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. In regards to the 103 rejection of claim 1, Applicant respectfully disagrees. Applicant submits that the proposed combination of references is improper and insufficient to support a prima facie case of obviousness because the proposed modification of Gao would render Gao unsatisfactory for its intended purpose or change the principle of operation of Gao. Gao's rotating reflector 13 is used for two purposes: (i) to align the launch laser beam to the target on the ground, and (ii) as a reflecting surface to direct the terrain scattered light 19 toward the light collector 11. In paragraph [0036], Gao discloses that the terrain scattered light 19 formed after the laser beam is scattered by the ground 16 within the spiral tube detection track is converged on the detector 20 through the rotating reflector 13 and the light collector 11 and converted into an electrical signal by the detector. Applicant submits that replacing Gao's rotary reflector 13 with a smaller MEMS mirror would cause Gao's detection device to be non-functional as barely any terrain scattered light will reach the light collector.
a. (Examiner’s response) Applicant's arguments filed have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Examiner notes when the reference relied on expressly anticipates or makes obvious all of the elements of the claimed invention, the reference is presumed to be operable (SEE MPEP 2121 I). Chowdhury ,in the same field of endeavor as Gao of remote leak detection of gases, implicitly shows the ability of the MEMS mirror (fig 1, 202) to direct a laser across an object (fig 1), wherein the scattered light is collected by a detector (fig 2, 200). Examiner notes Chowdhury is demonstrating a similar intended purpose of a scanning mirror to that of Gao (fig 1). Based upon Chowdhury’s teachings, there is no reason to believe the intended purpose or change the principle of operation of Gao is unsatisfactory. Examiner further notes Chowdhury’s mirror is smaller and requires less power consumption during scanning which provides a proposed modification of the applied reference(s) necessary to arrive at the claimed subject matter and an explanation as to why the claimed invention would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the relevant time.
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) 1-3, 7, 8,13-16,19, & 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GAO CN 106402664 in view of VAKHSHOORI WO 2019231512 in further view of Choudhury US 20180188129.
With respect to claim 1, Gao teaches a handheld gas detector (1) comprising:
a laser beam source (fig 1, 5) for outputting a laser beam (pg. 5, ¶ 5);
a mirror (fig 1, 13) in the path of the laser beam and actuatable “motor 14 shaft” (pg. 5, ¶ 10) in one or two angular directions (fig 2) “a detection track spiral tube” (pg. 6, ¶ 3, lines 3-8) that reflects the laser beam towards a target remote (fig 2, 16);
a controller “motor” (pg. 5, ¶ 10) configured to actuate the mirror to direct the reflected laser beam (28) to a predetermined pattern (fig 2) of locations on the target;
a photodetector (fig 1, 20) for detecting backscattered laser energy (fig 1, 19) “scattered light” from the target (fig 1) (pg. 6, ¶ 3, lines 8-10); and
a processing subsystem “computer” (fig 1, 24) configured to process outputs “calculating the concentration of leaked gas” (pg. 2, ¶ 10, lines 8-9) lines of the photodetector at selected locations of the pattern.
Gao does not teach a housing.
Vakhshoori, in the same field of endeavor as Gao of standoff optical detection, teaches a housing configured to hold all optical and electrical components (fig 13a) (fig 14). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to combine Vakhshoori’s housing with Gao’s optical and electrical components to enable user to conveniently detect leaks at remote places due to its handheld configuration.
The combination does not teach a microelectromechanical mirror.
Choudhury, in the same field of endeavor as Gao of remote leak detection of gases, teaches a light from a laser source is scanned using a microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) mirror (which is smaller and requires less power consumption relative to scanning large mirrors) (0047, lines 1-2). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to substitute the combination’s mirror for a MEMS mirror in order to scan light in a more compact manner with less power consumption.
With respect to claim 2 according to claim 1, the combination does not teach the processed photodetector outputs are utilized to render on a display screen a visible depiction of a gas plume.
Vakhshoori, in the same field of endeavor as Gao of standoff optical detection, teaches a display screen (fig 13B) on a housing configured to image the spectrum of an object (0147, lines 1-3), wherein a photodetector (fig 14, 1410) configured to capture the spectrum is electronically coupled to the display screen (fig 14, 1420). 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 Vakhshoori’s display screen with the combination’s photodetector to enable a user physically see the detected object.
With respect to claim 3 according to claim 2, the combination does not teach a video camera within the housing , the camera aimed substantially parallel to the laser beam, and the processing subsystem creates on the display screen an image of the target in addition to the visible depiction of the gas plume.
Vakhshoori, in the same field of endeavor as Gao of standoff optical detection, teaches a video camera (fig 14, 10) within the housing, wherein the camera is aimed substantially to parallel to the laser beam (fig 2, telescope) (pg. 7, 0015, lines 10-15). Vakhshoori further teaches the camera helps the user aim the spot onto a desired location in a surrounding environment via the display screen connected to a processing subsystem. 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 Vakhshoori’s video camera with the combination’s display screen to enable precise targeting of the laser beam onto a desired target.
With respect to claim 7 according to claim 1, the combination does not teach the wavelength of the laser beam source is tuned for detection of one of the gases selected from: methane.
The background of Gao invention teaches a laser remote sensing system and method for natural gas pipeline leak, wherein the invention patent system is mainly composed of a methane gas detection laser (pg. 2, ¶ 3, lines 15-18). Examiner notes on of ordinary skill in the art would understand a user tunes the wavelength of the laser of the gas detector since gas molecules absorb light at specific wavelengths. 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 tune the wavelength of the combination’s laser to detect the leaking of methane gas to help reduce greenhouse gases.
With respect to claim 8 according to claim 1, the combination teaches the handheld gas detector, wherein the laser beam source (10) is selected from one of the groups consisting of a quantum cascade laser (pg. 5, ¶ 6, line 3 Gao).
With respect to claim 13 according to claim 2, the combination teaches the handheld gas detector, wherein the display screen is on the housing (fig, 13b Vakhshoori).
With respect to claim 14, Gao teaches a handheld gas detector (1) comprising:
a laser beam source (fig 1, 5) for outputting a laser beam (pg. 5, ¶ 5);
a mirror (fig 1, 13) in the path of the laser beam and
actuatable in one or two angular directions (fig 2) “a detection track spiral tube” (pg. 6, ¶ 3, lines 3-8) that reflects the laser beam towards a target;
a controller “motor” (pg. 5, ¶ 10) configured to actuate the microelectromechanical mirror to
direct the reflected laser beam to a predetermined pattern of locations on the target;
a photodetector (fig 1, 20) for detecting backscattered laser energy (fig 1, 19) “scattered light” from the target;
a processing subsystem “computer” (fig 1, 24) configured to process outputs “calculating the concentration of leaked gas” (pg. 2, ¶ 10, lines 8-9) lines of the photodetector at selected locations of the pattern.
and
a beam collection optical element (fig 1, 10) for directing backscattered laser energy to
the photodetector.
Gao does not teach a housing.
Vakhshoori, in the same field of endeavor as Gao of standoff optical detection, teaches a housing configured to hold all optical and electrical components (fig 13a) (fig 14). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to combine Vakhshoori’s housing with Gao’s optical and electrical components to enable user to conveniently detect leaks at remote places due to its handheld configuration.
The combination does not teach a microelectromechanical mirror.
Choudhury, in the same field of endeavor as Gao of remote leak detection of gases, teaches a light from a laser source is scanned using a microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) mirror (which is smaller and requires less power consumption relative to scanning large mirrors) (0047, lines 1-2). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to substitute the combination’s mirror for a MEMS mirror in order to scan light in a more compact manner with less power consumption.
With respect to claim 15 according to claim 14, the combination does not teach the processed photodetector outputs are utilized to render on a display screen a visible depiction of a gas plume.
Vakhshoori, in the same field of endeavor as Gao of standoff optical detection, teaches a display screen (fig 13B) on a housing configured to image the spectrum of an object (0147, lines 1-3), wherein a photodetector (fig 14, 1410) configured to capture the spectrum is electronically coupled to the display screen (fig 14, 1420). 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 Vakhshoori’s display screen with the combination’s photodetector to enable a user physically see the detected object.
With respect to claim 16 according to claim 15, the combination does not teach a video camera within the housing , the camera aimed substantially parallel to the laser beam, and the processing subsystem creates on the display screen an image of the target in addition to the visible depiction of the gas plume.
Vakhshoori, in the same field of endeavor as Gao of standoff optical detection, teaches a video camera (fig 14, 10) within the housing, wherein the camera is aimed substantially to parallel to the laser beam (fig 2, telescope) (pg. 7, 0015, lines 10-15). Vakhshoori further teaches the camera helps the user aim the spot onto a desired location in a surrounding environment via the display screen connected to a processing subsystem. 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 Vakhshoori’s video camera with the combination’s display screen to enable precise targeting of the laser beam onto a desired target.
With respect to claim 19 according to claim 14, the combination does not teach the wavelength of the laser beam source is tuned for detection of one of the gases selected from: methane.
The background of Gao invention teaches a laser remote sensing system and method for natural gas pipeline leak, wherein the invention patent system is mainly composed of a methane gas detection laser (pg. 2, ¶ 3, lines 15-18). Examiner notes on of ordinary skill in the art would understand a user tunes the wavelength of the laser of the gas detector since gas molecules absorb light at specific wavelengths. 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 tune the wavelength of the combination’s laser to detect the leaking of methane gas to help reduce greenhouse gases.
With respect to claim 23 according to claim 15, the combination teaches the handheld gas detector, wherein the display screen is on the housing (fig, 13b Vakhshoori).
Claim(s) 9 & 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GAO CN 106402664 in view of VAKHSHOORI WO 2019231512 in further view of Choudhury US 20180188129 in further view of MURJADA WO 2014143045.
With respect to claim 9 according to claim 1, the combination does not teach a receiver window that passes the laser wavelength while inhibiting passage of ambient light.
Murjada, in the same field of endeavor as Gao of gas detection via optics, teaches a receiver window that passes the laser wavelength while inhibiting all other radiation frequencies (0044, lines 1-4). Murjada further teaches selecting different materials for the window which are compatible with specific measurement ranges such as 2800 nm- 4300 nm of the gas detector for specific gases. Examiner notes one of ordinary skill in the art would understand sunlight i.e. ambient light would be viewed as all other light since it has a large spectrum that covers beyond 2800 nm- 4300 nm. At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to combine Murjada’s receiver window with the combination’s housing to block unwanted background light which can distort or block measurements of the gases.
With respect to claim 20 according to claim 14, the combination does not teach a receiver window that passes the laser wavelength while inhibiting passage of ambient light.
Murjada, in the same field of endeavor as Gao of gas detection via optics, teaches a receiver window that passes the laser wavelength while inhibiting all other radiation frequencies (0044, lines 1-4). Murjada further teaches selecting different materials for the window which are compatible with specific measurement ranges such as 2800 nm- 4300 nm of the gas detector for specific gases. Examiner notes one of ordinary skill in the art would understand sunlight i.e. ambient light would be viewed as all other light since it has a large spectrum that covers beyond 2800 nm- 4300 nm. At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to combine Murjada’s receiver window with the combination’s housing to block unwanted background light which can distort or block measurements of the gases.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GAO CN 106402664 in view of VAKHSHOORI WO 2019231512 in further view of Choudhury US 20180188129 in further view of VON DRASEK WO 0133200.
With respect to claim 10 according to claim 1, the combination does not teach the photodetector is a photodiode of the type including one of the groups consisting of silicon.
Von Drasek, in the same field of endeavor as Gao of infrared detection of gases, teaches a silicon photodiode is a suitable choice for monitoring species of gas in the near infrared region (pg. 15, lines 5-10). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art to combine Von Drasek’s photodetector with the combination’s laser as a design choice for detecting specific gas species.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GAO CN 106402664 in view of VAKHSHOORI WO 2019231512 in further view of Choudhury US 20180188129 in further view of Alien Tech, “Maksutov Cassegrain vs Schmidt Cassegrain Telescopes”, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhLIU7jn3Zk , Nov 26, 2022 hereafter Alien Tech.
With respect to claim 17 according to claim 1, the combination does not a first fixture including the beam collection optical element ( 40).
Alien Tech, in the same field of endeavor as Gao of Cassegrain telescopes, teaches a first fixture (fig 1) figured to include a beam collection optical element (fig 1, mirror 2). 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 Alien Tech’s fixture with the combination’s beam collection optical element as a known design choice for allowing light to travel inside the telescope and subsequently hit the detector for optical analysis. Examiner notes since a housing is configured to surround the optical elements the fixture would be considered as being in the housing.
PNG
media_image1.png
834
1364
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11, 12, 18, 21, & 22 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 11, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious “an input or calculation of wind speed and direction and the processing subsystem ( 48) is responsive to the wind speed and direction to calculate a gas plume leak rate”, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 11.
As to claim 12, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious “a wind speed and direction sensor (51) and the processing subsystem (48) is responsive to the wind speed and direction sensor (51) to calculate a gas plume leak rate”, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 12.
As to claim 18, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious “including a second fixture (21) within the housing (13) attached to the first fixture (7) and including a beam collimator (18) for the laser beam (26) and the microelectromechanical mirror (20)”, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 18.
As to claim 21, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious “an input or calculation of wind speed and direction and the processing subsystem (48) is responsive to the wind speed and direction to calculate a gas plume leak rate”, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 21.
As to claim 22, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious “including a wind speed and direction sensor (51) and the processing subsystem (48) is responsive to the wind speed and
direction sensor (51) to calculate a gas plume leak rate”, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 22.
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