DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1 through 30 originally filed 13 February 2023. By preliminary amendment received 13 February 2023; claims 1 through 27, 29, and 30 are amended. By amendment received 25 February 2026; claims 1, 5, 7 through 9, 11, 12, 16 through 18, and 20 through 23 are amended and claim 2 is cancelled. Claims 1 and 3 through 30 are addressed by this 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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered; they are addressed below.
Applicant argues that the amendments to the drawings and disclosure resolve the previous objections to the drawings.
This argument is persuasive with respect to the objection to Figure 1 and the objections relating to the use of reference character "40" in the disclosure. Those objections are withdrawn.
This argument is not persuasive with respect to the objection relating to the use of reference character "20" because one instance of incorrect usage remains. This objection is maintained and the erroneous location is noted below with the objection.
Applicant argues that the amendment to the abstract resolves the previous objection thereto. This argument is persuasive and the corresponding objection is withdrawn.
Applicant argues that the amendment to the disclosure resolves the previous objection thereto. This argument is not persuasive because one instance of misspelling remains. This objection is maintained and the location of the misspelled word is noted below with the objection.
Applicant argues that the amendment to claim 7 resolves the previous objection thereto. This argument is persuasive and the corresponding objection is withdrawn.
Applicant argues that the amendments to the claims and explanations presently provided resolve the previous rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
This argument is persuasive with respect to claims 1, 2, 5, 7, and 8 as well as claims rejected under this section only for reasons of depending on these claims. The corresponding rejections are withdrawn.
This argument is not persuasive with respect to claim 18 and claims dependent thereon. The present response does not address the rejection of claim 18 on the basis that features recited therein are required to simultaneously have ranges of different scopes. As such, this rejection is maintained.
Applicant argues that the combined teachings of Kondo et al. (K228a, US Pub. 2016/0248228), Takeuchi (US Pub. 2009/0213889), Garnache et al. (Garnache, US Patent 6,611,546), and Furukawa (US Pub. 2002/0094004) do not teach or render obvious the limitation "Wherein the small divergence angle denotes a divergence angle of fewer than 20 degree." This argument is persuasive and the corresponding rejection is withdrawn. However, upon further search and consideration, Ghosh et al. (G441a, US Pub. 2020/0127441) has been located which renders this feature obvious in light of the previously cited art. As such, new rejections have been formulated as set forth below.
Applicant argues that the combined teachings of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a do not teach or render obvious the limitation "The current confinement layer is disposed within two wavelengths from a side of the active layer along the direction perpendicular to the active layer" because, according to applicant, K228a does not teach this feature. To support this argument, applicant contends that K228a does not identify the distance between layers 110 and 106.
Initially, due to the above noted change in rejection, this claim is rejected on the basis of the combined teachings of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a (see below).
Applicant's argument is not persuasive because the argued feature is clearly set forth in K228a. Specifically, K228a states and shows that there is no layer, space, or feature between the active layer and the bottom layer of the upper DBR (K228a, ¶21 describing the arrangement of Figure 2 in which upper DBR 108 is "stacked on" the active region 106 with no element present between upper DBR 108 and active region 106). K228a also states that the confinement layer is formed as the bottom layer of the upper DBR (K228a, ¶26 describing the arrangement of Figure 2 in which confinement layer 110 is formed in the bottom of upper DBR 108). This arrangement causes the confinement layer to abut the active region in the arrangement of K228a. Since K228a teaches an arrangement in which the confinement layer abuts the active region, K228a teaches providing the confinement layer zero wavelengths from a side of the active region. As such, this argument is not persuasive.
The limitation "The current confinement layer is disposed within two wavelengths from a side of the active layer along the direction perpendicular to the active layer" is rendered obvious by the combined teachings of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a (see below). Applicant's argument that K228a does not teach this feature is not persuasive because the argued feature is clearly set forth in K228a.
As such, all claims are addressed as follows:
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4).
The description uses the reference characters "20" to refer to more than one part each. The same reference character must never be used to designate different parts.
In the present case, these reference characters or similar numbers appear in the following locations: "20" is erroneously used in line 25 of page 11 of the clean specification submitted 25 February 2026
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as "amended." If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The disclosure is objected to for misspelling the term "Bragg" as "Brag" in line 29 of page 22 of the clean specification submitted 25 February 2026. This is a typographical error.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 18 through 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 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.
Regarding claim 18, this claim requires "Wherein the active layer comprises at least one quantum well" and "Wherein the active layer comprises more than one quantum well" as well as "Wherein an optical path distance between a center of each of the at least one quantum well along a direction perpendicular to the active layer and a nearest antinode of a standing wave light field is less than one fifth of a lasing wavelength" and "In response to the active layer comprising more than one quantum well, an optical path distance between a center position of an entire group of quantum wells and the nearest antinode of the standing wave light field is less than one tenth of the lasing wavelength." First, the active layer is required to have number of quantum wells that is both "at least one" and "more than one". Second, the "center of each of the at least one quantum well" is required to be both within "one fifth of a lasing wavelength" and "one tenth of the lasing wavelength" of the "nearest antinode of a standing wave light field". Due to the requirement of multiple overlapping and progressively narrower ranges in both the first and second case, it is unclear if the narrower ranges are exemplary or required. Since it is unclear what is required by this claim, this claim is determined to be indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. For the remainder of this action, this claim will be interpreted as requiring only the broadest recited range.
Regarding claims 19 and 20, each of these claims depend properly from claim 18 and inherit all limitations thereof. As such, these claims are also indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. For the remainder of this action, these claims will also be interpreted as noted above regarding claim 18.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 3 through 5, 8 through 10, 15 through 18, 21 through 25, 27, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kondo et al. (K228a, US Pub. 2016/0248228), in view of Takeuchi (US Pub. 2009/0213889), in view of Garnache et al. (Garnache, US Patent 6,611,546), in view of Furukawa (US Pub. 2002/0094004), and further in view of Ghosh et al. (G441a, US Pub. 2020/0127441).
Regarding claim 1, K228a discloses, "A lower Bragg reflection layer" (p. [0021] and Fig. 2, pt. 102). "An active layer disposed on a side of the lower Bragg reflection layer" (p. [0021] and Fig. 2, pts. 102 and 106). "An upper Bragg reflection layer disposed on a side of the active layer facing away from the lower Bragg reflection layer" (p. [0021] and Fig. 2, pts. 106 and 108). "Wherein a current confinement layer defining a light-emitting region is disposed in the active layer or outside the active layer" (p. [0026] and Fig. 2, pts. 106 and 110). "A light reservoir layer is disposed at at least one of a position between the lower Bragg reflection layer and the active layer or a position between the upper Bragg reflection layer and the active layer" (p. [0023] and Fig. 2, pts. 102, 104, and 106, where cavity extension region 104 performs the cavity extension function of the claimed light storage layer). "Wherein a number of current confinement layers is at least one" (p. [0026] and Fig. 2, pt. 110). "Wherein the current confinement layer is outside the active layer" (p. [0026] and Fig. 2, pts. 106 and 110, where the confinement layer is adjacent to the active layer). "The current confinement layer is disposed within two wavelengths from a side of the active layer along the direction perpendicular to the active layer" (p. [0026] and Fig. 2, pts. 106 and 110, where the confinement layer is adjacent to the active layer). K228a does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the light reservoir layer is configured to store light field energy." Takeuchi discloses, "Wherein the light reservoir layer is configured to store light field energy" (p. [0042] and Fig. 1B, pts. 191 and 192). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of K228a with the teachings of Takeuchi. In view of the teachings of K228a regarding a long cavity VCSEL, the additional specification that the antinode with the highest intensity is located away from the active region and the alternate construction of the cavity extension as a reflecting multilayer as taught by Takeuchi would enhance the teachings of K228a by indicating an intensity distribution that facilitates the effect of a long cavity length and by indicating that the cavity extension may suitably be constructed as a multilayer.
The combination of K228a and Takeuchi does not explicitly disclose, "An antireflection layer having an antireflection interface is disposed between the light reservoir layer and the active layer." "Wherein the antireflection layer is configured to increase a maximal light field intensity of the light reservoir layer to be higher than a maximal light field intensity of the active layer." Garnache discloses, "An antireflection layer having an antireflection interface is disposed between the light reservoir layer and the active layer" (col. 18, lines 26-34 and Fig. 4, pts. 118, 122, and 124, where the antireflection layer is placed between the active region and the cavity extension of K228a to prevent undesired reflections at that interface). "Wherein the antireflection layer is configured to increase a maximal light field intensity of the light reservoir layer to be higher than a maximal light field intensity of the active layer" (col. 18, lines 26-34 and Fig. 4, pt. 122, where the inclusion of an antireflection layer to prevent spurious reflections also allows enhancement of the desired effect of Takeuchi regarding intensity distribution). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a and Takeuchi with the teachings of Garnache. In view of the teachings of K228a regarding a long cavity VCSEL, the additional inclusion of an antireflective layer within a laser cavity and the additional inclusion of multiple quantum well regions within the active layer as taught by Garnache would enhance the teachings of K228a and Takeuchi by allowing undesired internal reflections due to abrupt refractive index transitions, such as between the active region and the cavity extension region, to be eliminated and by allowing for production of a higher output power.
The combination of K228a, Takeuchi, and Garnache does not explicitly disclose, "An optical path distance between a center of the current confinement layer along a direction perpendicular to the active layer and a nearest node of a standing wave light field is less than one tenth of a lasing wavelength." Furukawa discloses, "An optical path distance between a center of the current confinement layer along a direction perpendicular to the active layer and a nearest node of a standing wave light field is less than one tenth of a lasing wavelength" (p. [0043], [0066], and Fig. 5, pt. 111b). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a, Takeuchi, and Garnache with the teachings of Furukawa. In view of the teachings of K228a regarding a long cavity VCSEL having a current constriction region, the additional specification that the current constriction region should be positioned at a local minimum in the cavity mode as taught by Furukawa would enhance the teachings of K228a, Takeuchi, and Garnache by allowing scattering and absorption of light by the current constriction region to be minimized.
The combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, and Furukawa does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the small divergence angle denotes a divergence angle of fewer than 20 degree." G441a discloses, "Wherein the small divergence angle denotes a divergence angle of fewer than 20 degree" (p. [0007]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, and Furukawa with the teachings of G441a. In view of the teachings of K228a regarding a long cavity VCSEL and Garnache regarding the provision of multiple quantum well regions within the active layer, the additional adjustment of the cavity length to control divergence and the additional inclusion of tunnel junctions between quantum well regions as taught by G441a would enhance the teachings of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, and Furukawa by allowing the divergence of the laser to be reduced and by allowing more efficient operation within the quantum well regions.
Regarding claim 3, K228a discloses, "Wherein a number of current confinement layers is at least one" (p. [0026] and Fig. 2, pt. 110).
The combination of K228a, Takeuchi, and Garnache does not explicitly disclose, "A center of the current confinement layer along the direction perpendicular to the active layer is aligned with a node of the standing wave light field." Furukawa discloses, "A center of the current confinement layer along the direction perpendicular to the active layer is aligned with a node of the standing wave light field" (p. [0043], [0066], and Fig. 5, pt. 111b). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a, Takeuchi, and Garnache with the teachings of Furukawa for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 4, K228a discloses, "Wherein the current confinement layer comprises an oxide layer which is an epitaxially grown AlGaAs with a high Al content" (p. [0026] and Fig. 2, pt. 110). "An outer oxidized region of the oxide layer forms an insulating aluminum oxide film" (p. [0027] and Fig. 2, pt. 110A). "Wherein an unoxidized region of the oxide layer forms a light-emitting region in which an effective current is injected" (p. [0027] and Fig. 2, pt. 110B).
Regarding claim 5, The combination of K228a and Takeuchi does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein along a direction in which the active layer points to the light reservoir layer, the antireflection interface comprises at least one of a first antireflection interface or a second antireflection interface." "The first antireflection interface is between the light storage layer and the active layer and disposed at an interface position from a low refractive index to a high refractive index." "The second antireflection interface is between the light storage layer and the active layer and disposed at an interface position from the high refractive index to the low refractive index." "Wherein at least one of the following conditions is satisfied: an optical path distance between the first antireflection interface and a nearest antinode of a standing wave light field is less than one tenth of a lasing wavelength; or an optical path distance between the second antireflection interface and a nearest node of the standing wave light field is less than one tenth of the lasing wavelength." Garnache discloses, "Wherein along a direction in which the active layer points to the light reservoir layer, the antireflection interface comprises at least one of a first antireflection interface or a second antireflection interface" (col. 18, lines 26-34 and Fig. 4, pt. 122). "The first antireflection interface is between the light storage layer and the active layer and disposed at an interface position from a low refractive index to a high refractive index" (col. 18, lines 26-34 and Fig. 4, pt. 122). "The second antireflection interface is between the light storage layer and the active layer and disposed at an interface position from the high refractive index to the low refractive index" (col. 18, lines 26-34 and Fig. 4, pt. 122, where this interface is not required because Garnache teaches an interface corresponding to the first antireflection interface). "Wherein at least one of the following conditions is satisfied: an optical path distance between the first antireflection interface and a nearest antinode of a standing wave light field is less than one tenth of a lasing wavelength; or an optical path distance between the second antireflection interface and a nearest node of the standing wave light field is less than one tenth of the lasing wavelength" (col. 18, lines 26-34 and Fig. 4, pt. 122, where layer 122 is depicted as locating this interface at an antinode). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a and Takeuchi with the teachings of Garnache for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 8, The combination of K228a and Takeuchi does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the antireflection layer comprises one of the first antireflection interface and the second antireflection interface." "The one of the first antireflection interface and the second antireflection interface is disposed at a contact interface between the light reservoir layer and the active layer, or the one of the first antireflection interface and the second antireflection interface is an interface where a refractive index midpoint of a graded-refractive-index layer between the light reservoir layer and the active layer is located." Garnache discloses, "Wherein the antireflection layer comprises one of the first antireflection interface and the second antireflection interface" (col. 18, lines 26-34 and Fig. 4, pt. 122). "The one of the first antireflection interface and the second antireflection interface is disposed at a contact interface between the light reservoir layer and the active layer, or the one of the first antireflection interface and the second antireflection interface is an interface where a refractive index midpoint of a graded-refractive-index layer between the light reservoir layer and the active layer is located" (col. 18, lines 26-34 and Fig. 4, pts. 122 and 124). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a and Takeuchi with the teachings of Garnache for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 9, The combination of K228a and Takeuchi does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the antireflection layer comprises two antireflection interfaces." "One of the two antireflection interfaces is a contact interface between the light reservoir layer and the antireflection layer, or one of the antireflection interfaces is an interface where a refractive index midpoint of a graded-refractive-index layer between the light reservoir layer and the antireflection layer is located." "The other one of the two antireflection interfaces is a contact interface between the active layer and the antireflection layer, or the other one of the two antireflection interfaces is an interface where a refractive index midpoint of a graded-refractive-index layer between the active layer and the antireflection layer is located." Garnache discloses, "Wherein the antireflection layer comprises two antireflection interfaces" (col. 20, lines 4-16 and Fig. 4, pt. 122). "One of the two antireflection interfaces is a contact interface between the light reservoir layer and the antireflection layer, or one of the antireflection interfaces is an interface where a refractive index midpoint of a graded-refractive-index layer between the light reservoir layer and the antireflection layer is located" (col. 20, lines 4-16 and Fig. 4, pt. 122, where all interfaces in the antireflection layer are between the active region and the cavity extension of K228a). "The other one of the two antireflection interfaces is a contact interface between the active layer and the antireflection layer, or the other one of the two antireflection interfaces is an interface where a refractive index midpoint of a graded-refractive-index layer between the active layer and the antireflection layer is located" (col. 20, lines 4-16 and Fig. 4, pt. 122, where all interfaces in the antireflection layer are between the active region and the cavity extension of K228a). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a and Takeuchi with the teachings of Garnache for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 10, The combination of K228a and Takeuchi does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the two antireflection interfaces are the first antireflection interface and the second antireflection interface, respectively, and along a direction perpendicular to the active layer, an optical thickness between the two antireflection interfaces is an odd multiple of a quarter lasing wavelength, or, the two antireflection interfaces are both first antireflection interfaces, and along a direction perpendicular to the active layer, an optical thickness between the two antireflection interfaces is an integer multiple of a half lasing wavelength, or, the two antireflection interfaces are both second antireflection interfaces, and along a direction perpendicular to the active layer, an optical thickness between the two antireflection interfaces is an integer multiple of a half lasing wavelength." Garnache discloses, "Wherein the two antireflection interfaces are the first antireflection interface and the second antireflection interface, respectively, and along a direction perpendicular to the active layer, an optical thickness between the two antireflection interfaces is an odd multiple of a quarter lasing wavelength, or, the two antireflection interfaces are both first antireflection interfaces, and along a direction perpendicular to the active layer, an optical thickness between the two antireflection interfaces is an integer multiple of a half lasing wavelength, or, the two antireflection interfaces are both second antireflection interfaces, and along a direction perpendicular to the active layer, an optical thickness between the two antireflection interfaces is an integer multiple of a half lasing wavelength" (col. 20, lines 4-16 and Fig. 4, pt. 122, where there is an integer multiple of a half wavelength difference between the top and bottom of the antireflection layer). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a and Takeuchi with the teachings of Garnache for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 15, The combination of K228a and Takeuchi does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein an optical thickness of the active layer is an odd multiple of a quarter lasing wavelength." Garnache discloses, "Wherein an optical thickness of the active layer is an odd multiple of a quarter lasing wavelength" (col. 18, lines 45-50 and Fig. 4, pt. 124). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a and Takeuchi with the teachings of Garnache for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 16, The combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein a material of at least one of the upper Bragg reflection layer, the lower Bragg reflection layer, the antireflection layer, or the light reservoir layer is a dielectric material." The examiner takes Official Notice of the fact that it was known in the art to design a VCSEL such that one of the DBR reflectors is at least partially formed of dielectric materials rather than semiconductor materials so as to take advantage of the relatively larger refractive index contrast available to dielectric materials. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the VCSEL such that at least one of the DBR reflectors is formed of dielectric materials, since such a modification would allow for relatively larger refractive index contrast between layers.
Regarding claim 17, K228a discloses, "Wherein a material of at least one of the upper Bragg reflection layer, the lower Bragg reflection layer, the antireflection layer, or the light reservoir layer is a semiconductor material" (p. [0022] and Fig. 2, pts. 102 and 108).
Regarding claim 18, K228a discloses, "Wherein the active layer comprises at least one quantum well" (p. [0025] and Fig. 2, pt. 106).
The combination of K228a and Takeuchi does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein an optical path distance between a center of each of the at least one quantum well along a direction perpendicular to the active layer and a nearest antinode of a standing wave light field is less than one fifth of a lasing wavelength." "Wherein the active layer comprises more than one quantum well." "An optical path distance between a center position of an entire group of quantum wells and the nearest antinode of the standing wave light field is less than one tenth of the lasing wavelength." Garnache discloses, "Wherein an optical path distance between a center of each of the at least one quantum well along a direction perpendicular to the active layer and a nearest antinode of a standing wave light field is less than one fifth of a lasing wavelength" (col. 18, lines 45-50 and Fig. 4, pt. 130). "Wherein the active layer comprises more than one quantum well" (col. 18, lines 45-50 and Fig. 4, pt. 130). "An optical path distance between a center position of an entire group of quantum wells and the nearest antinode of the standing wave light field is less than one tenth of the lasing wavelength" (col. 18, lines 45-50 and Fig. 4, pt. 130). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a and Takeuchi with the teachings of Garnache for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 21, K228a discloses, "Wherein along a direction perpendicular to the active layer, a refractive index of the light reservoir layer is uniformly distributed" (p. [0023] and Fig. 2, pt. 106).
Regarding claim 22, K228a does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein along a direction perpendicular to the active layer, high refractive indexes and low refractive indexes of the light reservoir layer are alternately distributed." Takeuchi discloses, "Wherein along a direction perpendicular to the active layer, high refractive indexes and low refractive indexes of the light reservoir layer are alternately distributed" (p. [0039] and Fig. 1A, pt. 130). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of K228a with the teachings of Takeuchi for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 23, K228a does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the light reservoir layer comprises a middle Bragg reflection layer." "Wherein the middle Bragg reflection layer comprises a plurality of reflectors with an optical thickness of a quarter lasing wavelength." "The plurality of reflectors are alternately disposed according to high and low refractive indexes." Takeuchi discloses, "Wherein the light reservoir layer comprises a middle Bragg reflection layer" (p. [0039] and Fig. 1A, pt. 130). "Wherein the middle Bragg reflection layer comprises a plurality of reflectors with an optical thickness of a quarter lasing wavelength" (p. [0039] and Fig. 1A, pt. 130). "The plurality of reflectors are alternately disposed according to high and low refractive indexes" (p. [0039] and Fig. 1A, pt. 130). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of K228a with the teachings of Takeuchi for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 24, The combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein a refractive index contrast of the middle Bragg reflection layer in each half-wavelength period is lower than a corresponding refractive index contrast of the lower Bragg reflection layer and/or the upper Bragg reflection layer in each half-wavelength period." Takeuchi teaches that one of ordinary skill in the art may select the refractive index contrast of the middle Bragg reflection layer to be different than the refractive index contrast in the adjacent Bragg reflection layer (p. [0046]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust the relative refractive index contrasts within the Bragg reflection layers to within the claimed range so as to adjust the reflectivity of each Bragg reflection layer, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 25, K228a discloses, "A substrate" (p. [0021] and Fig. 2, pt. 100). "Wherein the substrate is disposed on a side of the lower Bragg reflection layer facing away from the active layer" (p. [0021] and Fig. 2, pts. 100, 102, and 106). "A material of the substrate comprises GaAs or Si" (p. [0021] and Fig. 2, pt. 100).
Regarding claim 27, K228a discloses, "Wherein a light emission surface or a main light emission surface of a laser is disposed on a side of the lower Bragg reflection layer facing away from the active layer, and reflectance of the upper Bragg reflection layer is higher than reflectance of the lower Bragg reflection layer; or, a light emission surface or a main light emission surface of a laser is disposed on a side of the upper Bragg reflection layer facing away from the active layer, and reflectance of the lower Bragg reflection layer is higher than reflectance of the upper Bragg reflection layer" (p. [0044]).
Regarding claim 29, K228a discloses, "A VCSEL chip with a small divergence angle comprising a plurality of [the] VCSELs with the small divergence angle" (p. [0046]). "Wherein the plurality of VCSELs with the small divergence angle form an area array arrangement which is a regular arrangement, a random arrangement, or a plurality of subarrays for addressing" (p. [0046]).
Claims 6, 7, and 11 through 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over K228a, in view of Takeuchi, in view of Garnache, in view of Furukawa, in view of G441a, and further in view of Hirose et al. (Hirose, US Pub. 2018/0026419).
Regarding claim 6, The combination of K228a and Takeuchi does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the first antireflection interface is at an antinode of the standing wave light field." Garnache discloses, "Wherein the first antireflection interface is at an antinode of the standing wave light field" (col. 18, lines 26-34 and Fig. 4, pt. 122, where layer 122 is depicted as locating this interface at an antinode). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a and Takeuchi with the teachings of Garnache for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
The combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a does not explicitly disclose, "The second antireflection interface is at a node of the standing wave light field." Hirose discloses, "The second antireflection interface is at a node of the standing wave light field" (p. [0125], where forming the antireflection layer of Garnache as a multilayer in this manner naturally results in the interfaces corresponding to the second antireflection interfaces being located at nodes in the standing wave light field). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a with the teachings of Hirose. In view of the teachings of K228a regarding a long cavity VCSEL and Garnache regarding an antireflective layer within a laser cavity, the alternate construction of the antireflection layer as a multilayer as taught by Hirose would enhance the teachings of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a by allowing for a suitably alternate arrangement of layers that provides the desired antireflection feature.
Regarding claim 7, The combination of K228a and Takeuchi does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein along the direction in which the active layer points to the light reservoir layer, an optical distance between the first antireflection interface of the antireflection layer and any interface which is from the low refractive index to the high refractive index and in one of the upper Bragg reflection layer and the lower Bragg reflection layer which is located on an opposite side to the light reservoir layer with respect to the active layer is an integer multiple of a half wavelength." "An optical distance between the first antireflection interface of the antireflection layer and any interface which is from the low refractive index to the high refractive index and in an other one of the upper Bragg reflection layer and the lower Bragg reflection layer which is located on a same side of the light reservoir layer with respect to the active layer is an odd multiple of a quarter lasing wavelength." Garnache discloses, "Wherein along the direction in which the active layer points to the light reservoir layer, an optical distance between the first antireflection interface of the antireflection layer and any interface which is from the low refractive index to the high refractive index and in one of the upper Bragg reflection layer and the lower Bragg reflection layer which is located on an opposite side to the light reservoir layer with respect to the active layer is an integer multiple of a half wavelength" (Fig. 4, pt. 122, where configuring an AR film to locate the interface from low refractive index to high refractive index at a node in the manner of Garnache while also locating the interface from low refractive index to high refractive index in the lower DBR at a node as in Figures 1 and 2 of Takeuchi necessitates these interfaces to be separated by an integer multiple of half wavelengths). "An optical distance between the first antireflection interface of the antireflection layer and any interface which is from the low refractive index to the high refractive index and in an other one of the upper Bragg reflection layer and the lower Bragg reflection layer which is located on a same side of the light reservoir layer with respect to the active layer is an odd multiple of a quarter lasing wavelength" (Fig. 4, pt. 122, where configuring an AR film to locate the interface from low refractive index to high refractive index at a node in the manner of Garnache while also locating the interface from high refractive index to low refractive index in the lower DBR at a antinode as in Figures 1 and 2 of Takeuchi necessitates these interfaces to be separated by an odd multiple of quarter wavelengths). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a and Takeuchi with the teachings of Garnache for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
The combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a does not explicitly disclose, "An optical distance between the second antireflection interface of the antireflection layer and any interface which is from the high refractive index to the low refractive index and in the one of the upper Bragg reflection layer and the lower Bragg reflection layer which is located on the opposite side to the light reservoir layer with respect to the active layer is the integer multiple of the half wavelength." "An optical distance between the second antireflection interface of the antireflection layer and any interface which is from the high refractive index to the low refractive index and in other one of the upper Bragg reflection layer and the lower Bragg reflection layer which is located on the same side of the light reservoir layer with respect to the active layer is the odd multiple of the quarter lasing wavelength." Hirose discloses, "An optical distance between the second antireflection interface of the antireflection layer and any interface which is from the high refractive index to the low refractive index and in the one of the upper Bragg reflection layer and the lower Bragg reflection layer which is located on the opposite side to the light reservoir layer with respect to the active layer is the integer multiple of the half wavelength" (p. [0125], where forming the antireflection layer of Garnache as a multilayer in this manner naturally results second interfaces which are shifted by a quarter wavelength relative to the first interfaces of Garnache). "An optical distance between the second antireflection interface of the antireflection layer and any interface which is from the high refractive index to the low refractive index and in other one of the upper Bragg reflection layer and the lower Bragg reflection layer which is located on the same side of the light reservoir layer with respect to the active layer is the odd multiple of the quarter lasing wavelength" (p. [0125], where forming the antireflection layer of Garnache as a multilayer in this manner naturally results second interfaces which are shifted by a quarter wavelength relative to the first interfaces of Garnache). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a with the teachings of Hirose for the reasons provided above regarding claim 6.
Regarding claim 11, The combination of K228a and Takeuchi does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein a number of antireflection interfaces comprised in the antireflection layer is greater than or equal to three." "Along the direction in which the active layer points to the light reservoir layer, the first one of the antireflection interfaces is a contact interface between the active layer and the antireflection layer, or the first one of the antireflection interfaces is an interface where a refractive index midpoint of a graded-refractive-index layer between the active layer and the antireflection layer is located." "The (m+n)-th one of the antireflection interfaces is a contact interface between the light reservoir layer and the antireflection layer, or the (m+n)-th one of the antireflection interfaces is an interface where a refractive index midpoint of a graded-refractive-index layer between the light reservoir layer and the antireflection layer is located." Garnache discloses, "Wherein a number of antireflection interfaces comprised in the antireflection layer is greater than or equal to three" (col. 20, lines 4-16 and Fig. 4, pt. 122, where the final antireflection layer has three interfaces). "Along the direction in which the active layer points to the light reservoir layer, the first one of the antireflection interfaces is a contact interface between the active layer and the antireflection layer, or the first one of the antireflection interfaces is an interface where a refractive index midpoint of a graded-refractive-index layer between the active layer and the antireflection layer is located" (col. 20, lines 4-16 and Fig. 4, pt. 122, where all interfaces in the antireflection layer are between the active region and the cavity extension of K228a). "The (m+n)-th one of the antireflection interfaces is a contact interface between the light reservoir layer and the antireflection layer, or the (m+n)-th one of the antireflection interfaces is an interface where a refractive index midpoint of a graded-refractive-index layer between the light reservoir layer and the antireflection layer is located" (col. 20, lines 4-16 and Fig. 4, pt. 122, where all interfaces in the antireflection layer are between the active region and the cavity extension of K228a). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a and Takeuchi with the teachings of Garnache for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
The combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a does not explicitly disclose, "The antireflection layer comprises m first antireflection interfaces and n second antireflection interfaces, wherein m is an integer greater than or equal to one, and n is an integer greater than or equal to one." "One of a first one of the antireflection interfaces and an (m+n)-th one of the antireflection interfaces is the first antireflection interface." "The other one of the first one of the antireflection interfaces and the (m+n)-th one of the antireflection interfaces is the second antireflection interface." "A second one to an (m+n-1)-th one of the antireflection interfaces are a contact interface between two adjacent high- and low-refractive-index sublayers in the antireflection layer, or a second one to an (m+n-1)-th one of the antireflection interfaces are an interface where a refractive index midpoint of a graded-refractive-index layer between high- and low-refractive-index sublayers is located." Hirose discloses, "The antireflection layer comprises m first antireflection interfaces and n second antireflection interfaces, wherein m is an integer greater than or equal to one, and n is an integer greater than or equal to one" (p. [0125], where formation of the antireflection layer of Garnache as a multilayer in this manner necessarily results in this number of these interfaces). "One of a first one of the antireflection interfaces and an (m+n)-th one of the antireflection interfaces is the first antireflection interface" (p. [0125], where formation of the antireflection layer of Garnache as a multilayer in this manner necessarily results in this arrangement of these interfaces). "The other one of the first one of the antireflection interfaces and the (m+n)-th one of the antireflection interfaces is the second antireflection interface" (p. [0125], where formation of the antireflection layer of Garnache as a multilayer in this manner necessarily results in this arrangement of these interfaces). "A second one to an (m+n-1)-th one of the antireflection interfaces are a contact interface between two adjacent high- and low-refractive-index sublayers in the antireflection layer, or a second one to an (m+n-1)-th one of the antireflection interfaces are an interface where a refractive index midpoint of a graded-refractive-index layer between high- and low-refractive-index sublayers is located" (p. [0125], where formation of the antireflection layer of Garnache as a multilayer in this manner necessarily results in this configuration of these interfaces). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a with the teachings of Hirose for the reasons provided above regarding claim 6.
The combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, G441a, and Hirose does not explicitly disclose, "An optical thickness of the antireflection layer is an odd multiple of a quarter lasing wavelength." The examiner takes Official Notice of the fact that it was known in the art to size a layer desired to suppress reflections according to the relative refractive indices on either side of the antireflection layer. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ an antireflection layer having an odd multiple of quarter wavelengths, since such a modification allows a reflection suppressing transition to layers having a refractive index higher than the lowest refractive index of the antireflection layer.
Regarding claim 12, The combination of K228a and Takeuchi does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein a number of antireflection interfaces comprised in the antireflection layer is greater than or equal to three." "The antireflection layer comprises m first antireflection interfaces and n second antireflection interfaces, wherein m is an integer greater than or equal to zero, and n is an integer greater than or equal to zero." "Both a first one of the antireflection interfaces and an (m+n)-th one of the antireflection interfaces are first antireflection interfaces or second antireflection interfaces." "An optical thickness of the antireflection layer is an integer multiple of a half lasing wavelength." "Along the direction in which the active layer points to the light reservoir layer, the first one of the antireflection interfaces is a contact interface between the active layer and the antireflection layer, or the first one of the antireflection interfaces is an interface where a refractive index midpoint of a graded-refractive-index layer between the active layer and the antireflection layer is located." "The (m+n)-th one of the antireflection interfaces is a contact interface between the light reservoir layer and the antireflection layer, or the (m+n)-th one of the antireflection interfaces is an interface where a refractive index midpoint of a graded-refractive-index layer between the light reservoir layer and the antireflection layer is located." Garnache discloses, "Wherein a number of antireflection interfaces comprised in the antireflection layer is greater than or equal to three" (col. 20, lines 4-16 and Fig. 4, pt. 122, where the final antireflection layer has three interfaces). "The antireflection layer comprises m first antireflection interfaces and n second antireflection interfaces, wherein m is an integer greater than or equal to zero, and n is an integer greater than or equal to zero" (col. 18, lines 26-34 and Fig. 4, pt. 122). "Both a first one of the antireflection interfaces and an (m+n)-th one of the antireflection interfaces are first antireflection interfaces or second antireflection interfaces" (col. 20, lines 4-16 and Fig. 4, pt. 122). "An optical thickness of the antireflection layer is an integer multiple of a half lasing wavelength" (col. 20, lines 4-16 and Fig. 4, pt. 122). "Along the direction in which the active layer points to the light reservoir layer, the first one of the antireflection interfaces is a contact interface between the active layer and the antireflection layer, or the first one of the antireflection interfaces is an interface where a refractive index midpoint of a graded-refractive-index layer between the active layer and the antireflection layer is located" (col. 20, lines 4-16 and Fig. 4, pt. 122, where all interfaces in the antireflection layer are between the active region and the cavity extension of K228a). "The (m+n)-th one of the antireflection interfaces is a contact interface between the light reservoir layer and the antireflection layer, or the (m+n)-th one of the antireflection interfaces is an interface where a refractive index midpoint of a graded-refractive-index layer between the light reservoir layer and the antireflection layer is located" (col. 20, lines 4-16 and Fig. 4, pt. 122, where all interfaces in the antireflection layer are between the active region and the cavity extension of K228a). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a and Takeuchi with the teachings of Garnache for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
The combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a does not explicitly disclose, "A second one to an (m+n-1)-th one of the antireflection interfaces are a contact interface between two adjacent high- and low-refractive-index sublayers in the antireflection layer, or a second one to an (m+n-1)-th one of the antireflection interfaces are an interface where a refractive index midpoint of a graded-refractive-index layer between high- and low-refractive-index sublayers is located." Hirose discloses, "A second one to an (m+n-1)-th one of the antireflection interfaces are a contact interface between two adjacent high- and low-refractive-index sublayers in the antireflection layer, or a second one to an (m+n-1)-th one of the antireflection interfaces are an interface where a refractive index midpoint of a graded-refractive-index layer between high- and low-refractive-index sublayers is located" (p. [0125], where formation of the antireflection layer of Garnache as a multilayer in this manner necessarily results in this configuration of these interfaces). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a with the teachings of Hirose for the reasons provided above regarding claim 6.
Regarding claim 13, The combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein a distance between any two first antireflection interfaces or a distance between any two second antireflection interfaces is the integer multiple of the half lasing wavelength." "A distance between any first antireflection interface and any second antireflection interface is the odd multiple of the quarter lasing wavelength." Hirose discloses, "Wherein a distance between any two first antireflection interfaces or a distance between any two second antireflection interfaces is the integer multiple of the half lasing wavelength" (p. [0125], where formation of the antireflection layer of Garnache as a multilayer in this manner necessarily results in interfaces having this spacing). "A distance between any first antireflection interface and any second antireflection interface is the odd multiple of the quarter lasing wavelength" (p. [0125]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a with the teachings of Hirose for the reasons provided above regarding claim 6.
Regarding claim 14, The combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the first antireflection interfaces and the second antireflection interfaces are alternately disposed." "An optical thickness between two adjacent antireflection interfaces is the quarter lasing wavelength." Hirose discloses, "Wherein the first antireflection interfaces and the second antireflection interfaces are alternately disposed" (p. [0125]). "An optical thickness between two adjacent antireflection interfaces is the quarter lasing wavelength" (p. [0125]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a with the teachings of Hirose for the reasons provided above regarding claim 6.
Claims 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over K228a, in view of Takeuchi, in view of Garnache, in view of Furukawa, in view of G441a, and further in view of Ghosh et al. (G915b, US Pub. 2017/0256915).
Regarding claim 19, The combination of K228a and Takeuchi does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the active layer comprises at least two active sublayers." "Each of the active sublayers comprises the at least one quantum well." Garnache discloses, "Wherein the active layer comprises at least two active sublayers" (col. 18, lines 45-50 and Fig. 4, pts. 124 and 130). "Each of the active sublayers comprises the at least one quantum well" (col. 18, lines 45-50 and Fig. 4, pt. 130). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a and Takeuchi with the teachings of Garnache for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
The combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, and Furukawa does not explicitly disclose, "Two adjacent active sublayers are connected by a tunnel junction." G441a discloses, "Two adjacent active sublayers are connected by a tunnel junction" (p. [0032] and Fig. 4, pts. 436 and 437). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, and Furukawa with the teachings of G441a for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
The combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a does not explicitly disclose, "An optical path distance between the tunnel junction and a nearest node of the standing wave light field is less than one tenth of the lasing wavelength." G915b discloses, "An optical path distance between the tunnel junction and a nearest node of the standing wave light field is less than one tenth of the lasing wavelength" (p. [0041] and Fig. 2, pt. 210). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a with the teachings of G915b. In view of the teachings of K228a regarding a long cavity VCSEL, Garnache regarding the provision of multiple quantum well regions within the active layer, and the teachings of G441a regarding the placement of tunnel junctions between quantum well regions, the additional placement of the tunnel junctions at nodes of the standing wave as taught by G915b would enhance the teachings of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a by allowing the risk of absorbing light in the tunnel junctions to be minimized.
Regarding claim 20, The combination of K228a and Takeuchi does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the antireflection layer and the light reservoir layer are disposed on at least one side of each of the at least two active sublayers." "At most one current confinement layer exists in each of the at least active sublayer." Garnache discloses, "Wherein the antireflection layer and the light reservoir layer are disposed on at least one side of each of the at least two active sublayers" (col. 18, lines 45-50 and Fig. 4, pts. 122 and 130). "At most one current confinement layer exists in each of the at least active sublayer" (Fig. 4, where no confinement layers are present between the active sublayers). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a and Takeuchi with the teachings of Garnache for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
The combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a does not explicitly disclose, "The tunnel junction is disposed at a zero value position of a standing wave light field." G915b discloses, "The tunnel junction is disposed at a zero value position of a standing wave light field" (p. [0041] and Fig. 2, pt. 210). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a with the teachings of G915b for the reasons provided above regarding claim 19.
Claims 26 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over K228a, in view of Takeuchi, in view of Garnache, in view of Furukawa, in view of G441a, and further in view of Kondo (K582b, US Pub. 2002/0044582).
Regarding claim 26, The combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a does not explicitly disclose, "A transparent superstrate." "Wherein the superstrate is disposed on a side of the upper Bragg reflection layer facing away from the active layer." "A material of the transparent superstrate comprises a sapphire, quartz, glass, or a transparent polymer." K582b discloses, "A transparent superstrate" (p. [0061] and Fig. 1, pt. 111). "Wherein the superstrate is disposed on a side of the upper Bragg reflection layer facing away from the active layer" (p. [0061] and Fig. 1, pts. 103, 104, and 111). "A material of the transparent superstrate comprises a sapphire, quartz, glass, or a transparent polymer" (p. [0061] and Fig. 1, pt. 111). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a with the teachings of K582b. In view of the teachings of K228a regarding a long cavity VCSEL, the additional inclusion of a lens formed over the emission surface as taught by K582b would enhance the teachings of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a by allowing the emitted light to be focused by an integrated element.
Regarding claim 28, The combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a does not explicitly disclose, "A microlens integrated on a side of the light emission surface and configured to reduce a divergence angle of a far field." K582b discloses, "A microlens integrated on a side of the light emission surface and configured to reduce a divergence angle of a far field" (p. [0061] and Fig. 1, pt. 111). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a with the teachings of K582b for the reasons provided above regarding claim 26.
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over K228a, in view of Takeuchi, in view of Garnache, in view of Furukawa, in view of G441a, and further in view of Weichmann et al. (Weichmann, US Pub. 2020/0403376).
Regarding claim 30, The combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a does not explicitly disclose, "A light source for a light detection and ranging (LIDAR) system comprising at least one [of the] VCSEL with the small divergence angle." Weichmann discloses, "A light source for a light detection and ranging (LIDAR) system comprising at least one [of the] VCSEL with the small divergence angle" (p. [0022]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a with the teachings of Weichmann. In view of the teachings of K228a regarding a long cavity VCSEL, the additional application of VCSELs to the field of LIDAR as taught by Weichmann would enhance the teachings of K228a, Takeuchi, Garnache, Furukawa, and G441a by indicating that the VCSEL according to these combined teachings may suitably be employed in a LIDAR system.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Naone et al. (Naone, US Pub. 2002/0150135) is cited for teaching a VCSEL in which the length of the cavity is adjusted to reduce divergence.
Sekiya et al. (Sekiya, US Pub. 2003/0053501) is cited for teaching a VCSEL in which the divergence is less than 20 degrees.
Downing et al. (Downing, US Pub. 2012/0025714) is cited for teaching a VCSEL in which the divergence is less than 20 degrees.
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 Sean P Hagan whose telephone number is (571)270-1242. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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, MinSun Harvey can be reached at 571-272-1835. 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.
/SEAN P HAGAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2828