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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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, 2, 5, 6, 11, 12, 14, 15, and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lyuboshenko (Pub. No. US 2019/0302439 A1; hereafter Lyuboshenko).
Regarding claim 1, Lyuboshenko discloses an optical sensor system comprising: a rolling shutter camera (see Lyuboshenko Fig. 11, item 1140 and paragraph [0102] “Detector 1140 may be a digital camera and may include a rolling shutter.”); a laser (see Lyuboshenko Fig. 11, items 1102 and 1112); and a liquid lens placed in a path of the laser (see Lyuboshenko Fig. 11, items 1106 and 1116, and [0096] ““optical” includes not only purely optical (e.g. lenses) but also… “opto-acoustical” (for example as tunable acoustic gradient index of refraction lens, or TAG lenses, in which the focus variation is achieved via fast refractive index change of a fluid within the mechanically sealed closing by the fluid's excitation with acoustic waves)”); wherein the liquid lens is synchronized to the rolling shutter camera (see Lyuboshenko paragraph [0070] “scanning lines of a rolling shutter of the detector (e.g., digital camera) are synchronized with the sweeping position of the waist of the light sheet”).
Regarding claim 2, Lyuboshenko discloses the optical sensor system of claim 1, wherein the liquid lens is synchronized to a rolling shutter of the rolling shutter camera (see Lyuboshenko paragraph [0070] “scanning lines of a rolling shutter of the detector (e.g., digital camera) are synchronized with the sweeping position of the waist of the light sheet”).
Regarding claim 5, P discloses the optical sensor system of claim 1, wherein the liquid lens drives a laser waist to a position in a field of view of the camera (see Lyuboshenko Fig. [0070] “scanning lines of a rolling shutter of the detector (e.g., digital camera) are synchronized with the sweeping position of the waist of the light sheet”).
Regarding claim 6, Lyuboshenko discloses the optical sensor system of claim 1, wherein the liquid lens is driven so that a narrowest part of a laser beam is imaged by the camera (see Lyuboshenko Fig. [0070] “scanning lines of a rolling shutter of the detector (e.g., digital camera) are synchronized with the sweeping position of the waist of the light sheet”).
Regarding claim 11, Lyuboshenko discloses a method for synchronized optical profilometry, comprising: providing a camera (see Lyuboshenko Fig. 11, item 1140); providing a laser beam source (see Lyuboshenko Fig. 11, items 1102 and 1112); providing a liquid lens (see Lyuboshenko Fig. 11, items 1106 and 1116); and synchronizing the liquid lens to the camera (see Lyuboshenko paragraph [0070] “scanning lines of a rolling shutter of the detector (e.g., digital camera) are synchronized with the sweeping position of the waist of the light sheet”).
Regarding claim 12, Lyuboshenko discloses the method of claim 11, wherein the camera is a rolling shutter camera (see Lyuboshenko Fig. 11, item 1140 and paragraph [0102] “Detector 1140 may be a digital camera and may include a rolling shutter.”).
Regarding claim 14, Lyuboshenko discloses the method of claim 11, wherein synchronizing the liquid lens includes moving a laser beam waist (see Lyuboshenko Fig. [0070] “scanning lines of a rolling shutter of the detector (e.g., digital camera) are synchronized with the sweeping position of the waist of the light sheet”).
Regarding claim 15, Lyuboshenko discloses the method of claim 11, wherein the laser beam waist is moved to correspond with a rolling shutter of the camera (see Lyuboshenko Fig. [0070] “scanning lines of a rolling shutter of the detector (e.g., digital camera) are synchronized with the sweeping position of the waist of the light sheet”).
Regarding claim 17, Lyuboshenko discloses the method of claim 11, wherein synchronizing the liquid lens to the camera includes determining lens profiles, and combining the lens profiles with a pixel readout timing of the camera (this is controlling the waist of the laser, by altering the lens properties, in order to synchronize the illuminated portion of the target with the rolling shutter).
Regarding claim 18, Lyuboshenko discloses the method of claim 17, wherein synchronizing the liquid lens further includes determining a single sweep profile (see Lyuboshenko Fig. 12, steps 1202-1208 which describe setting up an image capturing sweep by setting up the spatial and temporal synchronization of the lasers and detectors).
Regarding claim 19, Lyuboshenko discloses a computer program product comprising a computer readable hardware storage medium having program instructions embodied therewith, the program instructions readable by one or more processors of a computer system to cause the one or more processors to: synchronize a liquid lens to a rolling shutter camera (see Lyuboshenko paragraphs [0070] “scanning lines of a rolling shutter of the detector (e.g., digital camera) are synchronized with the sweeping position of the waist of the light sheet” and [0038] “invention can be implemented in numerous ways, including… a computer program product embodied on a computer readable storage medium”).
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.
Claim(s) 3, 4, 7, 8, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao et al. (Pub. No. US 2022/0018779 A1; hereafter Yao) and Vogt (Pub. No. US 2020/0142188 A1; hereafter Vogt).
Regarding claims 3, 7, and 8, Lyuboshenko discloses the optical sensor system of claim 1, but does not specifically disclose that the liquid lens has a drive system for changing a shape of the liquid lens; [claim 7] wherein the liquid lens comprises an actuator and a membrane; [claim 8] wherein the liquid lens comprises voice coil.
Lyuboshenko discloses that the device can use any of a number of optical systems “such as “opto-mechanical”…, “opto-acoustical”…, “electro-wetting”…, other electrically tunable lenses, other mechanisms for varying focus (e.g. varying chemical composition, varying environmental conditions such as temperature, atmospheric pressure, etc.), other components which guide, direct or change the path of light, and/or combinations thereof” (see Lyuboshenko paragraph [0096]), but does not specifically disclose a liquid lens drive system which changes a shape of the lens using a membrane and voice coil. While Lyuboshenko discloses a TAG lens system, such devices alter the density of the liquid, which does not clearly constitute a change in shape.
Yao explicitly discloses that one such well-known alternative is a tunable liquid lens provided by Optotune (see Yao paragraph [0118] “other control elements can alternatively be utilized as would be evident to one of skill in the art, such as electric liquid lenses (Optotune) or tunable acoustic index gradient (TAG) lenses”). Vogt discloses that this tunable liquid lens is one which has a drive system for changing the shape of the liquid lens comprising a membrane and a voice coil (see Vogt paragraph [0002] “Optotune Switzerland AG, (Dietikon, Switzerland), manufactures a line of electrically tunable lenses” wherein “the curvature of the lens is adjusted by applying an electric current to a voice coil or bobbin that surrounds perimeter of the lens.”).
It therefore would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to replace the TAG lens of Lyuboshenko with another well-known, suitable lens like the readily available lenses manufactured by Optotune as a simple replacement of one element for another to achieve expected results.
Regarding claim 4, Lyuboshenko as modified discloses the optical sensor system of claim 3, wherein the drive system is tuned to a field of view of the camera (see Lyuboshenko Fig. 12, steps 1202 and 1204 can be construed as tuning the drive system to the field of view of the camera, as it is setting the system up so that the camera can properly take an image).
Regarding claim 13, Lyuboshenko discloses the method of claim 11, but does not specifically disclose synchronizing the liquid lens includes altering a profile of a membrane of the liquid lens.
As discussed with respect to claims 3, 7, and 8, above, it would have been obvious to replace the TAG lens of Lyuboshenko with another well-known, suitable lens like the readily available lenses manufactured by Optotune as a simple replacement of one element for another to achieve expected results.
Claim(s) 9 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lyuboshenko in view of Ben-Yakar et al. (Pub. No. US 2021/0161385 A1; hereafter Ben-Yakar).
Regarding claims 9 and 16, Lyuboshenko discloses the optical sensor system and method of claims 1 and 11, respectively, but does not specifically disclose that the optical sensor system is an optical profilometer sensor that conducts optical profilometry using the synchronized liquid lens.
Ben-Yakar discloses that in addition to fluorescent microscopy, like in the case of Lyuboshenko, “LEAD microscopy in accordance with systems and methods according to the present disclosure has numerous practical applications” which “include but are not limited to: Noncontact 3D inspection of semiconductors; Profilometry; and Surface roughness measurements” (see Ben-Yakar paragraph [0172]).
It would therefore have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to utilize the light-sheet imaging for profilometry, as suggested by Ben-Yakar.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lyuboshenko in view of Knebel et al. Pub. No. US 2013/0335818 A1; hereafter Knebel).
Regarding claim 10, Lyuboshenko discloses the optical sensor system of claim 1, but does not disclose that a Scheimpflug configuration is used.
Knebel discloses that in the traditional SPIM method “The target region of the specimen illuminated by this light sheet is imaged by the detection objective, whose optical axis extends perpendicular to the light sheet, onto a detection surface” (see Knebel paragraph [0004]), but that “in a modified SPIM method…. A cylindrical lens arranged in front of the objective generates in the specimen an illuminating light sheet that is inclined with respect to the optical axis of the objective” (see Knebel paragraph [0006]). Knebel further discloses that in the modification made in the invention of Knebel “ image erection is, however, also possible in a different manner, for example using a so-called Scheimpflug arrangement” (see Knebel paragraph [0027]).
It therefore would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the setup of Lyuboshenko in a Scheimpflug arrangement, as another well-known alternative arrangement to the traditional SPIM arrangement of Lyuboshenko in order to increase the flexibility of the orientation of the device, for example where the orientation of the illumination to the detector being at an angle other than perpendicular is desirable.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOAM S REISNER whose telephone number is (571)270-7542. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00AM-5:30PM.
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, STEPHANIE BLOSS can be reached at 571-272-3555. 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.
/NOAM REISNER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852 1/29/2026