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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: On lines 3, 4 7, 8 and 11, “medium” should be corrected to say –the medium--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 4 is 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.
It is unclear what “wherein the diffusion disk is configured as a converging lens” means in terms of the entire limitation, since it is unclear how a diffusion disk can be configured as a converging lens. A “converging lens” focuses light while a “diffusion disk” scatters light, which are opposite functions. The limitation is indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine or clarify the limitation.
Specification paragraph [0037] merely states that the diffusion disk is configured as a converging lens, for example. This does not clarify how a diffusion disk can be configured as a converging lens. Therefore, for examination purposes, the claim limitation is understood to mean a diffusion disk works alongside a converging lens.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
PNG
media_image1.png
1360
752
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Sabry Fig. 1
PNG
media_image2.png
1502
951
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Sabry Fig. 30A-B
Claim 1 and 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sabry et al. (US20230014558A1), hereinafter Sabry.
As to claim 1, Sabry teaches an optical measuring system for determining a measured variable in a medium (claim 1; [0115]; gas analyzer comprising light interaction with the sample within the gas cell in a measurement mode, wherein the measurement mode comprises identifying a gas sample under test by measuring the sample spectrum) comprising
a light source for emitting light (claim 1; [0141]; fig. 30A-B; light source 3012)
a container with medium (claim 1; [0141]; the sample within the gas cell 3002), wherein the light source:
radiates measuring light into the container with medium on a first light path (claim 1; [0142]; the sample path through the gas cell 3002), wherein the measuring light is converted by the medium into reception light as a function of the measured variable ([0140]; output light 3018 from the gas cell 3002 may be directed towards the spectral sensor 3014 via an output optical coupling element 3010 (e.g., an off-axis parabolic mirror) to obtain a sample spectrum of the sample);
and radiates reference light past the container with medium on a second light path ([0141]; the reference light path comprises the reference light 3028 reflected towards the spectral sensor 3014 to obtain a reference spectrum without the sample);
a diffusion disk arranged between the container with medium and a receiver ([0143]; the transmission diffuser 3044 is between the gas cell 3002 and the spectral sensor 3014);
wherein the diffusion disk is configured and arranged such that the reception light impinges on the receiver through the diffusion disk after exiting the container with medium (fig. 30B; [0143]; The output light 3018 of the sample path (comprising the gas cell 3002) are focused onto the transmission diffuser 3044. The output from the transmission diffuser 3044 may be directed towards the spectral sensor 3014, i.e. the receiver, and thus the output light impinges on the spectral sensor through the transmission diffuser);
wherein the diffusion disk is configured and arranged such that the reference light impinges on the receiver through the diffusion disk ([0143]; The reference light 3040 may be coupled to a transmission diffuser 3044 via a coupling mirror 3042, where the reference light 3040 of the reference path and the output light 3018 of the sample path are focused onto the transmission diffuser 3044. The output from the transmission diffuser 3044 may be directed towards the spectral sensor 3014, i.e. the receiver, and thus the reference light impinges on the spectral sensor through the transmission diffuser);
the receiver that receives the reception light and the reference light (fig. 30A-B; [0143]; the spectral sensor 3014 receives the output light 3018 of the sample path and the reference light 3040);
and a data processing unit which is connected to the light source and the receiver and determines the measured variable from the reception light and the reference light (claim 1; [0076]; The control circuitry 316 (i.e. the data processing unit) can be configured to control the spectrometer and the light source(s) to initiate a measurement of a sample. The control circuitry 316 may be configured to power on/off the light source and spectral sensor (i.e. the receiver) and to provide other control signals to the light source and the spectral sensor).
As to claim 5, Sabry teaches the measuring system according to claim 1, wherein the reception light and the reference light form an overlap surface on the diffusion disk (fig. 30A-B; the reference light 3040 of the reference path and the output light 3018 of the sample path are focused onto the transmission diffuser 3044, forming an overlap surface).
As to claim 6, Sabry teaches the measuring system according to claim 1, comprising a light selector which switches light from the light source between the first light path and the second light path as measuring light or reference light (fig. 30A-B; The self-calibration component includes an electro-optic controlled element 3024 configured to switch between the calibration mode (reference path) and the measurement mode (sample path)).
