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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed on 10/29/2024 and 11/29/2024 has been entered and considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings filed on 07/29/2024, has been accepted for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 10 and 13-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hermann (2020/0025591 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hermann discloses an optical position-measuring device (figs. 1-6) (see abstract) for determining a relative position of two objects (20 and 10) that are movable relative to one another along at least a first and a second measurement direction [pars. 0012-15, 0033], the optical position-measuring device comprising:
a plurality of scanning units which are connected to a first one of the two objects (20) and each include at least one light source (22), one or more gratings (23.1), and a detector assembly (25.1 and/or 25.2) [par. 0034]; and
a scale a scale 10 which is connected to a second one a scale carrier 11 of the two objects, the scale comprising:
a two-dimensional measuring graduation 12.1a, 12.1b, 12.2a, 12.2b composed of structure elements which are periodically arranged along the first and second measurement directions two measurement directions x, y and have different optical properties [pars. 0013, 0037], and
a plurality of reference marks 13.1, 13.2 which are integrated into the measuring graduation and have periodic and aperiodic sub-regions, wherein scanning of a respective one of the reference marks 13.1, 13.2 allows a respective reference signal to be generated at a defined reference position along one of the measurement directions two measurement directions x, y (see abstract)[pars. 0004, 0013], and wherein at least the periodic sub-regions of the reference marks 13.1, 13.2 have a higher scanning efficiency than a surrounding part of the measuring graduation having different optical properties [pars. 0037-45].
As to claims 2, 4-5 and 10, Hermann also discloses a structure that is use in the optical position-measuring device system that is implementing limitations such as, wherein the reference marks 13.1, 13.2 include two rectangular reference marks arranged in the shape of an L (formed by x and y axis) that are integrated in the measuring graduation, a first one of the two rectangular reference marks being associated with the first measurement direction one of the directions x, y, and a second one of the two rectangular reference marks being associated with the second measurement direction included in the one of the two measurement directions x, y, which is oriented orthogonal to the first measurement direction two measurement directions x, y, as can be seen in depicted (fig. 2) [pars. 0015-16, 0037-45] (claim 2); wherein the two rectangular reference marks 13.1, 13.2 are arranged in respective peripheral regions of the measuring graduation, as can be seen in depicted (fig. 2) [pars. 0015-16, 0037-45] (claim 4);
wherein the two rectangular reference marks 13.1, 13.2 are each spaced from a respective edge of the measuring graduation by a respective distance that is smaller than a distance between two adjacent ones of the scanning units two scanning units (20) (see abstract) [pars. 0004, 0013, 0030, 0033] that are disposed along a respective one of the measurement directions included in two measurement directions x, y with which a respective one of the two rectangular reference marks 13.1, 13.2 is associated (claim 5); and
wherein the periodic sub-regions 14.2, 14.1 of the reference marks 13.1, 13.2 each have arranged therein a one-dimensional incremental graduation 12.1, 12.2, x2’ based on the depicted structure that has an increased scanning efficiency in a form of a higher diffraction efficiency based on the shaped regions of the grating structures as compared to the surrounding part of the measuring graduation as can be seen in depicted drawing (fig. 2) [pars. 0040-45] (claim 10)
As to claims 13-18, Hermann also discloses a structure that is use in the optical position-measuring device system that is implementing limitations such as, wherein the periodic sub-regions and the aperiodic sub-regions of the reference marks 13.1, 13.2 have an increased scanning efficiency in a form of a higher reflectivity as compared to the surrounding part of the measuring graduation grating structures increases from axis of symmetry S symmetrically outwardly perpendicularly to incremental graduation direction [pars. 0038-45] (claim 13); wherein the periodic sub-regions 12.1a, 12.1b, 12.2a, 12.2b of the reference marks 13.1, 13.2 have arranged therein a cross grating which, like the surrounding part of the measuring graduation, is configured as a reflection phase grating, both the periodic sub-regions and the aperiodic sub-regions of the reference marks having a reflection-enhancing coating [pars. 0028, 0037] (claim 14);
