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 .
The 35 USC § 112 rejection regarding to claim 1 and 10 is withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities: indefinite.
Claim 1 and 10 recite “(B)(2) swapping, substantially simultaneously...” which is indefinite. Please remove “substantially”.
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.
Claims 1-3, 7-8, 11-12, 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Gorman et al. (O’Gorman) “Generalized swap networks for near-term quantum computing” arXiv preprint arXiv:1905.05118, 2019, arxiv.org, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1905.05118, May 14, 2019 in view of Babbush et al. (Babbush) US 20200293937
In regard to claim 1, O’Gorman disclose A method for evolving a lattice of qubits in a quantum computer, wherein the lattice of qubits is an a x 2 lattice comprising a first row and a second row, (Section II. Model, p3, Fig. 1, lattice can be 2 rows)
the lattice of qubits comprising a first plurality of qubits forming the first row in the quantum computer and a second plurality of qubits forming the second row in the quantum computer, wherein each qubit in the first plurality of qubits is adjacent to at least one qubit in the second plurality of qubits located in a same column, the method comprising: (Section II. Model, p3, Fig. 1, lattice can be 2 rows and each line has qubits, lattice of qubits, some qubits in first row are connected with some qubits in the second row located in a same column as Fig.1)
(A) applying, in parallel, (Abstract, “any unordered set of k-qubit gates on distinct k-qubit subsets of n logical qubits can be ordered and parallelized in O(n k−1 ) depth using a linear arrangement of n physical qubits;”) a first set of quantum gates between the first plurality of qubits and the second plurality of qubits to create the first set of entangled pairs of qubits (Abstract, Section III, Swap Networks, Fig. 2, p5-6, set of gates between the bipartite qubits to make set of pairs of qubits,” ; “the construction is completely general and achieves optimal scaling in the case where gates acting on all”)
(B) after (A), swapping, performing a plurality of qubit swaps, in parallel, pairs of qubits, the swapping comprising: (Section III, Swap Networks, p4-6, Section VI Unitary coupled cluster, Fig. 6, p 11, perform qubit swaps, in parallel)
(B)(1) swapping pairs of adjacent qubits in the first plurality of qubits within the first row according to a first swap criterion; and (Section III, Swap Networks, p4-6, swap gates with swap qubits with even pairs, the pair of qubits are linearly adjacent physical qubits in the linear architecture which means the pair of qubits in the same row)
(B)(2) swapping, substantially simultaneously, pairs of adjacent qubits in the second plurality of qubits within the second row according to a second swap criterion, wherein the second swap criterion differs from the first swap criterion to shift the first plurality of qubits relative to the second plurality of qubits (Section III, Swap Networks, Fig. 1, p4-6, Section VI Unitary coupled cluster, Fig. 6, p 11, swap gates with swap qubits with odd pairs vs. even pairs, the pair of qubits are linearly adjacent physical qubits in the linear architecture which means the pair of qubits in the same row and the swap can be parallel operation, perform qubit swaps, in parallel) to shift the first plurality of qubits relative to the second plurality of qubits. (Section I Introduction, II Model, III, Swap Networks page 2-6 to change the ordering of the string which changes the relative positions of the first row of qubits and the second row of qubits as Fig.1 after swapping compared to the initial positions of the first and second rows of qubits)
But O’Gorman fail to explicitly disclose “to create a first set of entangled pairs of qubits in respective columns of the lattice;”
Babbush disclose to create a first set of entangled pairs of qubits in respective columns of the lattice. (Fig. 2, [0073]-[0079] create a set of entangled qubits in respective column 202, 204, etc.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention was made to incorporate Babbush‘s qubits manipulation into O’Gorman’s invention as they are related to the same field endeavor of quantum computing. The motivation to combine these arts, as proposed above, at least because Babbush‘s method of qubits entanglement would help to provide more qubits operations into O’Gorman’s system. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention was made that providing more entanglement operations would facilitate quantum computing.
In regard to Claim 2, O’Gorman and Babbush disclose The method of claim 1,
O’Gorman disclose further comprising:
(C) after (B), applying, in parallel, a second set of quantum gates between the first plurality of qubits and the second plurality of qubits to create the second set of entangled pairs of qubits. (Abstract, Section III, Swap Networks, p3-6, set of gates between the bipartite qubits to make set of pairs of qubits, “the construction is completely general and achieves optimal scaling in the case where gates acting on all” “One direction for generalization is to (S, A)-swap networks, where S is a subset of all pairs of qubits and A is an architecture, such as a 2D grid.”)
But But O’Gorman fail to explicitly disclose “to create a second set of entangled pairs of qubits.”
Babbush disclose to create a second set of entangled pairs of qubits.
(Fig. 2, [0073]-[0079] create a set of entangled qubits in respective column 202, 204, etc.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention was made to incorporate Babbush‘s qubits manipulation into O’Gorman’s invention as they are related to the same field endeavor of quantum computing. The motivation to combine these arts, as proposed above, at least because Babbush‘s method of qubits entanglement would help to provide more qubits operations into O’Gorman’s system. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention was made that providing more entanglement operations would facilitate quantum computing.
In regard to Claim 3, O’Gorman and Babbush disclose The method of claim 2,
O’Gorman disclose further comprising:
(D) after (C), swapping, in parallel, pairs of qubits, the swapping comprising:
(1) swapping pairs of adjacent qubits in the first plurality of qubits according to the second swap criterion; and (Section III, Swap Networks, p4-6, swap gates with swap qubits with odd pairs vs. even pairs)
(2) swapping pairs of adjacent qubits in the second plurality of qubits according to the first swap criterion. (Section III, Swap Networks, p4-6, swap gates with swap qubits with even pairs)
In regard to Claim 7, O’Gorman and Babbush disclose The method of claim 1,
O’Gorman disclose wherein the first swap criterion comprises an even swap criterion. (Section III, Swap Networks, p4-6, swap gates with swap qubits with even pairs)
In regard to Claim 8, O’Gorman and Babbush disclose The method of claim 1,
O’Gorman disclose wherein the first swap criterion comprises an odd swap criterion. (Section III, Swap Networks, p4-6, swap gates with swap qubits with odd pairs vs. even pairs)
In regard to claims 11-12, 16-17, claims 11-12, 16-17 are system claims corresponding to the method claims 2-3, 7-8 above and, therefore, are rejected for the same reasons set forth in the rejections of claims 2-3, 7-8.
Claims 4-5, 9-10, 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Gorman et al. (O’Gorman) “Generalized swap networks for near-term quantum computing” arXiv preprint arXiv:1905.05118, 2019, arxiv.org, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1905.05118, May 14, 2019 and Babbush et al. (Babbush) US 20200293937 as applied to claim 1, further in view of Low et al. (Low) US 20200394544
In regard to Claim 4, O’Gorman and Babbush disclose The method of claim 3,
O’Gorman disclose a subset of the first plurality of qubits, each qubit of the second plurality of qubits. (Section II. Model, p3, a line of n qubits, lattice of qubits, Section III, Swap Networks, p4-6 “One direction for generalization is to (S, A)-swap networks, where S is a subset of all pairs of qubits and A is an architecture, such as a 2D grid.” Subset of paired qubits is created, before pairing, it was the subset of qubits)
But O’Gorman and Babbush disclose fail to explicitly disclose “further comprising: (E) after (D), repeating (A)-(D) until each qubit of the subset of the first plurality of qubits is part of an entangled pair with the each qubit of the second plurality of qubits.”
Low disclose further comprising: (E) after (D), repeating (A)-(D) until each qubit of the subset of the first plurality of qubits is part of an entangled pair with the each qubit of the second plurality of qubits. (Fig. 3A-3C, 302, 308, [0060] [0074]-[0085] Fig. 5,A-5C, [0100]-[0112] iterating the steps until each qubits of the subset of qubits entangled paired with each qubit of the other set of the qubits)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention was made to incorporate Low‘s swap network into Babbush and O’Gorman’s invention as they are related to the same field endeavor of quantum computing. The motivation to combine these arts, as proposed above, at least because Low‘s swap network with iterating swap operations would help to provide more swap operation conditions into Babbush and O’Gorman’s system. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention was made that providing more swap operation conditions until all qubits are swapped would facilitate quantum computing.
In regard to Claim 5, O’Gorman, Low and Babbush disclose The method of claim 4,
O’Gormandisclose further comprising: (F) after (E), measuring at least one qubit in the lattice of qubits to generate an output state. (Section III, Swap Networks, p6, “After an application of the swap network, the swap layers following the logical layer to be measured can be executed” qubit can be measured to generate the qubit state)
In regard to Claim 9, O’Gorman and Babbush disclose The method of claim 1,
But O’Gorman and Babbush fail to explicitly disclose “further comprising using a classical computer to control the quantum computer to perform (A) and (B), the classical computer comprising at least one processor and at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium having computer program instructions stored therein, the computer program instructions being executable by the at least one processor to cause the classical computer to control the quantum computer to perform (A) and (B).”
Low disclose further comprising using a classical computer to control the quantum computer to perform (A) and (B), the classical computer comprising at least one processor and at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium having computer program instructions stored therein, the computer program instructions being executable by the at least one processor to cause the classical computer to control the quantum computer to perform (A) and (B). ([0033] [0137]-[0139] the a classical computer and processor, memory to control the quantum computer)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention was made to incorporate Low‘s swap network into Babbush and O’Gorman’s invention as they are related to the same field endeavor of quantum computing. The motivation to combine these arts, as proposed above, at least because Low‘s swap network using classical computer to control the quantum computer would help to provide quantum control into Babbush and O’Gorman’s system. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention was made that providing quantum control using the classical computer would facilitate quantum computing.
In regard to Claim 10, O’Gorman and Babbush disclose A hybrid quantum-classical computing system for evolving a lattice of qubits in a quantum computer, wherein the lattice of qubits is an a x 2 lattice comprising a first row and a second row, (Section II. Model, p3, Fig. 1, lattice can be 2 rows) the lattice of qubits comprising a first plurality of qubits forming the first row in the quantum computer and a second plurality of qubits forming the second row in the quantum computer, the plurality of qubits including the first plurality of qubits and the second plurality of qubits located in the same column; and to perform a method, corresponding to the method claim above 1 and, therefore, is rejected for the same reasons set forth in the rejections of claim 1.
But O’Gorman and Babbush fail to explicitly disclose “wherein each qubit in the first plurality of qubits is adjacent to at least one qubit in the second plurality of qubits, the hybrid quantum-classical computing system comprising: the quantum computer, the quantum computer including a plurality of qubits and a qubit controller that manipulates the plurality of qubits, a classical computer storing machine-readable instructions that, when executed by the classical computer, control the classical computer to cooperate with the quantum computer.”
Low disclose wherein each qubit in the first plurality of qubits is adjacent to at least one qubit in the second plurality of qubits, the hybrid quantum-classical computing system comprising: the quantum computer, the quantum computer including a plurality of qubits and a qubit controller that manipulates the plurality of qubits, a classical computer storing machine-readable instructions that, when executed by the classical computer, control the classical computer to cooperate with the quantum computer.
([0033] Fig. 8, [0137]-[0139] the system include quantum processor as a controller to control qubits and a classical computer and processor, memory to control the quantum computer)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention was made to incorporate Low‘s swap network into Babbush and O’Gorman’s invention as they are related to the same field endeavor of quantum computing. The motivation to combine these arts, as proposed above, at least because Low‘s swap network using classical computer to control the quantum computer would help to provide quantum control into Babbush and O’Gorman’s system. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention was made that providing quantum control using the classical computer would facilitate quantum computing.
In regard to claims 13-14, claims 13-14 are system claims corresponding to the method claims 4-5 above and, therefore, are rejected for the same reasons set forth in the rejections of claims 4-5.
Claims 6, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Gorman et al. (O’Gorman) “Generalized swap networks for near-term quantum computing” arXiv preprint arXiv:1905.05118, 2019, arxiv.org, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1905.05118, May 14, 2019 and Babbush et al. (Babbush) US 20200293937 as applied to claim 1, further in view of Versluis et al. (Versluis) US 2021/0279134
In regard to Claim 6, O’Gorman and Babbush disclose The method of claim 1,
But O’Gorman and Babbush fail to explicitly disclose “wherein the first set of quantum gates comprises a ZZ-interaction.”
Versluis disclose wherein the first set of quantum gates comprises a ZZ-interaction. ([0020]-[0021][0051]-[0053][0076]-[0080] zz-interaction)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention was made to incorporate Versluis‘s quantum computing into Babbush and O’Gorman’s invention as they are related to the same field endeavor of quantum computing. The motivation to combine these arts, as proposed above, at least because Versluis‘s quantum computing with zz-interaction would help to provide more qubits pair operation into Babbush and O’Gorman’s system. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention was made that providing more qubits pair operation would facilitate quantum computing.
In regard to claim 15, claim 15 a system claim corresponding to the method claim 6 above and, therefore, is rejected for the same reasons set forth in the rejections of claim 6.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-17 filed on 2/13/2026 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the current rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent Documents PATENT DATE INVENTOR(S) TITLE
US 20120155870 A1 2012-06-21 Harrison et al.
Method And Apparatus For Selectively Routing Entanglement Building
Harrison et al. disclose A method and apparatus (80) are provided for routing entanglement building between a selected pairing of interface qubits (82). The qubits of the selected pairing of interface qubits (82) are separately entangled with at least one intermediate qubit (84) by interacting respective light fields with the interface qubits of the selected pairing and using an optical merge arrangement (83) to further interact the light fields with at least one intermediate qubit (84). Where there are multiple intermediate qubits (84) the intermediate qubits are entangled with each other. The or each entangled intermediate qubit (84) is then removed from entanglement… see abstract.
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 XUYANG XIA whose telephone number is (571)270-3045. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-4pm.
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, Jennifer Welch can be reached at 571-272-7212. 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.
XUYANG XIA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2143
/XUYANG XIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2143