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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/29/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2011247906 A (hereinafter Ryosuke), in view of JP 2006011045 A (hereinafter Mochizuki), and further in view of EP 2930496 A1 (hereinafter Shinsuke).
Regarding claim 1, Ryosuke teaches a microscopic Raman device comprising: a sample set unit that has a cover (fig. 1 element 7, p. 3 para 1), and that stores a sample therein (fig. 1 shows 11 is inside element 7, p. 3 para 1); a first laser light source that generates first laser light to be projected onto the sample (fig. 1 elements 1 or 2, p. 2 para 12); a shutter disposed on a first light path which is a light path of the first laser light from the first laser light source to the sample (fig. 1 elements 26 or 27, p. 2 para 13); the microscopic Raman device (fig. 1, p. 2 para 12) further comprising: a dichroic mirror disposed on the first light path (fig. 1 element 8, p. 3 para 1); and the shutter is disposed on a portion of the first light path between the first laser light source and the dichroic mirror (this is shown in fig. 1).
Ryosuke fails to teach a cover which is openable and closable, a shutter drive unit that opens and closes the shutter; and a sensor, wherein the shutter drive unit is configured to close the shutter by the sensor sensing that the cover is opened, and the shutter blocks the first laser light by the sensor sensing that the cover is closed, such that the first laser light does not enter the sample set unit, a beam splitter, an illumination light source that generates illumination light to be projected onto the sample, wherein the illumination light source is disposed so that the illumination light is irradiated on the sample without passing through the beam splitter; and a camera, wherein the beam splitter causes the first laser light to pass therethrough, and reflects the illumination light reflected in the sample and causes the reflected illumination light to enter the camera, and causes to a first Raman scattered light generated by projecting the first laser light onto the sample to pass therethrough.
Mochizuki, from the same field of endeavor as Ryosuke, teaches a cover which is openable and closable (fig. 1 element 125, p. 4 para 6), a shutter drive unit that opens and closes the shutter (fig. 1 shutter 131, p. 4 para 6); and a sensor, wherein the shutter drive unit is configured to close the shutter by the sensor sensing that the cover is opened (this is explained in p. 4 para 6), and “the shutter blocks the first laser light by the sensor sensing that the cover is closed, such that the first laser light does not enter the sample set unit” (this is the time for the signal to reach the interlock box 102; p. 4 para 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Mochizuki to Ryosuke to have a cover which is openable and closable, a shutter drive unit that opens and closes the shutter; and a sensor, wherein the shutter drive unit is configured to close the shutter by the sensor sensing that the cover is opened, and the shutter blocks the first laser light by the sensor sensing that the cover is closed, such that the first laser light does not enter the sample set unit in order for the safety of the user (pa. 2 para 2).
Ryosuke, when modified by Mochizuki, does not teach a beam splitter, an illumination light source that generates illumination light to be projected onto the sample, wherein the illumination light source is disposed so that the illumination light is irradiated on the sample without passing through the beam splitter; and a camera, wherein the beam splitter causes the first laser light to pass therethrough, and reflects the illumination light reflected in the sample and causes the reflected illumination light to enter the camera, and causes to a first Raman scattered light generated by projecting the first laser light onto the sample to pass therethrough.
Shinsuke, from the same field of endeavor as Ryosuke, teaches a beam splitter (fig. 2 beam splitter 28, p. 7 last para to p. 8 para 1; note that a dichroic mirror may be a beam splitter, see US 9423343 B2 col 19 lines 17-21), an illumination light source that generates illumination light to be projected onto the sample (fig. 2 illuminator 6, p. 7 last para to p. 8 para 1), wherein the illumination light source is disposed so that the illumination light is irradiated on the sample without passing through the beam splitter (this is shown in fig. 2); and a camera (fig. 2 camera 5, p. 7 last para to p. 8 para 1), wherein the beam splitter causes the first laser light to pass therethrough (this is shown in fig. 2), and reflects the illumination light reflected in the sample and causes the reflected illumination light to enter the camera (this is shown in fig. 2), and causes to a first Raman scattered light generated by projecting the first laser light onto the sample to pass therethrough (this is shown in fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Shinsuke to Ryosuke, when modified by Mochizuki, to have a beam splitter, an illumination light source that generates illumination light to be projected onto the sample, wherein the illumination light source is disposed so that the illumination light is irradiated on the sample without passing through the beam splitter; and a camera, wherein the beam splitter causes the first laser light to pass therethrough, and reflects the illumination light reflected in the sample and causes the reflected illumination light to enter the camera, and causes to a first Raman scattered light generated by projecting the first laser light onto the sample to pass therethrough in order to enable to visualize images of the sample, including target particles in the sample (p. 8 para 4).
Regarding claim 3, Ryosuke teaches the microscopic Raman device according to claim 1, further comprising a second laser light source that generates second laser light to be projected onto the sample (fig. 1 elements 1 and 2 are laser, p. 2 para 12 lines 2-5), wherein the shutter (fig. 1 elements 26-27, p. 2 para 13) is disposed on a portion of the first light path (fig. 1 shows both laser lights passing through element 14) that overlaps a second light path which is a light path of the second laser light from the second laser light source to the sample (laser 1 and 2 overlap each other as shown in fig. 1), and the shutter blocks the first laser light and the second laser light when closed (p. 2 para 13).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ryosuke, Mochizuki, and Shinsuke as applied to claim(s) 1 above, and in view of Izzia, F. et al., US 9121755 B2 (hereinafter Izzia).
Regarding claim 2, the modified apparatus of Fuminori does not teach the microscopic Raman device according to claim 1, wherein the shutter drive unit is a solenoid.
Izzia, from the same field of endeavor as Fuminori, teaches the microscopic Raman device according to claim 1, wherein the shutter drive unit is a solenoid (col 6 lines 63-67 to col 7 line 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Izzia to the modified apparatus of Fuminori to have the microscopic Raman device according to claim 1, wherein the shutter drive unit is a solenoid in order to form a safe interlock system (col 6 lines 63-67 to col 7 line 1).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERTO FABIAN JR whose telephone number is (571)272-3632. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (8-12, 1-5).
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.
/ROBERTO FABIAN JR/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/Kara E. Geisel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights