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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 7 July 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 15 June 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-15 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to Claims 1, 11 and 12 have overcome the U.S.C. 102 rejections previously set forth in the Final Office Action mailed on 13 April 2026. However, Applicant’s amendments to Claims 1, 11 and 12 do not overcome the U.S.C. 103 rejections.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 15 June 2026, with respect to the U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 1-15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection has newly cited references teaching the amended claim.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the substrate must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1 on line 14, “the cover” should be corrected to say –the temperature equalizing cover—.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are:
“evaluation unit” in claim 12.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-8 and 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nohira et al. (US-4891519-A) from the IDS, hereinafter Nohira, in view of Prokop et al. (US20240377315A1), hereinafter Prokop.
As to claim 1, Nohira teaches a photodetector for measuring optical radiation (col. 1 ln. 5-12; The photometering apparatus which projects a radiation beam to a substance to be measured and which receives radiation emanating from the substance to convert into an electric signal), the photodetector comprising:
at least one active pixel (fig. 1B and 2; col. 6 ln. 23-29; photodiode 1) comprising an active photosensitive region (fig. 1B and 2; the photodiode comprises an active photosensitive region: the light receiving element 13), wherein the active pixel is configured for generating at least one active signal by using the active photosensitive region (fig. 1B and 2; col. 3 ln. 58-65; the output signals are supplied from the light receiving elements 13, 15), wherein the active signal is dependent on an illumination of the active pixel by the optical radiation (claim 1; a light emitting portion having a light emitting element for projecting a radiation beam to a substance to be measured, and a light receiving portion having a first light receiving element for receiving radiation emanating from the substance and converting it into an electric signal);
and at least one dark pixel (fig. 1B and 2; col. 1 ln. 48-60; the second semiconductor photodiode 2 is shielded from light) comprising:
a dark photosensitive region (col. 3 ln. 52-58; the second light-shielded light receiving element 15 is shielded from the external light), wherein the dark pixel is configured for generating at least one dark signal by using the dark photosensitive region (fig. 1B and 2; col. 3 ln. 58-65; the output signals are supplied from the light receiving elements 13, 15), wherein the dark signal is independent from an illumination of the dark pixel by the optical radiation (col. 2, ln. 47-52; the second light receiving element does not receive the radiation emanating from the substance, and is thus, independent from illumination);
and a temperature equalizing cover (fig. 11; col. 7 ln. 3-9; housing 71 and shielding wall 73) configured for covering the dark photosensitive region at least against the optical radiation (fig. 11; col. 7 ln. 3-9; The temperature compensating light emitting element 74 is shielded from the external light by means of the shielding wall. Thus, the housing 71 and shielding wall 73 equalize the temperature while keeping out the external light),
and a fixture surrounding the active photosensitive region and the dark photosensitive region (fig. 3-4 and 11; col. 3 ln. 4-8; col. 4 ln. 44-51; Fig. 3 is a view including the photometering apparatus. Fig. 4 is “a longitudinal cross section showing the construction of the sensor unit shown in FIG. 3”, comprising the light emitting portion 40 and the light receiving portion 41. Col. 4 ln. 24-27; The sensor unit 31 comprises “a hollow main body 34 formed by a metal cylinder”, i.e. the fixture. The hollow main body 34 is described by Nohira as the fixture, which surrounds the light receiving portion 41. The light receiving portion 41 comprises the light receiving element 13 (i.e. the active photosensitive region) and the second light-shielded light receiving element 15 (i.e. the dark photosensitive region). Therefore, the main body 34 surrounds the active photosensitive region 13 and the dark photosensitive region 15),
the fixture supporting the temperature equalizing cover above the dark photosensitive region (Claim 7; fig. 4; The metal cap 45 comprises the light shielding wall 73, i.e. the temperature equalizing cover. Thus, the cap 45 is described by Nohira as the temperature equalizing cover unit. In Fig. 4, the cap 45 is above the second light-shielded light receiving element 15 (i.e. the dark photosensitive region). Col. 4 ln. 64- col. 5 ln. 1; Further, the cap 45 is “screwed to an upper end of the main body”, and thus, the cap 45 is supported above the light receiving portion 41 by the main body 34. Therefore, the main body 34 (i.e. the fixture) supports the cap 45 (i.e. the temperature equalizing cover unit) above the second light-shielded light receiving element 15 (i.e. the dark photosensitive region).
However, Nohira does not explicitly disclose a substrate; the active photosensitive region supported by the substrate; the dark photosensitive region supported by the substrate; the cover configured to be disposed between a source of the optical radiation and the dark photosensitive region; and the fixture attached to the substrate.
Prokop, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches a substrate (Prokop [0027]; “The photodetector may comprise at least one substrate”);
the active photosensitive region supported by the substrate; the dark photosensitive region supported by the substrate (Prokop [0030]; “The substrate may have only one photosensitive area or a dual photosensitive area, with one “active” area and one second “darkened” area by means of mechanical or optical measures”);
the cover configured to be disposed between a source of the optical radiation (Prokop fig. 1; [0167]; “radiation source 116 configured for emitting optical radiation 112”) and the dark photosensitive region (Prokop fig. 1; [0174]; “The darkened pixel 124 may be a covered pixel 121. Darkened may refer to that no illumination in the sensitivity wavelength range of the photosensitive area reaches the photosensitive area. The darkened pixel 124 may be covered by a material absorbing in the same wavelength range as the sensitivity range of the photodetector, and/or it may be a piece of metal on top of the photosensitive area reflecting the incident light away from the darkened pixel. The darkened pixel 124 may be covered with a material absorbing the optical radiation such as glue and/or ink. Additionally or alternatively, the darkened pixel may be covered with at least one material reflecting the optical radiation such as a metal. The darkened pixel 124 may specifically see no or at least almost no optical radiation… The darkened pixel 124 may be used for eliminating long-time drifts and temperature effects”. Thus, the temperature equalizing cover is between the radiation source 116 and the darkened pixel 124);
and the fixture attached to the substrate (Prokop fig. 3A-3B; [0175]; “For example, each of the photodetectors 120 may comprise two pixels 121, i.e. an active 123 and a darkened pixel 124”. In fig. 3A-3B, the substrate of photodetector 120 has a support positioning type fixture to secure the active 123 and the darkened pixel 124 (i.e. a covered pixel 121) in place upon the substrate).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Nohira to incorporate the teachings of Prokop to include a substrate; the active photosensitive region supported by the substrate; the dark photosensitive region supported by the substrate; the cover configured to be disposed between a source of the optical radiation and the dark photosensitive region; and the fixture attached to the substrate; for the advantage of further eliminating long-time drifts and temperature effects (Prokop [0031]).
PNG
media_image1.png
448
912
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Nohira Fig. 1B
PNG
media_image2.png
702
802
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Nohira Fig. 2
PNG
media_image3.png
1068
902
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Nohira Fig. 3
PNG
media_image4.png
890
579
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Nohira Fig. 4
PNG
media_image5.png
523
418
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Nohira Fig. 11
PNG
media_image6.png
758
952
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Prokop Fig. 1
PNG
media_image7.png
656
1083
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Prokop Fig. 3A
PNG
media_image8.png
715
991
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Prokop Fig. 3B
As to claim 2, Nohira teaches wherein the temperature equalizing cover is configured for equalizing heat input on the active pixel and the dark pixel (col. 3 ln. 26-44; the first light receiving element 13 and the second light receiving element 15 have the same construction and are arranged in the same housing).
As to claim 3, Nohira teaches wherein the temperature equalizing cover is configured for maintaining a temperature of the dark photosensitive region stable within a temperature range from -30 °C to 90 °C (fig. 10; col. 6 ln. 31-35; The measurements are taken by the photometering apparatus in the temperature range of 10 Celsius to approximately 40 Celsius. Thus, the housing is configured for maintaining a temperature of the photodiode 2 within -30 Celsius and 90 Celsius).
PNG
media_image9.png
787
568
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Nohira Fig. 10
As to claim 4, Nohira does not explicitly disclose wherein the temperature equalizing cover is configured for suppressing a temperature change of the dark photosensitive region of more than 1 °C.
However, applicant has not provided criticality for suppressing a temperature change of the dark photosensitive region of more than 1 °C. Applicant discloses merely that “The temperature equalizing cover 128 may be con- figured for suppressing a temperature change, specifically a temperature increase, of the dark photosensitive region 126 of more than 1 °C, specifically of more than 0.5 °C, more specifically of more than 0.1 °C” (Specification page 33 ln. 6-8). Furthermore, it has been held that finding the optimal or working ranges of a variable involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.05). In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Peterson, 315 F.3d at 1330, 65 USPQ2d at 1382.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Nohira to incorporate wherein the temperature equalizing cover is configured for suppressing a temperature change of the dark photosensitive region of more than 1 °C; for the advantage of design choice for accurate temperature equalizing.
As to claim 5, Nohira teaches wherein the temperature equalizing cover is configured for maintaining a temperature of the dark photosensitive region at a temperature of the active photosensitive region within a temperature range from -30 °C to 90 °C (fig. 10; col. 6 ln. 31-35; The measurements are taken by the photometering apparatus in the temperature range of 10 Celsius to approximately 40 Celsius. Thus, the housing is configured for maintaining an operating temperature of the photodiodes 1 and 2 within -30 Celsius and 90 Celsius).
As to claim 6, Nohira does not explicitly disclose wherein the temperature equalizing cover is configured for maintaining a temperature difference between the active photosensitive region and the dark photosensitive region of less than 1 °C.
However, applicant has not provided criticality for maintaining a temperature difference between the active photosensitive region and the dark photosensitive region of less than 1 °C. Applicant discloses merely that “The temperature equalizing cover may be configured for maintaining a temperature difference between the active photosensitive region and the dark photosensitive region of less than 1 °C, specifically of less than 0.5 °C, more specifically of less than 0.1 °C” (Specification page 11 ln. 32-34). Furthermore, it has been held that finding the optimal or working ranges of a variable involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.05). In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Peterson, 315 F.3d at 1330, 65 USPQ2d at 1382.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Nohira to incorporate wherein the temperature equalizing cover is configured for maintaining a temperature difference between the active photosensitive region and the dark photosensitive region of less than 1 °C; for the advantage of design choice for accurate temperature equalizing.
As to claim 7, Nohira does not explicitly disclose wherein the temperature equalizing cover has, at least in a spectral range of the optical radiation, an absorption of less than 5%.
However, applicant has not provided criticality for, at least in a spectral range of the optical radiation, an absorption of less than 5%. Applicant discloses merely that “The temperature equalizing cover may have, at least in a spectral range of the optical radiation, an absorption of less than 5%, specifically of less than 3%, more specifically of less than 1 %” (Specification page 9 ln. 31-33). Furthermore, it has been held that finding the optimal or working ranges of a variable involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.05). In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Peterson, 315 F.3d at 1330, 65 USPQ2d at 1382.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Nohira to incorporate wherein the temperature equalizing cover has, at least in a spectral range of the optical radiation, an absorption of less than 5%; for the advantage of design choice for accurate temperature equalizing.
As to claim 8, Nohira teaches wherein the temperature equalizing cover has, at least in a sensitive spectral range of the dark photosensitive region, a low transmittance (col. 7 ln. 3-9; the housing is made of metal, which inherently has low transmittance).
Nohira does not explicitly disclose the transmittance of less than 5%.
However, applicant has not provided criticality for the transmittance of less than 5%. Applicant discloses merely that “The temperature equalizing cover may have, at least in a sensitive spectral range of the dark photo- sensitive region, a transmittance of less than 5%, specifically of less than 3%, more specifically of less than 1 %” (Specification page 8 ln. 25-28). Furthermore, it has been held that finding the optimal or working ranges of a variable involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.05). In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Peterson, 315 F.3d at 1330, 65 USPQ2d at 1382.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Nohira to incorporate the transmittance of less than 5%, for the advantage of design choice for accurate temperature equalizing.
As to claim 11, Nohira teaches wherein the active photosensitive region and the dark photosensitive region are of the same kind (col. 3 ln. 26-44; the first light receiving element 13 and the second light receiving element 15 have the same construction).
As to claim 12, Nohira teaches a spectral measurement device (abstract; a turbidimeter) for spectrally analyzing optical radiation provided by at least one measurement object (col. 1 ln. 5-12; The turbidimeter comprises a photometering apparatus which projects a radiation beam to a substance to be measured and which receives radiation emanating from the substance to convert into an electric signal), the spectral measurement device comprising:
at least one photodetector according to claim 1 (col. 1 ln. 5-12; The photometering apparatus);
at least one radiation source configured for emitting optical radiation at least partially towards the measurement object (claim 1; fig. 2; a light emitting portion 12 having a light emitting element for projecting a radiation beam to a substance to be measured);
and at least one evaluation unit (fig. 2; controller unit 23) configured for
performing a calibration of the spectral measurement device by using the dark signal (fig. 9B; col. 6 ln. 14-22; The outputs of the photodiodes 52 and 56 are amplified by the operational amplifiers 53 and 56, and then the difference between the amplified outputs is derived by the differential amplifier 63, so that the output of the differential amplifier becomes constant in regardless of the temperature change as illustrated by a curve A in FIG. 9B. Thus, there is a calibration of the differential amplifier and therefore, of the turbidimeter itself);
and generating at least one item of spectral information related to the measurement object by using the active signal (col. 5 ln. 66-69; The output signal from the differential amplifier is processed in a measuring circuit 64 to derive the turbidity which is displayed on a display device 65).
PNG
media_image10.png
479
492
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Nohira Fig. 9B
As to claim 13, Nohira teaches wherein the calibration comprises at least one of compensating a temperature drift (col. 2 ln. 32-37; col. 6 ln. 29-32; The temperature drift of the light receiving elements and amplifier can be compensated for sufficiently) and compensating a long-time drift (col. 6 ln. 44-50; the stable measurement can be carried out for a very long time period).
As to claim 14, Nohira teaches a method for spectrally analyzing optical radiation provided by at least one measurement object by using at least one spectral measurement device according to claim 12 (col. 1 ln. 5-12; The photometering apparatus which projects a radiation beam to a substance to be measured and which receives radiation emanating from the substance to convert into an electric signal), the method comprising:
a) emitting optical radiation at least partially towards the measurement object by using the radiation source (claim 1; fig. 2; a light emitting portion 12 having a light emitting element for projecting a radiation beam to a substance to be measured);
b) generating at least one dark signal (Col. 3 ln. 52-58; The second light-shielded light receiving element 15 is shielded from the external light. Col. 3 ln. 58-65; The output signals are supplied from the light receiving elements 13, 15) by using the dark pixel (fig. 1B and 2; col. 1 ln. 48-60; the second semiconductor photodiode 2), wherein the dark signal is independent on an illumination of the dark pixel by the optical radiation provided by the measurement object (col. 2, ln. 47-52; the second light receiving element does not receive the radiation emanating from the substance, and is thus, independent from illumination);
c) performing a calibration of the spectral measurement device by using the evaluation unit for evaluating the dark signal (fig. 9B; col. 6 ln. 14-22; The outputs of the photodiodes 52 and 56 are amplified by the operational amplifiers 53 and 56, and then the difference between the amplified outputs is derived by the differential amplifier 63, so that the output of the differential amplifier becomes constant in regardless of the temperature change as illustrated by a curve A in FIG. 9B. Thus, there is a calibration of the differential amplifier and therefore, of the turbidimeter itself);
d) generating at least one active signal (fig. 1B and 2; col. 3 ln. 58-65; the output signals are supplied from the light receiving elements 13, 15) by using the active pixel (fig. 1B and 2; col. 6 ln. 23-29; photodiode 1), wherein the active signal is dependent on an illumination of the active pixel by the optical radiation provided by the measurement object (claim 1; a light emitting portion having a light emitting element for projecting a radiation beam to a substance to be measured, and a light receiving portion having a first light receiving element for receiving radiation emanating from the substance and converting it into an electric signal);
and e) generating at least one item of spectral information related to the measurement object by using the evaluation unit for evaluating the active signal (col. 5 ln. 66-69; The output signal from the differential amplifier is processed in a measuring circuit 64 to derive the turbidity which is displayed on a display device 65).
As to claim 15, Nohira teaches 15. A method of using a photodetector according to claim 1, the method comprising using the photodetector for a purpose selected from the group consisting of an infrared detection application; a spectroscopy application; an exhaust gas monitoring application; a combustion process monitoring application; a pollution monitoring application; an industrial process monitoring application; a mixing or blending process monitoring; a chemical process monitoring application; a food processing process monitoring application; a food preparation process monitoring; a water quality monitoring application; an air quality monitoring application; a quality control application; a temperature control application; a motion control application; an exhaust control application; a gas sensing application; a gas analytics application; a motion sensing application; a chemical sensing application; a mobile application; a medical application; a mobile spectroscopy application; a food analysis application; an agricultural application, in particular characterization of soil, silage, feed, crop or produce, monitoring plant health; a plastics identification; and a recycling application (col. 1, ln. 13-18; The photometering apparatus has been widely used in various kinds of photometries, i.e. in a turbidimeter for measuring the turbidity of a particle suspension and in a colorimeter for measuring the absorbance of a test solution for radiation having a specified wavelength. Thus, the application of the system can be selected from the group as listed).
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nohira in view Prokop, further in view of Kim et al. (KR102164930B1) from the IDS, hereinafter Kim.
As to claim 9, Nohira in view of Prokop does not explicitly disclose wherein the temperature equalizing cover comprises at least one of an optical filter and an optical reflector.
Kim, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein the temperature equalizing cover comprises at least one of an optical filter (Kim fig. 5; page 8 ln. 32-33; the infrared absorbing layer 111) and an optical reflector (Kim page 8 ln. 32-33; the second reflective layer 112).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Nohira in view of Prokop to incorporate the teachings of Kim to include wherein the temperature equalizing cover comprises at least one of an optical filter and an optical reflector; for the advantage of design choice, for example absorbing infrared rays and preventing reactions to infrared rays (Kim page 8 ln. 34-42).
PNG
media_image11.png
405
1222
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Kim Fig. 5
As to claim 10, Nohira in view of Prokop does not explicitly disclose wherein the active pixel comprises at least one optical filter arranged in a beam path of the optical radiation before the active photosensitive region, wherein the optical filter and the temperature equalizing cover have identical geometries, at least up to tolerances of 5%.
Kim, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, teaches wherein the active pixel comprises at least one optical filter arranged in a beam path of the optical radiation before the active photosensitive region (Kim fig. 5; page 8 ln. 32-33; the infrared absorbing layer 111 is arranged in the beam path before the sensor layer 109).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Nohira in view of Prokop to incorporate the teachings of Kim to include wherein the active pixel comprises at least one optical filter arranged in a beam path of the optical radiation before the active photosensitive region; for the advantage of design choice, for example absorbing infrared rays and preventing reactions to infrared rays (Kim page 8 ln. 34-42).
Still lacking the limitation such as wherein the optical filter and the temperature equalizing cover have identical geometries, at least up to tolerances of 5%.
However, applicant has not provided criticality for wherein the optical filter and the temperature equalizing cover have identical geometries, at least up to tolerances of 5%. Applicant discloses merely that “The temperature equalizing cover may be configured for equalizing the heat input as equal as possible, e.g. within tolerances of less than 5%, specifically 3%, more specifically 1 %. Other tolerances may be feasible and may specifically be depended on a specific application” (Specification page 9 ln. 4-7). Further, a mere change in size or design choice of a component is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Nohira in view of Prokop and Kim to incorporate wherein the optical filter and the temperature equalizing cover have identical geometries, at least up to tolerances of 5%; for the advantage of design choice for accurate temperature equalizing.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEMAYA NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-9078. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30 am - 5:00pm 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, Tarifur Chowdhury can be reached on (571) 272-2287. 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.
/KEMAYA NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/TARIFUR R CHOWDHURY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877
