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
2. The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 04/10/2026, 03/23/2026, 01/22/2026, 12/26/2024 was/were filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TW 201312101 A (hereinafter Takami), and in view of CN 111341687 A (hereinafter Zhou).
Regarding claim 1, Takami teaches a battery inspection device comprising: an upper inspection unit comprising a first module configured to focus a first light (fig. 1, the path of light going to camera 7) and a first camera mounted above the first module (fig. 1 camera 7 is mounted above); a lower inspection unit disposed horizontally spaced apart from the first module (fig. 1 this is the light focus to camera 5) and comprising a second module configured to focus a second light (fig. 1 light goes to camera 5) and a second camera (fig. 1 camera 7); and “a light-path guide unit coupled to the first module and the second module and configured to split incident light incident from an inspection object into the first light and the second light” (fig. 1 element 10 is the light-path guide unit with beam splitter 11), “guide the first light to the first module, and guide the second light to the second module” (this is shown in fig. 1).
Takami does not explicitly teach a first lens module, a second lens module, and a second camera mounted above the second lens module. Note that it is well known in the arts that a lens is used to focus light onto a camera.
Zhou, from the same field of endeavor as Takami, teaches a first lens module (fig. 1 element 300, p. 7 para 6 lines 4-6), a second lens module (fig. 1 element 300, p. 7 para 6 lines 4-6), and a second camera mounted above the second lens module (fig. 1 element 300, p. 7 para 6 lines 4-6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Zhou to Takami to have a first lens module, a second lens module, and a second camera mounted above the second lens module in order to optimize the focus of the light in the camera.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takami and Zhou as applied to claim(s) 1 above, and further in view of CN 101672802 A (hereinafter Ajharali).
Regarding claim 2, Takami teaches the battery inspection device according to claim 1, wherein the light-path guide unit comprises: a beam splitter configured to split the incident light into the first light and the second light (fig. 1 element 10 is the light-path guide unit with beam splitter 11).
The modified device of Takami does not teach a reflective mirror configured to refract (the examiner will interpret this as “reflect”) the first light toward the first lens module.
Ajharali, from the same field of endeavor as Takami, teaches a reflective mirror configured to refract (the examiner will interpret this as “reflect”) the first light toward the first lens module (fig. 5 element 58, p. 7 para 7 lines 2-4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Ajharali to the modified device of Takami to have a reflective mirror configured to refract (the examiner will interpret this as “reflect”) the first light toward the first lens module in order to increase the reflected light in higher percentage to the camera (p. 7 para 7 lines 2-4).
Claim(s) 3, 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takami, Zhou, and Ajharali as applied to claim(s) 2 above, and further in view of KR 101314539 B1 (hereinafter Yung).
Regarding claim 3, Takami does not teach the battery inspection device according to claim 2, wherein the light-path guide unit further comprises: a barrel configured in the shape of a box and having a passage through which the first light and the second light pass; a first lens connection hole provided on the top of the barrel and to which the first lens module is configured to connected; a second lens connection hole provided on the top of the barrel and to which the second lens module is configured to connected; and a light entrance provided on the bottom of the barrel configured to allow light to enters or exits the barrel.
Yung, from the same field of endeavor as Takami, teaches the battery inspection device according to claim 2, wherein the light-path guide unit further comprises: a barrel (fig. 2, where the two lights go to cameras 10 and 20) configured in the shape of a box (this is shown in fig. 2) and having “a passage through which the first light and the second light pass” (fig. 2 shows two passages); a first lens connection hole provided on the top of the barrel (fig. 2, the connection goes to camera 10) and to which the first module is configured to connected (this is shown in fig. 2); a second lens connection hole provided on the top of the barrel (fig. 2, the connection goes to camera 20) and to which the second module is configured to connected (this is shown in fig. 2); and a light entrance provided on the bottom of the barrel configured to allow light to enters (this is shown in fig. 2, light from the sample goes up to cameras 10 and 20) or exits the barrel.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Yung to Takami to have the battery inspection device according to claim 2, wherein the light-path guide unit further comprises: a barrel configured in the shape of a box and having a passage through which the first light and the second light pass; a first lens connection hole provided on the top of the barrel and to which the first module is configured to connected; a second lens connection hole provided on the top of the barrel and to which the second module is configured to connected; and a light entrance provided on the bottom of the barrel configured to allow light to enters or exits the barrel in order to obtain a wide depth of field (Abstract line 2).
Takami, when modified by Yung, does not teach the first lens module and the second lens module.
Zhou, from the same field of endeavor as Takami, teaches a first lens module (fig. 1 element 300, p. 7 para 6 lines 4-6) and a second lens module (fig. 1 element 300, p. 7 para 6 lines 4-6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Zhou to Takami, when modified by Yung, to have the first lens module and the second lens module in order to optimize the focus of the light in the camera.
Regarding claim 4, the modified device of Takami does not teach the battery inspection device according to claim 3, wherein, inside the passage, the reflective mirror is disposed vertically below the first lens connection hole and the beam splitter is disposed vertically below the second lens connection hole, and wherein the light entrance is provided vertically below the beam splitter.
Ajharali, from the same field of endeavor as Takami, teaches the battery inspection device according to claim 3, wherein, inside the passage (fig. 1 the passage is element 16), the reflective mirror (fig. 8 element 58, p. 7 para 7) is disposed vertically below the first lens connection hole (this is shown in fig. 8) and the beam splitter (fig. 8 element 56, p. 7 para 4 line 11) is disposed vertically below the second lens connection hole (this is shown in fig. 8), and wherein the light entrance is provided vertically below the beam splitter (this is shown in fig. 8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Ajharali to the modified device of Takami to have the battery inspection device according to claim 3,wherein, inside the passage, the reflective mirror is disposed vertically below the first lens connection hole and the beam splitter is disposed vertically below the second lens connection hole, and wherein the light entrance is provided vertically below the beam splitter in order to obtain multiple image surfaces of the sample (p. 1 last para lines 3-4).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takami, Zhou, Ajharali, and Yung as applied to claim(s) 2 above, and further in view of US20100295938A1 (hereinafter Hahn).
Regarding claim 5, the modified device of Takami does not teach the battery inspection device according to claim 3, wherein the light-path guide unit further comprises: a mirror support configured to support and hold the reflective mirror; a splitter support configured to support and hold the beam splitter; and slots through which the mirror support and the splitter support are inserted into the barrel from outside the barrel.
Hahn, from the same field of endeavor as Takami, teaches the battery inspection device according to claim 3, wherein the light-path guide unit further comprises: a mirror support configured to support and hold the reflective mirror (fig. 1 frame 2 supports element 99 in fig. 2); a splitter support configured to support and hold the beam splitter (fig. 1 frame 2 supports element 92 in fig. 2); and slots through which the mirror support and the splitter support are inserted into the barrel from outside the barrel (fig. 1 frame 2 housed all the elements in fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Hahn to the modified device of Takami to have the battery inspection device according to claim 3, wherein the light-path guide unit further comprises: a mirror support configured to support and hold the reflective mirror; a splitter support configured to support and hold the beam splitter; and slots through which the mirror support and the splitter support are inserted into the barrel from outside the barrel in order to for these optical elements to have a stable position so that it will provide a high quality detection of the surface of the wafer as possible (para [0022] last sentence).
Claim(s) 6, 7, 8, 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takami and Zhou as applied to claim(s) 1 above, and further in view of TW M607872 U (hereinafter Sun).
Regarding claim 6, the modified device of Takami does not teach the battery inspection device according to claim 1, wherein the second lens module comprises a telecentric lens.
Sun, from the same field of endeavor as Takami, teaches the battery inspection device according to claim 1, wherein the second lens module comprises a telecentric lens (p. 4 para 1 lines 1-5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Sun to the modified device of Takami to have the battery inspection device according to claim 1, wherein the second lens module comprises a telecentric lens in order to have a low distortion, and maintain the image clarity and accurate screening of defects (p. 4 para 1 lines 1-5).
Regarding claim 7, the modified device of Takami does not teach the battery inspection device according to claim 1, wherein the upper inspection unit comprises a first lighting equipment coupled to the first lens module.
Sun, from the same field of endeavor as Takami, teaches the battery inspection device according to claim 1, wherein the upper inspection unit comprises a first lighting equipment coupled to the first lens module (fig. 1 element 30, p. 3 last para lines 1-3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Sun to the modified device of Takami to have the battery inspection device according to claim 1, wherein the upper inspection unit comprises a first lighting equipment coupled to the first lens module in order to irradiate the sample and obtain images to inspect surface defect of the sample (p. 1 para 6).
Regarding claim 8, the modified device of Takami does not teach the battery inspection device according to claim 7, wherein the first lighting equipment is coaxial projection lighting equipment.
Sun, from the same field of endeavor as Takami, teaches the battery inspection device according to claim 7, wherein the first lighting equipment is coaxial projection lighting equipment (fig. 2 elements 32, 52 are the same axes for each corresponding camera; note that the instant application does not define or describe a “coaxial projection lighting equipment”; the examiner interprets “coaxial projection lighting equipment” as the lighting equipment is in the same axis as the cameras).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Sun to the modified device of Takami to have the battery inspection device according to claim 7, wherein the first lighting equipment is coaxial projection lighting equipment in order to have parallel lights irradiating to the workpiece (Abstract lines 8-10).
Regarding claim 9, the modified device of Takami does not teach the battery inspection device according to claim 1, wherein the lower inspection unit comprises a second lighting equipment coupled to the second lens module.
Sun, from the same field of endeavor as Takami, teaches the battery inspection device according to claim 1, wherein the lower inspection unit comprises a second lighting equipment coupled to the second lens module (fig. 1 element 52, p. 4 para 4 lines 1-3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Sun to the modified device of Takami to have the battery inspection device according to claim 1, wherein the lower inspection unit comprises a second lighting equipment coupled to the second lens module in order to irradiate the sample and obtain images to inspect surface defect on the sample (p. 1 para 6).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takami, Zhou, and Sun as applied to claim(s) 9 above, and further in view of US 20130188038 A1 (hereinafter Tanimoto).
Regarding claim 10, Takami, when modified Zhou and Sun, does not teach the battery inspection device according to claim 9, wherein the second lighting equipment is parallel-light lighting equipment (note that the instant application does not define or describe a “parallel-light lighting equipment”; the examiner interprets “parallel-light lighting equipment” as the lighting equipment making the light parallel).
Tanimoto, from the same field of endeavor as Takami, teaches the battery inspection device according to claim 9, wherein the second lighting equipment is parallel-light lighting equipment (fig 1 element 22, para [0048] lines 1-17).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Tanimoto to Takami, when modified Zhou and Sun, to have the battery inspection device according to claim 9, wherein the second lighting equipment is parallel-light lighting equipment in order to inspect a tablet enclosed in a medicine package (para [0001]).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takami, Zhou, and Sun as applied to claim(s) 9 above, and further in view of WO 2010024082 A1 (hereinafter Shizunori).
Regarding claim 11, Takami, when modified Zhou and Sun, does not teach the battery inspection device according to claim 9, wherein the lower inspection unit comprises an aperture controller capable of controlling the amount of light entering the second lens module from the second lighting equipment.
Shizunori, from the same field of endeavor as Takami, teaches the battery inspection device according to claim 9, wherein the lower inspection unit comprises an aperture controller capable of controlling the amount of light entering the second lens module from the second lighting equipment (p. 3 para 3 lines 3-6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Shizunori to Takami, when modified Zhou and Sun, to have the battery inspection device according to claim 9, wherein the lower inspection unit comprises an aperture controller capable of controlling the amount of light entering the second lens module from the second lighting equipment in order to have a clear bright image in the vicinity of the dark region created by defects such as bubbles existing in the bright field image (p. 3 para 5 last sentence).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takami, Zhou, Sun, and Shizunori as applied to claim(s) 9 above, in view of KR 20110117371 A (hereinafter Jun), and further in view of JP 3353923 B2 (hereinafter Saito).
Regarding claim 12, Takami, when modified Zhou, Sun, and Shizunori, does not teach the battery inspection device according to claim 11, wherein the aperture controller comprises: an aperture unit having an aperture mounted to a lighting connection hole provided in the second lens module for connection of the second lighting equipment, and configured such that a cogwheel provided on the outer surface of the aperture unit rotates clockwise or counterclockwise to gradually increase or reduce a diameter of the aperture, thereby adjusting the amount of light entering the lighting connection hole; a motor bracket coupled to the outer side of the second lens module; a drive motor fixed to the bracket; and a timing belt connected to the drive motor and the cogwheel.
Jun, from the same field of endeavor as Takami, teaches the battery inspection device according to claim 11, wherein the aperture controller comprises: an aperture unit having an aperture mounted to a lighting connection hole provided in the second lens module for connection of the second lighting equipment (this is the aperture value, p. 5 para 8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Jun to Takami, when modified Zhou, Sun, and Shizunori, to have the battery inspection device according to claim 11, wherein the aperture controller comprises: an aperture unit having an aperture mounted to a lighting connection hole provided in the second lens module for connection of the second lighting equipment in order to control the amount of light received by each corresponding camera.
Takami, when modified Zhou, Sun, Shizunori, and Jun, does not teach configured such that a cogwheel provided on the outer surface of the aperture unit rotates clockwise or counterclockwise to gradually increase or reduce a diameter of the aperture, thereby adjusting the amount of light entering the lighting connection hole; a motor bracket coupled to the outer side of the second lens module; a drive motor fixed to the bracket; and a timing belt connected to the drive motor and the cogwheel.
Saito, from the same field of endeavor as Takami, teaches configured such that a cogwheel (this is shown in figs. 3 and 4, p. 4 para 7 to p. 5 para 6) provided on the outer surface of the aperture unit rotates clockwise or counterclockwise to gradually increase or reduce a diameter of the aperture (p. 5 para 4), thereby adjusting the amount of light entering the lighting connection hole (these apertures control the amount of light in the microscope); a motor bracket coupled to the outer side of the second lens module (fig. 4, p. 4 para 13 to p. 5 para 6); a drive motor fixed to the bracket (fig. 4, p. 4 para 13 to p. 5 para 6); and a timing belt connected to the drive motor and the cogwheel (fig. 4, p. 4 para 13 to p. 5 para 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Saito to Takami, when modified Zhou, Sun, Shizunori, and Jun, to have configured such that a cogwheel provided on the outer surface of the aperture unit rotates clockwise or counterclockwise to gradually increase or reduce a diameter of the aperture, thereby adjusting the amount of light entering the lighting connection hole; a motor bracket coupled to the outer side of the second lens module; a drive motor fixed to the bracket; and a timing belt connected to the drive motor and the cogwheel in order to have an extremely excellent operability of the aperture (p. 2 para 1).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERTO FABIAN JR whose telephone number is (571)272-3632. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (8-12, 1-5).
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, KARA GEISEL can be reached at (571)272-2416. 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.
/ROBERTO FABIAN JR/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/Kara E. Geisel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights