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 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a laser light with a wavelength of 1030 to 1064 nm” in lines 2-3 should be changed to “the laser light with a wavelength of 1030 to 1064 nm” to correspond to the limitations previously recited in parent claim 1 in order to avoid a 112-indefiniteness rejection. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a laser light with a wavelength of 1030 to 1064 nm to a second harmonic” in line 3 should be changed to “the laser light with a wavelength of 1030 to 1065 nm to the second harmonic” to correspond to the limitations previously recited in parent claim 1 in order to avoid a 112-indefiniteness rejection . Appropriate correction is required. Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the nonlinear optical crystal” in line 2 lacks antecedent basis and should be changed to “a nonlinear optical crystal” in order to avoid a 112-indefiniteness rejection. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: “reflecting a light with a wavelength of 1030 to 1064” in lines 2-3 and “converting the light into a laser light with a wavelength of 515 to 532 nm” in lines 3-4 should be changed to “reflecting the light with a wavelength of 1030 to 1064” and “converting the light into the laser light with a wavelength of 515 to 532 nm” to correspond to the limitations previously recited in parent claim 1 in order to avoid a 112-indefiniteness rejection. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a laser light with a wavelength of 1030 to 1064 nm” in line 2 should be changed to “the laser light with a wavelength of 1030 to 1064 nm” to correspond to the limitations previously recited in parent claim 1 in order to avoid a 112-indefiniteness rejection. 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claim 2 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. Claim 2 recites identical limitations as parent claim 1 except each of the claimed wavelength ranges being narrowed to a specific wavelength. However, the same elements of the parent claim 1 have been repeatedly recited in claim 2 (e.g. “an excitation light source”, “an optical parametric oscillating part”, “a separating part”, etc.) and it’s unclear if they are the same or separate elements. Therefore, claim 2 is considered indefinite. The Examiner suggests converting claim 2 to an independent claim so that it can stand alone with the same elements as recited in claim 1 with a specific wavelength for each of the claimed wavelength ranges. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 2 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claims 1 and 3-10 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Takaoka et al. (US Patent 6,477,188 B1, 05/01/25 IDS), Chuang et al. (US PG Pub 2016/0099540 A1), Ming (US PG Pub 2002/0095142 A1) are the closest prior art. In particular, Takaoka discloses a 193 -nm wavelength laser light generating device (FIG. 23 and see abstract) comprising: an excitation light source part ( a Nd:YAG laser light source L1 and a nonlinear optical crystal C15, FIG. 23 , col. 24 lines 19-27 ) for converting a laser light with a wavelength of 1030 to 1064 nm (L1 emits a wavelength of 1064 nm) to a second harmonic, and generating a laser light with a wavelength of 515 to 532 nm (C15 generates a second harmonic of 532 nm) ; an optical parametric oscillating part ( an OPO L5, FIG. 23 , col. 24 lines 41-48 ) for generating a signal light and an idler light (it’s implicitly taught by the OPO structure) using the laser light with the wavelength of 515 to 532 nm generated at the excitation light source part as an excitation light ( the light of a wavelength of 532 nm is reflected by a harmonic separator Hs1 into the OPO L5, FIG. 23) ; a separating part (a dichroic mirror DM2, FIG. 23 , col. 24 lines 35-40 ) for separating an output of the OPO part ; a first wavelength converting part ( a nonlinear optical crystal C17, FIG. 23 , col. 24 lines 35-40 ) for generating a fourth harmonic with a wavelength of 215 to 222 nm from the output of the OPO part ; a second wavelength converting part ( a nonlinear optical crystal C4, FIG. 23) for generating a deep ultraviolet light with a wavelength of 193 nm; and a coupling part (a dichroic mirror DM1, FIG. 23 , col. 24 lines 61-67 ) for coupling the fourth harmonic with the wavelength of 235.8 nm from the first wavelength converting part. Moreover, Chuang discloses a 183 nm laser (FIG. 1B , [0035] ) comprising a second harmonic generation module ( 153, FIG. 1B , [0087] ), a fourth harmonic generation module (155, FIG. 1B , [0087] ) , a fifth harmonic generation module (157, FIG. 1B , [0087] ) , an OPO module (116, FIG. 1B , [0041] ) , and a frequency mixing module (104, FIG. 1B , [0086] ) similar to that of Takaoka. Lastly, Ming discloses an output coupling prism (640, FIG. 6, [0055]) used to separate different wavelengths. However, the cited prior art fails to disclose or suggest “ an optical parametric oscillating part for generating a signal light with a wavelength of 858 to 887 nm and an idler light with a wavelength of 1288 to 1330 nm using the laser light with the wavelength of 515 to 532 nm generated at the excitation light source part as an excitation light; a separating part for separating the signal light with the wavelength of 858 to 887 nm and the idler light with the wavelength of 1288 to 1330 nm ” and “ a coupling part for coupling the fourth harmonic with the wavelength of 215 to 222 nm from the first wavelength converting part and the deep ultraviolet light with the wavelength of 215 to 222 nm from the second wavelength converting part ” in combination with the rest of the limitations as recited in claim 1. Therefore, claim 1 is allowable over the cited prior art and claims 3-10 are also allowable as they directly depend on claim 1. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Jacob (US Patent 6,373,869 B1) discloses an optical system for producing ultraviolet radiation similar to the claimed invention (see FIG. 3). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT YUANDA ZHANG whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-1439 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 10:30 AM - 6:30 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT MINSUN HARVEY can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-1835 . 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. /YUANDA ZHANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828