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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: for Figure 1, element number 13 as described in paragraph 0028 of the specification. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 2 of claim 5, the phrase “the adjusting the reference section” should be amended to read “the adjusting of the reference section”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 7, 9, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Webster (2016/0039045).
Regarding claim 1, Webster (Fig. 6) discloses a method for adjusting a reference section of an optical coherence tomography (OCT) system, the method comprising providing the OCT system (see paragraph 0142 for example); generating a measuring beam using the OCT system (the measurement beam is generated by a coherent imaging light source; note that in paragraphs 0084 and 0085, Webster discloses that coherent imaging is performed using a low-coherence interferometry imaging light source, which is sufficient for performing OCT; this light is split by a fused mode coupler to send light to the sample arm), and conducting the measuring beam to a measurement object (the light passes through the sample arm and the sample probe with the optics to the sample as seen in Fig. 6); generating a reference beam using the OCT system (the fused mode coupler splits light from the coherent imaging light source towards the adjustable delay line that is part of the reference arm), and conducting the reference beam through the reference section (the light passes from the fused mode coupler, through the adjustable delay line, and through the path marked reference arm to be reflected by an end mirror that makes up the reference arm of the interferometer); superimposing the measuring beam reflected from the measurement object and the reference beam (this is done using the fused mode coupler), and registering interference signals between the measuring beam and the superimposed reference beam using an interferometer of the OCT system (the coherent imaging detector registers the interference signals; the optics shown in Fig. 6 and described above is the interferometer of the OCT system); dividing a scanning path of the measuring beam into measurement phases and positioning phases (see paragraph 0116 – “This is accomplished by moving the imaging beam to several locations on an object that is known to be flat, measuring the apparent height of the object in the coherent imaging system and subtracting the desired profile from these results. This data yields the error between the uncorrected and desired profiles”); and adjusting the reference section exclusively in the positioning phases (see paragraph 0117 – “The next step is to apply the correction . . . This includes modifying the reference arm delay line length. In production, this can be co-ordinated with the scanning device.” As this is done as a “next step”, this means that the adjustment of the reference section happens exclusively in the positioning phase and not while measurement is actively taking place).
As for claim 2, Webster discloses scanning and recording measurement data using the measuring beam in the measurement phases; and moving or jumping the measuring beam in the positioning phases without recording the measurement data (see paragraph 0116 – the imaging beam is moved, and, subsequent to the movement, measurements are made).
As for claim 3, Webster discloses that the adjusting the reference section is performed based on correction data in an evaluation unit (see paragraphs 0116-0117, which state that data is obtained that yields the error between the uncorrected and desired profiles, and then a correction is applied to address the error, the correction involving, as an option, modifying the reference arm delay line length).
As for claim 5, Webster discloses that the adjusting of the reference section is performed by activating and moving or pivoting at least one optical element in an OCT scanner of the OCT system (see paragraph 0117 – “this includes modifying the reference arm delay line length”; see also paragraph 0138).
Regarding claim 7, Webster (Fig. 6) discloses an optical coherence tomography (OCT) system for adjusting a reference section thereof, the OCT system being configured to apply a measuring beam (the measurement beam is generated by a coherent imaging light source; note that in paragraphs 0084 and 0085, Webster discloses that coherent imaging is performed using a low-coherence interferometry imaging light source, which is sufficient for performing OCT; this light is split by a fused mode coupler to send light to the sample arm) to a measurement object (the light passes through the sample arm and the sample probe with the optics to the sample as seen in Fig. 6), to conduct a reference beam (the fused mode coupler splits light from the coherent imaging light source towards the adjustable delay line that is part of the reference arm) through the reference section (the light passes from the fused mode coupler, through the adjustable delay line, and through the path marked reference arm to be reflected by an end mirror that makes up the reference arm of the interferometer), and to superimpose the measuring beam reflected from the measurement object and the reference beam (this is done using the fused mode coupler), the OCT system comprising: an interferometer (see Fig. 6) for registering interference signals between the measuring beam and the superimposed reference beam (the coherent imaging detector registers the interference signals; the optics shown in Fig. 6 and described above is the interferometer of the OCT system), wherein a scanning path of the measuring beam is divided into measurement phases and positioning phases (see paragraph 0116 – “This is accomplished by moving the imaging beam to several locations on an object that is known to be flat, measuring the apparent height of the object in the coherent imaging system and subtracting the desired profile from these results. This data yields the error between the uncorrected and desired profiles”), and wherein the OCT system is configured to adjust the reference section exclusively in the positioning phases (see paragraph 0117 – “The next step is to apply the correction . . . This includes modifying the reference arm delay line length. In production, this can be co-ordinated with the scanning device.” As this is done as a “next step”, this means that the adjustment of the reference section happens exclusively in the positioning phase and not while measurement is actively taking place).
