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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on January 15th, 2023 has been considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 26 and 28 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.
Claim 26 recites the limitation "the longitudinal axis" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 28 recites the limitation "the ridge" in line 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 8, 13, 15-18, 33-34, 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Najer et al., “A gated quatum dot strongly coupled to an optical microcavity”, Nature, Vol. 575 Published 10/21/2019, p. 622-627.
Regarding claims 1 and 34 , Najer et al. discloses a single photon source comprising a microcavity (Fig. 1, the space including the word vacuum on the left side of the diagram), arranged between a concave first mirror (Fig. 1, the upper curved concave mirror portion), and a semiconductor heterostructure (Fig. 1, The right expanded image of the quantum dot heterolayer structure and the planar mirror stack on the right hand below the QD layer, facing a mirror, a laser light source (Note top of Fig. 1 indicating laser light emitted in) for exciting the QD (p, 624, 2nd paragraph in particular). Claim 34 is similarly rejected since Najer et al. performs the required excitation step of claim 34 using the recited structure.
Regarding claim 8, Najer et al. discloses in Extended Data Fig. 1 that the apparatus includes a dark field microscope.
PNG
media_image1.png
756
954
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, Najer et al. in Fig. 1 in the left illustration shows a first concave mirror comprising a substrate comprising a concave recess formed into a substrate surface the surface facing a semiconductor heterostructure.
Regarding claim 15, Najer et al. in Fig. 1, the right side of the illustration, shows a heterostructure comprising a diode in which the quantum dot is embedded arranged on a second mirror formed by a distributed Bragg reflector.
Regarding claim 16, Najer et al. discloses an apparatus comprising a positioning device to position the semiconductor heterostructure with respect to the first mirror (Note Fig. 1, Left side of the illustration, the xyz positioner at the base of the illustrated invention).
Regarding claim 17, the xyz positioner of Najer et al. is configured to move the heterostructure in x, y, and z directions as claimed.
Regarding claim 18, Najer et al. includes a first mirror with a first mirror reflectivity lower than the second mirror as evidenced by the OUT indication where light is emitted from the first mirror in Fig. 1(a).
Regarding claim 33, Najer et al. discloses in the additional details under Methods that the heterostructure comprises a surface facing the first mirror formed in sections by a passivation layer formed out of Al.sub.2.O.sub.3.
PNG
media_image2.png
534
484
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 40, Najer et al. in Extended Data Fig. 1(b) shows, similar to Fig. 6 of the instant application, collection of single emitted photons escaping a first mirror, passing through an objective lens and ultimately coupling the emitted photons into a single mode optical fiber via a lens at the top of Extended Data Fig. 1(b).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-7, 9-12, 14, 19-32, and 35-39 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 2, and claims 3-7 by virtue of their dependency are indicated as allowable because the prior art, including Najer et al. fails to teach or fairly suggest the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the microcavity (2) comprises a first optical mode (H) having a first optical frequency and a second optical mode (V) having a different second optical frequency, wherein a spectrum of the laser light (L) is broader than the absolute difference between the first and the second optical frequency. Claims 35 and claims 36-37 are similarly indicated objected to with allowable subject matter since the claims encompass substantially similar subject matter.
Claim 9 is indicated as allowable because it requires the dark field microscope in addition the elements of claim 8 be arranged with a half wave plate, while the prior art in Najer et al. discloses only a quarter wave plate. There is no teaching or suggestion to substitute the half wave plate claimed for the required quarter wave plate in the prior art.
Regarding claim 10 and 38, the claim requires in addition to the other limitations of the claim, that the laser light for exciting the quantum dots be introduced laterally, while the prior art in Fig. 1 clearly indicates illumination orthonormal the surface of the quantum dot heterostructure. In addition, there is no teaching in the prior art that the optical mode is confined to the surface of the heterostructure. These limitations in claim 10 do not appear in the prior art, nor is there teaching or suggestion toward them, therefore claim 10 and its dependent claims 20-32 are indicated as containing allowable subject matter. However, claims 26 and 28 are rejected as above for having terms lacking antecedent basis. Claim 38 is similarly indicated as objected to and containing allowable subject matter since like claim 10, the excitation laser beam is required to be introduced laterally.
Regarding claim 11, the prior art of Najer et al. discloses a continuous wave excitation beam and does not explicitly disclose a pulsed laser excitation source.
Regarding claim 12, Najer et al. and the prior art as a whole fail to teach or fairly suggest the apparatus of claim 1 and wherein the single photon source (1) is configured to generate an on-demand coherent single photon with a probability of at least 50%, particularly at least 57%, on excitation with laser light (L) in form of a laser light 7-pulse.
Regarding claim 14, Najer et al. and the prior art fail to teach or fairly suggest the subject matter of claim 13 further requiring wherein the recess (31) comprises a sagittal height (s) in the range from 0.08 pm to 8 pm, preferably in the range from 0.5 pm to 2 pm, and/or wherein the recess (31) comprises a radius (R) of curvature in the range from 1.2 pm to 70 pm, preferably in the range from 5 pm to 20.
Regarding claim 19, Najer et al. and the prior art fails to teach or fairly suggest the apparatus of claim 18 further wherein the reflectivity of the first mirror (3) and the reflectivity of the second mirror (40) are selected such that the cavity loss rate atop attributed to the first mirror (3) is larger than the cavity loss rate (bottom attributed to the second mirror (40) by at least a factor of 4, preferably at least a factor of 20, preferably at least a factor of 100, preferably at least a factor of 200, preferably at least a factor of 500, and wherein the total cavity loss rate 'total deviates less than 300%, preferably less than 100%, preferably less than 50% from the product 2- g, wherein g corresponds to the atom-cavity coupling.
Regarding claim 39, Najer et al. and the prior art fails to teach or fairly suggest the method of claim 34 further requiring wherein prior to the step of exciting the quantum dot (5), the method further comprises the steps of:
Application of a gate voltage across a diode (41), comprised by the semiconductor heterostructure (4) to determine a desired charge state of the quantum dot (5);
Positioning the second mirror (40) along an optical axis (z) running perpendicular to the second mirror (40) so as to bring an optical mode of the microcavity (2), particularly said first or second optical mode (H, V), into resonance with a frequency of an optical transition of the quantum dot (5);
Positioning the semiconductor heterostructure (4) in two lateral directions perpendicular to the optical axis (z) to position the quantum dot (5) at an anti- node of the optical mode of the microcavity.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID A VANORE whose telephone number is (571)272-2483. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 7AM to 6 PM.
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, Robert Kim can be reached at 571-272-2293. 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.
/DAVID A VANORE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881