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 .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I and Species A1 in the reply filed on 05/19/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 16-22 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 05/19/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 11/15/2022, 07/15/2024, and 11/25/2024 were filed on or after the filing date of this application. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 7-12, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Otsuka (US5440207), hereafter Otsuka.
Regarding claims 1 and 9, Otsuka discloses an optical system (Fig. 4; Fig. 5), comprising: a seed laser source configured to output a first optical signal with a first wavelength (Figs. 4 and 5 element 11); a frequency adjuster configured to receive the first optical signal and output an adjusted first optical signal with a second wavelength (Figs. 4 and 5 element 13); a reference laser source configured to output a second optical signal with a third wavelength (Figs. 4 and 5 element 21), wherein the first wavelength is different than the third wavelength (Figs. 4 and 5 element 11 emits at 1.56 um while element 21 emits at 0.78 um); an atomic reference configured to receive the second optical signal (Fig. 4 element 25; Fig. 5 element 40) and output a control signal to the reference laser source that locks the second optical signal to the third wavelength (Figs. 4 and 5 elements 27, 28, and 29; col. 5 ll. 21-35); and a controller configured to adjust the first optical signal based on comparing the adjusted first optical signal to the second optical signal (Figs. 4 and 5elements 17, 18, 19, 20, and 10; col. 6 ll. 30-42).
Regarding claims 2 and 10, Otsuka further discloses the first wavelength is approximately an integer multiple of the third wavelength (Figs. 4 and 5element 11 emits at 1.56 um while element 21 emits at 0.78 um).
Regarding claims 3 and 11, Otsuka further discloses the integer multiple is two (Figs. 4 and 5 element 11 emits at 1.56 um while element 21 emits at 0.78 um).
Regarding claim 4, Otsuka further discloses the first wavelength is approximately 1560 nm and the third wavelength is approximately 780 nm (Figs. 4 and 5 element 11 emits at 1.56 um while element 21 emits at 0.78 um).
Regarding claims 5 and 12, Otsuka further discloses a beatnote detector configured to receive the adjusted first optical signal and the second optical signal and output an error signal to the controller indicating a difference between wavelengths of the adjusted first optical signal and the second optical signal (col. 6 ll. 30-42).
Regarding claims 7 and 14, Otsuka further discloses the atomic reference comprises a gas cell configured to be used to perform laser spectroscopy to lock the second optical signal to the third wavelength (Fig. 4 element 25 Fig. 5 element 40; col. 5 ll. 21-35).
Regarding claim 8 and 15, Otsuka further discloses the controller is configured to adjust the first wavelength of the first optical signal to perform a frequency jump that results in a desired frequency offset between the adjusted first optical signal and the second optical signal (col. 6 ll. 15-52).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 6 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otsuka.
Regarding claims 6 and 13, Otsuka further discloses a splitter coupled to the seed laser source and configured to transmit a first portion of the power of the adjusted first optical signal to an output of the optical system and a second portion of the power of the adjusted first optical signal to the beatnote detector (col. 6 ll. 15-29). Otsuka does not explicitly disclose the splitter coupled to an output of the frequency adjuster. However, the Office takes Official Notice that changing the location of a beam splitter to output a different wavelength of light based on the intended use of the device is well known in the art. An advantage is to achieve the stabilized light at the desired wavelength. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Oktsuka with the splitter coupled to an output of the frequency adjuster as is known in the art in order to output a different wavelength of light based on the intended use of the device and since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached Notice of References Cited. See, e.g., US20190181611A1 Fig. 1, WO2011123822A2 Fig. 2.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA KING whose telephone number is (571)270-1441. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 10am-5pm MT.
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, Min Sun 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.
/Joshua King/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828 07/11/2026
Prosecution Insights