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 § 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-8, 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuzaki (JP 2010-256623) in view of Hasegawa (JP 2009-236732) (both references supplied in IDS).
Regarding claim 1, Matsuzaki A bright- and dark-field microscope comprising (i.e., open language for the claim):
a light source (6 – light source);
a collimator making light emitted from the light source into parallel light (11-makes the beam parallel);
a ring-forming optical system making light coming from the collimator into a ring shape (7-ring shape lighting lens);
a through-hole mirror reflecting light coming from the ring-forming optical system to an object and passing light reflecting and coming from the object through a through-hole formed at a center (24-ring-state mirror);
a reflective objective lens aligning a focus of light reflecting from the through-hole mirror toward the object on the object (14A – objective lens);
a camera obtaining an image by collecting light reflecting from the object and passing through the through- hole (17a-c – CCD camera).
Matsuzaki and Hasegawa are related as inspection devices with stages.
Hasegawa teaches a white reflecting plate reflecting and scattering light and detachably provided behind the object (12a-subtrate reflecting member located on floating stage 12). The benefit is that it facilitates illumination or dark options (As shown in Fig. 4 … When the scattering / reflecting part 12a is retracted from the position where the dark field illumination light is scattered and reflected in this manner, the reflected light from the scattering / reflecting part 12a is reflected when the reflected light from the glass substrate 10 is observed by epi-illumination. Can prevent light.) so that sourced illumination or fluorescence, for example, can be studied.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinarily skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add to Matsuzaki a white reflecting plate reflecting and scattering light and detachably provided behind the object Hasegawa to permit viewing under illuminated or darkness for florescence.
Regarding claim 2, the combination The bright- and dark-field microscope of claim 1, wherein when the white scattering plate is disposed behind the object, light reflecting and scattering from the white scattering plate passes through the object and is collected at the camera, whereby a bright-field image of the object is obtained (Matsuzaki, Fig. 1 – note beam path); and when the white scattering plate is removed from behind the object, light reflecting and scattering from the object is collected at the camera, whereby a dark-field image of the object is obtained.
Matsuzaki and Hasegawa are related as inspection devices with stages.
Hasegawa teaches a white reflecting plate reflecting and scattering light and detachably provided behind the object (12a-subtrate reflecting member located on floating stage 12). The benefit is that it facilitates illumination or dark options (As shown in Fig. 4 … When the scattering / reflecting part 12a is retracted from the position where the dark field illumination light is scattered and reflected in this manner, the reflected light from the scattering / reflecting part 12a is reflected when the reflected light from the glass substrate 10 is observed by epi-illumination. Can prevent light.) so that sourced illumination or fluorescence, for example, can be studied.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinarily skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add to Matsuzaki a white reflecting plate reflecting and scattering light and detachably provided behind the object Hasegawa to permit viewing under illuminated or darkness for florescence.
Regarding claim 3, the combination The bright- and dark-field microscope of claim 1, wherein the light source emits white light (Matsuzaki, abstr – white light source).
Regarding claim 4, the combination The bright- and dark-field microscope of claim 3, wherein the ring-forming optical system includes: a first condenser lens focusing light coming from the collimator; a ring filter making light focused at the first condenser lens into ring-shaped light; a collimating lens collimating light coming from the ring filter; and a second condenser lens focusing and sending light coming from the collimating lens to the through-hole mirror (Matsuzaki, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 5, the combination The bright- and dark-field microscope of claim 4, wherein the ring filter makes light into a ring shape by passing the light through a mask with a ring-shaped empty space (Matsuzaki, Fig. 1:9 – aperture stop).
Regarding claim 6, the combination The bright- and dark-field microscope of claim 4, wherein the ring-forming optical system further includes: a first aperture (Matsuzaki, Fig. 1: 9 – aperture stop) adjusting an outermost size of the light focused at the first condenser lens; and a second aperture (13 – half mirror) adjusting brightness of the light adjusted at the first aperture and sending the light to the collimating lens (Matsuzaki, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 7, the combination The bright- and dark-field microscope of claim 6, wherein the ring-forming optical system is disposed such that a focus of light coming from the first condenser lens is positioned between the first aperture and the second aperture (Matsuzaki, Fig. 1: 12-illumination lens).
Regarding claim 8, the combination The bright- and dark-field microscope of claim 1, wherein the reflective objective lens is provided such that light reflecting from the through-hole mirror and traveling to the object passes through an edge portion of the reflective objective lens, and light reflecting and coming from the object passes through a center portion of the reflective objective lens (Matsuzaki, Fig. 1 – note beam path).
Regarding claim 10, the combination The bright- and dark-field microscope of claim 1, further comprising: a front aperture removing noise of light passing and coming through the through-hole; and a collecting lens collecting and sending light coming from the front aperture to the camera (Matsuzaki, Fig. 1; since this is the same structure as that provided, it must perform the same function; MPEP § 2114, Sections I and II, citing Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469; 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) and In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1478; 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997).).
Regarding claim 11, the combination does not explicitly disclose The bright- and dark-field microscope of claim 1, wherein the white scattering plate is spaced a predetermined distance behind the object and detachably provided.
Matsuzaki and Hasegawa are related as inspection devices with stages.
Hasegawa teaches a white reflecting plate reflecting and scattering light and detachably provided behind the object (12a- is retractable). The benefit is that it facilitates illumination or dark options (As shown in Fig. 4 … When the scattering / reflecting part 12a is retracted from the position where the dark field illumination light is scattered and reflected in this manner, the reflected light from the scattering / reflecting part 12a is reflected when the reflected light from the glass substrate 10 is observed by epi-illumination. Can prevent light.) so that sourced illumination or fluorescence, for example, can be studied.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinarily skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add to Matsuzaki a white reflecting plate reflecting and scattering light and detachably provided behind the object Hasegawa to permit viewing under illuminated or darkness for florescence.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 is 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.
Regarding claim 9, the prior art does not teach or suggest “The bright- and dark-field microscope of claim 8,” including the specific arrangement for “the combination does not explicitly disclose wherein the reflective objective lens has separate independent lenses at the edge portion and the center portion, respectively.” as set forth in the claimed combination(s).
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20210231939 – coaxial microscope.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER D. CARRUTH whose telephone number is (571)272-9791, who can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9:00 AM - 4:00 PM ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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 Supervisory Examiner Carruth by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Director Allana L Bidder, can be reached on 571-272-5560. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JENNIFER D. CARRUTH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights