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 .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 7-8, 12, and 13 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12 November, 2025. Although claim 7 was indicated as generic, the election of Species C corresponds to the embodiment shown in Fig. 3. The coupler shown in Fig. 3 is a vertical coupler, not an edge coupler. Therefore, claim 7 is drawn to a nonelected species and is also withdrawn.
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 4 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. It is unclear how the “central region” and the “peripheral regions” are defined. The claim does not provide a definition, so examiner looked to the specification, but it did not provide clarity. Therefore, “central region” and “peripheral regions” are not considered limiting, since any region can be considered either central or peripheral depending on frame of reference.
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 1-6, 9-11, and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei et al. (US 2022/0065407; hereinafter Wei) in view of Vallance et al. (US 2017/0299824; hereinafter Vallance).
Regarding claim 1: Wei disclosesA photonic device (Fig. 1C) including: a substrate (Fig. 1C, substrate 110); photonic circuitry (see title and paragraph 0021, a PIC includes photonic circuitry) on the substrate; an optical waveguide structure (Fig. 1C, waveguide 170) on the substrate; an optical coupler (Fig. 1C, grating 172) coupled to the photonic circuitry at one end thereof by way of the optical waveguide structure, and having a terminus at another end thereof (Fig. 1C has this structure). Wei further disclosesa metalens (Fig. 1C, metalens 193) structure on the substrate, the metalens structure including a plurality of vertical nanostructures (see paragraph 0026) to configure an optical path between the optical coupler and an optical interface component that is to be optically coupled to the photonic device (Fig. 1C shows this).
Wei fails to disclose that the terminus outputs an optical beam, since the coupler of Wei Fig. 1C is coupling light into the PIC. It would be well known to one of ordinary skill in the art that the same general design can be used for input couplers and output couplers, since the light path is simply reversed, but the considerations such as minimizing loss are the same. For example, Vallance teaches an optical assembly including an input coupler, an output coupler, and a PIC, and shows that there is a paralleled/mirrored arrangement between the input side and the output side, including a focusing element 24/25 (see paragraph 0046) and a grating coupler 104/105. Additionally, it has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Einstein, 8 USPQ 167. Based on this, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the same general structure for incoupling light that was disclosed by Wei to outcouple light, in order to combine the benefits of the Wei device including its efficiency (see paragraph 0024) with the ability to outcouple light from the PIC.
Regarding claim 24: The method for fabricating recited results in the structure of claim 1, which is obvious over Wei in view of Vallance, as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above. Since the method steps of claim 24 do not require any specific manufacture techniques, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the recited method steps of claim 24 to fabricate the device of claim 1 using conventional manufacturing techniques well known in the art.
Regarding claim 2: Modified Wei teaches the photonic device of claim 1, as applied above. Wei further teaches that the metalens structure collimates the optical beam (see Wei paragraph 0024). Additionally, Vallance teaches that the curved reflector collimates the light (see Vallance paragraph 0046). Based on this, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, when making the modification described in the rejection of claim 1, to modify the Wei device such that the metalens structure is to configure the optical path by at least one of expanding the optical beam from the optical coupler or substantially collimating the optical beam from the optical coupler.
Regarding claim 25: The method for fabricating recited results in the structure of claim 2, which is obvious over Wei in view of Vallance, as explained in the rejection of claim 2 above. Since the method steps of claim 25 do not require any specific manufacture techniques, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the recited method steps of claim 25 to fabricate the device of claim 2 using conventional manufacturing techniques well known in the art.
Regarding claim 3: Modified Wei teachesThe photonic device of claim 1 (as applied above), wherein the vertical structures define a heterogenous pattern across an exposed surface of the metalens structure (see paragraph 0026, nano-pillars are disclosed to be non-periodic and have different diameters, considered to be a heterogeneous pattern).
Regarding claim 4: Modified Wei teachesThe photonic device of claim 3 (as applied above), wherein a footprint of the vertical structures at a central region of the exposed surface of the metalens structure is different from a footprint of the vertical structures at peripheral regions of the exposed surface of the metalens structure (the nano-pillars with different diameters would meet this claim limitation, since central region and peripheral region are not sufficiently defined to distinguish from the nano-pillars having different diameters between any two points on the microlens disclosed by Wei in paragraph 0026).
Regarding claim 5: Modified Wei teachesThe photonic device of claim 1 (as applied above), wherein the exposed surface of the metalens structure is substantially flat (see paragraph 0026).
Regarding claim 6: Modified Wei teachesThe photonic device of claim 5 (as applied above), further comprising a cavity therein (Fig. 1C, void 199), the metalens structure in the cavity (Fig. 1C shows this).
Regarding claim 9: Modified Wei teachesThe photonic device of claim 1 (as applied above), wherein the optical path includes a first optical path portion between the optical coupler and the metalens structure (see Wei Fig. 1C, portion between surface 129 and grating coupler 172), and a second optical path portion between the metalens structure and the optical interface component to be optically coupled to the photonic device (Wei Fig. 1C, portion of path within void).
Regarding claim 10: Modified Wei teachesThe photonic device of claim 5 (as applied above), wherein the optical coupler is a vertical coupler (Wei Fig. 1C shows a vertical coupler).
Regarding claim 11: Modified Wei teachesThe photonic device of claim 10 (as applied above), wherein the exposed surface of the metalens structure is substantially parallel with a top surface of the substrate (Fig. 1C shows this where the exposed surface of the metalens structure is considered to be the top surface facing the void; see also Wei paragraph 0026).
Claim(s) 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei et al. (US 2022/0065407; hereinafter Wei) in view of Vallance et al. (US 2017/0299824; hereinafter Vallance) and further in view of Witzens (WO 2021/170200; in the following rejections, reference is made to corresponding US publication US 2023/0152537; hereinafter Witzens).
Regarding claim 14: Modified Wei teachesThe photonic device of claim 10 (as applied above), wherein the substrate, photonic circuitry, optical waveguide structure, and optical coupler are part of a photonic integrated circuit (PIC) of the photonic device (the photonic device, as applied above, is a photonic integrated circuit including the substrate, photonic circuitry, the optical waveguide structure, and the optical coupler), the photonic device further including a metalens assembly, the metalens assembly comprising the metalens structure (the structure including the metalens is considered a metalens assembly) and an optically transparent block abutting a top surface of the PIC (Fig. 1C, light director layer 191).
The photonic device of Wei Fig. 1C does not have an optically transparent block abutting a top surface of the PIC, wherein the metalens structure is on a surface of the optically transparent block that is substantially parallel to a top surface of the substrate. However, the embodiment of Wei Fig. 5 shows an optically transparent spacer layer (240) on a top surface of the PIC, wherein a lens (133) is on a surface of the optically transparent spacer layer that is substantially parallel to a top surface of the substrate (110). The optically transparent block is taught to provide a planar surface for the optically coupled device, in this case a light source.
However, the optically transparent spacer is not considered to be an optically transparent block abutting the top surface of the PIC, since it is a part of the PIC. However, Witzens, also related to optical coupling to/from PICs including grating couplers and lenses (see title, abstract, and Figs. 1-9), teaches that lenses (Fig. 2(a), lenses 320a) placed in the optical path between an output coupler of a PIC (see paragraph 0042 and Fig. 2(a), coupler 110/112) and downstream optical components (Fig. 2(a) second optical element 200) can be attached to optical interposers that are optically transparent blocks placed on top of the PICs (Figs. 1-8 and abstract). This provides a more modular design while allowing the angles in which beams are emitted from the PIC to be very well controlled (see paragraph 0036). Based on this, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the Wei device by including the metalens on the optically transparent block above the PIC, such that the optically transparent block abuts a top surface of the PIC and the metalens structure is on a surface of the optically transparent block that is substantially parallel to a top surface of the substrate, in order to provide a more modular arrangement while still ensuring that the angle of beam emission is well-controlled.
Regarding claim 15: Modified Wei teaches the photonic device of claim 14, as applied above. Witzens further teaches providing at least one, but typically two lenses in the optical interposer allows matching a beam profile between a PIC and a downstream optical components (see paragraph 0036). In the two lens configuration (such as is shown in Figs. 2(a) and 15), which allows a vertical coupling to/from a component directly above the PIC, the two lenses face each other. Based on this, including one or two lenses in the optical interposer is considered a matter of obvious design choice. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select the number of metalenses appropriate for matching a beam profile between a PIC and a downstream optical component in the modified Wei device, including providing a first metalens structure and a second metalens structure facing each other.
Regarding claim 16: Modified Wei teaches the photonic device of claim 15, as applied above. Witzens further teaches modular glass interposer building blocks, being fabricated individually and then assembled, for ease of manufacturing (see Fig. 15 and paragraph 0074). These interposers include a cavity for facing the PIC (Fig. 15, cavity containing lens 602B), the first lens structure disposed on a surface of the cavity facing the vertical coupler (see Figs. 13 and 15), and the second metalens disposed on a top surface of the optically transparent block (Fig. 15, lens 602a is on a top surface of the optically transparent block). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to preserve this general arrangement, when making the modified Wei device described above, since it would protect the metalens structure, as it would be recessed from the outer surface of the interposer and the cavity walls would shield it from damage.
Regarding claim 17: Modified Wei teachesThe photonic device of claim 16 (as applied above), wherein the optical path includes a first optical path portion between the optical coupler and the first metalens structure, a second optical path portion through the optically transparent block between the first metalens structure and the second metalens structure, and a third optical path portion from the second metalens structure in a direction toward the optical interface component to be optically coupled to the PIC (the modified Wei device, as described above, would have this configuration, since light would travel from the optical coupler to the first metalens, then through the optically transparent block to the second metalens structure, and then toward an optical interface component).
Claims 18-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Na et al. (US 2013/0279844; hereinafter Na) in view of Mayukh et al. (US 2023/0367087; hereinafter Mayukh) as evidenced by Wei et al. (US 2022/0065407; hereinafter Wei).
Regarding claim 18: Na disclosesA semiconductor package (Fig. 1), comprising: a package substrate (Fig. 1, package substrate 101; a photonic device (Fig. 1, PIC chip 105) on the package substrate and electrically coupled thereto (see paragraph 0020), the photonic device including: a substrate (see paragraph 0024); photonic circuitry on the substrate (Fig. 1, optical devices 115, see paragraph 0020); an optical waveguide structure on the substrate (see paragraph 0020); an optical coupler coupled to the photonic circuitry at one end thereof by way of the optical waveguide structure (Fig. 1, vertical coupler 130; see paragraph 0022), and having a terminus at another end thereof to output an optical beam (Fig. 2a, grating 265 has this feature).
Na further discloses a lens structure on the substrate (Fig. 1, lens 140) to configure an optical path between the optical coupler and an optical interface component that is to be optically coupled to the photonic device (Fig. 1, fiber). Na fails to teach that the photonic device is optically coupled to the package substrate and that the lens is a metalens structure on the substrate, the metalens structure including a plurality of vertical structures to configure an optical path between the optical coupler and an optical interface component that is to be optically coupled to the photonic device. However, Mayukh also related to co-packaged assemblies including PICs and package substrates (see paragraph 0013 and Fig. 1), teaches optically connecting a photonic integrated circuit and a substrate, which allows optical routing through the substrate (see paragraph 0050). In order to provide optical routing through the substrate, in applications where it is desirable to couple light from the PIC through a package substrate to downstream components on the other side of the substrate, 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 Na device in order to optically connect the photonic integrated circuit and the package substrate since it was taught by Mayukh. Modified Wei therefore teaches the claimed invention except that refractive lenses are used instead of metalenses. Wei shows that metalenses are equivalent structures in the art (see paragraph 0035). Therefore, because these two types of lenses were art-recognized equivalents at the time the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to substitute metalenses for conventional lenses (See MPEP §2144.06).
Regarding claim 19: Modified Na teaches the semiconductor package of claim 18, as applied above. Additionally, Na shows the light propagating toward a the lens structure is to configure the optical path by at least one of expanding the optical beam from the optical coupler or substantially collimating the beam from the optical coupler. However, the lens would necessarily configure the optical beam in one of these ways, since if the beam is not collimated by the lens it would expand eventually.
Regarding claim 20: Modified Na teachesThe semiconductor package of claim 18 (as applied above), wherein the vertical structures define a heterogenous pattern across an exposed surface of the metalens structure (see paragraph 0026, nano-pillars are disclosed to be non-periodic and have different diameters, considered to be a heterogeneous pattern).
Regarding claim 21: Na disclosesAn integrated circuit (IC) device assembly including: a printed circuit board (Fig. 1, PCB 170); a package substrate (Fig. 1, package substrate 101) on the printed circuit board and electrically coupled thereto (see paragraph 0019); and a photonic device (Fig. 1, photonic device 105) on the package substrate and electrically coupled thereto (see paragraph 0020), the photonic device including: a substrate (see paragraph 0024); photonic circuitry on the substrate (Fig. 1, optical devices 115, see paragraph 0020); an optical waveguide structure on the substrate (see paragraph 0020); an optical coupler coupled to the photonic circuitry at one end thereof by way of the optical waveguide structure (Fig. 1, vertical coupler 130; see paragraph 0022), and having a terminus at another end thereof to output an optical beam (Fig. 2a, grating 265 has this feature).
Na further discloses a lens structure on the substrate (Fig. 1, lens 140) to configure an optical path between the optical coupler and an optical interface component that is to be optically coupled to the photonic device (Fig. 1, fiber). Na fails to teach that the photonic device is optically coupled to the package substrate and that the lens is a metalens structure on the substrate, the metalens structure including a plurality of vertical structures to configure an optical path between the optical coupler and an optical interface component that is to be optically coupled to the photonic device. However, Mayukh also related to co-packaged assemblies including PICs and package substrates (see paragraph 0013 and Fig. 1), teaches optically connecting a photonic integrated circuit and a substrate, which allows optical routing through the substrate (see paragraph 0050). In order to provide optical routing through the substrate, in applications where it is desirable to couple light from the PIC through a package substrate to downstream components on the other side of the substrate, 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 Na device in order to optically connect the photonic integrated circuit and the package substrate since it was taught by Mayukh. Modified Wei therefore teaches the claimed invention except that refractive lenses are used instead of metalenses. Wei shows that metalenses are equivalent structures in the art (see paragraph 0035). Therefore, because these two types of lenses were art-recognized equivalents at the time the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to substitute metalenses for conventional lenses (See MPEP §2144.06).
Regarding claim 22: Modified Na teaches the IC device assembly of claim 21, as applied above. Na is silent as to whether the lens structure is to configure the optical path by at least one of expanding the optical beam from the optical coupler or substantially collimating the beam from the optical coupler. However, the lens would necessarily configure the optical beam in one of these ways, since if the beam is not collimated by the lens it would expand eventually.
Regarding claim 23: Modified Na teaches The IC device assembly of any one of claims 21 (as applied above), wherein the vertical structures define a heterogenous pattern across an exposed surface of the metalens structure (see paragraph 0026, nano-pillars are disclosed to be non-periodic and have different diameters, considered to be a heterogeneous pattern).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kirsten D Endresen whose telephone number is (703)756-1533. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday.
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, Thomas Hollweg can be reached at (571)270-1739. 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.
/KIRSTEN D. ENDRESEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2874
/MICHELLE R CONNELLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874