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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 08/01/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Examiner acknowledges the amended claims 1-4, 17 and 19 as well as cancellation of claim 18.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/01/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the Applicant’s argument on page 7 “Neither the Tan reference nor the Stern reference teaches fabricating a nonlinear device in the SiO2 layer”. The Examiner disagrees because Tan teaches in a different embodiment a non linear device in the SiO2 layer in Fig. 2b where 230 is the non linear device and 282 is the SiO2, see rejection in claim 1.
Regarding the Applicant’s argument on page 6 “At best, paragraph [0030] of the Tan reference teaches selecting a material with a refractive index that minimizes TPA, but does not discuss selecting the material based on bandgap to minimize TPA”. The Examiner disagree because Tan teaches a nonlinear device comprises AlxGa1-xAs which is the same material stated by the Applicant therefore it is inherent that the material selected by Tan is capable to avoid two photon absorption TPA in the C-band since the bandgap of AlxGa1-xAs is approximately from 1.42-2.16 eV which depends of the value of x. In addition, paragraphs [005] and [0037] from Tan states “the material of the nonlinear waveguide is free of two-photon absorption ”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Previous rejected has been withdrawn.
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 1-4, 17 and 19 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.
Claim 1 states “the non-linear device generates sharp and equidistant frequency lines”. It is not clear what “sharp frequency lines” mean because a line does not have edges. For examination purposes we will consider “sharp frequency lines” as any frequency lines.
Claim 1 states “a thickness of about 360 nm to 450 nm”. It is not clear how much variation means “a thickness of about 360 nm to 450 nm”. For examination purposes we will consider “a thickness of about 360 nm to 450 nm” as “a thickness of between 50 nm to 50 mm”.
Claim 1 states “vary the bandgap of between about 1.42 eV and about 2.16 eV”. It is not clear how much variation is “between about 1.42 eV and about 2.16 eV”. For examination purposes we will consider “between 1.42 eV and 2.16 eV”.
Claims 2-4, 17 and 19 are rejected due to their dependency with claim 1.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan (US Patent US-20220019124-A1) in the view of Stern (Foreign Patent WO-2019191647-A1) hereinafter Stern and Clayton (US Patent US-20030026312-A1) hereinafter Clayton.
Regarding claim 1, Tan teaches a monolithically integrated laser and non-linear device (Fig. 1b pulse compressor #101 & Fig. 5A optical system #580; [0045] states that the device in Fig. 1b is a monolithic structure) comprising:
a substrate (Fig. 1b, substrate #110);
a nonlinear device (Fig. 1b nonlinear waveguide #120 & anomalous dispersive component #130; paragraph [0045] states “the anomalous dispersive component 130 and the nonlinear waveguide 120 may be integrally formed on the substrate in a manner so as to form a continuous monolithic structure”; so #120 and #130 can be considered as nonlinear device) fabricated on substrate (Fig. 1b nonlinear waveguide #120 & anomalous dispersive component #130 are fabricated on the substrate #110),
wherein the nonlinear device (Fig. 1b nonlinear waveguide #120 & anomalous dispersive component #130) comprises a semiconductor waveguide (Fig. 1b nonlinear waveguide #120 and dispersive component #130 can be considered as the semiconductor waveguide, paragraph [0037] states “nonlinear waveguide 120 may include, but not limited to…aluminium gallium arsenide” and paragraph [0045] states “ the anomalous dispersive component 130 and the nonlinear waveguide 120 may be integrally formed on the substrate in a manner so as to form a continuous monolithic structure”)
having a thickness of about 360 nm to 450 nm (paragraph [0033] states “the nonlinear waveguide 120…may have a thickness of 50 nm to 50 mm”) and a waveguide width of between 600nm and 800 nm (paragraph [0033] states “the nonlinear waveguide 120 may have a width between 10 nm to 100 μm”)
selected based on a material of the semiconductor waveguide (Fig. 1b nonlinear waveguide #120 and anomalous dispersive component #130; paragraph [0045] states “ the anomalous dispersive component 130 and the nonlinear waveguide 120 may be made of the same material…and may be integrally formed on the substrate in a manner so as to form a continuous monolithic structure”; therefore waveguide #120 includes anomalous dispersive component #130 which can be both made of the same material such as AlGaAs, see paragraph [0037])
to provide anomalous group velocity dispersion -GVD- (paragraph [0041] states “ the anomalous dispersive component 130 may induce a differential group delay with respect to wavelength to induce dispersion of the pulse or the optical pulse or the light….the differential group delay may decrease with increasing frequency -or decreasing wavelength- component within the predetermined operating wavelength ranges of the pulse or the optical pulse or the light to induce anomalous dispersion of the pulse or the optical pulse or the light”; therefore #120 and #130 provides anomalous group velocity dispersion) in the 1.53mm-1.57mm C-band frequency (it is inherent that the non-linear device would provide a frequency in the 1.53mm-1.57mm C-band because non linear waveguide 120 has the same material and about the same dimensions as the applicant),
wherein the nonlinear device comprises AlxGa1-xAs, where 0<x<1 (paragraphs [0037] and [0045] states that #120 and #130 can be made of AlGaAs; therefore, AlGaAs must have a values of x between 0 and 1 because when x=0 the material is GaAs and when x=1 the material is AlAs) is selected to vary the bandgap between about 1.42 eV and 2.16 eV to avoid two photon absorption TPA in the C-band (paragraph [0037] states ” a material free of two-photon absorption within the optical telecommunication wavelength ranges for the nonlinear waveguide 120 may include…aluminium gallium arsenide AlGaAs”; therefore AlGaAs would vary the bandgap between 1.42 eV and 2.16 eV to avoid two photon absorption TPA in the C-band since it is the same material as the applicant);
and a pump laser (Fig. 5A optical system #580 includes a pulse emitter #582; paragraph [003] states “optical system such as laser system” ).
Tan fails to teach a silicon substrate having a silicon-dioxide SiO2 layer; the nonlinear device fabricated in the SiO2 layer; pump laser located on the same semiconductor substrate; a monolithically-mounted pump laser epitaxially realized in III-V material and coupled to the non-linear device on the same silicon substrate; wherein in response to an optical input provided by the monolithically-mounted pump laser the non-linear device generates sharp and equidistant frequency lines in the C-band in response to the input optical frequency provided by the pump laser.
However, Tan teaches a semiconductor silicon substrate having a silicon-dioxide SiO2 layer (Fig. 2a-b substrate #210; paragraph [0080] states substrate is made of silicon the under-cladding layer 280 may be made of silicon dioxide); the nonlinear device fabricated in the SiO2 layer (Fig. 2b nonlinear waveguide 220 & anomalous dispersive component 230 are in the SiO2). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Tan’s device in Fig. 1b with silicon substrate having a silicon-dioxide SiO2 layer as taught by Tan in Fig. 2b because having it would allow to further interconnect additional devices.
Tan in Fig. 2 also fails to teach pump laser located on the same semiconductor substrate; a monolithically-mounted pump laser epitaxially realized in III-V material and coupled to the non-linear device on the same silicon substrate; wherein in response to an optical input provided by the monolithically-mounted pump laser the non-linear device generates sharp and equidistant frequency lines in the C-band in response to the input optical frequency provided by the pump laser.
However, Stern teaches a pump laser located on the same substrate (for example Fig. 4A pump laser #102 and nonlinear resonator #120; paragraph [0086] states “The laser can be integrated monolithically on the same substrate as the nonlinear resonator”); wherein in response to an input provided by the pump laser the non-linear device generates sharp and equidistant frequency lines in response to the input frequency provided by the pump laser (Fig. 4C is the response of the input of pump laser #102 generated by resonator 120 generating a comb formation; it is inherent that a conformation would generate sharp and equidistant frequencies). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Tan’s device to have a pump laser located on the same substrate (e.g. having pulse emitter 582 on the same substrate 110 from Tan) and to generate sharp and equidistant frequency lines (e.g. generate a comb formation like the one in Fig. 4C from Stern. In addition, it is inherent that the generated frequency lines would be in the C band since the material used by Tan is the same as the applicant) as taught by Stern because the same substrate can be used to interconnect the pump laser and the non-linear device simplifying fabrication steps and generating sharp and equidistant frequencies would allow to have desired frequencies with redueced noise signal.
Stern fails to teach a pump laser epitaxially realized in III-V material; optical input provided by the monolithically-mounted pump laser.
However, Clayton teaches a monolithically-mounted pump laser (Fig. 2 pump laser 404 is monolithically integrated to common substrate 406, see [0042]) epitaxially realized in III-V material (Fig. 2 pump laser 404 is epitaxially growth which includes InGaAsP, see [0056] and step formation in Figs 4-6) and coupled to a waveguide on the same substrate (Fig. 2a waveguide 410’ is coupled to pump laser 404 on the same substrate 406, see [0043]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Tan’s device in the view of Stern with a pump laser epitaxially realized in III-V material as taught by Clayton because having a pump laser epitaxially realized in III-V material would allow to achieve high output power, while providing the single chip semiconductor benefits of small size, high efficiency, and mechanical simplicity (from Clayton see paragraph [009]).
Regarding claim 2, Tan teaches wherein the nonlinear device is a resonator (Fig. 1b nonlinear waveguide #120 & dispersive element #130 comprise thermo-optic tunning #160 which includes a resonator, see paragraph [0053]; therefore, the nonlinear device is a resonator).
Regarding claim 3, Tan teaches wherein the nonlinear device is a waveguide (Fig. 1b nonlinear waveguide #120).
Regarding claim 4, Tan in the view of Stern teaches the nonlinear device in claim 1.
Tan fails to teach wherein the nonlinear device includes one or more of a frequency comb generator, stimulated Brillouin effect, Raman effect, second harmonic generator, and/or optical parametric oscillator.
However, Stern teaches one or more of a frequency comb generator (for example Fig. 4C shows the comb formation; paragraph [0036] states “The integrated comb source can comprise a laser cavity and a nonlinear microresonator for comb generation.”). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Tan’s device to have the nonlinear device to include a frequency com generator because it would allow to generate precise optical frequencies offering the potential for high-precision photonic devices for time and frequency applications in a highly compact and robust platform (see Stern paragraph [0003]).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan (US Patent US-20220019124-A1) in the view of Stern (Foreign Patent WO-2019191647-A1) and Clayton (US Patent US-20030026312-A1), as per claim 1, in further view of Shin (US Patent US-20210364695-A1) hereinafter Shin.
Regarding claim 17, Tan’s modified device in claim 1 teaches wherein the semiconductor waveguide (from Tan Fig. 1b nonlinear waveguide #120 is a semiconductor, see paragraph [0037]) has a thickness (from Tan paragraph [0059] states that the height of #120 is 330nm).
Tan’s modified device fails to teach a thickness between 350nm- 450 nanometers.
However, Shin teaches a semiconductor waveguide with a thickness between 350nm and 450 nm (paragraph [0082] states “the width W2 of the optical waveguide 11 is 0.75 μm and the height T2 is 400 nm”). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Tan’s device in the view of Stern and Clayton having a waveguide with a thickness of 400nm as taught by Shin because it would allow to satisfy the desired performance of the device (e.g. from Shin 400nm was selected in order to optical condiment factor, see paragraph [0082] ).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan (US Patent US-20220019124-A1) in the view of Stern (Foreign Patent WO-2019191647-A1), Clayton (US Patent US-20030026312-A1) and Shin (US Patent US-20210364695-A1), as per claim 17, in further view of Islam (US Patent US-5224194-A) and Leo (US Patent US-20230273503-A1) hereinafter Islam and Leo.
Regarding claim 19, Tan’s modified device in claim 17 teaches wherein the non-linear device (from Tan Fig. 1b nonlinear waveguide #120 & anomalous dispersive component #130) is comprised of AlGaAs (from Tan see paragraphs [0037] and [0045]).
Tan’s modified device fails to teach wherein the non-linear device is comprised of Al0.2Ga0.8As to generate a frequency comb output in the C-band (1530 nm to 1565 nm).
However, Islam teaches a nonlinear device comprises Al0.2Ga0.8As (Fig. 4 waveguide #401; column 3 lines 56-68 states waveguide of Fig. 4 is made of Al0.2Ga0.8As). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Tan’s device in the view of Stern, Clayton and Shin with a waveguide comprising Al0.2Ga0.8As as taught by Islam because it avoid photon absorption (from Islam column 3 lines 56-68).
Islam also fails to teach to generate a frequency comb output in the C-band (1530 nm to 1565 nm).
However, Leo teaches a waveguide (Fig. 1b gain element #101 provided with integrated optical waveguide with intensity-dependent refractive index Kerr effect, see paragraph [104]) to generate a frequency comb output in the C-band between 1530 nm to 1565 nm (Fig. 4 shows a frequency comb output at ~1550 nm). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Tan’s device in the view of Stern, Clayton, Shin and Islam with a frequency comb output in the C-band between 15030nm-1565nm because it would allow to generate a wavelength with low optical loss with a coherent light emission (see abstract and paragraph [0120] from Leo).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Bjarki (US Patent US-20230033612-A1) teaches also anomalous dispersion waveguide.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FERNANDA ADRIANA CAMACHO ALANIS whose telephone number is (703)756-1545. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-5:30pm Friday off.
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, MinSun Harvey can be reached on (571) 272-1835. 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.
/FERNANDA ADRIANA CAMACHO ALANIS/Examiner, Art Unit 2828
/MINSUN O HARVEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2828