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 .
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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Skogen (US 12,355,209).
Re claim 1:
Skogen teaches (column 1, line 54 to column 2, line 51, with emphasis by the examiner):
“One aspect of the present invention relates to an SOA device structure with a variable optical confinement factor I′ along the length of the device, i.e., I′ (x). At the input end of the SOA, the optical confinement is high, resulting in a high-gain region that rapidly increases the optical signal power. In the central portion of the SOA, the optical confinement is reduced, thereby lowering the gain, but increasing the output saturation power. Near the output end of the SOA, the optical confinement factor is held constant, providing a length of additional gain, thereby further increasing the output power. The net effect is that the core of the waveguide in the SOA is moved away from the optical gain layer of the SOA. The SOA may optionally include a spot-size converter region to focus the output optical signal.
In at least one embodiment of the present invention, a semiconductor optical amplifier comprises a lower cladding layer, an optical gain layer on the lower cladding layer (the optical gain layer providing optical gain to an optical signal), a confinement tuning layer on the optical gain layer, a core on the confinement tuning layer (the core having a first core thickness), and an upper cladding layer on the core, wherein the lower cladding layer, the confinement tuning layer, the core, and the upper cladding layer collectively guide the optical signal, a thickness of the confinement tuning layer in a high-gain region has a first confinement layer thickness (the confinement tuning layer in the high-gain region producing a first optical confinement factor), the thickness of the confinement tuning layer in a mid-gain region adjacent the high-gain region is continuously tapered from the first confinement layer thickness to a second confinement layer thickness (the second confinement layer thickness greater than the first confinement layer thickness), and the thickness of the confinement tuning layer in a high-saturation region adjacent the mid-gain region has the second confinement layer thickness (the confinement tuning layer in the high-saturation region producing a second optical confinement factor, the second optical confinement factor less than the first confinement factor).
(7) In other semiconductor optical amplifiers, the optical gain layer includes one of bulk material or multiple quantum wells; the bulk material or multiple quantum wells include at least one of InGaAsP, InGaAs, AlGaAs, InAlGaAs, or GaAs; each of the lower cladding layer, the confinement tuning layer, and the upper cladding layer includes at least one of InP, GaAs, AlGaAs, or InGaP; the core includes at least one of InGaAsP, InGaAs, AlGaAs, GaAs, or InAlGaAs; the first core thickness is between approximately 500 Å and approximately 5,000 Å; the first confinement layer thickness is between approximately 100 Å and approximately 500 Å; the second confinement layer thickness is between approximately 1,000 Å and approximately 5,000 Å; the high-gain region has a length between approximately 10 μm and approximately 500 μm; the mid-gain region has a length between approximately 200 μm and approximately 5,000 μm; the high-saturation region has a length between approximately 1,000 μm and approximately 10,000 μm; the first optical confinement factor is between approximately 2% and approximately 15% and the second optical confinement factor is between approximately 0.1% and approximately 2.0%; a thickness of each of the lower cladding layer and the upper cladding layer is between approximately 1.5 μm and approximately 2.0 μm; and the semiconductor optical amplifier further comprises a substrate, the lower cladding layer on the substrate (the substrate including at least one of InP or GaAs).”
Thus, the invention is generally shown in Skogen. The first confinement factor is higher and the second confinement factor is lower. The first gain is higher, and the second gain is lower. The first length is short, and the second length is longer.
Re claim 2:
See column 2 of Skogen: “the first optical confinement factor is between approximately 2% and approximately 15% and the second optical confinement factor is between approximately 0.1% and approximately 2.0%.”
Re claim 3: See discussion re clam 1 above. The second length is generally longer than the first length.
Re claim 4:
Skogen teaches at column 2:
“The high-gain region has a length between approximately 10 μm and approximately 500 μm; the mid-gain region has a length between approximately 200 μm and approximately 5,000 μm.”
This has large overlap with the claimed length ranges.
Re claim 5:
See figure 1 of Skogen.
Re claims 6-10:
These limitations are generally met or are obvious as the structures in Skogen are similar. See columns 3-6.
Notably, see column 5, lines 29-41 regarding the claimed MQW structure:
“The optical gain layer formed in step 310 may be of any suitable material compatible with the operating wavelength of the input optical signal. In one or more embodiments, the optical gain layer is formed of bulk material or a multiple quantum well (MQW) structure. When operating in the near infrared (NIR) range of 800 nm to 1.6 μm, the bulk material or MQW structure may, for example, be formed of one or more of InGaAsP, InGaAs, AlGaAs, InAlGaAs, or GaAs. The optical gain layer may be formed by any suitable technique. In one or more embodiments, the optical gain layer may be formed, for example, by a chemical vapor deposition (CVD) process or a molecular beam epitaxy (MBE) process.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL A HESS whose telephone number is (571)272-2392. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, from 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, Michael G. Lee can be reached at (571)272-2398. 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.
/DANIEL A HESS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876