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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 07/28/26 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Examiner acknowledges and accepts the amendment filed on 07/28/26.
Claims 18, 25-27, and 30 are amended; and
Claims 18-34 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 18-30 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.
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.
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.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TAJIRI (US PG Pub 2020/0343685 A1).
Regarding claim 18, TAJIRI discloses a micromechanical optical component (A1, FIG. 5, [0050]), comprising:
a substrate (2, FIG. 5, [0064]), a spacer (430, FIG. 5, [0090]), and a cover wafer (8, FIG. 5, [0050] and [0125]), which are positioned one above the other and delimit a sealed cavity (FIG. 5);
a semiconductor laser (6, FIG. 5, [0050]) situated in the cavity, on the substrate;
wherein an optical element (7, FIG. 5, [0050] and [0124]), which is attached to the spacer (7 is attached to 430, FIG. 5), is positioned in a beam path of the semiconductor laser (7 is positioned in a beam path of 6, FIG. 5),
wherein the spacer includes a groove (431, FIG. 5, [0098]) on a first flank of the cavity, the groove configured to receive and fix the optical element in position (431 is configured to receive and fix 7 in position, FIG. 5).
PNG
media_image1.png
298
800
media_image1.png
Greyscale
TAJIRI does not explicitly disclose the sealed cavity is a hermetically sealed cavity.
However, it’s well known in the art that a hermetically sealed cavity minimizes contaminants within the cavity and constructing a hermetically sealed cavity involves routine skill in the art.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sealed cavity of TAJIRI with a hermetically sealed cavity in order to increase optical efficiency of the optical component by minimizing contaminants within the cavity.
Claims 18-20, 23 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN208569286U (hereafter CN’286, machine translation is provided).
Regarding claim 18, CN’286 discloses a micromechanical optical component (10, FIG. 8, see underlined portions on pages 9-10), comprising:
a substrate (111, FIG. 8), a spacer (112, FIG. 8), and a cover wafer (a base substrate of an optical element 14 which acts as a cover wafer, see annotated FIG. 8 below), which are positioned one above the other and delimit a sealed cavity (113, FIG. 8);
a semiconductor laser (13, FIG. 8, where 13 can be a VCSEL, see underlined portion page 7) situated in the cavity, on the substrate;
wherein an optical element (14, FIG. 8, where 14 comprises a diffractive micro-structure 144), which is attached to the spacer (14 is attached to 112, FIG. 8), is positioned in a beam path of the semiconductor laser (13 emits light toward an incident face 141 of 14, FIG. 8),
wherein the spacer includes a groove (1122, FIG. 8, where 1122 is a mounting groove formed on a flank of the sealed cavity) on a first flank of the cavity, the groove configured to receive and fix the optical element in position (14 is mounted on 1122, FIG. 8).
PNG
media_image2.png
506
786
media_image2.png
Greyscale
CN’286 does not explicitly disclose the sealed cavity is a hermetically sealed cavity.
However, it’s well known in the art that a hermetically sealed cavity minimizes contaminants within the cavity and constructing a hermetically sealed cavity involves routine skill in the art.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sealed cavity of CN’286 with a hermetically sealed cavity in order to increase optical efficiency of the optical component by minimizing contaminants within the cavity.
Regarding claim 19, CN’286 discloses the optical element is attached to an inner side or to an outer side of the spacer (14 is attached to an inner side of 112, FIG. 8).
Regarding claim 20, CN’286 discloses the substrate is a single-layer or multilayer ceramic substrate (111 is a single-layer or a multilayer made of ceramic, see underlined portion on page 6).
Regarding claim 23, CN’286 has disclosed the micromechanical optical component outlined in the rejection to claim 18 above except the spacer is made of monocrystalline silicon. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the spacer with monocrystalline silicon in order to obtain desired thermal conductivity, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claim 28, CN’286 discloses the optical element is an optical window for transmitting light from the semiconductor laser (FIG. 8).
Claims 21 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN’286 in view of Yoshida (US PG Pub 2002/0100914 A1) and EP0617420A1 (herein EP’420).
Regarding claims 21 and 30, CN’286 has disclosed the micromechanical optical component outlined in the rejection to claim 18 above.
CN’286 does not disclose on an inner side, the spacer includes a beam trap.
Yoshida discloses a light absorber (34, FIG. 7, [0057]) formed in a rear beam path of a semiconductor laser (10, FIG. 7, [0057]) to absorb rear emission of the laser and functions as an emission monitor ([0059]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the spacer of CN’286 with a beam trap formed on an inner side as taught by Yoshida in order to obtain emission monitoring.
The combination does not disclose the beam trap is in the form of a micromechanical pattern, the pattern including slotted trenches for light from the semiconductor laser.
EP’420 discloses a beam trap in a form of a grating-like unevenness (104, FIG. 10, col. 5 lines 41-49) by etching a grating-like form or slotted trenches onto a surface in order to absorb an incident beam.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the beam trap of the combination with a micromechanical pattern including slotted trenches for light from the semiconductor laser as taught by EP’420 in order to minimize interference of the unwanted beam.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN’286 in view of Kamijima (US PG Pub 2008/0259975 A1).
Regarding claim 22, CN’286 has disclosed the micromechanical optical component outlined in the rejection to claim 18 above except on an outer side, the spacer includes a micromechanical pattern for cooling, the pattern including slotted trenches. Kamijima discloses forming a heat sink including radiation fins (33, FIG. 3, [0072]) on an outer side of a light absorbing member (25, FIG. 3, [0072]) order to maximize cooling of the light absorbing member. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the spacer of CN’286 with forming slotted trenches (radiation fins) for cooling on an outer side as taught by Kamijima in order to obtain desired cooling effect to the optical component.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN’286 in view of Lee (US PG Pub 2003/0026304 A1).
Regarding claim 24, CN’286 has disclosed the micromechanical optical component outlined in the rejection to claim 18 above except the optical element is a mirror for reflecting light from the semiconductor laser. Lee discloses a laser light source (20, FIG. 4, [0019]) comprising a diffraction grating (29, FIG. 4, [0019]) as an output window for reflecting a portion of light emitted by a laser (26, FIG. 4, [0019]) to optical detectors (27, FIG. 4, [0019]) for output light intensity feedback control ([0026]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the diffraction optical element of CN’286 with a partially reflective diffraction grating equivalent to the function of a mirror as taught by Lee in order to obtain output light intensity control.
Claims 25-26 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN’286 and Lee as applied to claims 24 and 28 above, and further in view of MIYATA (US PG Pub 2019/0097381 A1).
Regarding claim 25, the combination has disclosed the micromechanical optical component outlined in the rejection to claim 24 above and CN’286 further discloses the cover wafer is made of a material transparent to light from the semiconductor laser (light emitted from the laser pass through 14, FIG. 8) except the material being glass. MIYATA discloses a cover (10, FIG. 5, [0025] and [0040]) that is made of translucent glass to maximize light transmission. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cover of the combination with a translucent glass as taught by MIYATA in order to maximize light transmission through the cover.
Regarding claims 26 and 29, the combination has disclosed the micromechanical optical component outlined in the rejection to claims 25 and 28 above except the cover wafer or the optical window has an antireflection layer on an inner side and/or on an outer side. MIYATA discloses the cover or the optical window has an antireflection layer (26, FIG. 5, [0073]) on an inner side and/or on an outer side (26 is formed on an outer side of 10, FIG. 5). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cover of the combination with an AR film coated on the outer side as taught by MIYATA in order to minimize unwanted reflection at the output surface of the cover or the optical window.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN’286, Lee and MIYATA et al. as applied to claim 25 above, and further in view of Kuwata (US PG Pub 2006/0120426 A1).
Regarding claim 27, the combination has disclosed the cover wafer outlined in the rejection to claim 25 above except some regions of an outer side of the cover wafer include a radiation absorption layer. Kuwata discloses a block member (34, FIG. 3B, [0041]) formed on an outer side of a cover (33, FIG. 3B, [0041]) for absorbing light of selected wavelength (“the block member may be made of a material that can absorb light of the selected wavelength,” [0060]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cover of the combination with a radiation absorption layer formed on an outer side of the cover as taught by Kuwata in order to obtain wavelength filtering.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 31-34 are allowed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YUANDA ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1439. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:30 AM - 6:30 PM.
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.
/YUANDA ZHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Prosecution Insights