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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/30/2026 has been entered.
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 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(s) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jolivet, L., et al. "Review of the recent advances and applications of LIBS-based imaging." Spectrochimica Acta Part B: Atomic Spectroscopy 151 (2019): 41-53 (hereinafter Jolivet) , and in view of Unrath, M. et al., US 20190001442 A1 (hereinafter Unrath).
Regarding claim 1, Jolivet teaches a method for laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy, the method comprising: providing a sample having a surface containing an area to be analyzed (this is shown in Fig. 1a, p. 2 section 2.1 para 1 lines 1-5); moving an ablation point to a position of a plurality of positions on the surface (p. 2 section 2.1 para 2 lines 1-7) pulsing an energy source to provide an electromagnetic energy beam to ablate material at the ablation point (Fig. 1a “Laser Pulse”); collecting an emission spectrum in response to pulsing the energy source (Fig. 1a “Spectrometer”); analyzing the emission spectrum to determine a composition at the surface (p. 2 section 2.1 para 1 lines 1-5).
Jolivet does not teach along an arc path defined by a plurality of arcs, wherein the plurality of arcs extend from an edge of the area to another edge of the area, wherein the arc path follows adjacent arcs of the plurality of arcs; wherein the plurality of arcs have a common center point; and wherein the common center point is disposed at one of: an edge of the surface, an intersection of two edges of the surface, and outside of the bounds of the surface.
Unrath teaches “along an arc path defined by a plurality of arcs, wherein the plurality of arcs extend from an edge of the area to another edge of the area, wherein the arc path follows adjacent arcs of the plurality of arcs” (this entire limitation is Fig. 27, para [0208] lines 19-22); wherein the plurality of arcs have a common center point (para [0042] lines 7-12; a circle has a common center point).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Unrath to Jolivet to have “along an arc path defined by a plurality of arcs, wherein the plurality of arcs extend from an edge of the area to another edge of the area, wherein the arc path follows adjacent arcs of the plurality of arcs” and wherein the plurality of arcs have a common center point in order to enhance accuracy and throughput of the measurement (Abstract line 9; applying the laser scan of Unrath to Jolivet enhances the accuracy and throughput of the measurement since the laser scan of Unrath can be programmed).
Jolivet, when modified by Unrath, does not teach wherein the common center point is disposed at one of: an edge of the surface, an intersection of two edges of the surface, and outside of the bounds of the surface.
As stated in Unrath, the laser scan can be programmed to form any arbitrarily shape (para [0042] lines 7-12). Therefore, it would be obvious to try the limitation “wherein the common center point is disposed at one of: an edge of the surface, an intersection of two edges of the surface, and outside of the bounds of the surface” (see evidentiary reference, CN 109731968 B, fig. 3 p. 4 para 5; the laser scanning was programmed to create shapes which reads the limitation “wherein the common center point is disposed at one of: an edge of the surface, an intersection of two edges of the surface, and outside of the bounds of the surface”) to apply to the teaching of Jolivet in order to increase the spectrum of elemental maps of the sample (the edges of the sample are included in the scanning since the edges are part of the sample).
Regarding claim 2, Jolivet does not teach the method of claim 1, further comprising moving the ablation point to a second position on the surface along the arc path, the second position adjacent a first position along the arc path.
Unrath teaches “the method of claim 1, further comprising moving the ablation point to a second position on the surface along the arc path, the second position adjacent a first position along the arc path” (this represents the pattern of Fig. 27, para [0208] lines 19-22).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Unrath to Jolivet to have “the method of claim 1, further comprising moving the ablation point to a second position on the surface along the arc path, the second position adjacent a first position along the arc path” in order to enhance accuracy and throughput of the measurement (Abstract line 9; applying the laser scan of Unrath to Jolivet enhances the accuracy and throughput of the measurement since the laser scan of Unrath can be programmed).
Regarding claim 3, Jolivet teaches the method of claim 2, wherein moving the ablation point includes moving the sample using a translation plate (p. 2 section 2.1 para 2 lines 1-5).
Regarding claim 4, Jolivet does not teach the method of claim 2, wherein moving the ablation point includes positioning mirrors.
Unrath teaches the method of claim 2, wherein moving the ablation point includes positioning mirrors (para [0091] lines 1-11).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Unrath to Jolivet to have “the method of claim 2, wherein moving the ablation point includes positioning mirrors” in order to help maintain the positional accuracy and precision with which features such as vias are drilled (para [0091] lines 1-11).
Regarding claim 5, Jolivet teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the energy source includes a laser (see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 7, Jolivet teaches “the method of claim 1, wherein the straight-line path follows adjacent straight lines of the plurality of straight lines in opposite directions along the adjacent straight-line path” (this entire limitation is shown in Fig. 1b).
Jolivet does not disclose an arc path in angular directions.
Unrath teaches an arc path in angular directions (this entire limitation is Fig. 27, para [0208] lines 19-22).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Unrath to Jolivet to have an arc path in angular directions in order to enhance accuracy and throughput of the measurement (Abstract line 9; applying the laser scan of Unrath to Jolivet enhances the accuracy and throughput of the measurement since the laser scan of Unrath can be programmed).
Regarding claim 8, Jolivet does not teach the method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of arcs are distributed at different radii.
Unrath teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of arcs are distributed at different radii (this entire limitation is Fig. 27, para [0208] lines 19-22).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Unrath to Jolivet to have “the method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of arcs are distributed at different radii” in order to enhance accuracy and throughput of the measurement (Abstract line 9; applying the laser scan of Unrath to Jolivet enhances the accuracy and throughput of the measurement since the laser scan of Unrath can be programmed).
Regarding claim 12, Jolivet does not teach the method of claim 8, wherein moving the ablation point includes successively scanning arcs of the plurality of arcs in a direction towards the common center point. Regarding claim 13, Jolivet does not teach the method of claim 8, wherein each arc of the plurality of arcs is distributed equidistant from an adjacent arc along a radial direction from the common center point.
Unrath teaches the method of claim 8, wherein moving the ablation point includes successively scanning arcs of the plurality of arcs in a direction towards the common center point (Fig. 27 the common center is “2504a”, para [0208] lines 19-22), the method of claim 8, wherein each arc of the plurality of arcs is distributed equidistant from an adjacent arc along a radial direction from the common center point (this is shown in Fig. 27).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Unrath to Jolivet to have “the method of claim 8, wherein moving the ablation point includes successively scanning arcs of the plurality of arcs in a direction towards the common center point, the method of claim 8, wherein each arc of the plurality of arcs is distributed equidistant from an adjacent arc along a radial direction from the common center point” in order to enhance accuracy and throughput of the measurement (Abstract line 9; applying the laser scan of Unrath to Jolivet enhances the accuracy and throughput of the measurement since the laser scan of Unrath can be programmed).
Regarding claim 14, Jolivet does not teach the method claim 1, wherein the plurality of arcs have two foci.
Unrath teaches the method claim 1, wherein the plurality of arcs have two foci (para [0042] lines 10-12; an ellipse have common two foci).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Unrath to Jolivet to have the method claim 1, wherein the plurality of arcs have two foci in order to enhance accuracy and throughput of the measurement (Abstract line 9; applying the laser scan of Unrath to Jolivet enhances the accuracy and throughput of the measurement since the laser scan of Unrath can be programmed).
Regarding claim 15, Jolivet does not teach the method of claim 14, wherein moving the ablation point includes successively scanning arcs of the plurality of arcs in a direction towards the common foci. Regarding claim 16, Jolivet does not teach the method of claim 14, wherein each arc of the plurality of arcs is distributed equidistant from an adjacent arc along a direction from the common foci.
Unrath teaches the method of claim 14, wherein moving the ablation point includes successively scanning arcs of the plurality of arcs in a direction towards the common foci (Fig. 27, the movement of the ablation process is toward “2504a”), the method of claim 14, wherein each arc of the plurality of arcs is distributed equidistant from an adjacent arc along a direction from the common foci (each arc in Fig. 27 is equidistant to one another).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Unrath to Jolivet to have the method of claim 14, wherein moving the ablation point includes successively scanning arcs of the plurality of arcs in a direction towards the common foci and the method of claim 14, wherein each arc of the plurality of arcs is distributed equidistant from an adjacent arc along a direction from the common foci in order to enhance accuracy and throughput of the measurement (Abstract line 9; applying the laser scan of Unrath to Jolivet enhances the accuracy and throughput of the measurement since the laser scan of Unrath can be programmed).
Regarding claim 17, Jolivet does not teach the method of claim 1, wherein each position of the plurality of positions within an arc of the plurality of arcs is distributed to be linearly equidistant. Regarding claim 18, Jolivet does not teach the method of claim 1, wherein each position of the plurality of positions within an arc of the plurality of arcs is distributed to be equidistant along the arc. Regarding claim 19, Jolivet does not teach the method of claim 1, wherein the position on an arc of the plurality of arcs is an equal distance from another position on the arc of the plurality of arcs and a further position on an adjacent arc of the plurality of arcs.
Unrath teaches the method of claim 1, wherein each position of the plurality of positions within an arc of the plurality of arcs is distributed to be linearly equidistant (Fig. 27 shows the positions within an arc of the plurality of arcs is linearly equidistant), the method of claim 1, wherein each position of the plurality of positions within an arc of the plurality of arcs is distributed to be equidistant along the arc (Fig. 27 also shows equidistant along the arc), the method of claim 1, wherein the position on an arc of the plurality of arcs is an equal distance from another position on the arc of the plurality of arcs and a further position on an adjacent arc of the plurality of arcs (this is shown in Fig. 27 due to its symmetry).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Unrath to Jolivet to have the method of claim 1, wherein each position of the plurality of positions within an arc of the plurality of arcs is distributed to be linearly equidistant and the method of claim 1, wherein each position of the plurality of positions within an arc of the plurality of arcs is distributed to be equidistant along the arc, the method of claim 1, wherein the position on an arc of the plurality of arcs is an equal distance from another position on the arc of the plurality of arcs and a further position on an adjacent arc of the plurality of arcs in order to enhance accuracy and throughput of the measurement (Abstract line 9; applying the laser scan of Unrath to Jolivet enhances the accuracy and throughput of the measurement since the laser scan of Unrath can be programmed).
Regarding claim 22, Jolivet teaches the method of claim 1, “wherein analyzing includes determining a composition at the position and producing a positionally- resolved image including the composition displayed at a relative position with other compositions displayed at other relative positions” (this is shown in Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 23, Jolivet does not teach the method of claim 1, wherein each arc of the plurality of arcs has a non-zero and non-infinite radius of curvature.
Unrath teaches the method of claim 1, wherein each arc of the plurality of arcs has a non-zero and non-infinite radius of curvature (para [0042] lines 7-12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Unrath to Jolivet to have the method of claim 1, wherein each arc of the plurality of arcs has a non-zero and non-infinite radius of curvature in order to enhance accuracy and throughput of the measurement (Abstract line 9; applying the laser scan of Unrath to Jolivet enhances the accuracy and throughput of the measurement since the laser scan of Unrath can be programmed).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jolivet and Unrath as applied to claim 1, and in view of Sabsabi, Mohamad, Rene Heon, and Louis St-Onge. "Critical evaluation of gated CCD detectors for laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy analysis." Spectrochimica Acta Part B: Atomic Spectroscopy 60.7-8 (2005): 1211-1216 (hereinafter Sabsabi).
Regarding claim 6, the modified device of Jolivet does not teach the method of claim 1, wherein collecting the emission spectrum includes collecting the emission spectrum with a solid state device or a photomultiplier.
Sabsabi teaches the method of claim 1, wherein collecting the emission spectrum includes collecting the emission spectrum with a solid state device (Abstract lines 2-6; CCD is a solid state device) or a photomultiplier.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Sabsabi to the modified device of Jolivet to have the method of claim 1, wherein collecting the emission spectrum includes collecting the emission spectrum with a solid state device or a photomultiplier in order to optimize the spectral and temporal resolution, dynamic range and sensitivity of the measurement signal (Abstract lines 2-6).
Claim(s) 20, 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jolivet and Unrath as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Day, D. et al., US 20140204377 A1 (hereinafter Day).
Regarding claim 20, Jolivet teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising selecting a sampling density and determining a number of straight lines (see Fig. 1a) defining the plurality of straight lines (see Fig. 1a) based at least in part on the selected sampling density (see Fig. 1a; the images in Fig. 6 are the selected sampling density). Jolivet, when modified by Unrath, fails to disclose “a number of arcs defining plurality of arcs”. Regarding claim 21, the modified device of Jolivet does not teach the method of claim 1, wherein analyzing includes determining a composition at the position and averaging the composition with other compositions determined at other positions of the plurality of positions.
Day, teaches “a number of arcs defining plurality of arcs” (para [0092] lines 11-15; a circle comprises of arcs), the method of claim 1, wherein analyzing includes determining a composition at the position and averaging the composition with other compositions determined at other positions of the plurality of positions (this is explained in para [0013] as “rolling average”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Day to Jolivet, when modified by Unrath, to have “a number of arcs defining plurality of arcs”, the method of claim 1, wherein analyzing includes determining a composition at the position and averaging the composition with other compositions determined at other positions of the plurality of positions in order to optimize the detection of elemental concentration of lower atomic numbered elements in the sample (para [0005] first sentence).
Claim(s) 24, 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jolivet, in view of Day, and further in view of Unrath.
Regarding claim 24, Jolivet teaches a system for laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy comprising: an energy source to provide an energy beam (Fig. 1a “Laser Pulse”); a positioning mechanism (p. 2 section 2.1 para 2 lines 1-7) to position relatively a surface of a sample (p. 2 section 2.1 para 2 lines 1-7) and the energy beam to provide an ablation point at a position of a plurality of positions on the surface (p. 2 section 2.1 para 2 lines 1-7), the surface containing an area to be analyzed (p. 2 section 2.1 para 1 lines 1-5); a controller in communication with the positioning mechanism (p. 2 section 2.1 para 2 lines 1-7),
Jolivet fails to disclose a collection lens directed to collect an emission spectrum from the ablation point; a spectrometer in optical communication with collection lens; the controller to direct movement of the ablation point on the surface to the plurality of positions along an arc path defined by a plurality of arcs extending from an edge of the area to another edge of the area; wherein the plurality of arcs have a common center point and are distributed at different radii; and wherein the common center point is disposed at one of: an edge of the surface, an intersection of two edges of the surface, and outside of the bounds of the surface.
Day, teaches a collection lens directed to collect an emission spectrum from the ablation point (Fig. 19A-B “328”, para [0145] lines 1-4); a spectrometer in optical communication with collection lens (para [0145] lines 1-4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Day to Jolivet, to have a collection lens directed to collect an emission spectrum from the ablation point; a spectrometer in optical communication with collection lens in order to optimize the collection of light for spectroscopic measurement (para [0145] lines 1-4).
Jolivet, when modified by Day, does not teach the controller to direct movement of the ablation point on the surface to the plurality of positions along an arc path defined by a plurality of arcs extending from an edge of the area to another edge of the area; wherein the plurality of arcs have a common center point and are distributed at different radii; and wherein the common center point is disposed at one of: an edge of the surface, an intersection of two edges of the surface, and outside of the bounds of the surface.
Unrath teaches the controller to direct movement of the ablation point on the surface to the plurality of positions along an arc path defined by a plurality of arcs extending from an edge of the area to another edge of the area (this entire limitation is Fig. 27, para [0208] lines 19-22, the controller is shown in Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Unrath to Jolivet, when modfied by Day, to have the controller to direct movement of the ablation point on the surface to the plurality of positions along an arc path defined by a plurality of arcs extending from an edge of the area to another edge of the area in order to enhance accuracy and throughput of the measurement (Abstract line 9; applying the laser scan of Unrath to Jolivet enhances the accuracy and throughput of the measurement since the laser scan of Unrath can be programmed).
As stated in Unrath, the laser scan can be programmed to form any arbitrarily shape (para [0042] lines 7-12). Therefore, it would be obvious to try the limitation “wherein the plurality of arcs have a common center point and are distributed at different radii; and wherein the common center point is disposed at one of: an edge of the surface, an intersection of two edges of the surface, and outside of the bounds of the surface” (see evidentiary reference, CN 109731968 B, fig. 3 p. 4 para 5; the laser scanning was programmed to create shapes which reads the limitation “wherein the plurality of arcs have a common center point and are distributed at different radii; and wherein the common center point is disposed at one of: an edge of the surface, an intersection of two edges of the surface, and outside of the bounds of the surface”) to apply to the teaching of Jolivet in order to increase the spectrum of elemental maps of the sample (the edges of the sample are included in the scanning since the edges are part of the sample).
Regarding claim 25, Jolivet does not teach the system of claim 24, further comprising an F-theta lens in a path of the energy beam.
Unrath teaches the system of claim 24, further comprising an F-theta lens in a path of the energy beam (para [0074] lines 1-9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Unrath to have the system of claim 24, further comprising an F-theta lens in a path of the energy beam in order to focus the position of the laser on the desired process spot on the sample (para [0074] lines 1-9).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERTO FABIAN JR whose telephone number is (571)272-3632. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (8-12, 1-5).
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, KARA GEISEL can be reached at (571)272-2416. 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.
/ROBERTO FABIAN JR/ Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/Kara E. Geisel/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877