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 .
Summary
This action is responsive to the response filed on 11/10/2025. Applicant has submitted Claims 1-22 for examination.
Examiner finds the following: 1) Claims 1-22 are rejected; 2) no claims objected to; and 3) no claims allowable.
Foreign Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for priority to PCT/US2023/031993, filed 09/05/2022.
Response to Arguments and Remarks
Examiner respectfully acknowledges Applicant's arguments, remarks, and amendments.
Examiner has found Applicant’s arguments persuasive. As such, Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
Claims 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kilpatrick (US 20090046296 A1) in view of Ozharar (US 20230130788 A1).
Regarding Claim 19, Kilpatrick discloses:
A system, comprising:
a stable laser light source (Kilpatrick, FIG. 1, [0078], laser 116) for master reference in a Doppler vibrometer scheme (Kilpatrick, [0030], Laser Doppler vibrometry (LDV));
a camera configured to receive scattered light from target (Kilpatrick, FIG. 6, [0095], “the focal plan 213 of FIG. 2 can be replace with an imaging detector 801, e.g., a camera”) and a spatially offset reference beam (Kilpatrick, FIG. 2, [0088], “The collimated beam from the telecentric/collimator lens 212 "flood" illuminates the focal plane area and defines a local oscillator or reference beam of the interferometer,” FIG. 6, [0095], “The imaging detector can provide signals representative of the interfering reference beam and the individual measurement beams via cable 802 to detector electronics 802,” and [0105], “a method for characterizing the movement of a surface can comprise providing a matrix of laser beams that have a common source and heterodyning scattered light from the surface with a reference beam from the common source”);
a precision timer for acquisition control and data registration (Kilpatrick, FIG. 7, [0096], “Frames A-P show different deflection shapes. The position along the time history where these deflection shapes occur is labeled A-P on the time history. For example, the deflection shape of frame A occurs at point A of the time history. One or more embodiments of the imaging vibrometer can provide such images in substantially real time.” Examiner notes that for Kilpatrick to be able to operate in substantially real time and also be able to note times with images, then Kilpatrick inherently discloses a timing device); …
… a means for determining vibration information of the target, wherein the vibration information includes vibration modes (Kilpatrick, [0107], “One or more embodiments of the present invention can facilitate vibration imaging”) …
Kilpatrick discloses the above, but does not explicitly disclose:
… a means for encoding precision timing data into each image frame; and …
However, Ozharar, in a similar field of endeavor (OUTDOOR APPLICATION OF DISTRIBUTED FIBER OPTIC SENSING / ACOUSTIC SENSING), discloses:
… a means for encoding precision timing data into each image frame (Ozharar, FIG. 14, [0089], “Note that as the open/close event is a continuous action, it is natural to investigate the underlying correlation between different time stamp, which is encoded in the rows in the waterfall image as shown in FIG. 14.” Examiner notes that for the purposes of the mapping, Examiner is solely relying on the in image time stamping of Ozharar) …
It would have been obvious to PHOSITA before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kilpatrick with the time stamping of Ozharar. PHOSITA would have known about the uses of time stamping as disclosed by Ozharar and how to use them to modify Kilpatrick. PHOSITA would have been motivated to do this as a use of known technique to improve similar devices in the same way (See MPEP § 2143 (I)(C)), specifically the use of a known method of encoding time stamp into captured images under examination.
The combination of Kilpatrick and Ozharar discloses the above but does not explicitly disclose:
… at a frequency exceeding F/2, wherein F is a frame rate of the camera.
However, Kilpatrick discloses in [0063]:
The frame readout rate can be 0.625 MHz and can be limited by the speed of available A-to-D converters.
Additionally in FIG. 7, [0096]:
One or more embodiments of the imaging vibrometer can provide such images in substantially real time.
The frame rate used is a result-effective variable. In that, if the device does not have a sufficient frame rate, the device would be unable to accurately model the vibrations as disclosed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to PHOSITA before Applicant' s filing date to include the claimed frame rate, since frame rate is based on a result effective variable and would require routine skill in the art. Furthermore, it has been held that that determining the optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.05 (II (A) and (B)).
