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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 26 May 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 26 May 2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 9-33 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to Claims 1 and 32 do not overcome the objections nor the U.S.C. 103 rejections.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 26 May 2026, with respect to the U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 9-33 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection has newly cited references teaching the amended claim.
Claim Objections
Claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1 line 10, “the subset of optical cavities” should be corrected to say –the subset of the optical cavities--.
In claim 9 line 2, “a plurality of pairs of micromirrors” should be corrected to say –the plurality of pairs of micromirrors—because the antecedent basis is set forth in claim 1.
In claim 19 line 1, “wherein, wherein” should be corrected to say –wherein--. On lines 3-4, “signal to piezoelectric material” should be corrected to say -- signal to the piezoelectric material--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 of this title, 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, 4, 5, 9-11, 17-19, 21, 22, 29 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kiesel et al. (US7554673B2), hereinafter Kiesel, in view of Smith et al. (US 9945775 B2), hereinafter Smith, further in view of Rohini College of Engineering & Technology, "3.4 resonator configuration," in EC8452 - Optoelectronic Devices Course Materials, 2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.rcet.org.in/uploads/academics/rohini_75899258689.pdf, hereinafter Rohini.
As to claim 1, Kiesel teaches a gas-sensing apparatus (Kiesel col. 20 ln. 64-65; col. 21 ln. 1-11; col. 33 ln. 65-67; the moving fluid such as a liquid, gas or aerosol passes through the device 350 to be photosensed by array 362) comprising:
a test chamber formed in a body (Kiesel col. 21 ln. 1-4; fig. 11; Within channel 384, a moving fluid such as a liquid, gas, or aerosol, represented by arrows 390, carries an object 392, providing analyte-array relative movement),
the test chamber comprising a plurality of pairs (Kiesel col. 15 ln. 44-47; fig. 7; “FIG. 7 shows system 200, an exemplary implementation of system 100 in FIG. 1. System 200 includes optical cavity structure 202, a structure that can include one or more optical cavities with features described above”) of micromirrors (Kiesel col. 5 ln. 19-24, “Some of the photosensing implementations described herein employ structures with one or more dimensions smaller than 1 mm, and various techniques have been proposed for producing such structures. In particular, some techniques for producing such structures are referred to as "microfabrication”. This implies the capability of using micromirrors in the device of Kiesel),
one of each pair of mirrors being disposed on the first surface of the body and the other of each pair of mirrors being disposed on a second surface of the body, wherein each pair of mirrors forms a respective optical cavity (Kiesel col. 21 ln. 63-66; fig. 11; Entry and exit light- reflective structures 382 and 394 operate as two parallel mirrors, with channel 384 being a light-transmission region between them, providing an optical cavity. The reflective structures 382 and 394 make up two surfaces of the body of the device 350);
a light inlet arranged to couple light into only a subset of the optical cavities (Kiesel col. 20 ln. 64- col. 21 ln. 2; fig. 11; fig. 7; Light sources 360 are providing light, represented by arrows 380, which passes through entry glass 352 and through entry light-reflective structure 382 before entering channel 384. A subset can include the entire optical cavity structure 202. col. 7 ln. 44-53; fig. 7; The subset is described by Kiesel as the optical cavity 204 selected based on it containing the analyte),
the subset of optical cavities comprising one or more optical cavities selected based on one or more target gas species to be detected by the gas-sensing apparatus (Kiesel col. 7 ln. 44-53; fig. 7; The subset is described by Kiesel as the optical cavity 204 selected based on it containing the analyte. Col. 20 ln. 64-65; col. 21 ln. 1-11; The analyte is a moving fluid such as a liquid, gas or aerosol. Thus, the subset comprises one or more cavities selected based on the target gas to be sensed);
light outlets arranged to receive light from only the selected subset of the optical cavities (Kiesel col. 21 ln. 8-11; fig. 11; analyte-affected output light exits through exit light-reflective structure 394 and is transmitted through exit glass 396 and then transmission structure 398 before being photosensed by array 362);
and a gas inlet configured to allow gas from outside of the apparatus to enter the test chamber (Kiesel col. 20 ln. 46-53; fig. 10; an analyte or a fluid carrying an analyte can enter the optical cavity from inlet 356).
However, Kiesel does not explicitly disclose the respective optical cavity with one or both micromirrors of the pair of micromirrors being curved with a radius of curvature, and a distance between the micromirrors of the pair being less than twice the radius of curvature, and wherein the optical cavities have different resonant frequencies.
