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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 16 and claim 20 by dependency are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the sample" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claims 1-5, 8-11, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Syzbek (US2018299328A1) in view of Applied Spectroscopy (Pavel Matousek, "Inverse Spatially Offset Raman Spectroscopy for Deep Noninvasive Probing of Turbid Media," Appl. Spectrosc. 60, 1341-1347 (2006))
Regarding claim 1, Syzbek teaches a method for enhancing a Raman contribution in a spectrum of a sample (paragraph [0025] discloses the intention of improving other Raman spectroscopy systems), the method comprising:
setting a first spot size of light emitted by a light source (11, Fig. 1) at a first position of the sample (paragraph [0027] discloses a light beam which irradiates the sample at a first beam position);
recording a first spectrum of light comprising information associated with ambient light (the examiner is interpreting "background noise" disclosed in paragraph [0048] to include ambient light; paragraphs [0108]-[0110] address "stray light") and a first measurement response (paragraph [0027] discloses a detector which records a spectrum associated with light from the object), wherein the first measurement response comprises a first optical response (paragraph [0028] discloses a level of fluorescence being included in the spectrum) and a first Raman response of the sample in response to being illuminated with light having the first spot size (paragraph [0027] discloses the spectrum includes inelastic scattered electromagnetic radiation; paragraph [0003] discloses Raman scattering is inelastic scattering);
setting a second spot size of light emitted by the light source at a second position of the sample (paragraph [0027] discloses a light beam which irradiates the sample at a second beam position);
recording a second spectrum of light comprising information associated with ambient light (the examiner is interpreting "background noise" disclosed in paragraph [0048] to include ambient light; paragraphs [0108]-[0110] address "stray light") and a second measurement response (paragraph [0103] discloses a spectrum is recorded for each beam position or shape; paragraph [0027] discloses a detector which records a spectrum associated with light from the object), wherein the second measurement response comprises a second optical response (paragraph [0028] discloses a level of fluorescence being included in the spectrum) and a second Raman response of the sample in response to being illuminated with light having the second spot size (paragraph [0027] discloses the spectrum includes inelastic scattered electromagnetic radiation; paragraph [0003] discloses Raman scattering is inelastic scattering).
Syzbek fails to teach the first spot size is larger than the second spot size, whereby an intensity of light from the light source at the sample is stronger within the second spot size than within the first spot size whereby a contribution, to the first measurement response, of the first Raman response in relation to a contribution of the first optical response is smaller than a contribution, to the second measurement response, of the second Raman response in relation to the second optical response; and forming a data set based on a dissimilarity between the first spectrum and the second spectrum thereby enhancing a contribution of a Raman response to the formed data set.
However, in the same field of endeavor of enhancing Raman response in spectroscopy systems, Applied Spectroscopy discloses a spectroscopy system where two spots are illuminated having different radii (paragraph 1 of "Experimental" section, page 1344 discloses radii of the beam ranging from 0.9 to 7.9 mm; first paragraph of first column, page 1346 also discloses two different spot sizes).
Further, by definition the intensity of light is the power per unit area. Therefore, it would follow that if the first spot size is larger than the second spot size, the first spot would have a weaker intensity than the second spot size. Thus, the intensity of the light spot is simply a result of the choice of size of the light spot.
In addition, it is inherent that the Raman response is proportional to the intensity of the light (see Fig. 1 of supplemental material, Kneipp). Consequently, a stronger intensity would lead to a stronger Raman response.
Additionally, Applied Spectroscopy teaches finding a dissimilarity between the two Raman spectra to obtain an enhanced sample (first paragraph of first column, page 1346 discloses subtracting the Raman spectra resulting from two different sized illumination beams to obtain a "pure" Raman signal).
Applied Spectroscopy discloses typical Raman spectroscopy systems, such as the one disclosed in Syzbek, struggle to recover weaker Raman signals coming from deeper in the sample (first full paragraph of first column, page 1342). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the method in Syzbek with the method of a subtracting Raman spectra resulting from a smaller and larger illuminated spot size taught in Applied Spectroscopy as this method allows for weaker Raman signals to be measured, thus enhancing a Raman signal from a sample (Applied Spectroscopy: 1st paragraph of column 2 on page 1346).
Regarding claim 2, Syzbek as modified by Applied Spectroscopy teaches the invention as explained above in claim 1, and further teaches the act of setting the spot size comprises:
applying a focus voltage to a liquid lens (Syzbek: paragraph [0072] discloses the tunable lens may be a liquid lens, and the tunable lens operates as a function of applied voltage) configured to focus the light emitted by the light source (Syzbek: paragraph [0052] discloses the tunable lens controls the focus position), the liquid lens having a focal length being dependent upon the applied focus voltage (Syzbek: paragraph [0071] discloses the focal length changes as voltage changes).
Regarding claim 3, Syzbek as modified by Applied Spectroscopy teaches the invention as explained above in claim 1, and further teaches the first optical response comprises a first fluorescence response of the sample (Syzbek: paragraph [0028] discloses a fluorescence level in the first spectrum); and
wherein the second optical response comprises a second fluorescence response of the sample (Syzbek: paragraph [0030] discloses a fluorescence level associated with the second beam position).
Regarding claim 4, Syzbek as modified by Applied Spectroscopy teaches the invention as explained above in claim 1, and further teaches the first optical response and/or the second optical response comprises one or more of:
light reflected from the sample (Syzbek: paragraph [0065] discloses some light is reflected back to the detectors); and
Rayleigh scattered light from the sample (Syzbek: paragraph [0048] discloses the measurement response includes "background noise", while paragraph [0108] discloses the background may include Rayleigh scattering).
Regarding claim 5, Syzbek as modified by Applied Spectroscopy teaches the invention as explained above in claim 1, and further teaches a method where at least two Raman spectra are collected and the difference between them is found creating a data set (Applied Spectroscopy: first paragraph of first column, page 1346 discloses subtracting the Raman spectra resulting from two different sized illumination beams to obtain a "pure" Raman signal). As outlined above, a person of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to combine the method of Syzbek with the subtraction of Raman spectra taught in Applied Spectroscopy as the subtraction method allows for weaker Raman signals to be discovered and enhanced.
Regarding claim 8, Syzbek as modified by Applied Spectroscopy teaches the invention as explained above in claim 1, and teaches forming a data set as explained above, but does not explicitly disclose the data set is a spectrum.
However, it is the position of the examiner that subtracting one spectrum from another spectrum would yield a resultant spectrum, making it inherent that the formed data set would also be a spectrum.
Regarding claim 9, Syzbek teaches a spectroscopy system (10, Fig. 1) comprising:
a light source (11, Fig. 1);
a focusing element (13, Fig. 1)configured to direct light emitted by the light source towards a sample ('O', Fig. 1), wherein a longitudinal position of a focal point of the focusing element is adjustable (paragraph [0027] discloses a first and second focal point, implying the focal point is adjustable);
a spectrometer configured to record a spectrum of light (12, Fig. 1); and
circuitry (14, Fig. 1) configured to execute:
a first focal point function configured to set a first longitudinal position of the focal point of the focusing element (paragraph [0028] discloses an operation which comprises setting a first focal length), whereby a first spot size of light emitted by the light source at a first position of the sample is set (paragraph [0028] discloses an operation which comprises setting a first beam position),
a first record function configured to record, using the spectrometer, a first spectrum of light comprising information associated with ambient light (the examiner is interpreting "background noise" disclosed in paragraph [0048] to include ambient light; paragraphs [0108]-[0110] address "stray light") and a first measurement response (paragraph [0027] discloses a detector which records a spectrum associated with light from the object), wherein the first measurement response comprises a first optical response (paragraph [0028] discloses a level of fluorescence being included in the spectrum) and a first Raman response of the sample in response to being illuminated with light having the first spot size (paragraph [0027] discloses the spectrum includes inelastic scattered electromagnetic radiation; paragraph [0003] discloses Raman scattering is inelastic scattering),
a second focal point function configured to set a second longitudinal position of the focal point of the focusing element (paragraph [0028] discloses an operation which comprises setting a second focal length), whereby a second spot size of light emitted by the light source at a second position of the sample is set (paragraph [0028] discloses an operation which comprises setting a second beam position),
a second record function configured to record, using the spectrometer, a second spectrum of light comprising information associated with ambient light (the examiner is interpreting "background noise" disclosed in paragraph [0048] to include ambient light; paragraphs [0108]-[0110] address "stray light") and a second measurement response (paragraph [0103] discloses a spectrum is recorded for each beam position or shape; paragraph [0027] discloses a detector which records a spectrum associated with light from the object), wherein the second measurement response comprises a second optical response (paragraph [0028] discloses a level of fluorescence being included in the spectrum) and a second Raman response of the sample in response to being illuminated with light having the second spot size (paragraph [0027] discloses the spectrum includes inelastic scattered electromagnetic radiation; paragraph [0003] discloses Raman scattering is inelastic scattering).
Syzbek fails to explicitly disclose the first spot size is larger than the second spot size, whereby an intensity of light from the light source at the sample is stronger within the second spot size than within the first spot size, whereby a contribution, to the first measurement response, of the first Raman response in relation to a contribution of the first optical response is smaller than a contribution, to the second measurement response, of the second Raman response in relation to the second optical response,
wherein the circuitry is further configured to execute a form function configured to form a data set comprising information associated with a spectrum of the sample based on a dissimilarity between the first spectrum and the second spectrum, whereby a contribution of a Raman response to the formed data set is enhanced.
However, Applied Spectroscopy discloses a spectroscopy system where at least two different spots are illuminated having different radii (paragraph 1 of "Experimental" section, page 1344 discloses radii of the beam ranging from 0.9 to 7.9 mm; first paragraph of first column, page 1346 also discloses two different spot sizes).
Further, by definition the intensity of light is the power per unit area. Therefore, it would follow that if the first spot size is larger than the second spot size, the first spot would have a weaker intensity than the second spot size. Thus, the intensity of the light spot is simply a result of the choice of size of the light spot.
In addition, it is inherent that the Raman response is proportional to the intensity of the light (see Fig. 1 of supplemental material, Kneipp). Consequently, a stronger intensity would lead to a stronger Raman response.
Additionally, Applied Spectroscopy teaches finding a dissimilarity between the two Raman spectra to obtain an enhanced sample (first paragraph of first column, page 1346 discloses subtracting the Raman spectra resulting from two different sized illumination beams to obtain a "pure" Raman signal).
Applied Spectroscopy discloses typical Raman spectroscopy systems, such as the one disclosed in Syzbek, struggle to recover weaker Raman signals coming from deeper in the sample (first full paragraph of first column, page 1342). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the method in Syzbek with the method of a subtracting Raman spectra resulting from a smaller and larger illuminated spot size taught in Applied Spectroscopy as this method allows for weaker Raman signals to be measured, thus enhancing a Raman signal from a sample (Applied Spectroscopy: 1st paragraph of column 2 on page 1346).
Regarding claim 10, Syzbek as modified by Applied Spectroscopy teaches the invention as explained above in claim 9, and further teaches the focusing element comprises a liquid lens, the liquid lens having a focal length being dependent upon an applied focus voltage (Syzbek: paragraph [0072] discloses the tunable lens may be a liquid lens, and the tunable lens operates as a function of applied voltage; paragraph [0052] discloses the tunable lens controls the focus position) and, wherein the first focal point function and the second focal point function are configured to set the longitudinal position of the focal point of the focusing element (Syzbek: paragraph [0071] discloses the focal length changes as voltage changes) by being configured to:
apply a focus voltage to the liquid lens (Syzbek: paragraph [0072] discloses applying a voltage to the lens).
Regarding claim 11, Syzbek as modified by Applied Spectroscopy teaches the invention as explained above in claim 9, and further teaches a method where at least two Raman spectra are collected and the difference between them is found creating a data set (Applied Spectroscopy: first paragraph of first column, page 1346 discloses subtracting the Raman spectra resulting from two different sized illumination beams to obtain a "pure" Raman signal). As outlined above, a person of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to combine to combine the method of Syzbek with the subtraction of Raman spectra taught in Applied Spectroscopy as the subtraction method allows for weaker Raman signals to be discovered and enhanced.
Regarding claim 14, Syzbek as modified by Applied Spectroscopy teaches the invention as explained above in claim 9, and further teaches forming a data set as explained above, but does not explicitly disclose the data set is a spectrum.
However, it is the position of the examiner that subtracting one spectrum from another spectrum would yield a resultant spectrum, making it inherent that the formed data set would also be a spectrum.
Regarding claim 15, Syzbek as modified by Applied Spectroscopy teaches the invention as explained above in claim 9, and further teaches the spectroscopy system is a handheld spectroscopy system (Syzbek: paragraph [0008] discloses handheld Raman instruments are common).
Regarding claim 18, Syzbek as modified by Applied Spectroscopy teaches the invention as explained above in claim 1, and further teaches the first position of the sample and the second position of the sample are the same position (Applied Spectroscopy: third full paragraph of first column of page 1342 discloses the position of the different light beams are all centered at the same point on the sample).
Positioning the different light beams at the same position on the sample is inherent to the method taught in Applied Spectroscopy. As outlined above, a person of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to combine the method of Syzbek with the method taught in Applied Spectroscopy as the method allows for weaker Raman signals to be discovered and enhanced.
Regarding claim 19, Syzbek as modified by Matousek teaches the invention as explained above in claim 9, and further teaches the first position of the sample and the second position of the sample are the same position (Applied Spectroscopy: third full paragraph of first column of page 1342 discloses the position of the different light beams are all centered at the same point on the sample).
Positioning the different light beams at the same position on the sample is inherent to the method taught in Applied Spectroscopy. As outlined above, a person of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to combine the method of Syzbek with the method taught in Applied Spectroscopy as the method allows for weaker Raman signals to be discovered and enhanced.
Claims 6 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Syzbek (US2018299328A1) in view of Applied Spectroscopy (Pavel Matousek, "Inverse Spatially Offset Raman Spectroscopy for Deep Noninvasive Probing of Turbid Media," Appl. Spectrosc. 60, 1341-1347 (2006)) as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Kiyoshi (WO2021149760A1).
Regarding claim 6, Syzbek as modified by Applied Spectroscopy teaches the invention as explained above in claim 1, but fails to teach
forming a ratio between the first spectrum and the second spectrum;
and wherein the data set is formed based on the formed ratio.
However, in the same field of endeavor of Raman spectroscopy, Kiyoshi teaches a method which involves calculating the ratio between a first Raman signal and a second Raman signal (paragraph [0008]).
Syzbek as modified by Applied Spectroscopy discloses an advantage of the disclosed method is minimizing fluorescence (Syzbek: paragraph [0033]). Thus, it would be obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the method of Syzbek as modified by Applied Spectroscopy with the method of finding a ratio between the two spectra taught in Kiyoshi as this method allows for the needed exposure time to be calculated (Kiyoshi: paragraph [0008]) which allows the prevention of fluorescence overlapping and overpowering the Raman spectrum (Kiyoshi: paragraph [0003]).
Regarding claim 12, Syzbek as modified by Applied Spectroscopy teaches the invention as explained above in claim 9, but fails to teach a division function configured to form a ratio between the first spectrum and the second spectrum; and
wherein the form function is configured to form the data set based on the formed ratio.
However, Kiyoshi teaches a method which involves calculating the ratio between a first Raman signal and a second Raman signal (paragraph [0008]).
Syzbek as modified by Applied Spectroscopy discloses an advantage of the disclosed method is minimizing fluorescence (Syzbek: paragraph [0033]). Thus, it would be obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the method of Syzbek as modified by Applied Spectroscopy with the method of finding a ratio between the two spectra taught in Kiyoshi as this method allows for the needed exposure time to be calculated (Kiyoshi: paragraph [0008]) which allows the prevention of fluorescence overlapping and overpowering the Raman spectrum (Kiyoshi: paragraph [0003]).
Claims 7 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Syzbek (US2018299328A1) in view of Applied Spectroscopy (Pavel Matousek, "Inverse Spatially Offset Raman Spectroscopy for Deep Noninvasive Probing of Turbid Media," Appl. Spectrosc. 60, 1341-1347 (2006)) as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Matousek (US20100091276A1).
Regarding claim 7, Syzbek as modified by Applied Spectroscopy teaches the invention as explained above in claim 1, but fails to teach normalizing the first spectrum;
normalizing the second spectrum; and
wherein the data set is formed based on a dissimilarity between the normalized first spectrum and the normalized second spectrum.
However, in the same field of endeavor of Raman spectroscopy, Matousek teaches a method where the Raman spectra are normalized ("scaled" to have the same height) and then subtracted (Matousek: Fig. 14; paragraph [0077]).
Syzbek as modified by Applied Spectroscopy discloses an advantage of the disclosed method is improving a Raman spectroscopy device (Syzbek: paragraph [0032]). Thus, it would be obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the method of Syzbek as modified by Applied Spectroscopy with the normalization and subtraction of spectra taught in Matousek as this normalizing of the data allows for an improvement to be quantified (Matousek: paragraph [0077]).
Regarding claim 13, Syzbek as modified by Applied Spectroscopy teaches the invention as explained above in claim 9, but fails to teach a normalization function configured to normalize the first spectrum and the second spectrum; and
wherein the form function is configured to form the data set based on a difference between the normalized first spectrum and the normalized second spectrum.
However, Matousek teaches a device which enacts a method where the Raman spectra are normalized ("scaled" to have the same height) and then subtracted (Matousek: Fig. 14; paragraph [0077]).
Syzbek as modified by Applied Spectroscopy discloses an advantage of the disclosed method is improving a Raman spectroscopy device (Syzbek: paragraph [0032]). It would be obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the method of Syzbek as modified by Applied Spectroscopy with the normalization and subtraction of spectra taught in Matousek as this normalizing of the data allows for an improvement to be quantified (Matousek: paragraph [0077]).
Claims 16 and 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Syzbek (US2018299328A1) in view of Matousek (US20100091276A1) and Applied Spectroscopy (Pavel Matousek, "Inverse Spatially Offset Raman Spectroscopy for Deep Noninvasive Probing of Turbid Media," Appl. Spectrosc. 60, 1341-1347 (2006))
Regarding claim 16, Syzbek teaches circuitry of a Raman spectroscopy system to execute a method, comprising:
setting a first spot size of light emitted by a light source (11, Fig. 1) at a first position of the sample (paragraph [0027] discloses a light beam which irradiates the sample at a first beam position);
recording a first spectrum of light comprising information associated with ambient light (the examiner is interpreting "background noise" disclosed in paragraph [0048] to include ambient light; paragraphs [0108]-[0110] address "stray light") and a first measurement response (paragraph [0027] discloses a detector which records a spectrum associated with light from the object), wherein the first measurement response comprises a first optical response (paragraph [0028] discloses a level of fluorescence being included in the spectrum) and a first Raman response of the sample in response to being illuminated with light having the first spot size (paragraph [0027] discloses the spectrum includes inelastic scattered electromagnetic radiation; paragraph [0003] discloses Raman scattering is inelastic scattering);
setting a second spot size of light emitted by the light source at a second position of the sample (paragraph [0027] discloses a light beam which irradiates the sample at a second beam position);
recording a second spectrum of light comprising information associated with ambient light (the examiner is interpreting "background noise" disclosed in paragraph [0048] to include ambient light; paragraphs [0108]-[0110] address "stray light") and a second measurement response (paragraph [0103] discloses a spectrum is recorded for each beam position or shape; paragraph [0027] discloses a detector which records a spectrum associated with light from the object), wherein the second measurement response comprises a second optical response (paragraph [0028] discloses a level of fluorescence being included in the spectrum) and a second Raman response of the sample in response to being illuminated with light having the second spot size (paragraph [0027] discloses the spectrum includes inelastic scattered electromagnetic radiation; paragraph [0003] discloses Raman scattering is inelastic scattering).
Syzbek does not explicitly disclose a computer program, or the first spot size is larger than the second spot size, whereby an intensity of light from the light source at the sample is stronger within the second spot size than within the first spot size, whereby a contribution, to the first measurement response, of the first Raman response in relation to a contribution of the first optical response is smaller than a contribution, to the second measurement response, of the second Raman response in relation to the second optical response,
wherein the circuitry is further configured to execute a form function configured to form a data set comprising information associated with a spectrum of the sample based on a dissimilarity between the first spectrum and the second spectrum, whereby a contribution of a Raman response to the formed data set is enhanced.
While Syzbek does not explicitly disclose a computer program, it is instead disclosed that a control unit (14, Fig. 1) is responsible for executing the method. However, in the same field of endeavor of Raman spectroscopy, Matousek teaches a computer which is used to execute the method of Raman spectra analysis (paragraph [0050]). Computer programs are well-known in the art and widely used as controls to execute methods. A person having ordinary skill in the art would be able to use a computer program as the control unit with a reasonable expectation of success in enacting the method.
It would be obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art combine the control unit taught in Syzbek with the computer taught in Matousek in order to enact the method described as being done by the control unit with a reasonable expectation of success as they are widely used and well-known in the art.
Syzbek as modified by Matousek does not disclose the first spot size is larger than the second spot size, whereby an intensity of light from the light source at the sample is stronger within the second spot size than within the first spot size, whereby a contribution, to the first measurement response, of the first Raman response in relation to a contribution of the first optical response is smaller than a contribution, to the second measurement response, of the second Raman response in relation to the second optical response,
wherein the circuitry is further configured to execute a form function configured to form a data set comprising information associated with a spectrum of the sample based on a dissimilarity between the first spectrum and the second spectrum, whereby a contribution of a Raman response to the formed data set is enhanced.
However, in the same field of endeavor of enhancing Raman response in spectroscopy systems, Applied Spectroscopy discloses a spectroscopy system where at least two different spots are illuminated having different radii (paragraph 1 of "Experimental" section, page 1344 discloses radii of the beam ranging from 0.9 to 7.9 mm; first paragraph of first column, page 1346 also discloses two different spot sizes where one has a larger area than the other).
Further, by definition, the intensity of light is the power per unit area. Therefore, it would follow that if the first spot size is larger than the second spot size (thus having a larger area), the first spot would have a weaker intensity than the second spot size. Thus, the intensity of the light spot is simply a result of the choice of size of the light spot.
In addition, it is inherent that the Raman response is proportional to the intensity of the light (see Fig. 1 of supplemental material, Kneipp). Consequently, a stronger intensity would lead to a stronger Raman response.
Additionally, Applied Spectroscopy teaches finding a dissimilarity between the two Raman spectra to obtain an enhanced sample (first paragraph of first column, page 1346 discloses subtracting the Raman spectra resulting from two different sized illumination beams to obtain a "pure" Raman signal).
Applied Spectroscopy discloses typical Raman spectroscopy systems, such as the one disclosed in Syzbek, struggle to recover weaker Raman signals coming from deeper in the sample (first full paragraph of first column, page 1342). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the method in Syzbek with the method of a subtracting Raman spectra resulting from a smaller and larger illuminated spot size taught in Applied Spectroscopy as this method allows for weaker Raman signals to be measured, thus enhancing a Raman signal from a sample (Applied Spectroscopy: 1st paragraph of column 2 on page 1346).
Regarding claim 20, Syzbek as modified by Applied Spectroscopy teaches the invention as explained above in claim 16, and further teaches the first position of the sample and the second position of the sample are the same position (Applied Spectroscopy: third full paragraph of first column of page 1342 discloses the position of the different light beams are all centered at the same point on the sample).
Positioning the different light beams at the same position on the sample is inherent to the method taught in Applied Spectroscopy. As outlined above, a person of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to combine the method of Syzbek with the method taught in Applied Spectroscopy as the method allows for weaker Raman signals to be discovered and enhanced.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alexandria Mendoza whose telephone number is (571)272-5282. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thur 9:00 - 6:00 CDT.
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, Michelle Iacoletti can be reached at (571) 270-5789. 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.
/ALEXANDRIA MENDOZA/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/MICHELLE M IACOLETTI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877