I do not think i am pedantic, obstinate or whatever.
Let's go through the first claim of the patent :
This refers to any situation where there are 2 or more single-emitter diodes combined. Yet the word " superimposed" means the are on top of each other, the first being " covered" by the others in such a way that they form a combination...a whole if you will...Laser device (1) comprising a plurality of single-emitter laser diodes (2), the individual output beams (3) of which are superimposed to form a total output beam (4),
This is added to the statement above and only states a collimator. Not even an adjustable collimator as we all know collimators need to be adjusted. The RGB block in our system uses adjustable collimating lenses.- wherein to each single-emitter laser diode (2) a first collimator (7) is assigned for bundling each individual output beam (3),
This section is applicable to each and every situation where more then 1 beam is being combined. It's too generic and is considered common knowledge. Nothing new here....moving on...- wherein the individual output beams (3) of at least one group (8) of single-emitter laser diodes (2) are converged together by means of a plurality of converging deflecting mirrors (10b to 10d, 14, 18) into at least one group-beam-array (20, 23), in which the individual output beams (3) run closely adjacent to one another at least during a first common beam path,
there you have it, in the fat text....- wherein at each converging deflection mirror (10b to 10d, 14, 18) at least one first individual output beam (3a) not reflected by the converging deflecting mirror (10b to 10d, 14, 18) is converged with at least one second individual output beam (3b) reflected by the converging deflection mirror (10b to 10d, 14, 18),
characterised in that at least at individual converging deflecting mirrors (10b to 10d, 14, 18) a portion of the non-reflected (3a) individual output beam and/or a portion of the reflected (3b) individual output beam (3) is cut off, so that the cut-off cross sectional parts do not contribute to the group beam array (20, 23).
This makes the application thus specific that it *only* applies to situations where indeed "a portion of the non-reflected (3a) individual output beam and/or a portion of the reflected (3b) individual output beam (3) is cut off" .
So if the whole beam is reflected it does NOT apply.
Hope this clarifies it and shows who's being obstinate ...:P