least two optical fibers bundled such that they are aligned along a circumference, making them aligned in a circumferential direction) , to a second end of the output optical fiber, the second end facing the first end ( this is illustrated by the interface at tip portion 1ca, but generally defined by the point at which the tip portion of the input fibers is in contact with the output fiber 3 ) ; at least one first light source optically connected to one of the first input optical fibers to output laser light, the at least one first light source being a multi-mode light source (a multimode laser module is disclosed directly with respect to the excitation light sources 101 and/or 107, and Figures 4 and 9, “ optical coupler having 19 input optical fibers is shown, but if a 100 W output semiconductor laser module having a pigtail output optical fiber with a clad diameter of 125 μm is connected, the core diameter An output of 1900 W can be obtained from a multimode output optical fiber with NA 0.22 at 200 μm or 300 μm ”) ; F2020 does not disclose an optical head explicitly, but a direct diode laser outputting laser light would necessarily require some kind of collimating lens or condenser lens to make the output light controlled and useful. A skilled artisan would have found it obvious to employ an optical head as disclosed, as it would enable the claimed function of the device. F2020 discloses a cladding (Figure 5, cladding 1ac or 5ac), but not that in a cross section intersecting an axial direction of the first end, a cladding of the first input optical fiber has an extending portion extending linearly in a direction intersecting the axial direction between cores of two first input optical fibers adjacent in a circumferential direction. Stork discloses a laser processing/machining head (title, Figure 1, laser machining head 100), and an optical head optically connected to the output optical fiber (fiber 110) to output laser light output (the light from the input lasers described above would necessarily pass through an optical head and be output as laser light) , by the first light source and passing through the first input optical fiber and the output optical fiber (this is the only light in the system that passes through the optical head). F2018 discloses an optical fiber-based laser processing apparatus (Title), wherein a cladding (Figure 2, clad 21b) of a first input optical fiber (Figure 2, any of the input fibers 21 may be a first fiber) has an extending portion (Figure 3, the cladding 21b as it is in panel c) extending linearly in a direction intersecting the axial direction between cores of two first input optical fibers adjacent in a circumferential direction (Figure s 3a- 3c , show how this occurs as we approach the first end ) . Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the invention described in the invention of F2020 under the teachings of F2018 and Stork, to include an optical head for focusing laser light and a cladding structure which extends linearly while intersecting the claddings of adjacent fibers towards the first end. This may be accomplished using methods known in the art (bundling, melting, simple placement of parts), and would predictably result in a fiber bundle which is improved over that of F2020 due to the fused cladding layer by reducing gap spacing and leakage, reducing overall volume profile, and utilizing only conventional structures without altering the function of the claimed device. Regarding claim 2: F2020 in view of F2018 and further in view of Stork teaches the laser processing apparatus according to claim 1. F2020 does not teach the claddings as being welded. F2018 explicitly teaches that the claddings of two first input optical fibers adjacent in a circumferential direction are welded to each other at the extending portion (Figure 3c shows this explicitly) . Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the invention described in the rejection of claim 1 above under the teachings of F2018 to melt and integrate the adjacent circumferential fibers using known methods (applied heat, specific application of force), predictably result ing in a device where the fiber bundle is not separated by gaps at a first end, and comprises a welded cladding at the extending portions between bundled fibers, reducing crosstalk and signal loss while minimizing the cross-sectional area and thus volumetric footprint of the connected fibers. Regarding claim 3: F2020 discloses a laser processing apparatus (Figure 4, optical coupler 20 combines a plurality of input fibers 1 which convey laser light, making it part of a ‘laser processing apparatus’; Description, “ This optical coupler may be applied to fiber optic lasers and fiber optic amplifiers ”), comprising: at least two first input optical fibers that are multi-mode optical fibers (shown in Figure 4, the fibers 1a, 1b are explicitly disclosed to be multimode) ; an output optical fiber (Figure 4, output optical fiber 3) that is a multi-mode optical fiber (optical fiber 3 is explicitly multimode) ; a coupler (coupler 20) configured to optically couple a first end of a bundle portion (best seen in Figure 4) in which the at least two first input optical fibers are bundled so as to be aligned in a circumferential direction (Figure 2, Figure 5 show all embodiments of the input fiber bundle having at least two optical fibers bundled such that they are aligned along a circumference, making them aligned in a circumferential direction) , to a second end of the output optical fiber, the second end facing the first end (this is illustrated by the interface at tip portion 1ca, but generally defined by the point at which the tip portion of the input fibers is in contact with the output fiber 3) ; at least one first light source optically connected to one of the first input optical fibers to output laser light, the at least one first light source being a multi-mode light source (a multimode laser module is disclosed directly with respect to the excitation light sources 101 and/or 107, and Figures 4 and 9, “ optical coupler having 19 input optical fibers is shown, but if a 100 W output semiconductor laser module having a pigtail output optical fiber with a clad diameter of 125 μm is connected, the core diameter An output of 1900 W can be obtained from a multimode output optical fiber with NA 0.22 at 200 μm or 300 μm ”) ; F2020 does not disclose an optical head explicitly, but a direct diode laser outputting laser light would necessarily require some kind of collimating lens or condenser lens to make the output light controlled and useful. A skilled artisan would have found it obvious to employ an optical head as disclosed, as it would enable the claimed function of the device. F2020 discloses a cladding (Figure 5, cladding or 5ac), but not that in a cross section intersecting an axial direction of the first end, a boundary between a core and a cladding of the first input optical fiber in a circumferential direction has a first section and a second section with a radius of curvature smaller than a radius of curvature of the first section. Stork discloses a laser processing/machining head (title, Figure 1, laser machining head 100), and an optical head optically connected to the output optical fiber (fiber 110) to output laser light output (the light from the input lasers described above would necessarily pass through an optical head and be output as laser light) , by the first light source and passing through the first input optical fiber and the output optical fiber (this is the only light in the system that passes through the optical head). F2018 discloses an optical fiber-based laser processing apparatus (Title), wherein a boundary between a core and cladding (Figure 2, clad 21b) of a first input optical fiber (Figure 2, any of the input fibers 21 may be a first fiber) in a circumferential direction has a first section (nearest the axial center) and a second section (nearest the outer perimeter of the bundle) with a radius of curvature smaller than a radius of curvature of the first section (Figure 3, a-b, shows how this occurs as we approach the first end in a combination with F2020) . Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the invention described in the invention of F2020 under the teachings of F2018 and Stork, to include an optical head for focusing laser light and a cladding structure which results in two different radii of curvature at the first end. This may be accomplished using methods known in the art (bundling, melting, simple placement of parts), and would predictably result in a fiber bundle which is improved over that of F2020 due to the fused cladding layer by reducing gap spacing and leakage, reducing overall volume profile, and utilizing only conventional structures without altering the function of the claimed device. Regarding claim 4: F2020 in view of F2018 and further in view of Stork teaches the laser processing apparatus according to claim 3 . F2020 does not disclose a first and second section as claimed. F2018 discloses that the boundary has, as the second section, a second section located radially inside with respect to the first section and a second section located radially outside with respect to the first section (Figure 3 shows this explicitly, and is provided below with th e corresponding regions of the instant application annotated in quotes ). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the invention described in the rejection of claim 3 above under the teachings of F2018, to apply F2018’s no-gap fusion of bundled fibers to F2020’s close-packed bundle to improve interface integrity and reduce leakage. In the resulting fused, close-packed fiber bundle, the deformation of the outer fiber cross sections with regions of different local curvature at the core/cladding boundary, is the natural result of the fusion and compression of adjacent circumferential fibers, as evidenced in F2018. Regarding claim 5: F2020 in view of F2018 and further in view of Stork teaches the laser processing apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising : a plurality of first light sources configured to output laser light ( in an embodiment, direct diode laser 200 is a light source and includes a plurality of semiconductor laser modules 201; Figure 9) with a same wavelength (“ Each of the plurality of semiconductor laser modules 201 outputs laser light having a wavelength of, for example, 1070 nm ”) , as the first light source (Figure 9 shows this explicitly) . Regarding claim 7: F2020 in view of F2018 and further in view of Stork teaches the laser processing apparatus according to claim 5 . While F2020 does not explicitly state that the laser processing apparatus is configured to switch between output and output stop of laser light from each of the first light sources , on/off control of each semiconductor laser module would have been obvious to a skilled artisan. Regarding claim 8: F2020 in view of F2018 and further in view of Stork teaches the laser processing apparatus according to claim 1 , wherein the bundle portion has no optical fiber radially inside of at least two the first input optical fibers aligned in a circumferential direction . F2020 teaches: “ The number of input optical fibers is not particularly limited, but any of 3, 7, and 19 is preferable because the position stability of the input optical fibers when bundled is high. ” A configuration with 3 fibers in the bundle necessarily has no optical fiber radially inside of at least two the first input optical fibers aligned in a circumferential direction. Regarding claim 9: F2020 in view of F2018 and further in view of Stork teaches the laser processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the bundle portion has a second input optical fiber radially inside of at least two the first input optical fibers aligned in a circumferential direction (Figure 2, Figure 5 depict this explicitly) . Regarding claim 10: F2020 in view of F2018 and further in view of Stork teaches the laser processing apparatus according to claim 9, wherein the second input optical fiber has a third end aligned with the first end, facing the second end, and optically coupled to the second end at the bundle portion (Figure 2, Figure 9; in either embodiment, central fiber[s] 1a and 4a are part of input bundles whose tip is fusion-spliced to the output fiber tip, with aligned optical axes; this reads on a third end being aligned with the first end and optically coupled to the output-fiber end at the bundle portion) and the laser processing apparatus further comprises a second light source optically connected to the second input optical fiber to output laser light (each input optical fiber is connected on the proximal end side to an optical fiber carrying light from a corresponding semiconductor source/module. This covers a second light source connected to the central second input optical fiber) . Regarding claim 11: F2020 in view of F2018 and further in view of Stork teaches the laser processing apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the second input optical fiber is a multi-mode optical fiber, and the second light source is a multi-mode light source (“ The input optical fibers 1a and 1b are, for example, multimode optical fibers , ” motivating a multimode light source and making it obvious to a skilled artisan. ) Regarding claim 13: F2020 in view of F2018 and further in view of Stork teaches the laser processing apparatus according to claim 10 . F2020 does not explicitly disclose a specific beam intensity difference between light sources. Relative light source power is a result-effective variable in a multi-source system, directly impacting the output beam profile, coupling balance, and auxiliary beam function. Intensity modulation is routine in the art and the outcome beam profile, intensity, and beam function would predictably behave in a manner corresponding to the chosen intensities. A skilled artisan would have found it obvious to configure the invention of claim 10, such that power of laser light of the second light source is lower than power of laser light of the first light source , to achieve a desired output beam. Regarding claim 17: F2020 in view of F2018 and further in view of Stork teaches the laser processing apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising a third light source configured to output laser light and optically connected to the optical head, wherein the optical head includes an optical system configured to combine laser light from the first light source and laser light from the third light source (in an embodiment, direct diode laser 200 is a light source and includes a plurality of semiconductor laser modules 201; Figure 9 – the third laser light source would be an obvious modification to a skilled artisan, to add another wavelength regime during use and adding to the applicable range of the device) . Regarding claim 18: F2020 in view of F2018 and further in view of Stork teaches the laser processing apparatus according to claim 17. F2020 discloses wavelength bands in the cited range (“ For example, as a semiconductor laser device, an element that outputs laser light in each wavelength band such as infrared, visible, and blue close to the ultraviolet, such as 900 nm band, 650 nm band, and 400 nm band, can also be used as a light source. ”) F2020 does not disclose the mapping to the laser light sources explicitly, but a skilled artisan would have found it obvious to configure the laser light sources in the invention of claim 17, wherein a wavelength of laser light output by the first light source is 400 nm or more and 500 nm or less, and a wavelength of laser light output by the third light source is 800 nm or more and 1200 nm or less . This may be accomplished using routine design oversight and components known in the art, and would predictably allow the device to use known wavelength bands that were recognized as available and useful in the save fiber-delivered laser system in order to obtain a combined multi-wavelength laser output for processing. Regarding claim 19: F2020 discloses a coupler (Figure 4, optical coupler 20 combines a plurality of input fibers 1 which convey laser light, making it part of a ‘laser processing apparatus’; Description, “ This optical coupler may be applied to fiber optic lasers and fiber optic amplifiers ”) comprising: at least two first input optical fibers that are multi-mode optical fibers (Figure 2, Figure 5 show all embodiments of the input fiber bundle having at least two optical fibers bundled such that they are aligned along a circumference, making them aligned in a circumferential direction) ; and an output optical fiber that is a multi-mode optical fiber (optical fiber 3 is an output fiber, and is explicitly multimode) , (best seen in Figure 4) in which the at least two first input optical fibers are bundled so as to be aligned in a circumferential direction the coupler being configured to optically couple a first end of a bundle portion in which the at least two first input optical fibers are bundled so as to be aligned in a circumferential direction (Figure 2, Figure 5 show all embodiments of the input fiber bundle having at least two optical fibers bundled such that they are aligned along a circumference, making them aligned in a circumferential direction) , to a second end of the output optical fiber, the second end facing the first end (this is illustrated by the interface at tip portion 1ca, but generally defined by the point at which the tip portion of the input fibers is in contact with the output fiber 3). F2020 discloses a cladding (Figure 5, cladding 1ac or 5ac), but not that in a cross section intersecting an axial direction of the first end, a cladding of the first input optical fiber has an extending portion extending linearly in a direction intersecting the axial direction between cores of two first input optical fibers adjacent in a circumferential direction. F2018 discloses an optical fiber-based laser processing apparatus (Title), wherein a cladding (Figure 2, clad 21b) of a first input optical fiber (Figure 2, any of the input fibers 21 may be a first fiber) has an extending portion (Figure 3, the cladding 21b as it is in panel c) extending linearly in a direction intersecting the axial direction between cores of two first input optical fibers adjacent in a circumferential direction (Figures 3a-3c, show how this occurs as we approach the first end) . Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the invention described in the invention of F2020 under the teachings of F2018, to include a cladding structure which extends linearly with a cross section intersecting the claddings of adjacent fibers towards the first end. This may be accomplished using methods known in the art (bundling, melting, simple placement of parts), and would predictably result in a fiber bundle which is improved over that of F2020 due to the fused cladding layer by reducing gap spacing and leakage, reducing overall volume profile, and utilizing only conventional structures without altering the function of the claimed device. Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over F2020 (JP 2020183977 A) in view of F2018 (JP 2018190918 A), and further in view of Stork (US 20120188365 A1) and Stachowiak (2017, "(5+1)x1 pump and signal power combiner with 9/80 μm feed-through signal fiber", Optics and Laser Technology ) Regarding claim 16: F2020 in view of F2018 and further in view of Stork teaches the laser processing apparatus according to claim 1. F2020 does not disclose specific ratios of outer diameters. Stachowiak discloses optical fiber bundles wherein a ratio of an outer diameter of a cladding to an outer diameter of a core in an unstretched segment of the first input optical fiber that is outside the bundle portion in a free state with no external force applied is 1.04 or more and 1.25 or less (Figure 1, Introduction: “ Typically, combiners utilize MM fibers with 105/125 u m core/clad diameter ”) . Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the invention described in the rejection of claim 1 above under the teachings of Stachowiak, to configure the outer diameter of the fibers and core such that ratio of an outer diameter of a cladding to an outer diameter of a core in an unstretched segment of the first input optical fiber that is outside the bundle portion in a free state with no external force applied is 1.04 or more and 1.25 or less. This may be accomplished using routine design oversight and configuration of components for a thin cladding around the input fiber core, so that laser light can be controlled such that is follows a specific beam profile between circumferential cores and provide a desired beam-shape/intensity distribution and improved signal processing. Claim(s) 14 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over F2020 (JP 2020183977 A) in view of F2018 (JP 2018190918 A), and further in view of Stork (US 20120188365 A1) and Mitsubishi (JP 2002060238) . Regarding claim 14: F2020 in view of F2018 and further in view of Stork teaches the laser processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein F2020 teaches quartz-glass cores/claddings for input fibers. However, F2020 does not disclose OH groups explicitly. Mitsubishi discloses quartz-core optical fibers materials in which the core materials contains OH groups, including specific examples of ppm concentration of OH in the core material used (“ Therefore, the content of the OH group (simple substance) is preferably 500 ppm or less, particularly preferably 0 to 300 ppm. ”) . Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the invention described in the rejection of claim 1 above under the teachings of Mitsubishi to use known OH-containing quartz-core fiber material , wherein a core of the first input optical fiber contains OH groups. Configuring it to be at a first end would require only ordinary skill and routine design oversight for the skilled artisan, and would predictably result in a fiber which reduces loss due to the presence of OH groups in the quartz material. Regarding claim 15: F2020 in view of F2018 and further in view of Stork and Mitsubishi teaches the laser processing apparatus according to claim 14, F2020 does not teach OH group concentrations. Mitsubishi teaches an amount of OH groups in the material of optical fiber s is 10 ppm or more and 2000 ppm or less (“ Therefore, the content of the OH group (simple substance) is preferably 500 ppm or less, particularly preferably 0 to 300 ppm. ”). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the invention described in the rejection of claim 14 under the teachings of Mitsubishi to configure the OH groups to have a concentration of 10 ppm or more or 2000 ppm or less . This could be accomplished using methods known in the art, and would predictably result in an optical fiber where the core material comprises OH groups that are tuned to predictably optimize the properties of the material such that it reduces loss due to the presence of specific amounts of OH groups in the quartz material. Claim(s) 6 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over F2020 (JP 2020183977 A) in view of F2018 (JP 2018190918 A), and further in view of Stork (US 20120188365 A1) and Cooper (US 20110134519 A1) . Regarding claim 6: F2020 in view of F2018 and further in view of Stork teaches the laser processing apparatus according to claim 1. F2020 does not explicitly state that the laser processing apparatus is configured to output laser light with different wavelengths, but using a plurality of multimode fibers to transmit light of varying wavelengths is standard practice in the art and permits the end user of a device like this to probe a broader range of wavelengths. Cooper teaches that it is a known practice to use multiple radiation sources of different wavelengths and to combine those different-wavelength beams into a common multimode fiber delivery path (Paragraph 49, “ The radiation source module 202 generates and optionally conditions radiation for acceptance into a multimode fiber 208 of the radiation delivery module 204 . The example radiation source module 202 comprises a radiation source 210 emitting light of one or more wavelengths, followed by a light control and conditioning unit 212 , a light combining unit 214 and a light-coupling unit 216 . ”) Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the invention described in the rejection of claim 1 above to configure the output laser light by using a plurality of multimode fibers with light of varying wavelengths. This could be accomplished using wavelength selective optics (i.e. dichoric mirrors) and configurations of lasers known in the art, and would predictably allow the device to combine beams of different wavelengths into a multi-wavelength collimated beam onto the incident end of the multimode fiber in a general fiber-delivery context, broadening the wavelength regime of applications for the device. Regarding claim 12: F2020 in view of F2018 and further in view of Stork teaches the laser processing apparatus according to claim 10 . F2020 does not explicitly state that the laser processing apparatus is configured to output laser light with different wavelengths, but using a plurality of multimode fibers to transmit light of varying wavelengths is standard practice in the art and permits the end user of a device like this to probe a broader range of wavelengths. Cooper teaches that it is a known practice to use multiple radiation sources of different wavelengths and to combine those different-wavelength beams into a common multimode fiber delivery path (Paragraph 49, “ The radiation source module 202 generates and optionally conditions radiation for acceptance into a multimode fiber 208 of the radiation delivery module 204 . The example radiation source module 202 comprises a radiation source 210 emitting light of one or more wavelengths, followed by a light control and conditioning unit 212 , a light combining unit 214 and a light-coupling unit 216 . ”) Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the invention described in the rejection of claim 1 0 above to configure the output laser light by using a plurality of multimode fibers with light of varying wavelengths. This could be accomplished using wavelength selective optics (i.e. dichoric mirrors) and configurations of lasers known in the art, and would predictably allow the device to combine beams of different wavelengths into a multi-wavelength collimated beam onto the incident end of the multimode fiber in a general fiber-delivery context, broadening the wavelength regime of applications for the device. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT PREET B PATEL whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-2579 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Mon-Thu: 8:30 am - 6:30 pm . 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, THOMAS A HOLLWEG can be reached at 571-270-1739 . 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. /PREET B PATEL/ Examiner, Art Unit 2874 /THOMAS A HOLLWEG/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874