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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/02/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-6 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.
Applicant argues:
At p. 8 second to the last para that “calculating the adjustment control value of the light source, based on the relational expression stored in the storage unit, from a brightness value of the sample to be measured acquired by the imaging unit”; and “performing irradiation with light from the light source using the calculated adjustment control value and acquiring the brightness value of the sample to be measured by the imaging unit” is not taught.
Examiner response:
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Wakitani teaches the above limitations in para [0027-28]. After Wakitani setup the types A and B light correction (para [0020-26]), the device automatically sets Type A light source mode for new inspection sample 13 and Type B for new inspection sample 18 as mentioned in para [0028]. Also, Hwa discloses the limitation above (Abstract last para, p. 4 para 3-4). Based on this, this art is deemed proper and maintained in the rejection below.
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, 3, 4, 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wakitani, K., et al., JP 2004184242 A (hereinafter Wakitani) and in view of KR 20120075173 A (hereinafter Hwa).
Regarding claim 1, Wakitani teaches an analysis method of irradiating a sample with light and analyzing the sample by using a light source that irradiates the sample with light, an imaging unit that condenses transmitted light transmitting through the sample, receives a quantity of the condensed light, and acquires a brightness value, and a control unit that controls the light source and the imaging unit, the analysis method comprising: “irradiating a reference sample with light from the light source using a preset control value” (para [0020], the reference sample is element 15, para [0027-28] fig. 2a-c); “storing a relational expression between measured brightness value of the reference sample acquired by the imaging unit and adjustment control values of the light source for adjusting the measured brightness values of the reference sample to a preset reference brightness value in a storage unit” (this entire limitation is discussed in para [0027-28] fig. 2a-c; the relational expression corresponds to the types A and B); “irradiating a sample to be measured with light from the light source using the preset control value” (para [0027-28] fig. 2a-c); “calculating the adjustment control value of the light source, based on the relational expression stored in the storage unit, from a brightness value of the sample to be measured acquired by the imaging unit” (para [0027-28] fig. 2a-c); and “performing irradiation with light from the light source using the calculated adjustment control value and acquiring the brightness value of the sample to be measured by the imaging unit” (para [0027-28] fig. 2a-c).
Wakitani does not teach two or more reference samples that differ in at least one of transmittance or color.
Hwa, from the same field of endeavor as Wakitani, teaches two or more reference samples that differ in at least one of transmittance or color (fig. 2 p. 3 para 2; the reference samples have a wide range of range and this indicates the reference samples have different transmittance or color, p. 3 para 4; Abstract last sentence).
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 Hwa to Wakitani to have two or more reference samples that differ in at least one of transmittance or color in order to accurately measure a whiteness index of a steel plate without contacts and to control a surface of a steel plate to be in an optimal condition by monitoring a processing condition of the steel plate on areal time basis (Abstract first sentence).
Regarding claim 3, Wakitani teaches the analysis method according to claim 1, “wherein when a certain period of time elapses from last measurement of the reference sample, the measurement of the reference sample is performed, and the relational expression between the measured brightness value of the reference sample and adjustment control value of the light source for adjusting the measured brightness value of the reference sample to the preset reference brightness value, is stored in the storage unit” (para [0027-31]; “certain period of time elapses from last measurement of the reference sample” corresponds to the time it takes to repeat the measurement of element 15 due to the two samples 13 and 18; the time lapse from the reference sample can be easily obtained by Wakitani during measuring for types A and B).
Wakitani does not teach two or more reference samples.
Hwa, from the same field of endeavor as Wakitani, teaches two or more reference samples (fig. 2 p. 3 para 2; the reference samples have a wide range of range and this indicates the reference samples have different transmittance or color, p. 3 para 4; Abstract last sentence).
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 Hwa to Wakitani to have two or more reference samples in order to accurately measure a whiteness index of a steel plate without contacts and to control a surface of a steel plate to be in an optimal condition by monitoring a processing condition of the steel plate on areal time basis (Abstract first sentence).
Regarding claim 4, Wakitani teaches an analysis device that irradiates a sample with light, analyzes the sample, and includes a light source that irradiates the sample with light, an imaging unit that condenses transmitted light transmitting through the sample, receives a quantity of the condensed light, and acquires a brightness value, and a control unit that controls the light source and the imaging unit, the analysis device comprising: a reference sample (para [0020], the reference sample is element 15, para [0027-28] fig. 2a-c); and a storage unit that stores the brightness value and a control value of the light source (this entire limitation is discussed in para [0027-28] fig. 2a-c; the relational expression corresponds to the types A and B), “wherein the control unit causes the reference sample to be irradiated with light from the light source using a preset control value and causes the storage unit to store a relational expression between measured brightness value of the reference sample acquired by the imaging unit and adjustment control values of the light source for adjusting the measured brightness value of the reference sample to a preset reference brightness” (para [0027-31] fig. 2a-c),“irradiates a sample to be measured with light from the light source using the preset control value and calculates the adjustment control value of the light source” (para [0027-28] fig. 2a-c), based on the relational expression stored in the storage unit, from a brightness value of the sample to be measured acquired by the imaging unit (this entire limitation is discussed in para [0027-28] fig. 2a-c; the relational expression corresponds to the types A and B), and “causes irradiation with light from the light source to be performed using the calculated adjustment control value and causes the imaging unit to acquire the brightness value of the sample to be measured” (para [0027-31] fig. 2a-c).
Wakitani does not teach two or more reference samples that differ in at least one of transmittance or color.
Hwa, from the same field of endeavor as Wakitani, teaches two or more reference samples that differ in at least one of transmittance or color (fig. 2 p. 3 para 2; the reference samples have a wider range and this indicate the reference samples have different transmittance or color, p. 3 para 4; Abstract last sentence).
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 Hwa to Wakitani to have two or more reference samples that differ in at least one of transmittance or color in order to accurately measure a whiteness index of a steel plate without contacts and to control a surface of a steel plate to be in an optimal condition by monitoring a processing condition of the steel plate on areal time basis (Abstract first sentence).
Regarding claim 6, Wakitani teaches the analysis device according to claim 4, “wherein the control unit, when a certain period of time elapses from last measurement of the reference sample, causes the measurement of the reference sample to be performed, and causes the storage unit to store the relational expression between the measured brightness value of the reference value and the adjustment control value of the light source for adjusting the measured brightness value of the reference sample to the preset reference brightness value” (para [0027-31]; “certain period of time elapses from last measurement of the reference sample” corresponds to the time it takes to repeat the measurement of element 15 due to the two samples 13 and 18; the time lapse from the reference sample can be easily obtained by Wakitani during measuring for types A and B).
Wakitani does not teach two or more reference samples.
Hwa, from the same field of endeavor as Wakitani, teaches two or more reference samples (fig. 2 p. 3 para 2; the reference samples have a wide range of range and this indicates the reference samples have different transmittance or color, p. 3 para 4; Abstract last sentence).
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 Hwa to Wakitani to have two or more reference samples in order to accurately measure a whiteness index of a steel plate without contacts and to control a surface of a steel plate to be in an optimal condition by monitoring a processing condition of the steel plate on areal time basis (Abstract first sentence).
Claim(s) 2, 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wakitani and Hwa as applied to claim(s) 1, 4 above and further in view of Furuya, I. et al., JP 2011007642 A (hereinafter Furuya).
Regarding claim 2, Wakitani teaches the analysis method according to claim 1, “wherein the adjustment control value of the light source is stored in the storage unit for each sample to be measured, the adjustment control value is used to correct the light source and measurement is performed” (para [0027-31] the samples are elements 13 and 18).
Furuya, from the same field of endeavor as Wakitani, teaches the “in measuring a change with lapse of time of the sample to be measured” (para [0033-34]).
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 Furuya to Wakitani to have “in measuring a change with lapse of time of the sample to be measured” in order to obtain a very high accurate measurements (para [0009]).
Regarding claim 5, the modified device of Wakitani fails to teach the analysis device according to claim 4, wherein the control unit causes the storage unit to store the adjustment control value of the light source for each sample to be measured, and corrects the light source using the adjustment control value in measuring a change with lapse of time of the sample to be measured, and performs measurement.
Furuya, from the same field of endeavor as Hirai, teaches the analysis device according to claim 4, wherein the control unit causes the storage unit to store the adjustment control value of the light source for each sample to be measured (this is described in para [0026]), and corrects the light source using the adjustment control value in measuring a change with lapse of time of the sample to be measured (para [0033]; these are the setting periods of the carousel), and performs measurement (para [0026]).
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 Furuya to the modified device of Wakitani to have the analysis device according to claim 4, wherein the control unit causes the storage unit to store the adjustment control value of the light source for each sample to be measured, and corrects the light source using the adjustment control value in measuring a change with lapse of time of the sample to be measured, and performs measurement in order to obtain a very high accurate measurements (para [0009]).
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