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 § 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumar et al (US 2020/0393792 A1) in view of BenYakar et al (US 2013/0211391 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kumar discloses a camera system (para 33, portable digital holographic camera), comprising:
a light source (Fig. 2, laser source 3) configured to emit light in one or more wavelength ranges (para 33, a diode laser 3 is used as a source of coherent light for illumination of the object 14);
a first beam splitter (Fig. 2, HOE 4) positioned to split the emitted light into a reference beam and a transmission beam (para 34, a thin beam 20 splits into two beams having desired directions and controlled divergences, another beam 26 generated by HOE 4 as shown in Fig. 3 illuminates the object 14 whose hologram is to be recorded, the object beam 29 is then combined with the reference beam 22 by beam combiner 7 as shown in Fig. 4);
a concave lens (Fig. 3, concave lens 9);
a convex lens (Fig 3, convex lens 10);
a second beam splitter (Fig. 7, beam combiner 7) positioned intermediate the concave lens (9) and the convex lens (10, see Fig. 7); and
a detector (8) configured to capture an image of an interference between the reference beam and the object beam (para 10, digital holograms, which are interference pattern generated by superposition of reference beam and the object beam, are recorded with a digital image sensor CCD/CMOS and stored in a PC/memory device and which is processed numerically for reconstruction and thus further processing of digital hologram).
However, Kumar lacks an aperture though which the transmission beam traverses en route to an object, and where an object beam formed from light reflected off the object is configured to travel back through the aperture.
BenYakar discloses an aperture though which the transmission beam traverses en route to an object, and where an object beam formed from light reflected off the object is configured to travel back through the aperture (para 71, a portion of the optical energy 14 from the optical energy source 12 that contacts the back aperture 21 of the objective lens 18 may be transmitted onto a region of interest, e.g. target tissue 20 of the object).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention before the effective filing date combine the aperture of BenYakar with the camera system of Kumar to improve the resolution and size (see BenYakar, para 82, the system 10 can be used to enhance a field of view, resolution and/or collection efficiency while avoiding undesirable effects that maybe present in conventional miniaturized multiphoton fluorescent microscope designs).
Regarding claim 2, the camera system of claim 1, wherein the concave lens, the convex lens, the second beam splitter, and the detector are positioned such that the second beam splitter directs the reference beam toward the detector, the object beam is directed through the concave lens, and the reference beam and the object beam travel through the convex lens (see Fig. 7, the beam 29 going through convex lens 9, see para 34, lines 9-39).
Regarding claim 3, the camera system of claim 1, further comprising a controller configured to obtain output from the detector and generate the image based on the output (para 33, data storage and processing module).
Claims 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumar et al (US 2020/0393792 A1) in view of BenYakar et al (US 2013/0211391 A1) as applied to claims above, and further in view of Ando et al (US 2016/0123810 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Kumar in view of BenYakar discloses the claimed invention as set forth above except for further comprising an ultrasound element configured to transmit and/or receive ultrasound signals.
Ando discloses an ultrasound element configured to transmit and/or receive ultrasound signals (para 13, acousto-optic device is composed of an acousto-optic crystal and a piezoelectric element, which are bonded with each other, when an electrical signal is applied to the acousto-optic crystal, ultrasonic waves are generated).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention before the effective filing date to further comprising an ultrasound element configured to transmit and/or receive ultrasound signals as taught by Ando for the purpose of improving the resolution of the displayed image.
Regarding claim 5, Kumar in view of BenYakar discloses the claimed invention as set forth above except for wherein the controller (Ando, para 13, voltage control) is configured to control the ultrasound element to transmit and receive ultrasound signals and generate an ultrasonic image based on the received ultrasound signals (acousto-optic device is composed of an acousto-optic crystal and a piezoelectric element, which are bonded with each other, when an electrical signal is applied to the acousto-optic crystal, ultrasonic waves are generated).
Regarding claim 6, Kumar in view of BenYakar discloses the claimed invention as set forth above except for wherein the controller is configured to control the ultrasound element to focus an ultrasonic signal to the object to wavelength-shift a portion of the transmission beam and/or the object beam (Ando, para 13, acousto-optic device is composed of an acousto-optic crystal and a piezoelectric element, which are bonded with each other, when an electrical signal is applied to the acousto-optic crystal, ultrasonic waves are generated, para 41, spatially shifts… with wavelength).
Regarding claim 7, Kumar in view of BenYakar discloses the claimed invention as set forth above except for wherein the controller is configured to control the ultrasound element to capture photoacoustic signals generated at the object by the transmission beam (Ando, para 13, acousto-optic device is composed of an acousto-optic crystal and a piezoelectric element, which are bonded with each other, when an electrical signal is applied to the acousto-optic crystal, ultrasonic waves are generated).
Claims 8 and 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumar et al (US 2020/0393792 A1) in view of BenYakar et al (US 2013/0211391 A1) as applied to claims above, and further in view of Roichman et al (US 2019/0191979 A1) and Papadopoulos et al (US 2015/0015879 A1), further in view of Ando et al (US 2016/0123810 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Kumar in view of BenYakar discloses the claimed invention as set forth above except for a spatial light modulator positioned to modulate the transmission beam.
Roichman discloses a spatial light modulator positioned to modulate the transmission beam (para 106).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention before the effective filing date to add a special light modulator for the purpose of improving the control of the beam and directing image light to light detecting system, as disclosed (Roichman paras 106, 117).
Kumar in view of BenYakar, and further in view of Roichman discloses the claimed invention as set forth above except for a partially-reflective mirror positioned between the aperture and the object.
Papadopoulos discloses a partially-reflective mirror positioned between the aperture and object (para 169, the reflective layer 2320 is partially reflective).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention before the effective filing date to position a partially-reflective mirror as taught by Papadopoulos to produce the required phase conjugated beam, as described by Papadopoulos (para 151-153).
Regarding claim 12, the camera system of claim 8, wherein the camera system comprises an endoscope (BenYakar, para 91, endoscope).
Regarding claim 13, the camera system of claim 8, further comprising an ultrasound element (Ando, para 13, acousto-optic device is composed of an acousto-optic crystal and a piezoelectric element, which are bonded with each other, when an electrical signal is applied to the acousto-optic crystal, ultrasonic waves are generated).
Regarding claim 14, the camera system of claim 13, further comprising a controller configured to control the ultrasound element and the light source such that an ultrasound wave emitted by the ultrasound element arrives at the object with the transmission beam to focus the transmission beam (Ando, para 13, acousto-optic device is composed of an acousto-optic crystal and a piezoelectric element, which are bonded with each other, when an electrical signal is applied to the acousto-optic crystal, ultrasonic waves are generated).
Regarding claims 15-20, a method for a camera system, comprising the steps of activating, detecting, generating, directing and modulating are inherently met by the disclosure of the prior arts.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-11 are 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:
claims are allowable at least for the reason that the prior art does not teach or reasonably suggest wherein the aperture comprises a distal end of an optical fiber bundle, and wherein the reference beam and the transmission beam travel from a proximal end of the optical fiber bundle to the distal end as set forth in the claimed combination.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EUNCHA P CHERRY whose telephone number is (571)272-2310. The examiner can normally be reached M to F 7am to 3:30pm.
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, Pinping Sun can be reached at (571) 270-1284. 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.
11/16/2025
/EUNCHA P CHERRY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872