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 the amendments made to claims 1-4. No new claims have been added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-4 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.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The previous rejection of claims 1-4 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) have been withdrawn in light of the amendments made to claim 1.
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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US 20050025206 A1) in view of Chen et al. (hereinafter Chen (066)) (US 20170201066 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Chen discloses in Fig. 5,
a vertical-cavity surface-emitting laser (VCSEL) array (Fig. 5) (Para. [0051]), comprising a plurality of arranged VCSEL units (Paras. [0050,0051]) arranged in a VCSEL array (Para. [0050]), wherein a light-emission aperture [384] (Para. [0051]) is deposed on each of said VCSEL units in said VCSEL array (Paras. [0051,0052]), and wherein a distance from a center of each light-emission aperture [384] to a center of an immediately adjacent light- emission aperture [384] is less than 20 microns (µm) (Para. [0038]);
Examiner notes that paragraph [0050] of Chen states that a fabrication process similar to that of the second embodiment is applied. Therefore, citations of elements the same as shown in Fig. 5 aside from a change of the first number (e.g. semiconductor substrate 110 now shown as 310 in Fig. 5 (Para. [0029])) will be used and cited from the prior art.
Para. [0038] of Chen discloses that a width [d] of a window can be 3-7µm with a distance [D] between them of 1-6µm. Using a width [d] value of 6µm and a distance [D] of 6µm, the distance of [(d/2) +(d/2) +D] gives a total distance between the center of the respective windows of about 12µm.
Chen fails to disclose,
two or more electrodes ,each of said electrodes is injected with a different current to control the shape of electrical-to-optical (E-O) frequency response of the VCSEL units
Chen (066) discloses in Fig. 2A,
a VCSEL element [200] (Para. [0037]) with two or more electrodes [2121,2122, 2123] (Para. [0037]) each of said electrodes in injected with a different current (Para. [0037])
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 multiple electrodes as shown in Chen (066) in the device of Chen for the purpose of controlling the light-intensity distributions and electric field. (Chen (066) Para. [0037])
Examiner notes that a claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. (See MPEP §2114 (II)). Therefore, the electrodes whose number are note smaller than two, each injected with a different current as shown in Chen (066) disclose the limitations of claim 1 as the functional limitation of “to control the shape of electrical-to-topical (E-O) frequency response” has been fully considered but is seen to not distinguish the claimed apparatus from the prior art as the structure of the device claimed in claim 1 is anticipated by Chen in view of Chen (066) as shown above.
Examiner also notes the preamble of “with improved electrical-to-optical (E-O) frequency response” has been fully considered is not seen as a claim limitation and of no significance to claim construction as described in MPEP § 2111.02 (II).
Regarding claim 2, Chen in view of Chen (066) as applied to claim 1 above further discloses in Chen,
wherein said VCSEL array [Fig. 5] is arranged as an MxM array of the VCSEL units with said M as a positive integer not smaller than 2 (Para. [0050]).
Regarding claim 3, Chen in view of Chen (066) as applied to claim 1 above further discloses in Chen,
wherein each of said VCSEL units comprises distributed Bragg reflectors [320,360] (Paras. [0029,0032]) and multiple quantum wells [342,344] (Paras. [0030,0031,0046]).
Regarding claim 4, Chen in view of Chen (066) as applied to claim 1 above further discloses in Chen,
wherein each of said VCSEL units [Fig. 5] further comprises zinc diffusion apertures [364] (Para. [0037]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Examiner notes “Separated electrodes for the enhancement of high-speed data transmission in vertical-cavity surface-emitting laser arrays” (hereinafter Zhao) which discloses a VCSEL array with a plurality of VCSEL units and two electrodes. See PTO-892 form.
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 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 /TOD T VAN ROY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Prosecution Insights