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
Acknowledgement is made that the instant application is a continuation of application PCT/EP2023/079432, filed on 10/23/2023, which claims priority from DE102022211335.7, filed on 10/26/2022.
Claim Objections
Claims 16-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 16, line 13, “a controller” should be changed to --a control unit-- to agree with the terminology used in lines 15 and 17 or “the control unit” in lines 15 and 17 should be changed to --the controller-- to agree with line 13.
Claim 17, line 2, “an optical system according to claim 16” should be changed to --an optical apparatus according to claim 16-- to correct antecedence.
Claim 18, lines 5-6, “an optical system according to claim 16” should be changed to --an optical apparatus according to claim 16-- to correct antecedence.
Claim 18, lines 6-7, “a projection exposure apparatus-- should be changed to --the projection exposure apparatus-- to correct antecedence.
Claim 19, lines 8-9, “an optical system according to claim 16” should be changed to --an optical apparatus according to claim 16-- to correct antecedence.
Claim 20, lines 8-9, “an optical system according to claim 16” should be changed to --an optical apparatus according to claim 16-- to correct antecedence.
Appropriate correction is required to place claims in better form.
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 7-8 and 12-13 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 7, the limitation “when the first voltage exceeds the first limit value, applying a respective potential different from a reference potential to the one or more passive actuator electrodes via a voltage source with the reference potential” is vague and indefinite. It is unclear if “a reference potential” applied to the one or more passive actuator electrodes is different from the reference potential recited in claim 1 or if “a reference potential” is intended to refer to the reference potential introduced in claim 1. Additionally it is unclear if “a voltage source” is the same voltage source recited in claim 1 or if the claim is meant to refer to a second or different voltage source. For the purposes of examination, the limitation is being interpreted as meaning when the first voltage exceeds the first limit value, applying a respective potential different from the reference potential to the one or more passive actuator electrodes via the voltage source with the reference potential. Thus, claim 7 and all claims depending therefrom are rejected as being indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 8, the limitation “comprising, when the second voltage exceeds the second limit value applying a respective potential different from a reference potential to the one or more passive actuator electrodes via a voltage source with the reference potential” is vague and indefinite. It is unclear if “a reference potential” is different from the reference potential recited in claim 1 or if “a reference potential” is intended to refer to the reference potential introduced in claim 1. Additionally, it is unclear if “a voltage source” is the same voltage source recited in claim 1 or if claim 8 is meant to refer to a different voltage source. For the purposes of examination, the limitation is being interpreted as meaning comprising, when the second voltage exceeds the second limit value applying a respective potential different from the reference potential to the one or more passive actuator electrodes via the voltage source with the reference potential. Thus claim 8 is rejected as being indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 12, the limitation “comprising, when the first voltage exceeds the first limit value, applying a respective potential different from a reference potential to the one or more passive actuator electrodes via a voltage source with the reference potential” is vague and indefinite. It is unclear if “a reference potential” applied to the one or more passive actuator electrodes is different from the reference potential recited in claim 1 or if “a reference potential” is intended to refer to the reference potential introduced in claim 1. Additionally it is unclear if “a voltage source” is the same voltage source recited in claim 1 or if the claim is meant to refer to a second or different voltage source. For the purposes of examination, the limitation is being interpreted as meaning comprising, when the first voltage exceeds the first limit value, applying a respective potential different from the reference potential to the one or more passive actuator electrodes via the voltage source with the reference potential. Thus, claim 12 is rejected as being indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 13, the limitation “comprising, when the second voltage exceeds the second limit value applying a respective potential different from a reference potential to the one or more passive actuator electrodes via a voltage source with the reference potential” is vague and indefinite. It is unclear if “a reference potential” is different from the reference potential recited in claim 1 or if “a reference potential” is intended to refer to the reference potential introduced in claim 1. Additionally, it is unclear if “a voltage source” is the same voltage source recited in claim 1 or if claim 8 is meant to refer to a different voltage source. For the purposes of examination, the limitation is being interpreted as meaning comprising, when the second voltage exceeds the second limit value applying a respective potential different from the reference potential to the one or more passive actuator electrodes via the voltage source with the reference potential. Thus claim 13 is rejected as being indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-8, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hauf et al. (US PGPub 2017/0363861, Hauf hereinafter).
