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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
1. With respect to applicant’s remarks filed on 04/20/26 regarding rejected claims 1, 2, 4, 8-11, 13, 17-20, on pages 6-10 the new added limitation “using vibration to change a shape of the variable focus lens” has been found in reference of Nishizawa (U.S. Pat. No. 3,871,764), (column 7, lines 34-40).
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/18/26 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 8-11, 13, 17-20, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walton (Pat. No. 7,679,746) in view of Hart et al (U.S. 2023/0190097), or of Imai (U.S. Pub. No. 2012/0200832), or of Feldman (U.S. Pub. No 2007/0221821), further in view of Nishizawa (U.S. Pat. No. 3,871,764). Hereafter “Walton”, “Hart”, “Imai”, “Feldman”, “Nishizawa”.
Regarding Claim(s) 1, 10, 20, Walton teaches a diffuser inspection system (figure 1) comprising:
a diffuser support frame to hold a diffuser in a vertical position (figure 5A, rollers holding perforated panel is not different from support frame to hold the diffuser); and
an optical inspection tool for inspection of the diffuser (figures 1, 5A-B, camera assembly is not different from an optical inspection tool. Diffuser is not different from perforated panel), the optical inspection tool comprising:
one or more illumination sources to illuminate an opening structure in the diffuser (figure 1, illumination source 114, perforated panel 116 is not different from the diffuser. Opening structure is not different from panel holes 117);
a video microscope unit (VMU) comprising a fixed lens to magnify light reflected from the opening structure (figure 1, lens 102. It is inherent that light ray 120 transmitted through holes 117 must include light reflected from the holes 117);
an optics device comprising a focus lens positioned to receive light magnified by the fixed lens (figure 1, lens 102), and a camera positioned to receive light as magnified by the fixed lens of the VMU (figure 1, lens 102. Optical device with lens 102 is not different from a VMU); and
a camera positioned to receive light as magnified by the fixed lens of the VMU and as focused by the focal depths of the focus lens to capture images of the opening structure in the diffuser, (figure 1, camera 101 capture images of the opening structure 117 of the perforated panel 116).
However, Walton does not teach variable focus lens to focus at different focal depths by varying the variable focus lens; and focused by the different focal depths of the variable focus lens to capture a series of images, wherein each image in the series of images is associated with a different focal depth of the variable focus lens. Hart taches variable focus lens to focus at different focal depths by varying the variable focus lens; and focused by the different focal depths of the variable focus lens to capture a series of images, wherein each image in the series of images is associated with a different focal depth of the variable focus lens, ([0040], lines 2-4; [0049], lines 6-11). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify Walton by having each image in the series of images is associated with a different focal depth of the variable focus lens in order to capture plurality of images by scanning through various focus positions of the lens to detect the depth of the object (Hart, [0040], lines 2-4; [0049], lines 6-11).
Imai also teaches variable focus lens to focus at different focal depths by varying the variable focus lens; and focused by the different focal depths of the variable focus lens to capture a series of images, wherein each image in the series of images is associated with a different focal depth of the variable focus lens, (claim 25, lines 2-5).
Feldman also teaches this limitation, ([0004], lines 12-21).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify Walton by having each image in the series of images is associated with a different focal depth of the variable focus lens in order to focus at various focusing or object distances while providing a constant magnification image with no moving parts (Feldman, [0004], lines 12-21).
Moreover, Walton in view of Hart or Imai or Feldman do not disclose using vibration to change a shape of the variable focus lens. Nishizawa discloses using vibration to change a shape of the variable focus lens (column 7, lines 34-40; Figure 9A, vibrating mechanism changes the shape of the variable focus lens 80). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify Walton in view of Hart or Imai of Feldman by using vibration to change a shape of the variable focus lens in order to change the focus of the lens, (column 7, lines 34-40; Figure 9A, vibrating mechanism changes the shape of the variable focus lens 80).
Regarding Claim(s) 19, Walton teaches a method comprising:
aligning an optical inspection tool with each of a plurality of opening structures in a diffuser over a period of time (figures 1, 5A, aligning perforated panel 116 on rollers for inspection over a period of time, a plurality of opening structures 117);
capturing a respective series of images of each of the plurality of opening structures in the diffuser (figure 2A, step 204A); and
analyzing each respective series of images to determine whether a defect is present in each corresponding opening structure in the diffuser (figure 2A, step 212A; figure 1, controller 103, camera 101; Column 5, lines 39-45; Column 6, lines 15-20).
However, Walton does not teach each image in the series of images is associated with a different focal depth of the variable focus lens. Hart taches each image in the series of images is associated with a different focal depth of the variable focus lens, ([0040], lines 2-4; [0049], lines 6-11). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify Walton by having each image in the series of images is associated with a different focal depth of the variable focus lens in order to capture plurality of images by scanning through various focus positions of the lens to detect the depth of the object (Hart, [0040], lines 2-4; [0049], lines 6-11).
