DETAILED ACTION
Oath/Declaration
1. Oath and declaration filed on 8/23/2024 is accepted.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The prior art documents submitted by application in the Information Disclosure Statement filed on 11/11/2024 and 5/13/2026 have all been considered and made of record (note the attached copy of form PTO – 1449).
Specification
3.The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because “Abstract” should be one paragraph and less than 250 words. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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) 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brookhyser et al (2022/0048135 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Brookhyser et al discloses (refer to figure 4) a system (400) comprising: a first acousto-optic deflector (AOD) (402) operative to diffract an incident beam of laser energy to thereby produce and output therefrom a first beam of laser energy (i.e., propagating along beam path 114) and a second beam of laser light; a second AOD (404) arranged to receive the first beam of laser energy and operative to diffract the received first beam of laser energy to thereby produce and output therefrom a third beam of laser energy and a fourth beam of laser energy (paragraph 0111); at least one first beam trap (202) (paragraph 0105) arranged and configured to absorb the second beam of laser energy output from the first AOD; at least one second beam trap arranged and configured to absorb the fourth beam of laser energy output from the second AOD (paragraph 0132 beam trap 718 and surface 716 , where the laser energy absorb)
Brookhyser et al discloses all of the claimed limitations not explicitly disclose a controller communicatively coupled to the first AOD and to the second AOD, wherein the controller is configured to operate of the first AOD while not operating the second AOD.
However, different features easily derived ( see in figures 4,38,40-41, and [0014],[0112],[0259] the controller is configured to operate the first AOD and the second AOD during at least one slice period, “transmitting the zeroth -order beam into the second AOD (404) can sometimes help to maintain the AO cell of the first AOD (402)” and “one or both of the first AOD (402) and “ one or both of the first AOD (402) and second AOD (404) can sometimes help to maintain the AO cell of the second AOD (404) may be operated for a duration longer than a slice period to deflect the beam path 114 to within or more of the primary angular ranges 116, but are operated such that the periods in which they are driven overlap for a duration equal to a slice period)
It would have obvious a controller communicatively coupled to the first AOD and to the second AOD and the controller is configured to operate of the first AOD while not operating the second AOD.
PNG
media_image1.png
288
443
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Brookhyser et al discloses . wherein at least one selected from the group consisting of the first AOD and the second AOD includes an AO cell formed of a material that is susceptible to thermal lensing in the presence of the laser energy (paragraph 0011, thermal lensing).
Regarding claim 3, Brookhyser et al discloses wherein at least one selected from the group consisting of the first AOD and the second AOD includes an AO cell formed of germanium (see paragraph 0065).
Regarding claims 4 and 5, Brookhyser et al discloses wherein the controller is configured to: operate the first AOD while not operating the second AOD during a first time period; and operate the first AOD while operating the second AOD during a second time period (paragraphs 0112,paragraphs 0259; and figures 4,38,40-41 ;”transmitting the zero-order beam into the second AOD (404) can sometimes help to maintain the AO cell of the second AOD(404) at the same temperature as (or close to the same temperature as )the AO cell of the first AOD (402)” and “one or both of the first AOD(402) and the second AOD (404) may be operated for a duration longer than a slice period to deflect the beam path 114 to within one or more of the primary angular ranges 116, but are operated such that the periods in which they are driven overlap for a duration equal to a slice period”).
Regarding claim 6, Brookhyser et al discloses wherein a portion of the incident beam of laser energy is characterizable by a first temporal optical power profile, the controller is further configured to operate of the first AOD and the second AOD simultaneously to create from the incident beam of laser energy at least one laser pulse, and wherein the at least one laser pulse has a second temporal optical power profile, and wherein the first temporal optical power profile and the second temporal optical power are not congruent (paragraph 0255 and figures 35A-35B; “; “pulse size 3500 a, having the optical power profile shown in figure 35 A, can propagate to the second positioner 108a and the pulse slice 3500B,having the optical power profile shown in figure 35B, can propagate to the second positioner 108b” )
Regarding claim 7, Brookhyser et al discloses, wherein the beam of laser energy is a quasi-continuous wave (QCW) beam of laser energy (paragraph 0053, figure 1, the laser source 104, a QCW laser source).
Regarding claim 8, Brookhyser et al discloses wherein the first temporal optical power profile is not flat (paragraph 0053).
Regarding claim 9, Brookhyser et al discloses wherein the second temporal optical power profile is at least substantially flat (paragraph 0053).
Regarding claim 10, Brookhyser et al discloses wherein the beam of laser energy is manifested as a sequence of laser pulses propagatable along a beam path, the plurality of laser pulses being temporally separated from each other by an inter- pulse interval, the controller is further configured to operate of the first AOD and the second AOD during the inter-pulse interval by driving the first AOD and the second AOD at a plurality of frequencies (see paragraph 0251, and figure 35; “In which a mother laser pulse 3500 is temporally -divided into two pulse slices .Specifically , during a first slice period,p1 , the mother laser pulse 3500 is divided into a first pulse slice 3500a and during a second period ,p2, the mother laser pulse 3500 is divided into a second pulse slice 3500b”).
Allowable Subject Matter
5. Claims 11-20 are allowed.
6. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art taken either singularly or in a combination fails to anticipate or fairly suggest the limitations of the independent claims, in such a manner that rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103 would be proper. The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in independent claims 11 ,which include, a system, at least one exercise beam trap arranged and configured to absorb the third beam of laser light output from the second AOD; and a controller communicatively coupled to the first AOD and to the second AOD, wherein the controller is configured to command a first RF driver to apply a first drive signal to a transducer of the first AOD and command a second RF driver to apply a second drive signal to a transducer of the second AOD, wherein the controller is operative to: during a high state of a laser trigger command, operate the first AOD to diffract the incident beam of laser light along an exercise beam path to the second AOD, the second AOD configured to diffract the beam of laser light from the first AOD along an exercise beam path to an exercise beam trap, by applying a drive signal to a transducer of the first AOD and applying a drive signal to the second AOD, wherein the drive signal is modulated through a range of RF frequencies, thereby controlling a temperature gradient within the first AOD and the second AOD.
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
7.Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMED A HASAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2331. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 6 AM -4 PM.
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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at 571-272-2713. 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.
/MOHAMMED A HASAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 6/24/2026
Prosecution Insights