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 .
Response to Amendment
Examiner acknowledges amending of claims 1-2, 7, 10, 16-17, 19-20, and figure 7. Note, claim 2 marked “Original” but clearly amended + different from previous version of claim 2, dated 11/3/22. See 37 CFR 1.121 (c). Drawing objection withdrawn. All claim objections withdrawn. All claim 112b rejections withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 20 (arguments also apply to independent claim 19) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument (Remarks pgs. 8-9, added limitation “a drop port of the microresonator is optically coupled to a feedback loop to selectively return light toward the optical source”). Ma (US-20190199062-A1) used to reject amended claims 1, 19-20.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 8-13, 16, 18, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feng (US-8831049-B2) in view of Ma (US-20190199062-A1).
In Feng, “optical source” is interpreted as all portions of fig. 3a/b 320 that output light except for a portion equivalent to “additional chip” in instant application claim 12.
Regarding claim 1, Feng discloses a device (figs. 3a/b) comprising: an optical source configured to output light (fig. 3a/b optical source portion within chip 320 outputs light, col. 6 lines 30-35); a waveguide optically coupled to the optical source and configured to carry the light (fig. 3a/b waveguide 304+305+305A optically coupled to portion of 320 and configured to carry light, col. 2 lines 30-35, col. 5 lines 20-35 (same for 304+305+305A/portion of 320)); a feedback portion configured to reflect the light back to the optical source via the waveguide (fig. 3a/b feedback portion 315+304A, col. 5 lines 60-67), wherein the feedback portion comprises a microresonator optically coupled to the waveguide (fig. 3a/b 315+304A comprises microresonator 315+304A optically coupled to 304, col. 5 lines 60-67); and one or more tuning elements configured to tune one or more of the microresonator or the waveguide to cause constructive interference between the reflected light and the light of the optical source (fig. 3a/b heater/tuning element 316 tunes 315 to cause constructive interference, “microring resonator” operates using constructive interference and resonant wavelength adjusted by heater, col. 4 lines 30-35, col. 6 lines 15-27), resulting in optical emission of both the reflected light and the light of the optical source from an end of the waveguide (light emitted from distal end of 305A, col. 4 lines 30-35, col. 6 lines 20-30).
Feng does not disclose and wherein a drop port of the microresonator is optically coupled to a feedback loop to selectively return light toward the optical source.
Ma discloses an external cavity laser with a Sagnac feedback loop optically coupled to a drop port of a microring resonator (figs. 1+2, fig. 3b 65 optically coupled to 56/57/58, 0021, 0031, see instant application figure 1a 112).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a circular (loop) feedback structure coupled to the microresonator instead of the straight/planar reflector to eliminate/reduce the need for a reflective coating as reflection would be performed by side walls of interferometer due to lower angle of incidence.
PNG
media_image1.png
788
1334
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Modified fig. 3b (one rough example of proposed modification)
Regarding claim 2, modified Feng discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the feedback loop is further configured to receive light from the microresonator and provide the reflected light back to the microresonator (fig. 3a + mod. Fig. 3b added feedback loop receives light from 315+304A and provides reflected light back to 315+304A, col. 6 lines 25-27, see also Ma figs. 1+2, fig. 3b loop 65 optically coupled to 56/57/58, 0021, 0031, see instant application figure 1a 112).
Regarding claim 4, modified Feng discloses the device of claim 2, wherein the feedback loop is optically coupled to a side of the microresonator opposite of a side of the microresonator coupled to the waveguide (annotated + modified fig. 3b feedback loop optically coupled to Side 1 of 315+304A opposite Side 2 of 315+304A coupled to 304/305/305A).
PNG
media_image2.png
650
954
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig. 3b
Regarding claim 8, modified Feng discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the optical source comprises a Fabry-Perot laser diode (col. 5 lines 7-10, same for figs. 3a/b portion of 320).
Regarding claim 9, modified Feng discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the optical source emits laser light (col. 5 lines 7-10, same for portion of 320).
Regarding claim 10, modified Feng discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the optical source is configured to output one or more of visible light, near infrared light, or light in the range of 400 nm to 800 nm (“633 nm” col. 5 lines 9-12).
Regarding claim 11, modified Feng discloses the device of claim 1, further comprising an integrated chip comprising one or more of the optical source, the waveguide, the microresonator, or the one or more tuning elements (fig. 3b integrated chip 300 comprises portion of 320, 304/305/305A, 315+304A, 316, col. 5 lines 55-61).
Regarding claim 12, modified Feng discloses the device of claim 11, further comprising an additional chip comprising the optical source and coupled to the integrated chip (fig. 3b portion of chip 320 corresponding to additional chip comprises optical source/portion of 320 not corresponding to additional chip, “optical source” is on a separate “chip”, different from the integrated chip 300).
Regarding claim 13, modified Feng discloses the device of claim 11, wherein the integrated chip comprises the optical source (fig. 3b 300 comprises portion of 320, col. 5 lines 55-61).
“integrated chip” 300 comprises 320 which comprises optical source (portion of 320).
Regarding claim 16, modified Feng discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the one or more tuning elements comprise a tuning element disposed on at least a portion of the microresonator (fig. 3b tuning element/heater 316 disposed on 315+304A), wherein the tuning element is configured to tune the microresonator to align its resonance to a wavelength of the optical source (fig. 3b 316 configured to tune 315+304A for purposes of resonance alignment with (portion of) 320 emitted wavelength, col. 4 lines 30-35, col. 6 lines 15-25).
Regarding claim 18, modified Feng discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the one or more tuning elements comprise one or more of electro-optic modulators or heaters (fig. 3b 316 is heater, col. 6 lines 15-20).
Regarding claim 20, Feng discloses a method comprising: causing an optical source to output light (fig. 3a/b optical source portion within chip 320 outputs light, col. 6 lines 30-35); supplying, via a waveguide optically coupled to the optical source, the light to a feedback portion (fig. 3a/b waveguide 304+305+305A optically coupled to portion of 320 and supplies light to feedback portion 315+304A, col. 2 lines 30-35, col. 5 lines 20-35 (same for 304+305+305A/portion of 320, col. 5 lines 60-67); reflecting, via the feedback portion, the light back to the optical source via the waveguide (fig. 3a/b 315+304A reflects light back to portion of 320 via 304+305+305A, col. 5 lines 60-67), wherein the feedback portion comprises a microresonator optically coupled to the waveguide (fig. 3a/b 315+304A comprises microresonator 315+304A optically coupled to 304, col. 5 lines 60-67), and tuning one or more tuning elements configured to tune one or more of the microresonator or the waveguide to cause constructive interference between the reflected light and light of the optical source (fig. 3a/b heater/tuning element 316 tuned 315+304A to cause constructive interference, “microring resonator” operates using constructive interference and resonant wavelength adjusted by heater, col. 4 lines 30-35, col. 6 lines 15-27), resulting in optical emission of both the reflected light and the light of the optical source from an end of the waveguide (light emitted from distal end of 305A, col. 4 lines 30-35, col. 6 lines 20-30).
Feng does not disclose and wherein a drop port of the microresonator is optically coupled to a feedback loop to selectively return light toward the optical source.
Ma discloses an external cavity laser with a Sagnac feedback loop optically coupled to a drop port of a microring resonator (figs. 1+2, fig. 3b 65 optically coupled to 56/57/58, 0021, 0031, see instant application figure 1a 112).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a circular (loop) feedback structure coupled to the microresonator instead of the straight/planar reflector to eliminate/reduce the need for a reflective coating as reflection would be performed by side walls of interferometer due to lower angle of incidence.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feng in view of Ma and Lealman (US-20190296517-A1).
Regarding claim 3, modified Feng discloses the device of claim 2.
Modified Feng does not disclose wherein the feedback loop comprises one or more of a multimode- interferometer or Y splitter.
Lealman discloses a controllable output wavelength laser with a 2x2 MMI or Y-splitter used as a splitter (fig. 2 laser 200 with 2x2 MMI or y-splitter, 0037).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use one or more of a 2x2 multimode-interferometer or Y splitter in the feedback loop to provide best performance/compatibility with loop.
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feng in view of Ma and Welch (US-20080031626-A1).
Regarding claim 5, modified Feng discloses the device of claim 1, wherein one or more of the optical source, the waveguide, the feedback portion, or the one or more tuning elements comprise a light emitting element (fig. 3b portion of 320, 304/305/305A, 315+304A, 316 comprise light emitting element, col. 5 lines 55-60, col. 6 lines 25-30).
Modified Feng does not disclose a plurality of light emitting elements, wherein each of the plurality of light emitting elements are configured to output a different wavelength of light.
Welch discloses a photonic integrated circuit chip for WDM/DWDM networks with a plurality of light emitting elements that each emit at a different wavelength and all light emitting elements disposed on the same chip (fig. 9 chip 10 contains plurality of DFB lasers each emitting at different wavelength, 0080, 0171 lines 1-7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a plurality of light emitting elements on the same chip, wherein each of the plurality of light emitting elements are configured to output a different wavelength of light to allow for a plurality of wavelengths to be outputted for use in a greater number of optical applications while minimizing crosstalk (Welch 0068 lines 1-7, final 7 lines). Adding all emitters on same chip would allow for easier transport of device and improved positional consistency between different emitters.
Regarding claim 6, modified Feng discloses the device of claim 5, wherein each of the plurality of light emitting elements are disposed on a single integrated chip (fig. 9 each DFB on single 10).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feng in view of Ma, Welch, and Shi (US-20220345220-A1).
Regarding claim 7, modified Feng discloses the device of claim 5.
Modified Feng does not disclose wherein the plurality of light emitting elements together configure the device to output light along a full range of wavelengths from 400 nm to 800 nm.
Shi discloses a multi-color visible light source with micro-resonators configured to generate visible light (figs. 8+9, Abstract, 0055, 0076).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to output light along a full range of wavelengths from 400 nm to 800 nm as outputting light in visible wavelength range would allow for a way to confirm proper operation using only naked eye observations.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feng in view of Ma (2019) and Ma (US-20050025199-A1), hereinafter "Ma1".
Regarding claim 14, modified Feng discloses the device of claim 1.
Modified Feng does not disclose wherein the microresonator has a cross-sectional width that tapers along a circumference of microresonator such that a width of the microresonator is narrower at a coupling region of the microresonator and the waveguide than at a mid-point of the microresonator.
Ma1 discloses a wavelength tunable laser with a ring resonator coupled to linear waveguides, where the linear waveguides have a tapered narrower cross-sectional width within a coupling region than outside the coupling region (fig. 2A 24 and 26 narrower width in 27 than outside 27, 0062).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to ensure the microresonator has a cross-sectional width that tapers along a circumference of microresonator such that a width of the microresonator is narrower at a coupling region of the microresonator and the waveguide than at a mid-point of the microresonator by making the non-coupling regions of the microresonator thicker than the coupling regions to provide a higher Q value within the non-coupling regions of the resonator and reduce losses (Ma1 0099).
Modification makes non-coupling regions of resonator thicker rather than making coupling regions thinner, results in same final modified resonator.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feng in view of Ma (2019), Ma1 (2005), and Henry (US-5719976-A).
Regarding claim 15, modified Feng discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the microresonator has a first cross-sectional width at a coupling region of the microresonator and the waveguide and a second cross-sectional width at a mid-point of the microresonator (fig. 3a/b 315+304A has first cross-sectional width at coupling region of 315 and second cross-sectional width at non-coupling region/mid-point of 315, first and second cross-sectional widths are equal).
Modified Feng does not disclose wherein the first cross-sectional width allows only a single mode of light and the second cross-sectional width has a decreased scattering loss in comparison the first cross-sectional width.
Ma1 discloses a wavelength tunable laser with a ring resonator coupled to linear waveguides, where the linear waveguides have a tapered narrower cross-sectional width within a coupling region than outside the coupling region (fig. 2A 24 and 26 narrower width in 27 than outside 27, 0062).
Henry discloses waveguides with cross-sectional widths smaller in coupling regions than in non-coupling regions with an explicit goal of maximizing optical confinement and minimizing propagation loss where necessary (thicker non-coupling regions) while still maintaining single mode operation where necessary (thinner coupling regions) (fig. 1 waveguides thinner in coupling regions 22, 24, 26 and thicker in non-coupling regions, col. 2 lines 1-5, col. 4 lines 40-50, col. 6 lines 40-45).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to ensure the first cross-sectional width allows only a single mode of light and the second cross-sectional width has a decreased scattering loss in comparison the first cross-sectional width to improve efficiency of device by improving optical confinement and decreasing propagation loss, and to maintain single mode output to provide consistent operation and simplify use (Henry col. 2 lines 1-5).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feng in view of Ma and Van Rees (US-20220131342-A1).
Regarding claim 17, modified Feng discloses the device of claim 1.
Modified Feng does not disclose wherein the one or more tuning elements comprise a tuning element disposed on at least a portion of the waveguide between the optical source and the microresonator, wherein the tuning element is configured to adjust a phase of the reflected light to interfere constructively with the light of the optical source.
Van Rees discloses a tunable external-cavity laser with a tuning element/heater disposed on a waveguide between an optical source and a microring resonator configured to adjust a phase the reflected light to interfere constructively with the light of the optical source (fig. 2 heater 220-3 on waveguide between gain medium 202 and microring resonator MRR1, 0052-0057).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a tuning element disposed on at least a portion of the waveguide between the optical source and the microresonator, wherein the tuning element is configured to adjust a phase of the reflected light to interfere constructively with the light of the optical source to enable additional wavelength tuning of laser in an analogous “phase section” (Van Rees 0056).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feng in view of Ma and Marron (US-6690690-B2).
Regarding claim 19, Feng discloses a system comprising: one or more devices (figs. 3a/b, one device) comprising: an optical source configured to output light (fig. 3a/b optical source portion within chip 320 outputs light, col. 6 lines 30-35); a waveguide optically coupled to the optical source and configured to carry the light (fig. 3a/b waveguide 304+305+305A optically coupled to portion of 320 and configured to carry light, col. 2 lines 30-35, col. 5 lines 20-35 (same for 304+305+305A/portion of 320)); a feedback portion configured to reflect the light back to the optical source via the waveguide (fig. 3a/b feedback portion 315+304A, col. 5 lines 60-67), wherein the feedback portion comprises a microresonator optically coupled to the waveguide (fig. 3a/b 315+304A comprises microresonator 315+304A optically coupled to 304, col. 5 lines 60-67), and one or more tuning elements configured to tune one or more of the microresonator or the waveguide to cause constructive interference between the reflected light and the light of the optical source (fig. 3a/b heater/tuning element 316 tunes 315+304A to cause constructive interference, “microring resonator” operates using constructive interference and resonant wavelength adjusted by heater, col. 4 lines 30-35, col. 6 lines 15-27), resulting in optical emission of both the reflected light and the light of the optical source from an end of the waveguide (light emitted from distal end of 305A, col. 4 lines 30-35, col. 6 lines 20-30).
Feng does not disclose and wherein a drop port of the microresonator is optically coupled to a feedback loop to selectively return light toward the optical source.
Ma discloses an external cavity laser with a Sagnac feedback loop optically coupled to a drop port of a microring resonator (figs. 1+2, fig. 3b 65 optically coupled to 56/57/58, 0021, 0031, see instant application figure 1a 112).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a circular (loop) feedback structure coupled to the microresonator instead of the straight/planar reflector to eliminate/reduce the need for a reflective coating as reflection would be performed by side walls of interferometer due to lower angle of incidence.
Modified Feng does not disclose a computing device configured to control the one or more devices to output light.
Marron discloses a tunable laser system with an adjustable external cavity that uses a computer to control the laser system/output light in the laser system (fig. 7 computer 90 controls laser 12, col. 9 lines 30-35 + 50-60).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a computing device configured to control the one or more devices to output light to issue commands to components of the device with less human involvement and store data pertaining to these commands and component adjustments (Marron col. 9 lines 50-60).
Conclusion
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 Alex Ehrlich whose telephone number is (703)756-5716. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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.
/A.E./Examiner, Art Unit 2828
/MINSUN O HARVEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2828