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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 5, the claim recites the limitation "the first, second, third, and fourth displacement increments". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 5 does not define a first, second, third, and fourth displacement increment, so it is unclear whether "the first, second, third, and fourth displacement increments" each correspond to a specific numerical displacement value, or whether they are just arbitrary displacement increments that are not equal to one another. Similarly, claim 1, from which claim 5 depends, makes no recitation of a first, second, third, and fourth displacement increment, instead merely requiring that the size of the displacement increment is varied. Therefore claim 5 is unclear and thus indefinite. Claim 5 is interpreted to mean that the displacement increment in the y-direction is constant over several linear scans of the sample.
Further regarding claim 5, the claim recites the limitation “the several linear scans of the sample”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 5 fails to recite any limitation regarding the performance of several linear scans of the sample, so it is unclear what the requirements are for the additional several linear scans of the sample to satisfy the limitation. Additionally, claim 1, from which claim 5 depends, fails to recite any limitations regarding performing several linear scans of the sample, and instead only recites “a linear scanning of the sample”, meaning only one linear scanning of the sample is performed. Therefore claim 5 is further found to be unclear and thus indefinite. Claim 5 is interpreted to indicate that performance of further linear scanning of the sample is possible.
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, 2, 4-6, 8-11, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Czurratis et al. (DE 102006005448 A1, “Czurratis”. For all text citations, refer to the attached machine translation) in view of Grimard et al. (US 20220281107 A1, “Grimard”).
Regarding claim 1, Czurratis discloses a method for operating a scanning acoustic microscope (pg. 2, the invention is related to a method for acoustic scanning microscopy which reduces the measurement time per sample, allowing for safe detection), the method comprising:
scanning a sample (Fig. 6 (2)) in an X-Y plane by a transducer unit having one or more transducers(fig. 6 (60), (61), (62), (63), and (64)) (pg. 2, with at least 2 transducers, scanning is completed in the X-Y direction. The sample becomes pixel for pixel scanned based on scan lines so that the entire surface of the sample is detected);
wherein the scanning comprises: moving the transducer unit in the X direction for a linear scanning of the sample (pg. 3-4, mechanical scanning takes place in the form of a meander. For a given deflection at 50Hz and 512 pixels per scan line, it takes about 10 seconds to produce a 512x512 pixel image)(Fig. 3 illustrates a plurality of scan lines in the x-direction that make up meander (21))(See annotated Fig. 3, below);
after the linear scanning of the sample by the transducer unit, displacing the transducer unit in the Y direction by a displacement increment (pg. 3-4, mechanical scanning takes place in the form of a meander. For a given deflection at 50Hz and 512 pixels per scan line, it takes about 10 seconds to produce a 512x512 pixel image)(Fig. 3 illustrates a plurality of scan lines in the x-direction that make up meander (21). These scan lines are separated by a displacement increment in the y-direction) (See annotated Fig. 3, below);
PNG
media_image1.png
780
625
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 3
Czurritas fails to teach
and varying a size of the displacement increment of the transducer unit in the Y direction for the scanning of the sample.
Grimard teaches
and varying a size of the displacement increment of the transducer unit in the Y direction for the scanning of the sample ([0103], An array includes 4 transducers and is thus able to scan a width of 4 adjacent grid positions (76) of the surface (70). Successive scanning paths distributed along the index axis may have widths of 2, 2, 1, 3 and then 4 transducers)(Fig. 7 illustrates a meandering scan path of the transducer array with scan lines across a scan (x) axis which are separated by a displacement along an index (y) axis. the displacement between adjacent scan passes (60), (62), (66), and (68) being varied).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of Czurratis, to further include the teachings of Grimard in order to yield a method of operating a scanning acoustic microscope that has the functionality to vary the y-direction displacement of the transducer assembly in order to allow customized scanning of objects with complex or curved geometry in a manner that would allow more accurate imaging to be conducted (Grimard at [0102]-[0103]). Making such a modification would amount to merely applying a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale C.
Regarding claim 2, Czurratis, as modified in view of Grimard teaches the method according to claim 1. Czurratis further teaches
after the displacement of the transducer unit in the Y direction, performing at least one further linear scanning of the sample by the transducer unit in the Y direction (pg. 3-4, mechanical scanning takes place in the form of a meander. For a given deflection at 50Hz and 512 pixels per scan line, it takes about 10 seconds to produce a 512x512 pixel image)(Fig. 3 illustrates a plurality of scan lines in the x-direction as part of meander (21). Separating each of the plurality of scan lines is a y-direction displacement)(See annotated Fig. 3, above).
Regarding claim 4, Czurratis, as modified in view of Grimard teaches the method according to claim 1. Czurratis further teaches
performing several linear scans of the sample by the transducer unit(pg. 3-4, mechanical scanning takes place in the form of a meander. For a given deflection at 50Hz and 512 pixels per scan line, it takes about 10 seconds to produce a 512x512 pixel image)(Fig. 3 illustrates a plurality of scan lines in the x-direction that make up meander (21). These scan lines are separated by a displacement increment in the y-direction);
displacing the transducer unit is displaced in each of the several linear scans of the sample by a first displacement increment in the Y direction(pg. 3-4, mechanical scanning takes place in the form of a meander. For a given deflection at 50Hz and 512 pixels per scan line, it takes about 10 seconds to produce a 512x512 pixel image)(Fig. 3 illustrates a plurality of scan lines in the x-direction that make up meander (21). These scan lines are separated by a displacement increment in the y-direction)
Grimard further teaches
and one or more of: after a predetermined number of the several linear scans of the sample, displacing the transducer unit in the Y direction by a second displacement increment greater than the first displacement increment (Fig. 7, [0100], in the example of Fig. 7, array (30) of transducers covers a the surface (40) of an object in five scanning passes (60), (62),(64), (66), and (68). Passes (60), (62), and (64) cover the curved portion (44) of the surface (40). Only two transducers of the array are enabled in the scanning passes (62) and (64). Afterwards, during scanning pass (66), 8 transducers are enabled.)(Fig. 7 illustrates the scan pass path of the array (30) with a black arrow. The index (y) axis displacement between scanning pass (62) and (64) is two grid spaces, followed by a displacement increment of 4 grid spaces between scan passes (64) and (66)).
Regarding claim 5, Czurratis, as modified in view of Grimard teaches the method according to claim 1. Czurratis further teaches
wherein one or more of the first
Regarding claim 6, Czurratis, as modified in view of Grimard teaches the method according to claim 1. Czurratis further teaches
the moving of the transducer unit comprises moving the transducer unit (10) in a meandering course in the X-Y plane relative to the sample (pg. 2, with at least 2 transducers, scanning is completed in the X-Y direction. The sample becomes pixel for pixel scanned based on scan lines so that the entire surface of the sample is detected)(pg. 3-4, mechanical scanning takes place in the form of a meander. For a given deflection at 50Hz and 512 pixels per scan line, it takes about 10 seconds to produce a 512x512 pixel image).
Regarding claim 8, Czurratis, as modified in view of Grimard teaches the method according to claim 1. Grimard further teaches
wherein the transducer unit comprises several transducers arranged in the Y direction, one of,
the method comprises performing several linear scans in the X direction by the several transducers, the distances of the linear scans by the transducers are equidistant in the Y direction ([0066], as the array (30) of transducers (12) is moved between grid positions along the scan axis, it causes the transducers of the array to emit and receive ultrasonic signals on a first scan pass (32)) (Fig. 2 illustrates the array (30) consisting of transducers (12). Each transducer (12) completes a scan line corresponding with each of a first pass (32) and a second pass (34), which have an associated equidistant length in an index axis (y-axis) direction of 1 grid position) and,
after the performance of the several linear scans by the transducer unit, displacing the transducer unit in the Y direction with the displacement increment, which corresponds to the product of the equidistant distance of the linear scans with the number of the linear scans and the number of the transducers of the transducer unit in the Y direction([0066] When all grid positions of the first scan pass (32) have been completed, the array of transducers is moved in the direction of the index axis and a second scan pass (34) is initiated).
