7DETAILED 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 . This Office Action responds to the amendment/request for reconsideration after non-final rejection filed on 3/4/3036. Claims 1-8, 10-21 are pending, wherein claim 9 has been canceled and claims 1-8, 10-20 have been amended and claim 21 has been newly added.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-8,10,21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15 of U.S. Patent No. 11,49,4,541, B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because are obvious variations of each other, having similar circuit components such as driver, first and second electrically controllable photonic components and similar interconnections among these elements, wherein the “input trace” as presently claimed is variation of the “input pin” of the patented claim, providing data to the input pin as is known in the art and wherein “the output pin” and “input pin” as explicitly claimed in the patented claims are implied in the present claims since various circuit components would have input and output pin(s) or terminal(s) as known in the art in order to perform the desire functions.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8,10-21 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As per claims 1-8,10-21, Applicant’s arguments filed on 3/4/2026 set forth the patentability of Applicant’s claimed invention, which the prior arts made of record failed to teach or suggest as claimed (see Applicant’s amendment filed on 3/4/2026, pages 6-9).
Remarks
The rejections of claims 1-10 on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15 of U.S. Patent No. 11,49,4,541, B2, are still applicable for the reasons previously indicated, wherein applicant failed to provide proper response that would overcome the rejections, wherein the rejection of claim 9 is muted due to the cancellation of claim 9 and the rejection of claim 21 is newly rejected for the same reasons as previously indicated, being necessitated by Applicant’s amendment to the claim. Applicant’s request to defer the filing of the terminal disclaimer until one or more claims are found to be allowable. Appropriate actions are required as the claims have been found to be allowable as indicated above.
The rejections of claim(s) 1-9,11-20 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fazal (US Patent Application Publication No. 20170294925 A1) and the rejection of claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fazal (US Patent Application Publication No. 20170294925 A1) in view of Block et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 20140086523 A1) are withdrawn in light of Applicant’s arguments filed on 3/4/2026, wherein as pointed out by Applicant, the prior art made of record failed to teach or suggest the inventive features as claimed (see Applicant’s amendment filed on 3/4/2026, pages 6-9).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 PHALLAKA KIK whose telephone number is (571)272-1895. The examiner can normally be reached Maxiflex Mon-Fri 8AM-5:30PM.
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, Jack Chiang can be reached at 5712727483. 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.
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
P. O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
or faxed to:
571-273-8300
/PHALLAKA KIK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2851 June 13, 2026
Prosecution Insights