DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-23 filed September 26th 2024 are pending in the current 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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1, 13, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Owens et al. (US2018/0252936) in view of Case et al. (US2011/0175997)
Consider claim 1, where Owens teaches a system comprising: a light source configured to emit light; (See Owens ¶74, 149 where the substrate is illuminated by an illumination mechanism (not shown), and light from the substrate travels along an optical path through the objective lens 130. In other embodiments, the illumination source is mounted above the substrate, such that light collected by the objective lens is reflected by the field to the objective lens) a stage configured to support a substrate, wherein the stage is movable to scan the light across the substrate disposed on the stage; (See Owens Fig. 1 and ¶74 where the optical scanning system comprises a moveable stage 110 configured to move a mounted substrate 120 along an axis. The substrate 120 comprises one or more fields 121 that are individually imaged by the optical scanning system as the stage is continuously moving.) a camera configured to receive reflected light from the substrate and capture an image of the substrate based on the reflected light received within an exposure time; (See Owens Fig. 1 and ¶74, 104 where an image of the field 121 is captured by a camera 160 comprising an image sensor. The rotation of the velocity tracking mirror allows imaging of the substrate portion corresponding to the field by the camera during the exposure time, thereby allowing sufficient exposure onto the camera sensor.) and a mirror configured to direct the reflected light to the camera, wherein the mirror is configured to rotate at a constant velocity that is synchronized with a velocity of the stage and the exposure time of the camera. (See Owens Fig. 1 and ¶74, 145 where the image of the moving substrate is stabilized with respect to an image sensor by a velocity tracking mirror 140 and an acceleration tracking mirror 150. An image of the field 121 is captured by a camera 160 comprising an image sensor. The controller module can be used to create the correct waveforms to drive the movement of certain components, such as rotatable mirrors to adjust the optical path, and synchronize them to stage motion based on stage encoder or master clock values. )
Owens teaches a substrate 120, however Owens does not explicitly teach a workpiece. However, in an analogous field of endeavor Case teaches a workpiece. (See Case ¶18 where each camera 2A through 2H simultaneously images and digitizes a rectangular area on a workpiece or substrate, such as printed circuit board 10.) Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the scanned object of the substrate of Owens to the workpiece of Case. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform the modification or the advantage of/ benefit of using a known workpiece that is suitable for automated inspection such as the described substrate.
Consider claim 13, where Owens in view of Case teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the stage is movable in along a first axis, and the mirror is configured to rotate along an axis orthogonal to the first axis. (See Owens Fig. 1 and ¶8, 74, 104 where a first electrical motor operably coupled to said velocity tracking mirror to adjust the angle of the tracking mirror along said axis of stage movement in said optical path; a controller module operably coupled to said first electrical motor to send a first driving signal to said first electrical motor, wherein said first driving signal is a function of a velocity measurement of the stage movement along said axis; an acceleration tracking mirror mounted along said optical path; a second electrical motor operably coupled to said acceleration tracking mirror to adjust the angle of the acceleration tracking mirror along said axis of stage movement in said optical path, wherein said controller module is operably coupled to said second electrical motor to send a second driving signal to said second electrical motor, wherein said second driving signal is a function of the change of the stage velocity along said axis. )
Consider claim 18, where Owens teaches a method comprising: emitting light from a light source; (See Owens ¶74, 149 where the substrate is illuminated by an illumination mechanism (not shown), and light from the substrate travels along an optical path through the objective lens 130. In other embodiments, the illumination source is mounted above the substrate, such that light collected by the objective lens is reflected by the field to the objective lens) moving a stage supporting a substrate to scan the light across the substrate; (See Owens Fig. 1 and ¶74 where the optical scanning system comprises a moveable stage 110 configured to move a mounted substrate 120 along an axis. The substrate 120 comprises one or more fields 121 that are individually imaged by the optical scanning system as the stage is continuously moving.) directing light reflected from the substrate to a camera with a mirror; rotating the mirror in a first direction at a constant velocity that is synchronized with a velocity of the stage; (See Owens Fig. 1 and ¶74, 145 where the image of the moving substrate is stabilized with respect to an image sensor by a velocity tracking mirror 140 and an acceleration tracking mirror 150. An image of the field 121 is captured by a camera 160 comprising an image sensor. The controller module can be used to create the correct waveforms to drive the movement of certain components, such as rotatable mirrors to adjust the optical path, and synchronize them to stage motion based on stage encoder or master clock values. ) and capturing an image of the substrate with the camera based on the reflected light received by the camera within an exposure time, wherein the mirror is configured to rotate at the constant velocity for a duration of the exposure time of the camera. (See Owens Fig. 1 and ¶74, 104 where an image of the field 121 is captured by a camera 160 comprising an image sensor. The rotation of the velocity tracking mirror allows imaging of the substrate portion corresponding to the field by the camera during the exposure time, thereby allowing sufficient exposure onto the camera sensor.)