Regarding claim 9, Czurratis, as modified in view of Grimard teaches the method according to claim 1. Grimard further teaches
wherein the transducer unit with several transducers comprises a length in the Y direction (Fig. 2 illustrates the array (12) consisting of transducers (30) which each have a length in the direction of the index axis (or y-axis)),
wherein, after several linear scans in the X direction by the transducer unit, displacing the transducer unit in the Y direction with a displacement increment that corresponds to the length of the transducer unit([0066]as the array (30) of transducers (12) is moved between grid positions along the scan axis, it causes the transducers of the array to emit and receive ultrasonic signals on a first scan pass (32). When all grid positions of the first scan pass (32) have been completed, the array of transducers is moved in the direction of the index axis and a second scan pass (34) is initiated)(Fig. 2 illustrates the array (30), with an associated array length of 4 grid positions corresponding to each of the 4 transducers (12), being displaced in the index axis direction after the completion of the first pass (32) by 4 grid positions prior to commencing the second scan pass (34)),
wherein the respective distances of several linear scans performed prior to the displacement of the transducer unit in the Y direction with the displacement increment that corresponds to the length of the transducer unit correspond to a natural fraction of the length of the transducer unit(Fig. 2 illustrates each transducer (12) of the array (30) having a length in the index axis (y-axis) direction of 1 grid cell. Additionally Fig. 2 illustrates a first scan pass (32) of the array (12), where each transducer (30) completes a scan line of 12 grid cells, thus the fraction of the transducer length and scan line distance is equal to 1/12)
Regarding claim 10, Czurratis, as modified in view of Grimard teaches the method according to claim 1. Grimard further teaches
wherein the transducer unit comprises several transducer elements arranged in the Y direction, one of
wherein the transducers each comprise a width in the Y direction, performing several linear scans in the X direction([0066]as the array (30) of transducers (12) is moved between grid positions along the scan axis, it causes the transducers of the array to emit and receive ultrasonic signals on a first scan pass (32). (Fig. 2 illustrates the array (12) consisting of transducers (30) which each have a width of 1 grid position in the direction of the index axis (or y-axis))
wherein distances between the several linear scans correspond to a fraction of the width of the transducers(Fig. 2 illustrates each transducer (12) completed a scan line with respect to a first scan pass (32) and a second scan pass (34). Each transducers (12) first scan line associated with the first scan pass (32) is four grid positions in the index axis direction away from its second scan line associated with the second scan pass (34), thus the fraction relating the width of the transducers to the distances between scan lines is ¼),
and, after performance of the several linear scans, displacing the transducer unit in the Y direction by the displacement increment, which corresponds to a multiple of the width of the transducer elements ([0066],When all grid positions of the first scan pass (32) have been completed, the array of transducers is moved in the direction of the index axis and a second scan pass (34) is initiated)(Fig. 2 illustrates the displacement of the transducers (12) in the array (30) being displaced by four grid positions in the index axis direction, which is a multiple of 4 with respect to the width of the individual transducers (12)).
Regarding claim 11, Czurratis, as modified in view of Grimard teaches the method according to claim 10. Grimard further teaches
wherein the width in the Y direction is constant (Implicit, Fig. 2 illustrates the array (12) consisting of transducers (30) which each have a width of 1 grid position in the direction of the index axis (or y-axis), which corresponds to a physical width of the individual transducer (12)) .
Regarding claim 13, Czurratis, as modified in view of Grimard teaches the method according to claim 1. Czurratis further teaches
wherein the transducer unit comprises several transducers (fig. 6, pg. 4, fig. 6 is a schematic of a scanner with a variety of transducers (60), (61), (62), (63), and (64))
and the method further comprises operating the transducers in parallel (pg. 2, acoustic scanning microscope consists of two or more transducers, which are arranged so that they can simultaneously scan different points of a sample).
Claim(s) 3, 7, and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Czurratis in view of Grimard as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Komsky et al. (US 20140116143 A1, “Komsky”).
Regarding claim 3, Czurratis, as modified in view of Grimard teaches the method according to claim 1. Czurratis, as modified in view of Grimard fails to teach
wherein each of the one or more transducers comprising a lens.
Komsky teaches
wherein each of the one or more transducers comprising a lens (Fig. 5, [0035], different water path (WP) delays can be achieved when transducers in the assembly are positioned at different distances from the top of the surface of the inspected part. WP time delays can subsequently affect selection of the individual transducers in the assembly. All transducer parameters in focal length (FL1)/(FL2)/(FL3), lenses (2101)/(2102)/(2103), and piezoelectric crystals (2131)/(2132)/(2133) dimensions are selected to satisfy the required inspection resolution).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of Czurratis, as modified in view of the teachings of Grimard, to further include the teachings of Komsky in order to yield a method of operating a scanning acoustic microscope in which the individual transducers are able simultaneously image various portions of the scanned object which may have different material construction or configuration, as well as different required sensitivities and axial resolutions (Komsky at [0035]). Making such a modification amounts to merely using a known technique to improve similar devices in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale C.
Regarding claim 7, Czurratis, as modified in view of Grimard teaches the method according to claim 1. Czurratis, as modified in view of Grimard fails to teach
wherein one of: the transducer unit comprises several transducers each comprising a lens,
wherein at least two transducers of the several transducers comprise different focal lengths,
or the transducer unit comprises several transducers each comprising a lens,
wherein the several transducers comprise one or more of a same focal length and are arranged next to each other in a linear or rhombic arrangement in the Y direction.
Komsky teaches
wherein one of: the transducer unit comprises several transducers each comprising a lens (Fig. 5 illustrates three transducers each having a lens (2101), (2102), and (2103)),
wherein at least two transducers of the several transducers comprise different focal lengths (Fig. 5 illustrates three transducers each having different focal lengths (FL1), (FL2), and (FL3))
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of Czurratis, as modified in view of the teachings of Grimard, to further include the teachings of Komsky in order to yield a method of operating a scanning acoustic microscope in which the individual transducers are able simultaneously image various portions of the scanned object which may have different material construction or configuration, as well as different required sensitivities and axial resolutions (Komsky at [0035]). Making such a modification amounts to merely using a known technique to improve similar devices in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale C.
Regarding claim 14, Czurratis, as modified in view of Grimard and Komsky teaches the method according to claim 7.
Grimard further teaches
[two transducers arranged in a linear arrangement in the Y direction] (Fig.2, [0066], scanning flat objects includes an array (30) of ultrasonic transducers (12) arranged in a linear pattern parallel to the index axis)(Fig. 2 illustrates a scan axis, which is equivalent to an x-axis in which the array (30) travels and performs scan lines and an index axis, which is equivalent to a y-axis)
Komsky further teaches
[two transducers with different focal lengths] (Fig. 5, [0035], different water path (WP) delays can be achieved when transducers in the assembly are positioned at different distances from the top of the surface of the inspected part. WP time delays can subsequently affect selection of the individual transducers in the assembly. All transducer parameters in focal length (FL1)/(FL2)/(FL3), lenses (2101)/(2102)/(2103), and piezoelectric crystals (2131)/(2132)/(2133) dimensions are selected to satisfy the required inspection resolution)
Therefore, the combination of Czurratis, as modified in view of Grimard and Komsky teaches
one of: two transducers with different focal lengths in relation to an X-Y plane are arranged one of next to each other in a linear arrangement in the Y direction
Regarding claim 15, Czurratis, as modified in view of Grimard and Komsky teaches the method according to claim 14.
Grimard further teaches [two transducers arranged diagonally relative to each other in the X direction and in the Y direction](Fig. 9A, [0105], a further technique for scanning a surface includes using an array (410) consisting of multiple transducers (410). In this example the array is not parallel to any of the scan and index axes)(Fig. 9A illustrates the transducers (410) of the array being arranged diagonally to one another with respect to the scan (x) axis and index (y) axis)
Komsky further teaches
[Two transducers with different focal lengths] (Fig. 5, [0035], different water path (WP) delays can be achieved when transducers in the assembly are positioned at different distances from the top of the surface of the inspected part. WP time delays can subsequently affect selection of the individual transducers in the assembly. All transducer parameters in focal length (FL1)/(FL2)/(FL3), lenses (2101)/(2102)/(2103), and piezoelectric crystals (2131)/(2132)/(2133) dimensions are selected to satisfy the required inspection resolution) (Fig. 5 illustrates three transducers that have differing focal lengths arranged linearly, which depending on the installation orientation, would be along an x or y axis)
Therefore, the combination of Czurratis, in view of Grimard and Komsky teaches
The two transducers with different focal lengths in relation to an X-Y plane are arranged displaced diagonally relative to each other in the X direction and in the Y direction.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12, 16 and 17 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:
Regarding claim 12, Czurratis, as modified in view of Grimard teaches the method according to claim 8. Grimard further teaches
wherein a first displacement increment of the transducer unit in the Y directionIn other words, Grimard, which is the closest prior art, only teaches the ability to vary the displacement of the transducer unit in the index (y) axis direction. Grimard is completely silent regarding correcting the displacement increment based on a tolerance correction value. No other identified prior art teaches this limitation either wholly or in part with sufficient motivation to combine)
Grimard, which is the closest prior art, fails to teach correcting the displacement increment in the Y direction by a tolerance correction value, therefore Grimard cannot teach the required limitations regarding the formation of the tolerance correction value. No other identified prior art teaches this limitation either wholly or in part with sufficient motivation to combine)
Regarding claim 16, Czurratis, as modified in view of Grimard and Komsky teaches the method according to claim 7. Komsky further teaches
wherein the transducer unit comprises However, Komsky, which is the closest prior art, teaches that there is only one transducer element with a first focal length and one transducer element with a second focal length, rather than the required limitation stating that several transducers have a first focal length and several transducers have a second focal length. No other identified prior art teaches the limitation either wholly or in part with sufficient motivation to combine),
and one of: subsequently affect selection of the individual transducers in the assembly. All transducer parameters in focal length (FL1)/(FL2)/(FL3), lenses (2101)/(2102)/(2103), and piezoelectric crystals (2131)/(2132)/(2133) dimensions are selected to satisfy the required inspection resolution. However, Komsky, which is the closest prior art, teaches that there is only one transducer element with a first focal length and one transducer element with a second focal length, rather than the required limitation stating that several transducers have a first focal length and several transducers have a second focal length. Komsky further fails to teach the respective arrangements of the several transducers with the first focal length relative to the several transducers with the second focal length. No other identified prior art teaches the limitation either wholly or in part with sufficient motivation to combine).
Regarding claim 17, Czurratis, as modified in view of Grimard and Komsky teaches the method according to claim 7. Komsky further teaches
the However, Komsky, which is the closest prior art, teaches that there is only one transducer element with a first focal length and one transducer element with a second focal length, rather than the required limitation stating that several transducers have a first focal length and several transducers have a second focal length. Therefore, Komsky also fails to teach the required arrangement of the several transducers with the first focal length relative to the several transducers with the second focal length. No other identified prior art teaches the limitation either wholly or in part with sufficient motivation to combine).
Conclusion
Prior art made of record though not relied upon in the present basis of rejection are noted in the attached PTO 892 and include:
Kessler et al. (US 8794072 B2, “Kessler”) which discloses a scanning acoustic microscope with profilometer functionality
Kessler (US 20070180914 A1, “Kessler 2”) which discloses an acoustic microscope imaging device having a balanced linear motor assembly
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER RICHARD WALKER whose telephone number is (571)272-6136. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 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, Yuqing Xiao can be reached at 571-270-3603. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER RICHARD WALKER/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights