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 § 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 (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 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) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Helge et al (JP 2017-021356 A) in view of Park et al (KR 2012-0024436 A).
Regarding claim 1, Helge et al discloses a three-dimensional light detection apparatus (1) capable of detecting a light signal, resulting from multi-wavelength light, released from a light source (53) and emitted to a sample (9), reflecting off or radiation from the sample, the apparatus comprising: an objective lens (5) arranged toward the sample (9) (See Fig. 1); a band rejection filter (28) eliminating an exited light signal of the light source from the light signal; and an infrared image sensor (CCD) detecting a fluorescent signal from the light signal propagating through the band rejection filter (27) (See Figs. 1, 2 and paragraphs [0045], [0054], [0068]). Zeiss et al is silent with regards to the infrared image sensor detects two types of fluorescent signals, resulting from separation caused by a difference in a path for the light signal, in a distinguished manner, and the difference in the path is generated by a time taken for the light signal to reach the infrared image sensor or by a distance over which the light signal propagates to reach the infrared image sensor. Park et al discloses a multi fluorescent microscope and observing method and system comprising: first and second image acquisition unit (116)(124), have a path different with respect to an object (C) to be observed, distinguish and detect two types of fluorescence images (GFP image) and a (RFP image from the object to be observed (See Figs. 2-4 and paragraphs [0056], [0062]). Thus, it would have been obvious to modify Helge et al with the teachings of Park et al, so as to enable a three-dimensional light detection apparatus capable of acquiring fluorescent images having different wavelengths that distinguishes them on a per-wavelength basis.
Regarding claim 2, Helge et al discloses further comprising: a zoom lens (12) arranged between the band rejection filter (infrared block filter) (88) and the infrared image sensor (CCD image sensor) (page 7, paragraphs 5-7), wherein the path for the light signal comprises: a left-side light path; and a right-side light path (two parallel optical paths i.e. beam bundle (14)(15), and wherein the zoom lens (13) is arranged on each of the left-side light path and the right-side light path, and the band rejection filter is arranged on each of the left-side light path and right-side light path (i.e. zoom lens (13) disposed between first block filter (27) and objective lens (5) in optical path (15)) (See Fig. 1).
Regarding claims 3, 6, Helge et al discloses further comprising: a wavelength separator (33) (dichroic beam splitter) arranged between the infrared image sensor (36) and the zoom lens (13); and a visible light image sensor detecting a visible light signal separated from the light signal by the wavelength separator (i.e. detecting red, green and blue light split by the dichroic beam splitter (33)) (See Figs. 1, 2 and page 10, paragraph 2).
Regarding claim 4, Helge et al discloses a three-dimensional light detection apparatus (1) capable of detecting a light signal, resulting from multi-wavelength light, released from a light source (53) and emitted to a sample (9), reflecting off or radiating from the sample, the apparatus comprising: a lens unit (5) arranged toward the sample (9) (See Fig. 1). Helge et al is silent with regards to band rejection filter arrangement and a path separator as claimed. Park et al discloses wherein first and second radiation lights (EM1)(EM2) generated from an object (C) to be observed move parallel to each other in an optical path between the object (C) to be observed and a second dichroic filter (114); a first image acquisition unit (116) detects first radiation light (EM1) so as to obtain a GFP image of the object (C) to be observed; and a second image acquisition unit (124) detects the second radiation light (EM2) so as to obtain an RFP image of the object (C ) to be observed (See Figs. 2-4, Abstract and pages 9-10). Thus, it would have been obvious to modify Helge et al with the teachings of Park et al, so as to enable a three-dimensional light detection apparatus capable of acquiring fluorescent images having different wavelengths that distinguishes them on a per-wavelength basis.
Regarding claim 5, Helge et al discloses a reflector changing a path for the light signal in such a manner that one of the light signals, which result from the separation by the path separator, propagates toward the infrared image sensor, wherein the path separator is a beam splitter (33) (infrared light beam is transmitted from the dichroic beam splitter (33) to the camera chip (36) (See Figs. 1, 2).
Claim(s) 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Helge et al (JP 2017-021356 A) in view of Park et al (KR 2012-0024436 A), as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Mitsuaki et al (JP 2016-223899 A).
Regarding claims 7 and 9, Helge et al and Park et al disclose all of the limitations of parent claim 4, as taught supra however, Helge et al and Park et al are silent with regards to detect the fluorescent signals, which result from the temporal separation by the rotation reflection into a left-side light path and a right- side light path. Mitsuaki et al discloses deflected light input to optical sensor (20a)(20b) by using deflection rotation elements (51a)(51b) (See Fig. 10 and page 12). Thus, it would have been obvious to modify Helge et al and Park et al, so as to enable a three-dimensional light detection apparatus capable of acquiring fluorescent images having different wavelengths that distinguishes them on a per-wavelength basis.
Regarding claim 8, Helge et al discloses further comprising: a wavelength separator (33) (dichroic beam splitter) arranged between the infrared image sensor (36) and the zoom lens (13); and a visible light image sensor detecting a visible light signal separated from the light signal by the wavelength separator (i.e. detecting red, green and blue light split by the dichroic beam splitter (33)) (See Figs. 1, 2 and page 10, paragraph 2).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Fuji et al (US 2019/0162596 A1) discloses an optical filter including filter regions arrayed two-dimensionally, in which the filter regions include a first region and a second region; a wavelength distribution of an optical transmittance of the first region has a first local maximum in a first wavelength band and a second local maximum in a second wavelength band that differs from the first wavelength band, and a wavelength distribution of an optical transmittance of the second region has a third local maximum in a third wavelength band that differs from each of the first wavelength band and the second wavelength band and a fourth local maximum in a fourth wavelength band that differs from the third wavelength band.
PNG
media_image1.png
640
1118
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FANI POLYZOS BOOSALIS whose telephone number is (571)272-2447. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-3:30 PM.
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, David Porta can be reached at 571-272-2444. 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.
/DAVID P PORTA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884
/F.P.B./Examiner, Art Unit 2884