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 § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 7, 8, 11-14 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dallakian (US 2001/0036023 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Dallakian discloses an optical mount (Fig. 1-4, optical mount 10) for adjusting the position of an optical component (16), the optical mount (10) comprising:
a front plate (Fig. 4, plate 14) comprising a front surface (Fig. 4, 32), a back surface (Fig. 4, 34 and vertical line extending from 34), and a shaft (Fig. 4, 44), wherein the front surface (Fig. 4, 32) is configured to support the optical component (Fig. 4, 16), and the shaft (44) extends from the back surface of the front plate (see 44 is extends from the back surface of the front plate 14); and
a base (Fig. 4, plate 12) comprising a bore (Figs. 3 and 4, the sleeve 50 is disposed in the bore formed in 12; also see Fig. 3, 44 is inserted in the bore), wherein the bore is configured to receive the shaft (44) of the front plate (see Fig. 4, 44 is inserted into the front plate 14) such that the front plate (14) is configured to rotate around an axis of rotation of the front plate (para 19, “pivoting the optical element 16 about the center point” and “rotation of the mirror”; para 24, optical element 16 can be rotated about the x-axis … y-axis) that is aligned with the shaft (along the y-axis as shown in Fig. 1 and claim 1).
Regarding claim 2, the optical mount of claim 1, wherein the front surface (Fig. 4, 32) is further configured to support the optical component (16) such that an optical axis of the optical component is at an angle greater than O degrees and less than 90 degrees relative to the axis of rotation of the front plate (angle of rotation is greater than 0 and less than 90 degrees relative to the axis of the front plate 14 as shown in Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 7, the optical mount of claim 1, wherein the base (Figs. 2 and 3, plate 12) further comprises a screw (Fig. 2, 52) that is configured to cause the bore (54) to clamp on the shaft (44) and restrict movement of the shaft when tightened (para 20, a pair or screws 52 that clamp the first plate 52 onto the sleeves 50).
Regarding claim 8, the optical mount of claim 1, wherein the base (Figs. 2 and 4, plate 12) further comprises a set screw (Fig. 2, 52) that is configured to restrict movement of the shaft when tightened (para 20, a pair or screws 52 that clamp the first plate 52 onto the sleeves 50).
Regarding claim 11, the optical mount of claim 1, wherein the base (plate 12) comprises at least one curved slot (para 15, holes 18) configured to accommodate a mounting screw (para 15, fastener 22) and to enable the base to rotate around a vertical axis of rotation when the mounting screw is loose (when 22 is loose, a user can rotate the base around a vertical axis of rotation).
Regarding claim 12, a method of manufacturing an optical mount (Figs. 1-4, optical mount 10), the method comprising:
forming a front plate (Fig. 4, plate 14) comprising a front surface (Fig. 4, 32), a back surface (Fig. 4, 34 and vertical line extending from 34), and a shaft (Fig. 4, 44), wherein the front surface (Fig. 4, 32) is configured to support the optical component (Fig. 4, 16), and the shaft (44) extends from the back surface of the front plate (see 44 is extends from the back surface of the front plate 14); and
forming a base (Fig. 4, plate 12) comprising a bore (Fig. 4, the sleeve 50 is disposed in the bore; also see Fig. 3, 44 is inserted in the bore), wherein the bore is configured to receive the shaft (44) of the front plate (see Fig. 4, 44 is inserted into the front plate 14) such that the front plate (14) is configured to rotate around an axis of rotation of the front plate (para 19, “pivoting the optical element 16 about the center point” and “rotation of the mirror”; para 24, optical element 16 can be rotated about the x-axis … y-axis) that is aligned with the shaft (along the y-axis as shown in Fig, 1 and claim 1).
Regarding claim 13, the method of manufacturing of claim 12, further comprising:
forming the front plate (Fig. 3, 14) such that the front plate is monolithic (single piece); and
forming the base (Fig. 3, 12) such that the base is monolithic (single piece).
Regarding claim 14, the method of manufacturing of claim 13, wherein the front plate (14) is formed of aluminum (para 21).
Regarding claim 19, the method of manufacturing of claim 12, wherein forming the front plate (14) further comprises forming the front plate to support the optical component (16) such that an optical axis of the optical component is at an angle greater than 0 degrees and less than 90 degrees relative to the axis of rotation of the front plate (angle of rotation is greater than 0 and less than 90 degrees relative to the axis of the front plate 14 as shown in Fig. 4).
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dallakian.
Dallakian disclose the claimed invention as set forth above except for wherein the optical axis of the optical component is at an angle greater than 25 degrees and less than 65 degrees relative to the axis of rotation of the front plate. Figure 4 shows angle that is about 25 degrees, but silent on the angle greater than 25 degrees and less than 65 degrees relative to the axis of rotation of the front plate (14).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention before the effective filing date to choose the angle greater than 25 degrees and less than 65 degrees relative to the axis of rotation of the front plate, 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, as being motivated to not introduce a spatial phase shift in the reflected light. Also, excessive rotation can cause the mirror edge to hit the mount, leading to chipping, cracking or misalignment.
Claim 10 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dallakian in view of Szarmes (US 7,532,649 B1).
Dallakian discloses the front surface (Fig. 4, 32) is configured to support the optical component (16) such that an optical axis of the optical component is offset from the axis of rotation (when rotated as shown in Fig. 4) except the front plate further comprises a clear aperture aligned with the optical axis and configured to transmit light through the front plate.
Szarmes discloses the front plate further comprises a clear aperture aligned with the optical axis and configured to transmit light through the front plate (column 6, lines 4-7).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention before the effective filing date to have the front plate further comprising a clear aperture aligned with the optical axis and configured to transmit light through the front plate for the purpose of reducing any beam loss.
Claims 15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dallakian in view of Morrow (US 2008/0101430 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Dallakian discloses the claimed invention as set forth above except for the front plate is formed of heat- treated stainless steel.
Morrow discloses a plate that is formed of heat-treated stainless steel (para 64, mirror mount 100 is heat-treated stainless steel).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention before the effective filing date to make the plate with heat-treated stainless steel for the purpose of obtaining corrosion resistance.
Regarding claim 17, Dallakian in view of Morrow discloses the claimed invention as set forth above except for the front plate is formed of heat- treated stainless steel with a thermal expansion coefficient less than 18x10-6/K. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention before the effective filing date to make the front plate that is formed of heat- treated stainless steel with a thermal expansion coefficient less than 18x10-6/K because it provides best balance of low CTE, high stiffness, corrosion resistance and cost.
Claims 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dallakian in view of Heim (US 2004/0009835 A1).
Dallakian discloses the claimed invention as set forth above except for the front plate is formed titanium (para 10).
Heim discloses a plate that is formed of heat-treated stainless steel (para 10).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention before the effective filing date to make the plate with titanium for the purpose of obtaining corrosion resistance and light device.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gross (US4880301A) in view of Parker (US20060197001A1).
Gross teaches a method for adjusting the position of an optical component that is supported by an optical mount, the optical mount comprising a front plate (14, Fig. 1), and a base (24, Fig.1) configured to support the front plate, the method comprising:
adjusting a vertical angle (angle with plan 17 which is perpendicular to Z axis) of an optical axis (Z axis) of the optical component, relative to an axis of rotation of the front plate, by rotating the front plate relative to the base (mirror 12 is supported by adapter 14 at an angle relative to the z axis, as best shown in FIGS. 2 and 6. The cylindrical mirror 12 includes an operative surface 15 which makes an angle with a plane 17 which is perpendicular to the Z axis. The angle which surface 15 makes with plane 17 is designated α (see FIG. 6), and this angle can be a very small angle, for example one degree, when fine resolution is desired. A feature of the present invention is that the resolution of the mount 10 can be changed by using an adapter 14 which supports mirror 12 at a different angle, and thus, surface 15 will form a different angle with plane 17).
Gross does not teaches adjusting a horizontal angle of the optical axis of the optical component, relative to an axis of rotation of the base, by rotating the base.
However, Parker (US20060197001A1) teaches adjusting a horizontal angle of the optical axis of the optical component, relative to an axis of rotation of the base, by rotating the base (170, 190, Fig. 1) ([0012] The fulcrum of the support-base tilting-joint, on the other hand, is horizontal but can be rotated to any direction by varying its position via the panning-joint. Together, the support-base tilting-joint, panning-joint, and head tilting-joint allow the user a great deal of flexibility in choosing a position and angle for the camera. Since the base with head tilting-joint can rotate to any direction, it is able to adjust a horizontal angle of the optical axis of the optical component).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Gross to adjusting a horizontal angle of the optical axis of the optical component, relative to an axis of rotation of the base, by rotating the base, as taught by Parker, in order to provide the flexibility in choosing a position and angle for the optical device [0012] .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6 and 9 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 a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 4-6, claims are allowable at least for the reason that the prior art does not teach or reasonably suggest the base being configured to horizontally adjust the optical axis by rotating the base as set forth in the claimed combination;
Regarding claim 9, claim is allowable at least for the reason that the prior art does not teach or reasonably suggest the optical mount of further comprising: an adjustment screw set disposed in the base, the adjustment screw set comprising an adjustment screw and a threaded bushing; a first notch, formed in the shaft of the front plate, configured to receive the adjustment screw such that the adjustment screw contacts the first notch to cause the front plate to rotate when tightened; and a second notch, opposing the first notch, configured to receive a spring, such that the spring is compressed between the second notch and the base when the adjustment screw is tightened as set forth in the claimed combination.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EUNCHA P CHERRY whose telephone number is (571)272-2310. The examiner can normally be reached M to F 7am to 3:30pm.
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, Pinping Sun can be reached at (571) 270-1284. 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.
11/13/2025
/EUNCHA P CHERRY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872