Detailed Action
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure sheets (IDS) submitted on January 17th, 2025, May 13th, 2025, August 19th, 2025, and April 17th, 2026 have been considered by the examiner.
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 (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 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, 7, 15, 18, 24, 32, 35, 40, and 46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nishikawa (US 2018/0210183).
Regarding claim 1, Nishikawa discloses a method of calibrating a microscope system ([0008], “a slide for positioning accuracy management which can be used for a microscope system”), the microscope system comprising a stage ([0010], “mounted on a stage”), an imaging subsystem ([0010], “imaging means, mounted on a stage, for obtaining a microscope image”) adapted to obtain an image of a sample on the stage ([0010], “obtaining a microscope image of the above-defined slide for positioning accuracy management”), a processing subsystem adapted to identify regions of interest in the sample from images obtained by the imaging subsystem ([0010], “determination means for determining an error based on an actual movement amount of the stage obtained based on a position of the slide origin detected by the detection means and a coordinate value of the specific position and the instructed movement amount”), and a pattern illumination subsystem (Fig. Figs. 1-16, element 54) adapted to illuminate the regions of interest based on coordinates derived from the images by the processing subsystem ([0102], “projecting and exposing reticle patterns using a reduced projection exposure apparatus”), the method comprising:
projecting light from the pattern illumination subsystem (54) in an intended pattern ([0098], “Predetermined spaces are provided between the position mark 31, the position coordinate codes 32, and the increment mark area 34”) according to a plurality of coordinates corresponding to locations on the sample ([0102], “A pattern arranged on the slide 1 is formed by projecting and exposing reticle patterns using a reduced projection exposure apparatus”);
measuring differences between coordinates of locations where the light strikes the sample and coordinates of the intended pattern ([0123], “As shown in FIG. 15E, the CPU 1301 extracts increment mark A, of the four increment marks 33 surrounding the center 64, which is nearest to the center 64, and increment marks B and C adjacent to increment mark A, and measures the distances between the increment marks and the image center on an image pixel basis”, examiner interprets this to mean the differences are measured between the sample and intended pattern); and
generating correction factors based on the measured differences ([0125], “CPU 1301 determines whether the designated movement destination is located in either of the first area 501 to the fourth area 504”, Fig. 16, steps S110-S114).
Regarding claim 7, Nishikawa further discloses further comprising using the correction factors to adjust a position of light projected by the pattern illumination subsystem for calibrating the projected light ([0137], “the actual movement of the stage is obtained based on the position of the slide origin detected in step S101 and the coordinate value of the specific position in the microscope image after the movement of the XYZ stage 55”).
Regarding claim 15, Nishikawa further discloses wherein the step of generating correction factors comprises generating correction factors due to displacement state errors, due to speed state errors, or due to acceleration state errors ([0118], “the relationship between movement distances (encoder read values) and error values obtained by the above position checking using the slide 1 may be held in a memory”, [0137], “the determined error can be used for the correction of the movement amount of the XYZ stage 55 or for position management performance accuracy changing/evaluation of the XYZ stage 55”).
Regarding claim 18, Nishikawa further discloses a microscope system (Figs. 1-16, element 51), comprising:
a stage (55);
a sample (element 1, element 62) disposed on the stage (55);
an imaging subsystem (61) adapted to obtain an image of the sample ([0108], “digital camera 61”);
a processing subsystem (1301) adapted to identify regions of interest in the sample from images obtained by the imaging subsystem ([0010], “determination means for determining an error based on an actual movement amount of the stage obtained based on a position of the slide origin detected by the detection means and a coordinate value of the specific position and the instructed movement amount”; and
a pattern illumination subsystem (54) adapted to illuminate the regions of interest based on coordinates derived from the images by the processing subsystem ([0102], “projecting and exposing reticle patterns using a reduced projection exposure apparatus”), the pattern illumination subsystem being configured to:
project light in an intended pattern ([0098], “Predetermined spaces are provided between the position mark 31, the position coordinate codes 32, and the increment mark area 34”) according to a plurality of coordinates corresponding to locations on the sample ([0102], “A pattern arranged on the slide 1 is formed by projecting and exposing reticle patterns using a reduced projection exposure apparatus”);
measure differences between coordinates of locations where the light strikes the sample and coordinates of the intended pattern ([0123], “As shown in FIG. 15E, the CPU 1301 extracts increment mark A, of the four increment marks 33 surrounding the center 64, which is nearest to the center 64, and increment marks B and C adjacent to increment mark A, and measures the distances between the increment marks and the image center on an image pixel basis”, examiner interprets this to mean the differences are measured between the sample and intended pattern); and
generate correction factors based on the measured differences ([0125], “CPU 1301 determines whether the designated movement destination is located in either of the first area 501 to the fourth area 504”, Fig. 16, steps S110-S114).
Regarding claim 24, Nishikawa further discloses wherein the pattern illumination subsystem is configured to use the correction factors to adjust a position of light projected by the pattern illumination subsystem for calibrating the projected light ([0137], “the actual movement of the stage is obtained based on the position of the slide origin detected in step S101 and the coordinate value of the specific position in the microscope image after the movement of the XYZ stage 55”).
Regarding claim 32, Nishikawa further discloses wherein the pattern illumination subsystem is configured generate correction factors due to displacement state errors, due to speed state errors, or due to acceleration state errors ([0118], “the relationship between movement distances (encoder read values) and error values obtained by the above position checking using the slide 1 may be held in a memory”, [0137], “the determined error can be used for the correction of the movement amount of the XYZ stage 55 or for position management performance accuracy changing/evaluation of the XYZ stage 55”).
Regarding claim 35, Nishikawa discloses a non-transitory computing device readable medium (Figs. 1-16, 1302) having instructions stored thereon ([0111], “The ROM 1302 is a read only memory and stores various types of programs executed by the CPU 1301”), wherein the instructions are executable by one or more processors (1301) to cause a computing device to perform a method ([0008], “a slide for positioning accuracy management which can be used for a microscope system”) comprising:
measuring differences between coordinates of locations where projected light from a pattern illumination subsystem (54) strikes a microscope sample (1) and coordinates of an intended pattern ([0123], “As shown in FIG. 15E, the CPU 1301 extracts increment mark A, of the four increment marks 33 surrounding the center 64, which is nearest to the center 64, and increment marks B and C adjacent to increment mark A, and measures the distances between the increment marks and the image center on an image pixel basis”, examiner interprets this to mean the differences are measured between the sample and intended pattern); and
generating correction factors based on the measured differences ([0125], “CPU 1301 determines whether the designated movement destination is located in either of the first area 501 to the fourth area 504”, Fig. 16, steps S110-S114).
Regarding claim 40, Nishikawa further discloses wherein the instructions are executable by the one or more processors to use the correction factors to adjust a position of light projected by the pattern illumination subsystem for calibrating the projected light ([0137], “the actual movement of the stage is obtained based on the position of the slide origin detected in step S101 and the coordinate value of the specific position in the microscope image after the movement of the XYZ stage 55”).
Regarding claim 46, Nishikawa further discloses wherein the step of generating correction factors comprises generating correction factors due to displacement state errors, due to speed state errors, or due to acceleration state errors ([0118], “the relationship between movement distances (encoder read values) and error values obtained by the above position checking using the slide 1 may be held in a memory”, [0137], “the determined error can be used for the correction of the movement amount of the XYZ stage 55 or for position management performance accuracy changing/evaluation of the XYZ stage 55”).
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.
Claims 2, 19, and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishikawa (US 2018/0210183) in view of Amthor (US 2020/0379236).
Regarding claim 2, Nishikawa discloses as is set forth in claim 1 rejection above but does not specifically disclose wherein the sample is one of a fluorescent sample, a reflective sample, and a sample able to be photo-marked.
However Amthor, in the same filed of endeavor because both teach a microscope calibration system, teaches wherein the sample ([0064], “Examples of calibration samples”) is one of a fluorescent sample, a reflective sample, and a sample able to be photo-marked ([0064], “fluorescence reference samples for determining the laser light illumination”, [0031], “material properties of the calibration sample, such as, e.g., the texture or else reflection properties”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have the microscope calibration system of Nishikawa with the wherein the sample is one of a fluorescent sample, a reflective sample, and a sample able to be photo-marked as taught by Amthor, for the purpose of improving the calibration efficiency and simplicity ([0010]).
Regarding claim 19, Nishikawa discloses as is set forth in claim 18 rejection above but does not specifically disclose wherein the sample comprises a fluorescent sample, a reflective sample, and a sample able to be photo-marked.
However Amthor, in the same filed of endeavor because both teach a microscope calibration system, teaches wherein the sample ([0064], “Examples of calibration samples”) comprises a fluorescent sample, a reflective sample, and a sample able to be photo-marked ([0064], “fluorescence reference samples for determining the laser light illumination”, [0031], “material properties of the calibration sample, such as, e.g., the texture or else reflection properties”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have the microscope calibration system of Nishikawa with the wherein the sample comprises a fluorescent sample, a reflective sample, and a sample able to be photo-marked as taught by Amthor, for the purpose of improving the calibration efficiency and simplicity ([0010]).
Regarding claim 36, Nishikawa discloses as is set forth in claim 35 rejection above but does not specifically disclose wherein the sample is one of a fluorescent sample, a reflective sample, and a sample able to be photo-marked.
However Amthor, in the same filed of endeavor because both teach a microscope calibration system, teaches wherein the sample ([0064], “Examples of calibration samples”) is one of a fluorescent sample, a reflective sample, and a sample able to be photo-marked ([0064], “fluorescence reference samples for determining the laser light illumination”, [0031], “material properties of the calibration sample, such as, e.g., the texture or else reflection properties”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have the microscope calibration system of Nishikawa with the wherein the sample is one of a fluorescent sample, a reflective sample, and a sample able to be photo-marked as taught by Amthor, for the purpose of improving the calibration efficiency and simplicity ([0010]).
Claims 8, 25, and 41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishikawa (US 2018/0210183) in view of Peschka (US 2018/0284419).
Regarding claim 8, Nishikawa discloses as is set forth in claim 7 rejection above but does not specifically disclose wherein the pattern illumination subsystem comprises a movable mirror, wherein using the correction factors to adjust the position of light further comprises adjusting movement of the moveable mirror.
However Peschka, in the same filed of endeavor because both teach a microscope calibration system, teaches wherein the pattern illumination subsystem (Fig. 14, 137 and 138) comprises a movable mirror (145), wherein using the correction factors to adjust the position of light further comprises adjusting movement of the moveable mirror ([0038], “controllable movable or tiltable mirrors are suitable to this end, which mirrors, depending on how they are positioned relative to part of the illumination pencil of rays, steer or do not steer their part of the illumination pencil of rays directly or indirectly via an interposed optical system onto the object to be observed”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have the microscope calibration system of Nishikawa with the wherein the pattern illumination subsystem comprises a movable mirror, wherein using the correction factors to adjust the position of light further comprises adjusting movement of the moveable mirror as taught by Peschka, for the purpose of improving processing speed and compensate reflections ([0049]).
Regarding claim 25, Nishikawa discloses as is set forth in claim 18 rejection above but does not specifically disclose wherein the pattern illumination subsystem comprises a movable mirror, and wherein the pattern illumination subsystem is configured to use the correction factors to adjust a position of light projected by the pattern illumination subsystem by controlling movement of the movable element.
However Peschka, in the same filed of endeavor because both teach a microscope calibration system, teaches wherein the pattern illumination subsystem (Fig. 14, 137 and 138) comprises a movable mirror (145), and wherein the pattern illumination subsystem is configured to use the correction factors to adjust a position of light projected by the pattern illumination subsystem by controlling movement of the movable element ([0038], “controllable movable or tiltable mirrors are suitable to this end, which mirrors, depending on how they are positioned relative to part of the illumination pencil of rays, steer or do not steer their part of the illumination pencil of rays directly or indirectly via an interposed optical system onto the object to be observed”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have the microscope calibration system of Nishikawa with the wherein the pattern illumination subsystem comprises a movable mirror, and wherein the pattern illumination subsystem is configured to use the correction factors to adjust a position of light projected by the pattern illumination subsystem by controlling movement of the movable element as taught by Peschka, for the purpose of improving processing speed and compensate reflections ([0049]).
Regarding claim 41, Nishikawa discloses as is set forth in claim 35 rejection above but does not specifically disclose wherein the instructions are executable by the one or more processors to use the correction factors to adjust a position of light projected by the pattern illumination subsystem by controlling movement of a movable mirror of the pattern illumination subsystem.
However Peschka, in the same filed of endeavor because both teach a microscope calibration system, teaches wherein the instructions are executable by the one or more processors ([0138], “digital observation port 134 comprises an image recording sensor device for recording the images and an image processing device”) to use the correction factors to adjust a position of light projected by the pattern illumination subsystem by controlling movement of a movable mirror of the pattern illumination subsystem ([0038], “controllable movable or tiltable mirrors are suitable to this end, which mirrors, depending on how they are positioned relative to part of the illumination pencil of rays, steer or do not steer their part of the illumination pencil of rays directly or indirectly via an interposed optical system onto the object to be observed”, [0046], “sub-aperture modulation device can be used to correct the illumination reflection of the first illumination pupil”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have the microscope calibration system of Nishikawa with the wherein the instructions are executable by the one or more processors to use the correction factors to adjust a position of light projected by the pattern illumination subsystem by controlling movement of a movable mirror of the pattern illumination subsystem as taught by Peschka, for the purpose of improving processing speed and compensate reflections ([0049]).
Claims 11, 28, and 43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishikawa (US 2018/0210183) in view of Peschka (US 2018/0284419), further in view of Humphris (US 2020/0141970).
Regarding claim 11, modified Nishikawa teaches as is set forth in claim 8 rejection above but does not specifically disclose wherein the projecting step comprises moving the movable mirror through the intended pattern at a slow speed, at a constant speed, or in a plurality of different acceleration states.
However Humphris, in the same filed of endeavor because both teach a microscope calibration system, teaches wherein the projecting step ([0048], “The microscope 1 can be operated in a calibration mode shown in FIGS. 1,2 and 6”) comprises moving the movable mirror (Figs. 1-2, element 13) through the intended pattern at a slow speed, at a constant speed, or in a plurality of different acceleration states ([0053], “The lengths of the three struts 14a-c can be adjusted together to translate the mirror 13, or at different rates to rotate the mirror 13 about two orthogonal axes”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have the microscope calibration system of Nishikawa in view of Peschka with the wherein the projecting step comprises moving the movable mirror through the intended pattern at a slow speed, at a constant speed, or in a plurality of different acceleration states as taught by Humphris, for the purpose of improving the performance of the microscope through mirror adjustment ([0011]).
Regarding claim 28, modified Nishikawa teaches as is set forth in claim 25 rejection above but does not specifically disclose wherein the pattern illumination subsystem is configured to project light in the intended pattern by controlling movement of the movable element through the intended pattern at a slow speed, at a constant speed, or in a plurality of different acceleration states.
However Humphris, in the same filed of endeavor because both teach a microscope calibration system, teaches wherein the pattern illumination subsystem is configured to project light in the intended pattern ([0048], “The microscope 1 can be operated in a calibration mode shown in FIGS. 1,2 and 6”) by controlling movement of the movable element (Figs. 1-2, element 13) through the intended pattern at a slow speed, at a constant speed, or in a plurality of different acceleration states ([0053], “The lengths of the three struts 14a-c can be adjusted together to translate the mirror 13, or at different rates to rotate the mirror 13 about two orthogonal axes”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have the microscope calibration system of Nishikawa in view of Peschka with the wherein the pattern illumination subsystem is configured to project light in the intended pattern by controlling movement of the movable element through the intended pattern at a slow speed, at a constant speed, or in a plurality of different acceleration states as taught by Humphris, for the purpose of improving the performance of the microscope through mirror adjustment ([0011]).
Regarding claim 43, modified Nishikawa teaches as is set forth in claim 41 rejection above but does not specifically disclose wherein controlling movement of the moveable mirror comprises moving the movable mirror through the intended pattern at a slow speed, at a constant speed, or in a plurality of different acceleration states.
However Humphris, in the same filed of endeavor because both teach a microscope calibration system, teaches wherein controlling movement of the moveable mirror ([0048], “The microscope 1 can be operated in a calibration mode shown in FIGS. 1,2 and 6”) comprises moving the movable mirror through the intended pattern at a slow speed, at a constant speed, or in a plurality of different acceleration states ([0053], “The lengths of the three struts 14a-c can be adjusted together to translate the mirror 13, or at different rates to rotate the mirror 13 about two orthogonal axes”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to have the microscope calibration system of Nishikawa in view of Peschka with the wherein controlling movement of the moveable mirror comprises moving the movable mirror through the intended pattern at a slow speed, at a constant speed, or in a plurality of different acceleration states as taught by Humphris, for the purpose of improving the performance of the microscope through mirror adjustment ([0011]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10, 27, and 42 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: with respect to the allowable subject matter, none of the prior art either alone or in combination disclose or teach of the claimed combination of limitations to warrant a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103.
Specifically, regarding claim 10, none of the prior art either alone or in combination disclose or suggest wherein the projecting step comprising moving the movable mirror to project light from the pattern illumination system sequentially from a first coordinate to a second coordinate and from the first coordinate to a third coordinate, a distance between the first coordinate and the second coordinate being different than a distance between the first coordinate and the third coordinate.
Specifically, regarding claim 27, none of the prior art either alone or in combination disclose or suggest wherein the pattern illumination subsystem is configured to project light in the intended pattern by controlling movement of the movable mirror to project light from the pattern illumination system sequentially from a first coordinate to a second coordinate and from the first coordinate to a third coordinate, a distance between the first coordinate and the second coordinate being different than a distance between the first coordinate and the third coordinate.
Specifically, regarding claim 42, none of the prior art either alone or in combination disclose or suggest wherein controlling movement of the moveable mirror comprises moving the movable mirror to project light from the pattern illumination system sequentially from a first coordinate to a second coordinate and from the first coordinate to a third coordinate, a distance between the first coordinate and the second coordinate being different than a distance between the first coordinate and the third coordinate.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Sakamoto (US 2018/0348497), Deck (US 2018/0130233), Goelles (US 2009/0296207), Christiansen (US 2008/0309929), DIETRICH (DE 102020123562 A1, as evidenced by the machine translation), teach a method of calibrating a microscope system, the microscope system comprising a stage, an imaging subsystem adapted to obtain an image of a sample on the stage, a processing subsystem adapted to identify regions of interest in the sample from images obtained by the imaging subsystem, and a pattern illumination subsystem adapted to illuminate the regions of interest based on coordinates derived from the images by the processing subsystem.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW Y LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-3526. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 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, Pinping Sun can be reached at (571) 270 - 1284. 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 Y LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2872 6 August 2026
Prosecution Insights