DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16th, 2013 is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Sheet
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 03/12/2024 and 12/11/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specifications
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Page 6, line 5 recites, “The tenses 90 are lenses designed to condense…” However, it appears that the passage should instead recite “The lenses 90 are lenses designed to condense…”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC §112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites the limitation “…a plate-like member disposed in the middle of an optical path of the reflected light…” The term “middle” is indefinite because it is unclear whether it requires the plate-like member to be positioned at the exact geometric midpoint between the workpiece and the sensor, or merely somewhere along the optical path. The plain meaning of “middle” implies an equidistance central point. However, the specification at page 4 lines 11-12 states that the “plate like member 20 may be disposed at any position in the middle of the optical path 60.” This internal inconsistency between the ordinary meaning of the claim term and the definition provided in the specification renders the metes and bounds of the claim unclear.
Further regarding claim 1, the claim recites the limitation “a through-hole is formed at a place in the plate-like member”. The phrase “at a place” is vague and imprecise. It is unclear if this limitation requires a specific, defined location on the plate-like member, or if it merely requires that the through-hole exists somewhere within the member such that the reflected light passes through it.
Regarding claim 2, this claim is rejected under 35 USC 112(b) due to its dependence upon rejected claim 1.
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 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.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kawazoe (US 2011/0026016 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kawazoe discloses a laser processing apparatus (Figures 2-4, #1/#1B and described in ¶'s [0033] & [0048]) comprising:
a laser oscillator (Figure 1, #7 - laser oscillator) configured to emit a laser beam to a workpiece (Described in ¶ [0033] - "...The welding torch 2 is designed such that laser light (laser light for welding) is sent from a laser oscillator 7 through an optical fiber 8 and passes through the two lens units 5, 6 via a mirror 9. The laser light is then irradiated toward a workpiece (welding portion) W such that laser welding is carried out on the workpiece W...");
a sensor (Figure 1, #11 - camera) configured to measure intensity of light reflected from the workpiece (Described in ¶ [0035] & [0038] - "..The camera 11 uses the reflected laser light received through the first and second lens units 5, 6 to pick up an image of the workpiece W (work point Wk of the workpiece W), and acquires a welding portion image that is an image (visible image) of the workpiece W..." A digital camera inherently comprises a sensor array that measures light intensity to generate an image); and
a plate-like member (Figure 3, #30 - diaphragm) disposed in the middle of an optical path of the reflected light (An optical diaphragm is structurally a plate-like member. It is "provided between the imaging device and the protection glass" (i.e., in the optical path of the reflected glass" (i.e., in the optical path of the reflected light). See further ¶'s [0013], [0047], [0048, and shown in figure 3), wherein
a through-hole is formed at a place in the plate-like member through which the reflected light passes (A diaphragm inherently features a through-hole/aperture (also shown in figure 3). The reference explicitly notes that the light from the workpiece W is "not restricted by the diaphragm 30 and advances toward the camera 11 side", meaning it passes through the diaphragm opening. See further ¶'s [0047], [0049], and figure 3), and
the sensor (Figure 1, #11 - camera) measures the intensity of the reflected light that has passed through the through-hole (The camera #11 receives and images the reflected light that successfully passes the diaphragm #30, thereby measuring its intensity to judge welding quality. This is further described in ¶'s [0038] & [0049]).
Regarding claim 2, Kawazoe further discloses a lens (Figures 2 and 4, #5 - first lens unit) configured to condense the reflected light near the through-hole (Kawazoe teaches that the first lens unit #5 focuses/condenses the reflected light to an "image formation point for the welding portion" (first image formation point #15). This is further described, "the diaphragm 30 is provided at the first image formation point #15." Therefore, the lens condenses the light exactly at the through-hole of the diaphragm. This is further described in ¶'s [0036], [0050], and [0014]; and shown in figure 3).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB A SMITH whose telephone number is (571) 272-3974 and email address is Jacob.Smith@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 7:30AM - 5:30PM.
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, Anna Kinsaul can be reached at (571) 270-1926. 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.
/JACOB A SMITH/Examiner, Art Unit 3731
Prosecution Insights