F I N A L A C T I O N
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 1/02/26 complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
(pages 5-9 made by Applicant’s Representative – filed 10/14/25)
Applicant's arguments regarding the 35 USC 103 rejection to independent claims (1 and 6) and dependent claims (4 and 10) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments assert the prior art (Shiraishi and Toshiyuki) taken in combination does not teach the following underlined limitation (with emphasis in bold):
“wherein the second plate is designed as a mounting interface for an image sensor or image sensor carrier; wherein the first plate and the second plate are each made of a metallic material” – as similarly/analogously recited in claims 1 and 6.
Applicant’s arguments assert a person of ordinary skill in the art when provided with the Shiraishi and Toshiyuki references would not have replaced Shiraishi's ceramic package 270 with Toshiyuki’s metal package that has a concave portion formed in the center of the metal block because the metal side walls of the concave portion may reflect some ultraviolet light toward the CCD 164 and introduce noise or distortion in the image.
However, Applicant’s arguments are considered speculative in nature by asserting that metal side walls of the concave portion may reflect some ultraviolet light toward the CCD 164 and introduce noise or distortion in the image. Examiner considers the arguments to be a piecemeal analysis of the prior art references. Furthermore, it has been held that one cannot show non-obviousness by attacking references INDIVIDUALLY where, as here, the rejections are based on COMBINATIONS of references. In re Keller, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
In response to Applicant's arguments that there is no suggestion to combine the references, the Examiner recognizes that references cannot be arbitrarily combined and that there must be some reason why one skilled in the art would be motivated to make the proposed combination of primary and secondary references. In re Nomiya, 184 USPQ 607 (CCPA 1975). However, there is no requirement that a motivation to make the modification be expressly articulated. The test for combining references is what the combination of disclosures taken as a whole would suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art. In re McLaughlin, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971) references are evaluated by what they suggest to one versed in the art, rather than by their specific disclosures. In re Bozek, 163 USPQ 545 (CCPA 1969).
In this case, when considering the collective teachings of the prior art (Shiraishi and Toshiyuki), one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the plates that sandwich the semiconductor pellets of a Peltier module, may be formed of different materials (i.e. ceramic or metal) in order to achieve desired properties of strength and thermal conduction that optimize the cooling effect of a heat-generating electronic component (i.e. image sensor or CPU) that is mounted to the Peltier module.
Thus, when considering the collective knowledge bestowed by each applied prior art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to COMBINE the teachings of TOSHIYUKI (i.e. metal material) into suitable modification with the teachings of SHIRAISHI (i.e. ceramic material) to produce Applicant’s claimed invention with the structural arrangement / functional configuration stated in said underlined limitation for the MOTIVATED REASON of achieving rapid cooling by using materials with high thermal conductance (i.e. aluminum / copper) to interface with the hot/cold sides of a Peltier element, which will optimize the Peltier effect, in the analogous art of a Peltier device used for cooling electronic components.
Applicant's arguments regarding the 35 USC 103 rejection to dependent claim 4 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 AND/OR because the arguments do not apply to the combination of references being used in the current rejection.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action.
For a detailed claim mapping of the prior art teachings as each correspond to Applicant’s claimed invention, see the 35 USC 103 rejection below.
Closest Prior Art
The prior art (cited on PTO-892) is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Among these, the following references are considered to be the closest, collectively disclosing the state of the art concerned with a vacuum sealed image sensor module arranged with a Peltier cooling module.
SHIRAISHI NAOMASA (WO 2003054936) – applied to 35 USC 103 rejection, (English translation previously attached and termed as shown “underlined” hereafter), see ABSTRACT, Fig. 11A-B (BELOW), and pages 40-42.
PNG
media_image1.png
774
590
media_image1.png
Greyscale
NAKATSUKASA TOSHIYUKI (JP 2017147267) – applied to 35 USC 103 rejection, (English translation previously attached and termed as shown “underlined” hereafter), see ABSTRACT, Fig. 1-2, Fig. 4-5, and para [0012-0028]. FIG. 2 & 5 (BELOW):
[AltContent: textbox (FIG. 5)][AltContent: textbox (FIG. 2)]
PNG
media_image2.png
874
622
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
953
386
media_image3.png
Greyscale
CLAUSS (US 20130107239) – applied to 35 USC 103 rejection, see ABSTRACT, Fig. 1, and para [0045]: optical imaging system use a closed-loop controller 30 to control temperature of optical components (20, 21-24) and/or substrate of the optical components using a Peltier element (para [0026, 0049]) in EUV lithography optical system.
YOSHITAKE HIDESUKE (JP 2019200277) – applied to 35 USC 103 rejection, (English translation previously attached and termed as shown “underlined” hereafter), see ABSTRACT, Fig. 1, and page 5.
HIRANO (US 20050073815) – applied to 35 USC 103 rejection, see ABSTRACT, Fig. 3 (BELOW), and para [0007-0021, 0037].
PNG
media_image4.png
494
602
media_image4.png
Greyscale
OGURA MUTSURO (JP 2015135932 A) – (English translation previously attached and termed as shown “underlined” hereafter), see ABSTRACT, Fig. 1 & Fig. 4-5 (BELOW), Fig. 3 and para [0003-0007, 0009-0013]: image sensor 10 with carrier 14 mounted to Peltier 21 (cold side plate 3, pellets 1 & 2, hot side plate 4), which all mount to heatsink 22.
[AltContent: textbox (FIG. 1:)][AltContent: textbox (FIG. 4:)]
PNG
media_image5.png
55
105
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
55
105
media_image5.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (FIG. 5:)]
PNG
media_image5.png
55
105
media_image5.png
Greyscale
SEGER ULRICH (WO 2009135539) – (English translation previously attached and termed as shown “underlined” hereafter), see ABSTRACT, Fig. 3 (BELOW), pages 8-11, and claim 11 (on page 12). Discloses camera module 110 may be filled with a protective gas and/or applies a vacuum to improve cooling of the image sensor chip 112.
PNG
media_image6.png
390
474
media_image6.png
Greyscale
NAKAMURA YOSHIHARU (JP 2007220801) – (English translation previously attached and termed as shown “underlined” hereafter), see ABSTRACT, Fig. 1-4, and page 5.
RICCI (US 20140356985) – see ABSTRACT, Fig. 1, Fig. 4, and para [0019-22, 0028, 0034].
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 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 1-2, 6-9 and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SHIRAISHI NAOMASA (WO 2003054936) in view of NAKATSUKASA TOSHIYUKI (JP 2017147267) -- hereafter, termed as shown “underlined”.
As per INDEPENDENT CLAIM 1, SHIRAISHI teaches a Peltier module, comprising
a Peltier element arranged between a first plate forming a hot side and a second plate forming a cold side (Fig. 11A-B and pages 40-42: Peltier element 272 arranged between a first plate 274 on hot-side and second plate 270 on cold-side for cooling an image sensor 164);
and wherein a vacuum seal component is provided on the second plate (Fig. 11A-B and pages 40-42: second plate 270 with image sensor 164 fasten to a housing OB/Oba using clamp 279 and screws 280 to form an airtight chamber using an O-ring “vacuum component” 381 between second plate 270 and housing OB/Oba).
SHIRAISHI’s taught Peltier element is silent to (emphasis in bold): “a plurality of Peltier pellets, which are made of a semiconductor material and are arranged between a first plate forming a hot side and a second plate forming a cold side, wherein the first plate and the second plate are each made of a metallic material”.
However, the bolded features of said underlined limitation was known in the related art for a Peltier device used for cooling electronic components. For example, prior art TOSHIYUKI, as noted in “Closest Prior Art” section (Fig. 1-2, Fig. 4-5, and para [0012-0028]), discloses a Peltier element 11 (Fig. 4) having plural “pellets” 22 of P-Type & N-Type semiconductor material arranged between a first metal plate 12 on hot-side and second metal plate 13 on cold-side (Fig. 5, para [0012, 0015, 0019, 0023-24, 0025-26]).
Thus, when considering the collective knowledge bestowed by each applied prior art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to COMBINE the teachings of TOSHIYUKI into suitable modification with the teachings of SHIRAISHI to produce Applicant’s claimed invention with the structural arrangement / functional configuration stated in said underlined limitation for the MOTIVATED REASON of achieving rapid cooling by using materials with high thermal conductance (i.e. aluminum / copper) to interface with the hot/cold sides of a Peltier element, which will optimize the Peltier effect, in the analogous art of a Peltier device used for cooling electronic components.
Regarding the limitation: “wherein the second plate is designed as a mounting interface for an image sensor or image sensor carrier”, SHIRAISHI discloses in Fig. 11A-B and pages 40-42: a second plate 270 has a concave recess 270B to allow attachment space with an image sensor/carrier 164, wherein second plate 270 serves as an interface for mounting the image sensor 164 to the housing OB/Oba in airtight fashion.
As per CLAIM 2, SHIRAISHI in view of TOSHIYUKI teaches the Peltier module of Claim 1 but does not teach: “wherein the material of the second plate is a material suitable for operation at a partial pressure of less than 10^-5 pascals”.
However – given SHIRAISHI’s teaching (Fig. 11A) to mount the second plate 270 to the housing OB/Oba to form an airtight chamber (pages 40-41) taken in obviousness combination with TOSHIYUKI’s teaching (Fig. 2 & 5) that the second plate 13 may be a metal such as aluminum (para [0024]), which is also a metal material Applicant’s written description contemplates (para [0018]: second plate may be, e.g., aluminium) – it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the material composition of the second plate suitable for operation at a partial pressure of less than 10^-5 pascals, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice (In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416) and discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233).
As per INDEPENDENT CLAIM 6, SHIRAISHI teaches an assembly comprising
a Peltier module having a Peltier element arranged between a first plate forming a hot side and a second plate forming a cold side (Fig. 11A-B and pages 40-42: Peltier module comprises a Peltier element 272 arranged between a first plate 274 on hot-side and second plate 270 on cold-side for cooling an image sensor 164);
an image sensor carrier and/or image sensor fastened to the second plate (Fig. 11A-B and pages 40-42: image sensor 164 attaches to second plate 270 on cold-side for cooling an image sensor 164).
SHIRAISHI’s taught Peltier element is silent to (emphasis in bold): “a plurality of Peltier pellets, which are made of a semiconductor material and are arranged between a first plate forming a hot side and a second plate forming a cold side, wherein the first plate and the second plate are each made of a metallic material”.
However, the bolded features of said underlined limitation was known in the related art for a Peltier device used for cooling electronic components. For example, prior art TOSHIYUKI, as noted in “Closest Prior Art” section (Fig. 1-2, Fig. 4-5, and para [0012-0028]), discloses a Peltier element 11 (Fig. 4) having plural “pellets” 22 of P-Type & N-Type semiconductor material arranged between a first metal plate 12 on hot-side and second metal plate 13 on cold-side (Fig. 5, para [0012, 0015, 0019, 0023-24, 0025-26]).
Thus, when considering the collective knowledge bestowed by each applied prior art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to COMBINE the teachings of TOSHIYUKI into suitable modification with the teachings of SHIRAISHI to produce Applicant’s claimed invention with the structural arrangement / functional configuration stated in said underlined limitation for the MOTIVATED REASON of achieving rapid cooling by using materials with high thermal conductance (i.e. aluminum / copper) to interface with the hot/cold sides of a Peltier element, which will optimize the Peltier effect, in the analogous art of a Peltier device used for cooling electronic components.
As per CLAIM 7, SHIRAISHI in view of TOSHIYUKI teaches the assembly of Claim 6, wherein a vacuum seal component is provided on the second plate (SHIRAISHI, see Fig. 11A-B and pages 40-42: second plate 270 with image sensor 164 fasten to a housing OB/Oba using clamp 279 and screws 280 to form an airtight chamber using an O-ring “vacuum component” 381 between second plate 270 and housing OB/Oba).
As per CLAIM 8, SHIRAISHI in view of TOSHIYUKI teaches the assembly of Claim 6, wherein a heat dissipation block for dissipating heat generated on the hot side during operation is arranged on the first plate (This feature is considered obvious over additional teachings of TOSHIYUKI’s Figures 1 & 2 and para [0012-13]: disclosing a heatsink 4/4A attaching to first metal plate 12 on hot-side for motivated reason to optimize the Peltier effect and improve cooling of electronic component 2 on cold-side).
As per CLAIM 9, SHIRAISHI in view of TOSHIYUKI teaches the assembly of Claim 6, wherein a vacuum seal between a vacuum present in the region of the image sensor and an ambient atmosphere present in the region of the hot side is provided by the second plate (SHIRAISHI, Fig. 11A-B and pages 40-42: second plate 270 with image sensor 164 fasten to a housing OB/Oba using clamp 279 and screws 280 to form an airtight chamber using an O-ring “vacuum component” 381 between second plate 270 and housing OB/Oba. This seals off ambient atmosphere present in external environment surrounding hot side plate 274).
As per CLAIM 13, SHIRAISHI in view of TOSHIYUKI teaches the Peltier module of Claim 2, wherein the second plate is designed as a mounting interface for an image sensor or image sensor carrier (SHIRAISHI, Fig. 11A-B and pages 40-42: second plate 270 has a concave recess 270B to allow attachment space with an image sensor 164, wherein second plate 270 serves as an interface for mounting the image sensor 164 to the housing OB/Oba in airtight fashion).
As per CLAIM 14, SHIRAISHI in view of TOSHIYUKI teaches the assembly of Claim 7, comprising a heat dissipation block arranged on the first plate, wherein the heat dissipation block is configured to dissipate heat generated on the hot side during operation (This feature is considered obvious over additional teachings of TOSHIYUKI’s Figures 1 & 2 and para [0012-13]: disclosing a heatsink 4/4A attaching to first metal plate 12 on hot-side for motivated reason to optimize the Peltier effect and improve cooling of electronic component 2 on cold-side).
As per CLAIM 15, SHIRAISHI in view of TOSHIYUKI teaches the assembly of Claim 7, comprising the image sensor fastened to the second plate, wherein the second plate is configured to provide a vacuum seal between a vacuum present in the region of the image sensor and an ambient atmosphere present in the region of the hot side (SHIRAISHI, Fig. 11A-B and pages 40-42: second plate 270 with image sensor 164 fasten to a housing OB/Oba using clamp 279 and screws 280 to form an airtight chamber using an O-ring “vacuum component” 381 between second plate 270 and housing OB/Oba. This seals off ambient atmosphere present in external environment surrounding hot side plate 274).
As per CLAIM 16, SHIRAISHI in view of TOSHIYUKI teaches the assembly of Claim 8, comprising the image sensor fastened to the second plate, wherein the second plate is configured to provide a vacuum seal between a vacuum present in the region of the image sensor and an ambient atmosphere present in the region of the hot side (SHIRAISHI, Fig. 11A-B and pages 40-42: second plate 270 with image sensor 164 fasten to a housing OB/Oba using clamp 279 and screws 280 to form an airtight chamber using an O-ring “vacuum component” 381 between second plate 270 and housing OB/Oba. This seals off ambient atmosphere present in external environment surrounding hot side plate 274).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SHIRAISHI NAOMASA (WO 2003054936) in view of NAKATSUKASA TOSHIYUKI (JP 2017147267) in view of HIRANO (US 20050073815) -- hereafter, termed as shown “underlined”.
As per CLAIM 4, SHIRAISHI in view of TOSHIYUKI teaches the Peltier module of Claim 1. Regarding the limitation: “wherein the second plate has at least one fastening contour for fastening the image sensor carrier to the second plate”, Examiner takes the broadest reasonable interpretation of the term “fastening contour” to mean “shaped or formed” for fastening the image sensor carrier to the second plate. SHIRAISHI in view of TOSHIYUKI teaches that the second plate has a flat accommodating surface sized to mountably fasten to a corresponding flat surface of the heat-generating component (i.e. image sensor). See SHIRAISHI, Fig. 11A-B and pages 40-42: the second plate 270 has a flat accommodating surface sized to mountably fasten to a corresponding flat surface of the heat-generating component i.e. image sensor 164.
SHIRAISHI in view of TOSHIYUKI may not show that the image sensor may also have an image sensor carrier, however, it was previously known in the related art HIRANO (Fig. 3) to configure a Peltier device 51 second plate 43a that has a flat accommodating surface sized to mountably fasten to a corresponding flat surface of an image sensor carrier 42 of an image sensor 41, wherein a fastening contour using flat surfaces is known in the art to optimize thermal conduction between the second plate and carrier.
Thus, when considering the collective knowledge bestowed by each applied prior art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to COMBINE the teachings of HIRANO into suitable modification with the teachings of SHIRAISHI in view of TOSHIYUKI to produce Applicant’s claimed invention to use a second plate that has at least one fastening contour for fastening the image sensor carrier to the second plate for the MOTIVATED REASON to optimize thermal conduction between the second plate and the image sensor carrier in the analogous art of a Peltier cooling device configured with an image sensor.
Claims 10, 17, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SHIRAISHI NAOMASA (WO 2003054936) in view of NAKATSUKASA TOSHIYUKI (JP 2017147267) in view of CLAUSS (US 20130107239) -- hereafter, termed as shown “underlined”.
As per CLAIM 10, SHIRAISHI in view of TOSHIYUKI teaches the assembly of Claim 6 but remains silent to: “further comprising a closed-loop control unit configured to control the temperature of the image sensor”.
However, the bolded feature of said underlined limitation was previously known in the related art for an optical imaging system. For example, see ABSTRACT, Fig. 1, and para [0045] per prior art CLAUSS, discloses optical imaging system (EUV lithography optical system) that uses a closed-loop controller 30 to control temperature of optical components (20, 21-24) and/or substrate of the optical components by controlling temperature of a Peltier element (para [0026, 0049]) to a working temperature.
Thus, when considering the collective knowledge bestowed by each applied prior art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to COMBINE the teachings of CLAUSS into suitable modification with the teachings of SHIRAISHI in view of TOSHIYUKI to produce Applicant’s claimed invention to use a closed-loop control unit configured to control the temperature of a Peltier element mounted to an image sensor for the MOTIVATED REASON to achieve greater accuracy and efficiency by configuring an imaging optical system to self-regulate itself through feedback in the analogous art of an optical imaging system.
As per CLAIM 17, SHIRAISHI in view of TOSHIYUKI teaches the assembly of Claim 7 but remains silent to: “further comprising a closed-loop control unit configured to control the temperature of the image sensor”.
However, the bolded feature of said underlined limitation was previously known in the related art for an optical imaging system. For example, see ABSTRACT, Fig. 1, and para [0045] per prior art CLAUSS, discloses optical imaging system (EUV lithography optical system) that uses a closed-loop controller 30 to control temperature of optical components (20, 21-24) and/or substrate of the optical components by controlling temperature of a Peltier element (para [0026, 0049]) to a working temperature.
Thus, when considering the collective knowledge bestowed by each applied prior art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to COMBINE the teachings of CLAUSS into suitable modification with the teachings of SHIRAISHI in view of TOSHIYUKI to produce Applicant’s claimed invention to use a closed-loop control unit configured to control the temperature of a Peltier element mounted to an image sensor for the MOTIVATED REASON to achieve greater accuracy and efficiency by configuring an imaging optical system to self-regulate itself through feedback in the analogous art of an optical imaging system.
As per CLAIM 18, SHIRAISHI in view of TOSHIYUKI teaches the assembly of Claim 8 but remains silent to: “further comprising a closed-loop control unit configured to control the temperature of the image sensor”.
However, the bolded feature of said underlined limitation was previously known in the related art for an optical imaging system. For example, see ABSTRACT, Fig. 1, and para [0045] per prior art CLAUSS, discloses optical imaging system (EUV lithography optical system) that uses a closed-loop controller 30 to control temperature of optical components (20, 21-24) and/or substrate of the optical components by controlling temperature of a Peltier element (para [0026, 0049]) to a working temperature.
Thus, when considering the collective knowledge bestowed by each applied prior art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to COMBINE the teachings of CLAUSS into suitable modification with the teachings of SHIRAISHI in view of TOSHIYUKI to produce Applicant’s claimed invention to use a closed-loop control unit configured to control the temperature of a Peltier element mounted to an image sensor for the MOTIVATED REASON to achieve greater accuracy and efficiency by configuring an imaging optical system to self-regulate itself through feedback in the analogous art of an optical imaging system.
Claims 11-12, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SHIRAISHI NAOMASA (WO 2003054936) in view of NAKATSUKASA TOSHIYUKI (JP 2017147267) in view of YOSHITAKE HIDESUKE (JP 2019200277) -- hereafter, termed as shown “underlined”.
As per CLAIM 11, SHIRAISHI in view of TOSHIYUKI teaches a Peltier module of Claim 1 is provided for cooling at least one image sensor but remains silent to: “an apparatus for inspection of a mask, wherein the mask is intended to be illuminated in a lithography process in a projection exposure apparatus for exposing a wafer, wherein the apparatus comprises an illumination system, a projection lens and a sensor arrangement with at least one image sensor”.
However, the said underlined limitation was previously known in the related art for an optical imaging system (EUV mask inspection apparatus) that uses EUV light 500, EUV mask substrate 101 and CMOS image sensor 206 as taught by prior art YOSHITAKE, see middle of page 5 (para [0025]) and Fig.1. YOSHITAKE discloses an EUV mask inspection apparatus, wherein: a reflective optics system focuses coherent EUV light generated from a synchrotron light source 500 on a pattern formation area covered by a pellicle of a substrate 101 (EUV mask substrate); and a detector 206 detects EUV light reflected on the surface of an EUV mask in which a reflection angle is determined by an angle of incident light.
Thus, when considering the collective knowledge bestowed by each applied prior art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to COMBINE the teachings of YOSHITAKE (EUV mask inspection apparatus) into suitable modification with the teachings of SHIRAISHI in view of TOSHIYUKI (SHIRAISHI’s Peltier module to cool image sensor) to produce Applicant’s claimed invention with the structural arrangement / functional configuration of an EUV lithography optical system as stated in said underlined limitation for the MOTIVATED REASON to maintain the operability of an image sensor in the analogous art of a Peltier device used for cooling electronic components.
As per CLAIM 12, SHIRAISHI in view of TOSHIYUKI in view of YOSHITAKE teaches the apparatus of Claim 11 but does not teach: “wherein the mask is designed for operation in reflection at an operating wavelength of less than 30 nm”.
However – given the additional teachings over YOSHITAKE (middle of page 5 (para [0025]) and Fig.1) as discussed in claim 11 – it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to produce a mask designed for operation in reflection at an operating wavelength of less than 30 nm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
As per CLAIM 19, SHIRAISHI in view of TOSHIYUKI in view of YOSHITAKE teaches the apparatus of Claim 11 but does not teach: “wherein the material of the second plate is a material suitable for operation at a partial pressure of less than 10^-5 pascals”.
However – given SHIRAISHI’s teaching (Fig. 11A) to mount the second plate 270 to the housing OB/Oba to form an airtight chamber (pages 40-41) taken in obviousness combination with TOSHIYUKI’s teaching (Fig. 2 & 5) that the second plate 13 may be a metal such as aluminum (para [0024]), which is also a metal material Applicant’s written description contemplates (para [0018]: second plate may be, e.g., aluminium) – it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the material composition of the second plate suitable for operation at a partial pressure of less than 10^-5 pascals, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
As per CLAIM 20, SHIRAISHI in view of TOSHIYUKI in view of YOSHITAKE teaches the apparatus of Claim 11, wherein the second plate is designed as a mounting interface for an image sensor or image sensor carrier (SHIRAISHI, Fig. 11A-B and pages 40-42: second plate 270 has a concave recess 270B to allow attachment space with an image sensor 164, wherein second plate 270 serves as an interface for mounting the image sensor 164 to the housing OB/Oba in airtight fashion).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 is 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
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the EXAMINER should be directed to AKSHAY TREHAN whose telephone number is (571) 270-5252. The examiner can normally be reached between the hours of 10am – 6pm during the weekdays Monday – Friday.
Interviews with the examiner are available via telephone AND video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant may contact the examiner via telephone OR use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR), which can be found at: http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, TWYLER HASKINS can be reached on (571) 272-7406. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov.
Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AKSHAY TREHAN/
Examiner, Art Unit 2639
/TWYLER L HASKINS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2639