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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 26 March 2025, 12 January 2026, 22 January 2026, and 10 August 2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-3, 5, and 16-19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1: “multiple wavelengths” in lines 11 and 14 respectively should be “the multiple wavelengths” for further clarity and continuity in the claim language.
Claim 2: “multiple focal points” in line 2 should be “the multiple focal points” for further clarity and continuity in the claim language.
Claim 3: “the modulated light beams” in line 2 should be “the respective modulated light beams” for further clarity and continuity in the claim language.
Claim 5: “multiple wavelengths” in lines 3-4 should be “the multiple wavelengths” for further clarity and continuity in the claim language.
Claim 16: “the wavelengths” in line 3 should be “the multiple wavelengths” for further clarity and continuity in the claim language.
Claim 17: “multiple wavelengths” in lines 7 and 14 respectively should be “the multiple wavelengths” for further clarity and continuity in the claim language.
Claim 18: “multiple wavelengths” in lines 7, 9, and 12 respectively should be “the multiple wavelengths” for further clarity and continuity in the claim language.
Claim 19: “multiple wavelengths” in lines 3 and 7 respectively should be “the multiple wavelengths” and “the selected measurement section” in line 7 should be either “the one measurement section” or “the selected one measurement section” for further clarity and continuity in the claim language.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation is:
“an optical system configured to…” in claims 1 and 17: a plurality of lenses (¶79, The optical system may include multiple lenses).
Because this claim limitation is being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it is being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this limitation interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation to avoid it being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation recites sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitations recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitations are:
“a light modulation step” in claim 18.
“a light emission step” in claim 18.
“a focus adjustment step” in claim 18.
“an information acquisition step” in claim 18.
“a height measurement step” in claim 18.
“an external light source irradiation step” in claim 20.
“an external light source wavelength detection step” in claim 20.
Because these claim limitations are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, “light beams” in line 9 is unclear as multiple light beams has been mentioned previously in the same claim regarding light beams being emitted to the surface of the measurement object. Is this limitation referring to the same multiple light beams mentioned previously or different light beams? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting this limitation to be referring to the same multiple light beams mentioned previously. Additionally, “the light beams” in lines 11 and 13 respectively are unclear as both multiple light beams and respective modulated light beams have been mentioned previously. Are these limitations referring to the multiple light beams or the respective modulated light beams? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting these limitations to be referring to the respective modulated beams mentioned previously.
Claims 2-16 are rejected for their dependency on claim 1.
Regarding claim 4, “a curvature” in line 2 is unclear as this limitation has been mentioned previously in claim 3, on which claim 4 is dependent. Is this limitation referring to the same curvature mentioned previously or a different curvature? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting this limitation to be referring to the same curvature mentioned previously.
Regarding claim 5, ”the light beams” in line 3 is unclear as both multiple light beams and respective modulated light beams have been mentioned previously. Is this limitation referring to the multiple light beams or the respective modulated light beams? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting this limitation to be referring to the respective modulated beams mentioned previously.
Claim 6 is rejected for its dependency on claim 5.
Regarding claim 7, “light” in line 2 is unclear as this limitation has been mentioned previously in claim 1, on which claim 7 is dependent. Is this limitation referring to the same light mentioned previously or a different light? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting this limitation to be referring to the same light mentioned previously.
Regarding claim 8, “color information” in line 2 is unclear as this limitation has been mentioned previously in claim 1, on which claim 8 is dependent. Is this limitation referring to the same color information mentioned previously or different color information? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting this limitation to be referring to the same color information mentioned previously. Additionally, “multiple light beams” in line 2 is unclear as this limitation has been mentioned previously in claim 1, on which claim 8 is dependent. Is this limitation referring to the same multiple light beams mentioned previously or different multiple light beams? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting this limitation to be referring to the same multiple light beams mentioned previously.
Regarding claim 9, “the light beams” in line 2 is unclear as both multiple light beams and respective modulated light beams have been mentioned previously. Is this limitation referring to the multiple light beams or the respective modulated light beams? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting this limitation to be referring to the multiple light beams mentioned previously.
Claim 10 is rejected for its dependency on claim 9.
Regarding claim 10, “the light beams” in line 2 is unclear as both multiple light beams and respective modulated light beams have been mentioned previously. Is this limitation referring to the multiple light beams or the respective modulated light beams? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting this limitation to be referring to the multiple light beams mentioned previously.
Regarding claim 14, “light” in line 4 is unclear as this limitation has been mentioned previously in the same claim. Is this limitation referring to the same light mentioned previously or a different light? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting this limitation to be referring to the same light mentioned previously.
Claims 15-16 are rejected for their dependency on claim 14.
Regarding claim 15, “the wavelength” in line 3 lacks proper antecedent basis and is therefore unclear. Additionally, “light” in line 3 is unclear as light beams detected by the image sensor have been mentioned previously in claim 1. Is this limitation referring to the light beams mentioned previously, one of the light beams mentioned previously, or different light? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting this limitation to be referring to at least one light beam of the plurality of light beams mentioned previously. Additionally, “light” in line 4 is unclear as this limitation has been mentioned previously in claim 14, on which claim 15 is dependent. Is this limitation referring to the same light mentioned previously or a different light? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting this limitation to be referring to the same light mentioned previously.
Claim 16 is rejected for its dependency on claim 15.
Regarding claim 17, “the light beams” in line 6 is unclear as the limitation “multiple light beams” has been mentioned previously, yet this line 6 limitation appears to be referring to modulated light beams mentioned later in the claim. Is this limitation referring to the multiple light beams mentioned previously or the modulated light beams mentioned later? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting this limitation to be referring to the modulated light beams. Additionally, “the modulated light beams” in line 7 lacks proper antecedent basis and is therefore unclear. Additionally, “light beams” in line 9 is unclear as both multiple light beams and modulated light beams have been mentioned previously. Is this limitation referring to the multiple light beams mentioned previously, the modulated light beams mentioned previously, or different light beams? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting this limitation to be referring to the multiple light beams mentioned previously. Additionally, “the light beams” in lines 11 and 13 respectively are unclear as both multiple light beams and modulated light beams have been mentioned previously in the same claim. Are these limitations referring to the multiple light beams mentioned previously or the modulated light beams mentioned previously? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting these limitations to be referring to the modulated light beams mentioned previously.
Regarding claim 18, “the modulated light beams” in line 4 lacks proper antecedent basis and is therefore unclear (Note: it appears that this limitation can be referring to the multiple light beams mentioned previously, but it is not clear. The Applicant either needs to clearly differentiate between the two or clearly associate the two with one another). Additionally, “the light beams” in lines 7, 9, and 12 respectively are unclear as both multiple light beams and modulated light beams have been mentioned previously. Are these limitations referring to the multiple light beams mentioned previously or the modulated light beams mentioned previously? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting these limitations to be referring to the modulated light beams mentioned previously. Additionally, “the light beams” in line 10 is unclear as both multiple light beams and modulated light beams have been mentioned previously. Is this limitation referring to the multiple light beams mentioned previously or the modulated light beams mentioned previously? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting this limitation to be referring to the multiple light beams mentioned previously.
Claims 19-20 are rejected for their dependency on claim 18.
Regarding claim 19, “the light beams” in lines 3 and 6 respectively are unclear as both multiple light beams and modulated light beams have been mentioned previously. Are these limitations referring to the multiple light beams mentioned previously or the modulated light beams mentioned previously? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting these limitations to be referring to the modulated light beams mentioned previously. Additionally, “positions” in line 5 is unclear as this limitation has been mentioned previously in claim 18, on which claim 19 is dependent. Is this limitation referring to the same positions mentioned previously or different positions? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting this limitation to be referring to the same positions mentioned previously. Additionally, “the light beams” in line 5 is unclear as both multiple light beams and modulated light beams have been mentioned previously. Is this limitation referring to the multiple light beams mentioned previously or the modulated light beams mentioned previously? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting this limitation to be referring to the multiple light beams mentioned previously.
Regarding claim 20, “light” in lines 2 and 5 respectively is unclear as this limitation has been mentioned previously in claim 18, on which claim 20 is dependent. Are these limitations referring to the same light mentioned previously or a different light? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting this limitation to be referring to a different light (i.e. the light emitted from the external light source as opposed to the light emitted from the light source first mentioned). Additionally, “the external light source” in line 5 and “the wavelength” in lines 8-9 both lack proper antecedent and are therefore both unclear.
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:
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 1-2, 5-13, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (USPGPub 20240053140 A1) in view of Ma et al. (CN 108775875 A) and Wouters et al. (USPGPub 20200033121 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Jiang teaches a three-dimensional shape inspection device (abstract, A line-scanning three-dimensional sensing system measures a surface profile of an object) comprising: a light emitter (130) including a light source (see figure 1, light source module 130), the light emitter (130) being configured to emit multiple light beams having multiple focal points downward onto a surface of a measurement object (95) (see figure 11, groups of rays R1-R4; ¶60, The light source module 130 is used for generating a polychromatic light beam 131. The polychromatic light beam 131 is subsequently used for generating a spatial distribution of focused linear light beams with different colors for illuminating the object 95; and see ¶¶72-74); an optical system (113b/113c) configured to refract respective light beams at different refractive indices for each of multiple wavelengths based on chromatic aberration, thereby forming a measurement section in a vertical direction in which the light refracted for each wavelength is focused (see figure 1, lenses 113b and 113c; ¶75, the plurality of lenses 112, 113, 116 in the DOM 110 includes at least one dispersion lens pair (e.g., lenses 113b, 113c) for chromatically dispersing the PLLB 125; and ¶50, To realize chromatic dispersion of the polychromatic light beam, one may use a lens or a prism that exhibits different refractive indexes to narrowband light beams that have different wavelength contents); and an image sensor (145) configured to detect color information of light beams that are focused at and reflected from positions corresponding to heights on the surface of the measurement object (95) among the light beams refracted for each of multiple wavelengths (see figure 1, imaging sensor 145; and ¶86, the height profile is obtainable by analyzing a spectral content at each point of the output light line 220. Refer to FIG. 1. For obtaining the spectral content, the first system 100 may further comprise a grating 140 and an imaging sensor 145). However, Jiang fails to explicitly teach wherein the light emitter comprises a spatial light modulator configured to modulate light received from the light source, and wherein the optical system comprises a focus adjuster configured to change the measurement section by vertically changing positions at which the light beams refracted for each of multiple wavelengths are focused.
However, Ma teaches wherein the light emitter (1) comprises a spatial light modulator (4) configured to modulate light received from the light source (see figure 1; and ¶15, Polychromatic light emitted from a broadband light source is uniformly irradiated onto a spatial light modulator via a beam homogenizer and a beam folding coupler. The spatial light modulator is synchronously controlled to output a spatially uniformly distributed polychromatic light signal).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jiang to incorporate the teachings of Ma to further include a spatial light modulator to modulate light as [t]his enables rapid (dynamic or even transient) acquisition of full-field non-contact, high-precision measurement data of the microstructure of microstructures (especially those with complex and discontinuous surface shapes) (Ma, ¶23). However, the combination fails to explicitly teach wherein the optical system comprises a focus adjuster configured to change the measurement section by vertically changing positions at which the light beams refracted for each of multiple wavelengths are focused.
However, Wouters teaches wherein the optical system comprises a focus adjuster configured to change the measurement section by vertically changing positions at which the light beams refracted for each of multiple wavelengths are focused (¶51, An optional focus tunable lens can be used in the system 100 and may be positioned in a path of the light beam between the tube lens 106 and the lens system 107. By introducing a focus tunable lens into system 100, the measuring range can be shifted in Z-direction without mechanical movement).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Jiang and Ma to incorporate the teachings of Wouters to further include a focus adjuster element because the measuring range can be shifted in Z-direction without mechanical movement. This can be used to extend the Z-range (Wouters, ¶51).
Regarding claim 2, Jiang as modified by Ma and Wouters teaches the three-dimensional shape inspection device of claim 1, wherein the light emitter (Jiang 130 | Ma 1 | Wouters 101) is configured to emit the multiple light beams having multiple focal points downward onto the surface of the measurement object (Jiang 95 | Ma 8 | Wouters 108) in a horizontal direction perpendicular to the vertical direction (Jiang, see figure 11, groups of rays R1-R4; ¶60, The light source module 130 is used for generating a polychromatic light beam 131. The polychromatic light beam 131 is subsequently used for generating a spatial distribution of focused linear light beams with different colors for illuminating the object 95; and see ¶¶72-74 for further details).
Regarding claim 5, Jiang as modified by Ma and Wouters teaches the three-dimensional shape inspection device of claim 1, wherein the focus adjuster is configured to select one measurement section among multiple measurement sections by vertically changing positions at which the light beams refracted for each of multiple wavelengths are focused (Wouters, ¶51, An optional focus tunable lens can be used in the system 100 and may be positioned in a path of the light beam between the tube lens 106 and the lens system 107. By introducing a focus tunable lens into system 100, the measuring range can be shifted in Z-direction without mechanical movement; and Note: lenses refract light; and the measurement sections can be interpreted as vertical sections).
Regarding claim 6, Jiang as modified by Ma and Wouters teaches the three-dimensional shape inspection device of claim 5, wherein one of the multiple measurement sections is different from another of the multiple measurement sections (Wouters, ¶51, An optional focus tunable lens can be used in the system 100 and may be positioned in a path of the light beam between the tube lens 106 and the lens system 107. By introducing a focus tunable lens into system 100, the measuring range can be shifted in Z-direction without mechanical movement; and Note: There are a plurality of Z positions all different from one another).
Regarding claim 7, Jiang as modified by Ma and Wouters teaches the three-dimensional shape inspection device of claim 1, wherein the spatial light modulator (Ma 4) is configured to modulate light received from the light source (Jiang 130 | Ma 1 | Wouters 101) by reflecting the light, and comprises multiple digital micromirror devices arranged in an array (Ma, ¶11, The spatial light modulator is a digital micromirror device).
Regarding claim 8, Jiang as modified by Ma and Wouters teaches the three-dimensional shape inspection device of claim 1, wherein the image sensor (Jiang 145 | Ma 11 | Wouters 110) is configured to detect color information of multiple light beams after the multiple light beams are focused on and reflected from the surface of the measurement object (Jiang 95 | Ma 8 | Wouters 108) (Jiang, see figure 1, information-bearing color image 182 transformed into spectral image 230 by multiple optical elements and detected by imaging sensor 145; and ¶62, When the object 95 is illuminated by the rainbow light pattern 181, the illuminated object 95 displays an IBCI 282 on the object 95. The IBCI 282 contains height information of the scanned surface 283. Specifically, the height information is encoded in the color distribution of the IBCI 282), and wherein respective heights on the surface of the measurement object (Jiang 95 | Ma 8 | Wouters 108) from which the multiple light beams are reflected are measured based on the color information of the multiple light beams detected by the image sensor (Jiang 145 | Ma 11 | Wouters 110) (Jiang, ¶16, A height profile of the scanned surface is obtainable by analyzing a spectral content at each point of the output light line such that the surface profile is determinable according to respective height profiles obtained for a plurality of scanned surfaces of the object).
Regarding claim 9, Jiang as modified by Ma and Wouters teaches the three-dimensional shape inspection device of claim 1, wherein the color information comprises RGB information of the light beams that are focused on and reflected from the surface of the measurement object (Jiang 95 | Ma 8 | Wouters 108) (Jiang, ¶75, The rainbow light pattern 181 is localized above the reference plane 190 such that the working distance measurable by the rainbow light pattern 181 (denoted as D as shown in FIG. 11) is between 32 mm (at λ1 of wavelength 400 nm) and 38 mm (at λ3 of wavelength 700 nm); and Note: the above wavelength range goes from violet to red).
Regarding claim 10, Jiang as modified by Ma and Wouters teaches the three-dimensional shape inspection device of claim 9, wherein the image sensor (Jiang 145 | Ma 11 | Wouters 110) is configured to obtain wavelength information of the light beams that are focused on and reflected from the surface of the measurement object (Jiang 95 | Ma 8 | Wouters 108) based on the RGB information (Jiang, see figure 1, information-bearing color image 182 transformed into spectral image 230 by multiple optical elements and detected by imaging sensor 145; ¶62, When the object 95 is illuminated by the rainbow light pattern 181, the illuminated object 95 displays an IBCI 282 on the object 95. The IBCI 282 contains height information of the scanned surface 283. Specifically, the height information is encoded in the color distribution of the IBCI 282; and ¶86, The imaging sensor 145 is a 2D imaging sensor used for imaging the spectral image 230. The imaging sensor 145 is positioned at an orientation of θ with respect to the second optical axis 117 for imaging the first-order diffraction pattern, which is the spectral image 230. The spectral content at each point of the output light line 220 is determinable from the spectral image 230).
Regarding claim 11, Jiang as modified by Ma and Wouters teaches the three-dimensional shape inspection device of claim 1, wherein the image sensor (Jiang 145 | Ma 11 | Wouters 110) comprises any one of a color camera, a multispectral camera, and a monochrome camera with a band-pass filter (Jiang, ¶86, The imaging sensor 145 is a 2D imaging sensor used for imaging the spectral image 230).
Regarding claim 12, Jiang as modified by Ma and Wouters teaches the three-dimensional shape inspection device of claim 1, wherein the light source (Jiang 130 | Ma 1 | Wouters 101) comprises any one of an LED, a halogen lamp, and a xenon lamp (Jiang, ¶79, the light source 310 comprises one or more LEDs 315 for collectively generating the raw light rays 415, although other kinds of light emitters may be used).
Regarding claim 13, Jiang as modified by Ma and Wouters teaches the three-dimensional shape inspection device of claim 1, further comprising: a controller configured to measure a height of the surface of the measurement object (Jiang 95 | Ma 8 | Wouters 108) based on the color information detected by the image sensor (Jiang 145 | Ma 11 | Wouters 110) (Jiang, ¶16, A height profile of the scanned surface is obtainable by analyzing a spectral content at each point of the output light line such that the surface profile is determinable according to respective height profiles obtained for a plurality of scanned surfaces of the object; and Ma, ¶17, A snapshot-type multi/hyperspectral imaging detector and controller work together to acquire each frame of axial dispersive sinusoidal fringe reflected by the DUT, and transmit them to a computer for storage and processing).
Regarding claim 17, Jiang teaches a three-dimensional shape inspection device (abstract, A line-scanning three-dimensional sensing system measures a surface profile of an object) comprising: a light emitter (130) configured to emit multiple light beams having multiple focal points downward onto a surface of a measurement object (95) (see figure 1, light source module 130; see figure 11, groups of rays R1-R4; ¶60, The light source module 130 is used for generating a polychromatic light beam 131. The polychromatic light beam 131 is subsequently used for generating a spatial distribution of focused linear light beams with different colors for illuminating the object 95; and see ¶¶72-74 for further details), the light emitter (130) including a light source (130) (see figure 1, light source module 130); an optical system (113b/113c) configured to form a measurement section in a vertical direction, in which the light beams refracted for each of multiple wavelengths are focused, by refracting each of the light beams at different refractive indices for each of multiple wavelengths based on chromatic aberration (see figure 1, lenses 113b and 113c; ¶75, the plurality of lenses 112, 113, 116 in the DOM 110 includes at least one dispersion lens pair (e.g., lenses 113b, 113c) for chromatically dispersing the PLLB 125; and ¶50, To realize chromatic dispersion of the polychromatic light beam, one may use a lens or a prism that exhibits different refractive indexes to narrowband light beams that have different wavelength contents); an image sensor (145) configured to detect color information of light beams that are focused at and reflected from positions corresponding to heights on the surface of the measurement object (95) among the light beams refracted for each of multiple wavelengths (see figure 1, imaging sensor 145; and ¶86, the height profile is obtainable by analyzing a spectral content at each point of the output light line 220. Refer to FIG. 1. For obtaining the spectral content, the first system 100 may further comprise a grating 140 and an imaging sensor 145). However, Jiang fails to explicitly teach wherein the light emitter comprises a spatial light modulator configured to modulate light received from the light source; and a focus adjuster configured to change the measurement section by vertically moving the optical system to vertically change the positions at which the light beams refracted for each of multiple wavelengths are focused.
However, Ma teaches wherein the light emitter (1) comprises a spatial light modulator (4) configured to modulate light received from the light source (1) (see figure 1; and ¶15, Polychromatic light emitted from a broadband light source is uniformly irradiated onto a spatial light modulator via a beam homogenizer and a beam folding coupler. The spatial light modulator is synchronously controlled to output a spatially uniformly distributed polychromatic light signal).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jiang to incorporate the teachings of Ma to further include a spatial light modulator to modulate light as [t]his enables rapid (dynamic or even transient) acquisition of full-field non-contact, high-precision measurement data of the microstructure of microstructures (especially those with complex and discontinuous surface shapes) (Ma, ¶23). However, the combination fails to explicitly teach a focus adjuster configured to change the measurement section by vertically moving the optical system to vertically change the positions at which the light beams refracted for each of multiple wavelengths are focused.
However, Wouters teaches a focus adjuster configured to change the measurement section by vertically moving the optical system to vertically change the positions at which the light beams refracted for each of multiple wavelengths are focused (¶51, An optional focus tunable lens can be used in the system 100 and may be positioned in a path of the light beam between the tube lens 106 and the lens system 107. By introducing a focus tunable lens into system 100, the measuring range can be shifted in Z-direction without mechanical movement).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Jiang and Ma to incorporate the teachings of Wouters to further include a focus adjuster element because the measuring range can be shifted in Z-direction without mechanical movement. This can be used to extend the Z-range (Wouters, ¶51).
Regarding claim 18, Jiang teaches a method for inspecting a three-dimensional shape (abstract, A line-scanning three-dimensional sensing system measures a surface profile of an object), the method comprising: a light emission step of emitting multiple light beams having multiple focal points onto a surface of a measurement object using a light source (130) (see figure 1, light source module 130; see figure 11, groups of rays R1-R4; ¶60, The light source module 130 is used for generating a polychromatic light beam 131. The polychromatic light beam 131 is subsequently used for generating a spatial distribution of focused linear light beams with different colors for illuminating the object 95; and see ¶¶72-74); the light emission step of refracting each of the light beams at different refractive indices for each of multiple wavelengths based on chromatic aberration, thereby emitting the light beams downward to form a measurement section in a vertical direction, in which the light beams refracted for each of multiple wavelengths are focused (see figure 1, lenses 113b and 113c; ¶75, the plurality of lenses 112, 113, 116 in the DOM 110 includes at least one dispersion lens pair (e.g., lenses 113b, 113c) for chromatically dispersing the PLLB 125; and ¶50, To realize chromatic dispersion of the polychromatic light beam, one may use a lens or a prism that exhibits different refractive indexes to narrowband light beams that have different wavelength contents); an information acquisition step of detecting color information of the light beams that are focused at and reflected from positions corresponding to heights on the surface of the measurement object (95) among the light beams refracted for each of multiple wavelengths in the measurement section (see figure 1, imaging sensor 145; and ¶86, the height profile is obtainable by analyzing a spectral content at each point of the output light line 220. Refer to FIG. 1. For obtaining the spectral content, the first system 100 may further comprise a grating 140 and an imaging sensor 145); and a height measurement step of measuring the height of the surface of the measurement object (95) based on the detected color information (¶16, A height profile of the scanned surface is obtainable by analyzing a spectral content at each point of the output light line such that the surface profile is determinable according to respective height profiles obtained for a plurality of scanned surfaces of the object). However, Jiang fails to explicitly teach a light modulation step of modulating light received from a light source; and a focus adjustment step of changing the measurement section by vertically changing positions at which the light beams refracted for each of multiple wavelengths are focused.
However, Ma teaches a light modulation step of modulating light received from a light source (1) (see figure 1; and ¶15, Polychromatic light emitted from a broadband light source is uniformly irradiated onto a spatial light modulator via a beam homogenizer and a beam folding coupler. The spatial light modulator is synchronously controlled to output a spatially uniformly distributed polychromatic light signal).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jiang to incorporate the teachings of Ma to further include a spatial light modulator to modulate light as [t]his enables rapid (dynamic or even transient) acquisition of full-field non-contact, high-precision measurement data of the microstructure of microstructures (especially those with complex and discontinuous surface shapes) (Ma, ¶23). However, the combination fails to explicitly teach a focus adjustment step of changing the measurement section by vertically changing positions at which the light beams refracted for each of multiple wavelengths are focused.
However, Wouters teaches a focus adjustment step of changing the measurement section by vertically changing positions at which the light beams refracted for each of multiple wavelengths are focused (¶51, An optional focus tunable lens can be used in the system 100 and may be positioned in a path of the light beam between the tube lens 106 and the lens system 107. By introducing a focus tunable lens into system 100, the measuring range can be shifted in Z-direction without mechanical movement).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Jiang and Ma to incorporate the teachings of Wouters to further include a focus adjuster element because the measuring range can be shifted in Z-direction without mechanical movement. This can be used to extend the Z-range (Wouters, ¶51).
Regarding claim 19, Jiang as modified by Ma and Wouters teaches the method of claim 18, wherein the focus adjustment step comprises selecting one measurement section among multiple measurement sections by vertically changing the positions at which the light beams refracted for each of multiple wavelengths are focused (Wouters, ¶51, An optional focus tunable lens can be used in the system 100 and may be positioned in a path of the light beam between the tube lens 106 and the lens system 107. By introducing a focus tunable lens into system 100, the measuring range can be shifted in Z-direction without mechanical movement; and Note: lenses refract light; and the measurement sections can be interpreted as vertical sections), and wherein the information acquisition step and the height measurement step are performed based on the color information of the light beams that are focused at and reflected from positions corresponding to the heights on the surface of the measurement object (Jiang 95 | Ma 8 | Wouters 108) among the light beams refracted for each of multiple wavelengths in the selected measurement section (Jiang, abstract, The illuminated object displays an information-bearing color image (IBCI) containing height information of the scanned surface. The DOM captures the IBCI, and performs a backward optical process of optically condensing the captured IBCI to form an elongated light pattern. The backward optical process is an inverse of the forward one. A slit spatially filters the elongated light pattern to form an output light line. A height profile of the scanned surface is obtained by analyzing a spectral content at each point of the output light line).
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (USPGPub 20240053140 A1) in view of Ma et al. (CN 108775875 A) and Wouters et al. (USPGPub 20200033121 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Böttcher et al. (USPGPub 20240210668 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Jiang as modified by Ma and Wouters teaches the three-dimensional shape inspection device of claim 1, wherein the focus adjuster comprises a variable lens configured to refract each of the modulated light beams (Wouters, ¶51, An optional focus tunable lens can be used in the system 100 and may be positioned in a path of the light beam between the tube lens 106 and the lens system 107. By introducing a focus tunable lens into system 100, the measuring range can be shifted in Z-direction without mechanical movement…An electrically tunable liquid lens is an example for a focus tunable lens; and Note: lenses refract light). However, the combination fails to explicitly teach wherein the focus adjuster is configured to vertically change the measurement section by adjusting a curvature of the variable lens.
However, Böttcher teaches wherein the focus adjuster is configured to vertically change the measurement section by adjusting a curvature of the variable lens (¶20, the optical system includes a liquid lens 26 the focal length of which may be adjusted electronically. As has been shown schematically in the drawing, the liquid lens is formed by two non-mixing liquids which have different indices of refraction and are enclosed in a volume between two transparent electrodes 28, 30. On one of the electrodes, the liquid having the larger index of refraction forms a droplet that constitutes the proper light-refracting element of the lens. When the voltages applied between the electrodes 28, 30 is changed, this changes the contact angle and, consequently, the curvature of the droplet).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Jiang, Ma, and Wouters to incorporate the teachings of Böttcher to adjust the curvature of the lens as this is how liquid lenses function, and it allows the lens to adjust focus.
Regarding claim 4, Jiang as modified by Ma, Wouters, and Böttcher teaches the three-dimensional shape inspection device of claim 3, wherein the variable lens comprises a liquid lens having a curvature that changes based on a current applied to the focus adjuster (Böttcher, ¶20, the optical system includes a liquid lens 26 the focal length of which may be adjusted electronically. As has been shown schematically in the drawing, the liquid lens is formed by two non-mixing liquids which have different indices of refraction and are enclosed in a volume between two transparent electrodes 28, 30. On one of the electrodes, the liquid having the larger index of refraction forms a droplet that constitutes the proper light-refracting element of the lens. When the voltages applied between the electrodes 28, 30 is changed, this changes the contact angle and, consequently, the curvature of the droplet).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (USPGPub 20240053140 A1) in view of Ma et al. (CN 108775875 A) and Wouters et al. (USPGPub 20200033121 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Atiya et al. (USPGPub 20160003613 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Jiang as modified by Ma and Wouters teaches the image sensor (Jiang 145 | Ma 11 | Wouters 110). However, the combination fails to explicitly teach an external light source configured to emit light onto the surface of the measurement object, wherein the image sensor is configured to acquire wavelength information of light emitted from the external light source and reflected from the surface of the measurement object.
However, Atiya teaches an external light source (410) configured to emit light onto the surface of the measurement object (412) (see figure 5, front-end light sources 410 (i.e. external light sources); and ¶57, one or more of the light source 402 and front-end light source 410 provides light having a plurality of different wavelengths (e.g., via a polychromatic light source or a plurality of monochromatic light sources as described herein), thereby providing broad-band flooding illumination of the structure 412), wherein the image sensor (406) is configured to acquire wavelength information of light emitted from the external light source (410) and reflected from the surface of the measurement object (412) (¶57, Each of the different wavelengths can be focused to a respective different fixed focal length relative to the optical system 400. Accordingly, returning reflections of the light can be directed by the imaging optics 404 to be incident upon the sensor array 406, which measures the relative intensities of the multi-wavelength light).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Jiang, Ma, and Wouters to incorporate the teachings of Atiya to further include an external light source =such that the structure 412 is illuminated with all wavelengths equally at all positions relative to the optical system (Atiya, ¶57).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-16 and 20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 15, the prior art of record individually or combined fails to teach the three-dimensional shape inspection device of claims 14 and 1 as claimed, more specifically in combination with further comprising: a controller configured to control the focus adjuster to change the measurement section when the wavelength of light detected by the image sensor is a second wavelength different from a first wavelength, while the external light source emits light having the first wavelength.
Claim 16 would be allowed for its dependency on claim 15.
Regarding claim 20, the prior art of record individually or combined fails to teach the method of claim 18 as claimed, further comprising: an external light source irradiation step of emitting light onto the surface of the measurement object, wherein the information acquisition step comprises an external light source wavelength detection step of detecting wavelength information of light emitted from the external light source and reflected from the surface of the measurement object, and more specifically in combination with wherein, when light having a first wavelength is emitted in the external light source irradiation step, the focus adjustment step comprises changing the measurement section when the wavelength of the light detected in the external light source wavelength detection step is a second wavelength different from the first wavelength.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Keränen et al. (USPGPub 20230408695 A1): Keränen teaches an optical surface inspector that uses chromatic aberration in order to determine properties of the surface under test (see ¶75).
Dietz et al. (USPGPub 20230417533 A1): Dietz teaches a chromatic aberration measuring device.
Haverkamp (USPGPub 20200386671 A1): Haverkamp teaches a chromatic aberration 3D measurement device with multiple light beams (see figure 1).
Marukawa et al. (USPGPub 20180259390 A1): Marukawa teaches a chromatic aberration measuring device with an extended measuring range using a plurality of lenses (see figure 3).
Haverkamp (DE 102020110298 A1): Haverkamp teaches adjustable focusing elements (132’/134’/136’) as well as external light sources (112/113) (see figure 6).
Stock et al. (WO 2018130693 A1): Stock teaches a chromatic aberration surface topography imager with an external light source (9’) (see figure 4).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIN R GARBER whose telephone number is (571)272-4663. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0730-1730.
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, Georgia Y Epps can be reached at (571) 272-2328. 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.
/ERIN R GARBER/Examiner, Art Unit 2878
Prosecution Insights