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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Examiner notes that claim 12 reads “wherein the second harmonic wave generation unit is driven to be inside or outside the path”. Claim 12 is referring to path of light output from the third amplifier as recited in claim 11. Therefore, no matter where the second harmonic wave generation unit is placed in the device it will either be inside the path of light output from the third amplifier or it will not be in the light path and therefore will be outside the light path. Therefore, the limitation fails to further limit the claim in which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(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 1,3-6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Nowak et al. (hereinafter Nowak) (US 20130148674 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Nowak discloses in Fig. 9
A laser device [3A] (Para. [0117]) comprising:
a laser diode [312] (Paras. [0100,0102]) configured to output laser light with a variable pulse pattern (Paras. [0085,0189,0190]);
a pre-amp optical unit [370] (Para. [0117]) configured to amplify the laser light output from the laser diode [312] to a first energy level (Para. [0118]) and including a plurality of Pockels cells [373,376 Fig. 11] (Para. [0128]) and a first amplifier [372] (Para. [0128]);
a second amplifier [330A] (Para. [0119]) configured to amplify the laser light amplified to the first energy level to a second energy level (Para. [0123]);
a third amplifier [330B] (Para. [0121]) configured to amplify the laser light amplified to the second energy level to a third energy level (Para. [0123]); and
a control unit (Paras. [0085,0198]) configured to set a pulse pattern of the laser light output from the laser diode [312] (Para. [0085,0198]) and control a driver of the laser diode, the first amplifier, the second amplifier, and the third amplifier based on the pulse pattern (Paras. [0198,0199]).
Regarding claim 3, Nowak discloses the device outlined in claim 1 above and further discloses in Fig. 11,
wherein the pre-amp optical unit [370] (Para. [0128]) includes:
a polarization beam splitter [371] (Para. [0128]) configured to reflect light of a first polarization (Para. [0130]) and transmit light of a second polarization (Para. [0131]);
a first Pockels cell [373] (Para. [0131]) arranged in a path of light reflected from the polarization beam splitter [371] (Paras. [0130,0131]) and controlled to operate as a quarter wave plate at a first timing (Para. [0132]);
the first amplifier [372] configured to amplify the light passing through the first Pockels cell [373] (Para. [0131]);
a first total reflection mirror [375] (Para. [0132]) configured to reflect the light amplified and output from the first amplifier [372] back toward the first amplifier [372] again (Para. [0132]);
a second Pockels cell [376] (Para. [0132]) arranged to face the first Pockels cell [373] with the polarization beam splitter [371] between the first Pockels cell [373] and the second Pockels cell [376] (Para. [0132]) and controlled to operate as a quarter wave plate at a second timing (Para. [0133]); and
a second total reflection mirror [377] (Para. [0132]) configured to reflect the light passing through the second Pockels cell [376] back toward the second Pockels cell again [376] (Para. [0132]).
Regarding claim 4, Nowak discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 3 above and further discloses,
wherein the laser light output from the laser diode is the light of the first polarization (Para. [0130]).
Regarding claim 5, Nowak discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 4 above and further discloses in Fig. 9,
wherein the first timing is a time from an instant when the laser light is reflected from the polarization beam splitter [371] to an instant when the laser light reciprocates the first amplifier [372] once and returns back to the polarization beam splitter [371] again (Para. [0132]).
Regarding claim 6, Nowak discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 4 above and further discloses in Fig. 9,
wherein the second timing is a time from an instant when the laser light reciprocates the first amplifier [372] multiple times to an instant when the laser light has a first energy level and then reciprocates the second Pockels cell [376] once (Paras. [0132.0133]).
Regarding claim 8, Nowak discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above and further discloses,
wherein a number of times that the laser light reciprocates to the first amplifier is 5 to 20 times (Para. [0134]).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 2,9,10,15 and 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nowak in view of Yi et al. (hereinafter Yi) (US 20210242657 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Nowak discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above but fails to disclose,
wherein the pulse pattern includes one or more pulses having a pulse width in a range of 50 pico seconds to 100 nano seconds.
Yi discloses,
a pulse pattern including a pulse width in a range of 50 picoseconds to 100 nanoseconds (Paras. [0005,0021])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the pulse pattern width as disclosed in Yi in the device of Nowak for the purpose of allowing a desired variable pulse pattern. (Yi Paras. [0005,0021])
Regarding claim 9, Nowak discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above but fails to disclose,
further comprising a first beam expansion unit configured to expand a beam width of the laser light amplified by the pre-amp optical unit.
Yi discloses in Fig. 1,
a beam expansion unit [125a,125b] (Para. [0034]) configured to expand a beam width of a laser light amplified by an amplifier [121b] (Para. [0034])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the beam expansion unit shown in Yi before the third amplifier of Nowak for the purpose of adjusting the spatial seize of the laser pulse. (Yi Para. [0034])
Regarding claim 10, Nowak in view of Yi discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 9 above and further discloses,
further comprising a second beam expansion unit [320B] (Para. [0120]) configured to further expand the beam width (Para. [0120]) expanded in the first beam expansion unit [Yi 125a,125b Fig. 1].
Regarding claim 15, Nowak discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above and further discloses,
the laser device according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above)
Nowak fails to disclose,
A treatment device comprising:
the laser device according to claim 1; and
a control unit configured to control the laser device to output a pulse pattern suitable for a treatment mode.
Yi discloses in Fig. 1,
A treatment device [100] (Para. [0020]) comprising a laser device [110,120] (Para. [0020]) and
a control unit [130] (Para. [0020]) configured to control the laser device to output a pulse pattern suitable for a treatment mode (Para. [0021]) with a plurality of pulses (Para. [0021])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the device of Nowak in the treatment device structure shown in Yi with the plurality of pulses for the purpose of allowing a variety of laser pulse widths that can be easily generated. (Yi Para. [0023])
Regarding claim 16, Nowak discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 15 above and further discloses in Yi,
wherein the laser device is configured to output light of a pulse pattern including only pico-second pulses (Para. [0021]), output light of a pulse pattern
including only nano-second pulses (Para. [0021]), or output light of a pulse pattern including a combination of pico-second pulses and nano-second pulses (Para. [0021]).
Claims 7,11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nowak in view of Sierra et al. (hereinafter Sierra) (US 20140371730 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Nowak discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above but fails to disclose,
wherein the first energy level is greater than or equal to 100 microjoules (µJ).
Sierra discloses in Fig. 2,
an energy level from an amplifier [240] (Para. [0062]) being greater than or equal to 100 microjoules (µJ) (Para. [0062])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the energy level disclosed in Sierra for the amplifiers in the device of Nowak for the purpose of generating the pulses depending on an amount of energy required to perform a particular treatment. (Sierra Para. [0050])
Regarding claim 11, Nowak discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above but fails to disclose,
further comprising a second harmonic wave generation unit arranged in a path of light output from the third amplifier.
Sierra discloses in Fig. 2,
a second harmonic wave generation unit [250] (Para. [0063]) arranged in a path of light output from an amplifier [240] (Para. [0063])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the second harmonic wave generator shown in Sierra in the device of Nowak for the purpose of allowing conversion and frequency-doubling. (Sierra Para. [0058])
Regarding claim 12, Nowak in view of Sierra discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 11 above and further discloses in Sierra Fig. 2,
wherein the second harmonic wave generation unit [250] is driven to be inside or outside the path. (Para. [0057])
Second harmonic wave generation unit [250] of Sierra is shown to be in the path of light as shown in Fig. 2 of Sierra.
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nowak in view of Yi and further in view of Wang et al. (hereinafter Wang) (CN 113410739 A).
Examiner notes an attached machine translation will be used for the claim mapping of Wang. See PTO-892 form.
Regarding claim 13, Nowak discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above but fails to disclose,
further comprising:
a half wave plate arranged between the pre-amp optical unit and the second amplifier;
a polarization beam splitter arranged between the half wave plate and the second amplifier;
a quarter wave plate arranged between the polarization beam splitter and the second amplifier; and
a total reflection mirror configured to reflect the light passing through the second amplifier back toward the second amplifier again.
Yi discloses in Fig. 3,
a half wave plate [224b] (Para. [0054]) arranged between an amplifier [221a] and a subsequent following amplifier [221b] (Para. [0047])
a polarization beam splitter [223b] (Para. [0047]) arranged between the half wave plate [224b] and the subsequent amplifier [221b] (Para. [0047])
a total reflection mirror [222c] (Para. [0058]) configured to reflect light passing through the subsequent amplifier [221b] back toward the amplifier [221b] again (Para. [0058])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the wave plate and amplifier structure as shown in Yi in the second amplifier structure of Nowak for the purpose of changing a phase of a laser to allow selective transmission of a polarization state. (Yi Paras. [0054])
Nowak in view of Yi fails to disclose,
a quarter wave plate arranged between the polarization beam splitter and the second amplifier
Wang discloses in Fig. 1,
a quarter wave plate [18] (Para. [87]) between a polarization beam splitter [13] (Para. [87]) and an amplifier [20] (Para. [87])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement a quarter wave plate between the polarization beam splitter and amplifier of the modified device of Nowak as shown in Wang for the purpose of converting the polarization of light. (Wang Para. [98])
Regarding claim 14, Nowak discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above but fails to disclose,
further comprising:
a half wave plate arranged between the second amplifier and the third amplifier;
a polarization beam splitter arranged between the half wave plate and the third amplifier;
a quarter wave plate arranged between the polarization beam splitter and the third amplifier; and
a total reflection mirror configured to reflect the light passing through the third amplifier back toward the third amplifier again.
Yi discloses in Fig. 3,
a half wave plate [224b] (Para. [0054]) arranged between an amplifier [221a] and a subsequent following amplifier [221b] (Para. [0047])
a polarization beam splitter [223b] (Para. [0047]) arranged between the half wave plate [224b] and the subsequent amplifier [221b] (Para. [0047])
a total reflection mirror [222c] (Para. [0058]) configured to reflect light passing through the subsequent amplifier [221b] back toward the amplifier [221b] again (Para. [0058])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the wave plate and amplifier structure as shown in Yi in the second amplifier structure of Nowak for the purpose of changing a phase of a laser to allow selective transmission of a polarization state. (Yi Paras. [0054])
Nowak in view of Yi fails to disclose,
a quarter wave plate arranged between the polarization beam splitter and the third amplifier
Wang discloses in Fig. 1,
a quarter wave plate [18] (Para. [87]) between a polarization beam splitter [13] (Para. [87]) and an amplifier [20] (Para. [87])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement a quarter wave plate between the polarization beam splitter and amplifier of the modified device of Nowak as shown in Wang for the purpose of converting the polarization of light. (Wang Para. [98])
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Examiner notes (US 20200346301 A1) which discloses a device with a plurality of cascading amplifier structures including splitters and Pockels cells. See PTO-892 form.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNTER J NELSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5318. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8:30am-5:00 ET.
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, MinSun Harvey can be reached at (571) 272-1835. 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.
/H.J.N./Examiner, Art Unit 2828 /TOD T VAN ROY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Prosecution Insights