DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-9, filed December 23, 2025, with respect to double patenting of claims 20-26 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The double patenting rejection of claims 20-26 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-9, filed December 23, 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claims 1 and 19 under U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. A new ground(s) of rejection is necessitated by the amendment. The deficiencies of Schwindt are now met by Quan. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 19 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 7, 17-18 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwindt as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Quan et al. CN 114018290 A (hereinafter referred to as Quan).
Regarding claim 1, Schwindt discloses an atomic magnetometer (fig. 1, elm. 10, col. 7, ln.66-67) comprising: a pump laser (fig. 1, laser 20, col. 8, ln. 17-18); a probe laser (fig. 1, laser 30, col. 9, ln. 38); an atomic vapor cell (fig. 1, vapor cell 12, col. 7, ln. 66-67); a field coil (fig. 1, coils 48, col. 10, ln. 53-54); and a detector (fig. 1, photodetectors 40, col. 10, ln. 33-34); wherein the pump laser is configured to generate light pulses (fig. 1, pump light beam 18, col. 8, ln. 17-18) into the atomic vapor cell along a pump axis (clm., 1, 2); the field coil is configured to generate a magnetic field parallel to the pump axis (col. 16, ln. 1-2); the probe laser is configured to generate a probe light (fig. 1, probe light beam 28, col. 9, ln. 38) into the atomic vapor cell; and the detector is configured to detect a signal from the atomic vapor cell (col. 7, ln. 54-60).
Schwindt does not disclose field coil is configured to generate a pulsed magnetic field that has a component parallel to the pump axis.
Quan disclose field coil is configured to generate a pulsed magnetic field that has a component parallel to the pump axis (fig. 1, applying a pulse magnetic field on the x-axis or y-axis to induce atom self-rotating movement, the magnetic field direction is parallel to the pumping laser, Contents of the Invention, par. 3, stp. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply a pulse magnetic field on an x-axis or y-axis, as taught in Quan in modifying the apparatus of Schwindt. The motivation would be to enables accurate orthogonal alignment of pumping laser and detecting laser. (see Quan: abs.).
Regarding claim 2, Schwindt and Quan discloses the magnetometer of claim 1, Schwindt discloses wherein the pump laser is pulsed on one or more times during a pumping phase and switched off during a probing phase (col. 5, ln. 1-6).
Regarding claim 4, Schwindt and Quan discloses the magnetometer of claim 1, Schwindt discloses wherein the field coil is attached to a surface of the atomic vapor cell (see fig. 1, col. 10, ln. 54-56).
Regarding claim 7, Schwindt and Quan discloses the magnetometer of claim 1, Schwindt discloses wherein the magnetometer has a sensor geometry that is long on one axis and with the pumping axis perpendicular to the long axis (col. 2, ln. 1-6) and wherein the sensor geometry can be rotated along its long axis to reorient the pumping axis (col. 10, ln. 11-19).
Regarding claim 17, Schwindt and Quan discloses the magnetometer of claim 1, Schwindt discloses wherein the pump and probe lasers are arranged such that light beams from the pump laser and probe laser overlap (col. 3, ln. 64-67).
Regarding claim 18, Schwindt and Quan discloses the magnetometer of claim 17, Schwindt discloses further comprising a quarter waveplate (fig. 1, waveplate 26, col. 8, ln. 29-34) configured to affect polarization states of the light beams from the pump and probe lasers (col. 7, ln. 48-53).
Regarding claim 28, Schwindt and Quan discloses the magnetometer of claim 17, Schwindt discloses wherein during pumping in the magnetometer (fig. 1, elm. 10, col. 7, ln. 66-67) the pulsed magnetic field that has the component parallel to the pump axis is generated by the field coil to aid the pumping, such that a background magnetic field of the atomic vapor cell is increased (col. 14, pg. 6-11, col. 15, ln. 64-col. 16, ln. 19).
Claim(s) 3 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwindt in view of Quan as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Gerginov US 2022/0091200 A1.
Regarding claim 3, Schwindt and Quan discloses the magnetometer of claim 1, Schwindt and Quan do not disclose wherein the field coil is pulsed on during the pumping phase and switched off during the probing phase off.
Gerginov disclose wherein the field coil is pulsed on during the pumping phase and switched off during the probing phase off (par. [0048]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide optically pumped magnetometers operating in a nonzero DC bias magnetic field, as taught in Gerginov in modifying the apparatus of Schwindt and Quan. The motivation would be increases the degree of atomic polarization in optically-pumped magnetometers based on zeroing the bias field during the optical pumping process (see Gerginov: pg. [0007]).
Regarding claim 6, Schwindt and Quan discloses the magnetometer of claim 2, Schwindt and Quan do not disclose wherein the pump laser pulsed on duration is longer than the Larmor precession period of the atomic vapor but shorter than the detection period.
Gerginov discloses wherein the pump laser pulsed on duration is longer than the Larmor precession period of the atomic vapor (par. [0056]) but shorter than the detection (fig. 3, par. [0059]).
The references are combined for the same reason already applied in the rejection of claim 3.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwindt in view of Quan as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Liberman et al. US 5,670,914 A (hereinafter referred to as Liberman).
Regarding claim 5, Schwindt and Quan discloses the magnetometer of claim 1, Schwindt and Quan do not disclose wherein the field coil contributes to heating of the atomic vapor cell.
Liberman discloses wherein the field coil (fig. 1, elm. 67, col. 4, ln. 58) contributes to heating (col. 2, ln. 44-50) of the atomic vapor cell (fig. 1, elm. 7, col. 3, ln. 63).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to wind C-field coil on the thermal insulation just inside the magnetic shield, as taught in Liberman in modifying the apparatus of Schwindt and Quan. The motivation would be to reduce heat loss by conduction (see Liberman: abs.).
Claim(s) 9-12 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwindt in view of Quan as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Leger US 5,436,561 A.
Regarding claim 9, Schwindt and Quan discloses the magnetometer of claim 1, Schwindt and Quan do not disclose wherein the pump laser is tuned by temperature with a heater designed to reach the correct pump wavelength at a temperature above the ambient operating temperature.
Leger discloses wherein the pump laser (fig. 4, elm. 30, abs.) is tuned by temperature with a heater (fig. 4, elm. 52, col 5, ln. 36-37) designed to reach the correct pump wavelength at a temperature above the ambient operating temperature (col 5, ln. 34-40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a thermoregulated chamber with a heating coil, as taught in Leger in modifying the apparatus of Schwindt and Quan. The motivation would be to control the wavelength emitted by the laser. (see Leger: col. 5, ln. 23-40).
Regarding claim 10, Schwindt, Quan and Leger discloses the magnetometer of claim 9, Leger discloses wherein the pump laser is configured to generate light with wavelength selected by an internal grating tuned by temperature( clm. 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a laser includes crystal or fiber ensuring whose length is modulated to provide both a wavelength and amplitude control, as taught in Leger in modifying the apparatus of Schwindt. The motivation would be wavelength selection means by controlling the temperature of the laser crystal. (see Leger: col. 3, ln. 50-53).
Regarding claim 11, Schwindt, Quan and Leger discloses the magnetometer of claim 9, Leger discloses wherein the pump laser (fig. 4, elm. 30, abs.) is configured to generate light with wavelength selected by an external grating tuned by temperature (fig. 3, elm. 44, col. 5, ln. 16-22).
The references are combined for the same reason already applied in the rejection of claim 9.
Regarding claim 12, Schwindt and Quan discloses the magnetometer of claim 1, Schwindt and Quan do not disclose wherein the pump laser comprises a wavelength-selective element configured to operate at a designated wavelength at the same temperature.
Leger discloses wherein the pump laser (fig. 2, elm. 30, abs.) comprises a wavelength-selective element (fig. 2, elm. 32, col. 5, ln. 2-15) configured to operate at a designated wavelength at the same temperature (fig. 4, col 5, ln. 34-40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a laser includes crystal or fiber ensuring whose length is modulated to provide both a wavelength and amplitude control, as taught in Leger in modifying the apparatus of Schwindt and Quan. The motivation would be wavelength selection means by controlling the temperature of the laser crystal. (see Leger: col. 3, ln. 50-53).
Regarding claim 16, Schwindt, Quan and Leger discloses the magnetometer of claim 12, Leger discloses wherein the wavelength-selective element is a grating (fig. 3, elm. 44, col. 5, ln. 16-22).
The references are combined for the same reason already applied in the rejection of claim 12.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwindt in view of Quan as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hahn et al. US 2017/0343621 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Hahn).
Regarding claim 13, Schwindt and Quan discloses the magnetometer of claim 1, Schwindt and Quan do not disclose wherein the pump laser is pulsed by a pulse driver internal to a magnetometer package.
Hahn discloses wherein the pump laser (fig. 26, elm. 2610, par. [0123]) is pulsed by a pulse driver (fig. 26, elm. 2630, par. [0124]) internal to a magnetometer package (fig. 26, elm. 2500, par. [0123]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide magnetometer that includes an excitation source, a magneto-optical defect center element, a collection device, a top plate, a bottom plate, and a printed circuit board, as taught in Hahn in modifying the apparatus of Schwindt and Quan. The motivation would be to ensures that electrical contact etchings on the PCB can be used to electrically couple a corresponding circuitry to each corresponding component, thus eliminating unnecessary connections and/or wiring between components. (see Hahn: par. [0070]).
Claim(s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwindt in view of Quan in view of Hahn as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Zheng CN 209133839 U.
Regarding claim 14, Schwindt, Quan and Hahn discloses the magnetometer of claim 13, Schwindt, Quan and Hahn do not explicitly disclose wherein the pulse driver is made with substantially non-magnetic components.
Zheng discloses wherein the pulse driver (fig. 1, semiconductor laser pump power, 2nd par.) is made with substantially non-magnetic components (fig. 2, non-magnetic elements, 4th par. ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a semiconductor laser pump power provided by the utility model of the storage capacitor connected in series with an external laser, charging channel in parallel at the two ends of the laser, so it only uses two leads that can be connected with the constant-current charge unit as taught in Zheng in modifying the apparatus of Schwindt, Quan and Hahn. The motivation would be to reduce the complexity of system and improves reliability and reduces the production cost. (see Zheng: abs.).
Regarding claim 15, Schwindt, Quan and Hahn discloses the magnetometer of claim 13, Schwindt, Quan and Hahn do not explicitly disclose wherein the pulse driver contains a capacitor that is charged only during specific periods.
Zheng discloses wherein the pulse driver (fig. 1, laser pump power) contains a capacitor (fig. 1, elm. 6, 2nd par.) that is charged only during specific periods (2nd par.) .
The references are combined for the same reason already applied in the rejection of claim 14.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwindt in view of Quan in view of Gerginov.
Regarding claim 19, Schwindt discloses a method of operating a magnetometer comprising: providing an atomic magnetometer (fig. 1, elm. 10, col. 7, ln.66-67) that comprises a pump laser (fig. 1, laser 20, col. 8, ln. 17-18); a probe laser (fig. 1, laser 30, col. 9, ln. 38); an atomic vapor cell (fig. 1, vapor cell 12, col. 7, ln. 66-67); a field coil (fig. 1, coils 48, col. 10, ln. 53-54); and a detector (fig. 1, photodetectors 40, col. 10, ln. 33-34); wherein the pump laser is configured to generate light pulses (fig. 1, pump light beam 18, col. 8, ln. 17-18) into the atomic vapor cell along a pump axis (clm., 1, 2); the field coil is configured to generate a magnetic field parallel to the pump axis (col. 16, ln. 1-2); the probe laser is configured to generate a probe light (fig. 1, probe light beam 28, col. 9, ln. 38) into the atomic vapor cell; and the detector is configured to detect a signal (optical rotation of a linearly polarized probe light beam, col. 10, ln. 17-19) from the atomic vapor cell; providing a probe light (fig. 1, probe light beam 28, col. 9, ln. 38) to the atomic vapor cell using the probe laser (fig. 1, laser 30, col. 9, ln. 38) during a detection phase; and detecting a signal (signal 42, col. 10, ln. 36-38) from the atomic vapor cell using the detector.
Schwindt does not disclose field coil is configured to generate a pulsed magnetic field that has a component parallel to the pump axis; optically pumping the atomic vapor cell along the pump axis using the pulsed laser during a pumping phase with a pulse duration shorter than the Larmor period of the atoms in the atomic vapor cell; providing a probe light to the atomic vapor cell using the probe laser during a detection phase; and detecting a signal from the atomic vapor cell using the detector.
Quan disclose field coil is configured to generate a pulsed magnetic field that has a component parallel to the pump axis (fig. 1, applying a pulse magnetic field on the x-axis or y-axis to induce atom self-rotating movement, the magnetic field direction is parallel to the pumping laser, Contents of the Invention, par. 3, stp. 2).
The references are combined for the same reason already applied in the rejection of claim 1.
Gerginov discloses optically pumping the atomic vapor cell (fig. 19, vapor cell 1902, par. [0087]) along the pump axis using the pulsed laser during a pumping phase with a pulse duration shorter than the Larmor period of the atoms (par. [0070]) in the atomic vapor cell;
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide optically pumped magnetometers operating in a nonzero DC bias magnetic field, as taught in Gerginov in modifying the apparatus of Schwindt. The motivation would be increases the degree of atomic polarization in optically-pumped magnetometers based on zeroing the bias field during the optical pumping process (see Gerginov: pg. [0007]).
Claim(s) 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwindt in view of Quan as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Louis et al. US 3,133,243 A (hereinafter referred to as Louis).
Regarding claim 27, Schwindt and Quan discloses the magnetometer of claim 1, Schwindt and Quan do not disclose wherein the magnetic field coil is configured to be turned off faster than a Larmor precession period of a gas in one of the at least one atomic vapor cell.
Louis discloses wherein the magnetic field coil (fig. 1, elm. 6, col. 6, ln. 42-50)is configured to be turned off (fig. 1, switching device A, col. 6, ln. 49-55) faster than a Larmor precession period of a gas in one of the at least one atomic vapor cell (col. 5, ln. 30-41).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to determine the free precession frequency of a system of atomic nuclei, in the magnetic field to be measured, this frequency being, as taught in Louis in modifying the apparatus of Schwindt and Quan. The motivation would be to accurate measure of weak magnetic fields. (see Louis: col. 1, ln. 10-20).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COURTNEY G MCDONNOUGH whose telephone number is (571)272-6552. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 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, EMAN ALKAFAWI can be reached at (571) 272-4448. 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.
/COURTNEY G MCDONNOUGH/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/EMAN A ALKAFAWI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858
4/8/2026
Prosecution Insights