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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Light collection optical system configured to; Claim 1, 15, 16, 18, 19
Spectroscopic element configured to; Claim 1, 18, 19
Imaging unit including a plurality of light receiving elements arrayed in a row direction and a column direction, and configured to; Claim 1, 18, 19
Acquisition unit configured to; Claim 1, 10, 18, 19
Intensification processing unit configured to; Claim 1, 11, 18, 19
Placement unit includes a mechanism configured to; Claim 16, 17
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-3, 5-10, 13-17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-9, 11, 15-19 of U.S. Patent No. 12,228,517. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Patent 12,228,517 Application 18/827,253
1. An identification apparatus comprising: a plurality of light collection optical systems configured to collect scattered light from a plurality of test substances; a spectroscopic element configured to disperse a plurality of light beams from the plurality of light collection optical systems; an imaging unit including a plurality of light receiving elements arrayed in a row direction and a column direction, and configured to receive a plurality of dispersion spectra projected from the spectroscopic element and projected in the row direction; an acquisition unit configured to acquire spectroscopic information of at least any of the plurality of test substances based on an output signal from the imaging unit; and an intensification processing unit configured to perform row direction binning processing including integrating output signals of the plurality of light receiving elements existing at different positions in the row direction, wherein the acquisition unit includes the intensification processing unit.
4. The identification apparatus according to claim 2, wherein, where an element pitch in the row direction of the light receiving elements is denoted by Pr and a length in a row direction of a size Φmt of a projected image of monochromatic light in a predetermined wavelength that is projected onto the imaging unit when each light collection optical system collects the monochromatic light is denoted by Lmtr, the predetermined number of the elements is smaller than or equal to int (Lmtr/Pr)×2, and wherein F(x)=int(x) means an integer of a real number x.
1. An identification apparatus comprising: a plurality of light collection optical systems configured to collect scattered light from a plurality of test substances; a spectroscopic element configured to disperse a plurality of light beams from the plurality of light collection optical systems; an imaging unit including a plurality of light receiving elements arrayed in a row direction and a column direction, and configured to receive a plurality of dispersion spectra projected from the spectroscopic element and projected in the row direction; an acquisition unit configured to acquire spectroscopic information of at least any of the plurality of test substances based on an output signal from the imaging unit; and an intensification processing unit configured to perform row direction binning processing including integrating output signals of the plurality of light receiving elements existing at different positions in the row direction in association with a predetermined number of the light receiving elements adjacent in the row direction, wherein, where an element pitch in the row direction of the light receiving elements is denoted by Pr and a length in a row direction of a size Φmt of a projected image of monochromatic light in a predetermined wavelength that is projected onto the imaging unit when each light collection optical system collects the monochromatic light is denoted by Lmtr, the predetermined number of the elements is smaller than or equal to int(Lmtr/Pr)×2, where F(x)=int(x) means an integer of a real number x, and wherein a full width at half maximum of a wavelength of the monochromatic light is shorter than a wavelength width of a spectral limit of the spectroscopic element.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to use the full width at half maximum of a wavelength of the monochromatic light is shorter than a wavelength width of a spectral limit of the spectroscopic element since it is well known in the art that it is a fundamental principle in spectroscopy and that the Full Width at Half Maximum (FWHM) of a truly monochromatic light source is narrower (shorter) than the spectral bandwidth (spectral limit) of the spectroscopic instrument.
2. The identification apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the row direction binning processing includes processing of integrating output signals in association with a predetermined number of the light receiving elements adjacent in the row direction.
2. The identification apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the row direction binning processing includes processing of integrating output signals in association with a predetermined number of the light receiving elements adjacent in the row direction.
3. The identification apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the predetermined number of the elements is larger than or equal to 2.
3. The identification apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the predetermined number of the elements is larger than or equal to 2.
5. The identification apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the predetermined number of the elements is smaller than or equal to int (Lmtr/Pr).
5. The identification apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the predetermined number of the elements is smaller than or equal to int(Lmtr/Pr).
6. The identification apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the predetermined number of the elements varies depending on a spectral wavelength on the dispersed spectrum image.
6. The identification apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the predetermined number of the elements varies depending on a spectral wavelength on the dispersed spectrum image.
7. The identification apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the predetermined number of the elements is set based on information regarding a property of a test substance or information regarding a material candidate to be identified by the acquisition unit.
7. The identification apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the predetermined number of the elements is set based on information regarding a property of a test substance or information regarding a material candidate to be identified by the acquisition unit.
8. The identification apparatus according to claim 7, wherein the information regarding the property of the test substance includes at least any of information regarding spectral reflectance in a visible light range of the test substance, information regarding a height of the test substance, and information regarding surface roughness of the test substance.
8. The identification apparatus according to claim 7, wherein the information regarding the property of the test substance includes at least any of information regarding spectral reflectance in a visible light range of the test substance, information regarding a height of the test substance, and information regarding surface roughness of the test substance.
9. The identification apparatus according to claim 7, wherein at least any one of the information regarding the property of the test substance and the information regarding the material candidate includes prior information to be acquired before a time at which the light collection optical system collects light.
9. The identification apparatus according to claim 7, wherein at least any one of the information regarding the property of the test substance and the information regarding the material candidate includes prior information to be acquired before a time at which the light collection optical system collects light.
11. The identification apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the acquisition unit acquires spectroscopic information regarding one of the plurality of test substances based on a binning signal having been subjected to the row direction binning processing.
10. The identification apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the acquisition unit acquires spectroscopic information regarding one of the plurality of test substances based on a binning signal having been subjected to the row direction binning processing.
15. The identification apparatus according to claim 13, wherein, where an element pitch in the column direction of the light receiving elements is denoted by Pc and a length in a column direction of a size Φmt of a projected image of monochromatic light in a predetermined wavelength that is projected onto the imaging unit when each light collection optical system collects the monochromatic light is denoted by Lmtc, the predetermined number of the rows is smaller than or equal to int (Lmtc/Pc)×2, and wherein F(x)=int(x) means an integer of a real number x.
13. The identification apparatus according to claim 11, wherein, where an element pitch in the column direction of the light receiving elements is denoted by Pc and a length in a column direction of a size Φmt of a projected image of monochromatic light in a predetermined wavelength that is projected onto the imaging unit when each light collection optical system collects the monochromatic light is denoted by Lmtc, the predetermined number of the rows is smaller than or equal to int(Lmtc/Pc)×2, and wherein F(x)=int(x) means an integer of a real number x.
16. The identification apparatus according to claim 15, wherein the predetermined number of rows is smaller than or equal to int(Lmtc/Pc).
14. The identification apparatus according to claim 13, wherein the predetermined number of rows is smaller than or equal to int(Lmtc/Pc).
17. The identification apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the light collection optical systems collect Raman-scattered light from the test substances.
15. The identification apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the light collection optical systems collect Raman-scattered light from the test substances.
18. The identification apparatus according to claim 17, wherein the light collection optical system includes an effective light collection region, wherein, in the effective light collection region, the light collection optical system further includes a placement unit on which the test substance is placed, and wherein the placement unit includes a mechanism configured to move the test substance placed in the effective light collection region to an outside of the effective light collection region.
16. The identification apparatus according to claim 15, wherein the light collection optical system includes an effective light collection region, wherein, in the effective light collection region, the light collection optical system further includes a placement unit on which the test substance is placed, and wherein the placement unit includes a mechanism configured to move the test substance placed in the effective light collection region to an outside of the effective light collection region.
19. The identification apparatus according to claim 18, wherein the placement unit is configured to move the plurality of test substances in a predetermined direction.
17. The identification apparatus according to claim 16, wherein the placement unit is configured to move the plurality of test substances in a predetermined direction.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18-24 are allowed over the prior art of record.
Claims 4, 11-12 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 18-19, the closest prior arts of JP 2011226821 and WO 2019/111785 disclose identification devices for identifying of objects using spectroscopic analysis having light collection optics, spectroscopic elements, and an imaging unit. The prior arts fails to disclose or make obvious the use of an intensification processing unit configured to perform row direction binning processing including integrating output signals of the plurality of light receiving elements existing at different positions in the row direction, wherein the row direction binning processing includes apodization processing of applying a predetermined weight to the output signals depending on the plurality of light receiving elements, and processing of integrating the output signals having been subjected to apodization processing or an intensification processing unit configured to perform row direction binning processing including integrating output signals of the plurality of light receiving elements existing at different positions in the row direction wherein the intensification processing unit performs saturation determination of the light receiving elements, and performs the row direction binning processing based on a determination result of the saturation determination, and in combination with the other recited limitations of claims 18, 19. Claims 20-24 are allowed by the virtue of dependency on the allowed claim 18.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL PATRICK STAFIRA whose telephone number is (571)272-2430. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30am-3pm.
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.
/MICHAEL P STAFIRA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877 April 10, 2026
Prosecution Insights