DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim(s) 1 and 3-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103.
Claim 2 is objected to.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-6, 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Publication 2016/0084757 to Miron, in view of US Publication 2017/0010463 to Morizur et al.
In regards to claims 1, Miron discloses and shows in Figures 1-4, an absorption spectroscopy apparatus and method, wherein a plurality of laser sources (TLS1, TLS2) are utilized to provide light to a multi-pass gas cell module (301) for analyzing a sample gas, the multi-pass gas cell module further comprising a plurality of reflectors (208, 209) to increase the optical path length within the gas chamber (par. 2, 12, 221-222, 224);
[claim 3] wherein the chamber contains at least one optical mirror (208, 209) an inlet (203) and outlet (204) for the gas and at least one optical window (202) for a laser beam (par. 222, 224, 235);
[claim 9] wherein a single beam is delivered to said cell through an optical fiber (275), said fiber having a collimator (210) at its end facing said cell (par. 228-229, 239, 266).
Miron differs from the limitations in that it is silent to the apparatus further comprising: wherein at least one of said reflective means being a reflective multi-plane light conversion (MPLC) phase plate.
However, Morizur teaches and shows in Figures 1-3, a multi-pass cavity device (100), wherein a plurality of reflective phase plates or spatial light modulators (102, 104) (par. 94, 100) may be utilized to provide a plurality of different phase profile beams, wherein the reflective regions (116) of the phase plates can be individually adjusted and optimized (par. 4, 16, 37-43, 102, 120).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Miron to include the MPLC phase plate discussed above for the advantage of providing optimized phase profiles in a device that is “easier to install, to use and quicker to configure” (par. 16), with a reasonable expectation of success.
In regards to claims 4-6 and 10, Miron discloses and shows in Figures 1-4, an absorption spectroscopy apparatus and method, wherein both optical fiber and free space optics are utilized to provide a laser beam to a gas chamber (Figures 3a-3i).
Miron differs from the limitations in that it is silent to the apparatus:
[claim 4] wherein the MPLC phase plate exhibits a spatial phase profile compatible with a laser propagating in free space, said spatial phase profile being realized by producing a corresponding height profile of the reflective surface of said MPLC phase plate;
[claim 5] wherein the MPLC phase plate exhibits a spatial phase profile compatible with a laser propagating in an optical fiber, said spatial phase profile being realized by producing a corresponding height profile of the reflective surface of said MPLC phase plate;
[claim 6] wherein the spatial phase profile is produced by etching a desired height profile into the surface of the MPLC phase plate, preferably by making several MPLC phase plates on a single glass wafer using planar fabrication techniques and by depositing a metallic film onto said surface to increase its reflectivity;
[claim 10] the multi-plane light conversion (MPLC) phase plate being a glass structure made by planar manufacturing processes preferably by making several phase plates on a single wafer.
However, Morizur teaches and shows in Figures 1-3, a multi-pass cavity device (100), wherein a plurality of phase plates or spatial light modulators (102, 104), are configured to have a plurality of reflection regions (116) each having a different adjustable depth to obtain optimized phase profiles (par. 23, 40, 43, 102, 120). Further, the reflection regions of the phase plate may be obtained by etching a mirror surface or depositing a resin layer onto a substrate (par. 40). Attention is also brought to the fact that mirrors are commonly comprised of glass substrates and metallic films.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Miron to include the MPLC phase plate discussed above for the advantage of providing optimized phase profiles in a device that is “easier to install, to use and quicker to configure” (par. 16), with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim(s) 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miron, in view of Morizur, and further in view of US Publication 2022/025858 to Payne et al.
In regards to claims 7-8, Miron differs from the limitations in that it is silent to the apparatus further comprising:
[claim 7] wherein N phase profiles corresponding to N reflections on the MPLC phase plate are provided by N identical concave spherical or parabolic mirrors on the surface;
[claim 8] wherein the N mirrors are arranged in stacked rows of multiple mirrors resulting in an increased optical path length.
However, Payne teaches and shows in Figures 1-2c, and 4, a 2-D spatial light modulator array (400) comprising a plurality of MEMS or DMD devices (par. 4, 8), which may be curved (par. 34) (Figure 2a), wherein a linear array (401) of light modulators (402) are grouped into channels (404) along horizontal or longitudinal axes (406, 410) (par. 44).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Miron to include the spatial light modulator array discussed above for the advantage of utilizing commercially available optical elements for improving yield and performance, as well as increasing power handling capability (par. 4, 26), with a reasonable expectation of success.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 is 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.
As to claim 2, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious, the “multi-pass gas absorption cell” wherein a plurality of spatially separate beams of different wavelengths are “converted into orthogonal spatial modes” and measured by a single detector, in combination with the rest of the limitations of the claim.
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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN M HANSEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1736. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8am to 4pm.
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, Michelle Iacoletti can be reached at 571-270-5789. 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.
JONATHAN M. HANSEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2877
/JONATHAN M HANSEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877