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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The specification does not describe the light guide comprises a set of microbubbles and a diffusive texturing.
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 and 4-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nariyuki (US 20120153170) in view of Oh et al. (US 20150062965).
Regarding claim 1, Nariyuki teaches a solid-state digital detector for detecting incident radiation, the detector comprising a photosensitive sensor 70 and a light generator, the photosensitive sensor comprising photosensitive elements organized in a matrix, the light generator being intended to optically erase the photosensitive elements, wherein the light generator comprises:
a light guide 73(61) comprising a front face facing the front of the detector, a rear face opposite the front face and at least one side face extending between the front face and the rear face, and at least one light source arranged at the lateral periphery of the light guide (figure 5), and wherein the light generator is configured such that said at least one light source injects light through at least one of the faces of the light guide, said light guide being configured to distribute light from said at least one light source over the entire matrix of photosensitive elements (figure 5, para 101).
However, Nariyuki fails to teach the light guide comprises a set of microbubbles expediently arranged inside it in order to achieve a uniform distribution of light across the matrix of photosensitive elements.
Oh teaches a light guide comprises a set of microbubbles expediently arranged inside it in order to achieve a uniform distribution of light across the matrix of photosensitive elements (para 139).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the light guide of Nariyuki with the microbubbles as taught by Oh, since it would provide uniform distribution of light.
Regarding claim 2, Oh fails to teach the light guide comprises a diffusive texturing in order to achieve a uniform distribution of light across the matrix of photosensitive elements (para 139).
Regarding claim 4, Nariyuki teaches the photosensitive sensor comprises a transparent or translucent substrate 104 on which the matrix of photosensitive elements is arranged and wherein the front face of the light guide is arranged against said substrate (figure 5).
Regarding claim 5, Nariyuki teaches the light guide is attached to the substrate of the photosensitive sensor, preferably by adhesive bonding (para 72 74).
Regarding claim 6, Nariyuki teaches the photosensitive sensor comprises a transparent or translucent substrate 104 on which the matrix of photosensitive elements is arranged and wherein said substrate forms the light guide (figure 5).
Regarding claim 7, Nariyuki teaches said at least one light source is arranged facing at least one of the side faces of the light guide (figure 5).
Claim(s) 1-2 and 4-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Endo (US 20060180774) in view of Oh et al. (US 20150062965).
Regarding claim 1, Endo teaches a solid-state digital detector for detecting incident radiation, the detector comprising a photosensitive sensor 1105 and a light generator, the photosensitive sensor comprising photosensitive elements organized in a matrix, the light generator being intended to optically erase the photosensitive elements, wherein the light generator comprises:
a light guide 1109 comprising a front face facing the front of the detector, a rear face opposite the front face and at least one side face extending between the front face and the rear face, and at least one light source arranged at the lateral periphery of the light guide (figure 11), and wherein the light generator is configured such that said at least one light source injects light through at least one of the faces of the light guide, said light guide being configured to distribute light from said at least one light source over the entire matrix of photosensitive elements (figure 11).
However, Endo fails to teach the light guide comprises a set of microbubbles expediently arranged inside it in order to achieve a uniform distribution of light across the matrix of photosensitive elements.
Oh teaches a light guide comprises a set of microbubbles expediently arranged inside it in order to achieve a uniform distribution of light across the matrix of photosensitive elements (para 139).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the light guide of Nariyuki with the microbubbles as taught by Oh, since it would provide uniform distribution of light.
Regarding claim 2, Endo teaches the light guide comprises a diffusive texturing in order to achieve a uniform distribution of light across the matrix of photosensitive elements (para 119).
Regarding claim 4, Endo teaches the photosensitive sensor comprises a transparent or translucent substrate 106 on which the matrix of photosensitive elements is arranged and wherein the front face of the light guide is arranged against said substrate (figure 1).
Regarding claim 5, Endo teaches the light guide is attached to the substrate of the photosensitive sensor, preferably by adhesive bonding (para 85).
Regarding claim 6, Endo teaches the photosensitive sensor comprises a transparent or translucent substrate 104 on which the matrix of photosensitive elements is arranged and wherein said substrate forms the light guide (figure 1).
Regarding claim 7, Endo teaches said at least one light source is arranged facing at least one of the side faces of the light guide (figure 1).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nariyuki in view of Jeon et al. (US 20200209464).
Regarding claim 2, Nariyuki fails to teach the light guide comprises a diffusive texturing in order to achieve a uniform distribution of light across the matrix of photosensitive elements.
Jeon teaches a light guide comprises a diffusive texturing in order to achieve a uniform distribution of light across the matrix of photosensitive elements (para 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the light guide of Nariyuki with the light guide as taught by Jeon, since it would provide uniform distribution of light.
Claim(s) 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nariyuki in view of Nakatsugawa et al. (US 20120126124).
Regarding claim 8, Nariyuki fails to teach the light generator comprises at least one reflection member able to deflect light from said at least one light source towards the light guide.
Nakatsugawa teaches light generator comprises at least one reflection member 156 able to deflect light from said at least one light source 162 towards the light guide 150 (figure 15b).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the light guide of Nariyuki with the light guide as taught by Nakatsugawa, since it would provide uniform distribution of light.
Regarding claim 9, Nakatsugawa teaches the reflection member comprises at least one dioptre and/or at least one reflector arranged facing one of the faces of the light guide (figure 15b).
Regarding claim 10, Nariyuki fails to teach the light guide comprises at least two mutually opposing side faces, wherein the light generator comprises at least one lateral reflector arranged against at least one of the side faces of the light guide, and said at least one light source is preferably arranged facing the side face opposite that of the lateral reflector.
Nakatsugawa teaches light guide 150 comprises at least two mutually opposing side faces, wherein the light generator comprises at least one lateral reflector 156 arranged against at least one of the side faces of the light guide, and said at least one light source 162 is preferably arranged facing the side face opposite that of the lateral reflector (figure 15b).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the light guide of Nariyuki with the light guide as taught by Nakatsugawa, since it would provide uniform distribution of light.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 is 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 claim 11, the prior art fails to teach the matrix of photosensitive elements is arranged on a transparent or translucent substrate, wherein the light guide is arranged downstream of said substrate and comprises a lateral part offset from that of said substrate, wherein the light generator comprises at least one upper reflector extending against all or part of the upper face of said at least one offset lateral part of the light guide, and wherein said at least one light source is arranged at the periphery of said at least one offset lateral part of the light guide as claimed in claim 11.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-2 and 5-10 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOON K SONG whose telephone number is (571)272-2494. The examiner can normally be reached M to Th 10am to 7pm.
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, David Makiya can be reached at 571-272-2273. 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.
/HOON K SONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884