Owens teaches a substrate 120, however Owens does not explicitly teach a workpiece. However, in an analogous field of endeavor Case teaches a workpiece. (See Case ¶18 where each camera 2A through 2H simultaneously images and digitizes a rectangular area on a workpiece or substrate, such as printed circuit board 10.) Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the scanned object of the substrate of Owens to the workpiece of Case. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform the modification or the advantage of/ benefit of using a known workpiece that is suitable for automated inspection such as the described substrate.
Claim(s) 2-6 , 17 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Owens in view of Case as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Im et al. (US2013/0201634)
Consider claim 2, where Owens in view of Case teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the light source is configured to emit light according to a strobing frequency, (See Owens ¶113 where in some embodiments an acousto-optic modulator (AOM) switch (or other type of fast switch) may be used to turn on and off the illumination light that is incident onto the substrate being imaged.) the light is configured to illuminate the workpiece for a duration of a pulse width of the strobing frequency, and the mirror is configured to rotate at a tracking velocity that is further synchronized with the duration of the pulse width of the light source. (See Case ¶18-19 where Illuminator 9 provides a series of pulsed, short duration illumination fields referred to as strobed illumination. The short duration of each illumination field, or pattern, effectively "freezes" the image of printed circuit board 10 to suppress motion blurring. Two or more sets of images for each location on printed circuit board 10 are generated by camera array 4 with different illumination patterns for each exposure. ) (See Owens Fig. 1 and ¶74, 104 where an image of the field 121 is captured by a camera 160 comprising an image sensor. The rotation of the velocity tracking mirror allows imaging of the substrate portion corresponding to the field by the camera during the exposure time, thereby allowing sufficient exposure onto the camera sensor.)
Owens teaches a rotating mirror operating at a tracking velocity, however Owens does not explicitly teach a constant velocity. However, in an analogous field of endeavor Im teaches a constant velocity. (See Im Fig. 4 and ¶49 where a rotating optical element is used with faceted mirrors (a polygonal mirror, for example, from Lincoln Laser Company, Phoenix, Ariz.) to create a saw-tooth like motion of the beam (FIG. 7c). The advantage of the rotating optical element is that it moves at a constant velocity, eliminating the need to accelerate and decelerate.) Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art that the mirror of Owens may be substituted with the polygonal mirror as taught by Im. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform the substitution for the advantage of/ benefit of simplifying the system by eliminating the need to accelerate or decelerate.
Consider claim 3, where Owens in view of Case in view of Im teaches the system of claim 2, wherein the camera is configured to capture a plurality of images of the workpiece according to a frame rate, the frame rate is synchronized with the strobing frequency, (See Owens ¶111 where for better efficiency, the amount of time spent by a tracking mirror on each imaged area is made commensurate with the camera's frame rate, thereby allowing sufficient time to expose an image of each field onto the camera.) and the mirror is configured to rotate at the constant velocity that is further synchronized with the frame rate of the camera. (See Owens ¶130 where The motion controller component can then generate a motion profile for the single motion tracking mirror that is a function of both the constant or otherwise anticipated velocity of the substrate or stage (e.g., a sawtooth waveform) and velocity fluctuations determined from the signal from the sensor or that are predetermined for the stage.)
Consider claim 4, where Owens in view of Case in view of Im teaches the system of claim 2, further comprising: a motor configured to rotate the mirror; and a processor in electronic communication with the motor, wherein the processor is configured to send a mirror signal to the motor to control rotation of the mirror, such that the mirror rotates at the tracking velocity for the duration of the pulse width of the light source and the exposure time of the camera. (See Owens ¶130 where The motion controller component can then generate a motion profile for the single motion tracking mirror that is a function of both the constant or otherwise anticipated velocity of the substrate or stage (e.g., a sawtooth waveform) and velocity fluctuations determined from the signal from the sensor or that are predetermined for the stage.)
Owens teaches a rotating mirror operating at a tracking velocity, however Owens does not explicitly teach a constant velocity. However, in an analogous field of endeavor Im teaches a constant velocity. (See Im Fig. 4 and ¶49 where a rotating optical element is used with faceted mirrors (a polygonal mirror, for example, from Lincoln Laser Company, Phoenix, Ariz.) to create a saw-tooth like motion of the beam (FIG. 7c). The advantage of the rotating optical element is that it moves at a constant velocity, eliminating the need to accelerate and decelerate.) Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art that the mirror of Owens may be substituted with the polygonal mirror as taught by Im. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform the substitution for the advantage of/ benefit of simplifying the system by eliminating the need to accelerate or decelerate.
Consider claim 5, where Owens in view of Case teaches the system of claim 4, wherein the processor is in electronic communication with the light source and the camera, and the processor is further configured to send a strobing signal to the light source to control the strobing frequency of the light source and send an exposure signal to the camera to control the exposure time and frame rate of the camera, such that the exposure time of the camera is encompassed by the duration of the pulse width of the light source. (See Case ¶18-19, 29 where Illuminator 9 provides a series of pulsed, short duration illumination fields referred to as strobed illumination. The short duration of each illumination field, or pattern, effectively "freezes" the image of printed circuit board 10 to suppress motion blurring. Two or more sets of images for each location on printed circuit board 10 are generated by camera array 4 with different illumination patterns for each exposure. Timing generator 86 generates the appropriate signals to begin each image exposure by camera array 4 and command strobe lamp control 84 to energize the appropriate light sources at the proper time. Those of ordinary skill in the art will recognize that the “freezing” effect happens when the frame rate of the camera and the strobe rate are synchronized )
Consider claim 6, where Owens in view of Case in view of Im teaches the system of claim 5, wherein one period of the mirror signal corresponds to one period of the strobing signal and one period of the exposure signal. (See Owens Fig. 1 and ¶147 where the controller module can also be used to synchronize components of the optical scanning device to enable capture of an image of a field of a substrate on a moving stage. In addition to linking motion of the rotatable mirrors to the velocity of a moveable stage, the controller module can also control other components of the device. In some embodiments, the controller module comprises a mechanism to control illumination of the field. For example, the controller module may send a signal to an illumination device, such as a laser, to time illumination with the image capture process.)
Consider claim 17, where Owens in view of Case teaches the system of claim 1, where Owens teaches a rotating mirror operating at a tracking velocity, however Owens does not explicitly teach wherein the mirror is a polygonal mirror. However, in an analogous field of endeavor Im teaches wherein the mirror is a polygonal mirror. (See Im Fig. 4 and ¶49 where a rotating optical element is used with faceted mirrors (a polygonal mirror, for example, from Lincoln Laser Company, Phoenix, Ariz.) to create a saw-tooth like motion of the beam (FIG. 7c). The advantage of the rotating optical element is that it moves at a constant velocity, eliminating the need to accelerate and decelerate.) Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art that the mirror of Owens may be substituted with the polygonal mirror as taught by Im. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform the substitution for the advantage of/ benefit of simplifying the system by eliminating the need to accelerate or decelerate.
Consider claim 19, where Owens in view of Case teaches the method of claim 18, wherein emitting light from the light source comprises: emitting light from the light source according to a strobing frequency, wherein the light illuminates the workpiece for a duration of a pulse width of the strobing frequency; (See Owens ¶113 where in some embodiments an acousto-optic modulator (AOM) switch (or other type of fast switch) may be used to turn on and off the illumination light that is incident onto the substrate being imaged.) wherein the mirror is further configured to rotate at the tracking velocity for the duration of the pulse width of the light source. (See Case ¶18-19 where Illuminator 9 provides a series of pulsed, short duration illumination fields referred to as strobed illumination. The short duration of each illumination field, or pattern, effectively "freezes" the image of printed circuit board 10 to suppress motion blurring. Two or more sets of images for each location on printed circuit board 10 are generated by camera array 4 with different illumination patterns for each exposure. ) (See Owens Fig. 1 and ¶74, 104 where an image of the field 121 is captured by a camera 160 comprising an image sensor. The rotation of the velocity tracking mirror allows imaging of the substrate portion corresponding to the field by the camera during the exposure time, thereby allowing sufficient exposure onto the camera sensor.)
Owens teaches a rotating mirror operating at a tracking velocity, however Owens does not explicitly teach a constant velocity. However, in an analogous field of endeavor Im teaches a constant velocity. (See Im Fig. 4 and ¶49 where a rotating optical element is used with faceted mirrors (a polygonal mirror, for example, from Lincoln Laser Company, Phoenix, Ariz.) to create a saw-tooth like motion of the beam (FIG. 7c). The advantage of the rotating optical element is that it moves at a constant velocity, eliminating the need to accelerate and decelerate.) Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art that the mirror of Owens may be substituted with the polygonal mirror as taught by Im. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform the substitution for the advantage of/ benefit of simplifying the system by eliminating the need to accelerate or decelerate.
Claim(s) 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Owens in view of Case as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Ding et al. (US2025/0102822)
Consider claim 14, where Owens in view of Case teaches the system of claim 1, however they do not explicitly teach further comprising an optical head configured to carry the light source, the camera, and the mirror, wherein the stage is movable along a first axis and the optical head is movable along a second axis that is orthogonal to the first axis. However, in an analogous field of endeavor Ding teaches further comprising an optical head configured to carry the light source, the camera, and the mirror, wherein the stage is movable along a first axis and the optical head is movable along a second axis that is orthogonal to the first axis. (See Ding Fig. 2 and ¶29-30, 37 where the stage 202 may be movable in the x, y, z, and θ directions. The image capture system 204 may be coupled to an actuator to move the image capture system in the x, y directions.) Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the stage movement and mirror movement (see citation in claim 13) of Owens to be have more freedom of movement as taught by Ding. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform the modification for the advantage of/ benefit of having greater control of the relative movement between the stage and sensor system in order to reduce motion blur. (See Ding ¶6-7)
Consider claim 15, where Owens in view of Case in view of Ding teaches the system of claim 14, wherein the mirror is configured to rotate along an axis orthogonal to the second axis. (See Ding Fig. 5 and ¶19-30, 36-37 where a corresponding angular velocity ω of the deflection can compensate the motion blur, which can be represented as: ω=v/f which is in the X, Y plane)
Consider claim 16, where Owens in view of Case in view of Ding teaches the system of claim 14, wherein the optical head is movable along a third axis that is parallel to the first axis to move the camera to compensate for movement of the stage. (See Ding Fig. 2 and ¶29-30, 37 where the stage 202 may be movable in the x, y, z, and θ directions. The image capture system 204 may be coupled to an actuator to move the image capture system in the x, y directions. Thus, the optical head can move in the Y direction parallel to the stage direction)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7-12 and 20-23 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: Claim 7 recites the following limitation: “The system of claim 5, wherein the light source is a multi-modal light source configured to emit light of a first illumination modality for a first duration of the strobing signal and emit light of a second illumination modality for a second duration of the strobing signal, and the first illumination modality is different from the second illumination modality.” It should be noted that Case teaches a first illumination field type and a second illumination field type. However, there is no mention of a mirror within Case. While the prior art teaches the individual elements of the claim language, the interaction between the first illumination, second illumination, mirror rotation, stage velocity, and camera frame rate would be difficult to implement.
Claims 8-12 are allowed based upon their dependence form claim 7 and are objected to as allowable based upon their dependence from claim 7. Claim 20 recites a similar limitation to claim 7 and is allowed for similar reasons to claim 7. Claims 21-23 depend from claim 20 and are objected to as allowable based upon their dependence from claim 20.
Katzir et al. (US2021/0360140) also teaches illumination modalities, however, the mirror in Katzir does not appear to move.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM LU whose telephone number is (571)270-1809. The examiner can normally be reached 10am-6:30pm.
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, Matthew Eason can be reached at 571-270-7230. 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.
WILLIAM LU
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2624
/WILLIAM LU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2624
Prosecution Insights