Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/063,352

ULTRA-COMPACT PHASE MODULATORS BASED ON INDEX AND LOSS MODULATION IN RING RESONATOR CAVITIES

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Dec 08, 2022
Examiner
CONNELLY, MICHELLE R
Art Unit
2874
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York
OA Round
3 (Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
4-5
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
808 granted / 1010 resolved
+12.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
42 currently pending
Career history
1052
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
46.1%
+6.1% vs TC avg
§102
31.9%
-8.1% vs TC avg
§112
15.0%
-25.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1010 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on January 6, 2026 has been entered. Response to Amendment Applicant’s Amendment filed January 6, 2026 has been fully considered and entered. Claim Objections Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: “elector-refractive” in line 6 of claim 17 should be --electro-refractive --. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-14 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Datta et al. (“Low-loss composite photonic platform based on 2D semiconductor monolayers”, Nature Photonics, Vol. 14, April 2020, pages 256-262; hereafter Datta). Regarding claims 1-14 and 16; Datta discloses a device (see Figure 1a annotated below) comprising: a waveguide (waveguide); a resonator (resonator) optically coupled to the waveguide (waveguide); and at least one layer (Monolayer WS2; monolayer transition metal dichalcogenide (TMD)) comprising an electro-optic material, wherein the at least one layer has an electro-refractive material and electro-absorptive material (TMDs are electro-refractive and electro-absorptive materials; TMDs may be electrostatically tuned near their excitonic resonances, wherein the refractive index and absorption are modulated simultaneously; see the first paragraph on page 256); a first electrode (first electrode; see annotated Figure 1a below) adjacent the electro-refractive material (monolayer WS2); and a second electrode (second electrode; see annotated Figure 1a below) adjacent the electro-absorptive material (monolayer WS2); wherein the device causes phase modulation to optical signals based on using the at least one layer (Monolayer WS2; monolayer transition metal dichalcogenide (TMD)) to tune a coupling of the waveguide (waveguide) and the resonator (resonator) between being under-coupled and being over-coupled (the examiner notes that “using the at least one layer to tune a coupling of the waveguide and the resonator between being under-coupling and being over-coupled is an intended use, which does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus having the same structure and being capable of the same function); wherein the electro-optic material (Monolayer WS2; monolayer transition metal dichalcogenide (TMD)) comprises an electro-absorptive material, and wherein the electro-absorptive material comprises one or more of graphene, silicon, or a plasmonic material; wherein the electro-optic material (Monolayer WS2; monolayer transition metal dichalcogenide (TMD)) comprises an electro-refractive material, and wherein the electro-refractive material comprises one or more of transition metal dichalcogenide (TMD), silicon, indium gallium arsenide (InGaAs), or a plasmonic material; wherein the electro-optic material (Monolayer WS2; monolayer transition metal dichalcogenide (TMD)) comprises a plasmonic material having both the electro-refractive property and electro-absorptive property; wherein the electro-optic material (Monolayer WS2; monolayer transition metal dichalcogenide (TMD)) comprises transition metal dichalcogenide having both the electro-refractive property and electro-absorptive property at or near an excitonic resonance (TMDs may be electrostatically tuned near their excitonic resonances, wherein the refractive index and absorption are modulated simultaneously; see the first paragraph on page 256); wherein the phase modulation is caused based on simultaneously modulating (TMDs may be electrostatically tuned near their excitonic resonances, wherein the refractive index and absorption are modulated simultaneously; see the first paragraph on page 256), using the at least one layer (Monolayer WS2; monolayer transition metal dichalcogenide (TMD)), both an index of refraction of the resonator and an insertion loss of the resonator; wherein the phase modulation is caused based on modulating, using the electro-refractive property of the electro-optic material, an index of refraction of the resonator (TMDs may be electrostatically tuned near their excitonic resonances, wherein the refractive index and absorption are modulated simultaneously; see the first paragraph on page 256); wherein the phase modulation is caused based on modulating, using the electro-absorptive property of the electro-optic material, an insertion loss of the resonator (TMDs may be electrostatically tuned near their excitonic resonances, wherein the refractive index and absorption are modulated simultaneously; see the first paragraph on page 256); wherein the phase modulation is caused based on changing a voltage (Figure 1d shows the measured transmission spectrum of the rein resonator as a function of voltage, wherein different voltages are applied across the two electrodes) applied between an electro-refractive portion of the electro-optic material and an electro-absorptive portion of the electro-optic material (TMDs may be electrostatically tuned near their excitonic resonances, wherein the refractive index and absorption are modulated simultaneously; see the first paragraph on page 256); wherein the electro-refractive portion comprises a layer of transition metal dichalcogenide (TMDs; see page 256) and the electro-absorptive portion comprises a layer of graphene (graphene; see page 256); wherein changing the voltage applied between the electro- refractive portion of the electro-optic material and the electro-absorptive portion of the electro-optic material comprises changing the voltage (voltage applied across the first and second electrodes; see Figure 1a annotated below and Figure 1d) to cause a tuning of the coupling of the waveguide (waveguide) and the resonator (resonator) between being under-coupled and being over-coupled; wherein the at least one layer (Monolayer WS2; monolayer transition metal dichalcogenide (TMD)) is disposed adjacent the resonator (resonator), on the resonator (resonator), within the resonator (resonator), or a combination thereof; wherein the at least one layer (Monolayer WS2; monolayer transition metal dichalcogenide (TMD)) comprises a monolayer of an electro-refractive material; wherein the at least one layer (Monolayer WS2; monolayer transition metal dichalcogenide (TMD)) comprises a monolayer of an electro-absorptive material; wherein an optical mode of the resonator (resonator) overlaps at least partially with the electro-optic material. PNG media_image1.png 498 822 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claims 17-20; Datta discloses a method (see Figure 1a annotated above) comprising: supplying, via a waveguide (waveguide), an optical signal to a resonator (resonator) optically coupled to the waveguide (waveguide); modulating a phase of the optical signal using (i) at least one layer (Monolayer WS2; monolayer transition metal dichalcogenide (TMD)) comprising an electro-optic material (TMD) having an electro-refractive property and an electro-absorptive material (TMD) having an electro-absorptive property (see pages 256-257 and Figures 1a and 1d), wherein the modulating of the phase is based on using the at least one layer to tune a coupling of the waveguide (waveguide) and the resonator (resonator) between being under-coupled and being over-coupled; (ii) a first electrode (first electrode; see annotated Figure 1 above) adjacent the electro-refractive material, and (iii) a second electrode (second electrode; see annotated Figure 1 above) adjacent the electro-absorptive material), outputting, via the waveguide (waveguide), the modulated optical signal (Output); wherein modulating the phase of the optical signal comprises simultaneously modulating (TMDs may be electrostatically tuned near their excitonic resonances, wherein the refractive index and absorption are modulated simultaneously; see the first paragraph on page 256), using the at least one layer, both an index of refraction of the resonator and an insertion loss of the resonator; wherein modulating the phase of the optical signal comprises modulating, using the electro-absorptive property of the electro-optic material (Monolayer WS2; monolayer transition metal dichalcogenide (TMD)), an insertion loss of the resonator (resonator); wherein modulating the phase of the optical signal comprises changing a voltage (voltage is applied between the first electrode and the second electrode; see Figures 1a and 1d) applied between an electro-refractive portion of the electro-optic material (Monolayer WS2; monolayer transition metal dichalcogenide (TMD)) and an electro-absorptive portion of the electro-optic material (Monolayer WS2; monolayer transition metal dichalcogenide (TMD)). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 15 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record, which is the most relevant prior art known, does not disclose or render obvious the device defined by claim 15, wherein the at least one layer comprises a capacitor structure comprising a first layer having the electro-refractive material, a second layer comprising an insulator, a third layer comprising the electro-absorptive material, the first electrode adjacent the first layer, and the second electrode adjacent the third layer, in combination with all of the limitations of base claim 1. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed January 6, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that, as amended, independent claim 1 now recites, in part, "at least one layer comprising an electro-optic material, wherein the at least one layer has an electro-refractive material and an electro-absorptive material; a first electrode adjacent the electro-refractive material: and a second electrode adjacent the electro-absorptive material." This structural configuration incorporates aspects of allowable claim 15, and is supported by the specification, which describes a device with at least one layer having a first electrode, a second layer, an electro-refractive material, and an electro-absorptive material. See Specification at, e.g., [0092]-[0093], [0151], and FIG. 1A. The examiner disagrees. The prior art discloses amended claims 1 and 17 as applied above. The allowable features of claim 15 are not present in claim 1. Applicant states that Datta does not disclose a device having the claimed configuration of "at least one layer," wherein a first electrode is adjacent the electro-refractive material, a second electrode is adjacent the electro-absorptive material, and wherein the device causes phase modulation to optical signals based on using the at least one layer to tune a coupling of the waveguide. For example, Datta's devices employ a single monolayer TMD and disclose the claimed structure having separate electro-refractive and electro-absorptive materials with respective adjacent electrodes. See Datta at 256; FIG. 1. Additionally, as the office acknowledges, Datta does not disclose an electro-absorptive material layer, a first electrode adjacent the first layer, and a second electrode adjacent the third layer. Office Action at 13-14. The examiner disagrees. The limitation “at least one layer” requires only one layer. There could be more than one layer, but a single layer reads on this limitation. The single material layer of Datta is both electro-refractive and electro-absorptive as discussed in the rejection. The first and second electrodes are present in the invention of Datta and are annotated in Figure 1a. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHELLE R CONNELLY whose telephone number is (571)272-2345. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9 AM to 5 PM. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Uyen-Chau Le can be reached at 571-272-2397. 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. /MICHELLE R CONNELLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 08, 2022
Application Filed
Jun 20, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 09, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Jul 15, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 02, 2025
Final Rejection — §102
Jan 06, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 23, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 06, 2026
Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601872
HOLLOW-CORE OPTICAL FIBERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603476
EXTENDED-CAVITY DIODE LASER COMPONENT AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12591094
AN OPTICAL DEVICE AND A METHOD OF FORMING AN OPTICAL DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12571968
FIBER OPTIC ADAPTER ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12560756
ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVEGUIDE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+14.1%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1010 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month