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
The drawing objections set forth in the prior Office action are withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 3/25/2026 regarding the prior art rejection of claim 1 been fully considered but they are only partly persuasive.
Applicant argues that the examiner did not comply with the requisite standard for properly taking Official notice on the basis that documentary evidence in support of the Officially-noticed facts was not provided. In response, the examiner notes that to adequately traverse a finding based on official notice, an applicant must specifically point out the supposed errors in the examiner’s action, which would include stating why the noticed fact is not considered to be common knowledge or well-known in the art; a mere request by the applicant that the examiner provide documentary evidence in support of an officially-noticed fact is not a proper traversal (see MPEP 2144.03.C). Applicant’s statements, such as "Here, Applicants dispute the Examiner's assertions in the above-quoted portion of the Office Action regarding what was allegedly ‘well-known and conventional’", and “Applicants further dispute the apparent assertion that, even such subject matter were ‘well-known and conventional’ that this would support the Examiner's assertion regarding obviousness” are merely unsupported arguments. These arguments do not explain why the officially noticed facts are not well-known and conventional, or why the Office actions assertions of obviousness would improper even if the Officially-noticed facts are taken as true. No substantive discussion/reasoning on either point appears to be provided. Applicant’s arguments pertaining to the Officially-noticed facts therefore amount to no more than arguing that documentary evidence in support of the Officially-noticed facts has not been provided. Such traversals are inadequate (see MPEP 2144.03.C). The common knowledge or well-known in the art statements are taken to be admitted prior art because the traverse was inadequate (see MPEP 2144.03.C).
The examiner notes that the Officially-noticed facts as set forth in connection with the rejection of claim 1 are as follows (see Office action, page 11):
The examiner takes Official notice of the fact that the use test devices for measuring the continuity and/or resistance of a pair of electrical lines (e.g., an ohmmeter) or impedance (e.g., LCR meters) and evaluating the measurement against a predetermined expected/nominal response signal in order to determine/infer whether a defect (e.g., open, short) is present in one of the electrical lines was well-known and conventional before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. In either the case of continuity/resistance testing or impedance testing, the examiner notes that the test device will necessarily apply an electrical signal, e.g., a relatively small DC current/voltage in the case of an ohmmeter or an AC voltage in the case of an LCR meter, or order to perform the testing.
Official notice unsupported by documentary evidence may be taken by the examiner where the facts asserted to be well-known, or to be common knowledge in the art, are “capable of such instant and unquestionable demonstration as to defy dispute.” See MPEP 2144.03. The examiner maintains that the Officially-noticed facts in this case are clearly “capable of such instant and unquestionable demonstration as to defy dispute” such that documentary evidence is unnecessary. Nonetheless, the examiner attaches the following prior art references to this Office action, any or all of which sufficiently establish the Officially-noticed facts:
Siegel, How to Use a Multimeter, Part 3: Measuring Resistance and Verifying Continuity, 2017, available at https://www.hagerty.com/media/maintenance-and-tech/measuring-resistance/.
Testing Resistance (Ohms) with a Digital Multimeter, available at https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/multimeters101/chapter/testing-resistance-ohms-with-a-digital-multimeter/ on 7/16/2019.
LCR Meter Guide, available at https://bkpmedia.s3.amazonaws.com/downloads/guides/en-us/lcr_meter_guide.pdf on 7/1/2014.
Applicant’s argument pertaining to the amendment of claim 1 to recite “the interface comprises a second bundle of electrical lines electrically coupled with the first bundle of electrical lines to provide an extended bundle” is persuasive. Accordingly, the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horn is withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Horn.
Applicant's arguments filed 3/25/2026 regarding the prior art rejection of claims 14 and 20 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In the rejection of claim 14, the Office action considers “a first electronics region” to include data transmission coil 131a and supply voltage transmitting coil 132a corresponding to mirror element 110a. During operation the data transmission coil 131a and supply voltage transmitting coil 132a will collectively be characterized by a thermal power loss that is less than or equal to a threshold value. Further, the Office action considers “a second electronics region” to include data transmission coils and supply voltage transmitting coils associated with plurality of mirror elements other than mirror element 110a. The examiner notes mirror elements other than mirror element 110a may number in the hundreds (Horn, e.g., paragraph 35). It is therefore implicit that Horn’s second electronics region (many mirror elements other than 110a) generates a thermal power loss that is above the thermal power loss of the first electronics region (single mirror element 110a), with the thermal power loss of the first electronics region being a threshold value as claimed.
Applicant further argues in connection with claim 14 that the Examiner did not properly consider the definition of "passive input behaviour" provided at page 15, lines 13-14 of the application as filed. The examiner notes that it appears applicant may have intended to recite instead page 15, lines 17-22 which discusses "passive input behaviour". From this passage, the phrase "passive input behaviour" has a scope that incudes an input behavior (e.g., resistance, impedance) that is determinable with any active components being unpowered. The examiner maintains as set forth in the rejection of claim 14 that a pair of electrical lines for driving data transmission coils 131a-b has a passive input behavior (e.g., resistance, inductance) that is determinable using an electrical test signal transmitted via the wired interface. In this regard, the examiner notes that the pair of electrical lines for driving data transmission coils 131a-b are inherently characterized by an input behavior (e.g., resistance) in their unpowered state, and that this input behavior is capable of being determined using an electrical test signal transmitted via the wired interface.
Applicant’s “power loss” arguments pertaining to claim 20 are not persuasive for reasons analogous to those discussed above in connection with claim 14.
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DE102015202800A1 to Horn et al. (Horn).
Regarding claim 14, Horn discloses an optical system, comprising:
an optics module, comprising:
a plurality of displaceable optical elements to guide radiation in the optical system;
an actuator/sensor device configured to displace one of the optical elements and/or to acquire position information for the one of the optical elements;
a vacuum-tight housing; and
an electronics unit in the vacuum-tight housing,
wherein:
the electronics unit is configured to actuate the actuator/sensor device based on electrical signals received via a wired interface;
an input of the electronics unit is coupled to the wired interface (Horn, e.g., Fig. 1 (duplicated below), electronics unit in the form of data transmission coils 131a-b and supply voltage transmitting coils 132a-b that contained in separate housing ("electronics box") 130, which is sealed with respect to the surrounding housing 101 in a vacuum-tight manner and in which, in turn, "normal" ambient atmosphere is present, see, e.g., paragraphs 39-40; electronics box 130 is a component of an optics module that also includes, for example, mirror arrangement 110 which has a plurality of mirror elements (e.g., mirror elements 110a, 110b, … ) which can be adjusted independently of one another using suitable actuators, see, e.g., paragraph 37; note in Fig. 1 that input side of vacuum feedthrough 103 (i.e., that side of vacuum feedthrough 103 connected to output side of vacuum feedthrough 102) constitutes a wired interface for wired transmission of electrical signals to electronics box 130 that has input comprising a first bundle comprising a plurality of electrical lines, e.g., electrical lines for driving data transmission coils 131a-b and a second (extended) bundle comprising a plurality of electrical lines, e.g., electrical lines for driving supply voltage transmitting coils 132a-b; Horn’s mirror elements (e.g., mirror elements 110a, 110b, … ), actuators, housing ("electronics box") 130 and coils 131a-b, 132a-b respectively correspond to the plurality of displaceable optical elements, the actuator/sensor device, the vacuum-tight housing and the electronics unit as claimed and together constitute the optics module as claimed);
the input of the electronics unit comprises a plurality of electrical lines that has a wiring configuration with electrical and/or electronic components so that a pair of electrical lines has a passive input behavior that is determinable using an electrical test signal transmitted via the wired interface (see Horn as applied above, e.g., pair of electrical lines for driving data transmission coils 131a-b; the examiner notes that pair of electrical lines for driving data transmission coils 131a-b has a passive input behavior (e.g., resistance, inductance) that is determinable using an electrical test signal transmitted via the wired interface);
the electronics unit comprises a first electronics region containing a number of electrical and/or electronic component parts (Horn, e.g., Fig. 1, first electronics region including data transmission coil 131a and supply voltage transmitting coil 132a corresponding to mirror element 110a);
the first electronics region is configured so that, during operation, the first electronics region generates a thermal power loss that is less than or equal to a threshold value (see Horn as applied above, during operation the data transmission coil 131a and supply voltage transmitting coil 132a will collectively be characterized by a thermal power loss that is less than or equal to a threshold value);
the electronics unit comprises a second electronics region containing a number of electrical and/or electronic component parts (Horn, e.g., Fig. 1, second electronics region including data transmission coils and supply voltage transmitting coils associated with plurality of mirror elements other than mirror element 110a);
the second electronics region is configured so that, during operation, the second electronics region generates a thermal power loss above the threshold value (see Horn as applied above, during operation the data transmission coils and supply voltage transmitting coils associated with plurality of mirror elements other than mirror element 110a will collectively be characterized by a thermal power loss that is above the predetermined threshold at least in the case where the predetermined threshold is equal to the collective thermal power loss of the data transmission coil 131a and supply voltage transmitting coil 132a; and
the first electronics region is operable independently of the second electronics region (Horn, e.g., paragraph 35, mirror arrangement 110 which has a plurality of mirror elements which can be adjusted independently of one another; also see paragraph 37).
PNG
media_image1.png
634
851
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Horn, Fig. 1
Regarding claim 15, Horn discloses wherein the electrical and/or electronic components comprise a resistor, a capacitor, an inductor and/or a diode (see Horn as applied to claim 14, e.g., Fig. 1, each of coils 131a-b and coils 132a-b constitutes at least an inductor).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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 1-5, 8-13 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horn.
Regarding claim 1, Horn discloses a method of checking an interface for wired transmission of electrical signals to an electronics unit in a vacuum-tight housing of an optics module, the optics module comprising a plurality of displaceable optical elements to guide radiation, an actuator/sensor device being configured to displace one of the optical elements and/or to acquire position information for the one of the optical elements, the electronics unit configured to actuate the actuator/sensor device based on electrical signals received via the interface, the interface comprising a first bundle comprising a plurality of electrical lines (Horn, e.g., Fig. 1 (duplicated above in connection with claim 14), electronics unit in the form of data transmission coils 131a-b and supply voltage transmitting coils 132a-b that contained in separate housing ("electronics box") 130, which is sealed with respect to the surrounding housing 101 in a vacuum-tight manner and in which, in turn, "normal" ambient atmosphere is present, see, e.g., paragraphs 39-40; electronics box 130 is a component of an optics module that also includes, for example, mirror arrangement 110 which has a plurality of mirror elements (e.g., mirror elements 110a, 110b, … ) which can be adjusted independently of one another using suitable actuators, see, e.g., paragraph 37; note in Fig. 1 that electrical lines for driving supply voltage transmitting coils 132a-b between panel 124 and the supply voltage transmitting coils 132a-b collectively constitute an interface for wired transmission of electrical signals as claimed, and of these electrical lines, those on the right side of vacuum feedthrough 103 constitute a first bundle comprising a plurality of electrical lines and those on the left side of vacuum feedthrough 103 constitute a second bundle of electrical lines coupled with the first bundle of electrical lines to provide an extended bundle), the method comprising:
a) coupling the first bundle to the electronics unit (see Horn as applied above, electrical lines on the right side of vacuum feedthrough 103 connected to voltage transmitting coils 132a-b constitute a first bundle connected to the electronics unit);
wherein:
the interface comprises a second bundle of electrical lines electrically coupled with the first bundle of electrical lines to provide an extended bundle (see Horn as applied above, electrical lines for driving supply voltage transmitting coils 132a-b on the left side of vacuum feedthrough 103);
Horn is not relied upon as explicitly disclosing:
b) connecting a test device to the first bundle;
c) applying an electrical test signal generated by the test device to a pair of electrical lines of the first bundle;
d) acquiring an electrical response signal from the pair of electrical lines;
e) comparing the acquired response signal with a predetermined response signal for the pair of electrical lines; and
f) determining whether a defect is present in one of the electrical lines of the pair based on the comparison,
wherein:
b)-f) are performed for the extended bundle.
The examiner takes Official notice of the fact that the use test devices for measuring the continuity and/or resistance of a pair of electrical lines (e.g., an ohmmeter) or impedance (e.g., LCR meters) and evaluating the measurement against a predetermined expected/nominal response signal in order to determine/infer whether a defect (e.g., open, short) is present in one of the electrical lines was well-known and conventional before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. In either the case of continuity/resistance testing or impedance testing, the examiner notes that the test device will necessarily apply an electrical signal, e.g., a relatively small DC current/voltage in the case of an ohmmeter or an AC voltage in the case of an LCR meter, or order to perform the testing. It 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 to modify Horn to include the steps of: b) connecting a test device to the first bundle, c) applying an electrical test signal generated by the test device to a pair of electrical lines of the first bundle, d) acquiring an electrical response signal from the pair of electrical lines, e) comparing the acquired response signal with a predetermined response signal for the pair of electrical lines, f) determining whether a defect is present in one of the electrical lines of the pair based on the comparison, and then repeating steps b)-f) for the second (extended) bundle. In this way, each of the first bundle and second bundle can be tested for continuity/resistance or impedance, for example, with the results being evaluated against a predetermined expected/nominal response signal in order to determine whether a defect is present in one of the electrical lines, as is well-known and conventional in the art.
Regarding claim 2, modified Horn as applied to claim 1 discloses performing c)-f) for each pair of electrical lines of the first bundle (see Horn as applied to claim 1, noting that first bundle comprising a plurality of electrical lines, e.g., electrical lines for driving supply voltage transmitting coils 132a-b on the right side of vacuum feedthrough 103, constitutes the pair of electrical lines of the first bundle).
Regarding claim 3, modified Horn as applied to claim 1 discloses wherein the electrical test signal comprises: a DC voltage signal for determining an electrical resistance; an AC voltage signal with a frequency for determining a specific impedance; and/or an AC voltage signal with a changeable frequency for determining an impedance characteristic (see Horn as applied to claim 1).
Regarding claim 4, modified Horn as applied to claim 1 is not relied upon as explicitly disclosing prior to a), determining the predetermined response signal for each pair of contacts of the electronics unit by applying the test signal to the respective pair of contacts of the electronics unit and acquiring the response signal. The examiner takes Official notice of the fact that the use of a priori measurements to establish baseline/nominal characteristics/values for use in subsequent comparisons was well-known and conventional before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. It 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 to modify Horn to include a step of prior to a), determining the predetermined response signal for each pair of contacts of the electronics unit by applying the test signal to the respective pair of contacts of the electronics unit and acquiring the response signal. In this way, the expected/nominal resistance or impedance of each of the driving supply voltage transmitting coils 132a-b can be obtained beforehand as points of comparison when resistance or impedance testing of the associated pair of electrical lines is implemented.
Regarding claim 5, modified Horn as applied to claim 1 discloses wherein:
an optics system comprises a vacuum housing and the optics module (Horn, e.g., Fig. 1, electronics box 130 is a component of an optics module that also includes, for example, mirror arrangement 110; vacuum housing 101 in combination with optics module defines an optics system as claimed);
the optics module and the vacuum-tight housing are in the vacuum housing (see Horn as applied above and to claim 1, noting that electronics box 130 and mirror arrangement 110 are contained in vacuum housing 101);
the interface comprises a bundle of electrical lines extending through the vacuum housing and a vacuum interface (see Horn as applied to claim 1 pertaining to interface, first bundle and second bundle); and
the vacuum interface is on: i) the vacuum-tight housing; and/or ii) the vacuum housing (see Horn as applied above, vacuum feedthrough 103 on electronics box 130 and/or vacuum feedthrough 102 on vacuum housing 101).
Regarding claim 8, modified Horn as applied to claim 1 Horn discloses wherein:
the electronics unit comprises a first electronics region containing a plurality of electrical and/or electronic component parts (Horn, e.g., Fig. 1, first electronics region including data transmission coil 131a and supply voltage transmitting coil 132a corresponding to mirror element 110a);
during operation, the first electronic region generates a thermal power loss that is less than or equal to a predetermined threshold value (see Horn as applied above, during operation the data transmission coil 131a and supply voltage transmitting coil 132a will collectively be characterized by a thermal power loss that is less than or equal to a threshold value);
the electronics unit comprises a second electronics region containing a plurality of electrical and/or electronic component parts (Horn, e.g., Fig. 1, second electronics region including data transmission coils and supply voltage transmitting coils associated with plurality of mirror elements other than mirror element 110a);
during operation, the second electronics region generates a thermal power loss above the predetermined threshold value (see Horn as applied above, during operation the data transmission coils and supply voltage transmitting coils associated with plurality of mirror elements other than mirror element 110a will collectively be characterized by a thermal power loss that is above the predetermined threshold at least in the case where the predetermined threshold is equal to the collective thermal power loss of the data transmission coil 131a and supply voltage transmitting coil 132a; also see Response to Arguments above in connection with claim 14);
the first electronics region is operable independently of the second electronics region (Horn, e.g., paragraph 35, mirror arrangement 110 which has a plurality of mirror elements which can be adjusted independently of one another; also see paragraph 37); and
the method further comprises:
operating the first electronics region (see Horn as applied above, it is implicit that first electronics region including data transmission coil 131a and supply voltage transmitting coil 132a corresponding to mirror element 110a will be operated to suitably adjust mirror element 110a); and
Horn is not relied upon as explicitly disclosing checking an intended function of the first electronics region subsequent to the step of operating the first electronics region. Checking an intended function of the first electronics region (e.g., verifying/checking that mirror element 110a is actually adjusted in response to control data transmitted using data transmission coil 131a) nonetheless falls well withing the inferences and creative steps that a person of ordinary skill in the art would employ in light of Horn’s specific teachings and the knowledge of the person of ordinary skill generally as it relates to well-known and conventional control and feedback principles. For at least this reason, the recitation of checking an intended function of the first electronics region does not patentably distinguish over modified Horn as applied to the remainder of claim 8.