Imai also teaches each image in the series of images is associated with a different focal depth of the variable focus lens, (claim 25, lines 2-5).
Feldman also teaches this limitation, ([0004], lines 12-21).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify Walton by having each image in the series of images is associated with a different focal depth of the variable focus lens in order to focus at various focusing or object distances while providing a constant magnification image with no moving parts (Feldman, [0004], lines 12-21).
Moreover, Walton in view of Hart or Imai or Feldman do not disclose using vibration to change a shape of the variable focus lens. Nishizawa discloses using vibration to change a shape of the variable focus lens (column 7, lines 34-40; Figure 9A, vibrating mechanism changes the shape of the variable focus lens 80). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify Walton in view of Hart or Imai of Feldman by using vibration to change a shape of the variable focus lens in order to change the focus of the lens, (column 7, lines 34-40; Figure 9A, vibrating mechanism changes the shape of the variable focus lens 80).
Regarding Claim(s) 2, 11, Walton in view of Hart or Imai or Feldman and further in view of Nishizawa teaches the system according to claim 1 or claim 10 as stated above, except for the opening structure is one of a plurality of opening structures in the diffuser, wherein each of the plurality of opening structures passes through a diffuser body from a front side of the diffuser body to a back side of the diffuser body. Walton teaches the opening structure is one of a plurality of opening structures in the diffuser, wherein each of the plurality of opening structures passes through a diffuser body from a front side of the diffuser body to a back side of the diffuser body (figure 1, holes 117 of perforated panel is not different from a plurality of opening structures).
Regarding Claim(s) 4, 13, Walton in view of Hart or Imai or Feldman and further in view of Nishizawa teaches the system according to claim 1, or claim 10, as stated above, except for a complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor (CMOS) image sensor. Hart teaches CMOS image sensor, ([0044]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify Walton, Imai, Feldman, Nishizawa by having CMOS in order to obtain images.
Regarding Claim(s) 8, 17, Walton in view of Hart or Imai or Feldman and further in view of Nishizawa teaches the system according to claims 1 and 8, or claims 10 and 11, as stated above, except for at least a portion of the optical inspection tool is mounted on a motion controlled platform to align the portion of the optical inspection tool with each of the plurality of opening structures in the diffuser over a period of time. Walton teaches at least a portion of the optical inspection tool is mounted on a motion controlled platform to align the portion of the optical inspection tool with each of the plurality of opening structures in the diffuser over a period of time (figures 1, 5A, perforated panel 116 is mounted on rollers and moved in direction of arrow 112).
Regarding Claim(s) 9, 18, Walton in view of Hart or Imai or Feldman and further in view of Nishizawa teaches the system according to claim 1, or claim 10, as stated above, except for a processing system coupled to the camera, the processing system to analyze the series of images to determine whether a defect is present in the opening structure of the diffuser. Walton teaches a processing system coupled to the camera, the processing system to analyze the series of images to determine whether a defect is present in the opening structure of the diffuser (figure 1, controller 103, camera 101; Column 5, lines 39-45; Column 6, lines 15-20).
5. Claim(s) 5, 14, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walton (Pat. No. 7,679,746) in view of Hart et al (U.S. 2023/0190097), or of Imai (U.S. Pub. No. 2012/0200832), or of Feldman (U.S. Pub. No 2007/0221821), further in view of Nishizawa (U.S. Pat. No. 3,871,764), and further in view of Hamada et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 4,989,958). Hereafter “Walton”, “Hart”, “Imai”, “Feldman”, “Nishizawa”, “Hamada”.
Regarding Claim(s) 5, 14, Walton, Hart, Imai, Feldman, Nishizawa teach all the limitations of claim 1 or claim 10 as stated above except for a cylindrical piezo component surrounding a chamber of liquid. Hamada teaches a cylindrical piezo component surrounding a chamber of liquid, (column 1, lines 44-51). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify Walton, Hart, Imai, Feldman, Nishizawa, by having a cylindrical piezo component surrounding a chamber of liquid in order to implement adjust focus easily (Hamada, column 1, lines 44-51).
Allowable Subject Matter
6. Claims 3, 6-7, 12, 15-16, are 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.
7. The allowable Subject matter was indicated in office Action mailed on 10/01/25.
Fax/Telephone Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRI T TON whose telephone number is (571)272-9064. The examiner can normally be reached on 8am-4pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michelle Iacoletti can be reached on (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 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.
May 30, 2026
/Tri T Ton/
Primary Examiner Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights