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 .
DETAILED ACTION
2. This is the initial Office Action based on the application filed on July 01, 2025. The Examiner acknowledges the following:
3. Claims 1 – 54 were initially filed.
4. A preliminary Amendment to claims was filed on the same date, amending claims 3 – 5, 7, 9, 11 – 13, 17, 19, 21, 22 and 25.
5. Claims 2, 6, 10, 16, 18, 20, 23, 24 and 29 – 54 were canceled.
6. The specification was amended on the same date as to include the cross-related patent applications related to the present application.
7. The drawings filed on 07/01/2025are accepted by the Examiner.
8. Current claims 1 – 54 are pending. Claims 2, 6, 10, 16, 18, 20, 23, 24 and 29 – 54 were canceled by Applicant; therefore, claims 1, 3 – 5, 7 – 9, 11 – 15, 17, 19, 21, 22 and 25 – 28 are being considered for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
9. The IDS documents filed on filed on 07/01/2025 and 10/01/2025 are acknowledged by the Examiner.
Priority
10. Priority data is based on a Japanese provisional patent application #63/478260 filed on 01/03/2023 which is considered as the priority date.
NOTE: This application includes an application filed under 371-chapter PCT application PCT/US2024/010042, filed on 01/02/2024. Certified copy was filed to the office on 07/01/2025.
Abstract Objection
11. An Abstract was provided by Applicant as the front page of his/her European Application WO-2024/148009 A3, which is not filed according to the USPTO office. A new abstract or amendment to bring the abstract into compliance with the guidelines should be treated under 37 CFR 1.111(b) practice like any other formal matter. Any submission of a new abstract or amendment to an existing abstract should be carefully reviewed for introduction of new matter, 35 U.S.C. 132, MPEP § 608.04. The abstract will be printed on the patent.
The Abstract as it is objected .A new Abstract is required according the MPEP, section 608.01(b) as it is shown below.
608.01(b) Abstract of the Disclosure [R-01.2024]
37 C.F.R. 1.72 Title and abstract.
*****
(b) A brief abstract of the technical disclosure in the specification must commence on a separate sheet, preferably following the claims, under the heading "Abstract" or "Abstract of the Disclosure." The sheet or sheets presenting the abstract may not include other parts of the application or other material. The abstract must be as concise as the disclosure permits, preferably not exceeding 150 words in length. The purpose of the abstract is to enable the Office and the public generally to determine quickly from a cursory inspection the nature and gist of the technical disclosure. [AltContent: rect]
The Office of Patent Application Processing (OPAP) will review all applications filed under 35 U.S.C. 111(a) for compliance with 37 CFR 1.72 and will require an abstract, if one has not been filed. In all other applications which lack an abstract, the examiner in the first Office action should require the submission of an abstract directed to the technical disclosure in the specification. See Form Paragraph 6.12 (below). Applicants may use either "Abstract" or "Abstract of the Disclosure" as a heading.
If the abstract contained in the application does not comply with the guidelines, the examiner should point out the defect to the applicant in the first Office action, or at the earliest point in the prosecution that the defect is noted, and require compliance with the guidelines. Since the abstract of the disclosure has been interpreted to be a part of the specification for the purpose of compliance with 35 U.S.C. 112 (In re Armbruster, 512 F.2d 676, 678-79, 185 USPQ 152, 154 (CCPA 1975)), it would ordinarily be preferable that the applicant make the necessary changes to the abstract to bring it into compliance with the guidelines. See Form Paragraphs 6.13-6.16 (Consult the MPEP).
Claim Objections
12. Claim 4 and 12 have the same claim disclosure. Both depend on claim 1 and present the same disclosure. Claim 12 is a repetition of claim 4.
Claim Rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)
13. 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.
Regarding Claims 1, 3 and 17:
Claims 1 recites “ … a collimating optic that focuses light output by the wavelength stabilized laser to …”. There is no antecedent basis for this limitation. Which wavelength stabilized laser is referring to? There is a wide wavelength range for the light source based on the first limitation of claim 1, but nothing in the claim discloses that the light source is a stabilized laser.
Claim 3 recites that the wavelength stabilized laser is a volume-holographic grating (VHG) stabilized laser diode.
Claim 17 which depends on claim 15, recites “wherein the wavelength stabilized laser is …”
There is no antecedent basis for this limitation in any of the claims or the claim disclosure.
Claims 1, 3 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as for failing to clearly disclose what Applicant is trying to pursue as his invention. The claim language is confusing, and it does not help the one with the ordinary skill in the art to be able to get anywhere based on the claim disclosure.
Regarding Claims 9 and 22:
Claims 9 and 22 recite “… image capturing device comprises a long pass filter …” – There is not long pass filter in the specification and the language causes confusion – The specification paragraph [0044} only discloses “a low pass filter”, which is well known in the art. However, claim 9 confusing and it does not point out what the inventor(s) want to pursue as their invention.
Claims 9 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) because of its confusing language.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
14. 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 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 1, 5, 7, 19 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by “Lingbing Bu et al. CN 113885048 A, hereinafter Bu”. Note: Bu is art from the IDS document and the translation was provided by the Applicant)
Note: The rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for claim 1 is being considered in the rejections below.
Regarding Claims 1 and 15:
Bu teaches a dual-edge Rayleigh lidar system based on an iodine molecule absorption cell is characterized by comprising a dual-wavelength laser system, a laser emitting system, an optical receiving antenna system, and a data acquisition, processing, and control system. The laser emitting system includes an electrically controlled rotatable half-wave plate, a polarization beam splitter, a total reflection mirror, and a beam expander. The optical frequency discrimination system includes a fiber collimator, a narrowband filter, a FP interferometer, a mechanical chopper, a beam splitter, a converging mirror, an iodine molecule absorption cell, and a photomultiplier tube. The data acquisition, processing, and control system includes a photon counting card module and a PC. The dual-wavelength laser system alternately emits high-energy pulsed lasers locked on the left and right edges of the iodine molecule absorption spectral line, which are then transmitted via an electrically controlled rotatable half-wave plate and a polarization beam splitter. The beam splitter selects the transmission channel, and the signal is finally emitted into the atmosphere through the beam expander unit and the total reflection mirror. After the optical receiving antenna system receives the atmospheric backscattered echo signal, it passes through an optical fiber, an optical fiber collimator, a narrowband filter, an FP narrowband filter, and a mechanical chopper in sequence. The signal is then split into two paths by a beam splitter. One path is the energy monitoring channel, which directly enters the photomultiplier tube of this channel. The other path is the iodine pool measurement channel, which passes through an iodine molecule absorption cell and then enters the photomultiplier tube of this channel through a converging mirror. The photon counting card module in the data acquisition, processing, and control system records the number of photons acquired by the energy monitoring channel and the iodine pool measurement channel. The PC performs relevant wind field inversion, wherein the lidar system is characterized in that the dual-wavelength laser system comprises two DFB seed lasers that emit two different types of pulsed seed light, a polarization-independent fiber isolator, a 2x1 fiber combiner, a laser power amplifier module, and a PPLN frequency doubling crystal; the two DFB seed lasers emit continuous seed light, which is modulated into alternately emitted pulsed seed light by a fiber-coupled acousto-optic modulator that is opened and closed in a set order. The two pulsed seed lights are isolated by Fresnel reflection by the polarization-independent fiber isolator and then combined into one optical signal by the 2x1 fiber combiner. The signal is then amplified by the laser power amplifier module to obtain a 600mJ high-energy laser, which is then frequency-doubled to a 532nm wavelength by the PPLN frequency doubling crystal before being emitted and, wherein the lidar system is characterized in that the output wavelength of the DFB seed laser is adjusted by changing the control current of the DFB laser; the laser emitted from the DFB laser is split into one path by a beam splitter and enters the DFB controller. The beam splitter splits the signal light into two paths, one path enters the detection channel of the iodine molecule absorption cell, and the other path enters the reference channel. After the two signals enter the FPGA controller, the relative light intensity is obtained by first performing a starting ratio calculation, then the frequency value is obtained by inverse solving and subtracted from the set frequency value to obtain the frequency error, and finally the DFB control current is calculated by the control algorithm.
Regarding Claim 1:
Bu teaches,
An illumination system for laser speckle imaging (Fig 2. Double-edge Rayleigh laser radar or DFB laser system 1 and it includes DFB seed optical lasers 11 and 12. See [0009; 0044]), the illumination system comprising: a light source configured to output light having a wavelength ranging from 600 nm to 2000nm (Fig 2, the two seed light lasers 11 and 12 to alternately emit pulsed seed light with wavelength stabilized at 1064.518 nm and 1064.522 nm respectively. See [0044]); two or more sections of optical fiber (See [0006]); a fiber-coupled acousto-optic modulator (FCAOM) (Fig 3, fiber couple acousto-optic modulator 110. See [0045; 0046]), wherein the FCAOM is coupled to the light source by a first section of the two or more sections of optical fiber (Fig 2, the FCAOM is coupled with light source by the first section of the two or more sections of a 2 x 1 optical fiber section. See claim 2 [0045; 0046; 0055; 0056]); and a collimating optic (Optical fiber collimator 42. See [0063]) that focuses light output by the wavelength stabilized laser to illuminate a subject within a field of view (FOV), wherein the collimating optic is coupled to the FCAOM by a second section of the two or more sections of optical fiber (The collimating optic is coupled to the FCAOM modulator by a second section of the two or more sections of the optical fiber (or fiber collimator 42), which further receives a signal from the source through the dual wavelength laser system containing the FCAOM modulator. See [0056; 0057]).
Regarding Claim 15:
The rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Bu teaches,
A laser speckle imaging system (Fig 2. Double-edge Rayleigh laser radar or DFB laser system 1 and it includes DFB seed optical lasers 11 and 12. See [0009; 0044]) comprising: a light source having an operating wavelength ranging from 600 nm to 2000 nm (Fig 2, the two seed light lasers 11 and 12 to alternately emit pulsed seed light with wavelength stabilized at 1064.518 nm and 1064.522 nm respectively. See [0044]); an optical fiber (See [0006]); a fiber-coupled acousto-optic modulator (FCAOM) (Fig 3, fiber couple acousto-optic modulator 110. See [0045; 0046]), wherein the FCAOM is coupled to the light source by a first section of the optical fiber (Fig 2, the FCAOM is coupled with light source by the first section of the two or more sections of a 2 x 1 optical fiber section. See claim 2 [0045; 0046; 0055; 0056]); a collimating optic (optical fiber collimator 42. See [0063]) that focuses light output by the light source to illuminate a field of view (FOV), wherein the collimating optic is coupled to the FCAOM by a second section of the optical fiber (The collimating optic is coupled to the FCAOM modulator by a second section of the two or more sections of the optical fiber (or fiber collimator 42), which further receives a signal from the source through the dual wavelength laser system containing the FCAOM modulator. See claims 1 and 2 and [0056; 0057]); and an image capture device for capturing images of the FOV when the FOV is illuminated by the light source (It teaches energy monitoring by photomultiplier tubes 410 and 411 with a monitoring channel as for counting photons, which corresponds to the camera capturing images. See [0009; 0063]).
Regarding Claims 5 and 19:
The rejection of claims 1 and 15 is incorporated herein. As for claim 5 and claim 19 limitations, Bu teaches in Fig 2, the FCAOM is coupled with light source by the first section of the two or more sections of a 2 x 1 optical fiber section. See claim 2 [0045; 0046; 0055; 0056]). A collimating optic is coupled to the FCAOM modulator by a second section of the two or more sections of the optical fiber (or fiber collimator 42), which further receives a signal from the source through the dual wavelength laser system containing the FCAOM modulator. See [0056; 0057]).
Regarding Claim 7:
The rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. As for claim 7 limitations, Bu teaches energy monitoring by photomultiplier tubes 410 and 411 with a monitoring channel as for counting photons., which corresponds to the camera capturing images. See [0009; 0063]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
14. 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.
Claims 3 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Lingbing Bu et al. CN 113885048 A, hereinafter Bu”.” in view of “Art Hymel et al., US 2005/0248819 A1, hereinafter Hymel”. Note: both arts are from the IDS document. The translation of Bu art was provided by the Applicant).
Note: the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) has been considered in the rejections below
Regarding Claim 3:
The rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. As for claim 3 limitations, Bu teaches that the laser source is wavelength stabilized laser but it is silent about that the wavelength stabilized laser is a volume-holographic grating (VHG), which in the same field of endeavor is taught by Hymel. Hymel teaches A laser utilizes feedback from a multiplexed volume holographic grating (VHG) as a stand-alone element or integrated in a collimating lens as a wavelength standard to lock the laser output wavelength to its desired value. This feedback is optical, wherein a volume hologram reflection grating is used to generate optical feedback into the laser gain region. The multiplexed VHG can exhibit a variety of spectral bandwidth as a result of coherent superposition of the multiplexed gratings or the multiplexed VHG can replace individual VHGs that are used with several wavelength specific lasers. As for Claim 3 limitations, Hymel Fig 8A shows the schematic for wavelength stabilizing a multimode or single diode bar 800 via collimating optics 810 and the multiplexed VHG 820 (See Abstract and [0038; 0039]).
By modifying Bu illumination system with the teachings of Hymel by using volume hologram reflection gratings can provide a more accurate and temperature-stable means of filtering a narrow passband of light from a broadband spectrum (See Hymel [0006]).
Regarding Claim 17:
The rejection of claims 1, 3 and 15 is incorporated herein. As for claim 17 limitations, Bu teaches that the laser source is wavelength stabilized laser but it is silent about that the wavelength stabilized laser is a volume-holographic grating (VHG), which in the same field of endeavor is taught by Hymel. Hymel teaches wherein the light source is a volume-holographic stabilized laser diode as seen in Fig 8A that shows the schematic for wavelength stabilizing a multimode or single diode bar 800 via collimating optics 810 and the multiplexed VHG 820 (See Abstract and [0038; 0039]).
By modifying Bu illumination system with the teachings of Hymel which uses volume hologram reflection gratings as a lens and wavelength selective element as to wavelength stabilize a laser diode bar (See Hymel Abstract and [0013; 0038; 0039])
Claims 4 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Lingbing Bu et al. CN 113885048 A, hereinafter Bu”.” in view of “Jacques Gollier, US 2011/0285967 A1, hereinafter Gollier”. Note: both arts are from the IDS document. The translation of Bu art was provided by the Applicant).
Regarding Claims 4 and 12:
The rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. As discussed for claim 1, Bu teaches a laser speckle system with two DFB seed optical lasers 11 and 12 and it includes a collimating optic or optical fiber collimator 42 (See [0063]). However, it is silent about claim 4 limitations, which in the same field of endeavor is taught by Collier. Collier teaches
a laser projection system includes a light source, an optical scanning component, a focusing component, a speckle reduction diffusing surface, and an optical collimating component. The light source may include at least one laser configured to emit an output beam. The focusing component focuses the output beam at a first focused point. The speckle reduction diffusing surface is selectively introduced into an optical path at the first focused point. The optical collimating component collimates the output beam onto the optical scanning component. At least a portion of a scanned laser image is generated on a projection surface by operating the laser for optical emission of encoded image data and controlling the optical scanning component to scan the output beam. The optical collimating component images the first focused point at a second focused point at the projection surface when the speckle reduction diffusing surface is in the optical path. As for claims 4 and 12 limitations, Collier teaches in Fig 1 and Fig 2, a laser projection system with three emitted nearly collimated laser beams 114a, 114b and 114c into one single emitted beam 120 (See [0018]) and which includes a focusing optical component 122 (See [0023]) that is positioned on the path of the output beam 120 and a collimating component 124 (See [0023; 0025]). Focus adjustments may be provided by translating the speckle reduction diffusing surface 128 along the Y-axis. (See [0027]). Furthermore, the focus of the collimating component 124 is adjusted to image the beam waist of the beam P1 at a nominal screen distance of around 400 mm (See[0039]).
By modifying Bu illumination system with the teaching of Gollier, it is possible to reduce the speckle and display high spatial frequency content when displaying a text (See Gollier [0005]).
Allowable Subject Matter
15. Claims 8, 11, 13, 14, 21 and 25 – 28 are objected because its dependence to a base rejected claim; however, they would be allowed if written in an independent form.
Conclusion
16. The prior art is made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
1. Y. Koyata et al., US 2009/0080054 A1 – it teaches a speckle removing light source, comprising: a light source for outputting laser light; and light frequency modulation means for changing a wavelength of the laser light, wherein; the wavelength of the laser light outputted from the light source is temporally changed by the light frequency modulation means; and the light frequency modulation means has a predetermined period set for changing the wavelength of the laser light, wherein the laser light outputted from the light source has a single mode which is a longitudinal mode and, further comprising a multimode optical fiber which includes an internal core through which light propagates and has at least two light modes, wherein the wavelength of the laser light outputted from the light source is temporally changed by the light frequency modulation means and the laser light propagates through the multimode optical fiber and is outputted therefrom.
Contact
17. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARLY S.B. CAMARGO whose telephone number is (571)270-3729. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00-5:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Lin Ye can be reached on 571-272-7372. 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.
/MARLY S CAMARGO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2638
[AltContent: rect][AltContent: rect][AltContent: rect]
Prosecution Insights