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
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-6, 9-12, 14-15, and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Saeki (US 20200077897 A1).
Regarding Claim 1: Saeki discloses a system for non-contact measurement (Fig. 1) of one or more mechanical properties of a material, the system comprising:
an ultrasonic module comprising an ultrasonic applicator configured to apply ultrasonic pressure on a target region of the material (Fig. 1, 72; [0046]);
a detection module comprising an electromagnetic wave emitter (2) and an electromagnetic wave detector (12), said electromagnetic wave emitter being configured to emit an incident beam of electromagnetic waves towards the target region of the material, and said electromagnetic wave detector being configured to detect an emergent beam of electromagnetic waves reflected from the target region and/or transmitted through the target region (Fig. 1; [0038]); and
a processing module configured to determine one or more measures corresponding to the one or more mechanical properties of the material, based on changes in the emergent beam of electromagnetic waves (control unit 14; [0040]: The control computation unit 14 then computes tomographic distribution of the viscoelasticity of the object S on the basis of the tomographic image data…”).
Regarding Claim 2: The system according to claim 1, wherein the electromagnetic wave emitter and the electromagnetic wave detector are positioned such that the electromagnetic wave detector is capable of detecting the emergent beam of electromagnetic waves reflected from the target region (Fig. 1, detector 12).
Regarding Claim 4: The system according to claim 3, wherein the electromagnetic wave emitter is positioned to emit an incident beam of electromagnetic waves that is substantially perpendicular to the surface of the material at the target region (Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 5: The system according to claim 1, wherein the ultrasonic applicator comprises an air-coupled ultrasonic transducer ([0027]: (The load is applied to a desired cross-sectional position in the object by the acoustic radiation pressure in a non-contact manner…”).
Regarding Claim 6: The system according to claim 1, wherein the ultrasonic applicator comprises an array of transducer elements configured to generate directed ultrasonic waves to a 3D spatial location at the target region (Figs. 2A, 2B, transducer array 90 of piezoelectric elements 92; [0052]).
Regarding Claim 9: The system according to claim 1, wherein the processing module is configured to perform time-domain spectrum measurement based on changes in the emergent beam of electromagnetic waves detected by the electromagnetic wave detector ([0037]: time domain optical coherence tomography “OCT”).
Regarding Claim 10: The system according to claim 1, wherein the one or more measures corresponding to the one or more mechanical properties of the material comprises a measure of elasticity, rigidity, viscoelasticity and/or rheology ([0036]: viscoelasticity).
Regarding Claim 11: A method of non-contact measurement of one or more mechanical properties of a material, the method comprising,
emitting an incident beam of electromagnetic waves from an electromagnetic wave emitter towards a target region of the material (Fig. 1);
applying or varying an ultrasonic pressure on the target region of the material (Figs. 2a, 2b);
detecting an emergent beam of electromagnetic waves reflected from the target region and/or transmitted through the target region with an electromagnetic wave detector (12); and
determining one or more measures corresponding to the one or more mechanical properties with a processing module, based on changes in the emergent beam of electromagnetic waves (control unit 14; [0040]).
Regarding Claim 12: The method according to claim 11, wherein the changes in the emergent beam of electromagnetic waves are determined with respect to a reference emergent beam detected at a different time point ([0117]: “Upon acquiring a predetermined number of OCT images (S52: Y), the control computation unit 14 then reads two continuous tomographic images I(x,z,t) and I(x,z,t+Δt) with different times which are taken continuously (S54).”).
Regarding Claim 14: The method according to claim 11, wherein the method comprises,
(i) emitting the incident beam of electromagnetic waves and detecting the emergent beam of electromagnetic waves at a first time point ([0117]; Fig. 7, S54, I(x,z,t));
(ii) varying the ultrasonic pressure on the target region of the material ([0129]: “In this experiment, the same sample as that illustrated in FIGS. 12A and 12B was used. The amplitude of acoustic radiation pressure caused by ultrasonic waves was changed periodically while scanning in the X direction was performed by the OCT, and the obtained deformation rate was tomographically visualized. In this experiment, the amplitude modulation frequency was 2.4 Hz.);
(iii) emitting the incident beam of electromagnetic waves and detecting the emergent beam of electromagnetic waves at a second time point ([0117]; Fig. 7, S54, I(x,z,t+Δt);
(iv) repeating steps (i) to (iii) one or more times (Fig. 7); and
(v) determining the one or more measures corresponding to the one or more mechanical properties based on differences in emergent beams at least two different time points ([0040]: The control computation unit 14 then computes tomographic distribution of the viscoelasticity of the object S on the basis of the tomographic image data…”).
Regarding Claim 15: The method according to claim 11, wherein the ultrasonic pressure is applied using an air-coupled ultrasonic transducer over air ([0027]: (The load is applied to a desired cross-sectional position in the object by the acoustic radiation pressure in a non-contact manner…”).
Regarding Claim 18: The method according to claim 11, further comprising performing time-domain spectrum measurement based on the emergent beam of electromagnetic waves detected by the electromagnetic wave detector before and after application of the ultrasonic pressure ([0037]: time domain optical coherence tomography “OCT”; Figs. 11A/B to Figs. 12A/B).
Regarding Claim 19: The method according to claim 11, wherein the material comprises a hydrogel or a soft tissue in an eye of a mammalian subject ([0026]: “An “object” may be biological tissue of skin, cartilage, etc., or regenerated tissue (tissue generated from cultured cells) of regenerated skin, regenerated cartilage, etc.”).
Regarding Claim 20: A computer readable storage medium (14) having stored thereon instructions for instructing a processing unit of a system to execute a method of non-contact measurement of one or more mechanical properties of a material (Fig. 5), the method comprising,
emitting an incident beam of electromagnetic waves from an electromagnetic wave emitter towards a target region of the material (Fig. 1; Fig. 5);
applying or varying an ultrasonic pressure on the target region of the material (Figs. 2A/2B; [0129]: “In this experiment, the same sample as that illustrated in FIGS. 12A and 12B was used. The amplitude of acoustic radiation pressure caused by ultrasonic waves was changed periodically while scanning in the X direction was performed by the OCT, and the obtained deformation rate was tomographically visualized. In this experiment, the amplitude modulation frequency was 2.4 Hz.);
detecting an emergent beam of electromagnetic waves reflected from the target region and/or transmitted through the target region with an electromagnetic wave detector (12); and
determining one or more measures corresponding to the one or more mechanical properties with a processing module, based on changes in the emergent beam of electromagnetic waves (control unit 14; [0040]).
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.
Claim(s) 3, 7, 8, 16, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saeki (US 20200077897 A1) in view of Guo (US 20200209154 A1).
Regarding Claim 3: Saeki discloses the system according to claim 1, but Saeki fails to teach wherein the electromagnetic wave emitter and the electromagnetic wave detector are positioned such that the electromagnetic wave detector is capable of detecting the emergent beam of electromagnetic waves transmitted through the target region.
However, this is a configuration well-known in the art, as evidenced by Guo (Fig. 1, transmitter 100, sample 200, detector 300). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Saeki to incorporate the configuration of Guo. One would have been motivated to make such a modification on the basis of improving signal-to-noise ratio and measurement sensitivity in samples where reflected signals are weak or highly scattered.
Regarding Claim 7: Saeki discloses the system according to claim 1, but Saeki fails to teach wherein the ultrasonic applicator comprises a pulsed laser device configured to emit pulses of electromagnetic waves for applying the ultrasonic pressure at the target region on the surface of the material.
However, Guo teaches a terahertz measurement system wherein the ultrasonic applicator comprises a pulsed laser device configured to emit pulses of electromagnetic waves for applying the ultrasonic pressure at the target region on the surface of the material (Fig. 1, 500; [0022]: … the femtosecond fiber laser 500 is a laser device capable of generating femtosecond lasers, wherein femtosecond, abbreviated as fs, is a unit for measuring the length of time, and femtosecond lasers are lasers with the pulse reaching the femtosecond level.”)
Saeki and Guo are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the field of non-contact measurement with ultrasonic pressure. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Saeki to incorporate the teachings of Guo and provide an ultrasonic applicator comprising a pulsed laser device. One would be motivated to make such a modification on the basis of improving sensitivity and resolution of the measurements.
Regarding Claim 8: Saeki discloses the system according to claim 1, but Saeki fails to teach wherein the electromagnetic wave emitter is configured to emit an incident beam of electromagnetic waves having a frequency falling in a range from 0.1 THz to 10 THz.
However, Guo teaches a terahertz measurement system wherein the electromagnetic wave emitter is configured to emit an incident beam of electromagnetic waves having a frequency falling in a range from 0.1 THz to 10 THz ([0039]: The terahertz transmitter 100 can generate and transmit terahertz waves according to the pump light, and the terahertz waves are electromagnetic waves with a frequency from 0.1 THz to 10 THz…”).
Saeki and Guo are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the field of non-contact measurement with ultrasonic pressure. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Saeki to incorporate the teachings of Guo and provide a terahertz emitter. One would be motivated to make such a modification due to the advantages of low energy, high safety, and high penetrability of terahertz waves.
Regarding Claim 16: Saeki discloses the method according to claim 11, but Saeki fails to teach wherein the ultrasonic pressure is applied using a pulsed laser device over air, by applying pulses of electromagnetic waves having a pulse duration in the order of nanoseconds, picoseconds, or femtoseconds, and optionally wherein the pulses of electromagnetic waves are diffused to cover the target region on the surface of the material.
However, Guo teaches a terahertz measurement system wherein the ultrasonic applicator comprises a pulsed laser device configured to emit pulses of electromagnetic waves for applying the ultrasonic pressure at the target region on the surface of the material (Fig. 1, 500; [0022]: … the femtosecond fiber laser 500 is a laser device capable of generating femtosecond lasers, wherein femtosecond, abbreviated as fs, is a unit for measuring the length of time, and femtosecond lasers are lasers with the pulse reaching the femtosecond level.”)
Saeki and Guo are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the field of non-contact measurement with ultrasonic pressure. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Saeki to incorporate the teachings of Guo and provide an ultrasonic applicator comprising a pulsed laser device. One would be motivated to make such a modification on the basis of improving sensitivity and resolution of the measurements.
Regarding Claim 17: Saeki discloses the method according to claim 11, but Saeki fails to teach wherein the incident beam of electromagnetic waves emitted by the electromagnetic wave emitter has a frequency falling in a range from 0.1 THz to 10 THz.
However, Guo teaches a terahertz measurement system wherein the electromagnetic wave emitter is configured to emit an incident beam of electromagnetic waves having a frequency falling in a range from 0.1 THz to 10 THz ([0039]: The terahertz transmitter 100 can generate and transmit terahertz waves according to the pump light, and the terahertz waves are electromagnetic waves with a frequency from 0.1 THz to 10 THz…”).
Saeki and Guo are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the field of non-contact measurement with ultrasonic pressure. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Saeki to incorporate the teachings of Guo and provide a terahertz emitter. One would be motivated to make such a modification due to the advantages of low energy, high safety, and high penetrability of terahertz waves.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saeki in view of Byrnes (US 20190082964 A1).
Regarding Claim 13: Saeki discloses the method according to claim 11, but Saeki fails to teach wherein the ultrasonic pressure applied at the target region on the surface of the material is substantially constant without amplitude modulations.
However, Byrnes discloses a non-contact measurement system wherein the ultrasonic pressure applied at the target region on the surface of the material is substantially constant without amplitude modulations ([0019]: A different continuous-wave ultrasound frequency is applied to each individual ultrasound transducer 303.”).
Saeki and Byrnes are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the field of non-contact measurement with ultrasonic pressure. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Saeki to incorporate the teachings of Byrnes and apply constant ultrasonic pressure. One would be motivated to make such a modification on the basis of lower peak power operation and enabling continuous measurement with a simplified system design.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MIYA DOWNING whose telephone number is (703)756-1840. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM 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, David Makiya can be reached at (571) 272-2273. 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.
/MIYA DOWNING/Examiner, Art Unit 2884
/DAVID J MAKIYA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884