As for claim 9, Webster discloses an OCT beam source (coherent imaging light source), a beam splitter (fused mode coupler), a reference beam mirror (end mirror), an OCT fiber (see paragraph 0134), an OCT sensor (coherent imaging detector), and an OCT scanner (see the adjustable focal position indicator in Fig. 6 for Lens A; this can also be represented in an alternative embodiment by movable mirror 43 in Fig. 3).
As for claim 11, Webster discloses a laser system assigned to the OCT system (this is what generates the process beam in Fig. 6; this is generated by material processing laser 17 in Fig. 2 and described in paragraph 0084), wherein the laser system is suitable for processing the measurement object (see paragraph 0084), and the OCT system is configured to scan the measurement object during and/or after the processing by the laser system (see the Webster abstract, which states, “ By directing a measurement beam to multiple locations within and overlapping with the PCR, the system, apparatus, and method are used to determine, in real time, spatial and temporal characteristics of the weld such as keyhole depth, length, width, shape and whether the keyhole is unstable, closes or collapses”) (emphasis added).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 4 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Webster (2016/0039045) in view of Lessmueller et al (2016/0356595).
As for claim 4, Webster discloses the claimed invention as set forth above regarding claim 1, but fails to disclose blocking or delaying adjusting the reference section of the reference beam in response to a signal of the evaluation unit in the positioning phases if time intervals are too short for adjusting the reference section.
However, Lessmueller, in a method for laser processing a workpiece where position measurements are made using an optical interferometer, discloses that readjustment of the reference arm may be limited to the period of time during a change in the main processing path (see paragraph 0070). This means that if positioning phases are too short for adjusting the reference path, the reference path would not be adjusted.
As a result, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to block or delay adjustment of the reference section of the reference beam in the method of Webster in response to a signal of the evaluation unit in the positioning phases if time intervals are too short for adjusting the reference section as taught by Lessmueller, the motivation being that this provides more time for adjusting the length of the reference arm, as quicker, more continuous adjustment requires a great technical effort (see paragraph 0070 of Lessmueller).
As for claim 8, Webster discloses the claimed invention as set forth above regarding claim 7, but fails to disclose that the OCT system is configured to block or delay a following measurement if the positioning phases are too short for adjusting the reference section.
However, Lessmueller, in a system for laser processing a workpiece where position measurements are made using an optical interferometer, discloses that readjustment of the reference arm may be limited to the period of time during a change in the main processing path (see paragraph 0070). As the measurement and positioning phases are different as taught by Webster, this means that the OCT system will not perform measurements during the positioning phases and while the reference arm is adjusted.
As a result, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to block or delay a following measurement in the device of Webster if the positioning phases are too short for adjusting the reference section as taught by Lessmueller, the motivation being that this provides more time for adjusting the length of the reference arm, as quicker, more continuous adjustment requires a great technical effort (see paragraph 0070 of Lessmueller).
Claims 6 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Webster (2016/0039045) in view of Teleshevskij et al (RU 2645005).
As for claims 6 and 10, Webster disclose the claimed invention as set forth above regarding claims 5 and 7, respectively, but fails to disclose providing actuators for moving or pivoting the optical element in the OCT system within 2 ms.
Teleshevskij, in an interferometer, discloses displacing the reference mirror by means of an actuator controlled by a piezoelectric motor that has nanometer resolution and submillisecond response time (see the paragraph of the provided English translation that begins with “Firstly, the indicated technical solutions . . .”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select actuators for moving the delay arm of Webster within 2 ms as disclosed by Teleshevskij, the motivation being to ensure that the measurement process is minimally delayed by quick adjustment of the reference arm during the positioning phases of the scan. Additionally, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2022/0357150 to Stambeke et al. and US Pat. 11,549,798 to Strebel both disclose using optical coherence tomography to measure a workpiece undergoing laser processing.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael A. Lyons whose telephone number is (571)272-2420. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday.
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.
/Michael A Lyons/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877 December 18, 2025