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 § 102
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.
Claims 8-9 are rejected are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ando et al. (US 2005/0247895 A1, included in IDS on 07/22/2025), hereafter Ando.
Regarding claim 8, Ando teaches a measuring method (Fig. 9, [0065]) comprising:
emitting light, by a light source (Fig. 4, elements “lamp” + 41, [0050]), onto an object (Fig. 4 element 40) for measurement conveyed in a conveyance direction (The optical fiber 41 is a fiber bundle that is formed in the form of a line that illuminates light on a surface 40 under inspection (hereinafter, "surface 40", [0049]), (element 40 is conveyed by a table driving unit, [0055]);; and
receiving reflection light specularly reflected from a surface of the object (The CCD sensor 44 is a line CCD sensor that receives the reflected light from element 40, [0052-0053]), (The light is detected upon specular reflection at the surface 40, [0070]),
wherein the light is emitted from the light source (lamp + 41) through a diffuser plate (Fig. 4 element 42) and then onto the object (40), and from the surface of the object to a light receiver (Fig. 4 element 44), (The diffusion plate 42 causes to diffuse the light from the optical fiber 41 to illuminate element 40 and the reflected light is received by element 44, [0051, 0054]).
Regarding claim 9, Ando teaches the measuring method according to claim 8, further comprising: detecting a defect on the surface of the object (Fig. 4 element 40) based on the reflection light, [0068-0069].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ando in view of Suzuki et al. (JPH1096615A) hereafter Suzuki.
Regarding claim 10, Ando teaches the measuring method according to claim 9, further comprising: generating image information based on the reflection light received by the light receiver [0064]; calculating a characteristic value of the surface based on the image information; detecting a defect on the surface of the object according to the characteristic value, (“The image processor 47 is let to calculate the height of the dent or the bulge on the surface 40 based on the relationship between the intensity of the reflected light that is detected and the angle of the reflected light from the surface 40. Therefore, by calculating the height, it is possible to detect in detail the defect on the surface 40.”, [0072]).
Ando fail to teach output a corrective action to be performed on the object to correct the defect.
Suzuki related to defect inspection devices and thus from the same field of endeavor teaches output a corrective action to be performed on the object to correct the defect, [0021, 0051].
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified device of Ando by including output a corrective action to be performed on the object to correct the defect, (as taught by Suzuki) for several advantages such as: allow to adjust the conveyance speed during the repair of the defect thus increase the device efficiency, ([0021], Suzuki).
Claims 1-4, 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ando et al. (US 2005/0247895 A1, included in IDS on 07/22/2025), hereafter Ando in view of Naito et al. (JPH06129995A, included in IDS on 07/22/2025), hereafter Naito.
Regarding claim 1, Ando teaches a measuring apparatus (Fig 4, [0048]) comprising:
an illuminator (Fig. 4, the combination of a lamp and elements 41 + 42, [0048, 0050]) including:
a light source (Fig. 4, elements “lamp” + 41, [0050]) to emit a light beam to an object (Fig. 4 element 40) conveyed in a conveyance direction, (The optical fiber 41 is a fiber bundle that is formed in the form of a line that illuminates light on a surface 40 under inspection (hereinafter, "surface 40", [0049]), (element 40 is conveyed by a table driving unit, [0055]); and
a diffuser plate (Fig. 4 element 42) to diffuse the light beam emitted from the light source (lamp + 41) to illuminate a surface of the object (40) with a diffused light beam, (The diffusion plate 42 causes to diffuse the light from the optical fiber 41 to illuminate element 40, [0051, 0054]); and
a light receiver (Fig. 4 element 44) to receive reflection light specularly reflected from the surface of the object (40) illuminated by the illuminator, (The CCD sensor 44 is a line CCD sensor that receives the reflected light from element 40, [0052-0053]), (The light is detected upon specular reflection at the surface 40, [0070])
Even though Ando teaches “a lamp such as a halogen lamp is disposed at one end of the optical fiber 41”, [0050] and “the distance between the light source of the optical fiber 41 and the diffusion plate 42 is let to be in the range of 2 cm to 3 cm”, [0071], Ando is silent about the distance between the diffuser plate and the surface of the object. Therefore, Ando does not clearly teach the conditional expression below is satisfied: Li > L2 where L1 denotes a distance between the light source and the diffuser plate, and L2 denotes a distance between the diffuser plate and the surface of the object.
However, Naito related to optical inspection devices and thus from the same field of endeavor teaches the conditional expression below is satisfied: L1 > L2 where L1 denotes a distance between the light source (Fig. 1 element 3) and the diffuser plate (Fig. 1 element 4), and L2 denotes a distance between the diffuser plate (Fig. 1 element 4) and the surface of the object (Fig. 1 element 1), (The distance from the light source (element 3) to the slab surface (element 1) is 1000 mm (L1 + L2), the distance from the light source (element 3) to the diffuser plate (element 4) is 600 mm (L1), [0025]. Consequently, L1 = 600 mm, L1 + L2 = 1000m and L2 is 400 mm, therefore L1> L2.
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Ando by including teach the conditional expression below is satisfied: Li > L2 where L1 denotes a distance between the light source and the diffuser plate, and L2 denotes a distance between the diffuser plate and the surface of the object (as taught by Naito) for several advantages such as: as result of routine optimization in order to ensure that the spatial distribution of the diffused light reaching the target object is optimally dispersed, thus preventing hot spots on the object while maximizing uniform specular reflection back to the receiver.
Regarding claim 2, Ando in the combination outlined above teaches the measuring apparatus according to claim 1.
Ando further teaches wherein the diffuser plate (Fig. 4 element 42) is disposed between the light source (Fig. 4 elements lamp + 41) and the object (Fig. 4 element 40), (as shown in Fig. 4, [0051]).
Regarding claim 3, Ando in the combination outlined above teaches the measuring apparatus according to claim 1.
Even though Ando do not clearly teach wherein a conditional expression below is satisfied: B > 2 θ max where B denotes a diffusion angle at the diffuser plate in a plane parallel to the conveyance direction, and θ max denotes a maximum value of an angle between the conveyance direction and the surface of the object, Ando teaches “The optical fiber 41 is a fiber bundle that is formed in the form of a line that illuminates light on a surface 40 under inspection (hereinafter, "surface 40"). The optical fiber 41 is disposed such that a center of the line is parallel to the surface 40. Therefore, light illuminated from the optical fiber 41 is spread in a space with some directionality with respect to a direction orthogonal to a center of the line. However, there is no change in the amount of light in a direction along the center of the line.”, [0049]).
However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to satisfies the expression B > 2 θ max with a predictable variation since it has been held that to be a prima facie case of obviousness that the normal desire of scientists or artisans to improve upon what is already generally known provides the motivation to determine where in a disclosed set of ranges “angles” is the optimum combination of ranges. Further, as the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller 105 USPQ 233 (1955). See MPEP 2144.05 Sec. II A.
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified device of Ando to include a range satisfies the expression B > 2θ max since achieves the predictable result of routine optimization in order to prevent hot spots on the object while maximizing uniform specular reflection back to the receiver. Also in order to satisfy a particular design choice without deviating from the general teaching concept of Ando (see MPEP 2144.04 Section VI-C).
Regarding claim 4, Ando in the combination outlined above teaches the measuring apparatus according to claim 1.
Ando further teaches comprising circuitry (Fig. 4 element 47, [0067]) configured to detect a defect on the surface of the object (Fig. 4 element 40) based on the reflection light received by the light receiver (Fig. 4 element 44), [0068-0069].
Regarding claim 6, Ando in the combination outlined above teaches the measuring apparatus according to claim 1.
Ando further teaches comprising multiple light sources including the light source, (the light source element 41 include an optical-fiber bundle, therefore each fiber in the bundle is interpreted a light source, [0049]).
Regarding claim 7, Ando in the combination outlined above teaches the measuring apparatus according to claim 1.
Ando further teaches wherein the light source includes multiple light emitting diodes, [0084].
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ando in view of Naito, further in view of Suzuki et al. (JPH1096615A, included in IDS on 07/22/2025) hereafter Suzuki.
Regarding claim 5, Ando in the combination outlined above teaches the measuring apparatus according to claim 4.
Ando further teaches wherein the circuitry is further configured to: generate image information based on the reflection light received by the light receiver, [0064]; calculate a characteristic value of the surface based on the image information; detect the defect on the surface of the object according to the characteristic value; (“The image processor 47 is let to calculate the height of the dent or the bulge on the surface 40 based on the relationship between the intensity of the reflected light that is detected and the angle of the reflected light from the surface 40. Therefore, by calculating the height, it is possible to detect in detail the defect on the surface 40.”, [0072]).
The modified device of Ando fail to teach output a corrective action to be performed on the object to correct the defect.
Suzuki related to defect inspection devices and thus from the same field of endeavor teaches output a corrective action to be performed on the object to correct the defect, [0021, 0051].
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified device of Ando by including output a corrective action to be performed on the object to correct the defect, (as taught by Suzuki) for several advantages such as: allow to adjust the conveyance speed during the repair of the defect thus increase the device efficiency, ([0021], Suzuki).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kato et al. (US 20200408684 A1), discloses measurement device configured to measure reflection characteristic of a test surface and obtaining information indicating a degree of diffusion.
Matsumoto et al. (US 20070273886 A1), discloses a reflection characteristic measuring apparatus that enables to accurately measure a characteristic of a sample surface such as a gloss of the sample surface.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLOS G PEREZ-GUZMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3904. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am - 5:00 pm ET.
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.
/CARLOS PEREZ-GUZMAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/TARIFUR R CHOWDHURY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights