DETAILED ACTIONNotice 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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 6, 8-12 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ou et al (2015/0054979) (herein “Ou”) in view of Zheng et al (“Wide-field, high-resolution Fourier Ptychographic microscopy” NATURE PHOTONICS, vol 7, no.9 July 28 2013, pages 739-745) (herein “Zheng”) (copy supplied by applicant). In regards to claims 1, 12 and 14, Ou teaches a method for the Fourier ptychographic generation of an image of an object by means of a See; abstract and p[0009]), the method comprising illuminating the object with a multiplicity of illumination elements arranged in distributed fashion at a corresponding multiplicity of locations in space (See; Figs. 3A and Fig. 8 step 1100 for illuminating sample 20) ; detecting a plurality of spatial frequency patterns resulting from illuminating the object in each case with an individual illumination element of a plurality of illumination elements from the multiplicity of illumination elements (See; Fig. 8 step 1200, p[0082] and p[0128]); centering each spatial frequency patter at a position in the Fourier space corresponding to a nominal spatial frequency of the respective illumination element or of the respective illumination elements (See; p[0082] and p[0128] for centering of the image spectrum in the Fourier domain); and reconstructing the image using a totality of all the respectively centered spatial frequency patterns (See; Fig. 8 step 1500). Ou fails to explicitly teach color correction in the optical unit. However Zheng teaches using an existing microscope which is often color-corrected (See; page 741 “Experimental set-up and characterization” and “Digital wavefront correction”). Therefore it would have been obvious to modify Ou to use a color corrected microscope such as in Zheng so as to produce high quality color imaging. In regards to claim 2, Ou teaches wherein the multiplicity of locations in space at which the illumination elements are arranged lie on an area configured as planar, ellipsoidal, or in the shape of a spherical shell section (See; Figs. 3A, 4).
In regards to claim 3, Ou teaches wherein the respective nominal spatial frequency is ascertained from an angle of incidence of the respective illumination element on the object or a position of the respective illumination element (See; p[0082]).
In regards to claim 5, Ou teaches wherein reconstructing the image includes using an inverse Fourier transformation of the totality of all the respectively centered spatial frequency patterns (See; Fig. 9 step 1625, p[0121], p[0137]).
In regards to claim 6, Ou teaches wherein a spatial frequency domain for reconstructing the image is limited for this image on the basis of a maximum spatial frequency defined by a numerical aperture of the color-corrected optical unit (See; p[0082], p[0121]).
In regards to claim 8, the combination teaches wherein each spatial frequency pattern is corrected by way of an inverse modulation transfer function of the color-corrected optical unit (This is a conventional practice to correct errors in optics by taking into account the modulation transfer function and its inverses).
In regards to claim 9, the combination teaches wherein during the reconstructing each individual image obtained by way of the individual illumination element or the plurality of illumination elements from the multiplicity of illumination elements is freed of the modulation transfer function of the color-corrected optical unit by deconvolution, each individual image corrected in this way is subsequently transformed to a respective corrected spatial frequency pattern and only the corrected spatial frequency patterns are merged (This is a conventional practice to correct errors in optics by taking into account the modulation transfer function and its inverses. Where a deconvolution operation being used in order to subtract out the errors from the images generated is well known).
In regards to claim 10, Ou teaches wherein during the reconstructing each individual image obtained by way of the individual illumination element or the plurality of illumination elements from the multiplicity of illumination elements is transformed to a respective spatial frequency pattern by Fourier transformation, each spatial frequency pattern is subsequently freed of influences of the optical unit and/or of the illumination elements on a respective transfer function for Fourier components of the respective spatial frequency pattern and only the spatial frequency patterns corrected in this way are merged (See; Fig. 8, p[0082] and p[0128]).
In regards to claim 11, Ou teaches wherein during the reconstructing of the image all spatial frequency patterns are merged with the aid of an iterative optimization algorithm (See; p[0131]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 7 and 15 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN A BOYD whose telephone number is (571)270-7503. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00 - 5:00.
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, Ke Xiao can be reached at (571) 272-7776. 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 A BOYD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2627
Prosecution Insights