DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is responsive to the application filed on September 08, 2023. Claims 1-8-27 are pending. Claims 1-7 are canceled by the reply of July 08, 2026 and New Claims 21-27 have been added.
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 .
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 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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election without traverse of Invention Group II (Claims 8-20) in the reply filed on July 08, 2026 is acknowledged. New Claims 21-27 are examined along with Group II.
Prior Art Relied Upon
This action references the following issued US Patents and/or Patent Application Publications:
US PATENT or PUBLICATION NUMBER
HEREINAFTER
US-20220123517-A1
“LOWDER”
US-20200284986-A1
“FAULHABER”
US-11211765-B2
“KANSKAR”
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 8, 10-16, 18-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LOWDER in view of FAULHABER.
PNG
media_image1.png
1204
842
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re Independent Claim 8, LOWDER teaches an optical system [optical system of Figure 5] (see Figures 4-5 and ¶¶0044-0052), comprising:
multiple laser sources (¶¶0048-0051), that are configured to generate multiple lasers associated with different wavelengths (¶¶0031, 0047, 0049-0051);
a signal combiner 325 configured to combine the multiple lasers associated with the different wavelengths into broadband laser light (¶0052; see also ¶¶0041-0042);
a process cable 330 configured to transmit the broadband laser light (¶0052; see also ¶0043); and
a process head 350 configured to receive the broadband laser light transmitted by the process cable (¶0051) and to convey the broadband laser light onto a workpiece (¶¶0003, 0012, 0023, 0046).
LOWDER further teaches the optical system is usable in applications where the broadband laser light is focusable (¶0036) directed onto a workpiece, such as materials processing (see e.g., ¶¶0003, 0012, 0023, 0046). However, LOWDER fails to expressly teach the process head focuses light on the workpiece (though implicit).
FAULHABER teaches a process head 106 configured to receive and focus broadband laser light onto a workpiece (¶¶0020-0026, 0046-0051) such as by using a changeable focusing lens 504. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the process head so it is configured to receive the broadband laser light transmitted by the process cable and to focus the broadband laser light onto a workpiece, in order to accommodate multiple laser sources or a single laser source in a manner that facilitates desired beam characteristics (FAULHABER ¶0018-0020, 0047-0051).
Re Independent Claim 16, LOWDER teaches method for laser material processing (Figures 4-5, ¶¶0044-0055), comprising:
generating, by an optical system [optical system of Figure 5] (see Figures 4-5 and ¶¶0044-0052), multiple lasers (¶¶0048-0051) associated with different wavelengths using multiple laser sources (¶¶0031, 0047, 0049-0051);
combining, by the optical system, the multiple lasers associated with the different wavelengths into broadband laser light using a signal combiner 325 (¶0052; see also ¶¶0041-0042);
transmitting, by the optical system, the broadband laser light through a process cable 330 to a process head (¶0052; see also ¶0043); and
conveying, by the optical system, the broadband laser light onto a workpiece using the process head 350 (¶¶0003, 0012, 0023, 0046, 0051) LOWDER further teaches the optical system is usable in applications where the broadband laser light is focusable (¶0036) and directed onto a workpiece, such as materials processing (see e.g., ¶¶0003, 0012, 0023, 0046). However, LOWDER fails to expressly teach the process head focuses the light on the workpiece (though implicit).
FAULHABER teaches a process head 106 that receives and focuses broadband laser light onto a workpiece (¶¶0020-0026, 0046-0051) such as by using a changeable focusing lens 504. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the process such that it includes conveying, by the optical system, the broadband laser light onto the workpiece using the process head, in order to accommodate multiple laser sources or a single laser source in a manner that facilitates desired beam characteristics ( FAULHABER ¶0018-0020, 0047-0051).
Re Independent Claim 21, LOWDER teaches an optical system, comprising:
a laser engine [521, 522], comprising:
multiple laser sources (¶¶0048-0051), that are configured to generate multiple lasers associated with different wavelengths (¶¶0031, 0047, 0049-0051); and
a signal combiner 325 configured to:
receive the multiple lasers associated with the different wavelengths (¶0052; see also ¶¶0041-0042); and
combine the multiple lasers associated with the different wavelengths into broadband laser light (¶0052; see also ¶¶0041-0042);
a process cable 330 configured to transmit the broadband laser light (¶0052; see also ¶0043); and
a process head 350 configured to receive the broadband laser light transmitted by the process cable and to convey the broadband laser light onto a workpiece (¶¶0003, 0012, 0023, 0046).
LOWDER further teaches the optical system is usable in applications where the broadband laser light is focusable (¶0036) directed onto a workpiece, such as materials processing (see e.g., ¶¶0003, 0012, 0023, 0046). However, LOWDER fails to expressly teach the process head focuses light on the workpiece (though implicit).
FAULHABER teaches a process head 106 configured to receive and focus broadband laser light onto a workpiece (¶¶0020-0026, 0046-0051) such as by using a changeable focusing lens 504. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the process head so it is configured to receive the broadband laser light transmitted by the process cable and to focus the broadband laser light onto a workpiece, in order to accommodate multiple laser sources or a single laser source in a manner that facilitates desired beam characteristics (FAULHABER ¶0018-0020, 0047-0051).
Re Dependent Claims 10, 18 and 22, LOWDER in view of FAULHABER teaches the system/method/system of Claims 8/16/21 as discussed above.
LOWDER further teaches wherein the signal combiner is configured to incoherently combine the multiple lasers associated with the different wavelengths (LOWDER ¶¶0028, 0041).
Re Dependent Claims 11 and 23, LOWDER in view of FAULHABER teaches the system of Claims 8/21 as discussed above.
LOWDER further teaches wherein the multiple lasers generated by the multiple laser sources are associated with equal power levels (LOWDER ¶0028, Claim 17).
Re Dependent Claims 12 and 24, LOWDER in view of FAULHABER teaches the system of Claims 8/21 as discussed above, but as discussed so far fails to teach the multiple lasers generated by the multiple laser sources are associated with at least two different power levels.
LOWDER further teaches a first laser source may have a power Is1 that may be any one of 0.5 kW, 1 kW and 2 kW and the second laser source may have a power Is2 that may be any of any one of 0.5 kW, 1 kW and 2 kW (¶¶0023, 0026). LOWDER also suggests that only in only some embodiments the Is1 and Is2 are approximately equal, the same necessarily implies the powers may also be different. LOWDER therefore suggests the multiple lasers generated by the multiple laser sources may be associated with at least two different power levels. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the multiple lasers generated by the multiple laser sources are associated with at least two different power levels, to provide a desired output power Is3 from the sum of two distinct input powers (e.g., inputs of 2kW & 1kW or 1kW & .5 kW as suggested in ¶¶0023, 0026).
Additionally, at the time of the invention, there was a recognized desired in the art to provide varying output powers of reduced Raman Scattering with a finite number of identified, predictable potential solution (lasers equal to the example kW listed in ¶¶0023, 0026), and one of ordinary skill in the art could have pursued the known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success (LOWDER provides for such exemplary kW and indicates summed outputs result in output power Is3 of greater than 2kW). Thus, the multiple lasers generated by the multiple laser sources are associated with at least two different power levels would have been "obvious to try" for one of ordinary skill in the art and therefore would have been obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). See MPEP § 2143 (I) E.
Re Dependent Claims 13 and 25, LOWDER in view of FAULHABER teaches the system of Claims 8/21 as discussed above, but as discussed so far fails to teach the multiple lasers are associated with a uniform spacing between the different wavelengths.
LOWDER further teaches wherein the multiple lasers are associated with a uniform spacing (by 15nm) between the different wavelengths (¶0042). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the multiple lasers are associated with a uniform spacing between the different wavelengths, in order to provide a target center wavelength of the combined output in one input to the signal combiner and equally straddle the target wavelength in two or more remaining inputs to the signal combiner when an odd number of three or more laser inputs are utilized (¶0042).
Re Dependent Claims 14, 19 and 26, LOWDER in view of FAULHABER teaches the system/method/system of Claims 8/16/21 as discussed above.
LOWDER further teaches the multiple lasers are associated with respective stimulated Raman scattering (SRS) gains that are distributed over the different wavelengths (¶¶0028-0031,0042, 0049-0051).
Re Dependent Claims 15, 20 and 27, LOWDER in view of FAULHABER teaches the system/method/system of Claims 8/16/21 as discussed above. LOWDER further teaches wherein the broadband laser light is distributed over a range associated with the different wavelengths and that the signal combiner is configured to combine the multiple lasers associated with the different wavelengths to generate a broadband signal that is distributed over a range associated with the different wavelengths (¶¶0028-0031, 0041, 0052). However, LOWDER in view of FAULHABER as discussed above has yet to address gain of the broadband signal.
LOWDER further suggests the broadband light/signal having a gain that is less than individual gains associated with the multiple lasers (input signals Is1, Is2 determined Is3 and thus gain from a summation function ¶0028; Ir3, and thus Raman filter gain from Ir1, Ir2, is said to be less than a sum of the optical powers of the signal components Is1, Is2; ¶0029). See ¶¶0021-0022, 0028-0030. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the signal combiner is configured to combine the multiple lasers associated with the different wavelengths to generate a broadband signal that is distributed over a range associated with the different wavelengths and has a gain that is less than individual gains associated with the multiple lasers and wherein the broadband laser light is distributed over a range associated with the different wavelengths and has a gain that is less than individual gains associated with the multiple lasers, in order to mitigate undesirable effects of SRS light (¶0003) and reduce pumping of Raman spectrum by the signal spectrum (¶0022).
Claims 9 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LOWDER in view of FAULHABER as applied above, and further in view of KANSKAR.
Re Dependent Claims 9 and 17, LOWDER in view of FAULHABER teaches the system/method of Claims 8/16 as discussed above, but as discussed so far fails to teach the process cable has a core diameter of one hundred microns or less and the broadband laser light has a power of at least ten kilowatts.
LOWDER further teaches the broadband laser light has a power of defined by input signals each of 2kW, wherein numerous input signals may be provided and summed (¶¶0023, 0026, 0028). KANSKAR teaches wherein a process cable has a core diameter 379 of one hundred microns or less (12.5 um) and broadband laser light has a power of at least ten kilowatts (4:5-12; 5:50 to 6:15; see also 6:41-46). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide reduce size, weight quantum defect and/or costs while reaching high kW output (2:6-60).
Conclusion
The following additional prior art made of record but not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Prior Art
Pertinence
US-20060126159-A1
Optical amplifier w/ pumping using equally or differently spaced wavelengths
US-20110268140-A1
Multiple Wavelength laser using raman fiber
US-20190302354-A1
Fiber core diameter
US-7446933-B2
Raman Amplifier gain(s)
US-7567377-B2
Raman Amplifier gain(s)
US-20210135423-A1
Signal/Beam Combining
US-20130001208-A1
Process heads
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON H DUGER whose telephone number is (313) 446-6536. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30a to 6:30p EST Monday & Tuesday is OFF Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.
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, Phutthiwat Wongwian, can be reached on (571) 270-5426. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding 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 applications 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 Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
JASON H DUGER
PRIMARY EXAMINER, ART UNIT 3741
PHONE (313) 446 6536
FAX (571) 270 9083
DATE
09/05/2026
/JASON H DUGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights