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
The Examiner acknowledges the amending of claims 1-3, 6, 8, the cancellation of claim 4 and addition of claims 20-21..
Claim Objections
Claims 2 and 3 are accepted.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 8 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.
The Examiner notes new art is cited to account for the updated language of claim 8.
The Examiner notes US 7444046 is understood to additionally read on at least claim 8 in its current form.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 8, 9, 11, 20, 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a2 as being anticipated by Shi et al. (US 2022/0066036).
With respect to claim 8, Shi discloses a laser light source (fig.1, VCSEL #120, [0025]) comprising: a submount (fig.1 #102) having an upper surface (fig.1 top of #102); a semiconductor laser element (fig.1 #120, [0025]) located on the upper surface of the submount and having an end surface from which a laser beam is emitted (fig.1 #120 top side); a lens (fig.1 #112) facing the end surface of the semiconductor laser element; and a support member (fig.1 #104/106) bonded to the upper surface of the submount (fig.1 via #126 at either side) and supporting the lens (fig.1 via connection using #124, [0030]), wherein: the lens comprises: a collimating portion (fig.1 central rounded portion of #112, [0024]) that faces the end surface of the semiconductor laser element and is configured to collimate the laser beam emitted from the semiconductor laser element (fig.1 #112, [0024]); and an extension that extends from the collimating portion (fig.1 flat sides of #112) in a direction (fig.1 left/right) that is parallel to the end surface of the semiconductor laser element; and the lens is supported via a bonding member disposed at least between the extension and the support member (fig.1 #124, [0030]; seen also in fig.6a #624-1, [0073]); wherein in a front view, which is a view from a direction perpendicular to the end surface of the semiconductor laser element (fig.1 top down), a portion of the support member that is located adjacent to the semiconductor laser element in a direction parallel to the upper surface of the submount is bonded to the upper surface of the submount (fig.1 sides of #104/106 bonded to upper surface of #102 and adjacent to laser); and a portion of the upper surface of the submount on which the semiconductor laser element is located is coplanar with a portion of the upper surface of the submount to which the support member is bonded (laser and bonded portions on same plane of #102).
With respect to claim 9, Shi teaches the extension extends in a direction normal to the upper surface of the submount (as seen in fig.1 the defined extension is 3 dimensional and therefore extends in the up/down direction which is normal to the submount upper surface).
With respect to claim 11, Shi teaches the collimating portion and the extension are monolithic (all figures of Shi show element #112, which includes central collimating portion and lateral extensions, are of a single unified element/material).
With respect to claim 20, Shi teaches the support member has a symmetrical shape and bridges over the semiconductor laser element located on the upper surface of the submount (fig.1 #104/106 symmetrical and bridges over #120).
With respect to claim 21, Shi teaches the support member comprises: a first portion (fig.1 left side of #104/106) and a second portion (fig.1 right side of #104/106) that are arranged at a lateral side of the semiconductor laser element and that are bonded to the upper surface of the submount (fig.1 via #126 on each side), and a third portion that connects the first portion and the second portion and overlaps a portion of the semiconductor laser element in a plan view (fig.1 central portion of #104/106).
PNG
media_image1.png
401
824
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
Claim(s) 10, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shi in view of Lissotschenko (US 2004/0258124).
With respect to claim 10, Shi teaches the device outlined above, but does not teach the bonding member is disposed only at positions such that the bonding member is not irradiated with the laser beam emitted from the semiconductor laser element when the semiconductor laser element is driven. Lissotschenko teaches a related laser device integrated with a lens wherein the bonding material (fig.1 #8) is positioned such that it is not irradiated by the laser (as seen in fig.1 beam #3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the instant application to adapt the device of Shi to place the lens bonding material outside the beam path as demonstrated by Lissotschenko in order to avoid unwanted scattering, reflection, beam path divergence, and avoid the bonding material falling atop the laser (as the bonding agent would be outside the laser boundaries when outside the beam path).
With respect to claim 18, Shi teaches the device outlined above, but does not teach the collimating portion is configured to collimate a fast axis direction of the laser beam. Lissotschenko further teaches a collimating lens (fig.1 #6) which collimates the fast axis ([0011]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the instant application to adapt the device of Shi to collimate in the fast axis direction as taught by Lissotschenko in order to control the beam path in total.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 12-17 are allowed.
Please see the reasons outlined in the non-Final rejection of 01/27/2026 noting that the subject matter of claim 4 has been added to claim 1.
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 TOD THOMAS VAN ROY whose telephone number is (571)272-8447. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8AM-430PM.
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.
/TOD T VAN ROY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Prosecution Insights