Smith, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches the respective optical cavity (Smith fig. 1-2; col. 1 ln. 60-61; “The present invention performs sensing using a micrometer scale optical microcavity”. col. 9 ln. 50-52; “The sensor 1 comprises a sample introduction system 21 that is arranged to introduce a chemical sample inside the optical cavity 13”) with one or both micromirrors of the pair of micromirrors being curved with a radius of curvature (Smith col. 8 ln. 25-28; “The mirror 11 may be formed by using a bubble trapping method in glass to produce highly spherical surfaces with radii of curvature of order 50 μm”),
and a distance between the micromirrors of the pair being less than twice the radius of curvature (Smith col. 3 ln. 50-52; “The cavity length L of the optical cavity 13 is the distance between the mirrors 11 and 12 including the field penetration into the mirrors 11 and 12”. Smith col. 8 ln. 25-28; “The mirror 11 may be formed by using a bubble trapping method in glass to produce highly spherical surfaces with radii of curvature of order 50 μm”. Smith col. 7 ln. 15-16; “The optical cavity has a cavity length of at most 50 μm, preferably at most 30 μm, more preferably at most 10 μm”. Thus, the distance between the micromirrors (cavity length of at most 50 μm, preferably 30 μm or 10 μm) can be less than twice the radius of curvature (2*50 μm = 100 μm)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kiesel to incorporate the teachings of Smith to include the respective optical cavity with one or both micromirrors of the pair of micromirrors being curved with a radius of curvature, and a distance between the micromirrors of the pair being less than twice the radius of curvature; for the advantages of good mode control, good field of view, and a useful quantum mechanical enhancement of coupling between the optical and electronic systems (Smith col. 2 ln. 32-37).
Kiesel fig. 19 teaches the optical cavities of light-reflective structures 652, 654 can have different cavity lengths. However, still lacking the limitations such as wherein the optical cavities have different resonant frequencies.
Rohini, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein the optical cavities have different resonant frequencies (Rohini pg. 1 ln. 5-10; “Plane Parallel Resonator consists of two plane mirrors set parallel to each other, as Shown in the figure below. The one round trip of wave in the cavity should be an integral number times 2ı , the resonant frequencies is ı = kc/(2L), k is an integral number, c is the speed of light in the medium, L is the cavity length”. Thus, the resonant frequency changes with the cavity length. Therefore, in combination with Kiesel fig. 19 wherein the optical cavities have different cavity lengths, the resonant frequencies differ).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kiesel in view of Smith to incorporate the teachings of Rohini to include wherein the optical cavities have different resonant frequencies; for the advantage of higher precision detection.
PNG
media_image1.png
547
955
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kiesel Fig. 7
PNG
media_image2.png
556
1505
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Kiesel Fig. 10
PNG
media_image2.png
556
1505
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Kiesel Fig. 11
PNG
media_image3.png
555
628
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Kiesel Fig. 19
PNG
media_image4.png
1622
818
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Smith Fig. 1-2
As to claim 4, Kiesel teaches wherein the body comprises a first part and a second part (Kiesel fig. 11; The first part of the device 350 is between the light sources 360 and the first mirror 382: the entry glass 352. The second part of the device 350 is between the second mirror 394 and the transmission structure 398: the exit glass 396), the test chamber being formed between the first part and the second part (Kiesel fig. 11; the channel 384 is between the entry glass 352 and exit glass 396), and wherein the first surface is a surface of the first part (Kiesel col. 21 ln. 63-66; fig. 11; the entry glass 352 has a surface of the reflective structure 382, which is therefore a surface of the first part), and the second surface is a surface of the second part (Kiesel col. 21 ln. 63-66; fig. 11; the exit glass 396 has a surface of the reflective structure 394, which is therefore a surface of the second part).
As to claim 5, Kiesel teaches wherein the first part is a first substrate and the second part is a second substrate (Kiesel col. 20 ln. 41-53; fig. 11; entry glass 352 and exit glass 396 have coatings or other structures that function as light-reflective components, and thus are both substrates), and wherein the body further comprises a spacing structure separating the first substrate and the second substrate (Kiesel col. 20 ln. 41-53; fig. 10; the two glasses are separated by spacers 354).
As to claim 9, Kiesel teaches wherein the test chamber comprises a plurality of pairs (Kiesel col. 15 ln. 44-47; fig. 7; “FIG. 7 shows system 200, an exemplary implementation of system 100 in FIG. 1. System 200 includes optical cavity structure 202, a structure that can include one or more optical cavities with features described above”) of micromirrors (Kiesel col. 5 ln. 19-24, “Some of the photosensing implementations described herein employ structures with one or more dimensions smaller than 1 mm, and various techniques have been proposed for producing such structures. In particular, some techniques for producing such structures are referred to as "microfabrication”. This implies the capability of using micromirrors in the device of Kiesel)
for each of one or more target gas species to be detected by the gas-sensing apparatus (Kiesel fig. 11; col. 21 ln. 12-14; the pair of mirrors 382, 394 corresponds to the target gas species of object 392 which can be a particle, droplet, or small volume of fluid that can be carried by a fluid or other appropriate substance and that includes an analyte to be analyzed).
As to claim 10, Kiesel teaches wherein the test chamber comprises 2 or more, or 5 or more, or 10 or more pairs of micromirrors (Kiesel col. 15 ln. 44-47; fig. 7; “FIG. 7 shows system 200, an exemplary implementation of system 100 in FIG. 1. System 200 includes optical cavity structure 202, a structure that can include one or more optical cavities with features described above”) for each of the one or more target gas species (Kiesel col. 20 ln. 64-65; col. 21 ln. 1-11; The analyte is a moving fluid such as a liquid, gas or aerosol. Thus, for the one or more target gas species, the test chamber can comprise 2 or more pairs of micromirrors).
As to claim 11, Kiesel does not explicitly disclose wherein the gas-sensing apparatus is configured to detect 2 or more, or 5 or more, or 10 or more target gas species.
Smith, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein the gas-sensing apparatus is configured to detect 2 or more, or 5 or more, or 10 or more target gas species (Smith col. 14 ln. 19-21; “The sensor 1 is a general sensing platform that may be applied for sensing of a wide range of solution-phase and gas-phase analytes”. Thus, the sensor 1 can detect 2 or more target gas species).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kiesel to incorporate the teachings of Smith to include wherein the gas-sensing apparatus is configured to detect 2 or more, or 5 or more, or 10 or more target gas species; for the advantage of unambiguous identification of molecules of interest in a gaseous sample (Smith col. 12 ln. 45-48).
As to claim 17, Kiesel teaches optical cavity tuning system configured to alter the one or more of the optical cavities (Kiesel col. 30 ln. 34-40; the optical cavity can be tuned, e.g. adjusting its shape, which is known in the art to result in altering the resonant frequency).
However, Kiesel does not explicitly disclose altering the resonant frequency.
Smith, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches altering the resonant frequency (Smith col. 9 ln. 7-20; “To provide tuning of the wavelength of the modes of the optical cavity 30, the apparatus 1 is further provided with an actuator system 20 that is arranged to move the mirrors 11 and 12 relative to each other along the length of the optical cavity 13 between the mirrors 11 and 12. In particular, the actuator system 20 comprises a piezoelectric actuator 21 that is arranged between the mirrors 11 and 12 with extension parallel to the optical axis O”. Varying the wavelength modes alters the resonant frequency).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kiesel to incorporate the teachings of Smith to include altering the resonant frequency; for the advantage of reducing the cost and size of sensors (Smith col. 2 ln. 7-11).
As to claim 18, Kiesel teaches wherein the optical cavity tuning system is configured to change the temperature of the micromirrors and/or the body in order to vary the one or more of the optical cavities (Kiesel col. 18 ln. 26-35; The temperature of the cavity can be adjusted, which is known in the art to result in altering the resonant frequency. Thus, the temperature of the body is changed).
However, Kiesel does not explicitly disclose varying the resonant frequency.
Smith, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches varying the resonant frequency (Smith col. 9 ln. 7-20; “To provide tuning of the wavelength of the modes of the optical cavity 30, the apparatus 1 is further provided with an actuator system 20 that is arranged to move the mirrors 11 and 12 relative to each other along the length of the optical cavity 13 between the mirrors 11 and 12. In particular, the actuator system 20 comprises a piezoelectric actuator 21 that is arranged between the mirrors 11 and 12 with extension parallel to the optical axis O”. Varying the wavelength modes alters the resonant frequency).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kiesel to incorporate the teachings of Smith to include varying the resonant frequency; for the advantage of reducing the cost and size of sensors (Smith col. 2 ln. 7-11).
As to claim 19, Kiesel does not explicitly disclose wherein, wherein the micromirrors and/or the body comprise a piezoelectric material, and wherein the optical cavity tuning system is configured to apply a piezoelectric control signal to piezoelectric material in order to vary the resonant frequency of the one or more of the optical cavities.
Smith, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein, wherein the micromirrors and/or the body comprise a piezoelectric material (Smith col. 9 ln. 7-20; “the actuator system 20 comprises a piezoelectric actuator 21 that is arranged between the mirrors 11 and 12 with extension parallel to the optical axis O”),
and wherein the optical cavity tuning system is configured to apply a piezoelectric control signal to piezoelectric material (“The piezoelectric actuator 21 is driven by a drive signal supplied from a drive circuit 23 to provide positional control”) in order to vary the resonant frequency of the one or more of the optical cavities (Smith col. 9 ln. 7-20; “To provide tuning of the wavelength of the modes of the optical cavity 30, the apparatus 1 is further provided with an actuator system 20 that is arranged to move the mirrors 11 and 12 relative to each other along the length of the optical cavity 13 between the mirrors 11 and 12. In particular, the actuator system 20 comprises a piezoelectric actuator 21 that is arranged between the mirrors 11 and 12 with extension parallel to the optical axis O”. Varying the wavelength modes alters the resonant frequency).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kiesel to incorporate the teachings of Smith to include wherein, wherein the micromirrors and/or the body comprise a piezoelectric material, and wherein the optical cavity tuning system is configured to apply a piezoelectric control signal to piezoelectric material in order to vary the resonant frequency of the one or more of the optical cavities; for the advantage of reducing the cost and size of sensors (Smith col. 2 ln. 7-11).
As to claim 21, Kiesel does not explicitly disclose wherein the optical cavity or optical cavities are configured to have resonances in the visible to near- infrared electromagnetic ranges.
Smith, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein the optical cavity or optical cavities are configured to have resonances in the visible to near- infrared electromagnetic ranges (Smith col. 3 ln. 14-21; “The present invention is applied generally to EM radiation including in any combination” including visible light and infrared light, which includes near- infrared. The optical cavity is illuminated and resonances of an optical mode of the optical cavities that are affected by the individual particles may be excited. Thus, the optical cavity can be configured to have resonances in the visible to near- infrared electromagnetic ranges).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kiesel to incorporate the teachings of Smith to include wherein the optical cavity or optical cavities are configured to have resonances in the visible to near- infrared electromagnetic ranges; for the advantage stable resonance and standing waves of discrete frequencies and spatial distributions (Smith col. 3 ln. 36-41).
As to claim 22, Kiesel teaches a gas detector (Kiesel fig. 7; col. 15 ln. 50-53; The system 200 wherein the analyte can be photosensed within detector 210) comprising:
the gas-sensing apparatus of claim 1 (Kiesel col. 20 ln. 40-41; The device 350 can be used in an implementation of system 200);
a light emitting system arranged to transmit light into the light inlet of the gas- sensing apparatus (Kiesel col. 15 ln. 1-5; fig. 7; the one or more light sources 220 included within system 200 enters the light inlet of the optical cavity structure 202 as represented by arrow 222 in fig. 7);
and a light detecting system arranged to receive light from the light outlets of the gas- sensing apparatus, wherein the light detecting system is configured to generate a signal representative of the intensity of the received light (Kiesel col. 15 ln. 53-59; The detector 210 may include a photosensing component with one or more photosensitive surfaces at which lateral variation of light is detected. Such as after the light passes through an LVF. The sensing results from detector 210 can be provided to other components within system 200 or to external components, as represented by arrow 212).
As to claim 29, Kiesel teaches a method of detecting presence of a target gas species in an environment (Kiesel col. 31 ln 32-36; col. 33 ln. 63-67; The techniques can be applied for gas sensing, to distinguish objects from environment or background. Col. 33 ln. 54-62; For example, the techniques can be used via an implantable product or in a sophisticated fluidic system), the method comprising:
positioning the gas-sensing apparatus according to claim 1 in the environment such that gasses from the environment enter the test chamber of the apparatus (Kiesel col. 30 ln. 65- col. 31 ln. 7; The manner in which object 756 enters channel 754 and is carried by fluid can be via operation of propulsion components);
inputting a light beam into the one or more optical cavities of the gas-sensing apparatus; detecting the light exiting the one or more optical cavities (Kiesel col. 20 ln. 64- col. 21 ln. 2; fig. 11; light sources 360 are providing light, represented by arrows 380, which passes through entry glass 352 and through entry light-reflective structure 382 before entering channel 384);
and analysing the detected light to determine whether the target gas species is present (Kiesel col. 21 ln. 2-14; Within channel 384, a moving fluid such as a gas carries an object 392 that includes an analyte to be analyzed. The optical characteristics of the object 392 can affect light reflected which is transmitted out of the exit glass 396 before being photosensed by array 362. Thus, implicitly, the status of whether the target gas species is present can be determined).
As to claim 30, Kiesel teaches wherein: analysing the detected light comprises at least one of: determining an amount of light absorbed in the optical cavity; detecting a shift in a resonance frequency of the optical cavity; detecting a change in a ring-down time of the optical cavity; and detecting a change in a linewidth of the optical cavity (Kiesel fig. 14-15; col. 25 ln. 48-62; Information about the absorption information could be obtained from all the channels by the array 470);
and determining whether the target gas species is present is based on at least one of: the amount of light absorbed in the optical cavity; a magnitude of a resonance wavelength shift; a magnitude of the change in the ring -down time; and a magnitude of the change in linewidth (Kiesel col. 21 ln. 2-14; Within channel 384, a moving fluid such as a gas carries an object 392 that includes an analyte to be analyzed. The optical characteristics of the object 392 can affect light reflected which is transmitted out of the exit glass 396 before being photosensed by array 362. Kiesel fig. 14-15; col. 25 ln. 48-62; Information about the absorption information could be obtained from all the channels by the array 470. Thus, implicitly, the status of whether the target gas species is present can be determined based on absorbance).
PNG
media_image5.png
753
902
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Kiesel Fig. 14
PNG
media_image6.png
735
938
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Kiesel Fig. 15
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kiesel in view of Smith and Rohini, further in view of Ye et al. (US20080074660A1), hereinafter Ye.
As to claim 2, Kiesel in view of Smith and Rohini does not explicitly disclose wherein the optical cavity has an optical finesse of at least 10 000, or at least 50 000, or at least 100 000 or at least 250 000, or at least 500 000.
Ye, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein the optical cavity has an optical finesse of at least 10 000, or at least 50 000, or at least 100 000 or at least 250 000, or at least 500 000 (Ye [0079]-[0080]; the two mirror cavity has a high finesse of 30,000 or above).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kiesel in view of Smith and Rohini to incorporate the teachings of Ye to include wherein the optical cavity has an optical finesse of at least 10 000, or at least 50 000, or at least 100 000 or at least 250 000, or at least 500 000; for the advantage of increased sensitivity and resolution (Ye [0080]).
Claims 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kiesel in view of Smith and Rohini, further in view of Ross (US4153837A).