Regarding claim 9, modified Horn as applied to claim 8 discloses performing c)-f) for each pair of electrical lines of the first bundle (see Horn as applied to claim 1, noting that first bundle comprising a plurality of electrical lines, e.g., electrical lines for driving supply voltage transmitting coils 132a-b on the right side of vacuum feedthrough 103, constitutes the pair of electrical lines of the first bundle).
Regarding claim 10, modified Horn as applied to claim 8 discloses wherein the electrical test signal comprises: a DC voltage signal for determining an electrical resistance; an AC voltage signal with a frequency for determining a specific impedance; and/or an AC voltage signal with a changeable frequency for determining an impedance characteristic (see Horn as applied to claim 1).
Regarding claim 11, modified Horn as applied to claim 8 is not relied upon as explicitly disclosing prior to a), determining the predetermined response signal for each pair of contacts of the electronics unit by applying the test signal to the respective pair of contacts of the electronics unit and acquiring the response signal. The examiner takes Official notice of the fact that the use of a priori measurements to establish baseline/nominal characteristics/values for use in subsequent comparisons was well-known and conventional before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. It 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 to modify Horn to include a step of prior to a), determining the predetermined response signal for each pair of contacts of the electronics unit by applying the test signal to the respective pair of contacts of the electronics unit and acquiring the response signal. In this way, the expected/nominal resistance or impedance of each of the driving supply voltage transmitting coils 132a-b can be obtained beforehand as points of comparison when resistance or impedance testing of the associated pair of electrical lines is implemented.
Regarding claim 12, modified Horn as applied to claim 8 discloses wherein:
an optics system comprises a vacuum housing and the optics module (Horn, e.g., Fig. 1, electronics box 130 is a component of an optics module that also includes, for example, mirror arrangement 110; vacuum housing 101 in combination with optics module defines an optics system as claimed);
the optics module and the vacuum-tight housing are in the vacuum housing (see Horn as applied above and to claim 1, noting that electronics box 130 and mirror arrangement 110 are contained in vacuum housing 101);
the interface comprises a bundle of electrical lines extending through the vacuum housing and a vacuum interface (see Horn as applied to claim 1 pertaining to interface, first bundle and second bundle); and
the vacuum interface is on: i) the vacuum-tight housing; and/or ii) the vacuum housing (see Horn as applied above, vacuum feedthrough 103 on electronics box 130 and/or vacuum feedthrough 102 on vacuum housing 101).
Regarding claim 13, modified Horn as applied to claim 1 discloses before a), producing an optical system that comprises the optics module, the actuator sensor, the vacuum-tight housing, and the interface (see Horn as applied to claim 1; it is implicit that an optical system including the optics module, the actuator sensor, the vacuum-tight housing, and the interface will be produced/constructed prior to implementing the process of modified Horn).
Regarding claim 17, Horn is not relied upon as explicitly disclosing wherein:
the optical system comprises a plurality of optics module;
each optics module comprises:
a plurality of displaceable optical elements to guide radiation in the optical system;
an actuator/sensor device configured to displace one of the optical elements and/or to acquire position information for the one of the optical elements;
a vacuum-tight housing; and
an electronics unit in the vacuum-tight housing; and
for each optics module:
the electronics unit is configured to actuate the actuator/sensor device based on electrical signals received via a wired interface;
an input of the electronics unit is coupled to the wired interface;
the input of the electronics unit comprises a plurality of electrical lines that has a wiring configuration with electrical and/or electronic components so that a pair of electrical lines has a passive input behavior that is determinable using an electrical test signal transmitted via the wired interface;
the electronics unit comprises a first electronics region containing a number of electrical and/or electronic component parts;
the first electronics region is configured so that, during operation, the first electronics region generates a thermal power loss that is less than or equal to a threshold value;
the electronics unit comprises a second electronics region containing a number of electrical and/or electronic component parts;
the second electronics region is configured so that, during operation, the second electronics region generates a thermal power loss above the threshold value; and
the first electronics region is operable independently of the second electronics region.
The examiner notes that the scope of claim 17 corresponds to providing multiple optics modules as set forth in claim 14. The mere duplication of the optics module of 14, e.g., in a case where a relatively large number of mirror arrangements 110 (Horn, Fig. 1) are present such that it is convenient and/or necessary to organize the mirror arrangements 110 in to a first group and a second group, with each group having an electronics box 130 for controlling the corresponding mirror arrangements 100, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. Such reason falls well-within the inferences and creative steps that a person of ordinary skill in the art would employ in light of the specific teachings of Horn and the knowledge of one of ordinary skill generally and would appear to provide a result that is entirely predictable/expected. Also see MPEP 2144.04.VI.B, mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. For this reason, claim 17 does not patentably define over Horn as applied to claim 14.
Regarding claim 18, Horn discloses wherein the electrical and/or electronic components comprise a resistor, a capacitor, an inductor and/or a diode (see Horn as applied to claim 17, e.g., Fig. 1, each of coils 131a-b and coils 132a-b constitutes at least an inductor).
Claims 6-7, 16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horn in view of US 2019/0324372 to Wolfsteiner et al. (Wolfsteiner).
Regarding claims 6, modified Horn as applied to claim 1 is not relied upon as explicitly disclosing using a fluid cooling system to actively cooling the electronics unit during operation of the optics module. Wolfsteiner discloses using a fluid cooling system to actively cool an electronics unit during operation of an optics module (Wolfsteiner, e.g., Figs. 2-3, electronics unit contained in housing 60; also see, e.g., paragraph 127). It 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 to modify Horn to include using a fluid cooling system to actively cooling the electronics unit during operation of the optics module. In this way, in the manner disclosed by Wolfsteiner, fluid flow can be used for dissipating heat from Horn’s electronics box 130.
Claim 7 recites using a fluid cooling system to actively cooling the electronics unit during operation of the optics module and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Horn in view of Wolfsteiner for reasons analogous to those discussed above in connection with claim 6.
Regarding claim 16, Horn as applied to claim 14 discloses wherein:
the optical system is a lithography apparatus with a vacuum housing (see Horn, e.g., Abstract, microlithographic projection exposure apparatus; also see Horn, Fig. 1, vacuum housing 101);
the optics module is in the vacuum housing (Horn, e.g., Fig. 1, Horn’s mirror elements (e.g., mirror elements 110a, 110b, … ), actuators, housing ("electronics box") 130 and coils 131a-b, 132a-b respectively correspond to the plurality of displaceable optical elements, the actuator/sensor device, the vacuum-tight housing and the electronics unit as claimed and together constitute the optics module, with the optics module being contained in vacuum housing 101);
Horn is not relied upon as explicitly disclosing the lithography apparatus further comprises a fluid cooling system configured to cool the optics module during operation of the lithography apparatus. Wolfsteiner discloses using a fluid cooling system to actively cool an electronics unit during operation of an optics module (Wolfsteiner, e.g., Figs. 2-3, electronics unit contained in housing 60; also see, e.g., paragraph 127). It 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 to modify Horn to include using a fluid cooling system configured to cool the optics module during operation of the lithography apparatus. In this way, in the manner disclosed by Wolfsteiner, fluid flow can be used for dissipating heat from the electronics box 130 of Horn’s optics module.
