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 .
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.
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgment is made of Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) form PTO 1449.These IDS has been considered.
Examiner’s Note
The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages, paragraph and figures may apply. Applicant, in preparing the response, should consider fully the entire reference as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election, without traverse, of Group I: claims 1-10, in the “Response to Election / Restriction Filed” filed on 06/26/26 is acknowledged and entered by Examiner.
This office action considers claims 1-20 are thus pending for prosecution, of which, non-elected claims 11-20 are withdrawn, and elected claims 1-10 are examined on their merits.
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 of this title, 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) 1-2, 6 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lau et al. (US 20220068675 A1) (hereinafter Lau) in view of Onuma (US 20240305380 A1) (herein after Onuma).
As of claims 1 and 6, Lau discloses an apparatus, comprising:
a laser [162] configured to emit a laser beam [@fig.1A, ¶0027];
an optics module optically coupled to the laser, wherein the optics module comprises an optical element [split using optical components] [¶0061]; and
a plurality of optical fibers [160], wherein each of the plurality of optical fibers is configured to receive a corresponding one of the beams [¶0027-0028].
[Note: while each unit configured to perform as claimed may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function, because apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does].
Lau discloses all the features of the claimed invention except the limitation such as: “to split the laser beam into a plurality of split beams.
The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the optical element comprises a beam splitter”.
However, Onuma from the same field of endeavor discloses an optical element [120] configured to split the laser beam into a plurality of split beams [¶0027];
wherein the optical element comprises a beam splitter [¶0027].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify the device/method/system of Lau such that the optical element configured to split the laser beam into the plurality of split beams; wherein the optical element comprises the beam splitter; as taught by Onuma, for the advantages such as: in order to improve the signal to noise ratio.
As of claim 2, Lau discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the laser beam comprises a mid-infrared (MIR) wavelength or a far-infrared (FIR) wavelength [¶0037, 0059].
As of claim 10, Lau discloses the apparatus further comprising: a plurality of chambers, wherein each of the plurality of chambers is optically coupled to a corresponding one of the plurality of optical fibers [¶0032].
Claim(s) 3-5, 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lau et al. in view of Onuma and further in view of XIANG et al. (US 20180364334 A1) (herein after XIANG).
As of claims 3-5, 7-8, Lau when modified by Onuma discloses all the features of the claimed invention except the limitation such as: “The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the laser beam is polarized.
The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the optical element comprises a diffractive optical element.
The apparatus of claim 4, wherein the optics module further comprises a lens.
The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the optical element comprises an optical window oriented at an angle with respect to the laser beam that is configured to split the laser beam into the plurality of split beams.
The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the plurality of optical fibers each comprise a fiber collimator configured to receive the corresponding one of the plurality of split beams”.
However, XIANG from the same field of endeavor discloses a laser beam [410] is polarized [¶0169];
an optical element comprises a diffractive optical element [123] [¶0121];
wherein the optics module further comprises a lens [¶0122];
wherein the optical element comprises an optical window oriented at an angle with respect to the laser beam that is configured to split the laser beam into the plurality of split beams [¶0084];
wherein the plurality of optical fibers each comprise a fiber collimator configured to receive the corresponding one of the plurality of split beams [¶0167].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify the device/method/system of Lau when modified by Onuma such that the laser beam is polarized; the optical element comprises the diffractive optical element; wherein the optics module further comprises the lens; wherein the optical element comprises the optical window oriented at the angle with respect to the laser beam that is configured to split the laser beam into the plurality of split beams; wherein the plurality of optical fibers each comprise the fiber collimator configured to receive the corresponding one of the plurality of split beams; as taught by Xiang, for the advantages such as: achieve both high horizontal angular resolution and high scanning frequency.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lau et al. in view of Onuma and further in view of Carangelo (US 20150160126 A1) (herein after Carangelo).
As of claim 9, Lau when modified by Onuma discloses all the features of the claimed invention except the limitation such as: “The apparatus of claim 1, a reference cell, wherein one of the plurality of split beams is configured to pass through the reference cell; anda detector configured to receive the one of the plurality of split beams after the one of the plurality of split beams passes through the reference cell”.
However, Carangelo from the same field of endeavor discloses a reference cell, wherein one of the plurality of split beams is configured to pass through the reference cell [¶0050]; and a detector [608] configured to receive the one of the plurality of split beams after the one of the plurality of split beams passes through the reference cell [¶0049].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify the device/method/system of Lau when modified by Onuma such that the reference cell, wherein one of the plurality of split beams is configured to pass through the reference cell; and the detector configured to receive the one of the plurality of split beams after the one of the plurality of split beams passes through the reference cell; as taught by Carangelo, for the advantages such as: the first or second signal modulates a wavelength of the radiation in the cavity to obtain the desired wavelength.
Other prior art:
Krupkin et al. (US 20080219300 A1) only discloses: FIG. 5A, which is a schematic illustration of the cross-section of an optical fiber, generally referenced 270, used in the prior art. Optical fiber 270 includes a core 272, a cladding 274 and a coating 276. It is noted that core 272, cladding 274 and coating 276 are each circular in shape. Core 272 is surrounded by cladding 274, and cladding 274 is surrounded by coating 276…¶0071.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MD M RAHMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9175. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur.
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, TARIFUR CHOWDHURY can be reached at 571-272-2287. 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.
MD M. RAHMAN
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2886
/MD M RAHMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights