www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and TrademarkOffice
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`17/019,756
`
`09/14/2020
`
`Bien CHANN
`
`TER-080C3/110853-508
`
`1659
`
`MO
`
`ee
`
`US LLP
`
`MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP (BO)
`1701 MarketStreet
`Philadelphia, PA 19103
`
`NIU, XINNING
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2828
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`08/01/2023
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`Thetime period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e-mail address(es):
`
`judith.troilo @ morganlewis.com
`phpatentcorrespondence@ morganlewis.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`15-34 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) ___ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`Cj} Claim(s)
`is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 15-34 is/are rejected.
`S)
`) © Claim(s)___is/are objected to.
`Cj) Claim(s
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`)
`S)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you maybeeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http://Awww.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.gov.
`
`) )
`
`Application Papers
`10)C The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11){¥} The drawing(s)filed on 14 September 2020is/are: a)(¥| accepted or b)L) objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12)1) Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)or (f).
`Certified copies:
`_—_c)L) None ofthe:
`b)L) Some**
`a)Q) All
`1.2) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.2 Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.4.) Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been receivedin this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date 09/14/2020.
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3)
`
`(LJ Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) (J Other:
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20230726
`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`17/019,756
`CHANN etal.
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF) StatusExaminer
`XINNING(TOM) NIU
`2828
`Yes
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEof this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available underthe provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply betimely filed after SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing
`date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1) Responsive to communication(s)filed on 14 September 2020.
`C) A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`
`2a)() This action is FINAL. 2b)¥)This action is non-final.
`3)02 An election was madeby the applicant in responseto a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4)\0) Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/019,756
`Art Unit: 2828
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA or AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first
`
`inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`Double Patenting
`
`2.
`
`The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded
`
`in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise
`
`extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple
`
`assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not
`
`identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference
`
`claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious
`
`over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re
`
`Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed.
`
`Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164
`
`USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
`
`A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to
`
`overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the
`
`reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application,
`
`or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research
`
`agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination underthe first inventor tofile
`
`provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146et seq. for applications not subject
`
`to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. A terminal disclaimer must be
`
`signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/019,756
`Art Unit: 2828
`
`Page 3
`
`The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double
`
`patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a
`
`reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional
`
`the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection |.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action,
`
`see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration
`
`while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may befiled after final for consideration. See MPEP §§
`
`706.07(e) and 714.13.
`
`The USPTOInternet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Pleasevisit
`
`www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the formis filed
`
`determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA/25, or PTO/AIA/26) should be used. A
`
`web-based eTerminal Disclaimer maybefilled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal
`
`Disclaimer that meetsall requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission.
`
`For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to x
`
`
`
`3.
`
`Claims 15-20 and 22 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being
`
`unpatentable over the claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,525,269 (hereinafter Chann ‘269). Although the claims
`
`at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because Chann ‘668 discloses
`
`the limitations of claims 15-20 and 22.
`
`4.
`
`Regarding claim 15, Chann ‘269 discloses: stabilizing bearns emitted by a plurality of emitters
`
`each to a unique wavelength in an external laser cavity; and transmitting the stabilized beams to a
`
`dispersive element, the dispersive element combining the stabilized beams into a multi-wavelength
`
`output beam (claim 10).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/019,756
`Art Unit: 2828
`
`Page 4
`
`5.
`
`Regarding claim 16, Chann ‘269 discloses: wherein each beam is stabilized to its unique
`
`wavelength by introducing the beam to a stabilizing element that (i) reflects a portion of the beam back
`
`to its emitter to stabilize the beam and (ii) transmits the stabilized beam (claim 10).
`
`6.
`
`Regarding claim 17, Chann ‘269 discloses: wherein the stabilizing element comprises an etalon
`
`(claim 10).
`
`7.
`
`Regarding claim 18, Chann ‘269 discloses: wherein an optical axis of the stabilizing elementis
`
`tilted at a non-zerotilt angle with respect to a propagation direction of the beam (claim 10).
`
`8.
`
`Regarding claim 19, Chann ‘269 discloses: wherein the tilt angle of the stabilizing elementis
`
`selected from the range of approximately 2° to approximately 25° (claim 10).
`
`9.
`
`Regarding claim 20, Chann ‘269 discloses: wherein introducing the beam to the stabilizing
`
`element comprises focusing the beam toward the stabilizing element (claim 10).
`
`10.
`
`Regarding claim 22, Chann ‘269 discloses: wherein the dispersive element comprises a
`
`diffraction grating (claim 12).
`
`11.
`
`Claims 15-20 and 22 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being
`
`unpatentable over the claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,941,668 (hereinafter Chann ‘668). Although the claims
`
`at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because Chann ‘668 discloses
`
`the limitations of claims 15-20 and 22.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/019,756
`Art Unit: 2828
`
`Page 5
`
`12.
`
`Regarding claim 15, Chann ‘668discloses: stabilizing bearns emitted by a plurality of emitters
`
`each to a unique wavelength in an external laser cavity; and transmitting the stabilized beams to a
`
`dispersive element, the dispersive element combining the stabilized beams into a multi-wavelength
`
`output beam (claim 15).
`
`13.
`
`Regarding claim 16, Chann ‘668 discloses: wherein each beam is stabilized to its unique
`
`wavelength by introducing the beam to a stabilizing element that (i) reflects a portion of the beam back
`
`to its emitter to stabilize the beam and (ii) transmits the stabilized beam (claim 15).
`
`14.
`
`Regarding claim 17, Chann ‘668 discloses: wherein the stabilizing element comprises an etalon
`
`(claim 15).
`
`15.
`
`Regarding claim 18, Chann ‘668 discloses: wherein an optical axis of the stabilizing elementis
`
`tilted at a non-zerotilt angle with respect to a propagation direction of the beam (claim 20).
`
`16.
`
`Regarding claim 19, Chann ‘668 discloses: wherein the tilt angle of the stabilizing elementis
`
`selected from the range of approximately 2° to approximately 25° (claim 20).
`
`17.
`
`Regarding claim 20, Chann ‘668 discloses: wherein introducing the beam tothe stabilizing
`
`element comprises focusing the beam toward the stabilizing element (claim 20).
`
`18.
`
`Regarding claim 22, Chann ‘668 discloses: wherein the dispersive element comprises a
`
`diffraction grating (claim 17).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/019,756
`Art Unit: 2828
`
`Page 6
`
`19.
`
`Claims 15-19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being
`
`unpatentable over the claims of U.S. Patent No. 10,804,679 (hereinafter Chann ‘679). Although the
`
`claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because Chann ‘679
`
`discloses the limitations of claims 15-19.
`
`20.
`
`Regarding claim 15, Chann ‘679 discloses: stabilizing bearns emitted by a plurality of emitters
`
`each to a unique wavelength in an external laser cavity; and transmitting the stabilized beams to a
`
`dispersive element, the dispersive element combining the stabilized beams into a multi-wavelength
`
`output beam (claim 15).
`
`21.
`
`Regarding claim 16, Chann ‘679 discloses: wherein each beam is stabilized to its unique
`
`wavelength by introducing the beam to a stabilizing element that (i) reflects a portion of the beam back
`
`to its emitter to stabilize the beam and (ii) transmits the stabilized beam (claim 15).
`
`22.
`
`Regarding claim 17, Chann ‘679 discloses: wherein the stabilizing element comprises an etalon
`
`(claim 15).
`
`23.
`
`Regarding claim 18, Chann ‘679 discloses: wherein an optical axis of the stabilizing elementis
`
`tilted at a non-zerotilt angle with respect to a propagation direction of the beam (claim 17).
`
`24.
`
`Regarding claim 19, Chann ‘679 discloses: wherein the tilt angle of the stabilizing elementis
`
`selected from the range of approximately 2° to approximately 25° (claim 17).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/019,756
`Art Unit: 2828
`
`Page 7
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
`
`25.
`
`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-AlA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory
`
`basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AlA) 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.
`
`26.
`
`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 effectivefiling date of the claimed invention.
`
`27.
`
`Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Huber et al. (US PG Pub
`
`2016/0204570).
`
`28.
`
`Regarding claim 34, Huber et al. disclose: receiving a plurality of beams (101A-101N) at an
`
`etalon, each beam having a different wavelength (Fig. 1, [0054]); spatially combining the plurality of
`
`beams at the etalon to form a multi-wavelength output beam (Fig. 1, [0060]); and emitting the output
`
`beam from the etalon (Fig. 1, [0063)).
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`29.
`
`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-AlA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory
`
`basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AlA) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/019,756
`Art Unit: 2828
`
`Page 8
`
`rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same
`
`under either status.
`
`30.
`
`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 ordinaryskill in the art to which the
`claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention
`was made.
`
`31.
`
`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 contentsofthe 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 presentin the application indicating obviousness or
`
`nonobviousness.
`
`32.
`
`Claims 15-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of Huber etal.
`
`(US PG Pub 2016/0204570) in view of Liedenbaum etal. (US 5,471490) and Frankel et al. (US PG Pub
`
`2006/0092994).
`
`33.
`
`Regarding claim 15, Huber et al. disclose: stabilizing beams emitted by a plurality of emitters
`
`(101A-101N) each to a unique wavelength in an external laser cavity (Fig. 1, [0054]).
`
`34.
`
`Huber et al. do not disclose: transmitting the stabilized beams to a dispersive element, the
`
`dispersive element combining the stabilized beams into a multi-wavelength output beam.
`
`35.
`
`Liedenbaum etal. disclose: the required functions of wavelength selection and reflection
`
`towards the diode laser may notonly befulfilled by a reflecting grating but also by a Fabry-Perot etalon
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/019,756
`Art Unit: 2828
`
`Page 9
`
`as is shownin FIG. 14. Such an etalon comprises two partially reflecting, flat or curved surfaces enclosing
`
`a medium such as, for example air or glass (Fig. 14, col. 16, lines 9-28). 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
`
`device of Huber by using the etalon for reflection towards the emitters and wavelength selection in
`
`orderto stabilize the wavelength of the plurality of emitters without using an extra optical element.
`
`36.
`
`Huber as modified do not disclose: transmitting the stabilized beams to a dispersive element,
`
`the dispersive element combining the stabilized beams into a multi-wavelength output beam.
`
`37.
`
`Frankel et al. disclose: a beam combining diffractive element (grating) 504 that produces an
`
`overlapping amplified high power pulsed output beam 505havingall the wavelengths of the individual
`
`MOPAgain elements 501 ([0039]). 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 device of Huber as modified by replacing
`
`the element (105) with a diffractive element in order to produce an overlapping beam havingall the
`
`wavelengths of the individual emitters.
`
`38.
`
`Regarding claim 16, Huber as modified disclose: wherein each beam is stabilized to its unique
`
`wavelength by introducing the beam to a stabilizing element that (i) reflects a portion of the beam back
`
`to its emitter to stabilize the beam and (ii) transmits the stabilized beam (Liedenbaum, Fig. 14, col. 16,
`
`lines 9-28).
`
`39.
`
`Regarding claim 17, Huber as modified disclose: wherein the stabilizing element comprises an
`
`etalon (see the rejection of claim 17).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/019,756
`Art Unit: 2828
`
`Page 10
`
`40.
`
`Regarding claim 18, Huber as modified disclose: wherein an optical axis of the stabilizing
`
`element (etalon 103 tilted at non-zero angle) is tilted at a non-zerotilt angle with respect to a
`
`propagation direction of the beam (Huber, Fig. 1, [0054]).
`
`41.
`
`Regarding claim 19, Huber as modified do not disclose: wherein the tilt angle of the stabilizing
`
`elementis selected from the range of approximately 2° to approximately 25°.
`
`42.
`
`However, In accordance with MPEP 2144.05II, Optimization of Ranges: Where the general
`
`conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or
`
`workable ranges by routine experimentation.
`
`In the present application the general conditions are
`
`disclosed, an external cavity beam stabilizing device comprising an etalon tiled at an angle. Therefore,it
`
`would have been obvious to one ofordinaryskill in the art at the time of the invention to obtain a
`
`workable rangeofvaluesfor the tilt angle by routine experimentation.
`
`43.
`
`Regarding claim 20, Huber as modified disclose: wherein introducing the beam to the stabilizing
`
`element comprises focusing the beam (focusing using element 102) toward the stabilizing element
`
`(Huber, Fig. 1, [0058]).
`
`44.
`
`Regarding claim 21, Huber as modified do not disclose: wherein the dispersive element
`
`comprises a dispersive prism, a grism, or an Echelle grating.
`
`45.
`
`The examiner takes official notice that a dispersive prism, a grism, or an Echelle grating was well
`
`knownin the art before the time of filing. For example, see Chann et al. (US PG Pub 2011/0222574)
`
`([0006]). 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 device of Huber as modified by using an Echelle grating to combine
`
`a plurality of beams because the substitution of one known element for another yields predictable
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/019,756
`Art Unit: 2828
`
`Page 11
`
`results to one of ordinary skill in the art. In the instant case, the predictable result is an external cavity
`
`beam stabilizing device comprising an echelle grating.
`
`46.
`
`Regarding claim 22, Huber as modified disclose: wherein the dispersive element comprises a
`
`diffraction grating (504) (Frankel, [0039]).
`
`47.
`
`Regarding claim 23, Huber as modified do not disclose: wherein the dispersive element
`
`comprises a transmissive diffraction grating.
`
`48.
`
`The examiner takes official notice that a transmissive diffraction grating was well known in the
`
`art before the time offiling. For example, see Nowak et al. (US PG Pub 2012/0012762) (0071). It would
`
`have been obvious to one ofordinaryskill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed
`
`invention to modify the device of Huber as modified by using a transmissive diffraction grating to
`
`combine a plurality of beams because the substitution of one known element for another yields
`
`predictable results to one of ordinaryskill in the art. In the instant case, the predictable result is an
`
`external cavity beam stabilizing device comprising a transmissive diffraction grating.
`
`49.
`
`Regarding claim 24, Huber as modified disclose: wherein each of the beam emitters comprises a
`
`diode laser (Huber, [0053]).
`
`50.
`
`Regarding claim 25, Huber as modified do not disclose: further comprising collimating each
`
`beam after emission thereof by its beam emitter.
`
`51.
`
`The examiner takesofficial notice that collimating each beam after emission thereof by its beam
`
`emitter was well knownin the art before the time offiling. For example, see Farmer et al. (US
`
`6,657,775) (Fig. 1, col 4, lines 46-50). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/019,756
`Art Unit: 2828
`
`Page 12
`
`the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Huber as modified by
`
`collimating each beam after emission by its beam emitter in order to ensure production of a high-quality
`
`multi-spectral combined output beam.
`
`52.
`
`Regarding claim 26, Huber as modified do not disclose: wherein transmitting the stabilized
`
`beams to the dispersive element comprises converging the stabilized beams toward the dispersive
`
`element.
`
`53.
`
`The examiner takes official notice that converging the stabilized beams toward the dispersive
`
`element was well knownin the art before the time of filing. For example, see Farmer et al. (US
`
`6,657,775) converging beams toward grating using lens 15 (Fig. 1, col 4, lines 46-61). It would have been
`
`obvious to one of ordinaryskill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to
`
`modify the device of Huber as modified by using a lens to converge the stabilized beams toward the
`
`grating in order to ensure production of a high-quality multi-spectral combined output beam.
`
`54.
`
`Regarding claim 27, Huber as modified disclose: wherein the stabilized beams are converged
`
`toward the dispersive element by one or more lenses (see the rejection of claim 26).
`
`55.
`
`Regarding claim 28, Huber as modified do not disclose: further comprising coupling at least a
`
`portion of the output beam into an optical fiber.
`
`56.
`
`The examiner takes official notice that coupling at least a portion of the output beam into an
`
`optical fiber was well knownin the art before the time offiling. For example, see Farmeret al. (US
`
`6,657,775) (Fig. 1, col 4, lines 46-61). 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 device of Huber as modified by coupling
`
`the output beam into an optical fiber in order to direct the output beam to a desired location.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/019,756
`Art Unit: 2828
`
`Page 13
`
`57.
`
`Regarding claim 29, Huber as modified do not disclose: further comprising delivering the at least
`
`a portion of the output beam to a workpiece.
`
`58.
`
`The examiner takes official notice that delivering the at least a portion of the output beam to a
`
`workpiece was well knownin the art before the time of filing. For example, see Chann et al. (US PG Pub
`
`2011/0305256) ([0149]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinaryskill in the art before the
`
`effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Huber as modified by coupling the
`
`output beam into an optical fiber and delivering the output beam to a workpiece in order to cut or weld
`
`the workpiece.
`
`59.
`
`Regarding claim 30, Huber as modified disclose: further comprising cutting or welding the
`
`workpiece with the at least a portion of the output beam (see the rejection of claim 29).
`
`60.
`
`Regarding claim 31, Huber as modified do not disclose: further comprising delivering at least a
`
`portion of the output beam to a workpiece.
`
`61.
`
`The examiner takes official notice that delivering the at least a portion of the output beam to a
`
`workpiece was well knownin the art before the time of filing. For example, see Chann et al. (US PG Pub
`
`2011/0305256) ([0149]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinaryskill in the art before the
`
`effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Huber as modified by coupling the
`
`output beam into an optical fiber and delivering the output beam to a workpiece in order to cut or weld
`
`the workpiece.
`
`62.
`
`Regarding claim 32, Huber as modified disclose: further comprising cutting or welding the
`
`workpiece with the at least a portion of the output beam (see the rejection of claim 32).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/019,756
`Art Unit: 2828
`
`Page 14
`
`63.
`
`Regarding claim 33, Huber as modified disclose: wherein each of the beam emitters comprises
`
`an optical fiber (The individual laser emitters may be fiber lasers) (Huber, [0053]).
`
`Conclusion
`
`64.
`
`The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
`
`disclosure. Magill et al. (US 5,172,383) disclose: In one exemplary embodiment,thefilter is realized by
`
`the combination of a Fabry-Perot etalon, whose longitudinal axis is angled with respect to the
`
`longitudinal axis (propagation axis) of the laser output beam directed onto the filter, together with an
`
`external reflector whichis parallel to the Fabry-Perot etalon to permit multi-passing of the beam
`
`between the Fabry-Perot etalon and the reflector (Abstract). Villeneuve et al. (US 5,825,792) disclose: A
`
`compact wavelength monitoring and control assembly for a laser emission source is provided comprising
`
`a narrow bandpass, wavelength selective transmission filter element, of Fabry-Perot etalon structure,
`
`through which a non-collimated beam from the laser sourceis directed onto twoclosely spaced
`
`photodetectors. Chapman etal. (US PG Pub 2003/0007523) disclose: External cavity lasers apparatus
`
`and methods thatallow fast tuning, high wavelength stability, low cavity losses, and form factors that
`
`are comparable to solid state, fixed wavelength lasers. The apparatus comprise a gain medium emitting
`
`a light beam, a tunable wavelength selection element positioned in the light beam and configured feed
`
`back light of a selected wavelength to the gain medium, and a microelectromechanical systems (MEMS)
`
`actuator element operatively coupled to the tunable wavelength selection element. The MEMS actuator
`
`element may be configured to actuate the tunable wavelength selection element according toafirst
`
`degree of freedom to select the wavelength of the feedback to the gain medium, and to actuate the
`
`actuate the tunable wavelength selection element according to a second degree of freedom to provide
`
`phase control of the feedback (Abstract).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/019,756
`Art Unit: 2828
`
`Page 15
`
`65.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
`
`should be directed to XINNING(TOM) NIU whose telephone number is (571)270-1437. The examiner can
`
`normally be reached M-F: 9:30am-6:00pm.
`
`Examiner interviewsare 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,
`
`Minsun Harvey can be reached on 571-272-1835. The fax phone numberfor the organization where this
`
`application or proceedingis 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 aboutfiling 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.
`
`/XINNING(Tom) NIU/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828
`
`