Regarding Claim 20, the combination of Kilpatrick and Ozharar discloses Claim 19, but does not explicitly disclose:
… wherein the means of determining vibration information of the target comprises a means for determining vibration information at a rate up to 1/2TI, wherein T1 comprises an integration time of the camera.
However, Kilpatrick discloses in [0063]:
The frame readout rate can be 0.625 MHz and can be limited by the speed of available A-to-D converters.
Additionally in FIG. 7, [0096]:
One or more embodiments of the imaging vibrometer can provide such images in substantially real time.
The frame rate used is a result-effective variable. In that, if the device does not have a sufficient frame rate, the device would be unable to accurately model the vibrations as disclosed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to PHOSITA before Applicant' s filing date to include the claimed frame rate, since frame rate is based on a result effective variable and would require routine skill in the art. Furthermore, it has been held that that determining the optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.05 (II (A) and (B)).
Regarding Claim 21, the combination of Kilpatrick and Ozharar discloses Claim 19, but does not explicitly disclose:
… wherein the means of determining vibration information of the target comprises a means for determining vibration information at a rate between 30x and 50x, wherein x is F/2.
However, Kilpatrick discloses in [0063]:
The frame readout rate can be 0.625 MHz and can be limited by the speed of available A-to-D converters.
Additionally in FIG. 7, [0096]:
One or more embodiments of the imaging vibrometer can provide such images in substantially real time.
The frame rate used is a result-effective variable. In that, if the device does not have a sufficient frame rate, the device would be unable to accurately model the vibrations as disclosed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to PHOSITA before Applicant' s filing date to include the claimed frame rate, since frame rate is based on a result effective variable and would require routine skill in the art. Furthermore, it has been held that that determining the optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.05 (II (A) and (B)).
Claims 1, 3-12, 16-18, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kilpatrick (US 20090046296 A1), in view of Ozharar (US 20230130788 A1), and in further view of Hatahori (US 20190204275 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Kilpatrick discloses:
A vibration image measurement system (Kilpatrick, [0030], Laser Doppler vibrometry (LDV)) comprising:
a stable laser light source (Kilpatrick, FIG. 1, [0078], laser 116) for master reference in a Doppler vibrometer scheme (Kilpatrick, [0030], Laser Doppler vibrometry (LDV));
a camera configured to receive scattered light from a target (Kilpatrick, FIG. 6, [0095], “the focal plan 213 of FIG. 2 can be replace with an imaging detector 801, e.g., a camera”) and a spatially offset reference beam (Kilpatrick, FIG. 2, [0088], “The collimated beam from the telecentric/collimator lens 212 "flood" illuminates the focal plane area and defines a local oscillator or reference beam of the interferometer,” FIG. 6, [0095], “The imaging detector can provide signals representative of the interfering reference beam and the individual measurement beams via cable 802 to detector electronics 802,” and [0105], “a method for characterizing the movement of a surface can comprise providing a matrix of laser beams that have a common source and heterodyning scattered light from the surface with a reference beam from the common source”);
a precision timer for acquisition control and data registration (Kilpatrick, FIG. 7, [0096], “Frames A-P show different deflection shapes. The position along the time history where these deflection shapes occur is labeled A-P on the time history. For example, the deflection shape of frame A occurs at point A of the time history. One or more embodiments of the imaging vibrometer can provide such images in substantially real time.” Examiner notes that for Kilpatrick to be able to operate in substantially real time and also be able to note times with images, then Kilpatrick inherently discloses a timing device); …
… an acquisition system configured to acquire images from the camera, the images including the precision timing data (Kilpatrick, [0094], “All of the necessary functions, detection, A-to-D, and processing are preferable integrated in the detector/processor board which accepts N-channel fiber-optic input connectors and outputs N-channel processed velocity and displacement signals to the computer bus system”); …
… to perform pulse-pair Doppler processing to determine vibration of the target (Kilpatrick, [0051], “The MLV however bridges a gap between conventional electronic speckle pattern interferometers (ESPI) and scanning laser Doppler vibrometers (SLDV) combining the two dimensional (spatial) imaging capability of ESPI with the high bandwidth (temporal) performance of LDV for full-field vibration imaging”); and
optics configured to direct light from the light source to illuminate the target, to provide the reference beam, and to mix the reference beam with the received scattered light for holographic detection (Kilpatrick, [0014], “a multi-beam interferometer can comprise an array of discrete illuminating beam sources and an imager for imaging and optically mixing light from the discrete illuminating beam sources with a single flood-illuminated reference beam”).
Kilpatrick discloses the above but does not explicitly disclose:
… an optical encoder configured to insert precision timing data into each image frame …
However, Ozharar, in a similar field of endeavor (OUTDOOR APPLICATION OF DISTRIBUTED FIBER OPTIC SENSING / ACOUSTIC SENSING), discloses:
… an optical encoder configured to insert precision timing data into each image frame (Ozharar, FIG. 14, [0089], “Note that as the open/close event is a continuous action, it is natural to investigate the underlying correlation between different time stamp, which is encoded in the rows in the waterfall image as shown in FIG. 14.” Examiner notes that for the purposes of the mapping, Examiner is solely relying on the in-image time stamping of Ozharar) …
It would have been obvious to PHOSITA before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kilpatrick with the time stamping of Ozharar. PHOSITA would have known about the uses of time stamping as disclosed by Ozharar and how to use them to modify Kilpatrick. PHOSITA would have been motivated to do this as a use of known technique to improve similar devices in the same way (See MPEP § 2143 (I)(C)), specifically the use of a known method of encoding time stamp into captured images under examination.
The combination of Kilpatrick and Ozharar discloses the above but does not explicitly disclose:
… an image processor configured to demodulate light from the acquired images via a digital holographic scheme …
However, Hatahori, in a similar field of endeavor (SOUND-WAVE-PROPAGATION VISUALIZATION DEVICE AND METHOD), discloses:
… an image processor configured to demodulate light from the acquired images via a digital holographic scheme (Hatahori, [0062], “as a method for optically measuring the physical quantity similarly as in the embodiment described above, there are a holographic interference measurement method, a grid projection method (Non-patent document 2), a sampling moire method (Non-patent document 3), a digital image correlation (DIC) method, a measurement method with a laser Doppler vibrometer, or the like can be used”), and …
It would have been obvious to PHOSITA before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kilpatrick and Ozharar with the holographic method of Hatahori. PHOSITA would have known about the uses of holographic methods as disclosed by Hatahori and how to use them to modify the combination of Kilpatrick and Ozharar. PHOSITA would have been motivated to do this as a use of known technique to improve similar devices in the same way (See MPEP § 2143 (I)(C)), specifically the use of a known method of measuring and quantifying captured images.
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori discloses Claim 1, and Kilpatrick further discloses:
… wherein the image processor is further configured to perform digital holographic detection and demodulation to create complex images containing an amplitude (Kilpatrick, [0047], “a minimum of four intensity images are required to recover one phase image. This problem can be avoided by spatial phase stepping configurations where multiple intensity images are acquired simultaneously using multiple detectors or by spatial multiplexing schemes on single array detectors.” Examiner notes that amplitude and intensity are inherently related and that PHOSITA would have been aware of that relationship) and a phase for each image location (Kilpatrick, [0033], “such simultaneous measurements provide phase information which depicts the two-dimensional flow of mechanical energy within the structure and a potential diagnostic indicator for identification of propagation mechanisms and sound generation”).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori discloses Claim 1, and Kilpatrick further discloses:
… wherein the precision timer is configured to generate camera frame acquisition signals with temporal precision equal to an integration time, and at a maximum frame rate (Kilpatrick, [0063], “The frame readout rate can be 0.625 MHz and can be limited by the speed of available A-to-D converters,” and FIG. 7, [0096], “One or more embodiments of the imaging vibrometer can provide such images in substantially real time”).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori discloses Claim 1, and Ozharar further discloses:
… wherein the precision timing data is encoded optically within each data frame as a digital signal (Ozharar, FIG. 14, [0089], “Note that as the open/close event is a continuous action, it is natural to investigate the underlying correlation between different time stamp, which is encoded in the rows in the waterfall image as shown in FIG. 14.” Examiner notes that for the purposes of the mapping, Examiner is solely relying on the in-image time stamping of Ozharar) …
It would have been obvious to PHOSITA before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori with the time stamping of Ozharar. PHOSITA would have known about the uses of time stamping as disclosed by Ozharar and how to use them to modify the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori. PHOSITA would have been motivated to do this as a use of known technique to improve similar devices in the same way (See MPEP § 2143 (I)(C)), specifically the use of a known method of encoding time stamp into captured images under examination.
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori discloses Claim 5, and Kilpatrick further discloses:
… wherein the digital signal comprises a signal selected from: direct binary, gray code, or 2 dimensional pattern (Kilpatrick, FIG. 7, [0096]).
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori discloses Claim 5, and Kilpatrick further discloses:
… wherein the digital signal comprises an optimized optical readout format (Kilpatrick, FIG. 7, [0096]).
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori discloses Claim 1, and Kilpatrick further discloses:
… wherein precision timing data is positioned in areas of the image frame blocked by a holographic aperture field stop (Kilpatrick, FIG. 2, [0091], “The light scattered (reflected) by the surface 104 which lies within the collection aperture of the f-theta objective lens 207 passes back through the quarter wave plate 205 and the f-theta objective lens 207. Being orthogonally polarized by the dual passage through the quarter wave plate, the collected light is now transmitted by the polarizing beam splitter 206 and the matrix is re-imaged by the telecentric/collimator lens 212 in the back focal plane 213 of the interferometer,” and [0086], “The side-launch mechanism can be configured so as to tend to minimize obstruction of the pupil aperture”).
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori discloses Claim 1, and Kilpatrick further discloses:
… wherein the image processor is further configured to perform holographic imaging to extract a complex image with amplitude (Kilpatrick, [0047], “a minimum of four intensity images are required to recover one phase image. This problem can be avoided by spatial phase stepping configurations where multiple intensity images are acquired simultaneously using multiple detectors or by spatial multiplexing schemes on single array detectors.” Examiner notes that amplitude and intensity are inherently related and that PHOSITA would have been aware of that relationship) and phase (Kilpatrick, [0033], “such simultaneous measurements provide phase information which depicts the two-dimensional flow of mechanical energy within the structure and a potential diagnostic indicator for identification of propagation mechanisms and sound generation”).
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori discloses Claim 1, and Hatahori further discloses:
… wherein the image processor is further configured to perform sparse pulse-pair Doppler processing to extract a phase signal from each location within a complex data volume (Hatahori, FIG. 2, [0042], “the measurement control unit 22 transmits a pulse signal to the pulse laser light source 13. Since k=1 at this stage, the phase of vibration of the piezoelectric element 12 when the pulse signal is transmitted is ϕ.sub.0. The pulse laser light source 13 repeatedly outputs illumination light which is the pulsed laser light each time the pulse laser light source 13 receives the pulse signal. The diameter of this illumination light is expanded by an illumination light lens 14 and the entire measurement region on the surface of the object 11 to be measured is irradiated with the illumination light (Step S3). That is, the object 11 to be measured is illuminated by a stroboscope at a timing synchronized with the period of the sound wave”).
It would have been obvious to PHOSITA before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori with the pulsed signal of Hatahori. PHOSITA would have known about the uses of pulsed signals as disclosed by Hatahori and how to use them to modify the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori. PHOSITA would have been motivated to do this as a use of known technique to improve similar devices in the same way (See MPEP § 2143 (I)(C)), specifically the use of pulse pairs and signals to match a signal phases (see Hatahori, [0035]).
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori discloses Claim 1, and Kilpatrick further discloses:
… wherein the image processor is incorporated in the camera (Kilpatrick, [0094], “All of the necessary functions, detection, A-to-D, and processing are preferable integrated in the detector/processor board which accepts N-channel fiber-optic input connectors and outputs N-channel processed velocity and displacement signals to the computer bus system”).
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori discloses Claim 1, and Kilpatrick further discloses:
… wherein the image processor is further configured to perform holographic detection in an image plane (Kilpatrick, [0051], “The MLV however bridges a gap between conventional electronic speckle pattern interferometers (ESPI) and scanning laser Doppler vibrometers (SLDV) combining the two dimensional (spatial) imaging capability of ESPI with the high bandwidth (temporal) performance of LDV for full-field vibration imaging”).
Regarding Claim 15, the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori discloses Claim 1, and Hatahori further discloses:
… wherein light source to illuminate the target comprises a pulsed laser (Hatahori, FIG. 2, [0042], “the measurement control unit 22 transmits a pulse signal to the pulse laser light source 13. Since k=1 at this stage, the phase of vibration of the piezoelectric element 12 when the pulse signal is transmitted is ϕ.sub.0. The pulse laser light source 13 repeatedly outputs illumination light which is the pulsed laser light each time the pulse laser light source 13 receives the pulse signal. The diameter of this illumination light is expanded by an illumination light lens 14 and the entire measurement region on the surface of the object 11 to be measured is irradiated with the illumination light (Step S3). That is, the object 11 to be measured is illuminated by a stroboscope at a timing synchronized with the period of the sound wave”).
It would have been obvious to PHOSITA before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori with the pulsed signal of Hatahori. PHOSITA would have known about the uses of pulsed signals as disclosed by Hatahori and how to use them to modify the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori. PHOSITA would have been motivated to do this as a use of known technique to improve similar devices in the same way (See MPEP § 2143 (I)(C)), specifically the use of pulse pairs and signals to match a signal phases (see Hatahori, [0035]).
Regarding Claim 16, the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori discloses Claim 1, and Kilpatrick further discloses:
… wherein the camera provides precision timing, and wherein the image processor is further configured to perform holographic detection in an image plane (Kilpatrick, [0051], “The MLV however bridges a gap between conventional electronic speckle pattern interferometers (ESPI) and scanning laser Doppler vibrometers (SLDV) combining the two dimensional (spatial) imaging capability of ESPI with the high bandwidth (temporal) performance of LDV for full-field vibration imaging”).
Regarding Claim 17, the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori discloses Claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose:
… wherein the optical encoder is further configured to encode the precision timing data within each data frame as an analog signal.
However, Kilpatrick discloses in [0093]:
… this synchronization is controlled from a separate multichannel waveform generator board whose outputs drive the phase modulator, provide timing signals for the analog-to-digital convertors, transducer drive signals (e.g. piezo, acoustic), and any further triggering signals required to synchronize operation to external events.
Additionally, in Fig. 7, [0096]:
For example, the deflection shape of frame A occurs at point A of the time history. (Examiner notes this shows Kilpatrick associating the timing datum with the frame.)
The matching of the time and the frame is a result-effective variable. In that, if the device does not properly match the time to the frame, the device would be unable to accurately model the vibrations as disclosed. Kilpatrick further discloses that analog to digital conversion is known in the art, and that the associated datum would either be analog or digital.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to PHOSITA before Applicant' s filing date to include analog or digital data, since determining the ability to match the time to the frame is based on a result effective variable and would require routine skill in the art. Furthermore, it has been held that that determining the optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.05 (II (A) and (B)).
Regarding Claim 18, the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori discloses Claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose:
… wherein the optical encoder is further configured to encode the precision timing data within each data frame as a combination of analog and optical signals.
However, Kilpatrick discloses in [0093]:
… this synchronization is controlled from a separate multichannel waveform generator board whose outputs drive the phase modulator, provide timing signals for the analog-to-digital convertors, transducer drive signals (e.g. piezo, acoustic), and any further triggering signals required to synchronize operation to external events.
Additionally, in Fig. 7, [0096]:
For example, the deflection shape of frame A occurs at point A of the time history. (Examiner notes this shows Kilpatrick associating the timing datum with the frame.)
The matching of the time and the frame is a result-effective variable. In that, if the device does not properly match the time to the frame, the device would be unable to accurately model the vibrations as disclosed. Kilpatrick further discloses that analog to digital conversion is known in the art, and that the associated datum would either be analog or digital.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to PHOSITA before Applicant' s filing date to include analog or digital data, since determining the ability to match the time to the frame is based on a result effective variable and would require routine skill in the art. Furthermore, it has been held that that determining the optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.05 (II (A) and (B)).
Regarding Claim 22, the combination of Kilpatrick and Ozharar discloses Claim 19, and Kilpatrick further discloses:
… wherein the precision timer comprises a high rate high precision timer (Kilpatrick, FIG. 7, [0096], “Frames A-P show different deflection shapes. The position along the time history where these deflection shapes occur is labeled A-P on the time history. For example, the deflection shape of frame A occurs at point A of the time history. One or more embodiments of the imaging vibrometer can provide such images in substantially real time.” Examiner notes that for Kilpatrick to be able to operate in substantially real time and also be able to note times with images, then Kilpatrick inherently discloses a high rate high precision timing device), and wherein the means for determining vibration information of the target comprises: …
The combination of Kilpatrick and Ozharar discloses the above but does not explicitly disclose:
… a means for determining vibration information at a rate between 50x and 1OOx, wherein x is F/2.
However, Kilpatrick discloses in [0063]:
The frame readout rate can be 0.625 MHz and can be limited by the speed of available A-to-D converters.
Additionally in FIG. 7, [0096]:
One or more embodiments of the imaging vibrometer can provide such images in substantially real time.
The frame rate used is a result-effective variable. In that, if the device does not have a sufficient frame rate, the device would be unable to accurately model the vibrations as disclosed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to PHOSITA before Applicant' s filing date to include the claimed frame rate, since frame rate is based on a result effective variable and would require routine skill in the art. Furthermore, it has been held that that determining the optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.05 (II (A) and (B)).
The combination of Kilpatrick and Ozharar discloses the above, but does not explicitly disclose pulse lasers. However, Hatahori, in a similar field of endeavor (SOUND-WAVE-PROPAGATION VISUALIZATION DEVICE AND METHOD), discloses:
… a means for providing a short illumination pulse (Hatahori, FIG. 2, [0042], “the measurement control unit 22 transmits a pulse signal to the pulse laser light source 13. Since k=1 at this stage, the phase of vibration of the piezoelectric element 12 when the pulse signal is transmitted is ϕ.sub.0. The pulse laser light source 13 repeatedly outputs illumination light which is the pulsed laser light each time the pulse laser light source 13 receives the pulse signal. The diameter of this illumination light is expanded by an illumination light lens 14 and the entire measurement region on the surface of the object 11 to be measured is irradiated with the illumination light (Step S3). That is, the object 11 to be measured is illuminated by a stroboscope at a timing synchronized with the period of the sound wave”); and …
It would have been obvious to PHOSITA before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kilpatrick and Ozharar with the pulsed signal of Hatahori. PHOSITA would have known about the uses of pulsed signals as disclosed by Hatahori and how to use them to modify the combination of Kilpatrick and Ozharar. PHOSITA would have been motivated to do this as a use of known technique to improve similar devices in the same way (See MPEP § 2143 (I)(C)), specifically the use of pulse pairs and signals to match a signal phases (see Hatahori, [0035]).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kilpatrick (US 20090046296 A1), in view of Ozharar (US 20230130788 A1), in further view of Hatahori (US 20190204275 A1), and in further view of Weinberg (Gil Weinberg and Ori Katz, "100,000 frames-per-second compressive imaging with a conventional rolling-shutter camera by random point-spread-function engineering," Opt. Express 28, 30616-30625 (2020)).
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori discloses Claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose:
… wherein the precision timer is configured to trigger image acquisition at precision times randomly distributed around a maximum frame rate to create a sequence of sparsely spaced pupil plane images.
However, Weinberg, in a similar field of endeavor (100,000 frames-per-second compressive imaging with a conventional rolling-shutter camera by random point-spread-function engineering), discloses:
… wherein the precision timer is configured to trigger image acquisition at precision times randomly distributed around a maximum frame rate to create a sequence of sparsely spaced pupil plane images (Weinberg, FIGS. 1(b)-(g), P30617, Paragraph 4, “Aschematic realization of this principle using an optical diffuser is presented in Figs. 1(b)-(g). Alight scattering diffuser at the pupil plane of the imaging system (Fig. 1(c)) optically randomly encodes the entire scene to each row in the camera sensor by scattering (Fig. 1(d)). A camera with a rolling-shutter readout captures the single frame (Fig. 1(e)). Each row in the captured image encodes a single time frame of the video. The single captured image is fed into a CS reconstruction algorithm that decodes the video (Figs. 1(f)-(g)). Importantly, in common CMOS cameras, the readout speed of each row is usually several orders of magnitude faster than the full image acquisition rate (the number of rows in the image) [9]”).
It would have been obvious to PHOSITA before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori with the diffuser of Weinberg. PHOSITA would have known about the uses of the diffuser as disclosed by Weinberg and how to use them to modify the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori. PHOSITA would have been motivated to do this as a use of known technique to improve similar devices in the same way (See MPEP § 2143 (I)(C)), specifically the use of a diffuser as a compressive-sampling acquisition scheme.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kilpatrick (US 20090046296 A1), in view of Ozharar (US 20230130788 A1), in further view of Hatahori (US 20190204275 A1), and in further view of Lau (US 20160238534 A1).
Regarding Claim 13, the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori discloses Claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose:
… wherein the light source to illuminate the target comprises an amplified laser.
However, Lau, in a similar field of endeavor (SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETECTING A DEFECT IN A STRUCTURE MEMBER), discloses:
… wherein the light source to illuminate the target comprises an amplified laser (Lau, FIG. 1A, [0069], “The light source 106 may be a directed and amplified light source arranged to deliver an amplified light signal such as a laser”).
It would have been obvious to PHOSITA before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori with the amplified laser of Lau. PHOSITA would have known about the uses of amplified lasers as disclosed by Lau and how to use them to modify the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori. PHOSITA would have been motivated to do this as a use of known technique to improve similar devices in the same way (See MPEP § 2143 (I)(C)), specifically the use of amplified lasers to better control the laser signal.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kilpatrick (US 20090046296 A1), in view of Ozharar (US 20230130788 A1), in further view of Hatahori (US 20190204275 A1), and in further view of Pepper (US 20230175893 A1).
Regarding Claim 14, the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori discloses Claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose:
… wherein image processor is further configured to measure and correct systematic phase perturbations.
However, Pepper, in a similar field of endeavor (Conformal Imaging Vibrometer Using Adaptive Optics With Scene-based Wave-front Sensing), discloses:
… wherein image processor is further configured to measure and correct systematic phase perturbations (NAME, FIG. 1A, [0014], “It consists of a wave front error sensor 170, a processor module 177, and a pair of electronic drivers 180 and 185 that provide control signals to the tip-tilt compensator 150 and the spatial phase modulator 160, respectively.” Examiner notes that the art is not for the structure or form disclosed, but combines for the principle and method of detecting a phase error and then adjusting the system to account for detected errors).
It would have been obvious to PHOSITA before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori with the correcting detected errors of Pepper. PHOSITA would have known about the uses of correcting detected errors as disclosed by Pepper and how to use them to modify the combination of Kilpatrick, Ozharar, and Hatahori. PHOSITA would have been motivated to do this as a use of known technique to improve similar devices in the same way (See MPEP § 2143 (I)(C)), specifically the use of detecting phase errors and then correcting those errors for consistent analysis.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from Examiner should be directed to CHAD ANDREW REVERMAN whose telephone number is (571) 270-0079. Examiner is based in Minnesota and can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-5 EST (8-4 CST).
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 Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, Examiner' s Supervisor, Kara Geisel can be reached on (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.
/CHAD ANDREW REVERMAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/Kara E. Geisel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877