DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
Examiner acknowledges the amendments made to claim 1. Claims 3,5,6,8,9,14 and 18-20 stand as withdrawn. New claims 21-23 have been added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1,2,4,7,10-13,15-17 and 21-23 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/11/2025 was filed after the mailing date of the Non-Final Rejection on 09/18/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 23 is 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.
The term “approximately 220” in line 2 of claim 23 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “approximately” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
For the purposes of examination in the instant application, the term “a thickness of approximately 220nm” is understood to mean “ a thickness of 220nm” as shown in the prior art rejection of claim 23 below.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
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 contents of the 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 present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1,2,4,7,12, 17 and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duan et al. (hereinafter Duan) (EP 2463694 A1) in view of Leem et al. (hereinafter Leem) (US 20090154517 A1) and Keyvaninia et al. (hereinafter Keyvaninia) (US 20160327759 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Duan discloses in Figure 4,
A distributed feedback laser [1] comprising: (Para. [0027])
a III-V semiconductor structure [2] (Para. [0028]) comprising an active region [22] (Abstract, Page 1) and a grating [23] (Para, [0032]) comprising a bonding surface [bottom surface of grating layer], the bonding surface providing optical feedback to the active region to generate output light that is output from the active region; and (Para. [0011])
a silicon structure [3] (Para. [0028]) comprising a silicon waveguide [31] (Para. [0028]) to receive the output light from a first side and a second side of the active region [22] of the III-V semiconductor structure [2], (Para. [0031]) the III-V semiconductor structure [2] bonded to the silicon structure [3]. (Para. [0030])
Duan fails to disclose,
the grating comprising a bonding surface formed from exposed surfaces of the grating without regrowth of III-V semiconductor material over the grating,
the III-V semiconductor structure bonded to the silicon structure to enable adiabatic coupling of the output light between the grating and the silicon waveguide
Leem discloses in Figs. 2 and 3,
a grating [500 Fig. 3] (Para. [0047]) comprising a bonding surface bonded to a silicon structure [100 Fig. 2] (Para. [0042]), formed from exposed surfaces [520 Fig. 3] (Para. [0047]) of the grating [500 Fig. 3] (Para. [0047]) without regrowth of III-V semiconductor material over the grating [500 Fig. 3] (Para. [0047])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the grating of Duan bonded to the silicon structure without being filled by a regrowth as shown in Leem for the purpose of reducing the difficult of realizing single mode lasing and alleviating material stress. (Leem Paras. [0051,0052]).
Duan in view of Leem fails to disclose,
the III-V semiconductor structure bonded to the silicon structure to enable adiabatic coupling of the output light between the grating and the silicon waveguide
Keyvaninia discloses in Figure 7,
couplers [tapered sections in base 603 Fig. 7] (Para. [0072,0076]), enabling adiabatic coupling (Paras. [0055,0076]) of light to a silicon structure with a thickness of 220nm (Para. [0071])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the adiabatic taper coupling with a 220 nm silicon wafer disclosed in Keyvaninia into the device of Duan in view of Leem for the purpose of matching the effective index of the mode propagating in the silicon and in the III-V waveguide to allow optical adiabatic coupling. (Keyvaninia Para. [0005])
Regarding claim 2, Duan in view of Leem and Keyvaninia as applied to claim 1 above further discloses in Duan Figure 4
wherein the distributed feedback laser [1] is an asymmetric distributed feedback laser configured to output the output light from a single side [right side Fig. 4] of the active region [22]
Duan shows the transfer path [35] in figure 4 transferring from the waveguide [21] to the waveguide [31] in a single direction [to the right in Fig. 4]. Further, it is shown in figure 5 that the additional waveguides [36] are all guiding the light from a single side of each respective device towards the arrayed waveguide grating (AWG) [25].
Regarding claim 4, Duan in view of Leem and Keyvaninia as applied to claim 1 above further discloses in Duan Figure 4
wherein the first side [right side Fig. 4] and the second side [left side Fig. 4] of the active region [22] are separated by the grating [23] (Para. [0029])
Regarding claim 7, Duan in view of Leem and Keyvaninia as applied to claim 1 above further discloses in Duan Figure 4
wherein the grating [23] is configured to apply a quarter wave shift to form the output light (Para. [0032])
Regarding claim 12, Duan in view of Leem and Keyvaninia discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above and further discloses,
one or more evanescent couplers [Keyvaninia tapered sections in base 603 Fig. 7] (Para. [0072,0076]), wherein the output light is coupled from at least one or more of the first side [Keyvaninia left side Fig. 7] or second side [right side Fig. 7] using the one or more evanescent couplers [Keyvaninia tapered sections in base 603 Fig. 7] to couple light to the silicon waveguide [Duan 31 Fig. 4] (Duan Para. [0031]) (Keyvaninia Paras. [0072,0076])
Regarding claim 17, Duan in view of Leem and Keyvaninia as applied to claim 1 above further discloses in Duan Figure 4,
wherein the output light is coupled from the III-V semiconductor structure [waveguide 21 inside die section 2] to the silicon structure [waveguide 31 inside silicon wafer 3] without facet coating the III-V semiconductor structure (Para. [0034])
Regarding claim 21, Duan in view of Leem and Keyvaninia as applied to claim 1 above further discloses,
wherein the bonding surface of the grating [Duan 23 Fig. 4] (Duan Para. [0032]) is bonded to a surface of the silicon structure [Duan 3 Fig. 4] (Duan Para. [0031]) (Leem Para. [0047]) that does not include a grating (Duan Para. [0031])
Regarding claim 22, Duan in view of Leem and Keyvaninia as applied to claim 21 above further discloses,
wherein the silicon structure has a thickness of less than 500nm (Leem Para. [0071])
Regarding claim 23, Duan in view of Leem and Keyvaninia as applied to claim 22 above further discloses,
wherein the silicon structure has a thickness of approximately 220nm (Leem Para. [0071])
Claims 10, 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duan in view of Leem and Keyvaninia as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Sysak et al. (hereinafter Sysak) (US 20160380407 A1)
Regarding Claim 10, Duan in view of Leem and Keyvaninia as applied to claim 1 above further discloses in Duan Figure 4,
wherein the grating [23] is a non-uniform grating (Para. [0032])
Duan in view of Leem and Keyvaninia fails to disclose,
A grating that shifts an optical distribution towards one of: the first side of the active region, or the second side of the active region.
Sysak discloses in Figure 2A,
that the grating [sections 215 and 220] shifts an optical distribution towards one of: the first side [“front” side Fig. 2A] (Para. [0044]) of the active region [210] (Para. [0044]) or the second side of the active region
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement a non-uniform grating that shifts an optical distribution towards a single side of the active region as disclosed in Sysak into the modified device of Duan for the purpose of further enabling a highly asymmetric laser output. (Sysak Para. [0041])
Regarding claim 15, Duan in view of Leem and Keyvaninia discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above but fails to disclose,
wherein the silicon waveguide comprises a narrow width section that is proximate to the active region of the III-V semiconductor structure that is bonded to the silicon structure, the narrow width section minimizing coupling from the active region to the narrow width section of the silicon waveguide
Sysak discloses in Figures 2A and 2B,
wherein the silicon waveguide [210 Fig. 2B] comprises a narrow width section [215 Fig. 2B] that is proximate to the active region (Para. [0043]) of the III-V semiconductor structure [280,282,284 Fig. 2A] that is bonded to the silicon structure [210 and 205 Fig. 2A], (Para. [0043]) the narrow width section [215 Fig. 2B] minimizing coupling from the active region (Para. [0047]) to the narrow width section [215 Fig. 2B] of the silicon waveguide [210 Fig. 2B].
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 waveguide structure of Duan in view of Leem and Keyvaninia to have the waveguide structure shown in Sysak for the purpose of sufficiently countering any effective index of refraction difference between the corrugation structure and to achieve a desired narrowband resonance for lasing. (Sysak Para. [0045])
Regarding claim 16, Duan in view of Leem, Keyvaninia and Sysak as applied to claim 15 above further discloses in Sysak,
wherein the silicon waveguide [210 Fig. 2B] comprises one or more widened sections [220 Fig. 2B] that are wider than the narrow width section [215 Fig. 2B] (Para. [0045]) to couple the output light from the III-V semiconductor structure [280,282,284 Fig. 2A] to the silicon waveguide [210 Fig. 2B]. (Paras. [0042,0044])
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duan in view of Leem and Keyvaninia as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Kim (US 20180090576 A1)
Regarding claim 11, Duan in view of Leem and Keyvaninia as applied to claim 1 above further discloses,
a III-V semiconductor structure [2] (Para. [0028]) transferring light from an active region [22] (Abstract, Page 1) to a silicon waveguide [31] (Para. [0030])
Duan in view of Leem and Keyvaninia fails to disclose,
wherein the III-V semiconductor structure comprises a first semiconductor optical amplifier to amplify light from a first side of the active region to the silicon waveguide
Kim discloses in figure 1A,
a first semiconductor optical amplifier [SOA Fig. 1A] to amplify light (Para. [0067]) from a first side [right side Fig. 1A] of the active region [230] (Para. [0066])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement a semiconductor optical amplifier as disclosed in Kim into the device of Duan in view of Leem and Keyvaninia for the purpose of additionally amplifying the light emitted from the laser cavity with the semiconductor optical amplifier. (Kim Para. [0067])
Examiner notes that Duan also provides a semiconductor optical amplifier (SOA) [26] used to amplify an optical signal output (Para. [0039]) in figure 5. The rearrangement of this SOA to be placed in a position adjacent to the III-V would be found obvious since the changing the position of this SOA would not have changed the function of the amplifier. See MPEP § 2144.04 (VI)(C). Similarly, the duplication of this SOA to amplify light from a first side of the active region would also be found obvious since the duplication of this SOA would not produce a new and unexpected result. See MPEP § 2144.04(VI)(B).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duan in view of Leem and Keyvaninia as applied to claim 12 above and in further in view of Yariv et al. (hereinafter Yariv) (US 20080273567 A1)
Regarding claim 13, Duan in view of Leem and Keyvaninia as applied to claim 12 discloses in Figure 7 of Keyvaninia
wherein the evanescent coupler (Para. [0076]) [tapered sections in base 603] comprises a III-V waveguide (Para. [0072]),
Duan in view of Keyvaninia fails to disclose,
the III-V waveguide being disposed above the silicon waveguide and wherein the III-V waveguide and the silicon layer are separated by an oxide layer
Yariv discloses in Figure 4 (a),
the III-V waveguide [300] (Para. [0036]) disposed above the silicon waveguide [400] (Figure 4(a)) and wherein the III-V waveguide [300] and the silicon layer [400] are separated by an oxide layer [140] (Yariv Para. [0036])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the waveguide structure of an oxide layer between a III-V waveguide and a silicon layer as disclosed in Yariv into the device of Duan in view of Li and Keyvaninia for the purpose of assisting in bonding the III-V waveguide and the silicon waveguide together and to form a coupled waveguide system. (Yariv Para. [0036])
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNTER J NELSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5318. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8:30am-5:00 ET.
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 at (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.
/H.J.N./Examiner, Art Unit 2828 /TOD T VAN ROY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828