DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/18/2025 has been entered.
Response to Remarks
1. Applicant is reminded that a proper reply, per 37 CFR 1.111, requires: “clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made” (37 CFR 1.111(c)). Applicant’s arguments do not comply with 37 CFR 1.111(c) because Applicant did not present any explanation as to their thoughts on patentable novelty of the newly presented claims. Further, these arguments do not sufficiently show how the amendments avoid such references or objections.
2. Applicant’s remarks (see pgs. 5-6 of Remarks), filed 12/18/2025, regarding the prior art rejection of the claims under 35 U.S.C 102 have been fully considered but are moot upon further consideration because the new grounds of rejection in light of a change of statutory basis and/or in light of Olmschenk et al.’s teachings are necessitated by the Applicant’s amendments (on 12/18/2025), as detailed below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) filed on 12/18/2025 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and is/are being considered by the Examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 1506 (FIG. 15). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 5 and 9 contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventors, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The replacement claims submitted 12/18/2025 were not filed with the original disclosure filed on 07/15/2022 and are therefore examined for new matter, see MPEP 608.04(b) and 714.01(e). Claims 1, 5 and 9 limitation “wherein a first frequency of the one of the at least two side beams is offset from a carrier frequency of the carrier beam by an offset frequency and a second frequency of another one of the at least two side beams is away from any state transition” amounts to prohibited new matter. Specifically, the limitation lacks support in the original specification and claims submitted 12/18/2025 because all embodiments within the as-filed specification fail to disclose a first frequency of an offset frequency and/or a second frequency away from any state transition corresponding to the side beams or provide any clarification of how one could characterize or calculate such frequencies. Applicant’s remarks citing FIG. 15 & ¶0167-70 for support (see pg. 5 of Remarks) is insufficient to show possession of the claimed features at hand, since the cited portion of the specification appears to be completely silent with regard to any offset frequency of the first frequency sideband along with a second frequency of the sideband being away from any state transition. Rather, it appears that Applicant’s cited portions of the disclosure correspond to the other newly-amended limitation of “one of the at least two sideband beams is aligned to a resonant frequency of a transition from a first state to a second state”. See also corresponding Drawings objection, which generally renders the cited portion of the disclosure unclear. Claims 2-4, 6-8 and 10-12 inherit the deficiencies of the rejected base claim, and are thus rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a).
The Examiner respectfully suggests that the claims be amended to recite limitations that are supported by the originally-filed specification.
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.
Claims 1-12 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.
Claims 1, 5 and 9 recite the limitation: “one of the at least two sideband beams is aligned to a resonant frequency of a transition from a first state to a second state”. It is unclear what is meant by the sideband beams being aligned to the resonant frequency, i.e., is the sideband beam frequency resonant with the transition? In what manner is the sideband beam aligned to the resonant frequency? For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be treated as: “one of the at least two sideband beams corresponds to a resonant frequency of a transition from a first state to a second state”.
Claims 2-4, 6-8 and 10-12 inherit the deficiencies of the rejected base claim, and are thus rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
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.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (NPL titled “Realizing coherently convertible dual-type...” (June 28, 2021)) in view of Olmschenk et al. (NPL titled “Manipulation and detection…” (2007)).
Regarding Claim 1, Yang discloses: A method of operating a quantum information processing (QIP) system (p. 1 c. 1: quantum computers/computing), comprising: applying an optical beam (p. 4 c. 1, p. 2 c. 2 & p. 1 c. 2: 411 nm and 3432 nm lasers co-propagating with 355 nm Raman laser beams; FIG. 1: laser beams); modulating one or more of an amplitude, a phase, or a frequency of the optical beam via an acousto-optic modulator (AOM) (p. 6 c. 1: we use an acousto-optical modulator (AOM) controlled by a home-made direct digital synthesizer (DDS) to quickly change the carrier frequency); and the EOM configured to: receive a sideband signal via a channel of the EOM, and transform the optical beam to a carrier beam and at least two sideband beams (p. 6 c. 1: we turn on different electro-optical modulators (EOMs) to generate the desired microwave sidebands…To maintain the coherence during the qubit type conversion, we drive the two transition paths for the two basis states of the qubit simultaneously. This is achieved by using the two first-order sideband frequency components generated by an EOM; p. 3 c. 1: As shown in Fig. 1c, an S-qubit can first be transferred to the D5/2 levels through a 411nm pi pulse with suitable microwave sidebands for |0> and |1> simultaneously), such that one of the at least two sideband beams is aligned to a resonant frequency of a transition from a first state to a second state (pg. 6 c. 1: For optical pumping into |0>, the laser is set to be resonant with the |S1/2; F = 1> <-> |P1/2; F = 0> transition with a 2.1 GHz sideband for the S1/2; F = 1> <-> |P1/2; F = 1> transition; see FIG. 1b showing one of the at least two sideband beams is aligned to a resonant frequency of a transition from a first state to a second state in S qubit), wherein the AOM and the EOM are arranged in series (p. 4 c. 1, p. 2 c. 2 & p. 1 c. 2: 411 nm and 3432 nm lasers co-propagating with 355 nm Raman laser beams; FIG. 1: laser beams; the Examiner notes that it is commonly known in the art of circuits that an EOM and an AOM would be electrically connected in series within the same quantum computer system to achieve the modulations as claimed); wherein the light source is further configured to provide the one of the at least two sideband beams to one or more dual-space, single-species (DSSS) trapped ions of the QIP system to transition the one or more DSSS trapped ions from the first state to the second state (FIGS. 1c & 2: coherent conversion between two qubit types of the S-qubit and the F-qubit; p. 1 c. 1-2, p. 4 c. 2: we have experimentally demonstrated dual-type qubits that are coherently convertible to each other with the same species of 171Yb+ ions; p. 2 c. 1: Each ion can be in one of the two qubit types, encoded either in the clock states |0> and |1> of the S1/2 levels (S-qubit) or |0’> and |1’> of the metastable F7/2 levels), wherein a first frequency of the one of the at least two side beams is offset from a carrier frequency of the carrier beam by an offset frequency (We tune the carrier frequency of the 411nm (3432 nm) laser to the central frequency of the transitions, and set the driving frequency on the EOM to be half of the frequency difference between the two paths [offset frequency], that is, 6.42 GHz (1.91 GHz), respectively).
Yang does not appear to explicitly disclose: a second frequency of another one of the at least two side beams is away from any state transition.
Olmschenk is related to Yang with respect to a method of operating a quantum information processing system comprising applying a global optical beam to a plurality of dual-space, single-species trapped ions at a wavelength near a transition center via an AOM and an EOM in series (p. 1 c. 1-2: qubit stored in the first-order magnetic field-insensitive hyperfine levels of the ground state of Yb+ [DSSS ion trap] with a coherence time of the qubit to be 2.5 s) and Olmschenk teaches: wherein a first frequency of the one of the at least two side beams is offset from a carrier frequency of the carrier beam by an offset frequency (p. 3 c. 1: large bandwidth of the fiber EOM allows the laser to be scanned over a wide range…continuous tuning of the fiber EOM over nearly 20 GHz enables the spectroscopic measurement of the hyperfine structure; p.3 c. 2: the rf applied to the fiber EOM was varied in 0.5 MHz steps [offset frequency] over the areas of interest; see FIG. 6); a second frequency of another one of the at least two side beams is away from any state transition (p. 8 c. 1: To begin, the 935.2 nm laser is tuned far from the (~3 GHz) from the 2D3/2 |F=1> <-> 3D[3/2]1/2 |F=0> transition…we then scan the rf frequency applied to the fiber EOM in the 935.2 nm beam over a wide range (6 GHz); see FIG. 5 showing frequency away from any state transition); wherein the AOM and the EOM are arranged in series (see FIG. 3 (pg. 052314-3) showing an electro-optic modulator (EOM) and an acousto-optic modulator (AOM) disposed in series with the EOM).
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 method of Yang in view of Olmschenk to satisfy the claimed condition because such sideband frequencies are known and would be selected to generate a frequency component to depopulate the manifold during cooling and optical pumping, and to allow the laser to be scanned over a wide range while remaining locked to a given absorption line (pg. 4 col. 2 (FIG. 6 caption) and pg. 3 col. 1 of Olmschenk). Thus, the frequencies of the sidebands scanned over nearly 20 GHz enables the spectroscopic measurement of the hyperfine structure, as taught in pg. 3, col. 1 of Olmschenk.
Regarding Claim 2, Yang discloses the method according to Claim 1, as above. Yang further discloses: wherein a first frequency of the carrier beam is spaced at least one gigahertz from a second frequency of the one of the at least two sideband beams (p. 6 c. 2: we use 12.6428 GHz microwave fields to implement single-qubit gates for the S-qubit [carrier beam], and 3.6205 GHz microwave fields for the F-qubit [sidebands]).
Regarding Claim 3, Yang discloses the method according to Claim 1, as above. Yang further discloses: further comprising: deactivating the channel of the EOM when not addressing the one or more DSSS trapped ions (p. 2 c. 2: The 411nm laser supports selective control of one ion; p. 6 c. 1: we turn on different electro-optical modulators (EOMs) to generate the desired microwave sidebands (i.e., deactivating the channel when turning off EOM)).
Regarding Claim 4, Yang discloses the method according to Claim 1, as above. Yang further discloses: applying a plurality of additional signals to a plurality of additional channels of the EOM to generate a plurality of additional sideband beams; and providing the plurality of sideband beams to a plurality of additional DSSS trapped ions of the QIP system (see FIG. 3d; p. 3 c. 1: Then another 3432nm pi pulse, again with suitable microwave sidebands, finishes the conversion to the F-qubit; p. 4 c. 1: we add a microwave pi pulse in the experimental sequence).
Regarding Claim 5, Yang discloses: A quantum information processing (QIP) system (p. 1 c. 1: quantum computers/computing), comprising: a light source configured to provide an optical beam to an electro-optic modulator (EOM) and an acousto-optic modulator (AOM) disposed in series with the EOM (p. 4 c. 1, p. 2 c. 2 & p. 1 c. 2: 411 nm and 3432 nm lasers co-propagating with 355 nm Raman laser beams; FIG. 1: laser beams; the Examiner notes that it is commonly known in the art of circuits that an EOM and an AOM would be electrically connected in series within the same quantum computer system to achieve the modulations as claimed, see e.g., FIG. 3 (pg. 052314-3) of evidentiary reference of NPL by Olmschenk et al. disclosing an electro-optic modulator (EOM) and an acousto-optic modulator (AOM) disposed in series with the EOM in a quantum information processing system); the AOM configured to modulate one or more of an amplitude, a phase, or a frequency of the optical beam (p. 6 c. 1: we use an acousto-optical modulator (AOM) controlled by a home-made direct digital synthesizer (DDS) to quickly change the carrier frequency); and the EOM configured to: receive a sideband signal via a channel of the EOM, and transform the optical beam to a carrier beam and at least two sideband beams (p. 6 c. 1: we turn on different electro-optical modulators (EOMs) to generate the desired microwave sidebands…To maintain the coherence during the qubit type conversion, we drive the two transition paths for the two basis states of the qubit simultaneously. This is achieved by using the two first-order sideband frequency components generated by an EOM; p. 3 c. 1: As shown in Fig. 1c, an S-qubit can first be transferred to the D5/2 levels through a 411nm pi pulse with suitable microwave sidebands for |0> and |1> simultaneously), such that one of the at least two sideband beams is aligned to a resonant frequency of a transition from a first state to a second state (pg. 6 c. 1: For optical pumping into |0>, the laser is set to be resonant with the |S1/2; F = 1> <-> |P1/2; F = 0> transition with a 2.1 GHz sideband for the S1/2; F = 1> <-> |P1/2; F = 1> transition; see FIG. 1b showing one of the at least two sideband beams is aligned to a resonant frequency of a transition from a first state to a second state in S qubit), wherein the AOM and the EOM are arranged in series (p. 4 c. 1, p. 2 c. 2 & p. 1 c. 2: 411 nm and 3432 nm lasers co-propagating with 355 nm Raman laser beams; FIG. 1: laser beams; the Examiner notes that it is commonly known in the art of circuits that an EOM and an AOM would be electrically connected in series within the same quantum computer system to achieve the modulations as claimed); wherein the light source is further configured to provide one of the at least two sideband beams to one or more dual-space, single-species (DSSS) trapped ions of the QIP system to transition the one or more DSSS trapped ions from a first state to a second state (FIGS. 1c & 2: coherent conversion between two qubit types of the S-qubit and the F-qubit; p. 1 c. 1-2, p. 4 c. 2: we have experimentally demonstrated dual-type qubits that are coherently convertible to each other with the same species of 171Yb+ ions; p. 2 c. 1: Each ion can be in one of the two qubit types, encoded either in the clock states |0> and |1> of the S1/2 levels (S-qubit) or |0’> and |1’> of the metastable F7/2 levels).
Yang does not appear to explicitly disclose: a second frequency of another one of the at least two side beams is away from any state transition.
Olmschenk is related to Yang with respect to a method of operating a quantum information processing system comprising applying a global optical beam to a plurality of dual-space, single-species trapped ions at a wavelength near a transition center via an AOM and an EOM in series (p. 1 c. 1-2: qubit stored in the first-order magnetic field-insensitive hyperfine levels of the ground state of Yb+ [DSSS ion trap] with a coherence time of the qubit to be 2.5 s) and Olmschenk teaches: wherein a first frequency of the one of the at least two side beams is offset from a carrier frequency of the carrier beam by an offset frequency (p. 3 c. 1: large bandwidth of the fiber EOM allows the laser to be scanned over a wide range…continuous tuning of the fiber EOM over nearly 20 GHz enables the spectroscopic measurement of the hyperfine structure; p.3 c. 2: the rf applied to the fiber EOM was varied in 0.5 MHz steps [offset frequency] over the areas of interest; see FIG. 6); a second frequency of another one of the at least two side beams is away from any state transition (p. 8 c. 1: To begin, the 935.2 nm laser is tuned far from the (~3 GHz) from the 2D3/2 |F=1> <-> 3D[3/2]1/2 |F=0> transition…we then scan the rf frequency applied to the fiber EOM in the 935.2 nm beam over a wide range (6 GHz); see FIG. 5 showing frequency away from any state transition); wherein the AOM and the EOM are arranged in series (see FIG. 3 (pg. 052314-3) showing an electro-optic modulator (EOM) and an acousto-optic modulator (AOM) disposed in series with the EOM).
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 method of Yang in view of Olmschenk to satisfy the claimed condition because such sideband frequencies are known and would be selected to generate a frequency component to depopulate the manifold during cooling and optical pumping, and to allow the laser to be scanned over a wide range while remaining locked to a given absorption line (pg. 4 col. 2 (FIG. 6 caption) and pg. 3 col. 1 of Olmschenk). Thus, the frequencies of the sidebands scanned over nearly 20 GHz enables the spectroscopic measurement of the hyperfine structure, as taught in pg. 3, col. 1 of Olmschenk.
Regarding Claim 6, Yang discloses the QIP system according to Claim 5, as above. Yang further discloses: wherein a first frequency of the carrier beam is spaced at least one gigahertz from a second frequency of the one of the at least two sideband beams (see rejection of claim 2 supra).
Regarding Claim 7, Yang discloses the QIP system according to Claim 5, as above. Yang further discloses: wherein the EOM is further configured to deactivate the channel of the EOM when not addressing the one or more DSSS trapped ions (see rejection of claim 3 supra).
Regarding Claim 8, Yang discloses the QIP system according to Claim 5, as above. Yang further discloses: applying a plurality of additional signals to a plurality of additional channels of the EOM to generate a plurality of additional sideband beams; and providing the plurality of sideband beams to a plurality of additional DSSS trapped ions of the QIP system (see rejection of claim 4 supra).
Regarding Claim 9, Yang discloses: A non-transitory computer readable medium having instructions stored therein that, when executed by one or more processors of a quantum information processing (QIP) system, cause the one or more processors to (p. 1 c. 1-2: quantum computers): cause a light source to apply an optical beam; cause an acousto-optic modulator (AOM) to modulate one or more of an amplitude, a phase, or a frequency of the optical beam; apply a sideband signal to a channel of an electro-optic modulator (EOM) to transform the optical beam to a carrier beam and at least two sideband beams, wherein the AOM and the EOM are arranged in series; and provide one of the at least two sideband beams to one or more dual-space, single-species (DSSS) trapped ions of the QIP system to transition the one or more DSSS trapped ions from a first state to a second state (see rejection of claim 5 supra).
Regarding Claim 10, Yang discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium according to Claim 9, as above. Yang further discloses: wherein a first frequency of the carrier beam is spaced at least one gigahertz from a second frequency of the one of the at least two sideband beams (see rejection of claim 2 supra).
Regarding Claim 11, Yang discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium according to Claim 9, as above. Yang further discloses: further comprising instructions for: causing the EOM to deactivate the channel when not addressing the one or more DSSS trapped ions (see rejection of claim 3 supra).
Regarding Claim 12, Yang discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium according to Claim 9, as above. Yang further discloses: further comprising instructions for: applying a plurality of additional signals to a plurality of additional channels of the EOM to generate a plurality of additional sideband beams; and providing the plurality of sideband beams to a plurality of additional DSSS trapped ions of the QIP system (see rejection of claim 4 supra).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMANVITHA SRIDHAR whose telephone number is (571)270-0082. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 930-1800 (EST).
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, BUMSUK WON can be reached at 571-272-2713. 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.
/SAMANVITHA SRIDHAR/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/BUMSUK WON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872