Non-Final Rejection
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 8/4/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-2, 13-15, and 19-20 are amended. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 7-10 and 17-18 remain withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/19/2025.
Response to Arguments
The arguments filed with the 8/4/2026 response have been fully considered. The examiner agrees that the amendment overcomes the prior rejections, however, new grounds of rejection are presented below.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because in line 2 “therein” should be “wherein.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The claims refer to “the first wavelength selective element” which no longer has antecedent basis after the amendment to claim 1. This should be made consistent with claim 1.
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.
Claims 1-6, 11-16, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 10,038,301 (“Eggleston”) in view of US 2015/0255953 (“Chong”), and further in view of US 2019/0027899 (“Krishnamoorthy”).
Regarding claim 1, Eggleston discloses in Fig. 9 (see below, compare to Fig. 1 of this application. Fig. 9 discussion starts col. 6 line 65, but discussion of other figures is relevant for like parts and function):
PNG
media_image1.png
294
452
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
296
670
media_image2.png
Greyscale
A multiple wavelength external cavity laser device, comprising:
a gain medium;
a reflector optically coupled to the gain medium;
This is an external cavity laser. In this example four wavelengths are produced at the output. Col. 7 lines 37-40. There is gain medium 12 and reflector 24 coupled thereto.
a plurality of wavelength selective elements optically coupled to the gain medium and the reflector, each of the wavelength selective elements configured to filter light having a different wavelength; and
The elements 601 to 604 are optically coupled to the gain medium and reflector and each filter light of their own particular wavelength λa to λd.
a first chirped grating reflector optically coupled to the plurality of wavelength selective elements, wherein the first chirped grating reflector is configured to reflect a plurality of wavelengths, and
Grating reflector 18 is coupled to the wavelength selective elements and it is apparent that it reflects all of the wavelengths λa to λd. It is not said to be a chirped grating. Chong describes a similar system in Fig. 8, discussion starting [0031], a multiple wavelength external cavity laser with ring resonator 810 filtering wavelengths, and uses a chirped grating 830. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use a chirped grating as the chirped grating permits synchronization of the cavity mode and the filter wavelength over the wavelength range, as taught by Chong, allowing continuous single-mode hop free tuning. [0031]-[0032], [0022]-[0024].
the gain medium is optically coupled between the plurality of wavelength selective elements and the reflector; and
Gain medium 12 is plainly between selective elements 601 to 604 and reflector 24
a plurality of beam-controlling components configured to control a characteristic of the light and coupled between the first chirped grating reflector and corresponding ones of the plurality of wavelength selective elements.
This is not shown in Eggleston. Krishnamoorthy shows a similar system, where a gain medium is combined with several resonators formed by wavelength selective ring resonators. Krishnamoorthy additionally shows that each ring resonator may have beam controlling components such as phase tuners 320 or variable optical attenuators 322, and that these elements may be coupled between the ring resonator and the grating reflector. See Fig. 5. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to include these elements with each particular cavity as claimed, because the phase tuners can provide continuous tuning and the attenuators can provide switching on/off of a particular wavelength, as taught by Krishnamoorthy. [0051].
Regarding claim 2, Eggleston shows a first and second wavelength selective element 601 and 602 configured to filter light having a first and second wavelength, the second wavelength selective element optically coupled to the gain medium, the reflector, and grating. As to “a first portion of the first chirped grating reflector is configured to reflect the light having the first wavelength; and a second portion of the first chirped grating reflector is configured to reflect the light having the second wavelength” this is by definition true of a chirped grating, that is what it is and does. See also Chong [0022]-[0024], stating the chirped grating does this.
Regarding claim 3, again this is by definition what a chirped grating does, reflects light of different wavelengths from different portions.
Regarding claim 4, first and second wavelength selective elements 601 and 602 are in parallel (Fig. 9) and filter different wavelengths (Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 5, using the Chong chirped grating was deemed obvious above. Chong further teaches the chirped grating will produce first and second optical cavities at the first and second wavelengths defined by the first and second portions of the grating. See Chong [0022]-[0024].
Regarding claim 6, using the Chong chirped grating was deemed obvious above. Chong further teaches in [0032] that “the rate of cavity length change to total cavity length should be proportional to the rate of wavelength change to center wavelength.” When used with multiple cavities as combined with Eggleston this would be true of each cavity.
Regarding claims 11, the Eggleston filters may be tunable. Col. 6 lines 2-10. Additionally and alternatively, Chong shows a similar device and teaches the ring resonator filter may be tunable. [0031]. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to do so as this is a means for tuning the laser wavelength.
Regarding claim 12, the Eggleston filters are micro-ring resonator filters.
Regarding claim 13, the plurality of beam controlling components include an optical attenuator coupled to the first ring resonator filter as discussed above re: claim 1.
Claims 14-16 and 19-20 are method claims that describe the operation of the device of claims 1, 2, 5-6, 12, and 13, respectively, and are met for the same reasons discussed above.
Claims 1-6, 11-16, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chong in view of Eggleston, and further in view of Krishnamoorthy.
Regarding claim 1, Chong discloses in Fig. 8 (discussion starts [0031], but discussion of other figures is relevant for like parts and function):
A multiple wavelength external cavity laser device, comprising:
a gain medium;
a reflector optically coupled to the gain medium;
Chong is an external cavity laser tunable over multiple wavelengths with gain medium 820 and reflector 840 coupled to the gain medium. [0031]
a plurality of wavelength selective elements optically coupled to the gain medium and the reflector, each of the wavelength selective elements configured to filter light having a different wavelength; and
Chong shows one wavelength selective element 810, not a plurality as claimed. Eggleston shows a similar system and has a plurality of such wavelength selective elements 601 to 604 as claimed. The elements 601 to 604 are optically coupled to the gain medium and reflector and each filter light of their own particular wavelength λa to λd. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use multiple filters at different wavelengths as this is a way for the system to produce outputs at different wavelengths, as shown in Eggleston. See Fig. 9 and discussion starting at col. 6 line 65.
a first chirped grating reflector optically coupled to the plurality of wavelength selective elements, wherein the first chirped grating reflector is configured to reflect a plurality of wavelengths, and
Chirped grating reflector 830 is coupled to the wavelength selective element and it is apparent that it reflects multiple wavelengths. This is particularly so following the modification with Eggleston where multiple wavelength selective elements at different wavelengths are used.
the gain medium is optically coupled between the plurality of wavelength selective elements and the reflector; and
Gain medium 820 is not between the reflector 840 and selective element 810. Eggleston shows a similar system as discussed in the first rejection above, and Eggleston has the gain medium 12 between the wavelength selective element 60 and the partially reflective output 24 like that claimed. See rejection above. Eggleston additionally teaches that the configuration may be flipped, that the mirror 24 may be fully reflective and the mirror 18 may be a partially reflective output mirror. Col. 5 lines 13-19. While this is described as to Fig. 4, Fig. 4 is a more generalized view and this teaching is equally applicable to Fig. 9, which is more like Chong. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to switch the output partial reflector and the full reflector, as the art Eggleston recognizes these are equivalent alternatives. See MPEP 2144.06 II. (obvious to substitute equivalents recognized in the prior art). It is apparent when this teaching is applied to Chong Fig. 8, the chirped grating 830 and partial reflector 840 would be switched. This would result in the gain medium 820 being between the wavelength selective device and the reflector as claimed.
a plurality of beam-controlling components configured to control a characteristic of the light and coupled between the first chirped grating reflector and corresponding ones of the plurality of wavelength selective elements.
This is not shown in Chong or Eggleston. Krishnamoorthy shows a similar system, where a gain medium is combined with several resonators formed by wavelength selective ring resonators. Krishnamoorthy additionally shows that each ring resonator may have beam controlling components such as phase tuners 320 or variable optical attenuators 322, and that these elements may be coupled between the ring resonator and the grating reflector. See Fig. 5. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to include these elements with each particular cavity as claimed, because the phase tuners can provide continuous tuning and the attenuators can provide switching on/off of a particular wavelength, as taught by Krishnamoorthy. [0051].
Regarding claim 2, as in the rejection of claim 1 above and in the first 103 rejection Eggleston shows it was obvious to include a plurality, i.e. a first and second wavelength selective element as claimed and optically coupled to the gain medium, the reflector, and grating. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use multiple filters at different wavelengths as this is a way for the system to produce outputs at different wavelengths, as shown in Eggleston. See Fig. 9 and discussion starting at col. 6 line 65. As to “a first portion of the first chirped grating reflector is configured to reflect the light having the first wavelength; and a second portion of the first chirped grating reflector is configured to reflect the light having the second wavelength” this is by definition true of the Chong chirped grating, that is what it is and does. See Chong [0022]-[0024] (different embodiment but relevant in explaining how a chirped grating operates).
Regarding claim 3, again this is by definition what a chirped grating does, reflects light of different wavelengths from different portions. Chong [0022]-[0024].
Regarding claim 4, in Eggleston the first and second wavelength selective elements 601 and 602 are in parallel (Fig. 9) and filter different wavelengths (Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 5, the Chong chirped grating will produce first and second optical cavities at the first and second wavelengths defined by the first and second portions of the grating. See Chong [0022]-[0024].
Regarding claim 6, Chong further teaches in [0032] that “the rate of cavity length change to total cavity length should be proportional to the rate of wavelength change to center wavelength.” When used with multiple cavities as combined with Eggleston this would be true of each cavity.
Regarding claims 11-12, the Chong filter 810 is a tunable micro-ring filter. [0031].
Regarding claim 13, the plurality of beam controlling components include an optical attenuator coupled to the first ring resonator filter as discussed above re: claim 1.
Claims 14-16 and 19-20 are method claims that describe the operation of the device of claims 1, 2, 5-6, 12, and 13, respectively, and are met for the same reasons discussed above.
Conclusion
US 2004/0228564 also shows a similar system with multiple ring resonators and an attenuator and phase shift with each resonator. Fig. 3E shows these elements on the waveguide 120, but [0052] states they may alternatively be included on waveguide 125, more like the present invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James Menefee whose telephone number is (571)272-1944. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7-4.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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 applications may be obtained from Patent Center. See: 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.
/JAMES A MENEFEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Prosecution Insights