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 .
1- This office action is a response to an application filed on 09/06/2024, in which claims 1-10 are currently pending. The Application is a National Stage entry of PCT/JP2022/040135 , International Filing Date: 10/27/2022, and claims foreign priority to 2022-048296, filed 03/24/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
2- The submitted information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) is(are) in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is(are) being considered by the examiner.
Specification
3- The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which application may become aware in the specification.
Drawings
4- The drawings were received on 09/06/2024. These drawings are acceptable.
Claim Interpretation - 35 USC § 112
5- 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.
6- 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:
optical path change optical system in claim 7,
partially reflecting optical system in claim 8,
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.
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 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 (MPEP 706.02(m)).
7- 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.
In addition, the functional recitation in the claims (e.g. "configured to" or "adapted to" or the like) that does not limit a claim limitation to a particular structure does not limit the scope of the claim. It has been held that the recitation that an element is "adapted to", "configured to", "designed to", or "operable to" perform a function is not a positive limitation but only requires the ability to so perform and may not constitute a limitation in a patentable sense. In re Hutchinson, 69 USPQ 139. (See MPEP 2111.04); see also In In re Giannelli, 739 F.3d 1375, 1378, 109 USPQ2d 1333, 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2014).
Also, it should be noted that it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed device is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed device from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations Ex-parte Masham 2 USPQ2d 1647 1987).
The claimed system in the instant application is capable of performing the claimed functionality, as is the prior art used in the present office action. The Examiner notes that where the patent office has reason to believe that a functional limitation asserted to be critical for establishing novelty in the claimed subject matter may, in fact, be an inherent characteristic of the prior art, it possesses the authority to require the applicant to prove that the subject matter shown to be in the prior art does not possess the characteristic relied on. In re Swinehart and sfiligoj, 169 USPQ 226 (C.C.P.A. 1971).
8- Claims 1-10 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yoshii et al. (JP 2011187947, cited by Applicants)
As to claim 1, Yoshii teaches a light source apparatus (Abstract and Figs. 1-16) comprising: an optical amplifier (101) configured to amplify and release light (¶ 28-29, 34, 60, 245-248 for ex.); a spectroscopic element (106/107 or 166/167) configured to separate the light released from the optical amplifier according to wavelengths (Figs. 1-2, 6-7 and 13); a spatial phase modulating element including a base part and a plurality of grating elements (109/108 or 303/301) configured to reflect the light separated by the spectroscopic element, the spatial phase modulating element being configured to relatively displace at least a part of grating elements out of the plurality of grating elements with respect to the base part and thereby perform phase modulation on the light separated by the spectroscopic element, and emit diffracted light toward the spectroscopic element along an incident optical path from the spectroscopic element regarding a part of the wavelengths within a wavelength range of the light separated by the spectroscopic element (Figs. 1-3, 6-7 and 13; ¶ 28-36, 73, 92-97, 245-249 for ex.); and
a controller configured to control displacement of the plurality of grating elements with respect to the base part (necessary to control each mirror or the ribbons; ¶ 12, 91, 94-95, 101-102 and the controller in the application of Fig. 14), wherein the diffracted light emitted from the spatial phase modulating element generates the light having the part of the wavelengths in the spectroscopic element, and the light having the part of the wavelengths is amplified by the optical amplifier and is subsequently released toward the spectroscopic element (Figs. 1, 13 and ¶29, 142, 179-182 for ex.), and the light having the part of the wavelengths subjected to a plurality of times of amplification by the optical amplifier is output (Figs. 1, 13 and ¶29, 142, 179-182, 226-227, 248 for ex.)
(claim 2) wherein the optical amplifier includes a semiconductor optical amplifier, a booster optical amplifier, or a semiconductor laser (¶ 120-124).
(claim 3) wherein the spectroscopic element includes a diffraction grating (¶28, 31, 61 for ex).
(claim 4) wherein the controller changes a pattern of displacement of the plurality of grating elements with respect to the base part using the spatial phase modulating element from a first pattern to a second pattern, and thereby switches from a state in which the part of the wavelengths includes a first wavelength to a state in which the part of the wavelengths includes a second wavelength different from the first wavelength (Fig. 3, ¶ 92-103 for ex.)
(claims 5-6) wherein the part of the wavelengths includes a plurality of wavelengths being different and apart from each other; (claim 6) wherein the controller changes a pattern of displacement of the plurality of grating elements with respect to the base part using the spatial phase modulating element from a first pattern to a second pattern, and thereby switches from a state in which the plurality of wavelengths include a first-A wavelength and a first-B wavelength to a state in which the plurality of wavelengths include a second-A wavelength different from the first-A wavelength and a second-B wavelength different from the first-B wavelength. (Figs. 2-3, ¶ 20-23, 33-37, 58-61, 92-103, 144-145 for ex.)
(claim 7) further comprising: a first light guide part; an optical path change optical system; and a second light guide part, wherein the first light guide part guides the light released from the optical amplifier toward the optical path change optical system, the optical path change optical system guides the light that has been released from the optical amplifier and has passed through the first light guide part toward the spectroscopic element, and guides the light having the part of the wavelengths generated in the spectroscopic element according to the diffracted light emitted from the spatial phase modulating element to the second light guide part, and the second light guide part includes a first light output part configured to output a part of the light out of the light guided to the second light guide part by the optical path change optical system to an outside of the second light guide part, and a light guide portion configured to guide a rest of the light except the part of the light out of the light guided to the second light guide part by the optical path change optical system toward the optical amplifier (Fig. 13 with the different sections of optical fiber 1335 and the circulators 1332/1334, where parts of light are transmitted in a given direction, and other parts are reflected towards a different direction).
(claim 8) further comprising: a third light guide part configured to guide the light released from a first end surface of the optical amplifier toward the spectroscopic element, and guide the light having the part of the wavelengths generated in the spectroscopic element according to the diffracted light emitted from the spatial phase modulating element toward the first end surface of the optical amplifier; and a partially reflecting optical system configured to allow a part of the light out of the light released from a second end surface of the optical amplifier to be transmitted through the partially reflecting optical system and output the part of the light, and reflect a rest of the light except the part of the light out of the light released from the second end surface of the optical amplifier toward the second end surface (Figs. 13, 15, with the different sections of optical fiber 1335 and the circulators 1332/1334, where parts of light are transmitted in a given direction, and other parts are reflected towards a different direction. Beam splitters 1534 are also considered in Fig. 15 as a replacement to the circulators).
(claim 9) wherein the plurality of grating elements include a plurality of ribbon-like parts, each of the plurality of ribbon-like parts has an elongated ribbon-like shape extending along a first direction and flexibility, and includes a reflection part including a light reflecting surface on an opposite side of the base part, the plurality of ribbon-like parts are arrayed along a second direction perpendicular to the first direction, the reflection part of each of the plurality of ribbon-like parts faces the base part across a space, each of the plurality of ribbon-like parts includes a-two connection parts connected to the base part at both end portions in the first direction, the base part includes an electrode facing the reflection part of each of the plurality of ribbon-like parts, and the controller adjusts a potential difference to be applied between the reflection part of each of the plurality of ribbon-like parts and the electrode, and thereby deflects the plurality of ribbon- like parts using an electrostatic force between the reflection part of each of the plurality of ribbon- like parts and the electrode, and controls displacement of the reflection part of each of the plurality of ribbon-like parts with respect to the base part (Fig. 3, ¶ 92-103 for ex., the electrostatic metal foils/ribbons are necessarily controlled by a potential controlling mechanism).
(claim 10) wherein the spatial phase modulating element includes a plurality of reflective elements arrayed in a matrix shape, each of the plurality of reflective elements includes a movable reflection part facing the base part across a space and including a light reflecting surface on an opposite side of the base part, and a support part being configured to support each of a plurality of portions of the movable reflection part, being connected to the base part, and having flexibility, the plurality of grating elements include the movable reflection part of each of the plurality of reflective elements, the base part includes an electrode facing the movable reflection part of each of the plurality of reflective elements, and in each of the plurality of reflective elements, the controller adjusts a potential difference to be applied between the movable reflection part and the electrode and thereby deflects the support part using an electrostatic force between the movable reflection part and the electrode, and controls displacement of the movable reflection part with respect to the base part (Fig. 3, ¶ 92-103 for ex., the electrostatic metal foils/ribbons, correspond to the claimed reflective elements disposed in a matrix shape, and are necessarily controlled by a potential controlling mechanism).
Conclusion
The examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record in the body of this action for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. Applicant should consider the entire prior art as applicable as to the limitations of the claims. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the response, to consider fully the entire references as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMED K AMARA whose telephone number is (571)272-7847. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday: 9:00-17:00
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Tarifur Chowdhury can be reached on (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 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.
/Mohamed K AMARA/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877