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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/06/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Examiner acknowledges the amendments made to claims 1,9 and 15. Claims 3-6,12,18 and 20 stand as cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/06/2026 have been fully considered but they are respectfully found not persuasive.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Examiner notes that Page 10 of the remarks filed on 01/06/2026 discloses that Liu fails to disclose the second optical cavity as claimed and does not disclose any motivation to provide a second optical cavity in addition to a first optical cavity. It is noted that the first and second optical cavities are disclosed in the primary reference of Ji and the reference of Liu is only relied upon for the motivation to use both a photon-photon resonance (PPR) effect and a detuned-loading effect concurrently as stated in lines 3-6 of the abstract of Liu stating “The small-signal BW of the DFB laser was enhanced … due to the joint effects of photon-photon resonance (PPR) and detuned loading.”
Further, Page 10 of the remarks filed 01/06/2026 state that Liu is silent to the amended claim limitation of “wherein the second optical cavity provides passive feedback and facilitates excitation of the secondary optical mode to cause a resonant enhancement of a modulation sideband near the primary optical mode using the PPR effect”. Examiner notes that the amended claim limitation is disclosed in the primary reference of Ji and therefore would not rely on Liu for a teaching or motivation to include the functions of the claimed limitation.
Regarding “wherein the second optical cavity provides passive feedback and facilitates excitation of the secondary optical mode to cause a resonant enhancement of a modulation sideband near the primary optical mode using the PPR effect”, Examiner notes that Ji discloses:
wherein the second optical cavity [12 Fig. 1] provides passive feedback (Para. [0039]) and facilities excitation of the secondary optical mode (Paras. [0039,0041]) to cause a resonant enhancement of a modulation sideband near the primary optical mode using the PPR effect (Para. [0041]) (See Fig. 3).
Drawings
The objection to the drawings regarding “the third mirror defining a second optical cavity between the third mirror and the second mirror” as recited in claim 9 has been withdrawn in light of the arguments filed 01/06/2026.
Further, during the interview on 01/22/2026, the Applicant disclosed the claim limitation of “the third mirror defining a second optical cavity between the third mirror and the second mirror” as a positional relationship of the second optical cavity only needed to be between the third mirror and the second mirror and not having to directly form the second optical cavity functioning between the third and second mirrors.
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 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 1,9,13-15,17,19 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ji et al. (hereinafter Ji) (US 20090323751 A1) in view of “50-GHz Repetition Gain Switching Using a Cavity-Enhanced DFB Laser assisted by Optical Injection Locking” (hereinafter Liu) (See PTO-892 form)
Regarding claim 1, Ji discloses in Fig. 1
A vertical cavity surface emitting laser (VCSEL) [1] (Para. [0021]), comprising:
a substrate [3] (Para. [0021]) having a first side [top side of 3 Fig. 1] and a second side [bottom side of 3 Fig. 1];
a first mirror [4] (Para. [0021]) disposed to the first side of the substrate [top side of 3];
a second mirror [6] (Para. [0021]) disposed to the first side of the substrate [top side of 3] and defining a first optical cavity [between 4 and 6] (Para. [0024]) between the first mirror [4] and the second mirror [6] (Para. [0024]);
an active region [5] (Para. [0023]) between the first mirror [3] and the second mirror [6]; and
a third mirror [11] defining a second optical cavity [10] (Paras. [0022,0025]),
wherein the VCSEL is to generate a primary optical mode [42 Fig. 3] and a secondary optical mode [62 Fig. 3] (Paras. [0039,0040]) under direct modulation (Para. [0023]), and
wherein the second optical cavity [10] is configured to resonate the secondary optical mode [62 Fig. 3] (Para. [0041]), and
wherein the second optical cavity is configured to cause a photon-photon resonance (PPR) effect [See Fig. 3] (Paras. [0039-0043]) or a detuned-loading effect [See Fig. 4,] (Paras. [0045,0046]) in an optical output of the VCSEL, and
wherein the second optical cavity [12 Fig. 1] provides passive feedback (Para. [0039]) and facilities excitation of the secondary optical mode (Paras. [0039,0041]) to cause a resonant enhancement of a modulation sideband near the primary optical mode using the PPR effect (Para. [0041]) (See Fig. 3).
Ji fails to disclose,
wherein the second optical cavity is configured to cause a photon-photon resonance (PPR) effect and a detuned-loading effect in an optical output of the VCSEL
Liu discloses,
The joint use of both photon-photon resonance (PPR) and detuned loading effect (Page 1, left column, Abstract)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to jointly use both the photon-photon resonance (PPR) effect and detuned-loading effect in Ji as disclosed in Liu for the purpose of enhancing the bandwidth of the device. (Liu Page 1, left column, Abstract)
Regarding claim 22, Ji in view of Liu as applied to claim 1 above further discloses in Fig. 1 of Ji,
Wherein the second optical cavity [10] (Paras. [0022,0025]) is inactive.
Examiner notes that an inactive optical cavity is defined as an optical cavity that does not include a gain medium in the optical cavity in paragraph [0045] of the specification of the claimed application. The active layer [5] of Ji is disposed outside of the second optical cavity [10].
Regarding claim 9, Ji discloses in Fig. 1
An emitter [1] (Para. [0021]), comprising:
a first mirror [4] (Para. [0021]);
a second mirror [6] (Para. [0021]) defining a first optical cavity [between 4 and 6] (Para. [0024]) between the first mirror [6] and the second mirror [6] (Para. [0024]); and
a third mirror [11] (Para. [0022]) defining a second optical cavity [10] (Paras. [0036,0037]) between the third mirror [11] and the first mirror [4] or the second mirror [6] (Para. [0022,0025]),
wherein the emitter is to generate a primary optical mode [42 Fig. 3] and a secondary optical mode [53 Fig. 3] (Para. [0040]) under direct modulation (Para. [0023]), and
wherein the second optical cavity [10] is configured to resonate the secondary optical mode [62 Fig. 3] (Para. [0041]), and
wherein the second optical cavity [12 Fig. 1] provides passive feedback (Para. [0039]) and facilities excitation of the secondary optical mode (Paras. [0039,0041]) to cause a resonant enhancement of a modulation sideband near the primary optical mode using the PPR effect (Para. [0041]) (See Fig. 3).
Examiner notes for the purposes of examination in the instant application of claim 9, the limitation of “a third mirror defining a second optical cavity between the third mirror and the first mirror or second mirror” will be understood to read “a third mirror defining a second optical cavity between the third mirror and first mirror” as shown in Fig. 1 of Ji.
Ji fails to disclose,
wherein the second optical cavity is configured to cause both photon-photon resonance (PPR) effect and detuned-loading effect in an optical output of the emitter
Liu discloses,
The joint use of both photon-photon resonance (PPR) and detuned loading effect (Page 1, left column, Abstract)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to jointly use both the photon-photon resonance (PPR) effect and detuned-loading effect in Ji as disclosed in Liu for the purpose of enhancing the bandwidth of the device. (Liu Page 1, left column, Abstract)
Regarding claim 13, Ji in view of Liu as applied to claim 9 above further discloses in Fig. 1 of Ji,
wherein the third mirror [11] includes a plurality of dielectric layers having alternating refractive indexes (Paras. [0029].
Regarding claim 14, Ji in view of Liu as applied to claim 9 above further discloses in Fig. 1 of Ji,
wherein the third mirror [11] includes a distributed Bragg reflector (Para. [0022]).
Regarding claim 15, Ji discloses in Fig. 1
A vertical cavity surface emitting laser (VCSEL) [1] (Para. [0021]), comprising:
a substrate [3] (Para. [0021]) having a first side [top side of 3] and a second side [bottom side of 3];
a first mirror [4] (Para. [0021]) disposed to the first side of the substrate [top side of 3];
a second mirror [6] (Para. [0021]) disposed to the first side of the substrate [top side of 3] and defining a first optical cavity [between 4 and 6] (Para. [0024]) between the first mirror [4] and the second mirror [6] (Para. [0024]);
an active region [5] (Para. [0021]) between the first mirror [4] and the second mirror [6]; and
a third mirror [11] (Para. [0022]) defining a second optical cavity (Paras. [0022,0025]),
wherein the VCSEL is to generate a primary optical mode [42 Fig. 3] and a secondary optical mode [53 Fig. 3] (Para. [0040]) under direct modulation (Para. [0023]) and
wherein the second optical cavity is configured to cause at least one of a photon-photon resonance effect (See plots 50 and 60 Fig. 3) (Para. [0039]) or a detuned-loading effect in an optical output of the VCSEL (Para. [0029]), and
wherein the second optical cavity [12 Fig. 1] provides passive feedback (Para. [0039]) and facilities excitation of the secondary optical mode (Paras. [0039,0041]) to cause a resonant enhancement of a modulation sideband near the primary optical mode using the PPR effect (Para. [0041]) (See Fig. 3).
Ji fails to disclose,
wherein the second optical cavity is configured to cause a photon-photon resonance (PPR) effect and a detuned-loading effect in an optical output of the VCSEL
Liu discloses,
The joint use of both photon-photon resonance (PPR) and detuned loading effect (Page 1, left column, Abstract)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to jointly use both the photon-photon resonance (PPR) effect and detuned-loading effect in Ji as disclosed in Liu for the purpose of enhancing the bandwidth of the device. (Liu Page 1, left column, Abstract)
Regarding claim 17, Ji in view of Liu as applied to claim 15 above further discloses in Fig. 1 of Ji,
wherein the second optical cavity [10] (Paras. [0022,0025]) is between the third mirror [11] and the first mirror [4].
Regarding claim 19, Ji in view of Liu as applied to claim 15 above further discloses in Fig. 1 of Ji,
wherein the second optical cavity [10 Fig. 1] (Paras. [0022,0025]) is tuned to resonate at a frequency of the secondary optical mode [62 Fig. 3] (Para. [0041]).
Claims 2,10 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ji in view of Liu as applied to claims 1,9 and 15 above, and further in view of Mooradian (US 20020176473 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Ji in view of Liu discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above but fails to disclose,
wherein the third mirror is disposed to the second side of the substrate.
Mooradian discloses in Fig. 1,
a third mirror [28] (Para. [0031]) disposed to a second side [top side of 12 Fig. 1] (emission side) of a substrate [12] (Para. [0031])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the third mirror structure of Mooradian into the device of Ji with the third mirror of Ji for the purpose of allowing emission through the substrate with the mirror acting as an output coupler. (Mooradian Para. [0031])
Regarding claim 10, Ji discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 9 above and further discloses in Fig. 1,
wherein the first mirror [4] (Para. [0021]) and the second mirror [6] (Para. [0021]) are disposed to a first side of a substrate [top side of 3] (Para. [0021])
Ji in view of Liu fails to disclose,
wherein the third mirror is disposed to a second side of the substrate.
Mooradian discloses in Fig. 1,
a third mirror [28] (Para. [0031]) disposed to a second side [top side of 12 Fig. 1] (emission side) of a substrate [12] (Para. [0031])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the third mirror structure of Mooradian into the device of Ji with the third mirror of Ji for the purpose of allowing emission through the substrate with the mirror acting as an output coupler. (Mooradian Para. [0031])
Regarding claim 16, Ji in view of Liu discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 15 above but fails to disclose,
wherein the third mirror is disposed to the second side of the substrate.
Mooradian discloses in Fig. 1,
a third mirror [28] (Para. [0031]) disposed to a second side [top side of 12 Fig. 1] (emission side) of a substrate [12] (Para. [0031])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the third mirror structure of Mooradian into the device of Ji with the third mirror of Ji for the purpose of allowing emission through the substrate with the mirror acting as an output coupler. (Mooradian Para. [0031])
Claims 7,8,23,25 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ji in view of Liu as applied to claims 1,9 and 15 above and further in view of Cheung et al. (hereinafter Cheung) (US 20210399522 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Ji in view of Liu discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above but fails to disclose,
wherein an optical element is integrated into the second side of the substrate.
Cheung discloses in Fig. 4,
an optical element [503] (Para. [0030]) integrated into a second side of a substrate [bottom side of 502] (Para. [0030])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the integrated lens of Cheung into the device of Ji for the purpose of allowing substrate-side emission with partial reflection of light back to the mirrors. (Cheung Para. [0030])
Regarding claim 8, Li in view of Liu and further in view of Cheung as applied to claim 7 above further discloses,
wherein the third mirror [11 Ji Fig. 1] is disposed on an optical element [503 Cheung Fig. 4]
Examiner notes that Cheung discloses an optical element on a second side (bottom side) of a substrate in Fig. 4. When implemented into the device in Fig. 1 of Ji, the optical element [503] of Cheung will be integrated on the bottom side of the substrate [3] in Fig. 1 of Ji. Therefore, the third mirror [11] is disposed on an optical element [503]. With the interpretation of “on” being understood to be used as a function word to indicate a source of support. (See PTO-892 form)
Regarding claim 23, Ji in view of Liu and Cheung as applied to claim 7 above further discloses,
wherein the third mirror [11 Ji Fig. 1] is configured to be disposed on an optical element [503 Cheung Fig. 4]
Examiner notes that Cheung discloses an optical element on a second side (bottom side) of a substrate in Fig. 4. When implemented into the device in Fig. 1 of Ji, the optical element [503] of Cheung will be integrated on the bottom side of the substrate [3] in Fig. 1 of Ji. Therefore, the third mirror [11] is disposed on an optical element [503]. With the interpretation of “on” being understood to be used as a function word to indicate a source of support. (See PTO-892 form)
Regarding claim 25, Ji in view of Liu discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 9 above but fails to disclose,
Wherein the third mirror is configured to be disposed on an optical element
Cheung discloses in Fig. 4,
an optical element [503] (Para. [0030]) integrated into a second side of a substrate [bottom side of 502] (Para. [0030])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the integrated lens of Cheung into the modified device of Ji for the purpose of allowing substrate-side emission with partial reflection of light back to the mirrors. (Cheung Para. [0030])
Examiner notes that Cheung discloses an optical element on a second side (bottom side) of a substrate in Fig. 4. When implemented into the device in Fig. 1 of Ji, the optical element [503] of Cheung will be integrated on the bottom side of the substrate [3] in Fig. 1 of Ji. Therefore, the third mirror [11] is disposed on an optical element [503]. With the interpretation of “on” being understood to be used as a function word to indicate a source of support. (See PTO-892 form)
Regarding claim 26, Ji in view of Liu discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 15 above but fails to disclose,
Wherein the third mirror is configured to be disposed on an optical element
Cheung discloses in Fig. 4,
an optical element [503] (Para. [0030]) integrated into a second side of a substrate [bottom side of 502] (Para. [0030])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the integrated lens of Cheung into the modified device of Ji for the purpose of allowing substrate-side emission with partial reflection of light back to the mirrors. (Cheung Para. [0030])
Examiner notes that Cheung discloses an optical element on a second side (bottom side) of a substrate in Fig. 4. When implemented into the device in Fig. 1 of Ji, the optical element [503] of Cheung will be integrated on the bottom side of the substrate [3] in Fig. 1 of Ji. Therefore, the third mirror [11] is disposed on an optical element [503]. With the interpretation of “on” being understood to be used as a function word to indicate a source of support. (See PTO-892 form)
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ji in view of Liu as applied to claim 9 above and further in view of Thornton (US 20080086038 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Ji in view of Liu discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 9 above but fails to disclose,
wherein the third mirror is configured to provide an optical power reflection of less than 10%.
Thornton discloses in Fig. 1,
a third mirror [38] (Para. [0057]) configured to provide an optical power reflection of less than 10% (Para. [0057])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the low reflectivity of the third mirror of Thornton into the third mirror of Ji at the pump radiation of Ji for the purpose of allowing emission of light through the substrate.
Claims 21,24 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ji in view of Liu as applied to claims 1,9 and 15 above, and further in view of Yuen et al. (hereinafter Yuen) (US 20190305522 A1).
Regarding claim 21, Ji in view of Liu discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above but fails to disclose,
a metal layer configured in a partial-ring shape
Yuen discloses in Fig. 1A,
a metal layer [104] configured in a partial-ring shape (Para. [0018])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the partial ring shape of the top electrical contact of Ji for the purpose of having the top contact surrounding an emission aperture of the device and providing electrical contact around more of the top of the device structure.
Regarding claim 24, Ji in view of Liu discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 9 above but fails to disclose,
a metal layer configured in a partial-ring shape
Yuen discloses in Fig. 1A,
a metal layer [104] configured in a partial-ring shape (Para. [0018])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the partial ring shape of the top electrical contact of Ji for the purpose of having the top contact surrounding an emission aperture of the device and providing electrical contact around more of the top of the device structure.
Regarding claim 27, Ji in view of Liu discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 15 above but fails to disclose,
a metal layer configured in a partial-ring shape
Yuen discloses in Fig. 1A,
a metal layer [104] configured in a partial-ring shape (Para. [0018])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the partial ring shape of the top electrical contact of Ji for the purpose of having the top contact surrounding an emission aperture of the device and providing electrical contact around more of the top of the device structure.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Examiner particularly notes (US 20170256912 A1) which discloses the simultaneous use of a photon-photon resonance (PPR) effect and a detuned-loading effect.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNTER J NELSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5318. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8:30am-5:00 ET.
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.
/H.J.N./Examiner, Art Unit 2828
/XINNING(Tom) NIU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828