wherein the aperiodic sub-regions 12.1a, 12.1b, 12.2a, 12.2b of the reference marks 13.1, 13.2 each have chirped grating structures in which grating periods vary spatially symmetrically with respect to a central axis of symmetry grating structures increases from axis of symmetry S symmetrically outwardly perpendicularly to incremental graduation direction [pars. 0038-45] (claim 15);
wherein the periodic sub-regions and the aperiodic sub-regions 12.1a, 12.1b, 12.2a, 12.2b of the reference marks 13.1, 13.2 are arranged periodically in a direction perpendicular to one of the measurement directions measurement directions x, y (claim 16); wherein the periodic sub-regions and the aperiodic sub-regions of the reference marks 13.1, 13.2 have a surface area ratio different from 1:1 [pars. 0022, 0024, 0045] (claim 17); and wherein the periodic sub-regions 14.1, 14.2 of the reference marks 13.1, 13.2 have arranged therein one- or two-dimensional periodic grating structures having periodicities along one or both of the first and second measurement directions that are equal to periodicities of the surrounding part of the measuring graduation along the one or both of the first and second measurement directions measurement directions x, y [pars. 0022, 0024, 0045, 0050] (Hermann, claim 10 and 12) (claim 18).
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 3, 6-9, and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hermann (2020/0025591 A1).
As to claims 3 and 7, Hermann teaches of the features of claims 3 and 7, as applied to claim 1, comprising the optical position-measuring device for determining the relative position of two objects includes two scanning units (20) (see abstract)which are connected to one of the objects and each include a light source, one or more gratings and a detector assembly, and teaches of wherein the scanning units include a first scanning unit that is associated with the first measurement direction a first one of the measurement directions x. y, (see abstract) [par. 0033],
Hermann is silent regarding the constructional change of wherein the scanning units include a second and a third scanning unit that are associated with the second measurement direction, the second and third scanning units not being offset with respect to each other along the second measurement direction (claim 3); and wherein: the scanning units include four scanning units that are disposed on the first one of the two objects opposite the measuring graduation; a first and a fourth scanning unit of the four scanning units are associated with the first measurement direction, and are not offset with respect to each other along the second measurement direction; and a second and a third scanning unit of the four scanning units are associated with the second measurement direction, and are not offset with respect to each other along the second measurement direction (claim 7).
Hermann teaches of at least two scanning units (see abstract) [par. 0033] wherein one of the scanning units is associated with the second measurement direction one of the measurement directions x, y, Hermann further teaches that changes and modifications may be made by those of ordinary skill within the scope of the following claims [par. 0054].
However, even though, Hermann fail to teach the constructional changes in the device of claim 1, as that claimed by Applicants claims 3 and 7, the constructional changes differences are considered obvious design duplication of parts and design variation that allow for additional scanning of the plurality measurement direction of one of the measurement directions x. y, and adding additional parts in order to improve signal to be generated at a defined reference position along the measurement directions.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Hermann in the manner set forth in applicant's claims 3 and 7, in order to improve signal to be generated at a defined reference position along the measurement directions, since it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art, In re Stevens, 101 USPQ 284 (CC1954), and since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
As to claims 6, 8 and 9, Hermann teaches of the features of claims 6, 8 and 9, as applied to claim 1, comprising a plurality of reference marks 13.1, 13.2 which are integrated into the measuring graduation and have periodic and aperiodic sub-regions, wherein scanning of a respective one of the reference marks 13.1, 13.2 allows a respective reference signal to be generated at a defined reference position along one of the measurement directions two measurement directions x, y (see abstract) [pars. 0004, 0013], and wherein at least the periodic sub-regions of the reference marks 13.1, 13.2 have a higher scanning efficiency than a surrounding part of the measuring graduation having different optical properties [pars. 0037-45].
Hermann is silent regarding the constructional change of wherein the reference marks include three rectangular reference marks arranged in the shape of a U that are integrated into the measuring graduation, two of the three rectangular reference marks being associated with one of the measurement directions, and another one of the three rectangular reference marks being associated with a different one of the measurement directions, the measurement directions being oriented orthogonal to each other (claim 6); wherein the three rectangular reference marks are arranged in respective peripheral regions of the measuring graduation (claim 8); and wherein the three rectangular reference marks are each spaced from a respective edge of the measuring graduation by a respective distance that is smaller than a distance between two adjacent ones of the scanning units that are disposed along a respective one of the measurement directions with which a respective one of the three rectangular reference marks is associated (claim 9).
Hermann teaches of at least two scanning units (see abstract) [par. 0033] wherein one of the scanning units is associated with some sort of measurement direction one of the measurement directions x, y, z axis, as can be seen in depicted drawing (figs. 1-6), wherein the rectangular reference marks 13.1, 13.2 arranged in some sort shape that are integrated into the measuring/incremental graduation 12.1, 12.2. within graduation regions 14.2a, 14.2b. Hermann further teaches that changes and modifications may be made by those of ordinary skill within the scope of the following claims [par. 0054].
However, even though, Hermann fail to teach the constructional changes in the device of claim 1, as that claimed by Applicants claim 6, the constructional changes differences are considered obvious design variation of duplication and rearrangement of parts that allow for additional scanning of the marks in an additional measurement direction one of the measurement directions that would include(s) any of x, y and z axis direction(s), in order to improve signal to be generated at a defined reference position along the measurement directions distinct from any other measurement direction.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Hermann in the manner set forth in applicant's claims 6, 8 and 9, in order to improve and generate multiple signal at a defined reference position along multiple measurement directions, since it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art, In re Stevens, 101 USPQ 284 (CC1954).
As to claim 11, Hermann teaches of the features of claim 11, as applied to claim 10, comprising grating structure with shaped regions, the shaped regions having a periodic grating structure with a reference mark grating constant and function as periodic portions 14.1 of reference mark 13.2., the configuration of incremental graduation 12.2, graduation regions 14.1a, 14.1b having different optical properties, here different phase shifts, are arranged within the strip-shaped regions periodically along incremental graduation direction x.sub.2′ with first reference mark grating constant, the grating structures increases from axis of symmetry S symmetrically outwardly perpendicularly to incremental graduation direction x2′ [pars. 0040-45], as can be seen in depicted drawing (fig. 2).
Hermann fail to explicitly specify the constructional changes of wherein the one-dimensional incremental graduation in the periodic sub-regions of the reference marks only causes diffraction into +/- 1st diffraction orders along one of the first and second measurement directions, while in the surrounding part of the measuring graduation, diffraction into +/- 1st diffraction orders results along both the first and second measurement directions.
However, even though, Hermann fail to teach the constructional changes in the device of claim 1, as that claimed by Applicants claim 11, the constructional changes differences are considered obvious design variation of diffraction orders that would corresponds to a direct transmission of light through the grating that represent the discrete angles at which constructive interference occurs for light passing through or reflecting off the grating that determines the angles at which different orders are diffracted and/or diffracted based on wavelength and/or based on incident light being separated into other diffraction orders at higher angles.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Hermann in the manner set forth in applicant's claim 10, in order to generate diffraction order(s) accurately in a certain diffraction orders along a certain and/or multiple measurement directions, since it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art, In re Stevens, 101 USPQ 284 (CC1954).
As to claim 12, Hermann teaches of the features of claim 12, wherein the incremental graduation in the periodic sub-regions of the reference marks 13.1, 13.2 and the surrounding part of the measuring graduation are configured as reflection phase gratings [pars. 0040-45] (figs. 2-3).
Additional Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references listed in the attached form PTO-892 teach of other prior art optical position-measuring device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Isiaka Akanbi whose telephone number is (571) 272-8658. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Tarifur R. Chowdhury can be reached on (571) 272-2287. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 703-872-9306.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/ISIAKA O AKANBI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877