Claim 19 recites wherein:
the optical system is a lithography apparatus with a vacuum housing;
each optics module is in the vacuum housing;
the lithography apparatus further comprises a fluid cooling system configured to cool each optics module during operation of the lithography apparatus,
and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Horn in view of Wolfsteiner for reasons analogous to those discussed above in connection with claim 16.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horn in view of applicant-cited US 8,582,443 to Sun et al. (Sun).
Regarding claim 20, Horn discloses a test device configured to check an interface for wired transmission of electrical signals to an electronics unit in a vacuum-tight housing of an optics module, the interface comprising a first bundle comprising a plurality of electrical lines, the first bundle being coupled to the electronics unit, the test device comprising:
a test mode unit,
wherein:
the test mode unit is configured to selectively operate a first electronics region of the electronics unit to check an intended function of the first electronics region;
the first electronics region is part of the electronics unit;
the first electronics region comprises a plurality of electrical and/or electronic component parts;
the first electronics region is configured so that, during operation, the first electronics region generates a thermal power loss that is less than or equal to a threshold value;
the test mode unit is configured to selectively operate a second electronics region of the electronics unit to check an intended function of the second electronics region;
the second electronics region is part of the electronics unit; and
the second electronics part comprises a plurality of electrical and/or electronic component parts and that generates, during operation, a thermal power loss above the threshold value (see Horn as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, noting in particular that data and voltage generation unit 120 (Fig. 1) is configured to selectively operate first/second electronics regions of the electronics unit to check an intended function of the first/second electronics regions; also see Horn, e.g., paragraphs 59-60, 62; further, as explained in connection with the rejection of claim 8 above, checking an intended function of the first electronics region (e.g., verifying/checking that mirror element 110a is actually adjusted in response to control data transmitted using data transmission coil 131a) falls well withing the inferences and creative steps that a person of ordinary skill in the art would employ in light of Horn’s specific teachings and the knowledge of the person of ordinary skill generally as it relates to well-known and conventional control and feedback principles; for at least this reason, the recitation of checking an intended function of the first/second electronics regions does not patentably distinguish over Horn).
Horn is not relied upon as explicitly disclosing that the test device further includes:
a plug connector configured connect the test device to the first bundle of electrical lines;
a generation unit configured to generate an electrical test signal to check the pair of electrical lines;
an acquisition unit configured to acquire a response signal when the test signal is applied to the pair of electrical lines;
a multiplexing unit configured to connect the pair of electrical lines to the generation unit and to the acquisition unit;
a comparison unit configured to compare the acquired response signal for the pair of electrical lines with a predetermined response signal for the pair of electrical lines;
a determination unit configured to determine, based on the comparison, when a defect is present in one of the electrical lines of the pair of electrical lines.
Testing electrical cables using transmitted and reflected signals is known. Sun discloses in Fig. 1, for example, an arrangement for testing a cable 115 that is connected/plugged to a test device in the form of apparatus 100, with the apparatus 100 including a generation unit configured to generate an electrical test signal to check cable 115 (transmitter 105), an acquisition unit configured to acquire a response signal when the test signal is applied to the pair of electrical lines (receiver 110), a multiplexing unit configured to connect the cable 115 to the generation unit and to the acquisition unit (hybrid circuit 140), a comparison unit configured to compare the acquired response signal for the cable with a predetermined response signal for the (Sun, e.g., col. 6, lines 42-61) and a determination unit configured to determine, based on the comparison, when a defect is present in one of the electrical lines of the pair of electrical lines (Sun, e.g., col. 6, lines 42-61).
It 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 to modify Horn such that that the test device further includes:
a plug connector configured connect the test device to the first bundle of electrical lines;
a generation unit configured to generate an electrical test signal to check the pair of electrical lines;
an acquisition unit configured to acquire a response signal when the test signal is applied to the pair of electrical lines;
a multiplexing unit configured to connect the pair of electrical lines to the generation unit and to the acquisition unit;
a comparison unit configured to compare the acquired response signal for the pair of electrical lines with a predetermined response signal for the pair of electrical lines;
a determination unit configured to determine, based on the comparison, when a defect is present in one of the electrical lines of the pair of electrical lines.
In this way, in the manner disclosed by Sun, Horn’s electrical lines can be evaluated for the existence of faults.
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 DANIEL R MILLER whose telephone number is (571)270-1964. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM EST M-F.
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, Lee Rodak, can be reached at 571-270-5628. 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.
/DANIEL R MILLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights