DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Claims 1-7 and 9-11 were elected without traverse in the reply filed on March 13, 2026.
Claim Interpretation
The claimed invention is directed to an apparatus “for drilling an array of vents in a plastic mask”. This preamble feature is interpreted as a statement of intended use and/or material worked upon, and is not interpreted as a structural limitation of the claimed apparatus.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-6, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jensen (US 5,395,718).
As to claim 1, Jensen teaches features that meet the structural features of the claimed apparatus. Jensen provides a laser etch apparatus (Figs. 13-15) that meets the claimed drill and is capable of drilling vents in a plastic mask. Jensen provides a support (Fig. 13, support struts 64) inherently comprising a surface capable of receiving a mask (10) thereon. Jensen provides a positioning system (turntable 60 and actuator 62) which positions the support relative to the laser for laser etching, and is capable of laser drilling vents at sequential locations in an array through a mask on the support.
As to claims 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11, the Jensen laser etching apparatus (Figs. 13-16) is a laser drill inherently capable of variable alignment between the laser and a mask between 90° and 45° using the Jensen 5-axis positioning system (9:15) and by moving the support relative to the laser (using turntable 60 and actuator 62)). Any arrangement of vents/holes can be considered an indicia within the interpretation of claim 11.
Claims 1-4, 6, and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rockstroh (US 6,339,208).
As to claim 1, Rockstroh teaches a laser drilling apparatus capable of drilling an array of vents (20) in an article (10) which could be used as a mask. Rockstroh inherently provides a support (36) comprising a surface (36 with dotted lines in Fig. 1) configured to receive the article (10) and a positioning system configured to position the support relative to the drill for drilling vents at sequential locations in the array through a mask received at the support (Huffman 5 axis CNC machine tool, see 2:55-56).
As to claims 2, 3, 4, 6, and 11, the Rockstroh laser drilling apparatus is a laser drill inherently capable of variable alignment between the laser and a mask between 90° and 45° using the 5-axis positioning system (2:55-56) and by moving the support relative to the laser. Any arrangement of vents/holes can be considered an indicia within the interpretation of claim 11.
As to claims 9 and 10, Rockstroh teaches a laser drilling apparatus capable of drilling an array of vents (20) in an article. Rockstroh inherently provides a support (sealing plate 26) configured to receive the mask/article in an airtight manner with a gas source (air supply 32) configured to deliver a gas between the surface and the article. Rockstroh teaches a sensor (flow measurement device 34) to measure a change in flow of the gas through the article as holes/vents are drilled (laser 30; holes 20). Rockstroh teaches an array of vents (holes 20), the final configuration of the array of vents represents a feature of the resulting article or material worked upon. Rockstroh teaches all structural features of the claimed apparatus.
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.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jensen (US 5,395,718) in view of Lantzer (US 4,959,119). Jensen teaches the subject matter of claim 1 above under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1).
As to claims 7, Jensen is silent to the apparatus configured to drill “micro” holes.
Lantzer teaches a similar apparatus applied to drill holes in an insulating substrate with a conductive layer. The laser drill apparatus is sufficient to drill holes having a 0.005 in diameter which is interpreted to be a “micro” hole of 127 microns.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to filing to incorporate the focusing lens of Lantzer (3:60-4:10) into Jensen motivated by providing a device for adjusting the size of the laser beam. There was a reasonable expectation of success in light of the fact that Lantzer’s focusing lens is specifically for lasers drilling and Jensen is a laser drilling apparatus.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jensen (US 5,395,718) in view of Rockstroh (US 6,339,208). Jensen teaches the subject matter of claim 1 above under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1).
As to claims 9 and 10, Jensen is silent to the support configured to receive the mask in an airtight manner with a gas source configured to deliver a gas between the surface and the mask and a sensor to measure a change in flow of the gas through the mask as the vents are drilled, where a final configuration of the array of vents is determined by a measured flow rate of the gas through the mask.
Rockstroh teaches a laser drilling apparatus capable of drilling an array of vents (20) in an article. Rockstroh inherently provides a support (sealing plate 26) configured to receive the mask in an airtight manner with a gas source (air supply 32) configured to deliver a gas between the surface and the article. Rockstroh teaches a sensor (flow measurement device 34) to measure a change in flow of the gas through the article as holes/vents are drilled (laser 30; holes 20). Rockstroh teaches an array of vents (holes 20), the final configuration of the array of vents represents a feature of the resulting article or material worked upon. Rockstroh teaches all structural features of the claimed apparatus.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to filing to incorporate these features from Rockstroh into Jensen because this is the use of a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way. The prior art of Jensen teaches a base apparatus upon which the claimed invention can be viewed as an improvement because the claimed apparatus measures air flow through drilled holes. The prior art of Rockstroh teaches a comparable laser drilling apparatus improved in the same way as the claimed apparatus, as discussed above. One of ordinary skill in the art could have applied the Rockstroh improvement in the same way to the Jensen device to provide a predictable result, especially confirmation of the hole formation.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rockstroh (US 6,339,208) in view of Jensen (US 5,395,718). Rockstroh teaches the subject matter of claim 1 above under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1).
As to claim 5, Rockstroh is silent to a device which moves the support relative to the drill.
Jensen teaches a 5-axis positioning system (9:15) capable of moving the support relative to the laser (using turntable 60 and actuator 62).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to filing to incorporate these features from Jensen into Rockstroh motivated by providing the ability to position/reposition the support relative to the laser during laser drilling. There would have been a reasonable expectation of success in light of the fact that both Jensen and Rockstroh teach five axis positioning systems for laser drilling.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rockstroh (US 6,339,208) in view of Lantzer (US 4,959,119). Rockstroh teaches the subject matter of claim 1 above under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1).
As to claim 7, Rockstroh is silent to the apparatus configured to drill “micro” holes.
Lantzer teaches a similar apparatus applied to drill holes in substrate. The laser drill apparatus is sufficient to drill holes having a 0.005 in diameter which is interpreted to be a “micro” hole of 127 microns.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to filing to incorporate the focusing lens of Lantzer (3:60-4:10) into Rockstroh motivated by providing a device for adjusting the size of the laser beam. There was a reasonable expectation of success in light of the fact that Lantzer’s focusing lens is specifically for lasers drilling and Rockstroh is a laser drilling apparatus.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW J DANIELS whose telephone number is (313)446-4826. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30-5:00 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, Christina Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1176. 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.
/MATTHEW J DANIELS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights