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 .
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 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.
DETAILED ACTION
This is an AIA application filed July 17, 2024.
The earliest effective filing date of this AIA application is seen as January 18, 2022, the date of the earliest priority application (Europe 22152115.6) for any claims which are fully supported under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) by the parent application.
The same is similarly true for the following United States provisional, non-provisional, or international PCT patent application(s):
PCT international application number PCT/EP2023/050859 filed January 16, 2023.
The effective filing date of this AIA application is seen as July 17, 2024, the actual filing date, for any claims that are not fully supported by the foregoing provisional or non-provisional application(s).
The present application is also related to the applications giving rise to the following patent publication(s) (some redundancy may be present):
Office
Application
App. Date
Pub. #
Pub. Date
EP
22152115
01/18/2022
EP 4213317 A1
EP 4213317 B1
07/19/2023
01/08/2025
EP
PCT/EP2023/050859
01/16/2023
WO 2023139024 A1
07/27/2023
EP
23700538
01/16/2023
EP 4466763 A1
11/27/2024
JP
2024542410
01/16/2023
JP 2025503749 A
02/04/2025
The claims originally filed July 17, 2024 by preliminary amendment are entered, currently outstanding, and subject to examination.
This action is in response to the information disclosure statement/IDS filing of October 16, 2024.
The current status and history of the claims is summarized below:
Last Amendment/Response
Previously
Amended:
1, 3-11, & 13-15
N/A
Cancelled:
none
N/A
Withdrawn:
none
N/A
Added:
16-20
N/A
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and outstanding.
Regarding the preliminary amendment:
Claims 1, 3-11, and 13-15 were amended.
No claims were cancelled.
No claims were withdrawn.
Claims 16-20 were added.
Claims 1-20 are currently outstanding and subject to examination.
This is a non-final action and is the first action on the merits.
Allowable subject matter is not indicated below.
Often, in the substance of the action below, formal matters are addressed first, claim rejections second, and any response to arguments third.
Special Definitions for Claim Language - MPEP § 2111.01(IV)
No special definitions as defined by MPEP § 2111.01(IV) are seen as present in the specification regarding the language used in the claims. Consequently, the words and phrases of the claims are given their plain meaning. MPEP §§ 2173.01, 2173.05(a), and 2111.01.
If special definitions are present, Applicant should bring those to the attention of the examiner and the prosecution history with its next response in a manner both specific and particular. In doing so, there will be no mistake, confusion, and/or ambiguity as to what constitutes the special definition(s). Per above, such special definitions must conform to the requirements of MPEP § 2111.01(IV).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4-13, and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20050225846 of Nati et al. (Nati, cited by Applicant).
With respect to claim 1, Nati discloses a wavelength-stabilised narrow-linewidth mode-locked picosecond laser system (per the disclosure, abstract, ¶¶ 1, 7) comprising:
a laser cavity which includes:
an amplifier (¶ 60, amplifier pump diode);
a modelocking element (¶ 57, mode-locked fiber laser); and
a fiber Bragg grating (¶ 33, fiber Bragg grating (FBG)) which acts as a narrowband reflector,
a mount to which the fiber Bragg grating is mounted under tension (seen as inherent to provide mechanical stability);
a tension control system to adjust the tension of the fiber Bragg grating (¶ 33, the temperature of the grating is varied with a thermo-electric cooler);
a measurement device to provide a measurement output related to a current operating wavelength of the fiber Bragg grating (¶ 32, "With the target wavelength set at a slope on the etalon transfer function, i.e., etalon transmission vs. wavelength curve, drift or shift of wavelength can be monitored by measuring the differential value of two photocurrents."), and
a controller to wavelength-stabilise the laser by controlling the tension control system responsive to the measurement output (¶ 33, "By changing the reflectance as a function of the wavelength, the cavity Q can be adjusted for a preferred wavelength."),
wherein the controller is configured to receive a feedback signal derived from the measurement device and to generate a responsive control signal for electrically controlling the tension control system (claim 45, "wherein the system is a laser amplifier system and further comprises: a fiber Bragg grating in the oscillator, wherein the wavelength of the oscillator is monitored and controlled by controlling the temperature of said fiber Bragg grating."),
wherein the tension control system comprises one or more temperature control devices to control the temperature of at least part of the mount to cause thermal expansion or contraction of the at least part of the mount (per ¶ 33 and claim 45, above),
thereby to adjust the tension of the fiber Bragg grating (per ¶ 33 and claim 45, above).
With respect to claim 2, Nati as set forth above discloses the laser system of claim 1, including one wherein
the tension control system does not include a piezoelectric element.
Per ¶ 33, a piezo is absent from the first embodiment as it is alternatively disclosed in a second.
With respect to claim 4, Nati as set forth above discloses the laser system of claim 1, including one wherein
the measurement device comprises a temperature sensor configured to measure a temperature of at least part of the mount.
Per ¶ 33, as the grating is temperature controlled by a thermo-electric cooler, the necessary feedback circuit with its sensor are seen as so configured.
With respect to claim 5, Nati as set forth above discloses the laser system of claim 1, including one wherein
the measurement device is configured to measure a wavelength of radiation generated using the laser cavity.
Fig. 8, ¶ 31, "The temperature, current, wavelength, and repetition rate of the oscillator can be monitored and controlled."
With respect to claim 6, Nati as set forth above discloses the laser system of claim 1, including one wherein
the laser cavity is configured to provide pulses having a duration of less than 100 picoseconds.
The laser cavity is seen as so configured. ¶ 32, "For picosecond mode-locked fiber lasers, subnanometer wavelength stabilization is of potential importance because, for example, the spectral width of the time-bandwidth limited pulse is only 1 nm for a 1.6 ps pulse at 1060 nm."
With respect to claim 7, Nati as set forth above discloses the laser system of claim 1, including one wherein
the spectral linewidth of the laser is less than 200 picometers.
For product and apparatus claims, when the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties and/or functions are presumed to be inherent. Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). MPEP § 2112.01(I).
Consequently, because Nati as set forth above as set forth above provides the structure of claim 1, the combination is seen as also providing the same claimed properties or functions of claim 7.
Unsupported features are seen to directly result from the supported/claimed structures. No authority is known by which unsupported or “naked” functions/characteristics/features can be claimed and subject to exclusive protection.
Below, this analysis is referred to as “same product/same features”.
With respect to claim 8, Nati as set forth above discloses the laser system of claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to stabilise the operating wavelength of the laser to within 10% or less of the spectral linewidth of the laser.
Same product/same features.
With respect to claim 9, Nati as set forth above discloses the laser system of claim 1, including one wherein
the controller is configured to stabilise the operating wavelength of the laser to within 10 picometers or less of a desired operating wavelength.
Same product/same features.
With respect to claim 10, Nati as set forth above discloses the laser system of claim 1, including one wherein
the amplifier comprises a ytterbium fiber amplifier and the operating wavelength of the laser is between 1020 nm and 1080 nm.
¶¶ 4 and 5, "Also influencing the gain of the fiber is the temperature of the fiber. One physical process for changing this gain is made possible because rare earth ions, such as Yb and Er, are actually quasi three-level lasing materials rather than four-level lasing materials."
¶ 32 has 1060 nm.
With respect to claim 11, Nati as set forth above discloses a laser system of claim 1, including one further comprising
a frequency-converter to convert the operating wavelength of the laser system to a converted wavelength.
¶ 58, "An additional method of changing the repetition rate is to mount the fiber of the laser so that it may be stretched. For example, mounting the fiber on a Piezoelectric drum. The phase and frequency of the reference oscillator are then compared with the phase and frequency of the optical oscillator and the cavity length is adjusted such that the optical oscillator and the reference oscillator are locked in phase and frequency."
With respect to claim 12, Nati as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 11, including one wherein
the frequency-converter comprises one or more nonlinear frequency conversion crystals.
The piezoelectric drum is considered to be a crystal for typical piezoelectric devices and are seen as inherently non-linear.
With respect to claim 13, Nati as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 11, including one wherein
the frequency-converter is configured to convert the operating wavelength of the wavelength-stabilised laser system to a wavelength shorter than 300 nm.
Same product/same features.
With respect to claim 16, Nati as set forth above discloses the laser system of claim 1, including one wherein
the pulses have a duration of between 30 and 60 picoseconds.
Same product/same features.
With respect to claim 17, Nati as set forth above discloses the laser system of claim 1, including one wherein
the controller is configured to stabilise the operating wavelength of the laser to within 5% or less of the spectral linewidth of the laser.
Same product/same features.
With respect to claim 18, Nati as set forth above discloses the laser system of claim 1, including one wherein
the controller is configured to stabilise the operating wavelength of the laser to within 1% or less of the spectral linewidth of the laser.
Same product/same features.
With respect to claim 19, Nati as set forth above discloses the laser system of claim 1, including one wherein
the controller is configured to stabilise the operating wavelength of the laser to within 5 picometers or less of a desired operating wavelength.
Same product/same features.
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 14, 15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Nati as set forth above in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20060263024 of Dong et al. (Dong).
With respect to claim 14, Nati as set forth above discloses a laser system comprising:
a wavelength-stabilised laser system comprising:
a laser cavity which includes:
an amplifier;
a modelocking element; and
a fiber Bragg grating which acts as a narrowband reflector, a mount to which the fiber Bragg grating is mounted under tension;
a tension control system to adjust the tension of the fiber Bragg grating;
a measurement device to provide a measurement output related to a current operating wavelength of the fiber Bragg grating, and a controller to wavelength-stabilise the laser by controlling the tension control system responsive to the measurement output.
All per claim 1, above.
Dong discloses a single mode propagation in fibers and rods with large leakage channels that includes:
a solid state crystal configured to amplify radiation (¶ 123, "The achievable gain per unit length in rod 102 can further be optimized by the use of multi-components glasses, such as Bi-or phosphate glasses, ceramic or crystalline materials such as Yb:Y2O3 or Nd:YAG respectively, which can be fused directly to the glass rod.") generated using the wavelength-stabilised laser system (¶ 55, "In particular, the maximum width of the glass bridge, a, between the holes that define the core can be used as a design parameter for achieving stable single mode propagation.").
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use an Nd:YAG or other laser light-amplifying crystal along the lines of Dong in a system according to Nati as set forth above in order to make a better laser. This provides one rationale to combine the references.
Another completely independent and separately sufficient rationale arises as follows. In making the combination (above), the combining of prior art elements (listed above) according to known methods (per the references) to yield predictable results (a stable laser system) would occur as each element merely performs the same function in combination as it does separately. MPEP § 2141(III). This additional rationale is a sufficient, a complete, and an explicitly-recognized rationale to combine the references and conclude that the claim is obvious both under the controlling KSR Supreme Court case and MPEP § 2141(III)(A). Current Office policy regarding the determination of obviousness is set forth in the Federal Register notice at 89 Fed. Reg. 14449 (Feb. 27, 2024).
Further, the combination would then provide:
a solid state crystal configured to amplify radiation generated using the wavelength-stabilised laser system.
With respect to claim 15, Nati in view of Dong as set forth above discloses the laser system of claim 14, including one wherein
the solid state crystal comprises a Nd:YAG crystal.
Per claim 14.
With respect to claim 20, Nati in view of Dong as set forth above discloses a chirped pulse amplification, CPA, system (Dong, ¶ 47, "FIG. 20A schematically illustrates a generic chirped pulse amplification system for femtosecond (fs) or picosecond (ps) pulses utilizing an ultra-large mode rod.") including one comprising:
a pulse source comprising a wavelength-stabilised laser system, wherein the wavelength-stabilised laser system comprises:
a laser cavity which includes:
an amplifier;
a modelocking element; and
a fiber Bragg grating which acts as a narrowband reflector,
a mount to which the fiber Bragg grating is mounted under tension;
a tension control system to adjust the tension of the fiber Bragg grating;
a measurement device to provide a measurement output related to a current operating wavelength of the fiber Bragg grating, and
a controller to wavelength-stabilise the laser by controlling the tension control system responsive to the measurement output.
The foregoing are disclosed in Nati as set forth above as per claim 1.
Nati in view of Dong as set forth above does not disclose:
a pulse stretcher configured to temporally stretch pulses generated by the pulse source;
one or more optical amplifiers for amplifying pulses stretched by the pulse stretcher, and
a pulse compressor for temporally compressing pulses amplified by the one or more optical amplifiers.
Dong provides (¶ 137):
"A generic system for the amplification of fs or ps pulses, based on the chirped pulse amplification technique is shown in FIG. 20A. System 300 comprises a seed source 301, an optical gate 302, a waveguide rod amplifier 303 as well as a pulse compressor 304. The output from the system and the direction of light propagation is designated with arrow 305. In some embodiments, seed source 301 may comprise a laser that produces femtosecond or picosecond pulses, a pulse stretcher, and several pre-amplifier stages."
As such, per the obviousness analysis above applied mutatis mutandis here, the combination of Nati in view of Dong as set forth above provides:
a pulse stretcher configured to temporally stretch pulses generated by the pulse source;
one or more optical amplifiers for amplifying pulses stretched by the pulse stretcher, and
a pulse compressor for temporally compressing pulses amplified by the one or more optical amplifiers.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over .
With respect to claim 3, Nati as set forth above discloses the laser system of claim 1, including one wherein
the at least part of the mount comprises aluminium.
The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination.
Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) (Claims to a printing ink comprising a solvent having the vapor pressure characteristics of butyl carbitol so that the ink would not dry at room temperature but would dry quickly upon heating were held invalid over a reference teaching a printing ink made with a different solvent that was nonvolatile at room temperature but highly volatile when heated in view of an article which taught the desired boiling point and vapor pressure characteristics of a solvent for printing inks and a catalog teaching the boiling point and vapor pressure characteristics of butyl carbitol. “Reading a list and selecting a known compound to meet known requirements is no more ingenious than selecting the last piece to put in the last opening in a jig-saw puzzle.” 325 U.S. at 335, 65 USPQ at 301.).
See also In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (selection of a known plastic to make a container of a type made of plastics prior to the invention was held to be obvious); Ryco, Inc. v. Ag-Bag Corp., 857 F.2d 1418, 8 USPQ2d 1323 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (Claimed agricultural bagging machine, which differed from a prior art machine only in that the brake means were hydraulically operated rather than mechanically operated, was held to be obvious over the prior art machine in view of references which disclosed hydraulic brakes for performing the same function, albeit in a different environment.). MPEP § 2144.07.
Consequently, the recitation of specific materials (here, aluminium/aluminum) is seen as obvious. Aluminium is a corrosion-resistant material that is lightweight and conductive (both thermally and electrically). As such, in thermally-controlled systems, it makes for a valid base or mount.
Conclusion
Applicant’s publication US 20250105581 A1 published March 27, 2025 is cited.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited references have elements related to Applicant’s disclosure and/or claims or are otherwise associated with the other cited references, particularly with respect to pulsed laser systems and the like.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW JORDAN whose telephone number is (571) 270-1571. The examiner can normally be reached most days 1000-1800 PACIFIC TIME ZONE (messages are returned).
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. While examiner does not examine over the phone (see 37 C.F.R. § 1.2), examiner is glad to clarify or discuss issues so long as it forwards prosecution.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Thomas (Tom) HOLLWEG can be reached at (571) 270-1739. 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.
/Andrew Jordan/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
V: (571) 270-1571 (Pacific time)
F: (571) 270-2571
June 16, 2026
Prosecution Insights