DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-15, 17-20 have been presented for examination based on the application filed on 7/9/2025.
Claims 16 is cancelled.
Claim 21 is new.
Rejection for claims 1-3, 5, 8-9, 12 and 17 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1, 7-8, 21, 5, 17 and 9 respectively of copending Application No. 17/084600 (reference application) are WITHDRAWN in view of claim amendment.
Rejection for claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, 9-13, 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20110313748 A1 by LI; Zhanming, in view of US 11150332 B1 by Chen; Tong et al are WITHDRAWN in view of amendment.
Claims 1-15, 17-21 remain rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
This action is made Final.
---- This page is left blank after this line ----
Response to Arguments
(Argument 1) Applicant has argued in Remarks Pg.11-12:
PNG
media_image1.png
350
658
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(Response 1) Only independent claim 1 recites PDK and other independent claims 12 and 17 do not recite use of PDK. Further the claim 1 does not positively recite model from the PDK being executed. The claim 1 recites "... receiving, by a photodetector behavior model of a photonic process design kit (PDK),...". The model is a photodetector model itself is a mathematical model which is used to compute an output. The model is executed, not the PDK. The argument made above would make sense if the PDK was executed to generated an output in the computer implemented method.
(Argument 2) Applicant has argued in Remarks Pg.12:
PNG
media_image2.png
583
654
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(Response 2) MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(I)(C) states:
A claim that recites a mathematical calculation, when the claim is given its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification, will be considered as falling within the "mathematical concepts" grouping. A mathematical calculation is a mathematical operation (such as multiplication) or an act of calculating using mathematical methods to determine a variable or number, e.g., performing an arithmetic operation such as exponentiation. There is no particular word or set of words that indicates a claim recites a mathematical calculation. That is, a claim does not have to recite the word "calculating" in order to be considered a mathematical calculation. For example, a step of "determining" a variable or number using mathematical methods or "performing" a mathematical operation may also be considered mathematical calculations when the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim in light of the specification encompasses a mathematical calculation.
Claims 1, 12 and 17 are explicitly directed to determining various datum like responsivity and output based on responsivity which are “determined” and in light of specification (e.g. ¶[0033]-[0035]) are mathematical calculation. The claim does not disclose any other limitation that would use the output to improve a technology (e.g. use it to perform simulation using the output of the photodetector model; e.g. US 12387018 B2 claim 1).
(Argument 3) Applicant has argued in Remarks Pg.13:
PNG
media_image3.png
530
648
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(Response 3) Its unclear what is more than calculation of responsivity is claimed. Computing another output based on responsivity is yet another mathematical step. Further the claim does not claim how the determination is made whether responsivity is linear or non-linear. Either this is a mental step (e.g. an observer looking at a plotted curve of observed values) or at best convention mathematical step (take a derivative of the function of responsivity). Both by themselves are judicial exception. The claim does not disclose how this determination of linear/non-linear nature of responsivity affects the output. Simply stating output is based on responsivity is mathematical function description in highest form of abstraction (output = f(responsivity)). The last step of simulating does nothing but at best execute the function to generate output.
(Argument 4) Applicant has argued in Remarks Pg.13-17:
PNG
media_image4.png
52
694
media_image4.png
Greyscale
(Response 4) Applicant has argued that fact that photodetector model is from the photonics process design kit (PDK) the claim integrates the exception in practical application. (1) In the exemplary claim 1, photodetector behavior model is mathematical model at best and is not executed on a computer implemented method. PDK model is not executed. See Response 1. (2) Even if the method is claimed as a computer executed method, the method does not include any details of the how the linearity or non-linearity of responsivity is determined and how/what output if generated from it. See Response 2. (3) Advantages of PDK are well known and as argued by applicant on pgs. 13-16 are noted. As per use of PDK (not explicitly claimed, and not in computer implemented environment) the rejection is made under well-known routine and conventional use (MPEP 2106.05(d) & Berkheimer Memo). Contrary to arguments the claimed output is never used to improve any technology (See Response 3). For at least the above reasons the claim 1 and its dependent claims are not considered as patent eligible. Applicant are encouraged to request an interview before responding to this action.
---- This page is left blank after this line ----
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to mental process without any additional elements that provide a practical application or amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Claim 1:
Step 1: the claim is drawn to a method, falling under one of the four statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A, Prong 1: The claim 1 limitations recite (bolded for abstract idea identification):
Claim 1
Mapping Under Step 2A Prong 1
1. A method comprising:
receiving, by a photodetector behavior model of a photonic process design kit (PDK), an input optical data;
receiving, by the photodetector behavior model, input values corresponding to one or more input parameters for a photodetector , wherein the one or more input parameters comprises a reverse bias voltage;
identifying, by the photodetector behavior model, a set of coefficients from a set of coefficient lookup tables, based on the input values corresponding to the one or more input parameters;
determining, by the photodetector behavior model, characteristics of one or more model parameters of the photodetector based on the identified set of coefficients, wherein the one or more model parameters includes a responsivity, and
wherein determining the characteristics of one or more model parameters comprises determining a linear characteristic of the responsivity or a non-linear characteristics of the responsivity;
determining, by the photodetector behavior model, an output metric indicative of an electrical response of the photodetector, based on the input optical data and the determined linear characteristic ofthe responsivity or the determined a non-linear characteristics of the responsivity; and
simulating (i) a linear electrical behavior ofthe photodetector based on the output metric using the photonic PDK when the determined characteristic is a linear characteristic of the responsivity and (ii) a non-linear electrical behavior of the photodetector based on the output metric using the photonic PDK when the determined characteristic is a non-linear characteristic of the responsivity.
Abstract Idea/Mathematical concept: The photodetector behavior model may be an abstract idea/Mathematical Relationship /Mathematical Formulas or Equations /Mathematical Calculations as disclosed in specification [0014], [0031]-[0033]. It may also be a coefficient lookup table (CLT). This model is repeatedly used to each step and is mapped as abstract idea for being mathematical concept/mental step below also for each step.
Also see Step 2A Prong 2 & 2B for receiving aspect.
See Step 2A Prong 2 & 2B for receiving aspect.
Abstract Idea/Mental Step: In this step the mental processes include observations (various inputs) and evaluations, judgments, and opinions (identifying based on lookup table from the photodetector behavior model, the set of coefficients). See specification [0014], [0031]-[0033].
Abstract Idea/Mathematical Formulas and Equations/Mental step:
At least exemplarily, Specification [0014]1 & [0033] teaches the model parameters being computed based on mathematical equations, part of photodetector behavior model. Alternately if the argument is made that mathematical concepts are not recited, this can also be recited as mental step of forming an opinion/judgement about the model parameters based on observations of set of coefficients.
The first wherein clause defines the model parameter as responsivity. It is a measure responsivity2, which is a measure of output current versus incidental optical energy and is datum making the model which is provided/apriori in PDK in the first receiving step.
The second wherein clause makes the determination (without any details how the determination is made) whether responsivity is linear/non-linear. This is abstract idea/mental step based on the observation of the responsivity in the model provided in PDK. E.g. looking at curve of current versus incidental optical energy.
Abstract Idea/Mathematical Formulas and Equations/Mental Step: At least exemplarily, Specification [0014] & [0033]3 teaches an output metric indicative of an electrical response being computed based on mathematical equations, part of photodetector behavior model. Alternately if the argument is made that mathematical concepts are not recited, this can also be recited as mental step of forming an opinion/judgement about the electrical response based on observations of model parameters. Evaluation/judgement/opinion made based on whether linear or non-linear version of responsivity (observation based on previous determination) should be used for computing the output. This is therefore a mental step.
Abstract Idea/Mathematical Formulas and Equations/Mental Step: Simulating to generate the output metric is at best understood as mathematical concept as described in specification [0033]-[0034]4.
Under its broadest reasonable interpretation, these covers a mental process including an observation, evaluation, judgment or opinion that could be performed in the human mind or with the aid of pencil and paper. That is, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind or with the aid of pencil and paper but for the recitation of generic computer components. Also the mathematical concepts disclosed may also be performed in the mind or with the aid of pencil and paper.
Step 2A, Prong 2: The Prong Two analysis considers the claim as a whole. That is, the limitations containing the judicial exception as well as the additional elements in the claim besides the judicial exception need to be evaluated together to determine whether the claim integrates the judicial exception into a practical application. In accordance with this step, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application, as detailed below.
Claim 1
Mapping Under Step 2A Prong 2
1. A method comprising:
receiving, by a photodetector behavior model of a photonic process design kit (PDK), an input optical data;
receiving, by the photodetector behavior model, input values corresponding to one or more input parameters for a photodetector , wherein the one or more input parameters comprises a reverse bias voltage;
identifying, by the photodetector behavior model, a set of coefficients from a set of coefficient lookup tables, based on the input values corresponding to the one or more input parameters;
determining, by the photodetector behavior model, characteristics of one or more model parameters of the photodetector based on the identified set of coefficients, wherein the one or more model parameters includes a responsivity, and wherein determining the characteristics of one or more model parameters comprises determining a linear characteristic of the responsivity or a non-linear characteristics of the responsivity;
determining, by the photodetector behavior model, an output metric indicative of an electrical response of the photodetector, based on the input optical data and the determined linear characteristic ofthe responsivity or the determined a non-linear characteristics of the responsivity; and
simulating (i) a linear electrical behavior ofthe photodetector based on the output metric using the photonic PDK when the determined characteristic is a linear characteristic of the responsivity and (ii) a non-linear electrical behavior of the photodetector based on the output metric using the photonic PDK when the determined characteristic is a non-linear characteristic of the responsivity.
As per MPEP 2106.05(g) & (f), recites extra-solution activity to the judicial exception i.e. step of gathering data for use in a claimed process. The photodetector model being part of PDK is addressed under Step 2B.
As per MPEP 2106.05(g) & (f), recites a step of gathering data for use in a claimed process.
See Step 2A Prong 1.
See Step 2A Prong 1.
As per MPEP 2106.05(g) & (f), recites an extra-solution activity/post solution step of generically outputting a metric from the claimed judicial exception. The output is based on the abstract idea/mathematical concept as mapped above in specification [0033]-[0034].
See Step 2A Prong 1.
As described in MPEP 2106.05(g), limitations that amount to merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to a judicial exception cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B: As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a significantly more, the additional element of performing extrasolution activity do not contribute significantly more than simply providing data (receiving steps) and outputting data (output in last determining step) for inputting/outputting data into/outgof judicial exceptions (mathematical steps and mental processes) identified above. Further the steps of receiving are also considered as well-known, routine and conventional in view of the MPEP 2106.5(d)(II): The courts have recognized the following computer functions as well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions when they are claimed in a merely generic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity.
PNG
media_image6.png
18
19
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network); but see DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 1258, 113 USPQ2d 1097, 1106 (Fed. Cir. 2014)
Storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93;
Presenting offers and gathering statistics, OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1362-63, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93;
Further, as for the bolded limitation aspect:
receiving, by a photodetector behavior model of a photonic process design kit (PDK), an input optical data;
Photonics models (like a photodetector behavior model) are well-known routine and conventional (evidence provided below as per Berkheimer Memo & MPEP 216.05(d)), in the photonic process design kits (PDK). This is evident from the following prior arts:
Prior Art
Discussed at least in:
US 20090326873 A1
[0021]
US 20160055122 A1
[0059][0088]
US 20160171149 A1
[0008][0074][0075]
US 20140178005 A1
[0032]
US 20190018919 A1
[0018][0028]
US 20210141152 A1
[0067]
The claim 1 is therefore considered to be patent ineligible.
Claim 2 recites wherein the one or more input parameters includes at least one of a which add merely to abstract idea as claimed in claim 1 (Step 2A Prong 1) and at best details the what data is gathered (Step 2A Prong2). The claims does not disclose any additional limitations that integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more.
Claim 3 recites wherein the reverse bias voltage is categorized as a mandatory input, and wherein the process corner and the temperature condition are categorized as optional inputs, which further adds to abstract idea as claimed in claim 1 (Step 2A Prong 1). The claims does not disclose any additional limitations that integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more.
Claim 4 recites wherein each coefficient lookup table, out of the set of coefficient lookup tables, includes coefficients corresponding to a plurality of bias voltages ranging up to an avalanche breakdown voltage of the photodetector, and the plurality of bias voltages are provided in a random order, a random progressive order, a stepped progressive order, or a combination of one or more thereof, which further adds to abstract idea as claimed in claim 1 (Step 2A Prong 1) and at best details of the gathered data (Step 2A Prong 2). The claim does not disclose any additional limitations that integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more.
Claim 5 recites wherein the one or more model parameters includes which further adds to abstract idea as claimed in claim 1 (Step 2A Prong 1) where the opinion/judgement of what model parameters are, is formed based on observed data of coefficients (from the lookup table received as part of the photodetector behavior model). The claim does not disclose any additional limitations that integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more.
Claim 6 recites “wherein determining, by the photodetector behavior model, the characteristics of one or more model parameters of the photodetector, comprises: selecting, by the photodetector behavior model, a subset of equations from a set of equations, based on the input values corresponding to the one or more inputs parameters…”, where selecting an equations (judgement) based on input parameters (observations) is considered a mental step. Further the claim recites “…determining, by the photodetector behavior model, the characteristics of one or more model parameters from the one or more equations selected…”, which further adds to abstract idea of mental step of performing an evaluation of equation(s) to determine the characteristics or at best a mathematical concept where determining can be interpreted as executing the equation to compute the characteristics under step 2A Prong 1.The claim does not disclose any additional limitations that integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more.
Claim 7 recites identifying, by the photodetector behavior model, one or more additional parameters from a set of secondary lookup tables, based on the input values corresponding to the one or more input parameters, which further adds to abstract idea/mental step (of identifying based on input values) as claimed in claim 1 (Step 2A Prong 1). The claim does not disclose any additional limitations that integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more.
Claim 8 recites wherein the one or more additional parameters includes a resonance frequency, a Q-factor, and a parasitic resistance/ capacitance/ inductance, which further adds to abstract idea as claimed in claim 1 (Step 2A Prong 1). The claim does not disclose any additional limitations that integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more.
Claim 9 recites wherein the set of coefficient lookup tables are obtained by simulation of one or more photodetectors or measurement of characteristics of one or more physical photodetectors, which amounts to insignificant extra-solution activity of data gathering from enumerated sources (Step 2A Prong 2 & 2B). The claim does not disclose any additional limitations that integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more.
Claim 10 recites wherein the set of coefficient lookup tables includes one or more coefficient lookup tables, and each coefficient look table corresponding to a selected process corner and a selected temperature conditions, which amounts to insignificant extra-solution activity of data gathering from enumerated sources by simply defining source of lookup tables from different selected process corner and a selected temperature conditions (Step 2A Prong 2). The claim does not disclose any additional limitations that integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more.
Claim 11 recites wherein each coefficient look table comprises a plurality of sets of coefficients, wherein each set of coefficients corresponds to a selected reverse bias voltage, which further adds to abstract idea as claimed in claim 1 (Step 2A Prong 1) where the opinion/judgement of what model parameters are, is formed based on observed data of coefficients (from the lookup table received as part of the photodetector behavior model). The claim does not disclose any additional limitations that integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more.
Claim 12:
Step 1: the claim is drawn to an apparatus/system, falling under one of the four statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A, Prong 1: The claim 12 limitations recite (bolded for abstract idea identification):
Claim 12
Mapping Under Step 2A Prong 1
12. An apparatus, comprising:
one or more processors; and
a storage medium storing instructions executable by the one or more processors to cause the one or more processors to:
receive an input optical data;
receive input values corresponding to one or more input parameters for a photodetector wherein the one or more input parameters comprises a reverse bias voltage;
identify a set of coefficients from a set of coefficient lookup tables, based on the input values corresponding to the one or more input parameters;
determine characteristics of one or more model parameters of the photodetector based on the identified set of coefficients
wherein the one or more model parameters includes a responsivity, and
wherein determining the characteristics of one or more model parameters comprises determining a linear characteristic of the responsivity or a non-linear characteristics of the responsivity; and
determine an output metric indicative of an electrical response of the photodetector, based on the input optical data and the determined linear characteristic ofthe responsivity or the determined a non-linear characteristics of the responsivity; and
simulate (i) a linear electrical behavior of the photodetector based on the output metric when the determined characteristic is a linear characteristic of the responsivity and (ii) a non-linear electrical behavior of the photodetector based on the output metric when the determined characteristic is a non-linear characteristic of the responsivity.
See Step 2A Prong 2 & 2B.
See Step 2A Prong 2 & 2B.
See Step 2A Prong 2 & 2B.
See Step 2A Prong 2 & 2B for receiving aspect.
Abstract Idea/Mental Step: In this step the mental processes include observations (various inputs) and evaluations, judgments, and opinions (identifying based on lookup table the set of coefficients). See specification [0014], [0031]-[0033].
Abstract Idea/Mathematical Formulas and Equations/Mental step: At least exemplarily, Specification [0014]5 & [0033] teaches the model parameters being computed based on mathematical equations. Alternately if the argument is made that mathematical concepts are not recited, this can also be recited as mental step of forming an opinion/judgement about the model parameters based on observations based on the identified set of coefficients.
The first wherein clause defines the model parameter as responsivity. It is a measure responsivity6, which is a measure of output current versus incidental optical energy and is datum making the model which is provided/apriori in PDK in the first receiving step.
The second wherein clause makes the determination (without any details how the determination is made) whether responsivity is linear/non-linear. This is abstract idea/mental step based on the observation of the responsivity in the model provided in PDK. E.g. looking at curve of current versus incidental optical energy.
Abstract Idea/Mathematical Formulas and Equations: At least exemplarily, Specification [0014] & [0033]7 teaches an output metric indicative of an electrical response being computed based on mathematical equations. Alternately if the argument is made that mathematical concepts are not specifically recited, this can also be recited as mental step of forming an opinion/judgement (about the electrical response) based on observations (of input optical data & model parameters).
Evaluation/judgement/opinion made based on whether linear or non-linear version of responsivity (observation based on previous determination) should be used for computing the output. This is therefore a mental step.
Abstract Idea/Mathematical Formulas and Equations/Mental Step: Simulating to generate the output metric is at best understood as mathematical concept as described in specification [0033]-[0034]8.
Under its broadest reasonable interpretation, these covers a mental process including an observation, evaluation, judgment or opinion that could be performed in the human mind or with the aid of pencil and paper. That is, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind or with the aid of pencil and paper but for the recitation of generic computer components (Processor & storage medium). Also the mathematical concepts disclosed may also be performed in the mind or with the aid of pencil and paper.
Step 2A, Prong 2: The Prong Two analysis considers the claim as a whole. That is, the limitations containing the judicial exception as well as the additional elements in the claim besides the judicial exception need to be evaluated together to determine whether the claim integrates the judicial exception into a practical application. In accordance with this step, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application, as detailed below.
Claim 1
Mapping Under Step 2A Prong 2
12. An apparatus, comprising:
one or more processors; and
a storage medium storing instructions executable by the one or more processors to cause the one or more processors to:
receive an input optical data
receive input values corresponding to one or more input parameters for a photodetector wherein the one or more input parameters comprises a reverse bias voltage;
identify a set of coefficients from a set of coefficient lookup tables, based on the input values corresponding to the one or more input parameters;
determine characteristics of one or more model parameters of the photodetector based on the identified set of coefficients wherein the one or more model parameters includes a responsivity, and wherein determining the characteristics of one or more model parameters comprises determining a linear characteristic of the responsivity or a non-linear characteristics of the responsivity; and
determine an output metric indicative of an electrical response of the photodetector, based on the input optical data and the determined linear characteristic ofthe responsivity or the determined a non-linear characteristics of the responsivity; and
simulate (i) a linear electrical behavior of the photodetector based on the output metric when the determined characteristic is a linear characteristic of the responsivity and (ii) a non-linear electrical behavior of the photodetector based on the output metric when the determined characteristic is a non-linear characteristic of the responsivity.
As per MPEP 2106.05(f) & MPEP 2106.05(a)(I), implementing an abstract idea on a generic computer components (process and storage medium for instructions), does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application in Step 2A Prong Two or add significantly more in Step 2B
As per MPEP 2106.05(g) & (f), recites extra-
solution activity to the judicial exception i.e. step of gathering data for use in a claimed process.
As per MPEP 2106.05(g) & (f), recites a step of gathering data for use in a claimed process. Naming a specific parameter gathered provides more detail to data gathered.
See Step 2A Prong 1.
See Step 2A Prong 1.
As per MPEP 2106.05(g) & (f), recites an extra-solution activity/post solution step of generically outputting a metric from the claimed judicial exception. See Step 2A Prong 1 for non-bolded limitation.
As described in MPEP 2106.05(g), limitations that amount to merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to a judicial exception cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B: Step 2B: As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a significantly more, the additional element of performing extrasolution activity do not contribute significantly more than simply providing data (receiving steps) and outputting data (output in last determining step) for inputting/outputting data into/out of judicial exceptions (mathematical steps and mental processes) identified above. The additional elements of processor and storage medium are generic computer components that neither improve the functioning of the computer, nor of any specific technology (as per MPEP 2106.05(a)). Further the steps of receiving are also considered as well-known, routine and conventional in view of the MPEP 2106.5(d)(II): The courts have recognized the following computer functions as well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions when they are claimed in a merely generic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity.
PNG
media_image6.png
18
19
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network); but see DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 1258, 113 USPQ2d 1097, 1106 (Fed. Cir. 2014)
Storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93;
Presenting offers and gathering statistics, OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1362-63, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93;
The claim 12 is therefore considered to be patent ineligible.
Claim 13 recites “wherein identification of the set of coefficients from the set of coefficient lookup tables, includes the one or more processors to: select a coefficient lookup table from the set of coefficient lookup tables, based on the one or more input parameters; and…”, where selecting an equations (judgement) based on input parameters (observations) is considered a mental step. Further the claim recites “…identify the set of coefficients from the selected coefficient lookup table, based on a reverse bias voltage, wherein the reverse bias voltage is categorized as a mandatory input parameter out of the one or more input parameters.…”, which further adds to abstract idea of mental step of performing an evaluation of identifying the set of coefficients (enumerating) & making a judgement that one of them (reverse bias voltage) is mandatory and is rejected as an abstract idea under step 2A Prong 1.The claim does not disclose any additional limitations that integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more. Claim 18 is rejected with similar rationale.
Claim 14 recites “wherein the set of coefficient lookup tables include a default coefficient lookup table, wherein identification of the set of coefficients from the set of coefficient lookup tables, further includes the one or more processors to: select the default coefficient lookup table from the set of coefficient lookup tables based on availability of only the mandatory input parameter.…”, where selecting a default coefficient lookup table (judgement) based on availability of only the mandatory input parameter (observations) is considered a mental step. The claim does not disclose any additional limitations that integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more.
Claim 15 recites “wherein the set of coefficient lookup tables are stored on at least one of the storage medium or a storage disk, wherein the storage disk is disposed within the apparatus of the apparatus or disposed external to the apparatus.…”, simply adds generic computer component to store the coefficient lookup tables in generic apparatus or external to apparatus in generic manner. These generically recited additional elements of internal or external storage neither integrate the additional element into practical application nor add significantly more.
Claim 14 recites “wherein the characteristics of the one or more model parameters includes one of a linear or a non-linear characteristics..…”, simply adds to the mathematical model and is considered an abstract idea. The claim does not disclose any additional limitations that integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more.
Claim 17 recites similar limitations as claim 12 and is rejected in similar manner. Claim 17 recites a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium as an additional element, however the generic recitation of a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium neither integrates the judicial exception into practical application nor does it add significantly more such that it improves the functioning of the computer or any technological field. See MPEP 2106.05(a) and (h).
Claim 19 recites “wherein the set of equations includes at least one of a polynomial equation, a logarithmic equation, or an exponential equation...…”, simply adds to the mathematical model and is considered an abstract idea. The claim does not disclose any additional limitations that integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more.
Claim 20 recites wherein the instructions to determine the output metric indicative of an electrical response of the photodetector, includes instructions to: determine the output metric by multiplication of a selected model parameter, from the determined characteristics of the one or more model parameters, with the input optical data., which further adds to abstract idea as claimed in claim 1 (Step 2A Prong 1) where the opinion/judgement of determining output metric is formed based on observed multiplication of a selected model parameter, from the determined characteristics of the one or more model parameters, with the input optical data. This may also be considered as mathematical concept (multiplication operation between two datum) and therefore is an abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(I)(C). The claim does not disclose any additional limitations that integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more.
Claim 21 (New) recites determining, by the photodetector behavior model, a direct current (DC) level of the photodetector based on the input optical data and the determined characteristics of one or more model parameter; determining, by the photodetector behavior model, photo-generated carriers of the photodetector based on the determined DC level, the input optical data, the reverse bias voltage, and the determined characteristics of one or more model parameter; and determine electrical parasitics of the photodetector, wherein the output metric is based on the determined DC level, the photo-generated carriers, and the electrical parasitics, which are all judicial exceptions / mathematical concepts computed based on the code/equations. See specification [0033]-[0035]. The claim does not disclose any additional limitations that integrate the judicial exception into practical application or add significantly more.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Communication
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AKASH SAXENA whose telephone number is (571)272-8351. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 7AM-3:30PM.
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, RYAN PITARO can be reached on (571) 272-4071. 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.
AKASH SAXENA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2188
/AKASH SAXENA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2188 Wednesday, September 17, 2025
1 Specification [0014] "... Using the equation, linear or non-linear characteristics of model parameters may be determined...."
2 Specification [0012] – as mapped; additionally see [0023] "... The identified set of coefficients a0, a1, a2 a3 . . . are used to determine characteristics of one or more model parameters, such as responsivity...."; [0031].
3 Specification [0014] "... Using the equation, linear or non-linear characteristics of model parameters may be determined. The determined characteristics and input optical data may be used to provide an output metric indicative of electrical response of the photodetector...."
Specification [0033] "... Based on the determined characteristics, the simulation device 311 may determine an output metric, such as output current I.sub.op. In some examples, output metric current lop may be determined by the following equation:..."
4 Specification [0033]-[0034]:
PNG
media_image5.png
368
652
media_image5.png
Greyscale
5 Specification [0014] "... Using the equation, linear or non-linear characteristics of model parameters may be determined...."
6 Specification [0012] – as mapped; additionally see [0023] "... The identified set of coefficients a0, a1, a2 a3 . . . are used to determine characteristics of one or more model parameters, such as responsivity...."; [0031].
7 Specification [0014] "... Using the equation, linear or non-linear characteristics of model parameters may be determined. The determined characteristics and input optical data may be used to provide an output metric indicative of electrical response of the photodetector...."
Specification [0033] "... Based on the determined characteristics, the simulation device 311 may determine an output metric, such as output current I.sub.op. In some examples, output metric current lop may be determined by the following equation:..."
8 Specification [0033]-[0034]:
PNG
media_image5.png
368
652
media_image5.png
Greyscale