DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This office action is in response to the amendment filed 4/15/2026.
Continued Examination
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 5/4/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Osamu et al (JP H0697047, English translation attached).
Regarding Claim 1, Osamu teaches an optical system (abstract; fig. 5) comprising:
a first lens including a first surface and a second surface opposite to the first surface and having a first focal length (fig. 5, 2-- optical integrator; ¶[0086], line 1-3, the optical integrator 2 consists of, for example, an assembly of multiple lens elements);
a second lens including a third surface and a fourth surface opposite to the third surface and having a second focal length (fig. 5, 4—reimaging optical system; fig. 8, 43; ¶[0100], line 1-7, the re-imaging optical system 4 is composed of two refractive lenses); and
a curved mirror (fig. 5, 3) disposed on a traveling path of a first laser beam passing through the first lens and changing the traveling path of the first laser beam to enter the second lens by reflecting the first laser beam (fig. 5, 1, 2, 3, 4; ¶[0084], line 1-11, the illumination optical system consists of a light source means having a light source
1 such as a laser and an optical integrator 2, and a focusing optical system that focuses the light beam from the optical integrator 2. Furthermore, this light-gathering optical system includes a special reflecting mirror 3 and a reimaging optical system 4);
wherein the curved mirror includes a fifth surface and a sixth surface opposite to the fifth surface (fig. 5, 3; fig. 1 3), and
each of the fifth surface of the curved mirror, which reflects the first laser beam (fig. 1, 3—reflecting surface of 3), and the sixth surface of the curved mirror has a concave curved shape in a direction away from the first lens and the second lens (fig. 1, 3—back surface of 3), and a curvature of the fifth surface is the same as a curvature of the sixth surface (fig. 1, 3; fig. 5 3).
Regarding Claim 12, Osamu teaches a laser device (abstract; fig. 5) comprising:
a beam generator that emits a first laser beam (fig. 5, 1; ¶[0084], line 1-11, the illumination optical system consists of a light source means having a light source 1 such as a laser and an optical integrator 2...); and
an optical system comprising:
a first lens including a first surface and a second surface opposite to the first surface and having a first focal length (fig. 5, 2-- optical integrator; ¶[0086], line 1-3, the optical integrator 2 consists of, for example, an assembly of multiple lens elements);
a second lens including a third surface and a fourth surface opposite to the third surface and having a second focal length (fig. 5, 4—reimaging optical system; fig. 8, 43; ¶[0100], line 1-7, the re-imaging optical system 4 is composed of two refractive lenses); and
a curved mirror (fig. 5, 3) disposed on a traveling path of the first laser beam passing through the first lens and changing the traveling path of the first laser beam to enter the second lens by reflecting the first laser beam (fig. 5, 1, 2, 3, 4; ¶[0084], line 1-11, the illumination optical system consists of a light source means having a light source 1 such as a laser and an optical integrator 2, and a focusing optical system that focuses the light beam from the optical integrator 2. Furthermore, this light-gathering optical system includes a special reflecting mirror 3 and a reimaging optical system 4);
wherein the curved mirror includes a fifth surface and a sixth surface opposite to the fifth surface (fig. 5, 3; fig. 1 3),
each of the fifth surface of the curved mirror, which reflects the first laser beam (fig. 1, 3—reflecting surface of 3), and the sixth surface of the curved mirror has a concave curved shape in a direction away from the first lens and the second lens (fig. 1, 3—back surface of 3), and a curvature of the fifth surface is the same as a curvature of the sixth surface (fig. 1, 3; fig. 5 3).
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 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-4, 8-9, 11-13 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheldakova et al, “Stacked-actuators deformable mirror vs bimorph mirror for laser beam shaping”; Proc. of SPIE Vol. 10904, 3/21/2019, p109041K-1 to p109041K-8, in a view of Osamu et al (JP H0697047, English translation attached).
Regarding Claim 1, Sheldakova teaches an optical system (abstract; fig. 1) comprising:
a first lens including a first surface and a second surface opposite to the first surface and having a first focal length (fig. 1, collimator with diode laser; -- collimating lens integrated with diode laser);
a second lens including a third surface and a fourth surface opposite to the third surface and having a second focal length (fig. 1, focusing lens); and
a curved mirror (fig. 1, deformable mirror; table 1 and table 2, Deformation range; Mirror deformation range; page 109041K-3, line 1-5, control for the general curvature of the mirror) disposed on a traveling path of a first laser beam passing through the first lens and changing the traveling path of the first laser beam to enter the second lens by reflecting the first laser beam (fig, 1, collimator, deformable mirror, focusing lens),
wherein the curved mirror includes a fifth surface and a sixth surface opposite to the fifth surface (fig. 1, deformable mirror).
But Sheldakova does not specifically disclose that wherein each of the fifth surface of the curved mirror, which reflects the first laser beam, and the sixth surface of the curved mirror has a concave curved shape in a direction away from the first lens and the second lens, and a curvature of the fifth surface is the same as a curvature of the sixth surface.
However, Osamu teaches an optical system (abstract; fig. 5), wherein each of the fifth surface of the curved mirror, which reflects the first laser beam (fig. 1, 3--reflecting surface of 3), and the sixth surface of the curved mirror has a concave curved shape in a direction away from the first lens and the second lens (fig. 1, 3—back surface of 3), and a curvature of the fifth surface is the same as a curvature of the sixth surface (fig. 1, 3; fig. 5 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical system of Sheldakova by the optical system of Osamu for a purpose of lighting optical system with a uniform illumination and high lighting efficiency (abstract, line 1-14).
Regarding Claim 2, Sheldakova - Osamu combination teaches the optical system of claim 1, wherein,
a focal point of the first lens toward the curved mirror is a first focal point (--lens inherently has two focus points (front/back focus points); fig.1, focal point of collimator; --for collimation, fiber diode laser should at a focal point of the collimator, so focal length of the collimator may be about equal to a length of “Diode laser and collimator“, as disclosed in Sheldakova) and a focal point of the second lens toward the curved mirror is a second focal point (fig. 1, focal point of focusing lens, as disclosed in Sheldakova),
the first focal point is between the first lens and the curved mirror (fig. 1, collimator, deformable mirror; --back focal point of collimator is between the collimator and the deformable mirror, as disclosed in Sheldakova), and
the second focal point is between the curved mirror and the second lens (fig. 1, focusing lens; --front focal point of focusing lens is between the focusing lens and the deformable mirror, as disclosed in Sheldakova).
Regarding Claim 3, Sheldakova - Osamu combination teaches the optical system of claim 2, wherein the first focal length is smaller than the second focal length (fig. 1, collimator, focusing lens; --see above, focal length of the collimator may be about equal to a length of “Diode laser and collimator“, as disclosed in Sheldakova).
Regarding Claim 4, Sheldakova - Osamu combination teaches the optical system of claim 3, wherein magnification between the first lens and the curved mirror is greater than or equal to about 1.2 and less than or equal to about 1.6, and the magnification is defined as a value obtained by dividing the second focal length by the first focal length (fig. 1, collimator, focusing lens; --fig. 1 shows that focal length of focusing lens divided by the length of “Diode laser and collimator“, is about 1.5, as disclosed in Sheldakova).
Regarding Claim 8, Sheldakova - Osamu combination teaches the optical system of claim 7, wherein a radius of curvature of the curved mirror is greater than or equal to about 500 millimeters and less than or equal to about 1500 millimeters (fig. 1, 3;--reflecting surface of concave mirror 3, as disclosed in Osamu; the concave curved surface may have a radius of curvature in a range of 500 mm to 1500 mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A. 1955)).
Regarding Claim 9, Sheldakova - Osamu combination teaches that the optical system of claim 1, wherein an optical axis of the first lens and an optical axis of the second lens are perpendicular to each (fig. 5, 2, 3, 4; --light paths 2-3 and 3-4, as disclosed in Osamu).
Regarding Claim 11, Sheldakova - Osamu combination teaches the optical system of claim 1, wherein each of the first lens and the second lens is a telecentric lens (¶[0018], line 1-11, the telecentricity is maintained; a telecentric projection optical system is provided…; fig. 5, 2; --see light beam out of 2; fig. 8, 43; --see light beam after lens 43, as disclosed in Osamu).
Regarding Claim 12, Sheldakova teaches a laser device (abstract; fig. 1) comprising:
a beam generator that emits a first laser beam (fig. 1, diode laser); and
an optical system comprising:
a first lens including a first surface and a second surface opposite to the first surface and having a first focal length (fig. 1, collimator with diode laser; -- collimating lens integrated with diode laser);
a second lens including a third surface and a fourth surface opposite to the third surface and having a second focal length (fig. 1, focusing lens); and
a curved mirror (fig. 1, deformable mirror; table 1 and table 2, Deformation range; Mirror deformation range; page 109041K-3, line 1-5, control for the general curvature of the mirror) disposed on a traveling path of the first laser beam passing through the first lens and changing the traveling path of the first laser beam to enter the second lens by reflecting the first laser beam (fig, 1, collimator, deformable mirror, focusing lens),
wherein the curved mirror includes a fifth surface and a sixth surface opposite to the fifth surface (fig. 1, deformable mirror).
But Sheldakova does not specifically disclose that wherein each of the fifth surface of the curved mirror, which reflects the first laser beam, and the sixth surface of the curved mirror has a concave curved shape in a direction away from the first lens and the second lens, and a curvature of the fifth surface is the same as a curvature of the sixth surface.
However, Osamu teaches an optical system (abstract; fig. 5), wherein each of the fifth surface of the curved mirror, which reflects the first laser beam (fig. 1, 3--reflecting surface of 3), and the sixth surface of the curved mirror has a concave curved shape in a direction away from the first lens and the second lens (fig. 1, 3--back surface of 3), and a curvature of the fifth surface is the same as a curvature of the sixth surface (fig. 1, 3; fig. 5 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical system of Sheldakova by the optical system of Osamu for a purpose of lighting optical system with a uniform illumination and high lighting efficiency (abstract, line 1-14).
Regarding Claim 13, Sheldakova - Osamu combination teaches the laser device of claim 12, wherein,
magnification between the first lens and the curved mirror is greater than or equal to about 1.2 and less than or equal to about 1.6, and
the magnification is defined as a value obtained by dividing the second focal length by the first focal length (fig. 1, collimator, focusing lens; fig. 1 shows that focal length of focusing lens divided by the length of “Diode laser and collimator“, is about 1.5; --for collimation, fiber diode laser should at a focal point of the collimator, so focal length of the collimator may be about equal to a length of “Diode laser and collimator“, as disclosed in Sheldakova).
Regarding Claim 17, Sheldakova - Osamu combination teaches the optical system of claim 16, wherein a radius of curvature of the curved mirror is greater than or equal to about 500 millimeters and less than or equal to about 1500 millimeters (fig. 1, 3, -- reflecting surface of concave mirror 3, as disclosed in Osamu; the concave curved surface may have a radius of curvature in a range of 500 mm to 1500 mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A. 1955)).
Regarding Claim 18, Sheldakova - Osamu combination teaches the optical system of claim 12, wherein an optical axis of the first lens and an optical axis of the second lens are perpendicular to each (fig. 5, 2, 3, 4; --light paths 2-3 and 3-4, as disclosed in Osamu).
Regarding Claim 19, Sheldakova - Osamu combination teaches the laser device of claim 18, wherein each of the first lens and the second lens is a telecentric lens (¶[0018], line 1-11, the telecentricity is maintained; a telecentric projection optical system is provided…; fig. 5, 2; --see light beam out of 2; fig. 8, 43; -- see light beam after lens 43, as disclosed in Osamu).
Claims 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheldakova et al, “Stacked-actuators deformable mirror vs bimorph mirror for laser beam shaping”; Proc. of SPIE Vol. 10904, 3/21/2019, p109041K-1 to p109041K-8, in a view of Osamu et al (JP H0697047), further in a view of Miura (US 6084842).
Regarding Claim 10, Sheldakova - Osamu combination teaches discloses as set forth above but does not specifically disclose that the optical system of claim 1, wherein, the second surface of the first lens and the third surface of the second lens are adjacent to the curved mirror, the first surface has a convex curved shape in a direction from the first surface of the first lens toward the second surface, and the fourth surface has a convex curved shape in a direction from the fourth surface of the second lens toward the third surface.
However, Miura teaches an optical system (abstract; figs. 1-3), wherein
the second surface of the first lens and the third surface of the second lens are adjacent to the curved mirror (fig. 1A, C, 10, 11),
the first surface has a convex curved shape in a direction from the first surface of the first lens toward the second surface (fig. 1A, C), and
the fourth surface has a convex curved shape in a direction from the fourth surface of the second lens toward the third surface (fig. 1A, 11).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical system of Sheldakova - Osamu combination by the optical system of Miura for a purpose of providing of a concave surface having a curvature to reduce a divergence angle of the incident light beam after a reflection thereat (col. 3, line 66—col. 4, line 2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6 and 14-15 are 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.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for the allowable subject matter: The prior art taken singularly or in combination fails to anticipate or fairly suggest the limitations of the claims, in such a manner that a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103 would be proper.
In regard to claims 5 and 14, the prior art taken either singly or in combination fails to anticipate or fairly suggest an optical system further comprising wherein the second lens is spaced apart from the curved mirror by a sum of the first focal length and the second focal length as cited.
Claim 6 and 15 are also allowable as they depending on claim 5 and 14 respectively.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current new rejections.
Examiner’s Note
Regarding the references, the Examiner cites particular figures, paragraphs, columns and line numbers in the reference(s), as applied to the claims above. Although the particular citations are representative teachings and are applied to specific limitations within the claims, other passages, internally cited references, and figures may also apply. In preparing a response, it is respectfully requested that the Applicant fully consider the references, in their entirety, as potentially disclosing or teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as fully consider the context of the passage as taught by the reference(s) or as disclosed by the Examiner.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to Jie Lei whose telephone number is (571) 272 7231. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon.-Thurs. 8:00 am to 5:30 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by the telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Thomas Pham can be reached on (571) 272 3689.The Fax number for the organization where this application is assigned is (571) 273 8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published application 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 Services Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199(In USA or Canada) or 571-272-1000.
/JIE LEI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights