RAMAN SPECTROSCOPY SYSTEM

DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 08/05/2026 has been entered. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 08/05/2026 have been fully considered and are persuasive, the previous rejections of the claims in view of Levenson have been withdrawn. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1, 20-22, 24-25 and 27-28 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 5-6, 11-12, 20, and 27-30 of U.S. Patent No. 12,203,862. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the pending claims are broader in scope and are therefore anticipated by the patented claims. Claims 1, and 27-28 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 37 and 40 of co-pending Application No. 18/774,723 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claims are broader in scope and are therefore anticipated by the co-pending claims. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Claims 1, 22, 24 and 26-28 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 30, 33, and 35-37 of U.S. Patent No. 12,618,714. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the pending claims are broader in scope and are therefore anticipated by the patented claims. Claims 1, 21-24 and 26-28 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 6-8, 21, 23 and 31-32 of co-pending Application No. 18/762,415 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claims are broader in scope and are therefore anticipated by the co-pending claims. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Claims 1, and 22-24 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 20, 22, and 25 of co-pending Application No. 18/892,075 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claims are broader in scope and are therefore anticipated by the co-pending claims. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Claims 1, 22-24 and 26 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3, 18, and 23-24 of co-pending Application No. 18/930,095 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claims are broader in scope and are therefore anticipated by the co-pending claims. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Claims 1, 22 and 27 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 25 and 29 of co-pending Application No. 19/020,938 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claims are broader in scope and are therefore anticipated by the co-pending claims. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Claim 1 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of co-pending Application No. 19/187,630 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claims are broader in scope and are therefore anticipated by the co-pending claims. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Allowable Subject Matter As to claim 1 and 27-28, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious, a system and method for “measuring a Raman signal”, wherein the system further comprises “a third light source configured to produce a third beam of light at a third frequency distinct from the first frequency and second frequency”, and wherein each detector is “configured to coherently mix a portion of the Raman signal with at least a portion of the third beam of light”, in combination with the rest of the limitations of the claim. Claims 2-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, in view of the double patenting rejections presented above. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN M HANSEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1736. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8am to 4pm. 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. JONATHAN M. HANSEN Primary Examiner Art Unit 2877 /JONATHAN M HANSEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877