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
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group IB4 invention (figures 2b and 7a), including claims 1-16, in the reply filed on 07/15/2026 is acknowledged.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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, 4-10, 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rice et al. (US 2007/0201795).
Regarding claim 1, Rice et al. (figure 2) discloses an apparatus for combining a plurality of coherent laser beams to form at least one combined laser beam, the apparatus comprising:
a phase setting device for setting a respective phase difference between the coherent laser beams (phase modulator 28; see at least paragraph 0021),
a gain device for amplifying the coherent laser beams, wherein the amplified coherent laser beams are output coupled from the gain device (amplifier 30; see at least paragraph 0020), and
a measuring device configured to measure a respective actual phase difference between one of the amplified coherent laser beams and a further one of the amplified coherent laser beams or between the one of the amplified coherent laser beams and at least one reference laser beam (heterodyne detector 58; see at least paragraph 0021).
Regarding claim 2, Rice et al. (figure 2) discloses wherein the measuring device is configured to measure respective actual phase differences between different pairs of the amplified coherent laser beams or to measure respective actual phase differences between each one of the amplified coherent laser beams and the at least one reference laser beam (heterodyne detector 58; see at least paragraphs 0021-0024).
Regarding claim 4, Rice et al. (figure 2) discloses wherein the coherent laser beams comprise N coherent laser beams, and the amplified coherent laser beams comprise N amplified coherent laser beams, and wherein the measuring device is configured to measure actual phase differences between N-1 different pairs of amplified coherent laser beams or to measure a respective actual phase difference between each respective one of the N amplified coherent laser beams and the at least one reference laser beam (heterodyne detector 58; see at least paragraphs 0020-0024).
Regarding claim 5, Rice et al. (figure 2) discloses wherein the respective actual phase difference between a first one of the amplified coherent laser beams and a further one of the amplified coherent laser beams is measured, with the first one of the amplified coherent laser beams being different in all measurements and the further one of the amplified coherent laser beams being different in all measurements, or the further one of the amplified coherent laser beams being same in a subset of the measurements or in all measurements (heterodyne detector 58; see at least paragraphs 0020-0024).
Regarding claim 6, Rice et al. (figure 2) discloses an output coupling device for partial output coupling of the amplified coherent laser beams, wherein the partially output coupled amplified coherent laser beams are supplied to the measuring device in order to measure a respective actual phase difference between the amplified coherent laser beams (beam-splitting mirror 34; see at least paragraph 0020).
Regarding claim 7, Rice et al. (figure 2) discloses wherein the measuring device is used to spatially superimpose a component of the one of the amplified coherent laser beams and a component of the further one of the amplified coherent laser beams, or is used to spatially superimpose the component of the one of the amplified coherent laser beams and the at least one reference laser beam (heterodyne detector 58; see at least paragraphs 0020-0024).
The limitations “wherein the measuring device is used to spatially superimpose a component of the one of the amplified coherent laser beams and a component of the further one of the amplified coherent laser beams, or is used to spatially superimpose the component of the one of the amplified coherent laser beams and the at least one reference laser beam” are regarded as intended use limitations. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In this case, the light source of the display is not claimed.
Regarding claim 8, Rice et al. (figure 2) discloses wherein the coherent laser beams comprise N coherent laser beams, and the amplified coherent laser beams comprise N amplified coherent laser beams, and wherein the measuring device comprises at least N-1 measuring units, each measuring unit being configured to measure the respective actual phase difference between the one of the N amplified coherent laser beams and the further one of the N amplified coherent laser beams, or wherein the measuring device comprises at least N measuring units, each measuring unit being configured to measure the respective actual phase difference between the one of the N amplified coherent laser beams and the at least one reference laser beam (heterodyne detector 58; see at least paragraphs 0020-0024).
Regarding claim 10, Rice et al. (figure 2) discloses wherein at least one measuring unit comprises at least two measuring elements, and wherein the measuring device is configured to supply each of the at least two measuring elements with a respective pair of laser pulses, the respective pair of laser pulses comprising one laser pulse from the one of the N amplified coherent laser beams and one laser pulse from the further one of the N amplified coherent laser beams or the at least one reference laser beam (heterodyne detector 58; see at least paragraphs 0020-0024).
Regarding claim 12, Rice et al. (figure 2) discloses wherein the measuring device is configured to control the phase setting device in order to subject the respective actual phase difference between the amplified coherent laser beams to an open-loop and/or a closed-loop control (heterodyne detector 58; see at least paragraphs 0020-0024).
Regarding claim 13, Rice et al. (figure 2) discloses a beam splitting device for splitting an input laser beam into the plurality of coherent laser beams (26).
Regarding claim 14, Rice et al. (figure 2) discloses a combination device for combining the amplified coherent laser beams to form the at least one combined laser beam (40, 62).
Regarding claim 15, Rice et al. (figure 2) discloses wherein the combination device comprises at least one microlens array and/or at last one diffractive optical element (40, 62).
Regarding claim 16, Rice et al. (figure 2) discloses a laser system comprising at least one laser source for providing coherent laser beams and an apparatus for combining the coherent laser beams as claimed in claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 3, 9, 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rice et al. (US 2007/0201795).
Regarding claim 3, Rice et al. discloses the limitations as shown in the rejection of claim 1 above. However, Rice et al. is silent regarding wherein the measuring device comprises a photonic integrated circuit. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a photonic integrated circuit to build optical heterodyne detector since it was known in the art that such modification would eliminate bulky free-space optics, reduce parasitic electrical capacitance, and dramatically improve mechanical and thermal stability.
Regarding claim 9, Rice et al. (figure 2) discloses wherein at least one measuring unit comprises a single measuring element, with the one of the N amplified coherent laser beams and the further one of the N amplified coherent laser beams or the at least one reference laser beam being spatially superimposed on the measuring element. However, Rice et al. is silent regarding wherein the measuring device is configured to supply the measuring element and/or the at least one measuring unit with a plurality of pairs of laser pulses with a defined time offset from each other, each pair of laser pulses comprising one laser pulse from the one of the N amplified coherent laser beams and one laser pulse from the further one of the N amplified coherent laser beams or the reference laser beam. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the measuring device to supply the measuring element and/or the at least one measuring unit with a plurality of pairs of laser pulses with a defined time offset from each other, each pair of laser pulses comprising one laser pulse from the one of the N amplified coherent laser beams and one laser pulse from the further one of the N amplified coherent laser beams or the reference laser beam in order to make it possible to control the time overlap of the laser beams and thus to create an improved measurement.
Regarding claim 11, Rice et al. discloses the limitations as shown in the rejection of claim 10 above. However, Rice et al. is silent regarding wherein at least two different pairs of laser pulses are provided to the at least two measuring elements, the at least two different pairs of laser pulses having different defined offset phase differences. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the measuring device to provide at least two different pairs of laser pulses to the at least two measuring elements, the at least two different pairs of laser pulses having different defined offset phase differences.in order to make it possible to control the time overlap of the laser beams and thus to create an improved measurement.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAUREN NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1428. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday, 8:00 AM -6:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jennifer Carruth, can be reached at 571-272-9791. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/LAUREN NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights