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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Amendment
The amendment filed on 07/28/2026 has been entered into this application.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-13 and 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cohen (FR 2950441 A1, Translation, Applicant cited reference, previously cited reference).
Regarding claim 1, Cohen discloses a device/method (claim 16) for confocal-chromatic distance and/or thickness measurement (figs. 1A-16), comprising:
an illumination by light source 20 wherein the illumination diaphragm and/or the receiving diaphragm is/are formed by a fiber end of an optical waveguide diaphragm a single/separate fiber from the end of fiber bundle "300" wherein the illumination diaphragm and/or the receiving diaphragm is/are formed by a fiber end of an optical waveguide one of the end of optical fibers 300;
a confocal-chromatic optical system (fig. 1B: 11); page 9, lines 29-33) (page 10, line 1); and
an optical device objective 12 and/or a folding mirror 13 arranged between the illumination diaphragm and the confocal-chromatic optical system,
wherein the optical device objective 12 and/or a folding mirror 13 is configured to divide measuring light emerging from the illumination diaphragm into multiple partial beams of measuring light as can be seen depicted in drawing (fig. 1B),
wherein the partial beams of measuring light strike an object being measured at laterally offset measuring points after passing through the confocal-chromatic optical system, as can be seen depicted in drawing (fig. 1B),
the sensor consists of a measuring head 100 and an optoelectronic box 200 connected by a strand 300 having N optical fibers and sensors combine two optical principles: • a confocal optical configuration, characterized in that (i) the image of a point light source is projected onto a point on the surface of the object to be visualized, (ii) the retro light scattered from this object point passes through a filtering hole (called "spatial filter") before being intercepted by a photoelectric detector (iii) the respective optical axes of the illumination path and the observation path are combined and coaxial renderings using appropriate means of combination / separation of light brushes, such as a cube (or a blade) semi-reflective (page 1, par. 3 to page par. 1, and see page 9) anticipates wherein partial beams of detection light reflected from the measuring points fall onto a receiving diaphragm a diaphragm 57 (page 11, par. 3) replace diffraction grating 51 via the confocal-chromatic optical system and the optical device, and inherently wherein after the passing through the receiving diaphragm, a common detection light beam is present intended as a summed, spectrally encoded intensity signal as can be seen in depicted drawing (figs. 1 and 5A), the output signal from the spectrometer is inherently considered the sum of the spectrally encoded intensity signal.
For the purpose of clarity, the method claim 16 is taught/suggested by the functions shown/stated/set forth with regards to the apparatus/device claim 1 as rejected above as being anticipated by Cohen.
As to claims 2-4 and 6-10, Cohan also discloses a structure that is use in a method/system device that is implementing limitations such as, wherein the confocal -chromatic or a chromatic confocal optical sensor configuration combine the illumination fiber bundle and the detection fiber bundle left and right end bundle 300 (figs. 1A-1B) anticipates illumination diaphragm and/or the receiving diaphragm is/are formed by a fiber end of an optical waveguide and/or by at least one optical diaphragm element (claim 2); wherein the illumination diaphragm and the receiving diaphragm are formed by a common component as can be seen in depicted drawing (1A-1B)(page 11)(claim 3); and wherein the optical device has at least one optical element (lens/objective 11) (page 9 or page 11, par. 3)(claim 4); wherein the optical element is a first optical element (front lens 11) supplemented with a second optical element (achromatic lens 12) (claim 6); wherein the second optical element (achromatic lens 12) is formed in one piece measuring head 100 with the first optical element (front lens 11) or is arranged in a materially bonded manner on the first optical element (front lens 11) (claim 7); wherein the optical device measuring head 100 focuses the partial beams of measuring light individually onto a virtual surface Zmax and Zmin located in front of the confocal-chromatic optical system (claim 8); and wherein the virtual surface Zmax and Zmin lies in the focal point of the confocal-chromatic optical system, as can be seen in depicted drawing (figs. 1A-1B) (claim 9); and wherein the optical device is configured to divide the measuring light emerging from the illumination diaphragm into diverging partial beams of measuring light is the component beams run divergently to one another, within the respective fiber, as can be seen in depicted drawing (fig. 1B) (claim 10).
As to claim 5, Cohan also discloses wherein the optical element is such as a diffraction grating or a prism (page 9, par. 2) anticipate (i.e. a roof prism claim).
As to claims 11-13, Cohan also discloses a structure that is use in a method/system device that is implementing limitations such as, wherein the optical device diaphragms the end of the fiber bundle 300 as can be seen depicted in drawing (fig. 1B) show(s) the partial beams of the measuring light that are close (relative term) to the axis at the surface Zmax and Zmin. and/or intended to measure a single point located on their optical axis (page 3, par. 2) (claim 11); wherein near-axis that is point located on their optical axis measuring light partial beams of the partial beams of measuring light are deflectable by the optical device as can be seen depicted in drawing (fig. 1B), intended use (such that they do not strike the confocal-chromatic optical system and/or only strike it in an edge region) the optical axis is always normal to the surface of the object (page 13, par. 1, par. 3) (claim 12); and wherein a focusing lens optical system 10 (page 5, par. 1) of the optical device has a beam-deflecting surface (13) in a core zone close to the axis and/or is interrupted by this beam-deflecting surface as can be seen depicted in drawing (figs. 1A-1B)(claim 13).
For the purposes of clarity, the phrase “close to”, “near“ are considered relative term(s) so long the reference show proximity of any kind it is considered the phrase is met.
As to claim 15, Cohan also discloses apparatus for confocal-chromatic, distance and/or thickness measurement, comprising:
a device as can be seen in depicted drawing (figs. 1A-1B) according to claim 1, an polychromatic light source light sources i.e. white LEDs (20) for emitting measuring light, a spectrometer (page 2, pars, 1-2; page 4, par. 1 and page 8, par. 8), and an evaluation device a set of electronic and computer means 70 (page 4, par. 2; page 6, par. 3; page 9, pars. 1 and 2).
As to claims 17-20, Cohan also discloses a structure that is use in a method/system device that is implementing limitations such as, wherein the optical element included in the measuring head 100 is a refractive optical element and/or a diffractive optical element (figs. 3A-E) (page 10, pars. 2-3) (claim 17); wherein the second optical element (achromatic lens 12) is integrated in an optical surface of the first optical element (front lens 11) (claim 18); wherein the virtual surface Zmax and Zmin is a curved surface is depicted as non-flat geometric shape, as can be seen in depicted drawing (figs. 1A-1B) (claim 19); and wherein the optical device diaphragms the left and right end bundle 300 (figs. 1A-1B) the partial beams of the measuring light by masking/covering/illuminating at least one optical element that is included in the measuring head 100 with a non- transparent layer/filter/at least partially blocked by the spatial filter Fi (page 5, par. 3) (claim 20).
Allowable Subject Matter
As to claim 14, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious wherein the optical device has an optical element with multiple lens fragments, wherein central lens fragments located in a central region and peripheral lens fragments located in an edge region are arranged, and wherein the central lens fragments each deflect the measuring light striking them such that it-the measuring light is superimposed with the measuring light deflected by an edge lens fragment and forms a common partial beam of measuring light, in combination with the rest of the limitations of the claim.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments/remarks, (see pages 6-7), filed on 07/28/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments:
a) Applicant argues in particular that Cohen does not disclose a common detection light beam as recited in amended claim 1.
Similar claim language is set forth in independent claim 16 which includes "generating a summed, spectrally coded measuring signal of the measuring points."
Since claims 1 and 16 are neither taught nor suggested by Cohen, Applicant submits that claims 1 and 16, and all claim dependent thereon, are patentable over Cohen. Withdrawal of the claim rejections under Section 102 is warranted.
Examiner's response:
With respect to argument (a), it is respectfully pointed out to applicant that this argument is not persuasive because the structure and the arrangement of the device(s) is “confocal-” optical system, as such the feature "detection light beam" is common and the output signal from the spectrometer/detection device/detector is inherently considered the sum of the spectrally encoded intensity signal detected from the measuring points that is generated. Therefore, it is respectfully pointed out to applicant that this argument is not persuasive.
Finally, Applicant has argued the patentability of dependent claims, based solely upon the patentability of independent claim(s), and has presented no additional arguments exclusively pertaining to the claims, since the applicant has not argued the examiner’s position about the rejection(s) regarding the dependent claims, in the previous Official action. The applicant has acquiesced.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Isiaka Akanbi whose telephone number is (571) 272-8658. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Tarifur R. Chowdhury can be reached on (571) 272-2287. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 703-872-9306.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/ISIAKA O AKANBI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights