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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Priority
1. Applicant is reminded that in order for a patent issuing on the instant application to obtain the benefit of priority based on priority papers filed in parent Application No. (DE) 10 2022 110 797.3 under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), a claim for such foreign priority must be timely made in this application. To satisfy the requirement of 37 CFR 1.55(a)(2) for a certified copy of the foreign application, applicant may simply identify the application containing the certified copy.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/01/24 has been entered. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
3. The drawings filed on 11/01/24. These drawings are acceptable.
Claim Objections
4. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: all reference numbers in the claims should be deleted.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. 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 of this title, 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.
7. Claim(s) 1, 3-7, 10-11, 17, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Villringer Claus et al. (Applicant’s Non-Patent Literature Documents) in view of Buchmann Jens et al. (Applicant’s Non-Patent Literature Documents). Hereafter “Villringer” and “Buchmann”. (Please Applicant’s Non-Patent Literature Documents filed on 11/01/24 for references of Villringer and “Buchmann).
Regarding Claim(s) 1, 9, Villringer discloses a method for treating an optical spacer for a Fabry- Perot resonator comprising the steps of:
- arranging the optical spacer, which, at least partially, consists of a photopolymer, in a Fabry-Perot resonator, so that the Fabry-Perot resonator comprises two dichroic mirrors separated from one another by the optical spacer (page 1, Abstract, the Polymer spacers were deposited using spin coating and sandwiched between two dielectric mirrors. The dielectric mirrors are not different from dichroic mirrors);
- arranging the Fabry-Perot resonator in an optical system (figure 4 in page 4 discloses arranging the Fabry-Perot resonator);
- aligning a spatially modulated treatment beam with the Fabry-Perot resonator, wherein the spatially modulated treatment beam comprises light from a short-wave range, wherein the light from a short-wave range is suitable to cause a change in the refractive index of the optical spacer (page 2, figure 1, and page 4 figure 4 discloses aligning a spatially modulated treatment beam with the Fabry-Perot resonator of FP Sensor; Background, paragraph 2.1. UV light beam range is not different from a from a short-wave range);
-spatially resolved adjusting of a location-dependent irradiance of the spatially modulated treatment beam based on the detected reflected or transmitted portion, such that the caused change in the refractive index reduces a variance of indicated location-dependent resonance wavelengths of the Fabry-Perot resonator (page 1, Introduction, lines 3-6, 13-15. Raster-scanning the interrogation beam is not different from treatment beam. Correcting the refractive index is not different from change in the refractive index. It is inherent that correcting refractive index must reduce the variance of indicated location-dependent resonance wavelengths).
However, Villringer does not teach aligning a test beam, an optically expanded test beam, with the Fabry-Perot resonator; spatially resolved detecting of a reflected or transmitted portion of the test beam aligned with the Fabry-Perot resonator, wherein the reflected or transmitted portion indicates location-dependent resonance wavelengths of the Fabry-Perot resonator. Buchmann teaches aligning a test beam, in particular an optically expanded test beam, with the Fabry-Perot resonator; spatially resolved detecting of a reflected or transmitted portion of the test beam aligned with the Fabry-Perot resonator, wherein the reflected or transmitted portion indicates location-dependent resonance wavelengths of the Fabry-Perot resonator, (pages 2-3, paragraph 2.2 Experimental setup; The following figure 1, element A1 is not different from the test beam). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify Villringer by having test beam in order to generate excitation beam for the detection (Buchmann, pages 2-3, paragraph 2.2 Experimental setup).
[AltContent: textbox (A2)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (A1)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
278
600
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim(s) 3, Villringer as modified by Buchmann, teaches the method according to claim 1 as stated above except for the treatment beam comprises light with a wavelength of less than 450 nm, in particular less than 420 nm. Villringer further teaches beam is UV light (Abstract, lines 8-9. UV light range is from 0.1nm to 400nm).
Regarding Claim(s) 4, Villringer as modified by Buchmann, teaches the method according to claim 1 as stated above except for adjusting a duration of irradiation with the spatially modulated treatment beam based on the detected reflected or transmitted portion. Villringer further teaches adjusting a duration of irradiation with the spatially modulated treatment beam based on the detected reflected or transmitted portion (page 1, Abstract, lines 8-9; Page 4, paragraph 4.1, Optical thickness homogenization. Varying exposure time is not different from adjusting a duration of irradiation).
Regarding Claim(s) 5-6, Villringer as modified by Buchmann, teaches the method according to claim 1 as stated above except for simultaneously irradiated by the test beam and the treatment beam, and the simultaneous irradiation by the treatment beam and the test beam is made possible by inserting a dichroic mirror into the optical system. Buchmann further teaches simultaneously irradiated by the test beam and the treatment beam, and the simultaneous irradiation by the treatment beam and the test beam is made possible by inserting a dichroic mirror into the optical system (the above figure 1, A1 is not different from the test beam, and A2 is not different from the treatment beam; Page 2, paragraph 2.2 Experimental setup, lines 4-6 disclosed the fibre the beam is collimated and directed onto a dichroic mirror). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify Villringer by having simultaneous irradiation by the treatment beam and the test beam and a dichroic mirror; in order to scan treatment beam and irradiate test beam at the same time (the above figure 1, A1 is not different from the test beam, and A2 is not different from the treatment beam).
Regarding Claim(s) 7, Villringer as modified by Buchmann, teaches the method according to claim 1 as stated above except for the spatially resolved detecting of the reflected or transmitted portion and the spatially resolved adjusting of the location-dependent irradiance take place automatically. Villringer further teaches the spatially resolved detecting of the reflected or transmitted portion and the spatially resolved adjusting of the location-dependent irradiance take place automatically (page 1, Abstract, lines 8-9; paragraph 1, Introduction, lines 5-6, 10-11. It is inherent that scanning a UV beam is not different from adjusting of the location-dependent irradiance take place automatically).
Regarding Claim(s) 10-11, Villringer as modified by Buchmann, teaches the method according to claim 1 as stated above except for a cross-sectional area of the homogenized optical spacer (203) perpendicular to the intended optical axis comprises at least 100 mm2, in particular at least 200 mm2, and having a thickness between 1 pm and 50 pm. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to choose appropriate heating range for a cross-sectional area and thickness for treating an optical spacer for a Fabry-Perot resonator. It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding Claim(s) 17, Villringer as modified by Buchmann, teaches the method according to claim 1 as stated above except for a computer program with a program code for performing process steps when the program code is executed on a computer, a processor or a programmable hardware component, wherein the process steps comprise at least the following steps of spatially resolved detecting of a reflected or transmitted portion of a test beam aligned with a Fabry-Perot resonator, wherein the reflected or transmitted portion indicates location-dependent resonance wavelengths of the Fabry-Perot resonator; spatially resolved adjusting of a location-dependent irradiance of a spatially modulated treatment beam based on the detected reflected or transmitted portion, such that a variance of indicated location-dependent resonance wavelengths of the Fabry-Perot resonator is reduced by a caused change in the refractive index. Villringer further teaches the process steps comprise at least the following steps of spatially resolved detecting of a reflected or transmitted portion of a test beam aligned with a Fabry-Perot resonator, wherein the reflected or transmitted portion indicates location-dependent resonance wavelengths of the Fabry-Perot resonator (page 2, figure 1 discloses detecting of a reflected of a test beam); spatially resolved adjusting of a location-dependent irradiance of a spatially modulated treatment beam based on the detected reflected or transmitted portion, such that a variance of indicated location-dependent resonance wavelengths of the Fabry-Perot resonator is reduced by a caused change in the refractive index (page 1, Introduction, lines 3-6, 13-15. Raster-scanning the interrogation beam is not different from treatment beam. Correcting the refractive index is not different from change in the refractive index. It is inherent that correct refractive index must reduce the variance of indicated location-dependent resonance wavelengths). Buchmann further teaches a computer program with a program code, performing process steps when the program code is executed on a computer, a processor or a programmable hardware component (figure 1, computer PC. It is inherent that a PC must contain computer program with a program code). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify Villringer by having a computer, a processor or a programmable hardware component; in order to implement the detection system.
Allowable Subject Matter
8. Claims 2, 8, 12-16, 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.
9. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: there was no prior art found by the examiner that suggested modification or combination with the cited art so as to satisfy the combination of all the limitations in claims 2, 8.
10. As claim 2, the prior art of record taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious a method for treating an optical spacer for a Fabry-Perot resonator comprising the steps of: the Fabry-Perot resonator comprises two dichroic mirrors separated from one another by the optical spacer; aligning a spatially modulated treatment beam with the Fabry-Perot resonator, comprising light from a short-wave range being suitable to cause a change in the refractive index of the optical spacer; aligning a test beam; spatially resolved detecting of a reflected or transmitted portion of the test beam aligned with the Fabry-Perot resonator, indicating location-dependent resonance wavelengths of the Fabry-Perot resonator; and spatially resolved adjusting of a location-dependent irradiance of the spatially modulated treatment beam, such that the caused change in the refractive index reduces a variance of indicated location-dependent resonance wavelengths of the Fabry-Perot resonator; wherein a smallest indicated resonance wavelength of the Fabry-Perot resonator is determined for adjusting the location-dependent irradiance and the location-dependent irradiance is selected such that a change in the refractive index caused by the spatially modulated treatment beam causes a reduction of the respective location-dependent resonance wavelength substantially towards the smallest indicated resonance wavelength; in combination with the rest of the limitations of claims 1 and 2.
11. As claim 8, the prior art of record taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious a method for treating an optical spacer for a Fabry-Perot resonator comprising the steps of: the Fabry-Perot resonator comprises two dichroic mirrors separated from one another by the optical spacer; aligning a spatially modulated treatment beam with the Fabry-Perot resonator, comprising light from a short-wave range being suitable to cause a change in the refractive index of the optical spacer; aligning a test beam; spatially resolved detecting of a reflected or transmitted portion of the test beam aligned with the Fabry-Perot resonator, indicating location-dependent resonance wavelengths of the Fabry-Perot resonator; and spatially resolved adjusting of a location-dependent irradiance of the spatially modulated treatment beam, such that the caused change in the refractive index reduces a variance of indicated location-dependent resonance wavelengths of the Fabry-Perot resonator; wherein the spatially resolved detecting of the reflected or transmitted portion and the spatially resolved adjusting of the location-dependent irradiance based thereon are repeated until a predetermined threshold value for the variance of indicated location-dependent resonance wavelengths of the Fabry-Perot resonator (205) is reached at least in a relevant treatment area of the optical spacer; in combination with the rest of the limitations of claims 1 and 8.
12. As claim 12, the prior art of record taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious a method for treating an optical spacer for a Fabry-Perot resonator comprising the steps of: the Fabry-Perot resonator comprises two dichroic mirrors separated from one another by the optical spacer; aligning a spatially modulated treatment beam with the Fabry-Perot resonator, comprising light from a short-wave range being suitable to cause a change in the refractive index of the optical spacer; aligning a test beam; spatially resolved detecting of a reflected or transmitted portion of the test beam aligned with the Fabry-Perot resonator, indicating location-dependent resonance wavelengths of the Fabry-Perot resonator; and spatially resolved adjusting of a location-dependent irradiance of the spatially modulated treatment beam, such that the caused change in the refractive index reduces a variance of indicated location-dependent resonance wavelengths of the Fabry-Perot resonator; wherein the heating electrode enables a substantially spatially homogeneous heating of an optical spacer arranged thereon, in particular of the optical spacer according to at least one of claims 9 to 11, via a location-dependent layer thickness of the heating electrode and/or via a plurality of electrode strips of the heating electrode, to which, at least partially, various current intensities are applied; in combination with the rest of the limitations of claims 1 and 9 and 12.
13. As claim 16, the prior art of record taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious a method for treating an optical spacer for a Fabry-Perot resonator comprising the steps of: the Fabry-Perot resonator comprises two dichroic mirrors separated from one another by the optical spacer; aligning a spatially modulated treatment beam with the Fabry-Perot resonator, comprising light from a short-wave range being suitable to cause a change in the refractive index of the optical spacer; aligning a test beam; spatially resolved detecting of a reflected or transmitted portion of the test beam aligned with the Fabry-Perot resonator, indicating location-dependent resonance wavelengths of the Fabry-Perot resonator; and spatially resolved adjusting of a location-dependent irradiance of the spatially modulated treatment beam, such that the caused change in the refractive index reduces a variance of indicated location-dependent resonance wavelengths of the Fabry-Perot resonator; wherein the spectral camera comprises a Fabry-Perot resonator, the resonance properties of which can be adjusted in a location-independent manner via a heating electrode, in particular via a heating electrode by homogeneously heating the homogenized optical spacer; in combination with the rest of the limitations of claims 1 and 9 and 16.
Fax/Telephone Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRI T TON whose telephone number is (571)272-9064. The examiner can normally be reached on 8am-4pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michelle Iacoletti can be reached on (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 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.
August 26, 2026
/Tri T Ton/
Primary Examiner Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights