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
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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipate by Atkinson et al (US 5747807 A).
Regarding claim 1, Atkinson et al discloses a sensor (10) (col. 9, line 60), comprising: a spectrometer (600) (col. 5, lines 52-53); an integrating volume comprising a laser pump resonator (100) configured within the integrating volume (optical resonator cavity defined by physical length between mirrors (501)(503)(505) with ILS laser (500) (col. 12, lines 12-15), an interior reflective surface, and an inlet operable to receive a flow of an analyte (reflective surfaces of mirrors (501)(503)(505) define interior or resonator cavity) (See Fig. 4, col. 12, lines 12-15, col. 13, lines 39-42); a laser operable to excite the analyte with laser light via the laser pump resonator to generate analyte signature light from the excited analyte (col. 6, lines 66-67 and col. 7, lines 1-3); and an optical port configured with the integrating volume, and operable to direct the analyte signature light from the integrating volume to the spectrometer during reflections of the laser light in the laser pump resonator (i.e. window (403) integrated into cavity wall and suited to provide maximum transmission of sample light over operational spectrum of laser (500) (col. 12, lines 60-65), wherein the spectrometer is operable to identify the analyte based on the analyte signature light (i.e. spectrometer (600) determines identification of sample using sample light from laser) (col. 12, lines 60-64).
Regarding claim 2, Atkinson et al discloses wherein: the integrating volume comprises an exhaust port (412) operable to exhaust the analyte from the sensor (vacuum pump outlet (412) purging the chamber) (col. 12, lines 53-55).
Regarding claim 3, Atkinson et al discloses wherein further comprising: a vacuum device coupled to the exhaust port to maintain a pressure lower than an external environment (col. 12, lines 53-55, col. 13, lines 24-25).
Regarding claim 6, Atkinson et al discloses wherein the optical port (window (403)) comprises an afocal optical system (window have infinite focal length) operable to direct the signature light to the spectrometer (col. 12, lines 60-65).
Regarding claim 20, Atkinson et al discloses a method of identifying an analyte (See Abstract) comprises: flowing air comprising the analyte into an integrating volume that includes a laser pump resonator configured within the integrating volume (resonator cavity with pumping laser receives sample gas flow) (col. 4, lines 54-56, col. 6, lines 50-60); exciting the analyte with laser light via the laser pump resonator to generate analyte signature light from the excited analyte (col. 6, lines 66-67 and col. 7, lines 1-3); directing the analyte signature light (Beam F) from the integrating volume to a spectrometer via at least one reflection (mirrors (503)(505) from an internal reflective surface of the integrating volume during reflections of the laser light in the laser pump resonator (col. 20, lines 65-67, col. 21, lines 1-4); and identifying the analyte based on the analyte signature light (spectrometer (600) determines identification of sample using sample light from laser) (col. 12, lines 60-64).
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.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkinson et al (US 5747807 A) in view of Mcewen et al (US 20080048107 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Atkinson et al discloses all of the limitations of parent claim 1, as described above however, Atkinson et al is silent with regards to the nozzle configured. Mcewen et al discloses a nozzle configuration with integrating volume and operable to provide a sheath of clean gas surrounding the flow of analyte (flow of clean gas from sheath tube and exit tip (44) provides a corona of clean gas) (paragraphs [0045]-[0046]). Thus, t would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkinson et al of a gas detection system for detecting the presence of gaseous species in a gas sample with Mcewen et al of an ion source for a mass spectrometer. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this to enable insulating the sample from contamination.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkinson et al (US 5747807 A) in view of Brady et al (US 2007/0097363 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Atkinson et al discloses all of the limitations of parent claim 1, as described above however, Atkinson et al is silent with regards to a coded aperture spectrometer. Brady et al discloses a coded aperture spectrometer (paragraph [0036]). Thus, t would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkinson et al of a gas detection system for detecting the presence of gaseous species in a gas sample with Brady et al of coding and modulation for hyperspectral imaging. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this to enable focused light to the sample.
Claim(s) 7-8, 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkinson et al (US 5747807 A) in view of Miron et al (US 2016/0084757 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Atkinson et al discloses wherein the laser pump resonator comprises: a first resonator mirror and a second resonator mirror (reflective surfaces of mirrors (2A)(3A) define interior of resonator cavity) (See Fig. 4, col. 7, lines 26-29, col. 11, lines 27-28), an exhaust port operable to exhaust the flow of the analyte (col. 12, lines 53-55, col. 13, lines 24-25) and wherein the first and second resonator mirrors are operable to resonate the laser light within the laser pump resonator to excite and scatter the analyte signature light inside the integrating volume (col. 10, lines 62-67 and col. 11, lines 1-6). Atkinson et al is silent with regards to wherein the first resonator mirror includes at least one laser entrance port, second resonator mirror includes an exhaust port. Miron et al discloses a first resonator mirror includes at least one laser entrance port, second resonator mirror includes a port (paragraph [0078]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkinson et al of a gas detection system for detecting the presence of gaseous species in a gas sample with Miron et al of analytes monitoring by differential swept wavelength absorption spectroscopy. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this to prevent chamber contamination from sample gasses.
Regarding claim 8, Atkinson et al discloses wherein: the first and second resonator mirrors are configured to substantially confine the laser light within the laser pump resonator (col. 7, lines 23-26).
Regarding claim 11, Atkinson et al discloses wherein: the laser pump resonator further comprises an optical port operable to propagate the laser light into the laser pump resonator (beam F enters chamber (400A) through window (402)) (See Figs. 2, 4 and col. 12, lines 8-18).
Regarding claim 12, Atkinson et al discloses wherein: the optical port is configured to propagate the laser light to approximately a center of the flow of the analyte (col. 11, lines 56-58). Atkinson et al is silent with regards to other optical port configured to propagate laser light. Miron et al discloses another optical port configured to propagate laser light from an acute angle with respect to the inlet (paragraphs [0078], [0085]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkinson et al of a gas detection system for detecting the presence of gaseous species in a gas sample with Miron et al of analytes monitoring by differential swept wavelength absorption spectroscopy. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this to provide multiple excitation beams.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkinson et al (US 5747807 A) in view of Miron et al (US 2016/0084757 A1) and further in view of Milster et al (US 2010/0053599 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Atkinson et al and Miron et al disclose all of the limitations of claim 7, as described supra however, Atkinson et al and Miron et al is silent with regards to the first and second resonator mirrors are concave. Miron et al discloses wherein the first and second resonator mirrors are concave (360)(370) (paragraph [0068]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkinson et al of a gas detection system for detecting the presence of gaseous species in a gas sample and Miron et al of analytes monitoring by differential swept wavelength absorption spectroscopy with Milster et al of Apparatuses and methods for performing spectroscopy and optical microscopy. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this to optimize movement of light for resonator cavity shape.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkinson et al (US 5747807 A) in view of Miron et al (US 2016/0084757 A1) and further in view of Svetkoff et al (US 2005/0174580 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Atkinson et al and Miron et al disclose all of the limitations of claim 7, as described supra however, Atkinson et al and Miron et al are silent with regards to the first and second resonator mirrors comprises a spherical specular reflective surface. Svetkoff et al discloses a mirror comprising: a spherical specular reflective surface (paragraph [0096]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkinson et al of a gas detection system for detecting the presence of gaseous species in a gas sample and Miron et al of analytes monitoring by differential swept wavelength absorption spectroscopy with Svetkoff et al of method and system for high speed measuring of microscopic targets. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this to optimize movement of light for the resonator cavity shape.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkinson et al (US 5747807 A) in view of Milster et al (US 2010/0053599 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Atkinson et al discloses wherein the interior reflective surface are mirrors (2A)(3A) (See Fig. 4 and col. 7, lines 26-29, col. 11, lines 27-28). Atkinson et al fails to disclose a firs mirror with an ellipsoidal shape ad second mirror with spherical shape. Milster et al discloses a first mirror with an ellipsoidal shape (50) and second mirror with a spherical shape (45)(55) (paragraphs [0034], [0039]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkinson et al of a gas detection system for detecting the presence of gaseous species in a gas sample with Milster et al of Apparatuses and methods for performing spectroscopy and optical microscopy. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this to optimize movement of light for resonator cavity shape.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkinson et al (US 5747807 A) in view of Milster et al (US 2010/0053599 A1) and further in view of Milo et al (US 2022/0357201 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Atkinson et al and Milster et al disclose all of the limitations of claim 13, as described supra however, Atkinson et al and Milster et al are silent with regards diffusely scattering patch of material. Milo et al discloses a diffusely scattering path of material (paragraph [0164]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkinson et al of a gas detection system for detecting the presence of gaseous species in a gas sample and Milster et al of Apparatuses and methods for performing spectroscopy and optical microscopy with Milo et al of accessories for handheld spectrometer. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this to provide homogenous illumination of sample light.
Claim(s) 15, 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkinson et al (US 5747807 A) in view of Milo et al (US 2022/0357201 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Atkinson et al discloses all of the limitations of parent claim 1, as described above however, Atkinson et al is silent with regards to the interior reflective surface internally reflects with specular reflection. Milo et al discloses accessories for handheld spectrometer comprising: interior reflective surface internally reflects with specular reflection (i.e. reflective layer on interior of reflector box can be specular reflector) (paragraph [0190]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkinson et al of a gas detection system for detecting the presence of gaseous species in a gas sample with Milo et al of accessories for handheld spectrometer. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this to reflect the sample light in a single direction.
Regarding claim 17, Milo et al discloses a data library comprising data sets of analytes for comparison to spectral data from the spectrometer to identify the analytes (paragraph [0131]).
Regarding claim 18, Milo et al discloses further comprising: another laser configured to excite the analyte with other laser light in the laser pump resonator (paragraph [0233]).
Regarding claim 19, Milo et al discloses wherein: the other laser light comprises a different wavelength than the laser light (paragraphs [0231], [0233]).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkinson et al (US 5747807 A) in view of Boppart et al (WO 2012/118958 A2).
Regarding claim 16, Atkinson et al discloses further comprising: a component operable to block light from entering the integrating volume from at least one of the inlet, or optical port (col. 20, lines 51-56). Atkinson et al is silent with regards to the component is optically reflective fairings. Boppart et al discloses component is optically reflective fairings (disposable faring with reflective surface) (paragraph [0015]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Atkinson et al of a gas detection system for detecting the presence of gaseous species in a gas sample with Boppart et al of handheld fixed focus optical probe. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this to provide pulsed input light.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FANI POLYZOS BOOSALIS whose telephone number is (571)272-2447. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-3:30 PM.
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, Uzma Alam can be reached at Uzma.Alam@USPTO.GOV. 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.
/F.P.B./Examiner, Art Unit 2884
/UZMA ALAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884