Regarding claim 1, Hauf discloses a method of operating an optical component comprising a mirror element (Figs. 1-12, abstract, paras. [0122]-[0124], [0131], a displacement device controls tilting of a mirror), a substrate supporting the mirror element (Figs. 1-12, paras. [0134]-[0136], [0140], the substrate 39 supports mirror body 27 of mirror 20), an actuator device configured to tilt the mirror element about one or two tilt axes (Figs. 1-12, paras. [0054], [0111], [0126], [0129]-[0131], the mirror tilt is controlled by actuator electrodes), and a sensor device (Figs. 1-12, paras. [0123], [0152], [0160]-[0183], sensor device includes sensor transducer mirror electrodes 45 and sensor transducer stator electrodes 44), the actuator device comprising a plurality of active actuator electrodes and one or more passive actuator electrodes (Figs. 1-12, paras. [0033], [0054], [0111], [0126], [0129]-[0132], [0134], [0136]-[0138], [0142]-[0147], the actuator device includes actuator transducer stator electrodes 37 and the actuator mirror electrode 42, which is a passive electrode structure), the sensor device comprising a sensor electrode structure configured to detect a tilt angle of the mirror element based on changes in capacitance, the sensor device comprising a plurality of active sensor electrodes and a plurality of passive sensor electrodes (Figs. 1-12, paras. [0008]-[0010], [0021]-[0022], [0033], [0123], [0152], [0160]-[0183], [0223], the sensor device includes sensor transducer mirror electrodes 45 and sensor transducer stator electrodes 44 to detect the tilt of the mirror based on the change in capacitance between the sensor electrodes), the method comprising:
generating a first voltage between a first portion of the active actuator electrodes and the one or more passive actuator electrodes (Figs. 1-12, paras. [0146], [0152]-[0158], [0164], a voltage source is connected to apply variable actuator voltage to active actuator stator electrodes 37i to tilt the mirror such that a first voltage is applied between various actuator stator electrodes 37i and the actuator mirror electrode 42); and
generating a second voltage between a second portion of the active actuator electrodes and the one or more passive actuator electrodes (Figs. 1-12, paras. [0126], [0146], [0152]-[0158], [0164], a voltage source is connected to different actuator voltages to various active actuator stator electrodes 37i such that a second voltage is applied between various actuator stator electrodes 37i and the actuator mirror electrode 42 to tilt the mirror in multiple degrees of freedom);
wherein the method further comprises, when the first voltage exceeds a first limit value and/or the second voltage exceeds a second limit value, applying a respective potential different from a reference potential to the one or more passive actuator electrodes via a voltage source with the reference potential (the limitation “wherein the method further comprises, when the first voltage exceeds a first limit value and/or the second voltage exceeds a second limit value, applying a respective potential different from a reference potential to the one or more passive actuator electrodes via a voltage source with the reference potential” is a contingent limitation in a method claim, and the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method claim “having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met.” See MPEP 2111.04, subsection II. As the recited method does not require the first voltage to exceed a first limit value or the second voltage to exceed a second limit value, the method does not require applying a respective potential different from a reference potential to the one or more passive electrodes via a voltage source with the reference potential under the broadest reasonable interpretation. Figs. 1-12, paras. [0033], [0146], [0152]-[0158], [0164], [0226], a variable bias voltage is applied from a voltage source to the mirror and passive actuator mirror electrodes 42).
Regarding claim 3, Hauf discloses wherein the respective potentials applied to the one or more passive actuator electrodes are different from a second potential of the passive sensor electrodes (Figs. 1-12, paras. [0146], [0152], the sensor mirror electrodes 45 and the actuator mirror electrodes 42 are arranged at different potentials).
Regarding claim 4, Hauf discloses wherein each of the passive sensor electrodes has the reference potential (Figs. 1-12, paras. [0033], [0152], [0167]-[0169], [0226], the sensor transducer mirror electrodes 45 are connected to the mirror body 27 and arranged at a defined bias voltage).
Regarding claim 5, Hauf discloses further comprising changing one of the potentials applied to the one or more passive actuator electrodes when the first voltage exceeds a third limit value and/or the second voltage exceeds a fourth limit value (the limitation “further comprising changing one of the potentials applied to the one or more passive actuator electrodes when the first voltage exceeds a third limit value and/or the second voltage exceeds a fourth limit value” is a contingent limitation in a method claim, and the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method claim “having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met.” See MPEP 2111.04, subsection II. As the recited method does not require the first voltage exceeding a third limit value or the second voltage exceeding a fourth limit value, the method does not require changing one of the potentials applied to the one or more passive actuator electrodes under the broadest reasonable interpretation. Figs. 1-12, paras. [0033], [0146], [0152]-[0158], [0164], [0226], a variable bias voltage is applied from a voltage source to the mirror and passive actuator mirror electrodes 42).
Regarding claim 6, Hauf discloses further comprising regulating one of the potentials applied to the one or more passive actuator electrodes (Figs. 1-12, paras. [0126], [0146], [0152]-[0158], [0164], the bias voltages for the actuator mirror electrodes 42 are controlled).
Regarding claim 7, as best understood, Hauf discloses comprising, when the first voltage exceeds the first limit value, applying a respective potential different from a reference potential to the one or more passive actuator electrodes via a voltage source with the reference potential (the limitation “when the first voltage exceeds the first limit value, applying a respective potential different from a reference potential to the one or more passive actuator electrodes via a voltage source with the reference potential” is a contingent limitation in a method claim, and the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method claim “having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met.” See MPEP 2111.04, subsection II. As the recited method does not require the first voltage to exceed the first limit value, the method does not require applying a respective potential different from a reference potential to the one or more passive electrodes via a voltage source with the reference potential under the broadest reasonable interpretation. Figs. 1-12, paras. [0033], [0146], [0152]-[0158], [0164], [0226], a variable bias voltage is applied to the mirror and passive actuator mirror electrodes 42 by a voltage source).
Regarding claim 8, as best understood, Hauf discloses comprising, when the second voltage exceeds the second limit value applying a respective potential different from a reference potential to the one or more passive actuator electrodes via a voltage source with the reference potential (the limitation “when the second voltage exceeds the second limit value applying a respective potential different from a reference potential to the one or more passive actuator electrodes via a voltage source with the reference potential” is a contingent limitation in a method claim, and the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method claim “having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met.” See MPEP 2111.04, subsection II. As the recited method does not require the second voltage to exceed the second limit value, the method does not require applying a respective potential different from a reference potential to the one or more passive electrodes via a voltage source with the reference potential under the broadest reasonable interpretation. Figs. 1-12, paras. [0033], [0146], [0152]-[0158], [0164], [0226], a variable bias voltage is applied by a voltage source to the mirror and passive actuator mirror electrodes 42).
Regarding claim 13, as best understood, Hauf discloses when the second voltage exceeds the second limit value applying a respective potential different from a reference potential to the one or more passive actuator electrodes via a voltage source with the reference potential (the limitation “when the second voltage exceeds the second limit value applying a respective potential different from a reference potential to the one or more passive actuator electrodes via a voltage source with the reference potential” is a contingent limitation in a method claim, and the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method claim “having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met.” See MPEP 2111.04, subsection II. As the recited method does not require the second voltage to exceed the second limit value, the method does not require applying a respective potential different from a reference potential to the one or more passive electrodes via a voltage source with the reference potential under the broadest reasonable interpretation. Figs. 1-12, paras. [0033], [0146], [0152]-[0158], [0164], [0226], a variable bias voltage is applied by a voltage source to the mirror and passive actuator mirror electrodes 42).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 2 and 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hauf as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Horn et al. (US PGPub 2015/0185469, Horn hereinafter).
Regarding claim 2, Hauf does not appear to explicitly describe wherein the respective potentials applied to the one or more passive actuator electrodes are identical.
Horn discloses wherein the respective potentials applied to the one or more passive actuator electrodes are identical (Figs. 2-3, 10-13, paras. [0093]-[0094], an identical bias voltage is applied to subgroups of mirrors having actuator electrodes).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included wherein the respective potentials applied to the one or more passive actuator electrodes are identical as taught by Horn as the respective potentials applied to the one or more passive electrodes in the method as taught by Hauf since including the respective potentials applied to the one or more passive actuator electrodes are identical is commonly used to effectively control the mirrors as desired to obtain the desired patterns (Horn, para. [0094]).
Regarding claim 9, Hauf discloses the respective potentials applied to the one or more passive actuator electrodes are different from a second potential of the passive sensor electrodes (Figs. 1-12, paras. [0146], [0152], the sensor mirror electrodes 45 and the actuator mirror electrodes 42 are arranged at different potentials), but Hauf does not appear to explicitly describe wherein the respective potentials applied to the one or more passive actuator electrodes are identical.
Horn discloses wherein the respective potentials applied to the one or more passive actuator electrodes are identical (Figs. 2-3, 10-13, paras. [0093]-[0094], an identical bias voltage is applied to subgroups of mirrors having actuator electrodes).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included wherein the respective potentials applied to the one or more passive actuator electrodes are identical as taught by Horn in the method as taught by Hauf since including wherein the respective potentials applied to the one or more passive actuator electrodes are identical is commonly used to effectively control the mirrors as desired to obtain the desired patterns (Horn, para. [0094]).
Regarding claim 10, Hauf as modified by Horn discloses further comprising changing one of the potentials applied to the one or more passive actuator electrodes when the first voltage exceeds a third limit value and/or the second voltage exceeds a fourth limit value (the limitation “changing one of the potentials applied to the one or more passive actuator electrodes when the first voltage exceeds a third limit value and/or the second voltage exceeds a fourth limit value” is a contingent limitation in a method claim, and the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method claim “having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met.” See MPEP 2111.04, subsection II. As the recited method does not require the first voltage exceeding a third limit value or the second voltage exceeding a fourth limit value, the method does not require changing one of the potentials applied to the one or more passive actuator electrodes under the broadest reasonable interpretation. Hauf, Figs. 1-12, paras. [0033], [0146], [0152]-[0158], [0164], [0226], a variable bias voltage is applied from a voltage source to the mirror and passive actuator mirror electrodes 42).
Regarding claim 11, Hauf as modified by Horn discloses further comprising regulating one of the potentials applied to the one or more passive actuator electrodes (Hauf, Figs. 1-12, paras. [0126], [0146], [0152]-[0158], [0164], the bias voltages for the actuator mirror electrodes 42 are controlled).
Regarding claim 12, as best understood, Hauf as modified by Horn discloses comprising, when the first voltage exceeds the first limit value, applying a respective potential different from a reference potential to the one or more passive actuator electrodes via a voltage source with the reference potential (the limitation “when the first voltage exceeds the first limit value, applying a respective potential different from a reference potential to the one or more passive actuator electrodes via a voltage source with the reference potential” is a contingent limitation in a method claim, and the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method claim “having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met.” See MPEP 2111.04, subsection II. As the recited method does not require the first voltage exceeding the first limit value, the method does not require applying a respective potential different from a reference potential to the one or more passive actuator electrodes via a voltage source with the reference potential under the broadest reasonable interpretation. Hauf, Figs. 1-12, paras. [0033], [0146], [0152]-[0158], [0164], [0226], a variable bias voltage is applied from a voltage source to the mirror and passive actuator mirror electrodes 42).
Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hauf as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Dinger et al. (US PGPub 2018/0107122, Dinger hereinafter).
Regarding claim 14, although Hauf discloses the method of claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection above), Hauf does not appear to explicitly describe one or more machine-readable hardware storage devices comprising instructions that are executable by one or more processing devices to perform operations comprising the method.
Dinger discloses one or more machine-readable hardware storage devices comprising instructions that are executable by one or more processing devices to perform operations comprising the method (Figs. 1-17, paras. [0077], [0118]-[0120], [0133]-[0138], the evaluator unit 237 is implemented in a computer or microprocessor to perform control of the mirror 200).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included one or more machine-readable hardware storage devices comprising instructions that are executable by one or more processing devices to perform operations as taught by Dinger to perform the operations of the method as taught by Hauf since including one or more machine-readable hardware storage devices comprising instructions that are executable by one or more processing devices to perform operations comprising the method is commonly used to control and eliminate radiation-induced bias of the mirror and to automatically control operation of the mirror (Dinger, paras. [0026]-[0029], [0077], [0120], [0133]).
Regarding claim 15, Hauf discloses a system (Figs. 1-12, abstract, paras. [0097]-[0111], [0122]-[0124], [0131], projection exposure apparatus 1), comprising: performing the operations of the method of claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection above). Hauf does not appear to explicitly describe one or more processing devices; and one or more machine-readable hardware storage devices comprising instructions that are executable by one or more processing devices to perform operations comprising the method.
Dinger discloses a system (Figs. 1-17, paras. [0077], [0113]-[0120], EUV lithography apparatus 100), comprising:
one or more processing devices (Figs. 1-17, paras. [0077], [0113], [0120], [0133], a control devices controls the EUV lithography apparatus); and
one or more machine-readable hardware storage devices comprising instructions that are executable by one or more processing devices to perform operations comprising the method (Figs. 1-17, paras. [0077], [0118]-[0120], [0133]-[0138], the evaluator unit 237 is implemented in a computer or microprocessor to perform control of the mirror 200).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included one or more processing devices; and one or more machine-readable hardware storage devices comprising instructions that are executable by one or more processing devices to perform operations comprising the method as taught by Dinger to perform the operations in the method in the system as taught by Hauf since including one or more processing devices; and one or more machine-readable hardware storage devices comprising instructions that are executable by one or more processing devices to perform operations comprising the method is commonly used to control and eliminate radiation-induced bias of the mirror and to automatically control operation of the mirror (Dinger, paras. [0026]-[0029], [0077], [0120], [0133]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter.
Regarding claim 16, the prior art of record, either alone or in combination, fails to teach or render obvious a controller, wherein: the control unit and the voltage source are connected to a common reference potential; the control unit is configured to control the voltage source to: generate a first voltage between a first portion of the active actuator electrodes and the one or more passive actuator electrodes; generate a second voltage between a second portion of the active actuator electrodes and the one or more passive actuator electrodes; and when the first voltage exceeds a first limit value and/or the second voltage exceeds a second limit value, apply a respective potential different from a reference potential to the one or more passive actuator electrodes. These limitations in combination with the other limitations of claim 16 render the claim non-obvious over the prior art of record.
The dependent claims are likewise allowable by virtue of their dependency upon an allowable independent claim as stated above.
Hauf discloses a mirror element (Figs. 1-12, abstract, paras. [0122]-[0124], [0131], a displacement device controls tilting of a mirror), a substrate supporting the mirror element (Figs. 1-12, paras. [0134]-[0136], [0140], the substrate 39 supports mirror body 27 of mirror 20), an actuator device configured to tilt the mirror element about one or two tilt axes (Figs. 1-12, paras. [0054], [0111], [0126], [0129]-[0131], the mirror tilt is controlled by actuator electrodes), and a sensor device (Figs. 1-12, paras. [0123], [0152], [0160]-[0183], sensor device includes sensor transducer mirror electrodes 45 and sensor transducer stator electrodes 44), the actuator device comprising a plurality of active actuator electrodes and one or more passive actuator electrodes (Figs. 1-12, paras. [0033], [0054], [0111], [0126], [0129]-[0132], [0134], [0136]-[0138], [0142]-[0147], the actuator device includes actuator transducer stator electrodes 37 and the actuator mirror electrode 42, which is a passive electrode structure), the sensor device comprising a sensor electrode structure configured to detect a tilt angle of the mirror element based on changes in capacitance, the sensor device comprising a plurality of active sensor electrodes and a plurality of passive sensor electrodes (Figs. 1-12, paras. [0008]-[0010], [0021]-[0022], [0033], [0123], [0152], [0160]-[0183], [0223], the sensor device includes sensor transducer mirror electrodes 45 and sensor transducer stator electrodes 44 to detect the tilt of the mirror based on the change in capacitance between the sensor electrodes), the method comprising: generating a first voltage between a first portion of the active actuator electrodes and the one or more passive actuator electrodes (Figs. 1-12, paras. [0146], [0152]-[0158], [0164], a voltage source is connected to apply variable actuator voltage to active actuator stator electrodes 37i to tilt the mirror such that a first voltage is applied between various actuator stator electrodes 37i and the actuator mirror electrode 42); and generating a second voltage between a second portion of the active actuator electrodes and the one or more passive actuator electrodes (Figs. 1-12, paras. [0126], [0146], [0152]-[0158], [0164], a voltage source is connected to different actuator voltages to various active actuator stator electrodes 37i such that a second voltage is applied between various actuator stator electrodes 37i and the actuator mirror electrode 42 to tilt the mirror in multiple degrees of freedom). Hauf does not describe or render obvious a controller, wherein the control unit and the voltage source are connected to a common reference potential; the control unit is configured to control the voltage source to: generate a first voltage between a first portion of the active actuator electrodes and the one or more passive actuator electrodes; generate a second voltage between a second portion of the active actuator electrodes and the one or more passive actuator electrodes; and when the first voltage exceeds a first limit value and/or the second voltage exceeds a second limit value, apply a respective potential different from a reference potential to the one or more passive actuator electrodes.
Dinger discloses a control device for sensor electrodes (Figs. 1-17, paras. [0077], [0113], [0119]-[0120], [0133], an evaluation unit 237 is connected to sensor electrodes 231-236 to evaluate the resulting measurement signal), but Dinger does not describe or render obvious the control unit is configured to control the voltage source to: generate a first voltage between a first portion of the active actuator electrodes and the one or more passive actuator electrodes; generate a second voltage between a second portion of the active actuator electrodes and the one or more passive actuator electrodes; and when the first voltage exceeds a first limit value and/or the second voltage exceeds a second limit value, apply a respective potential different from a reference potential to the one or more passive actuator electrodes.
Horn et al. (US PGPub 2015/0185469) discloses generating bias voltage for the mirror element (Figs. 7-13, paras. [0070]-[0073]), but Horn does not describe or render obvious the control unit is configured to control the voltage source to: generate a first voltage between a first portion of the active actuator electrodes and the one or more passive actuator electrodes; generate a second voltage between a second portion of the active actuator electrodes and the one or more passive actuator electrodes; and when the first voltage exceeds a first limit value and/or the second voltage exceeds a second limit value, apply a respective potential different from a reference potential to the one or more passive actuator electrodes.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINA A. RIDDLE whose telephone number is (571)270-7538. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6:30AM-5PM.
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, Minh-Toan Ton can be reached at (571)272-2303. 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.
/CHRISTINA A RIDDLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Prosecution Insights