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 .
Response to Arguments
a. With regards to the claim objections, Applicant thanks the Examiner for the proposed recommendations, and Applicant has amended the claims accordingly. As such, the claim objections are now moot and should be withdrawn.
a. (Examiner’s response) Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 3, 4-6, & 11 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of 3, 4-6, & 11 has been withdrawn.
b. With regards to the U.S.C 103 rejection of claim 1, Applicant submits none of the disclosed configurations in Wongdong teach or suggest a narrow-band light source that is configured to produce light within a pre-determined wavelength range.
b. (Examiner’s response) Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under paper of Wongdong Lee, “Correction of spectral deformation by second-order diffraction overlap in a mid-infrared range grating spectrometer using a PbSe array detector”, 2014 hereafter Wongdong in view of Xu US Pat 9188486 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of paper of Wongdong Lee, “Correction of spectral deformation by second-order diffraction overlap in a mid-infrared range grating spectrometer using a PbSe array detector”, 2014 hereafter Wongdong in further view of paper of B. B. Khlevnoi, “REFERENCE BLACKBODY SOURCES IN THE 100-3500 K RANGE FOR PRECISION MEASUREMENTS IN RADIOMETRY, PHOTOMETRY, AND OPTICAL THERMOMETRY”, 2005 in view of Xu US Pat 9188486. Further explanation is shown in the action below.
c. With regards to the U.S.C 103 rejection of claim 14, Applicant submits claims 14-16 depend from claim 1, either directly or indirectly. As noted, the presently pending claims describe the use of a narrow-band light source that is configured to generate light within a pre-determined wavelength range. More specifically, the narrow-band light source specifically refers to a light source whose emission is confined to a short-wavelength range, such as a range S1-S2. This short-wavelength range lies outside a long-wavelength range L1-L2. Wongdong, alone or in any reasonable combination with Xu, fails to teach or suggest a "narrow- band" light source as provided in the presently pending claims.
c. (Examiner’s response) Applicant's arguments filed have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Claim 14 has no direct or indirect connection to claim 1 since claim 14 is independent of claim 1. Examiner further notes there is no language within the claims with regards to the limitation of a narrowband wavelength range.
d. In regards to claims 1, 3, 4, 11, 18, & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over paper of Mei-Zhen Huang, "A novel grating-based spectrometer system without any light filter", 2010 hereafter Huang in view of Xu US Pat 9188486. Applicant respectfully disagrees. As an initial matter, the Examiner concedes that Huang does not teach a narrow-band light source and relies on Xu for the proposition that it would have been obvious to substitute Huang's xenon lamp with a relatively narrow-band light source. However, this proposed modification would render Huang's system unsatisfactory for its intended purpose, See MPEP § 2143.01(V); In re Gordon, 733 F.2d 900 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
Huang describes receiving a broadband, multi-order mixed spectrum from the light source and algorithmically subtracts unwanted higher-order contributions using pre-characterized diffraction efficiency ratios. Therefore, replacing Huang's broadband xenon lamp with a narrow-band source would eliminate the multi-order spectral overlap that Huang's algorithm is specifically designed to process, thereby teaching away from the solution that Huang is specifically directed.
d. (Examiner’s response) Applicant's arguments filed have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Huang teaches the overlap occurs between different diffraction orders as shown in figure 2, in which the overlap is used to eliminate 2nd order diffraction to get a pure first order spectrum (col 2, ¶ 5 Huang). Examiner submits the multispectral overlap is not desirable i.e. intended purpose, but is a result of overlapping diffraction orders. Therefore, overlap between diffraction orders may occur in a relatively narrow spectrum. Examiner further notes the term narrow band is relative in which Huangdong teaches a range of 240 nm to 810 nm. The additional art of Xu in the same field of endeavor as Wongdong of removing second order-diffraction teaches alternative light sources are configured to provide narrower, wider, or shifted range of wavelengths (col 4, lines 38-41). The usage of different wavelengths can be based on the sample/target that one of ordinary skill choose to analyze since different materials can be captured by different wavelength ranges with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “stored in at least one data storage device” “access from one or more local or remote data storage devices” “store the compensated measurement value to one or more remote data storage devices” in claim 8, 14, & 15.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Applicant recites a processor which calculates second-order-diffraction-error compensated value which is stored in the data storage device. Examiner notes based upon the recitation one of ordinary skill in the art would understand data storage devices would include machine readable mediums.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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) 1, 8, 12, & 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over paper of Wongdong Lee, “Correction of spectral deformation by second-order diffraction overlap in a mid-infrared range grating spectrometer using a PbSe array detector”, 2014 hereafter Wongdong in further view of paper of B. B. Khlevnoi, “REFERENCE BLACKBODY SOURCES IN THE 100-3500 K RANGE FOR PRECISION MEASUREMENTS IN RADIOMETRY, PHOTOMETRY, AND OPTICAL THERMOMETRY”, 2005 in view of Xu US Pat 9188486.
With respect to claim 1, Wongdong teaches an apparatus for measuring the characteristics of a measurement target, comprising:
a light source (fig 2, blackbody) “full spectrum of the mid-IR region” (pg. 330, col 1, ¶ 1 lines 18-20); and
a measurement device having at least one light measurement sensor (fig 2, spectrometer);
calculate a diffraction ratio “ƞ =I2/I1”(equation 4 & 10) value corresponding to a ratio of a second-order diffraction
signal to a first diffraction signal (pg. 328, col 2, ¶ 3) at a plurality of wavelengths within the wavelength range of the narrow-band light source (fig 3);
obtain one or more measurement values “S1+2” (equation 6 & 10) of the measurement target “the measured signal intensity for the overlapped ranges” (pg. 329, col 1, ¶ 2, lines 5-7) using the measurement device; and
calculate a second-order-diffraction-error compensated measurement value “S1”(equation 10) “eliminating the predicted second-order signal intensity” (pg. 329, col 2, lines 6-7) for the measurement target using at least the one or more measurement values and the diffraction ratio value.
Wongdong does not specifically teach a narrow-band light source configured to emit light within a pre-determined wavelength range.
Khlevnoi, the same field of endeavor as Wongdong of blackbody infrared sources, teaches a graphite black body source have a pre-determined wavelength range of 0.25 to 2.5 μm (pg. 1086, ¶ 4). Examiner notes narrow-band is a relative term so in comparison to light sources such as white light blackbody infrared source can be considered narrowband. At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine a narrow-band light source with Wongdong’s spectrometer for infrared analysis.
Wongdong does not teach a processor.
Xu, in the same field of endeavor as Wongdong of removing second order-diffraction, teaches a processor (fig 1, 110) configured to obtain values from a light measurement sensor (fig 1, 114) to determine a second order diffraction compensated measurement value (claim 11). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine a processor with Wongdong’s light measurement sensor to accurately determine unwanted second order diffraction.
With respect to claim 8 according to claim 1, the combination does not teach the measurement value is stored in at least one data storage device.
Xu, in the same field of Wongdong of removing second order-diffraction via a processor, teaches memory (fig 1, 112) is configured to store values from a processor for later retrieval (col 11, lines 33-34). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill combine memory with Wongdong’s processor to retrieve values which can subsequently be utilized to remove unwanted second order diffraction.
With respect to claim 12 according to claim 1, the combination teaches the apparatus wherein the measurement device is a spectrometer (fig 2, spectrometer Wongdong) used to measure the measurement target.
With respect to claim 13 according to claim 11, the combination teaches the apparatus wherein the narrow-band light source is some other types of light sources (fig 2, blackbody Wongdong).
Claim(s) 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu US Pat 9188486 in view of paper of Wongdong Lee, “Correction of spectral deformation by second-order diffraction overlap in a mid-infrared range grating spectrometer using a PbSe array detector”, 2014 hereafter Wongdong.
With respect to claim 14, Xu teaches an apparatus for measuring the characteristics of a sample, comprising:
a light measurement device having at least a light measurement sensor (fig 1, 114) and at least one processor (fig 1, 110), the light measurement device configured by code executed by the processor to:
obtain a measurement of the sample (fig 1, 104) using the light measurement sensor;
access from one or more local or remote data storage devices (fig 1, 112) (col 5, lines 45-47), a stored base value (col 8, lines 65-67)
Xu does not teach calculating a compensated measurement value from a diffraction ratio value and measurement value.
Wongdong, in the same field of endeavor as Xu of removing second order-diffraction”, teaches calculating a compensation value S1”(equation 10) from a constant diffraction ratio value “ƞ =I2/I1”(equation 10) (pg. 331, ¶ 2, lines 10-11) and measurement value “S1+2” (equation 6 & 10), wherein the compensation value is obtained by eliminating unwanted second order diffraction without an additional filter (pg. 329, col 1, ¶ 2, lines 5-7). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to calculate Wongdong’s compensated value via Xu’s processor to remove unwanted second order diffraction to acquire accurate spectroscopic measurements (pg. 332, col 1, ¶ 1).
With respect to claim 15 according to claim 14, the combination teaches the apparatus wherein the processor is further configured to store the compensated measurement value to one or more remote data storage devices (col 5, lines 45-47 Xu).
With respect to claim 16 according to claim 14, the combination teaches the apparatus where the diffraction ratio is a constant (pg. 331, ¶ 2, lines 10-11 Wongdong).
Claim(s) 1, 3, 4, 11, 18, & 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over paper of Mei-Zhen Huang, “A novel grating-based spectrometer system without any light filter”, 2010 hereafter Huang in view of Xu US Pat 9188486.
With respect to claim 1, Huang teaches an apparatus for measuring the characteristics of a measurement target, comprising:
a light source (fig 1, lamp); and
a measurement device having at least one light measurement sensor (fig 1, PMT) and at least one processor (fig 1, Computer),
wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
calculate a diffraction ratio value “ƞ21” (pg. 3, col 2, ¶ 3) corresponding to a ratio of a second-order diffraction signal to a first diffraction signal at a plurality of wavelengths within the wavelength range of the light source;
obtain one or more measurement values “E’(λ)” of the measurement target using the
measurement device “main program running sequence is shown as follows” (pg. 3, col 2, ¶ 7); and
calculate a second-order-diffraction-error compensated measurement value “E”(λ)” for the
measurement target using “E”(λ) = E’(λ)- ƞ21(λ/2) E(λ/2)” at least the one or more measurement values and the diffraction ratio value.
Huang does not teach a narrowband light source.
Xu, in the same field of endeavor of Huang of removing second order diffraction, teaches alternative light sources are configured to provide narrower, wider, or shifted range of wavelengths (col 4, lines 38-41). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute Huang’s light source for a relatively narrowband light source depending on the desired spectrum to be measured.
With respect to claim 3 according to claim 1, the combination teaches the apparatus further comprising a broad-band light source of the spectrophotometer “UV–visible spectrophotometer” configured to illuminate the sample “long-wave pass filters” (pg. 3, col 1 ¶ 4 Huang).
With respect to claim 4 according to claim 1, the combination teaches the apparatus wherein a second wavelength range (fig 2, 240-810 nm Huang) is greater than a first wavelength range (fig 2, 240-405 nm Huang).
With respect to claim 11 according to claim 1, the combination teaches the apparatus where the narrow band light source is configured as a separate device remote “alternative light source” (col 4, lines 38-41 Xu) from the spectrophotometer and is used to obtain the diffraction ratio of the spectral sensor in the measurement device.
With respect to claim 18, Huang teaches a method for compensating second-order diffraction when measuring the light properties of a sample, the method comprising:
obtaining one or more measurement values, using a spectrophotometer “UV–visible spectrophotometer” having at least a light measurement sensor and a processor, of the light properties of the sample “long-wave pass filters” (pg. 3, col 1 ¶ 4),
accessing one or more diffraction ratio values “ƞ21” (pg. 3, col 2, ¶ 3) and one or more base signal values “E’(λ)”;
calculating “The diagram of the main program running sequence is shown as follows” (pg. 3, col 2, ¶ 7), using the obtained one or more measurement values, diffraction ratio values and base signal values, error corrected measurement values “E”(λ)” for the light properties of the sample, wherein the error corrected measurement values have substantially less second-order diffraction errors “subtracted 2nd-order spectrum” than the one or more measurement values.
Huang does not teach stored values.
Xu, in the same field of Huang of removing second order-diffraction via a processor (fig 8, Huang), teaches memory (fig 1, 112) is configured to store values from a processor for later retrieval (col 11, lines 33-34). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to combine memory with Huang’s processor to retrieve values which can subsequently be utilized to remove unwanted second order diffraction.
The combination does not specifically teach using light generated by a narrow-band light source.
Xu, in the same field of endeavor of Huang of removing second order diffraction, teaches alternative light sources are configured to provide narrower, wider, or shifted range of wavelengths (col 4, lines 38-41). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute combination’s light source for a relatively narrowband light source depending on the desired spectrum to be measured.
With respect to claim 20, Huang teaches the method wherein the one or more diffraction ratio values are obtained by:
illuminating the light measurement sensor with a light source (fig 1, lamp Huang);
measuring wavelengths of light within a light source to obtain a first diffraction signal “E1λ” (pg. 3, col 2, ¶ 3 Huang) at a first wavelength range (fig 8, λ≥720 & λ≤ 240 Huang), and a second-order diffraction signal “E2λ” (pg. 3, col 2, ¶ 3 Huang) at a second wavelength range (fig 8, λ≥720 & λ≤ 240 Huang);
calculating a diffraction ratio value “ƞ21= E2λ/ E1λ” corresponding to a ratio of the second-order diffraction
signal to the first diffraction signal at a plurality of wavelengths within the band;
obtaining one or more measurement values of the sample using the spectrophotometer “UV–visible spectrophotometer” (pg. 3, col 1 ¶ 4 Huang); and
calculating a second-order-diffraction-error compensated measurement value “E'' (λ) = E' (λ) – η21(λ/2)E' (λ/2)” for the sample using at least the one or more measurement values and the diffraction ratio value.
The combination does not teach a narrow-band.
Xu, in the same field of endeavor of Huang of removing second order diffraction, teaches alternative light sources are configured to provide narrower, wider, or shifted range of wavelengths (col 4, lines 38-41). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute Huang’s light source for a relatively narrowband light source depending on the desired spectrum to be measured.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over paper of Mei-Zhen Huang, “A novel grating-based spectrometer system without any light filter”, 2010 hereafter Huang in view of Xu US Pat 9188486 in further view of paper of Wongdong Lee, “Correction of spectral deformation by second-order diffraction overlap in a mid-infrared range grating spectrometer using a PbSe array detector”, 2014 hereafter Wongdong.
With respect to claim 7 according to claim 4, the combination does not teach the diffraction ratio is a constant.
Wongdong, in the same field of endeavor as Huang of removing second order diffraction, teaches a grating efficiency ratio is constant unless the grating structure is transformed. At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select a constant value for Huang’s diffraction ratio for a grating which has not been transformed to perform accurate measurements with a reasonable expectation of success.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 5, 6, 9, 10, 17, & 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims or to include the limitation(s) and any intervening claims into the base claim. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As to claim 2, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious “the wavelengths of light within the wavelength range of the narrow-band light source to obtain a first diffraction signal at
a first wavelength range, and (ii) a second-order diffraction signal at a second wavelength range outside the wavelength range of the narrow band light source.”, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 2.
As to claim 5, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious “a given wavelength in the first wavelength range to a given wavelength in the second wavelength range can be
expressed as: λL=λS x 2”, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 5.
As to claim 6, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious “the processor is configured to calculate the diffraction ratio for each wavelength between and according to [formula]”, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 6.
As to claim 9, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious “sample is corrected according to [formula] ….measurement values at λ,ƞ is the diffraction ratio”, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 9.
As to claim 10, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious “wherein the wavelengths of pixels in the long wavelength range (Ll-L2) cannot be divided to produce a whole number, the processor is further configured to implement an interpolation algorithm to generate the short wavelength values”, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 10.
As to claim 17, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious “the measurement of the sample is corrected according to [formula] measurement values at the diffraction ratio, and raw Base is the base value”, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 17.
As to claim 19, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious “the measurement of the sample is corrected according to [formula], where is the measurement values at is the diffraction ratio, and is a measured”, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 19.
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 MAURICE C SMITH whose telephone number is (571)272-2526. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm EST.
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, Kara Geisel can be reached at (571) 272-2416. 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.
/MAURICE C SMITH/Examiner, Art Unit 2877