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 .
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(s) 1, 5-7 and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Richter et al. (JP2012198511 A) in view of Milanovic et al. (US 7,295,726 B1).
Re claim 1, Richter et al. discloses a device comprising: a micromirror device including a mirror portion (4) that has a reflecting surface (7) for reflecting incident light (paragraphs 0030, 0033), the mirror portion swings around a first axis parallel to the reflecting surface in a case where the mirror portion is stationary, and the mirror portion swings around a second axis parallel to the reflecting surface and orthogonal to the first axis (paragraphs 0008, 0037); a light source (14) that emits a light beam; a light deflector (18) that deflects the light beam emitted from the light source; and an optical system that guides the light beam deflected by the light deflector to a back surface (6) of the mirror portion, which is a surface opposite to the reflecting surface (Figs. 1 and 3); and a position (19) detector that detects a position of the light beam deflected by the back surface (paragraphs 0035-0037; Fig. 2). Richter et al. does not disclose a first actuator that allows the mirror portion to swing around a first axis parallel to the reflecting surface, and a second actuator that allows the mirror portion to swing around a second axis parallel to the reflecting surface.
Milanovic et al. discloses a device comprising a first actuator (“Rotation actuator A”) that allows the mirror portion (1201) to swing around a first axis parallel to the reflecting surface, and a second actuator (Rotation actuator B”) that allows the mirror portion (1201) to swing around a second axis parallel to the reflecting surface (Fig. 12A).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to employ the device comprising a first actuator that allows the mirror portion to swing around a first axis parallel to the reflecting surface, and a second actuator that allows the mirror portion to swing around a second axis parallel to the reflecting surface since one would be motivated to achieve high speed operation for both axes (abstract).
Re claim 5, Richter et al. does not disclose the device wherein the first actuator are piezoelectric actuators each.
Milanovic et al. discloses the device wherein in the first actuator are piezoelectric actuators each (col. 15, lines 54-63).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to employ the device wherein the first actuator are piezoelectric actuators each since piezoelectric actuators are well known in the art as conventional actuators in a MEMs device.
Re claim 6, Richter et al. discloses the device wherein the light beam deflected by the back surface (2, 6) is incident into the optical system, and the optical system guides the incident light beam to a light-receiving surface of the position detector (19).
Re claim 7, Richter et al. discloses the device wherein the optical system always makes the incident light beam be incident on the light-receiving surface (Fig. 1, ref. 19).
Re claim 9, Richter et al. does not disclose the device wherein an elliptical structure is formed on the back surface, the light beam is incident into an inner region of the structure, and a beam diameter of the light beam on the back surface is smaller than an outer diameter of the structure in a minor axis direction.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to employ the device wherein an elliptical structure is formed on the back surface, the light beam is incident into an inner region of the structure since employing an elliptical reflective surface is a well-known and conventionally used shape for a reflective surface in the art. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to employ the device wherein beam diameter of the light beam on the back surface is smaller than an outer diameter of the structure in a minor axis direction since doing so is well known in the art to maintain high coupling efficiency.
Re claim 10, Richter et al. discloses the device wherein the position detector is a sensor that detects a light quantity centroid position of the light beam (Figs. 2 and 4; paragraph 0037).
Claim(s) 2-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Richter et al. and Milanovic et al. in view of Graves (US 2015/0139585 A1).
Re claim 2, Richter et al. does not disclose the device comprising a processor that causes the mirror portion to perform procession or spiral motion by providing a first driving signal and a second driving signal having the same driving frequency to the first actuator and the second actuator, respectively.
Graves discloses a device comprising a processor that causes the mirror to perform procession or spiral motion (paragraphs 0035-0042).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to employ the device comprising a processor that causes the mirror to perform procession or spiral motion since one would be motivated to align mirrors. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to employ the device wherein performing procession or spiral motion by providing a first driving signal and a second driving signal having the same driving frequency to the first actuator and the second actuator, respectively. Graves discloses the device wherein the precession frequency is measured to indicate when minor needs to be corrected (paragraph 0035). Therefore, obtaining the device wherein performing procession or spiral motion by providing a first driving signal and a second driving signal having the same driving frequency to the first actuator and the second actuator, respectively, so that the mirror portion performs procession or spiral motion is based on a result effective variable.
Re claim 3, Richter et al. discloses the device wherein the light deflector (18) has a surface mirror deflects (by deflecting light) the light beam emitted from the light source (14) by reflecting the light beam by the surface mirror (Fig. 1), but does not disclose the device wherein the light deflector has a surface mirror is formed by depositing a metal thin film or a dielectric multi-layer film on a surface of a base material.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to employ the device wherein the light deflector has a surface mirror formed by depositing a metal thin film or a dielectric multi-layer film on a surface of a base material, and the light deflector deflects the light beam emitted from the light source by reflecting the light beam by the surface mirror since doing so is well known in the art to obtain a reflective surface.
Re claim 4, Richter et al. does not disclose the device wherein the base material is a cylinder.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to employ the device wherein the base material is a cylinder since doing so is well known in the art to form a mirror with a base. As to the product-by-process claim limitation “the surface mirror is formed on a cut surface formed by cutting the base material obliquely with respect to a rotational symmetry axis of the cylinder”, "[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process” (MPEP 2113).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8 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 RICHARD H KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-2294. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 10 am-6:30 pm.
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, Michael Caley can be reached at 571-272-2286. 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.
/RICHARD H KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871