As to claim 7, Sabry teaches the measuring system according to claim 1, wherein the receiver is configured as a spectrometer ([0140]; the spectral sensor 3014 can be a spectrometer).
As to claim 8, Sabry teaches the measuring system according to claim 1, comprising an optical waveguide ([0063]; fibers 114), wherein the light source couples reference light on the second light path into the optical waveguide, the optical waveguide runs past the container with medium, and couples reference light from the optical waveguide onto the diffusion disk (fig. 1; [0063]; the MEMS interferometer 100 a may include fibers 114 for directing the input beam towards the beam splitter 110 and the output beam from the beam splitter 110 towards the detector (e.g., detector 112)).
As to claim 9, Sabry teaches the measuring system according to claim 1, comprising one or more mirrors ([0143]; coupling mirror 3042); wherein the light source guides reference light on the second light path via the at least one mirror past the container with medium and onto the diffusion disk ([0143]; The reference light 3040 may be coupled to a transmission diffuser 3044 via a coupling mirror 3042).
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sabry in view of Knupfer et al. (US8605146B2), hereinafter Knupfer, further in view of Shinbori et al. (US6618141B2), hereinafter Shinbori.
As to claim 2, Sabry does not explicitly disclose wherein the diffusion disk is configured as a volume diffusion disk; the volume diffusion disk is in particular manufactured from opal glass, quartz glass or frosted flashed glass.
Knupfer, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein the diffusion disk is configured as a volume diffusion disk; the volume diffusion disk is in particular manufactured from glass (Knupfer col. 6 lines 27-38; the diffusing screen is a translucent but non-transparent (which means it can be frosted flashed glass) and preferably diffusely scattering ground glass, which is a full-volume PTFE material).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Sabry to incorporate the teachings of Knupfer to include wherein the diffusion disk is configured as a volume diffusion disk; the volume diffusion disk is in particular manufactured from opal glass, quartz glass or frosted flashed glass, for the advantage of the generation of light-dark patterns, enhancing diffuser control (Knupfer col. 6 lines 27-38).
However, Sabry in view of Knupfer does not explicitly disclose the diffusion disk is in particular manufactured from opal glass, quartz glass or frosted flashed glass.
Shinbori, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches the diffusion disk is in particular manufactured from opal glass, quartz glass or frosted flashed glass (Shinbori col. 9 lines 59-66; the diffuser 38 consists of frosted quartz glass).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Sabry to incorporate the teachings of Shinbori to include the diffusion disk is in particular manufactured from opal glass, quartz glass or frosted flashed glass, for the advantage of high uniformity (Shinbori col. 9 lines 59-66).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sabry in view of Ingram (US20110108741A1).
As to claim 3, Sabry does not explicitly disclose wherein the diffusion disk is configured as a surface diffusion disk.
Ingram, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein the diffusion disk is configured as a surface diffusion disk (Ingram [0019]-[0020]; a diffuse reflective surface or a diffuse transmissive surface can be used in a system).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Sabry to incorporate the teachings of Ingram to include wherein the diffusion disk is configured as a surface diffusion disk, for the advantage of higher transmission efficiency via eliminating the detector's sensitivity to an incident angle of incoming light (Ingram [0010]).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sabry in view of Shinbori.
As to claim 4, Sabry does not explicitly disclose wherein the diffusion disk is configured as a converging lens.
Shinbori, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein the diffusion disk is configured as a converging lens (Shinbori abstract; a measurement head which emits the light transmitted by the fiber via a convergent lens and a diffuser).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Sabry to incorporate the teachings of Shinbori to include wherein the diffusion disk is configured as a converging lens, for the advantage of high uniformity (Shinbori col. 9 lines 59-66).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kemaya Nguyen whose telephone number is (571)272-9078. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 11 am – 8 pm ET.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Tarifur Chowdhury can be reached on (571) 272-2287. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-270-4211.
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.
/KEMAYA NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/TARIFUR R CHOWDHURY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877