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 .
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it exceeds 150 words. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 13 is a dependent claim that does not currently contain a reference to a preceding claim. For the purpose of examination, the examiner assumes that claim 13 should depend from claim 1. 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 applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 18 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 18 recites the limitation "the exhaust plume” (i.e. the first instance of this limitation). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wei et al. (CN 112748088 – cited on Applicant’s IDS; translation provided by Applicant).
Regarding claims 1 and 20, Wei discloses (Figs. 1-7) a device for measuring at least one gaseous or solid material (i.e. exhaust gas: see par. [0001]) in at least one measurement volume at a stationary measurement station (as shown in Fig. 1; [0012]), wherein a light source 115 and at least one detector 1195 [0035] are provided, and at least one main primary beam is emittable from the light source to at least one beam splitter unit 117 [0033],
wherein the at least one beam splitter unit 117 is arranged at a first distance from a first reflection region of a reflection unit 5 (i.e. on the left in Fig. 2), and the beam splitter unit 117 splits the main primary beam into at least one first partial beam (left of the splitter 117 in Fig. 5) oriented through the measurement volume toward the first reflection region (toward 118: see Fig. 5) and at least one secondary primary beam (right of the splitter 117 in Fig. 5) oriented in a different direction than the main primary beam (to the right: see Fig. 5),
wherein at least one deflecting unit 120 [0034] is arranged at a second distance from a second reflection region 5 (i.e. on the right in Fig. 2; and see Fig. 5), and the at least one secondary primary beam can be directed to the deflecting unit 120 (as shown in Fig. 5) by means of the beam splitter unit 117 and the at least one secondary primary beam can be directed, as a second partial beam, through the at least one measurement volume toward the second reflection region by means of the deflecting unit (as shown in Figs. 2 and 5),
wherein the at least one measurement volume is arranged between the beam splitter unit 117 or the deflection unit 120 and the associated reflection regions 5 (i.e. the measurement volume is vertically between the light source 1 and the reflective regions 5: see Fig. 2), and is at least partially delimited by the beam splitter unit 117 or the deflection unit 120 and the associated reflection regions 5 (vertically between the light source 1 and the reflective regions 5: see Fig. 2), wherein the first reflection region 5 is provided in order to direct the first partial beam as a first return beam through the at least one measurement volume to the at least one detector 1195 [0035],
wherein the second reflection region 5 is provided in order to direct the second partial beam as a second return beam through the at least one measuring volume to the at least one detector 1195 [0035], and wherein the at least one detector 1195 is provided to measure a light property of each return beam characterizing the at least one gaseous or solid material (i.e. concentration of the components of the exhaust gas: [0035].
The apparatus of Wei, as applied above in the rejection of claim 1, would perform the method and meet the limitations of claim 20.
Regarding claim 2, Wei discloses (Figs. 1-7) the reflection regions 5 are configured to direct the respective return beam to one detector 1195 each [0035].
Regarding claim 3, Wei discloses (Figs. 1-7) the first return beam is deflected back from the first reflection region 5 via the beam splitter unit 117 to the at least one detector 1195 [0035].
Regarding claim 4, Wei discloses (Figs. 1-7) the second return beam is deflected back from the second reflection region 5 via the deflection unit 117, or via the deflection unit 120 and the beam splitter unit 117, to the at least one detector 1195 [0035].
Regarding claim 5, Wei discloses (Figs. 1-7) the at least one detector 1195 is arranged in the deflection unit or the beam splitter unit (if the upper unit 1 is taken as a whole: see Fig. 2), or a detector is arranged in the deflection unit or the beam splitter unit in each case (if the upper unit 1 is taken as a whole: see Fig. 2; [0035]).
Regarding claim 6, Wei discloses (Figs. 1-7) the at least one detector 1195 is installed with the light source 115 in a housing (as shown in Fig. 5; [0035]).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 7-8 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei et al. (CN 112748088).
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Wei is applied as above, and discloses a second beam splitter may be provided: [0014].
Wei does not specifically disclose at least one second beam splitter unit at a third distance from a third reflection region is provided, wherein the second beam splitter unit is arranged between the first beam splitter unit and the deflection unit and receives the secondary primary beam from the first beam splitter unit, and wherein the second beam splitter unit divides the received secondary primary beam into a third partial beam oriented in the direction of the third reflection region, and a second secondary primary beam oriented in the direction of the deflection unit; and the beam splitter unit divides the obtained main primary beam or secondary primary beam into a first partial beam or third partial beam and into multiple secondary primary beams oriented in different directions, wherein the beam splitter unit directs each secondary primary beam to another beam splitter unit or a deflection unit.
However, such a modification would be merely a duplication of parts (i.e. to prove a second beam splitter and/or additional detection beams, which Wei contemplates: [0014]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wei’s device to include at least one second beam splitter unit at a third distance from a third reflection region is provided, wherein the second beam splitter unit is arranged between the first beam splitter unit and the deflection unit and receives the secondary primary beam from the first beam splitter unit, and wherein the second beam splitter unit divides the received secondary primary beam into a third partial beam oriented in the direction of the third reflection region, and a second secondary primary beam oriented in the direction of the deflection unit; and the beam splitter unit divides the obtained main primary beam or secondary primary beam into a first partial beam or third partial beam and into multiple secondary primary beams oriented in different directions, wherein the beam splitter unit directs each secondary primary beam to another beam splitter unit or a deflection unit – see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B).
Regarding claims 15-17, Wei is applied as above, and discloses a second beam splitter may be provided: [0014].
Wei does not specifically disclose a multiplexer unit is provided in at least one beam splitter unit or deflection unit, and divides the obtained main primary beam or secondary primary beam into a plurality of partial beams, and the multiplexer unit directs the plurality of partial beams to different locations of the respective reflection region which reflects the plurality of sub-beams as a plurality of return beams and transmits the plurality of return beams to the multiplexer unit, and that the multiplexer unit transmits the plurality of reflected return beams to at least one detector; a dedicated detector is provided for at least two of the plurality of return beams; and at least two of the plurality of partial beams in the multiplexer unit are each guided via a dedicated optical path, wherein the optical paths have different optical path lengths, and in that a common detector is provided for the at least two resulting return beams.
However, such a modification would be merely a duplication of parts (i.e. to prove a second beam splitter and/or additional detection beams, which Wei contemplates: [0014]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wei’s device so that a multiplexer unit is provided in at least one beam splitter unit or deflection unit, and divides the obtained main primary beam or secondary primary beam into a plurality of partial beams, and the multiplexer unit directs the plurality of partial beams to different locations of the respective reflection region which reflects the plurality of sub-beams as a plurality of return beams and transmits the plurality of return beams to the multiplexer unit, and that the multiplexer unit transmits the plurality of reflected return beams to at least one detector; a dedicated detector is provided for at least two of the plurality of return beams; and at least two of the plurality of partial beams in the multiplexer unit are each guided via a dedicated optical path, wherein the optical paths have different optical path lengths, and in that a common detector is provided for the at least two resulting return beams – see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei et al. (CN 112748088) in view of Lutzelschwab et al. (U.S. Pub. 2020/0400556).
Regarding claim 9, Wei is applied as above, but does not disclose at least one beam splitter unit is arranged so as to be pivotable about an axis in order to selectively guide the generated secondary primary beam to a plurality of deflection units or additional beam splitter units, wherein the axis is designed to extend normally to a reflection region or to a surface on which the reflection unit is arranged.
Lutzelschwab discloses at least one beam splitter unit is arranged so as to be pivotable about an axis [0042], wherein the axis is designed to extend normally to a reflection region or to a surface on which the reflection unit is arranged (implicit).
Although Wei and Lutzelschwab do not disclose in order to selectively guide the generated secondary primary beam to a plurality of deflection units or additional beam splitter units, such a modification would be merely a duplication of parts – see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wei’s device so that at least one beam splitter unit is arranged so as to be pivotable about an axis in order to selectively guide the generated secondary primary beam to a plurality of deflection units or additional beam splitter units, wherein the axis is designed to extend normally to a reflection region or to a surface on which the reflection unit is arranged, as taught by Lutzelschwab.
Such a modification would be the application of a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results – MPEP 2143(I)(D).
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei et al. (CN 112748088) in view of Stedman et al. (U.S. Pub. 2002/0010554).
Regarding claims 10 and 11, Wei is applied as above, but does not disclose a positioning optical unit is provided in at least one beam splitter unit or the deflection unit, and the positioning optical unit directs the first partial beam oriented in the direction of the respective reflection region in an angle deviating from a normal to the respective reflection region; and in at least one beam splitter unit or deflection unit an opposite second reflection unit with an opposite twin reflection region facing the respective reflection region is arranged at a distance from the respective reflection region, wherein the respective reflection region reflects the partial beam to the opposite twin reflection region, and the opposite twin reflection region reflects the partial beam back to the respective reflection region, wherein the at least one detector is configured to detect the partial beam after a plurality of such reflections as a return beam, or a deflection mirror is provided which deflects the partial beam after a plurality of such reflections as a return beam, and the at least one detector detects the return beam after a number of reflections between the reflection unit and the opposite reflection unit.
Stedman discloses (Figs. 1-3) a positioning optical unit 330 [0036] is provided in the deflection unit, and the positioning optical unit 330 directs the first partial beam oriented in the direction of the respective reflection region in an angle deviating from a normal to the respective reflection region (i.e. in a crisscross pattern: see Fig. 3; [0032]); and in at least one beam splitter unit or deflection unit an opposite second reflection unit with an opposite twin reflection region facing the respective reflection region is arranged at a distance from the respective reflection region (as shown in Fig. 3), wherein the respective reflection region reflects the partial beam to the opposite twin reflection region, and the opposite twin reflection region reflects the partial beam back to the respective reflection region (as shown in Fig. 3), wherein the at least one detector is configured to detect the partial beam after a plurality of such reflections as a return beam (at detector 320: [0037]), and the at least one detector 320 detects the return beam after a number of reflections between the reflection unit and the opposite reflection unit (as shown in Fig. 3).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wei’s device so that a positioning optical unit is provided in at least one beam splitter unit or the deflection unit, and the positioning optical unit directs the first partial beam oriented in the direction of the respective reflection region in an angle deviating from a normal to the respective reflection region; and in at least one beam splitter unit or deflection unit an opposite second reflection unit with an opposite twin reflection region facing the respective reflection region is arranged at a distance from the respective reflection region, wherein the respective reflection region reflects the partial beam to the opposite twin reflection region, and the opposite twin reflection region reflects the partial beam back to the respective reflection region, wherein the at least one detector is configured to detect the partial beam after a plurality of such reflections as a return beam, or a deflection mirror is provided which deflects the partial beam after a plurality of such reflections as a return beam, and the at least one detector detects the return beam after a number of reflections between the reflection unit and the opposite reflection unit, as taught by Stedman.
Such a modification would be the application of a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results – MPEP 2143(I)(D).
Regarding claim 12, Wei but does not disclose the angle is adjustable by the positioning optical unit.
However, such a modification would be merely to make the beam splitter unit angle adjustable, which is obvious – see MPEP 2144.04(V)(D).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wei’s device so that the angle is adjustable by the positioning optical unit.
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei et al. (CN 112748088) in view of Trainer et al. (U.S. Pub. 2016/0202164).
Regarding claims 13-14, Wei is applied as above, but does not disclose at least one modulation unit is provided in the device in order to divide a beam selected from the group consisting of the partial beam, a return beam, the main primary beam, and a secondary primary beam into individual light packets; and the at least two light packets are offset in time.
Trainer discloses (Fig. 6) at least one modulation unit is provided in the device [0181] in order to divide a beam selected from the group consisting of the partial beam, a return beam, the main primary beam, and a secondary primary beam (as shown in Fig. 6) into individual light packets (i.e. light pulses: [0181]); and the at least two light packets are offset in time [0181].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wei’s device so that at least one modulation unit is provided in the device in order to divide a beam selected from the group consisting of the partial beam, a return beam, the main primary beam, and a secondary primary beam into individual light packets; and the at least two light packets are offset in time, as taught by Trainer.
Such a modification would be the application of a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results – MPEP 2143(I)(D).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei et al. (CN 112748088) in view of Swanson (U.S. Patent 4,924,095).
Regarding claim 18, Wei is applied as above, but does not disclose at least one imaging unit is provided in the device in order to record at least a part of the exhaust plume from different directions in the presence of an exhaust plume in the measuring volume, wherein an evaluation unit is provided in order to reconstruct the images recorded by the image unit into an image of the at least one part of the exhaust plume and to determine from the image of the at least one part of the exhaust plume a passage length of the partial beam or of the return beam through the exhaust plume in the measuring volume, wherein the at least one detector which detects the return beam detects a decrease in intensity of the return beam due to the at least one gaseous or solid material, and the evaluation unit is provided to determine a concentration of the at least one gaseous or solid material in the measuring volume from the decrease in intensity and the determined passage length.
Swanson discloses (Figs. 1-7) at least one imaging unit (computer: col. 4, lines 16-19) is provided in the device in order to record at least a part of the exhaust plume from different directions in the presence of an exhaust plume in the measuring volume (as shown in Figs. 1-7; captures an entire volumetric cross-section of the exhaust plume: col. 4, lines 30-33), wherein an evaluation unit is provided in order to reconstruct the images recorded by the image unit into an image of the at least one part of the exhaust plume (col. 4, lines 30-33) and to determine from the image of the at least one part of the exhaust plume a passage length of the partial beam or of the return beam through the exhaust plume in the measuring volume (col. 4, lines 34-46), wherein the at least one detector which detects the return beam detects a decrease in intensity of the return beam due to the at least one gaseous or solid material (col. 3, lines 32-46), and the evaluation unit is provided to determine a concentration of the at least one gaseous or solid material in the measuring volume from the decrease in intensity and the determined passage length (col. 3, lines 32-46).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wei’s device so that at least one imaging unit is provided in the device in order to record at least a part of the exhaust plume from different directions in the presence of an exhaust plume in the measuring volume, wherein an evaluation unit is provided in order to reconstruct the images recorded by the image unit into an image of the at least one part of the exhaust plume and to determine from the image of the at least one part of the exhaust plume a passage length of the partial beam or of the return beam through the exhaust plume in the measuring volume, wherein the at least one detector which detects the return beam detects a decrease in intensity of the return beam due to the at least one gaseous or solid material, and the evaluation unit is provided to determine a concentration of the at least one gaseous or solid material in the measuring volume from the decrease in intensity and the determined passage length, as taught by Swanson.
Such a modification would be the application of a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results – MPEP 2143(I)(D).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei et al. (CN 112748088) in view of Sperlich (WO 2004/097381 – copy and full translation attached).
Regarding claim 19, Wei is applied as above, but does not disclose a protective film is arranged replaceably above a reflection region.
Sperlich discloses a protective film is arranged replaceably above a reflection region see Abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wei’s device so that a protective film is arranged replaceably above a reflection region, as taught by Sperlich.
Such a modification would protect the emitter and detector (see bottom p. 2, top p. 3).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Statz et al. (U.S. Pub. 2012/0182555) discloses a gas detector with a beam splitter, a deflector, and two reflectors (Fig. 4).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Benjamin Schmitt, whose telephone number is (571) 270-7930. The examiner can normally be reached M-F | 8:30-5:00.
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, Walter Lindsay can be reached at (571) 272-1674. 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.
/BENJAMIN R SCHMITT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852