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 .
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being by Andreev et al. [PG. Pub. No.: US 2017/0219621 A1].
With regards to claim 20, Andreev discloses a scanning probe microscope (¶0022) comprising: a cantilever with a probe (a cantilever probe element 110, Fig. 1, ¶0033); a light source (a source of light 126, which in operation emits a beam 130 of light, element 126, Fig 1, ¶0033) to irradiate the probe with a focused optical beam (elements 110, 122, 130, cantilever probe 110 is equipped with a tip 122 focusing a portion of the beam 130 onto the tip 122, Fig. 1, ¶0033); an optical system (targeted illumination of the tip 122 through an optical system 134, Fig 1, ¶0033) to adjust a focus position of the focused optical beam on the probe (element 122, 130, 134, the optical system 134 contains a component that changes a degree of spatial divergence of the beam 130 passing therethrough (such as, for example, a lens or a curved mirror), focusing a portion of the beam 130 onto the tip 122, Fig 1, ¶0033); a dither device connected to the cantilever to drive the cantilever to vibrate (the probe 122 is vibrated, in operation, at a frequency O that is substantially close to its resonance and is held in operational feedback in close proximity to the sample 118 by the AFM [atomic force microscope] controller 114, Fig 1, ¶0038); an optical detection system (an optical detector 138 which receives a portion of the illuminating beam 130 that has been backscattered and/or reflected from the tip 122 Fig 1, ¶0033) to measure a response of the probe with respect to the focused optical beam (¶0029); and a control unit (control-and-data-processing circuitry unit 142, Fig. 1, ¶0033) connected to the optical system (mutual lateral and/or angular repositioning between the beam 130 and the optical system 134 Various spatial adjustments are effectuated for example with a set of micro-positioners that are controlled by the circuitry unit 142, Fig 1, ¶0034),) and the optical detection system to select a preferred focus position of the focused optical beam on the probe based on the measured response of the cantilever for different adjusted focus positions of the focused optical beam on the probe (optical detector 138 which is interfaced with the control-and-data -processing circuitry unit 142 to select a preferred focus position of the focused optical beam on the probe based on the measured response of the cantilever for different adjusted focus positions of the focused optical beam on the probe (Fig 1, ¶0033 & ¶0069), reposition the optical system to cause a focal spot of a beam of light, that has been delivered to the probe through said optical system, spatially coincide with a tip of the probe such as to maximize an irradiance, of the spatial light pattern, that is caused by a near-field optical wave produced only by the tip in response to interaction thereof with the beam of light, ¶0069) .
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 12-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andreev et al. [PG. Pub. No.: US 2017/0219621 A1] in view of Dave et al. [PG. Pub. No.: US 2016/0328635 A1].
With regards to claim 1, Andreev discloses a method of operating a scanning probe microscope (Near-field scanning optical microscopy acquisition of an image with the use of a probe, ¶0022) using a focused optical beam (130 focused by the optical system thereof 134, Fig. 1) on a probe (110, with the tip 122) of the scanning probe microscope (cantilever probe 110 is equipped with a tip 122 focusing a portion of the beam 130 onto the tip 122, ¶0033) the method comprising: shining the focused optical beam (130) on the probe (110); adjusting a focus position of the focused optical beam (130) on the probe (110) relative to a tip (122) of the probe (elements 110, 122, 130; cantilever probe 110 is equipped with a tip 122 focusing a portion of the beam 130 onto the tip 122, Figs 1 & 2, ¶0027 & ¶0033); measuring at least one of a response of the probe and optical radiation scattered from the probe as a function of the position of the focused optical beam (Fig 1, element 138, ¶0033), an optical detector 138 which receives a portion of the illuminating beam 130 that has been backscattered and/or reflected from the tip 122, ¶0029, for evaluation of the identified optical characteristics, were formed in light re-radiated by a system's cantilever tip in response to such tip being targeted with the probe-illuminating beam... achieved by deliberately and intentionally making the tip and the focal plane of a probe-illuminating light beam spatially coincide, Fig 1, ¶0029 & ¶0033); and selecting a preferred focus position of the focused optical beam on the probe based on the measuring of the at least one of the response of the probe and the optical radiation scattered from the probe (reposition the optical system to cause a focal spot of a beam of light, that has been delivered to the probe through said optical system, spatially coincide with a tip of the probe such as to maximize an irradiance, of the spatial light pattern, that is caused by a near-field optical wave produced only by the tip in response to interaction thereof with the beam of light, ¶0069), however is silent on the scanning probe microscope without a presence of a sample to interact with the focused optical beam on the probe.
Dave teaches thereof a scanning probe microscopy (¶0028), atomic force microscopy (AFM) teaches performing autofocusing for later retrieval in advance of an imaging experiment to reduce focus-related delays (auto-focusing needs can be reduced or eliminated by measuring and storing substrate surface topography for later retrieval by an imaging system These steps can be done in advance of an imaging experiment to reduce focus- related delays during the experiment, ABSTRACT) and suggests scanning the imaging substrate before samples are loaded, such that scanning the imaging substrate occurs, for example: before samples are loaded onto the substrate for imaging, ¶0042).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to shine the focused optical beam on the probe of the scanning probe microscope of BRUKER without a presence of a sample to interact with the focused optical beam on the probe to reduce focus- related delays, based upon Dave teachings, (ABSTRACT, ¶ 0042).
With regards to claim 2, Andreev discloses wherein selecting the preferred focus position of the focused optical beam on the probe comprises: modulating the intensity of the optical beam intensity to produce modulated optical beam (the determination of the optimal alignment between the focal spot of the irradiating beam and the tip of the probe of the system can be effectuated while the irradiating beam is modulated varying the power of the tip-illuminating beam, (¶0030); measuring the amplitude of vibration of the probe in response to the modulated optical beam as a function of the focus position (the complex-valued s-SNOM data (which may be, at the same time, multivariable in that it include complex-valued amplitude/phase sets of data representing the results of demodulation of the detected signal at the 1st, 2nd, 3rd harmonics of the frequency of the probe vibration, and, optionally, the results of the DCSD measurements) can be obtained from the values of irradiance interferometrically acquired at the detector 138 both the amplitude and phase values can be calculated from two data sets taken, ¶0037); and selecting the preferred focus position based on the measured amplitude (the optical data representing complex-valued physical parameters is acquired, which contains information useful for optimized alignment of the probe tip 122 and the illuminating beam 130A and coded in both amplitude and phase, ¶0046).
With regards to claim 3, Andreev discloses wherein the preferred focus position is a focus position at which the amplitude of vibration of the probe is maximum (the probe 122 is vibrated, in operation, at a frequency o that is substantially close to its resonance and is held in operational feedback in close proximity to the sample 118 by the AFM [atomic force microscope] controller 114, Fig 1, ¶0038).
With regards to claim 4, Andreev discloses selecting the preferred focus position of the focused optical beam on the probe comprises: modulating the intensity of the optical beam intensity to produce modulated optical beam (¶0030), the determination of the optimal alignment between the focal spot of the irradiating beam and the tip of the probe of the system can be effectuated while the irradiating beam is modulated varying the power of the tip-illuminating beam."), measuring the phase of vibration of the probe in response to the modulated optical beam relative to the phase of the modulation (the complex-valued s-SNOM data (which may be, at the same time, multivariable in that it include complex-valued amplitude/phase sets of data representing the results of demodulation of the detected signal at the 1st, 2nd, 3rd harmonics of the frequency of the probe vibration, and, optionally, the results of the DCSD measurements) can be obtained from the values of irradiance interferometrically acquired at the detector 138 both the amplitude and phase values can be calculated from two data sets taken, ¶0037); and selecting the preferred focus position of the beam based on measured phase relationship (the optical data representing complex-valued physical parameters is acquired, which contains information useful for optimized alignment of the probe tip 122 and the illuminating beam 130A and coded in both amplitude and phase, ¶0046).
With regards to claim 5, Andreev discloses selecting the preferred focus position of the focused optical beam on the probe comprises: vibrating the probe at a driving frequency with a driving source other than a modulation frequency of the optical beam (element 114, the probe 122 is vibrated, in operation, at a frequency o that is substantially close to its resonance and is held in operational feedback in close proximity to the sample 118 by the AFM [atomic force microscope] controller 114, Fig 1, ¶0038); measuring the amplitude of vibration of the cantilever at the driving frequency (II the complex-valued s-SNOM data (which may be, at the same time, multivariable in that it include complex-valued amplitude/phase sets of data representing the results of demodulation of the detected signal at the 1st, 2nd, 3rd harmonics of the frequency of the probe vibration, and, optionally, the results of the DCSD measurements) can be obtained from the values of irradiance interferometrically acquired at the detector 138 both the amplitude and phase values can be calculated from two data sets taken, ¶0037); and selecting the preferred focus position based on the vibration amplitude measurement (the optical data representing complex-valued physical parameters is acquired, which contains information useful for optimized alignment of the probe tip 122 and the illuminating beam 130A and coded in both amplitude and phase, ¶0046).
With regards to claim 6, Andreev discloses selecting the preferred focus position of the focused optical beam on the probe comprises: vibrating the probe at a driving frequency with a driving source other than a modulation frequency of the optical beam (the probe 122 is vibrated, in operation, at a frequency O that is substantially close to its resonance and is held in operational feedback in close proximity to the sample 118 by the AFM [atomic force microscope] controller 114, Fig. 1, 0038); measuring the phase of vibration of the cantilever at the driving frequency relative to the phase of the driving source as a function of the focus position (the complex-valued s-SNOM data (which may be, at the same time, multivariable in that it include complex-valued amplitude/phase sets of data representing the results of demodulation of the detected signal at the 1st, 2nd, 3rd harmonics of the frequency of the probe vibration, and, optionally, the results of the DCSD measurements) can be obtained from the values of irradiance interferometrically acquired at the detector 138 both the amplitude and phase values can be calculated from two data sets taken, ¶0037); and selecting the preferred focus position based on a measured phase relationship between the phase of vibration of the cantilever and the phase of the driving source (the optical data representing complex-valued physical parameters is acquired, which contains information useful for optimized alignment of the probe tip 122 and the illuminating beam 130A and coded in both amplitude and phase, ¶0046).
With regards to claim 12, Andreev discloses bringing a sample surface into and measuring one or more probe responses with respect to the sample surface (¶0033 & ¶0069), however is silent on measuring proximity with the probe tip with focus position of the beam adjusted according to the preferred focus position determined without the sample present.
Dave teaches thereof a scanning probe microscopy (¶0028), atomic force microscopy (AFM) teaches performing autofocusing for later retrieval in advance of an imaging experiment to reduce focus-related delays (auto-focusing needs can be reduced or eliminated by measuring and storing substrate surface topography for later retrieval by an imaging system These steps can be done in advance of an imaging experiment to reduce focus- related delays during the experiment, ABSTRACT) and suggests scanning the imaging substrate before samples are loaded, such that scanning the imaging substrate occurs, for example: before samples are loaded onto the substrate for imaging, ¶0042).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to shine the focused optical beam on the probe of the scanning probe microscope of BRUKER without a presence of a sample to interact with the focused optical beam on the probe to reduce focus- related delays, based upon Dave teachings, (ABSTRACT, ¶0042).
With regards to claim 13, Andreev discloses a method of operating a scanning probe microscope (Near-field scanning optical microscopy acquisition of an image with the use of a probe, ¶0022) using a focused optical beam on a probe (cantilever probe 110 is equipped with a tip 122 focusing a portion of the beam 130 onto the tip 122, ¶0033) of the scanning probe microscope , the method comprising: shining the focused optical beam on the probe of the scanning probe microscope (elements 110, 122, 130, ¶0033), cantilever probe 110 is equipped with a tip 122 focusing a portion of the beam 130 onto the tip 122, Fig 1, ¶0033), adjusting a focus position of the focused optical beam on the probe relative to a tip of the probe (Fig 1, element 122, 130, 134, ¶0033), the optical system 134 contains a component that changes a degree of spatial divergence of the beam 130 passing therethrough (such as, for example, a lens or a curved mirror), focusing a portion of the beam 130 onto the tip 122); (element 138; an optical detector 138 which receives a portion of the illuminating beam 130 that has been backscattered and/or reflected from the tip 122, Fig 1, ¶0033); (for evaluation of the identified optical characteristics, were formed in light re-radiated by a system's cantilever tip in response to such tip being targeted with the probe-illuminating beam achieved by deliberately and intentionally making the tip and the focal plane of a probe-illuminating light beam spatially coincide, ¶0029); and selecting a preferred focus position of the focused optical beam on the probe based on the measuring of the response of the probe (¶0069), reposition the optical system to cause a focal spot of a beam of light, that has been delivered to the probe through said optical system, spatially coincide with a tip of the probe such as to maximize an irradiance, of the spatial light pattern, that is caused by a near-field optical wave produced only by the tip in response to interaction thereof with the beam of light.measuring a response of the probe as a function of the position of the focused optical beam; and selecting a preferred focus position of the focused optical beam on the probe based on the measuring of the response of the probe (¶0069). Andreev fails to disclose shining the focused optical beam on the probe of the scanning probe microscope without a presence of a sample to interact with the focused optical beam on the probe without a presence of a sample to interact with the focused optical beam on the probe. However, Dave, drawn to scanning probe microscopy (OF atomic force microscopy (AFM), 0028), teaches performing autofocusing for later retrieval in advance of an imaging experiment to reduce focus-related delays (abstract: auto-focusing needs can be reduced or eliminated by measuring and storing substrate surface topography for later retrieval by an imaging system These steps can be done in advance of an imaging experiment to reduce focus-related delays during the experiment) and suggests scanning the imaging substrate before samples are loaded (¶0042), such that scanning the imaging substrate occurs, for example: before samples are loaded onto the substrate for imaging ... ¶0042).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Andreev with the method to shine the focused optical beam on the probe of the scanning probe microscope of without a presence of a sample to interact with the focused optical beam on the probe to reduce focus-related delays, as taught by Dave (abstract, ¶0042).
With regards to claim 14, Andreev discloses selecting the preferred focus position of the focused optical beam on the probe comprises: modulating the intensity of the optical beam intensity to produce modulated optical beam (determination of the optimal alignment between the focal spot of the irradiating beam and the tip of the probe of the system can be effectuated while the irradiating beam is modulated varying the power of the tip-illuminating beam, ¶0033); measuring the amplitude of vibration of the probe in response to the modulated optical beam as a function of the focus position (the complex-valued s-SNOM data (which may be, at the same time, multivariable in that it include complex-valued amplitude/phase sets of data representing the results of demodulation of the detected signal at the 1st, 2nd, 3rd harmonics of the frequency of the probe vibration, and, optionally, the results of the DCSD measurements) can be obtained from the values of irradiance interferometrically acquired at the detector 138 both the amplitude and phase values can be calculated from two data sets taken, ¶0037); and selecting the preferred focus position based on the measured amplitude (the optical data representing complex-valued physical parameters is acquired, which contains information useful for optimized alignment of the probe tip 122 and the illuminating beam 130A and coded in both amplitude and phase, ¶0046).
With regards to claim 15, Andreev discloses selecting the preferred focus position of the focused optical beam on the probe comprises: modulating the intensity of the optical beam intensity to produce modulated optical beam (the determination of the optimal alignment between the focal spot of the irradiating beam and the tip of the probe of the system can be effectuated while the irradiating beam is modulated varying the power of the tip-illuminating beam, ¶0030), measuring the phase of vibration of the probe in response to the modulated optical beam relative to the phase of the modulation (the complex-valued s-SNOM data (which may be, at the same time, multivariable in that it include complex-valued amplitude/phase sets of data representing the results of demodulation of the detected signal at the 1st, 2nd, 3rd harmonics of the frequency of the probe vibration, and, optionally, the results of the DCSD measurements) can be obtained from the values of irradiance interferometrically acquired at the detector 138 both the amplitude and phase values can be calculated from two data sets taken, ¶0037); and selecting the preferred focus position of the beam based on measured phase relationship (the optical data representing complex-valued physical parameters is acquired, which contains information useful for optimized alignment of the probe tip 122 and the illuminating beam 130A and coded in both amplitude and phase, ¶0046).
With regards to claim 16, Andreev discloses selecting the preferred focus position of the focused optical beam on the probe comprises: vibrating the probe at a driving frequency with a driving source other than a modulation frequency of the optical beam(the probe 122 is vibrated, in operation, at a frequency o that is substantially close to its resonance and is held in operational feedback in close proximity to the sample 118 by the AFM [atomic force microscope] controller 114, Fig. 1, ¶0038); measuring the amplitude of vibration of a cantilever at the driving frequency (If the complex-valued s-SNOM data (which may be, at the same time, multivariable in that it include complex-valued amplitude/phase sets of data representing the results of demodulation of the detected signal at the 1st, 2nd, 3rd harmonics of the frequency of the probe vibration, and, optionally, the results of the DCSD measurements) can be obtained from the values of irradiance interferometrically acquired at the detector 138 both the amplitude and phase values can be calculated from two data sets taken, ¶0037); and selecting the preferred focus position based on the vibration amplitude measurement (the optical data representing complex-valued physical parameters is acquired, which contains information useful for optimized alignment of the probe tip 122 and the illuminating beam 130A and coded in both amplitude and phase, ¶0046).
With regards to claim 19, Andreev discloses bringing a sample surface into measuring proximity with the probe tip with focus position of the beam adjusted according to the preferred focus position determined without the sample present (¶0033 & ¶0069); and Dave teaches thereof measuring one or more probe responses with respect to the sample surface (atomic force microscopy (AFM) "), teaches performing autofocusing for later retrieval in advance of an imaging experiment to reduce focus-related delays (abstract: auto-focusing needs can be reduced or eliminated by measuring and storing substrate surface topography for later retrieval by an imaging system These steps can be done in advance of an imaging experiment to reduce focus- related delays during the experiment, ¶0028) and suggests scanning the imaging substrate before samples are loaded (¶0042), such that scanning the imaging substrate occurs, for example: before samples are loaded onto the substrate for imaging).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to determine the preferred focus position of Andreev without the sample present to reduce focus-related delays, as suggested by Dave, abstract, ¶0042).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-11, 17 & 18 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.
With regards to claim 7, the prior art does not disclose or suggest the method claimed “measuring the resonance frequency of a vibrational mode of the probe as a function of focus position; and selecting the preferred focus position based on the measured resonance frequency” in combination with the remaining claimed elements as set forth in claim 7 and from which it depends. Claims 8-11 are hereby depended therefrom claim 7.
With regards to claim 17, the prior art does not disclose or suggest the method claimed “selecting the preferred focus position of the focused optical beam on the probe comprises: vibrating the probe at a driving frequency with a driving source other than a modulation frequency of the optical beam; measuring the phase of vibration of the cantilever at the driving frequency relative to the phase of the driving source as a function of the focus position; and selecting the preferred focus position based on a measured phase relationship between the phase of vibration of the cantilever and the phase of the driving source” in combination with remaining claimed elements as set forth in claim 17 and from which it depends from.
With regards to claim 18, the prior art does not disclose or suggest the method claimed “selecting the preferred focus position of the focused optical beam on the probe comprises: measuring the resonance frequency of a vibrational mode of the probe as a function of focus position; and selecting the preferred focus position based on the measured resonance frequency” in combination with remaining claimed elements as set forth in claim 18 and from which it depends from.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANCIS C GRAY whose telephone number is (571)270-3348. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-5pm.
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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached at 571-272-3555. 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.
/FRANCIS C GRAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights