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 § 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.
Claims 1, 3-4 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geiger et al. (US 2016/0041038 A1), hereafter Geiger in view of Lys et al. (US 2023/0363328 A1), hereafter Lys.
Regarding claim 1, Geiger teaches a color measurement device (Fig. 9, [0038-0039]), for determining color characteristics of a measurement area (the term " for determining color characteristics of a measurement area " in the preamble merely designates an intended use which does not carry enough weight so as to patentably distinguish from the cited prior See MPEP 2111.02), the color measurement device comprising: (Fig. 9, [0038-0039]), Additionally, the recitation above is not limiting because the body of the claim describes a complete invention and the language recited solely in the preamble does not provide any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention' s limitations. Thus, the preamble of the claim(s) is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction. See Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). See MPEP § 2111.02.
an optical system (Fig. 9 element 10A) for guiding light that has been emitted from the measurement area to the detection area, [0038], the optical system defining a system axis (annotated Fig. 9 element (S)), the system axis (S) passing through the detection area, (Element 10A is symmetrical as shown in annotated Fig 9 below,[0038]), the optical system comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
582
780
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a first reflective surface (Fig. 9 element 220 + 222 + 224) configured to cause incident light rays (annotated Fig. 9 element “R in”) that have entered the optical system (10A) along an incident direction parallel to the system axis (annotated Fig. 9 element S) to be reflected into once-reflected light rays ( annotated Fig. 9 element Ri) having a first direction of reflection, (as shown in annotated Fig. 9), the first direction of reflection (Ri) having a component that is directed radially inwards towards the system axis (S) (as shown in annotated Fig. 9), the first reflective surface (224) being inclined relative to a plane perpendicular to the system axis (S) (as shown in annotated Fig. 9, [0038]), and shaped like at least a portion of a first axially symmetric surface having rotational circular symmetry with respect to the system axis, (as shown in annotated Fig. 9 element 222 is in each side of the (s) axis with symmetrical curve shape, [0038]); and
a second reflective surface (Fig. 9 element 219) configured to cause said once-reflected light rays (Ri) to be reflected into twice-reflected light rays (annotated Fig. 9 element R2), (as shown in annotated Fig. 9, [0038]),
wherein the detection area of the light detector (Fig. 9 element 18) is arranged to receive the twice- reflected light rays (R2), [0039].
Even though Geiger teaches a spectrally selective light detector (Fig. 1 element 18 + camera), (the camera can be used to perform a spectral analysis of the objects in the image in the visible (e.g., 380 nm 750 nm) and IR (e.g., 750 nm-3,000 nm) wavelength ranges, [0047], the camera do not define the detection area since is not located inside element 10A.
However, Lys related to optical measuring system and thus from the same field of endeavor teaches a spectrally selective light detector defining a detection area, (the integrated sensor comprises a combination of thermal sensor and color light sensor, [abstract , 0025, 0249]).
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Geiger by including a spectrally selective light detector defining a detection area (as taught by Lys) for several advantages such as: allowing to perform multispectral imaging and integrated sensing to provide a fuller compliment of information of the sample, thus increase the device accuracy, ([0013], Lys). Also an integrated sensor assembly allows for combining multiple sensing functions into a single unit, enabling simplified design, reduced complexity, improved performance, and efficient data collection.
Regarding claim 3, Geiger in the combination outlined above teaches the color measurement device of claim 1.
Geiger further teaches wherein the first reflective surface (Fig. 9 element 220 + 222 + 224) is curved in such a manner that a section of the first reflective surface with a sectional plane that contains the system axis (S) is curved, so as to cause focusing of parallel incident light rays towards the light detector, (element 220 is a concave curve mirror that as shown in Fig. 9 is focusing light of incident light Rin, [0039]).
Regarding claim 4, Geiger in the combination outlined above teaches the color measurement device of claim 1.
Geiger further teaches wherein the second reflective surface (Fig. 9 element 218) is inclined relative to a plane perpendicular to the system axis (S) ( as element 218 is a curve mirror is inclined relative to the perpendicular of axis (s) as shown in annotated Fig. 9), and shaped like at least a portion of a second axially symmetric surface having rotational circular symmetry with respect to the system axis, (as shown in Fig. 9, [0038-0039]).
Regarding claim 6, Geiger in the combination outlined above teaches the color measurement device of claim 4.
Geiger further teaches wherein the second reflective surface (Fig. 9 element 219) is curved in such a manner that a section of the second reflective surface with a sectional plane that contains the system axis (annotated Fig. 9 element S) is curved, (as shown in Fig. 9, [0038-0039]).
Regarding claim 7, Geiger in the combination outlined above teaches the color measurement device of claim 1.
Geiger further teaches wherein the optical system comprises or consists of a mirror element (Fig. 9 element 220 + 218) having mirror surfaces that form the first and second reflective surfaces (Fig. 9 elements 219 + 224), the mirror surfaces being configured to cause external reflection, (as shown on Fig. 9, [0038-0039]).
Claims 2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geiger in view of Lys and further in view of Moreno et al. (EP 0194820 A2, included in IDS om 06/28/2024), hereafter Moreno.
Regarding Claims 2 and 5, Geiger in the combination outlined above teaches the color measurement device of claim 1.
The modified device of Geiger fail to teach:
(claim 2) wherein the first reflective surface is shaped like a portion of a lateral surface of a right circular first cone having a first cone axis that coincides with the system axis (S).
(claim 5) wherein the second reflective surface is shaped like a portion of a lateral surface of a right circular second cone having a second cone axis that coincides with the system axis.
However, Moreno related to light collector receiver devices and thus from the same field of endeavor teaches:
(claim 2) wherein the first reflective surface (Fig. 6 element 50) is shaped like a portion of a lateral surface of a right circular first cone having a first cone axis that coincides with the system axis (S), (as shown in Figs. 5-6, [page 10, lines 15-30], [page 11, lines 8-15]). Additionally, it is a settled principle of law that a mere carrying forward of an original patented conception involving only change of form, proportions, or degree, or the substitution of equivalents doing the same thing as the original invention, by substantially the same means, is not such an invention as will sustain a patent, even though the changes of the kind may produce better results than prior inventions (see MPEP 2144.05 Section II-A).
(claim 5) wherein the second reflective surface (Fig. 6 element 51) is shaped like a portion of a lateral surface of a right circular second cone having a second cone axis that coincides with the system axis, (as shown in Figs. 5-6, [page 10, lines 15-30], [page 11, lines 8-15]). Additionally, it is a settled principle of law that a mere carrying forward of an original patented conception involving only change of form, proportions, or degree, or the substitution of equivalents doing the same thing as the original invention, by substantially the same means, is not such an invention as will sustain a patent, even though the changes of the kind may produce better results than prior inventions (see MPEP 2144.05 Section II-A).
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified device of Geiger by including wherein the first reflective surface is shaped like a portion of a lateral surface of a right circular first cone having a first cone axis that coincides with the system axis (S), wherein the second reflective surface is shaped like a portion of a lateral surface of a right circular second cone having a second cone axis that coincides with the system axis (as taught by Moreno) for several advantages such as: as result of routine optimization in order to redirect, focus, or magnify light in a controlled manner thus increase the efficiency of the device.
Claims 8, 10, 12, 15 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geiger in view of Lys and further view of Prenzel et al. (DE 102016112750 A1, included in IDS on 06/28/2024), hereafter Prenzel.
Regarding claim 8, Geiger in the combination outlined above teaches the color measurement device of claim 1.
Geiger further teaches wherein the optical system (Fig. 9 element 10A) comprises or consists of an optical body made of a transparent material, ( the optical system as shown in Fig. 9 comprise elements 226 + 228 that can be transparent, [0039]),
wherein the first (Fig. 9 element 224) and second (Fig. 9 element 219) reflective surfaces are formed by surface portions (Fig. 9 elements 222 + 218) of the optical body, [0039],
wherein the first reflective surface (224) is configured to cause reflection of the incident light rays, (as shown in annotated Fig. 9, element 224 cause reflection of R in, [0038-0039]), and
wherein the second reflective surface (219) is configured to cause reflection of the once-reflected light rays (as shown in annotated Fig. 9, element 219 cause reflection of Ri, [0038-0039]).
Even though the modified device of Geiger teaches the reflective surface that cause reflection of incident and once-reflected light rays, Geiger fail to teach wherein the reflective surface is configured to cause reflection by total internal reflection.
However, Prenzel related to optical measuring devices and thus from the same field of endeavor teaches wherein the reflective surface (Fig. 1 element 15) is configured to cause reflection by total internal reflection, [page 4, fourth paragraph], [page 5, fifth paragraph].
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified device of Geiger by including wherein the reflective surface is configured to cause reflection by total internal reflection (as taught by Prenzel) for several advantages such as: the total internal reflection lens permits to focus incident light beams on a particularly short distance, without causing aberrations (spherical /chromatic aberration) allowing the reduction of the overall length of the measuring device, (Prenzel, [Page 4, fourth and fifth paragraphs]).
Regarding claim 10, Geiger in the combination outlined above teaches the color measurement device of claim 8.
Geiger further teaches wherein the optical body (Fig. 9 element 10A) has an entrance surface (Fig. 9 element 216) for allowing the incident rays (Annotated Fig. 9 element R in) to enter the optical body, [0039], and an exit surface (Fig. 9 element 16) for allowing the twice-reflected rays (Annotated Fig. 9 element R2) to exit the optical body and to impinge onto the detection area (Fig. 9 element 18) of the light detector, [0038-0039], the exit surface (16) facing away from the entrance surface (214) and being intersected by the system axis (Annotated Fig. 9 element S), [0038-0039].
The modified device of Geiger is silent about the entrance surface being shaped like a ring or ring segment when viewed in a projection along the system axis. However, it is a settled principle of law that a mere carrying forward of an original patented conception involving only change of form, proportions, or degree, or the substitution of equivalents doing the same thing as the original invention, by substantially the same means, is not such an invention as will sustain a patent, even though the changes of the kind may produce better results than prior inventions (see MPEP 2144.05 Section II-A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify entrance surface (as taught by the Geiger) with a shaped like a ring or ring segment when viewed in a projection along the system axis without deviating from the general teaching concept of Jidai et al. and Hong et al. since such a modification constitutes only a change of form, proportions, or degree, which has been held to be a matter of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 Section II-A) in order to attain a particular design choice.
Regarding claim 12, Geiger in the combination outlined above teaches the color measurement device of claim 10.
Geiger further teaches wherein the optical body (Fig. 9 element 10A) has a recess (Fig. 9 elements 228) that is partially delimited by the exit surface (Fig. 9 element 16), the recess being formed in a portion of the optical body that faces away from the entrance surface (Fig. 9 element 216) , and wherein the light detector (Fig. 1 element 18) is received in the recess, ( as shown in Fig. 9 element 18 is received by element 228 as is incorporated in element 16, [0039]).
Regarding claim 15 and 27, Geiger in the combination outlined above teaches the color measurement device.
Geiger fail to teach:
(claim 15) a diffusor arranged in front of the detection area of the light detector, the diffusor being configured to diffuse the light that is propagated to the light detector before the light impinges onto the detection.
(claim 27) wherein the diffusor is configured to induce polarization mixing.
However, Prenzel further teaches:
(claim 15) a diffusor (Figs. 1-2 element 4) arranged in front of the detection area of the light detector (Fig. 1 element 5), the diffusor being configured to diffuse the light that is propagated to the light detector (Fig. 1 element 5) before the light impinges onto the detection, (as shown in Fig. 1, [page 5, third and fourth paragraphs]).
(claim 27) wherein the diffusor (Figs. 1-2 element 4) is configured to induce polarization mixing, [page 4, eighth paragraph].
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified device of Geiger by including a diffusor arranged in front of the detection area of the light detector, the diffusor being configured to diffuse the light that is propagated to the light detector before the light impinges onto the detection, wherein the diffusor is configured to induce polarization mixing (as taught by Prenzel) for several advantages such as: diffuser permit to homogenization of the light rays striking the diffuser allowing to transmit a uniform light beam to the detector thus increase the measurement accuracy, (Prenzel, [abstract], [page 5, first paragraph]).
Claims 9 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geiger in view of Lys , Prenzel and further view of Moreno et al. (EP 0194820 A2, included in IDS om 06/28/2024), hereafter Moreno and Cao et al. (US 2023/0393453 A1), hereafter Cao.
Regarding claim 9, Geiger in the combination outlined above teaches the color measurement device of claim 8.
Geiger further teaches the first reflective surface (Fig. 9 element (224) having first surface normal (N1) that are inclined to the system axis (S) by a first inclination angle (e1), (as shown in annotated Fig. 9, [0038]), the second reflective surface (Fig. 9 element 219) having second surface normal (N2) that are inclined to the first direction of reflection by a second inclination angle, (as shown in annotated Fig. 9, [0038]).
The modified device of Geiger fail to teach wherein the first reflective surface is shaped like a portion of a lateral surface of a right circular first cone having a first cone axis that coincides with the system axis, wherein the second reflective surface is shaped like a portion of a lateral surface of a right circular second cone having a second cone axis that coincides with the system axis, wherein each of the first and second inclination angles (01, 02) is larger than a critical angle of total internal reflection between the optical body and air.
However, Moreno related to optical devices and thus from the same field of endeavor teaches: wherein the first reflective surface (Fig. 6 element 50) is shaped like a portion of a lateral surface of a right circular first cone having a first cone axis that coincides with the system axis, (as shown in Figs. 5-6, [page 10, lines 15-30], [page 11, lines 8-15]). Additionally, it is a settled principle of law that a mere carrying forward of an original patented conception involving only change of form, proportions, or degree, or the substitution of equivalents doing the same thing as the original invention, by substantially the same means, is not such an invention as will sustain a patent, even though the changes of the kind may produce better results than prior inventions (see MPEP 2144.05 Section II-A) wherein the second reflective surface (Fig. 6 element 51) is shaped like a portion of a lateral surface of a right circular second cone having a second cone axis that coincides with the system axis, (as shown in Figs. 5-6, [page 10, lines 15-30], [page 11, lines 8-15]). Additionally, it is a settled principle of law that a mere carrying forward of an original patented conception involving only change of form, proportions, or degree, or the substitution of equivalents doing the same thing as the original invention, by substantially the same means, is not such an invention as will sustain a patent, even though the changes of the kind may produce better results than prior inventions (see MPEP 2144.05 Section II-A).
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Geiger by including wherein the first reflective surface is shaped like a portion of a lateral surface of a right circular first cone having a first cone axis that coincides with the system axis, wherein the second reflective surface is shaped like a portion of a lateral surface of a right circular second cone having a second cone axis that coincides with the system axis (as taught by Moreno) for several advantages such as: as result of routine optimization in order to redirect, focus, or magnify light in a controlled manner thus increase the efficiency of the device.
The modified device of Geiser and Moreno still lack to teach wherein each of the first and second inclination angles (01, 02) is larger than a critical angle of total internal reflection between the optical body and air.
However, Cao related to optical devices and thus from the same field of endeavor teaches wherein each of the first and second inclination angles (01, 02) is larger than a critical angle of total internal reflection between the optical body and air, (the inclination of the further surfaces of the optical expander with respect the propagation of the channels of light beams may be such that the angle of incidence exceeds the critical angle in the visible range of wavelengths as shown in Fig. 7, [0120-0121]).
wherein each of the first and second inclination angles (01, 02) is larger than a critical angle of total internal reflection between the optical body and air,
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified device of Geiger by including wherein each of the first and second inclination angles (01, 02) is larger than a critical angle of total internal reflection between the optical body and air, (as taught by Cao) for several advantages such as: by using TIR the channels of light beams are deflected, so that the direction of the light beam propagation is changed, thus allow to direct subsets of channels of light beams towards a specific direction efficiently by means of TIR. Thus increasing the accuracy of the device, ([0044], Cao).
Regarding Claim 26, Geiger in the combination outlined above The color measurement device of claim 9.
Geiger further teaches wherein the first (Fig. 9 element 224) and second reflective surfaces (Fig. 9 element 219) are parallel in any sectional plane that contains the system axis (annotated Fig. 9 element S), ( as shown in annotated Fig. 9 the surface 219 and 224 are parallel to the plane of the system axis (s)).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geiger in view of Lys , Prenzel and further view of Cameron et al. (US 5,793,538 A, included in IDS om 06/28/2024) hereafter Cameron.
Regarding claim 11, Geiger in the combination outlined above teaches the color measurement device of claim 10.
Geiger fail to teach wherein the entrance surface has positive optical lens power in such a manner that the entrance surface acts as a converging entrance lens for the incident rays (Rin); and/or wherein the exit surface has positive optical lens power in such a manner that the exit surface acts as a converging exit lens for the twice-reflected rays (R2).
However, Cameron related optical lens and thus from the same field of endeavor teaches wherein the entrance surface has positive optical lens power in such a manner that the entrance surface acts as a converging entrance lens for the incident rays (Rin); and/or wherein the exit surface has positive optical lens power in such a manner that the exit surface acts as a converging exit lens for the twice-reflected rays (R2), (as shown in Fig. 7 elements 524 + 560 comprise the convex exit surface that focus the twice reflected light in to element 536, [Col. 5, lines 14-25]).
. Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified device of Geiger by including the entrance surface has positive optical lens power in such a manner that the entrance surface acts as a converging entrance lens for the incident rays (Rin); and/or wherein the exit surface has positive optical lens power in such a manner that the exit surface acts as a converging exit lens for the twice-reflected rays (R2), (as taught by Cameron) for several advantages such as: lens of the present invention exhibits reduced size, has fewer parts and requires less assembly than other optical imaging configurations. Additionally, the solid lens of the present invention is capable of being produced in high volume at a relatively low cost, (Cameron, [Col. 2, Lines 14-22]).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geiger in view of Lys and further view of Osumi et al. (US 2015/0131090 A1), hereafter Osumi.
Regarding claim 16, Geiger in the combination outlined above teaches the color measurement device of claim 1.
Even though Geiger teaches wherein the light detector comprises an array of pixels, [0047], Geiger is silent about each pixel being arranged to receive light emitted at a different range of emission angles, and wherein the color measurement device is configured to average signals from different pixels.
However, Osumi related to optical measuring system and thus from the same field of endeavor teaches each pixel being arranged to receive light emitted at a different range of emission angles, and wherein the color measurement device is configured to average signals from different pixels, (Fig. 6, [0140]).
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified device of Geiger by including each pixel being arranged to receive light emitted at a different range of emission angles, and wherein the color measurement device is configured to average signals from different pixels, (as taught by Osumi) for several advantages such as: this method allows to measure information such as multi-angle spectral information on each pixel of a surface of an object in a short time can be provided thus increasing the accuracy of multi-angle spectral imaging, ([0032], Osumi).
Claims 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geiger et al. (US 2016/0041038 A1), hereafter Geiger in view of Moreno et al. (EP 0194820 A2, included in IDS om 06/28/2024), hereafter Moreno and further in view of Cao et al. (US 2023/0393453 A1), hereafter Cao.
Regarding claims 17-18, Geiger teaches an optical body (Fig. 9 element 10A) made of a transparent material, [0038-0039], the optical body defining a system axis (annotated Fig. 9 element (S)), (as shown in annotated Fig. 9 above), the optical body comprising:
an entrance surface (Fig. 9 element 212) for allowing light to enter the optical body, [0038-0039];
an exit surface (Fig. 9 element 16) facing away from the entrance surface (212) and being intersected by the system axis (S), (as shown in annotated Fig. 9 above),;
a first reflective surface (Fig. 9 element 220 + 222 + 224) configured to cause incident light rays (annotated Fig. 9 element “R in”) that have entered the optical body (10A) through the entrance surface (212) along an incident direction parallel to the system axis (S), (as shown in annotated Fig. 9 above), to be internally reflected into once-reflected light rays (Ri) having a first direction of reflection ( annotated Fig. 9 element Ri), the first direction of reflection having a component that is directed radially inwards towards the system axis (S), (as shown in annotated Fig. 9 element Ri, [0038-0039]),; and
a second reflective surface (Fig. 9 element 219) configured to cause said once-reflected light rays (Ri) to be internally reflected into twice-reflected light rays (annotated Fig. 9 element R2) having a second direction of reflection, [0038-0039], the second direction of reflection (R2) being directed towards the exit surface (16), (as shown in annotated Fig. 9, [0038]),
first reflective surface (224) having first surface normal (N1) that are inclined to the system axis (S) by a constant first inclination angle (A1), (as shown in annotated Fig. 9, [0038]).
(claim 18) the second reflective surface (Fig 10A element 219) having second surface normal (N2) that are inclined to the first direction of reflection by a constant second inclination angle (A2), (as shown in annotated Fig. 9, [0038]).
Geiser fail to teach:
(claim 17) wherein the first reflective surface is shaped like a portion of a lateral surface of a right circular first cone having a first cone axis that coincides with the system axis, and wherein the first inclination angle (A1) is larger than a critical angle of total internal reflection between the optical body and air in at least a portion of a wavelength range between 380 nm and 700 nm.
(claim 18) wherein the second reflective surface is shaped like a portion of a lateral surface of a right circular second cone having a second cone axis that coincides with the system axis, and wherein the second inclination angle (e2) is larger than a critical angle of total internal reflection between the optical body and air in at least a portion of a wavelength range between 380 nm and 700 nm.
However, Moreno related to optical devices and thus from the same field of endeavor teaches:
(claim 17) wherein the first reflective surface (Fig. 6 element 50) is shaped like a portion of a lateral surface of a right circular first cone having a first cone axis that coincides with the system axis (as shown in Figs. 5-6, [page 10, lines 15-30], [page 11, lines 8-15]). Additionally, it is a settled principle of law that a mere carrying forward of an original patented conception involving only change of form, proportions, or degree, or the substitution of equivalents doing the same thing as the original invention, by substantially the same means, is not such an invention as will sustain a patent, even though the changes of the kind may produce better results than prior inventions (see MPEP 2144.05 Section II-A).
(claim 18) wherein the second reflective surface (Fig. 6 element 51) is shaped like a portion of a lateral surface of a right circular second cone having a second cone axis that coincides with the system axis, (as shown in Figs. 5-6, [page 10, lines 15-30], [page 11, lines 8-15]). Additionally, it is a settled principle of law that a mere carrying forward of an original patented conception involving only change of form, proportions, or degree, or the substitution of equivalents doing the same thing as the original invention, by substantially the same means, is not such an invention as will sustain a patent, even though the changes of the kind may produce better results than prior inventions (see MPEP 2144.05 Section II-A).
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Geiger by including wherein the first reflective surface is shaped like a portion of a lateral surface of a right circular first cone having a first cone axis that coincides with the system axis, wherein the second reflective surface is shaped like a portion of a lateral surface of a right circular second cone having a second cone axis that coincides with the system axis (as taught by Moreno) for several advantages such as: as result of routine optimization in order to redirect, focus, or magnify light in a controlled manner thus increase the efficiency of the device.
Geiser and Moreno still lack to teach:
(claim 17) wherein the first inclination angle (A1) is larger than a critical angle of total internal reflection between the optical body and air in at least a portion of a wavelength range between 380 nm and 700 nm.
(claim 18) wherein the second inclination angle (e2) is larger than a critical angle of total internal reflection between the optical body and air in at least a portion of a wavelength range between 380 nm and 700 nm.
However, Cao related to optical devices and thus from the same field of endeavor teaches:
(claim 17) wherein the first inclination angle (A1) is larger than a critical angle of total internal reflection between the optical body and air in at least a portion of a wavelength range between 380 nm and 700 nm, (the inclination of the further surfaces of the optical expander with respect the propagation of the channels of light beams may be such that the angle of incidence exceeds the critical angle in the visible range of wavelengths as shown in Fig. 7, [0043, 0120-0121]).
(claim 18) wherein the second inclination angle (e2) is larger than a critical angle of total internal reflection between the optical body and air in at least a portion of a wavelength range between 380 nm and 700 nm. (the inclination of the further surfaces of the optical expander with respect the propagation of the channels of light beams may be such that the angle of incidence exceeds the critical angle in the visible range of wavelengths as shown in Fig. 7, [0120-0121]).
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified device of Geiger by including wherein the first inclination angle (A1) is larger than a critical angle of total internal reflection between the optical body and air in at least a portion of a wavelength range between 380 nm and 700 nm, wherein the second inclination angle (e2) is larger than a critical angle of total internal reflection between the optical body and air in at least a portion of a wavelength range between 380 nm and 700 nm (as taught by Cao) for several advantages such as: by using TIR the channels of light beams are deflected, so that the direction of the light beam propagation is changed, thus allow to direct subsets of channels of light beams towards a specific direction efficiently by means of TIR. Thus increasing the accuracy of the device, ([0044], Cao).
Regarding Claim 19, Geiger in the combination outlined above teaches the optical body of claim 18.
Geiger further teaches wherein the first (Fig. 9 element 224) and second reflective surfaces (Fig. 9 element 219) are parallel in any sectional plane that contains the system axis (annotated Fig. 9 element S), ( as shown in annotated Fig. 9 the surface 219 and 224 are parallel to the plane of the system axis (s)).
Claims 21-22 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bird et al. (US 2022/0059049 A1), hereafter Bird in view of Geiger et al. (US 2016/0041038 A1), hereafter Geiger.
Regarding claims 21 and 24, Bird teaches a system and method (Fig. 11A element 1120, [0064]) comprising:
a display device (Fig. 11A element 1100) having a surface portion (Fig. 11A element 1102) defining a measurement area, [0067], the display device (1102) configured to generate colors in the measurement area, [0067]; and
a color measurement device (Fig. 11A element 1108 + 1150 + 1104 + 1106) for determining color characteristics of the colors generated by the display device in the measurement area, [0064, 0067], the color measurement device comprising:
a spectrally selective light detector (Fig. 11A element 1106 + 1160 + 1170 + 1104, [0071]) defining a detection area, [0067];
Bird is silent about an optical system arranged and configured to guide light that has been emitted from the measurement area to the detection area, the optical system defining a system axis (S), the system axis (S) passing through the detection area, the optical system comprising: a first reflective surface configured to cause incident light rays that have entered the optical system along an incident direction parallel to the system axis (S) to be reflected into once-reflected light rays (R,) having a first direction of reflection, the first direction of reflection having a component that is directed radially inwards towards the system axis (S), the first reflective surface being inclined relative to a plane perpendicular to the system axis (S) and shaped like at least a portion of a first axially symmetric surface having rotational circular symmetry with respect to the system axis; and a second reflective surface configured to cause said once-reflected light rays (R1) to be reflected into twice-reflected light rays (R2),wherein the detection area of the light detector is arranged to receive the twice- reflected light rays (R2).
However, Geiger related to optical measuring systems and thus from the same field of endeavor teaches an optical system (Fig. 9 element 10A) for guiding light that has been emitted from the measurement area to the detection area, [0038], the optical system defining a system axis (annotated Fig. 9 element (S)), the system axis (S) passing through the detection area, (Element 10A is symmetrical as shown in annotated Fig 9 below,[0038]), the optical system comprising: a first reflective surface (Fig. 9 element 220 + 222 + 224) configured to cause incident light rays (annotated Fig. 9 element “R in”) that have entered the optical system (10A) along an incident direction parallel to the system axis (annotated Fig. 9 element S) to be reflected into once-reflected light rays ( annotated Fig. 9 element Ri) having a first direction of reflection, (as shown in annotated Fig. 9), the first direction of reflection (Ri) having a component that is directed radially inwards towards the system axis (S) (as shown in annotated Fig. 9), the first reflective surface (224) being inclined relative to a plane perpendicular to the system axis (S) (as shown in annotated Fig. 9, [0038]), and shaped like at least a portion of a first axially symmetric surface having rotational circular symmetry with respect to the system axis, (as shown in annotated Fig. 9 element 222 is in each side of the (s) axis with symmetrical curve shape, [0038]); and a second reflective surface (Fig. 9 element 219) configured to cause said once-reflected light rays (Ri) to be reflected into twice-reflected light rays (annotated Fig. 9 element R2), (as shown in annotated Fig. 9, [0038]), wherein the detection area of the light detector (Fig. 9 element 18) is arranged to receive the twice- reflected light rays (R2), [0039].
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified device of Bird by including an optical system arranged and configured to guide light that has been emitted from the measurement area to the detection area, the optical system defining a system axis (S), the system axis (S) passing through the detection area, the optical system comprising: a first reflective surface configured to cause incident light rays that have entered the optical system along an incident direction parallel to the system axis (S) to be reflected into once-reflected light rays (R,) having a first direction of reflection, the first direction of reflection having a component that is directed radially inwards towards the system axis (S), the first reflective surface being inclined relative to a plane perpendicular to the system axis (S) and shaped like at least a portion of a first axially symmetric surface having rotational circular symmetry with respect to the system axis; and a second reflective surface configured to cause said once-reflected light rays (R1) to be reflected into twice-reflected light rays (R2),wherein the detection area of the light detector is arranged to receive the twice- reflected light rays (R2) (as taught by Geiger) for several advantages such as: permitting to increase the light that can be collected and a smaller angle of view (AOV) can be provided, allowing to provide a larger focal length of the optical system for a given module height thus increase the device efficiency, ([0038], Geiger).
Regarding claim 22, Bird in the combination outlined above teaches the system of claim 21.
Bird fail to teach wherein the color measurement device is integrated with the display device.
Geiger further teaches wherein the color measurement device is integrated with the display device, (“The target sensor 1104 and/or temperature sensor 1106 can be embedded or attached to the display device 1100”, [0064]).
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified device of Bird by including wherein the color measurement device is integrated with the display device (as taught by Geiger) for several advantages such as: permitting to increase the light that can be collected and a smaller angle of view (AOV) can be provided, allowing to provide a larger focal length of the optical system for a given module height thus increase the device efficiency, ([0038], Geiger).
Claims 23 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bird in view of Geiger and further in view of Cao et al. (US 2023/0393453 A1),hereafter Cao .
Regarding claims 23 and 25, Bird in the combination outlined above teaches the system and method.
Geiger further teaches wherein the optical system (Fig. 9 element 10A) comprises or consists of an optical body made of a transparent material, ( the optical system as shown in Fig. 9 comprise elements 226 + 228 that can be transparent, [0039]), wherein the first (Fig. 9 element 224) and second (Fig. 9 element 219) reflective surfaces are formed by surface portions (Fig. 9 elements 222 + 218) of the optical body, [0039], wherein the first reflective surface (224) is configured to cause reflection of the incident light rays, (as shown in annotated Fig. 9, element 224 cause reflection of R in, [0038-0039]), and wherein the second reflective surface (219) is configured to cause reflection of the once-reflected light rays (as shown in annotated Fig. 9, element 219 cause reflection of Ri, [0038-0039]).
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified device of Bird by including wherein the optical system comprises or consists of an optical body made of a transparent material, wherein the first and second reflective surfaces are formed by surface portions of the optical body. wherein the first reflective surface is configured to cause reflection of the incident light rays by total internal reflection, and wherein the second reflective surface is configured to cause reflection of the once- reflected light rays by total internal reflection (as taught by Geiger) for several advantages such as: permitting to increase the light that can be collected and a smaller angle of view (AOV) can be provided, allowing to provide a larger focal length of the optical system for a given module height thus increase the device efficiency, ([0038], Geiger).
Even though the modified device of Bird teaches the reflective surface that cause reflection of incident and once-reflected light rays (Geiger, [0038-0039]), The modified device of Bird fail to teach wherein the reflective surface is configured to cause reflection by total internal reflection.
However, Cao related to optical devices and thus from the same field of endeavor teaches wherein the reflective surface is configured to cause reflection by total internal reflection. (Fig. 7, [0120-0121]).
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified device of Geiger by including wherein the reflective surface is configured to cause reflection by total internal reflection (as taught by Cao) for several advantages such as: by using TIR the channels of light beams are deflected, so that the direction of the light beam propagation is changed, thus allow to direct subsets of channels of light beams towards a specific direction efficiently by means of TIR, thus increasing the accuracy of the device, ([0044], Cao).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13-14 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding Claims 13, the prior art of record, taken either alone or in combination, fails to disclose, teach, or suggest or render obvious “wherein the optical body has a front surface arranged radially between the entrance surface and the system axis (S) and facing substantially in the same direction as the entrance surface, and wherein the front surface comprises a plurality of concentric, ring-shaped or ring- segment-shaped inclined surface portions, the inclined surface portions being axially staggered, each inclined surface portion being inclined relative to a plane that is perpendicular to the system axis (S) by an angle of 20 to 100 relative to the plane that is perpendicular to the center axis of the optical body.”, in the combination required by the claim.
Regarding Claims 14, the prior art of record, taken either alone or in combination, fails to disclose, teach, or suggest or render obvious “wherein the optical body has a front surface arranged radially between the entrance surface and the system axis (S) and facing substantially in the same direction as the entrance surface, and wherein the color measurement device further comprises a protective cap, the protective cap covering said front surface and the second reflective surface, wherein an air gap (G) is present between the protective cap and the second reflective surface. ”, in the combination required by the claim.
Regarding Claims 20, the prior art of record, taken either alone or in combination, fails to disclose, teach, or suggest or render obvious “wherein the optical body has a front surface arranged radially between the entrance surface and the system axis (S) and facing substantially in the same direction as the entrance surface, and wherein the front surface comprises a plurality of concentric, ring-shaped or ring- segment-shaped inclined surface portions, the inclined surface portions being axially staggered, each inclined surface portion being inclined relative to a plane that is perpendicular to the system axis (S) by an angle of 20 to 100 relative to the plane that is perpendicular to the center axis of the optical body. ”, in the combination required by the claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLOS G PEREZ-GUZMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3904. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 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, Tarifur Chowdhury can be reached at (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.
/TARIFUR R CHOWDHURY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/CARLOS PEREZ-GUZMAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2877