DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/02/2024 was filed and considered by the examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Futami et al., US 20200073109 A1.
Claim 1 is anticipated by Futami et al. figures 1-5, 13, 14 and accompanying text which disclose a magnifying observation device 1 for magnifying and observing an object, the magnifying observation device comprising:
. a base 10
. a placement table 30 provided on the base 10 and having a horizontal upper surface (placement surface) for an object to be observed
. a support column 20 extending in a vertical direction from the base 10
. a movable stage including a rail 17 and a holder 25 movable along the rail, the rail being supported with respect to the support column 20 to be rotatable about a first rotation axis parallel to a first direction along the horizontal upper surface such that the first rotation axis across the movable stage (figs 13-14)
. an observation head 22 including a camera 50, the observation head being held by the holder 25 with an optical axis of the camera along a moving direction of the holder of the movable stage, the camera 50 inherently capturing an image of the object via an objective lens to generate the image of the object
. a block 31 detachably attached to the horizontal upper surface of the placement table 32, and configured to locate a surface for an object to be observed closer to the observation head 22 along the vertical direction (figs 1-5)
. an image generation unit 2 configured to generate an observation image based on the image from the camera of the observation head (fig. 4), wherein a position of the block 30 attached to the horizontal upper surface is changeable in a second direction along the horizontal upper surface by moving the placement table, the second direction are orthogonal to the first direction (Left ↔ Right, Front ↔ Rear), and an angular position of the rail of the movable stage is adjustable with respect to the support column, one of the angular positions to be adjusted includes an angular position such that the moving direction of the holder of the movable stage is orthogonal to the horizontal upper surface (fig. 14).
Re claim 2, Futami et al. further disclose a rotating holder provided on the support column to be rotatable about the first rotation axis, wherein the rotating holder holds the movable stage (fig. 1, [0115]).
Re claim 3, Futami et al. further disclose comprising a lock mechanism capable of fixing rotation of the rotating holder with respect to the support column (fig 5, [0135]).
Re claim 4, Futami et al. further disclose a regulating member 46 disposed on the support column 20, a abutting member 44 disposed on the rotating holder, and configured to abut on the regulating member at the angular position where the moving direction of the holder with respect to the rail of the movable stage is orthogonal to the horizontal upper surface, a tilt angle measurement unit configured to measure a tilt angle representing an angle formed by the moving direction of the holder with respect to the rail of the movable stage and a direction orthogonal to the horizontal upper surface; a tilt angle display unit configured to display the tilt angle; and a display angle correction unit controlling the tilt angle display unit to display zero degree of the tilt angle when an abutting member abuts on a regulating member ([0217]).
Re claim 5, wherein the rotating holder 21b includes a rod-like handle, and a central axis of the rod-like handle is directed toward the first rotation axis and is along a plane orthogonal to the first rotation axis (fig. 6).
Re claim 6, wherein the horizontal upper surface of the placement table 31 has a plurality of positioning holes along the second direction, and the block has a positioning pin insertable into the positioning hole (fig 1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Futami et al., US 20200073109 A1, in view of Zeng, CN 209472843 U.
Re claim 7, Futami et al. disclose the claimed invention as described above except for the placement table further includes a fixing screw hole, the block further includes a fixing screw to fix the fixing screw hole, and the fixing screw corresponds to a position of the fixing screw hole when the positioning pin is inserted into the positioning hole. Zeng does disclose a placement table 3 including a fixing screw hole (e.g., hole through element 3), the block 2 including a fixing screw 33 to fix the fixing screw hole, and the fixing screw corresponds to a position of the fixing screw hole (figs. 1, 3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ a fixing screw, a fixing screw hole over the Futami et al. block and placement table, as shown by Zeng in order to attach and locate a working table (block) over a replacement table (Zeng, claim 1).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DUNG T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2297. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 - 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, Jennifer Carruth can be reached at 571-272-9791. 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.
/DUNG T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871