As to claim 12, Kiesel teaches a reference chamber formed in the body (Kiesel fig. 11, 14 and 15; col. 26 ln. 21-30; The reference chambers are described by Kiesel as the reference channels 452 and 456. While the channel 384 in fig. 11 and the channels 450, 454, 458 in fig. 14-15 corresponds to the test chambers), the reference chamber comprising:
one or more pairs of micromirrors (Kiesel col. 5 ln. 19-24, “Some of the photosensing implementations described herein employ structures with one or more dimensions smaller than 1 mm, and various techniques have been proposed for producing such structures. In particular, some techniques for producing such structures are referred to as "microfabrication”. This implies the capability of using micromirrors in the device of Kiesel), each pair of micromirrors forming a reference optical cavity (Kiesel fig. 14-15; the pair of light-reflective components 484, 492 and the walls 460 between each channel form individual cavities that make up the channels 450, 452, 454, 456, 458);
a light inlet arranged to couple light into one or more of the reference optical cavities (Kiesel fig. 15; col. 25 ln. 31-40; the entry glass 482 allows the light sources 480 to illuminate channels 450 through 458);
and a light outlet arranged to receive light from one or more of the reference optical cavities (Kiesel fig. 15; col. 25 ln. 31-40; the exit glass 494 receives the light from the channels 450 through 458).
However, Kiesel in view of Smith and Rohini does not explicitly disclose wherein the reference cavity is sealed or is sealable from outside gasses.
Ross, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein the reference chamber is sealed or is sealable from outside gasses (Ross col. 3 ln. 48-50; the reference chamber 64 is sealed at each end by windows 66 that may be epoxied in place).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kiesel in view of Smith and Rohini to incorporate the teachings of Ross to include wherein the reference chamber is sealed or is sealable from outside gasses; for the advantage of more control over what is permitted to flow therethrough (Ross col. 3 ln. 50-53).
As to claim 13, Kiesel teaches wherein the body comprises a first part and a second part (Kiesel fig. 15; The first part of the device 440 is between the light sources 480 and the first light-reflective structure 484. The second part of the device 440 is between the second light-reflective structure 492 and the transmission structure 490);
wherein the reference chamber is formed between the first part and the second part (Kiesel fig. 15; the reference channels 452 and 456 are formed between the light-reflective structures 484, 492).
As to claim 14, Kiesel in view of in view of Smith and Rohini does not explicitly disclose wherein the reference chamber is fillable with one or more reference gas species.
Ross, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein the reference chamber is fillable with one or more reference gas species (Ross col. 3 ln. 53-55; The reference chamber 64 may be filled with ambient air or an inert atmosphere).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kiesel in view of Smith and Rohini to incorporate the teachings of Ross to include wherein the reference chamber is fillable with one or more reference gas species; for the advantage of higher signal-to-noise ratio to maximize the sensitivity of readings (Ross col. 4 ln. 40-44).
As to claim 15, Kiesel teaches wherein the reference chamber comprises corresponding pairs of micromirrors for each pair of micromirrors in the test chamber (Kiesel col. 15 ln. 44-47; fig. 7; “FIG. 7 shows system 200, an exemplary implementation of system 100 in FIG. 1. System 200 includes optical cavity structure 202, a structure that can include one or more optical cavities with features described above”. Col. 5 ln. 19-24, “Some of the photosensing implementations described herein employ structures with one or more dimensions smaller than 1 mm, and various techniques have been proposed for producing such structures. In particular, some techniques for producing such structures are referred to as "microfabrication”. This implies the capability of using micromirrors in the device of Kiesel. Fig. 15; Each channel 450 through 458 corresponds to the pair of light-reflective components 484, 492).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kiesel in view of Smith, Rohini and Ross, further in view of Trichet et al. (US10948397B2), hereinafter Trichet.
As to claim 16, Kiesel teaches pairs of micromirrors (Kiesel col. 15 ln. 44-47; fig. 7; “FIG. 7 shows system 200, an exemplary implementation of system 100 in FIG. 1. System 200 includes optical cavity structure 202, a structure that can include one or more optical cavities with features described above”. Col. 5 ln. 19-24, “Some of the photosensing implementations described herein employ structures with one or more dimensions smaller than 1 mm, and various techniques have been proposed for producing such structures. In particular, some techniques for producing such structures are referred to as "microfabrication”. This implies the capability of using micromirrors in the device of Kiesel).
However, Kiesel in view of Smith, Rohini and Ross does not explicitly disclose wherein a resonant frequency of corresponding pairs of mirrors in the test chamber and reference chamber is substantially equal.
Trichet, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein a resonant frequency of corresponding pairs of mirrors in the test chamber and reference chamber is substantially equal (Trichet fig. 8; The trapping cavity 1a (test) and the reference cavity 1b (reference) share a corresponding pair of reflectors 2, 3. Pg. 9 ln. 16-20; Further, it is possible to use an array of plural optical cavities 1 having the same resonant frequency).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kiesel in view of Smith, Rohini and Ross to incorporate the teachings of Trichet to include wherein a resonant frequency of corresponding pairs of mirrors in the test chamber and reference chamber is substantially equal; for the advantage of enhanced detection of separate optical cavities (Trichet pg. 9 ln. 16-20).
PNG
media_image7.png
1094
1079
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Trichet Fig. 8
Claims 20 and 32-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kiesel in view of Smith and Rohini, further in view of Trichet.
As to claim 20, Kiesel in view of Smith and Rohini does not explicitly disclose wherein the optical cavity tuning system is arranged to monitor the resonant frequencies of one or more the optical cavities, and to alter the resonant frequency of one or more of the optical cavities based on the monitored resonant frequencies.
Trichet, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein the optical cavity tuning system is arranged to monitor the resonant frequencies of one or more the optical cavities (Trichet fig. 12; The resonant frequency for a set of multiple repeated measurements is derived experimentally in fig. 12. Pg. 11 ln. 13-15; The resonances in the different localized regions are detected and tracked as the particles 8 move in the optical cavity 1),
and to alter the resonant frequency of one or more of the optical cavities based on the monitored resonant frequencies (Trichet pg. 4 ln. 7-9; The step of illuminating the optical cavity further comprises tuning through the resonance, so that the at least one measurement of at least one parameter of the excited resonance may be derived by analysis of the output in the time domain. Thus, altering the resonant frequency is described by Trichet as tuning the resonance).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kiesel in view of Smith and Rohini to incorporate the teachings of Trichet to include wherein the optical cavity tuning system is arranged to monitor the resonant frequencies of one or more the optical cavities, and to alter the resonant frequency of one or more of the optical cavities based on the monitored resonant frequencies; for the advantage of allowing characterization of the particle with minimal perturbation to its intrinsic properties (Trichet pg. 3 ln. 19-25).
PNG
media_image8.png
656
647
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Trichet Fig. 12
As to claim 32, Kiesel teaches a method of providing a gas-sensing apparatus for use in detecting presence of a target gas species (Kiesel col. 31 ln 32-36; col. 33 ln. 63-67; The techniques can be applied for gas sensing, to distinguish objects from environment or background. Col. 20 ln. 64-65; col. 21 ln. 1-11; col. 33 ln. 65-67; the moving fluid such as a liquid, gas or aerosol passes through the device 350 to be photosensed by array 362) the method comprising:
constructing the gas-sensing apparatus by forming a test chamber between a first part and a second part, the test chamber comprising a plurality of pairs (Kiesel col. 15 ln. 44-47; fig. 7; “FIG. 7 shows system 200, an exemplary implementation of system 100 in FIG. 1. System 200 includes optical cavity structure 202, a structure that can include one or more optical cavities with features described above”) of micromirrors (Kiesel col. 5 ln. 19-24, “Some of the photosensing implementations described herein employ structures with one or more dimensions smaller than 1 mm, and various techniques have been proposed for producing such structures. In particular, some techniques for producing such structures are referred to as "microfabrication”. This implies the capability of using micromirrors in the device of Kiesel),
one of each pair of micromirrors being disposed on the first part and the other of each pair of mirrors being disposed on the second part (Kiesel fig. 11; The first part of the device 350 is between the light sources 360 and the first mirror 382: the entry glass 352. The second part of the device 350 is between the second mirror 394 and the transmission structure 398: the exit glass 396. Col. 21 ln. 1-4; fig. 11; The test chamber is described by Kiesel as the channel 384, which is between the first part and the second part), wherein each pair of micromirrors forms a respective optical cavity (Kiesel col. 21 ln. 63-66; fig. 11; Entry and exit light- reflective structures 382 and 394 provides an optical cavity);
coupling light into each optical cavity (Kiesel col. 20 ln. 64- col. 21 ln. 2; fig. 11; light sources 360 are providing light, represented by arrows 380, which passes through entry glass 352 and through entry light-reflective structure 382 before entering channel 384).
However, Kiesel does not explicitly disclose the respective optical cavity with one or both micromirrors of the pair of micromirrors being curved with a radius of curvature, and a distance between the micromirrors of the pair being less than twice the radius of curvature, and wherein the optical cavities have different resonant frequencies; determine a resonant frequency of each optical cavity; comparing the determined resonance frequencies to the frequency of an absorption peak of the target gas species; selecting a subset of the plurality of optical cavities based on the comparison of resonance frequencies to the frequency of the absorption peak, the subset comprising one or more of the optical cavities; and configuring the gas-sensing apparatus to detect light from only the selected subset of the plurality of optical cavities.
Smith, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches the respective optical cavity (Smith col. 1 ln. 60-61; “The present invention performs sensing using a micrometer scale optical microcavity”. col. 9 ln. 50-52; “The sensor 1 comprises a sample introduction system 21 that is arranged to introduce a chemical sample inside the optical cavity 13”) with one or both micromirrors of the pair of micromirrors being curved with a radius of curvature (Smith col. 8 ln. 25-28; “The mirror 11 may be formed by using a bubble trapping method in glass to produce highly spherical surfaces with radii of curvature of order 50 μm”),
and a distance between the micromirrors of the pair being less than twice the radius of curvature (Smith col. 3 ln. 50-52; “The cavity length L of the optical cavity 13 is the distance between the mirrors 11 and 12 including the field penetration into the mirrors 11 and 12”. Smith col. 8 ln. 25-28; “The mirror 11 may be formed by using a bubble trapping method in glass to produce highly spherical surfaces with radii of curvature of order 50 μm”. Smith col. 7 ln. 15-16; “The optical cavity has a cavity length of at most 50 μm, preferably at most 30 μm, more preferably at most 10 μm”. Thus, the distance between the micromirrors (cavity length of at most 50 μm, preferably 30 μm or 10 μm) can be less than twice the radius of curvature (2*50 μm = 100 μm)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kiesel to incorporate the teachings of Smith to include the respective optical cavity with one or both micromirrors of the pair of micromirrors being curved with a radius of curvature, and a distance between the micromirrors of the pair being less than twice the radius of curvature; for the advantages of good mode control, good field of view, and a useful quantum mechanical enhancement of coupling between the optical and electronic systems (Smith col. 2 ln. 32-37).
Kiesel fig. 19 teaches the optical cavities of light-reflective structures 652, 654 can have different cavity lengths. However, still lacking the limitations such as wherein the optical cavities have different resonant frequencies.
Rohini, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein the optical cavities have different resonant frequencies (Rohini pg. 1 ln. 5-10; “Plane Parallel Resonator consists of two plane mirrors set parallel to each other, as Shown in the figure below. The one round trip of wave in the cavity should be an integral number times 2ı , the resonant frequencies is ı = kc/(2L), k is an integral number, c is the speed of light in the medium, L is the cavity length”. Thus, the resonant frequency changes with the cavity length. Therefore, in combination with Kiesel fig. 19 wherein the optical cavities have different cavity lengths, the resonant frequencies differ).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kiesel in view of Smith to incorporate the teachings of Rohini to include wherein the optical cavities have different resonant frequencies; for the advantage of higher precision detection.
Still lacking the limitations such as determine a resonant frequency of each optical cavity; comparing the determined resonance frequencies to the frequency of an absorption peak of the target gas species; selecting a subset of the plurality of optical cavities based on the comparison of resonance frequencies to the frequency of the absorption peak, the subset comprising one or more of the optical cavities; and configuring the gas-sensing apparatus to detect light from only the selected subset of the plurality of optical cavities.
Trichet, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches determine a resonant frequency of each optical cavity (Trichet col. 7 ln. 16-18; In a device 10 comprising an array of plural optical cavities 1, the optical cavities 1 may have different resonant frequencies);
comparing the determined resonance frequencies to the frequency of an absorption peak of the target gas species (Trichet col. 10 ln. 11-18; Where plural optical cavities 1 having different resonant frequencies are used, or plural resonances in localised regions having different resonant frequencies are detected, the resonances are separated in frequency (and therefore also in wavelength). This separation provides spatial resolution of the optical cavities 1 by allowing at least one parameter to be derived in respect of each resonance and hence in respect of each particle 8. Col. 17 ln. 48-53; The measures (i.e the at least one parameter) may comprise the optical absorption of the particle 8. Thus, the different resonant frequencies can be compared to the optical absorption of the target particle 8);
selecting a subset of the plurality of optical cavities based on the comparison of resonance frequencies to the frequency of the absorption peak, the subset comprising one or more of the optical cavities (Trichet col. 10 ln. 11-18; Where plural optical cavities 1 having different resonant frequencies are used, at least one parameter can be derived in respect of each different particle 8. Thus, the optical cavity that holds the targeted particle 8 is selected as the subset);
and configuring the gas-sensing apparatus to detect light from only the selected subset of the plurality of optical cavities (Trichet col. 7 ln. 35-53; the output light from each optical cavity 1 may be detected together or separately by the detector).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kiesel in view of Smith and Rohini to incorporate the teachings of Trichet to include determine a resonant frequency of each optical cavity; comparing the determined resonance frequencies to the frequency of an absorption peak of the target gas species; selecting a subset of the plurality of optical cavities based on the comparison of resonance frequencies to the frequency of the absorption peak, the subset comprising one or more of the optical cavities; and configuring the gas-sensing apparatus to detect light from only the selected subset of the plurality of optical cavities; for the advantage of more design flexibility including providing spatial resolution (Trichet col. 7 ln. 41-45).
As to claim 33, Kiesel teaches calibrating the apparatus for one or more of temperature, pressure, and humidity (col. 26 ln. 30-34; Since reference medium and analyte are moving within the same environment or channel system this also allows compensation for external influences (like temperature, pressure, etc.) that may have a significant influence on optical properties).
PNG
media_image9.png
890
1196
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Deck Fig. 1
Claims 23-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kiesel in view of Smith and Rohini, further in view of Deck (US10845251B2).
As to claim 23, Kiesel teaches wherein the light emitting system comprises a light source (Kiesel col. 15 ln. 1-5; fig. 7; the one or more light sources 220).
However, Kiesel in view of Smith and Rohini does not explicitly disclose wherein the light emitting system comprises an optical fibre, the optical fibre arranged to couple light from the light source into the light inlet.
Deck, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein the light emitting system comprises an optical fibre, the optical fibre arranged to couple light from the light source into the light inlet (Deck col. 4 ln. 25-31; The light source 124 can be directed into a number of channels 104 via a fiber distributor 102).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kiesel in view of Smith and Rohini to incorporate the teachings of Deck to include wherein the light emitting system comprises an optical fibre, the optical fibre arranged to couple light from the light source into the light inlet; for the advantage of increasing the number of channels (Deck col. 4 ln. 25-31), thereby allowing for quicker analyses.
As to claim 24, Kiesel in view of Smith and Rohini does not explicitly disclose wherein the light detecting system comprises one or more photodiodes and one or more optical fibres, the one or more optical fibres arranged to couple light from the light outlet onto the one or more photodiodes.
Deck, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein the light detecting system comprises one or more photodiodes and one or more optical fibres, the one or more optical fibres arranged to couple light from the light outlet onto the one or more photodiodes (Deck fig. 1; col. 5 ln. 6-14; The detection module 110 comprises a plurality of detectors 126 that can be photodiodes. Col. 4 ln. 25-31; Light is coupled into the photodiodes via the fiber distributor 102).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kiesel in view of Smith and Rohini to incorporate the teachings of Deck to include wherein the light detecting system comprises one or more photodiodes and one or more optical fibres, the one or more optical fibres arranged to couple light from the light outlet onto the one or more photodiodes; for the advantage of increasing the number of channels (Deck col. 4 ln. 25-31), thereby allowing for quicker analyses.
As to claim 25, Kiesel teaches wherein the light emitting system and/or light detecting system is incorporated into the gas-sensing apparatus (Kiesel col. 15 ln. 1-5; fig. 7; the one or more light sources 220 is incorporated into the system 200 which senses gas).
Claims 26-28 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kiesel in view of Smith and Rohini, further in view of Woodford et al. (US20080173065A1), hereinafter Woodford.
As to claim 26, Kiesel teaches a gas detection system (Kiesel fig. 14-15; col. 25 ln. 23-27; a single two-dimensional array 470), wherein the gas detection system is configured to
receive the signal representative of the intensity of the light from the light detection system (Kiesel fig. 14-15; col. 25 ln. 23-27; a single two-dimensional array 470 can obtain sensing results for all the channels),
and to determine absorption information in the gas- sensing apparatus (Kiesel fig. 14-15; col. 25 ln. 48-62; Information about the absorption information could be obtained from all the channels by the array 470, which can include a proportion of light from the light source absorbed).
However, Kiesel in view of Smith and Rohini does not explicitly disclose the absorbance information is a proportion of light from the light source absorbed.
Woodford, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches the absorbance information is a proportion of light from the light source absorbed (Woodford [0015]; the sensor output provides raw calibration data which is converted to fractional absorbance: i.e. the proportion of light in the wavelength band of interest which has been absorbed by the target species).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kiesel in view of Smith and Rohini to incorporate the teachings of Woodford to include the absorbance information is a proportion of light from the light source absorbed; for the advantage of more data for the classification of the behavior and results of the sensor (Woodford [0055]).
As to claim 27, Kiesel in view of Smith and Rohini does not explicitly disclose wherein the detection system is configured to determine whether one or more target gasses are present in the test chamber based on the proportion of light absorbed in the light absorbed in the gas- sensing apparatus.
Woodford, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein the detection system is configured to determine whether one or more target gasses are present in the test chamber based on the proportion of light absorbed in the light absorbed in the gas- sensing apparatus (Woodford [0074]-[0076]; The fractional absorbance FA (i.e. the proportion of light absorbed) is used to calculate the concentration, i.e. the concentration of the target gas when combined with Kiesel in view of Fervel. The concentration can tell the user whether one or more target gasses are present).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kiesel in view of Smith and Rohini to incorporate the teachings of Woodford to include wherein the detection system is configured to determine whether one or more target gasses are present in the test chamber based on the proportion of light absorbed in the light absorbed in the gas- sensing apparatus; for the advantage of more data for the classification of the behavior and results of the sensor (Woodford [0055]).
As to claim 28, Kiesel does not explicitly disclose wherein the detection system is configured to determine a concentration of the one or more target gasses present in the chamber.
Smith, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein the detection system is configured to determine a concentration of the one or more target gasses present in the chamber (Smith col. 13 ln. 1-6; “By monitoring the absorption of the derivative, which is much stronger than that of any potential interferents, the initial concentration of the analyte of interest may be established”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kiesel to incorporate the teachings of Smith to include wherein the detection system is configured to determine a concentration of the one or more target gasses present in the chamber; for the advantage of enhancing detection sensitivity (Smith col. 13 ln. 20-22).
As to claim 31, Kiesel in view of Smith and Rohini does not explicitly disclose wherein determining whether the target gas species is present comprises determining a concentration of the target gas present in the test chamber.
Woodford, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein determining whether the target gas species is present comprises determining a concentration of the target gas present in the test chamber (Woodford [0074]-[0076]; The fractional absorbance FA (i.e. the proportion of light absorbed) is used to calculate the concentration, i.e. the concentration of the target gas when combined with Kiesel in view of Fervel. The concentration can tell the user whether one or more target gasses are present).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kiesel in view of Smith and Rohini to incorporate the teachings of Woodford to include wherein determining whether the target gas species is present comprises determining a concentration of the target gas present in the test chamber; for the advantage of more data for the classification of the behavior and results of the sensor (Woodford [0055]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEMAYA NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-9078. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30 am - 5:00pm ET.
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, Tarifur Chowdhury can be reached on (571) 272-2287. 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.
/KEMAYA NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/TARIFUR R CHOWDHURY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights