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 .
Claim(s) 1-7, 9 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1).
Claim(s) 8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In regards to the applicant’s arguments that the reference to Manzoni fails to disclose “a compensation optical device configured to reduce the dependence on angles on incidence”, the Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Attention is brought to the fact that the claims as written merely recite an interferometer apparatus comprised only of the structures of: an adjustable birefringence device; and a compensation optical device. The bulk of the claims recite intended use and functional limitations of the optical devices. Manzoni explicitly discloses an interferometer apparatus comprising and adjustable birefringent device (1) and a compensation optical device (9). Therefore, the reference to Manzoni is understood to explicitly disclose the claimed “interference apparatus”, which may be “configured to” meet the recited functions and intended use.
Further, Paragraph 53 of Manzoni explicitly discloses various structural design choices that may be made to obtain desired device characteristics. Specifically, Manzoni discloses the design choices as encompassing the selection of: “suitable birefringent materials, the geometrical arrangement, the accuracy in the position of the optical materials and the wavelength of the electromagnetic field”. The claim language appears to suggest that the function of “reducing the dependence on the angles of incidence”, is a result of the respective structural thickness and respective ordinary and extraordinary refractive indexes of the compensation device. As discussed above, the selection of the birefringent materials and their geometrical arrangement, are all well-known design choices within the skill of a person in the art.
Manzoni also explicitly discloses that the numerous wedge elements of the optical device may be translated and/or rotated (par. 63-64, 73-74), which would allow for the compensation of system optical element misalignments and errors associated with the manufacturing of the optical elements. Therefore, Manzoni is understood to explicitly disclose a compensation optical device that may be configured to reduce the dependence on angles on incidence.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 9 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by US Publication 2013/0329228 to Manzoni et al.
In regards to claims 1-7, 9 and 11-14, Manzoni discloses and shows in Figures 1-10, an interferometer apparatus comprising:
an adjustable birefringent device (1) configured to:
receive an input radiation (Pin) and produce corresponding replicas having reciprocally orthogonal polarizations and delayed from each other by an adjustable time delay depending on a configuration assumed by the adjustable birefringent device (par. 10, 40-41, 50-56; wherein a continuously adjustable Babinet-Soleil module is utilized to provide an adjustable relative group delay between two replica pulses of an input beam);
introduce an additional time delay between said replicas dependent on angles of incidence of said input radiation on the adjustable birefringent device, wherein the angles of incidence is a function of a structural thickness and an ordinary and an extraordinary refractive index of the adjustable birefringent device (par. 61-68; wherein the adjustable module is comprised of a plurality of optical wedges and an optical plate, and wherein the wedges may be translated or rotated to obtain a desired thickness and angular orientation);
a compensation optical device (9) that is optically coupled to said adjustable birefringent device and configured to have a respective structural thickness and respective ordinary and extraordinary refractive indexes so as to introduce at least a partial compensation time delay between said replicas having a sign opposite to a sign of the additional time delay so as to reduce the dependence on the angles of incidences in the interferometer apparatus (par. 69-74, 100-102; wherein a second adjustable wedge pair device is utilized to compensate and stabilize the optical pulses);
[claim 2] wherein the input radiation defines a main propagation direction and includes rays forming an angle with said main propagation direction in the range of between 0 rad - 0.14 rad (par. 35-41) (Figures 1-10);
[claim 3] wherein the adjustable birefringent device comprises:
a first birefringent component having a first thickness (par. 53, 59, 70, 118); and
a second birefringent component having a second thickness (par. 53, 59, 67-68, 70, 118);
the compensation optical device comprises:
a third birefringent component having a third thickness (par. 53, 59, 70, 118); and
a fourth birefringent component having a third thickness (par. 53, 59, 70, 118); and
wherein a sum of the first thickness of the first birefringent component and the second thickness of the second birefringent component is equal to a sum of the third thickness of the third birefringent component and the fourth thicknesses of the fourth birefringent component (par. 53, 59, 70, 118; wherein all of the optical elements are analogous; and further all of the parameters of the optical elements may be chosen based upon desired system design choices);
[claim 4] wherein the first birefringent component comprises an adjustable wedge pair comprising an optical wedge (A1) and a movable optical wedge (A2), configured to provide a first adjustable time delay between said replicas (par. 55-56, 63-68);
wherein the first adjustable time delay is dependent on a variable position of the movable optical wedge (par. 55-56, 63-68);
the second birefringent component (B) comprises an optical plate coupled with the adjustable wedge pair (A1, A2) and configured to introduce a fixed second delay between said replicas (par. 67-68, 118);
[claim 5] wherein the third birefringent component is selected from the group comprising an optical birefringent plate, and an adjustable wedge pair (par. 53, 59, 70, 118); and
the third birefringent component is configured so as to introduce a first compensation delay to reduce a dependence on said angles of incidence (par. 69-74, 100-102; wherein a second adjustable wedge pair device is utilized to compensate and stabilize the optical pulses);
the fourth birefringent component is selected from the group comprising an optical birefringent plate, and an adjustable wedge pair (par. 69-74, 100-102; wherein a second adjustable wedge pair device is utilized to compensate and stabilize the optical pulses);
the fourth birefringent component is configured so as to introduce a second compensation delay to reduce said dependence on said angles of incidence (par. 69-74, 100-102; wherein a second adjustable wedge pair device is utilized to compensate and stabilize the optical pulses);
[claim 6] wherein the compensation optical device further comprises: a polarization flipper (D) optically coupled with the adjustable birefringent device and configured to convert between horizonal polarization of the replicas and vertical polarization (par. 75);
[claim 7] wherein:
the third birefringent component has an optical axis parallel to an optical axis of the second birefringent component (Figures 1-10);
the third birefringent component and the second birefringent component have equal ordinary indexes and equal extraordinary indexes (par. 53, 59, 70, 118; wherein all of the optical elements are analogous; and further all of the parameters of the optical elements may be chosen based upon desired system design choices);
the fourth birefringent component has an optical axis parallel to an optical axis of the first birefringent component (Figures 1-10); and
the fourth birefringent component and the first birefringent component have equal respective ordinary indexes and equal respective extraordinary indexes (par. 53, 59, 70, 118; wherein all of the optical elements are analogous; and further all of the parameters of the optical elements may be chosen based upon desired system design choices);
[claim 9] wherein each of said first birefringent component, second birefringent component, third birefringent component and fourth birefringent component includes a respective adjustable wedge pair (par. 55-56, 63-73).
[claim 11] further comprising an input polarizer (D0) configured to receive a first radiation and produce said input radiation under the form of a linear polarization transversal to optical axes of said adjustable birefringent device (par. 128);
[claim 12] further comprising an output polarizer (D) configured to project the replicas to a common polarization state (par. 75);
a detector (302) configured to convert interfering radiation that exits the output polarizer to an electrical signal (par. 4-5, 134, 143, 148);
an analysis device configured to receive the electrical signal and perform elaborations (par. 4-5, 134, 143, 148; wherein the system may be utilized as a spectrometry device or a spectral imager);
[claim 13] configured to operate as one of the following devices: spectrometer, device for measuring the photoluminescence of samples, fluorimeter device; spectral imager (par. 4-5, 134, 143, 148; wherein the system may be utilized as a spectrometry device or a spectral imager);
[claim 14] wherein the corresponding replicas are produced to propagate substantially parallel to each other through the interferometer apparatus (Figures 1-10).
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, 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) 8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manzoni.
In regards to claim 8, Manzoni discloses the apparatus wherein the third birefringent component has an optical axis parallel to an optical axis of the second birefringent component (Figures 1-10); and the second birefringent component has ordinary and extraordinary indexes, to define a first birefringence range having a first sign (par. 41-43, 53, 59, 70, 78, 118; wherein all of the optical elements are analogous; and further all of the parameters of the optical elements may be chosen based upon desired system design choices).
Manzoni differs from the limitations in that it is silent to the apparatus, wherein the third birefringent component has second ordinary and extraordinary indexes, so as to define a second birefringence range having a second sign opposite to said first sign;
an optical axis of the fourth birefringent component is parallel to an optical axis of first birefringent component;
the fourth birefringent component shows said second birefringence range having the second sign and the first birefringent component shows said first birefringence range having the first sign.
However, as discussed above, Manzoni discloses the design choices as encompassing: “suitable birefringent materials, the geometrical arrangement, the accuracy in the position of the optical materials and the wavelength of the electromagnetic field”. Therefore, the selection of the birefringent materials, their geometrical arrangement, and their positional alignment, are all well-known design choices within the skill of a person in the art.
Further, a mere change in size or design choice of a component is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Manzoni to select desired materials, components and configuration as discussed above for the advantage of making obvious design choices and utilizing well-known optical elements to obtain a desired system configuration, with a reasonable expectation of success.
In regards to claim 10, Manzoni discloses the apparatus further including a plurality of motors (MT1, MT2) connected to a plurality of movable optical elements (par. 66).
Manzoni differs from the limitations in that it does not explicitly disclose additional motors being attached to a third birefringent component and a fourth birefringent component.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to connect a motor to each optical element to allow each component to be adjustable for the advantage of obtaining an easily configurable optical system.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Manzoni to select desired materials, components and configuration as discussed above for the advantage of making obvious design choices and utilizing well-known optical elements to obtain a desired system configuration, with a reasonable expectation of success.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN M HANSEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1736. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8am to 4pm.
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, Michelle Iacoletti can be reached at 571-270-5789. 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.
JONATHAN M. HANSEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2877
/JONATHAN M HANSEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877