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.
Claims 1, 2, 8, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication to Bowen 2014/0029894US in view of the US Patent Application Publication to Tokuse 2020/0260012US and further in view of the US Patent Application Publication to Lawson 2023/0305232US.
In terms of Claim 1, Bowen teaches a system (Figure 2), the system comprising: a plurality of optical fibres (Figure 2: within 110; [0017] and [0020]); and a plurality of photodiodes (Figure 2: 130; [0034-0036] teaches photodiodes can be arranged in an array), wherein: a first optical fibre of the plurality of optical fibres is parallel to a second optical fibre of plurality of optical fibres (Figure 1: fibers within 110 held within grooves 104 are arranged in parallel configuration [0020]), the first optical fibre and the second optical fibre are each cleaved at an angle ([0029]) such that a first primary optical path exiting the first optical fibre is not parallel to a second primary optical path exiting the second optical fibre (See Figure 1: wherein multi beams or rays of light exit from 110 at different angles towards 105a; Paragraph [0020] discloses that channel 104 holding multiple fibers in an array are arranged parallel next to each other, therefore some of the beams of light due to having different angles with have orientation relative to another that is not parallel due to its incline angles off the reflector 105a), ( and a first photodiode (Figure 1: 130) of the plurality of photodiodes (Paragraphs [0034-0036] discloses wherein the photodiodes maybe arranged in an array) is positioned according to the first primary optical path exiting the first optical fibre (See Figure 1 within 110), and a second photodiode of the plurality of photodiodes is positioned according to the second primary optical path exiting the second optical fibre (Paragraph [0020] discloses an array of fibers, Paragraphs [0034-0036] discloses an array of photodiodes thus a second path will be present within the array of fibers and photodiodes).
Bowen does not teach “wherein each photodiode comprises a receiving surface that is angled according to a principal ray of the optical path of the corresponding photodiode”.
Tokuse teaches a photodiode (Figure 6: 121e below), wherein the photodiode comprises a receiving surface (top surface of 121e; [0124]) that is angled according to a principal ray of the optical path of the corresponding photodiode (the top surface of 121e is angled relative to beam of light). This allows the surface to detect multiple signals with different angles of divergences see θ1 and θ2 shown in Figure 6 in order to reduce cross talk ([0127 or 0148]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to position the photodiode to be at an angle relative to divergence of light hitting the top surface of the photodiodes as shown by Tokuse in order to reduce crosstalk at the location of the photodiode. This allows the photodiode to function more accurate as a photodetector and prevent multiple signals from interfering with each other.
PNG
media_image1.png
610
504
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Bowen / Tokuse do not teach wherein first optical fiber and the second optical fiber are cleaved at angles in different directions relative to a path of a light beam in each of the first optical fiber and the second optical fiber.
Lawson does teach wherein first optical fiber and the second optical fiber are cleaved at angles in different directions relative to a path of a light beam in each of the first optical fiber and the second optical fiber ([0063] teaches a plurality of fibers can be arranged in an array ([0025], wherein the cleave ends of fiber have different cleave angles which will result in the first optical fiber and the second optical fiber being cleaved in different directions [0063]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cleave the fiber ends to have different angle directions in order to improve alignment of the fibers ends relative to the detector {[0063] and [0068]} or to tailor the angles at specific wavelengths to that channels by creating reflective surface which can allow the system to lock specific desired wavelengths of detection [0031] or [0240-0241]).
As for Claim 2, Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson teach the device of Claim 1, wherein Bowen teaches the first optical fibre (Figure 2: within 110; [0020]) and the second optical fibre (Paragraph [0020] disclose multiple fibers within an array thus a second fiber must be present) are separated by pre-defined spacing (Figure 1: spacing of 102 contains gaps from the conduit 110 that holds the fiber [0020], hence there must be some form pre-define spacing when multiple grooves and fibers are organize in an array [0020, 0034-0036]).
As for Claim 8, Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson teach the device of Claim 1, wherein Bowen teaches a multi-port receiver (Figure 3: left and right ports on the side of 300 housing element 310) wherein comprises the plurality of photodiodes (Figure 2: 130 can contain multiple photodiodes), and the plurality of optical fibers ([0020]) enter the multi-port receiver from two sides (Figure 3: 310; [0020]).
As for Claim 10, Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson teaches the device of Claim 1, wherein Bowen teaches a multi-port receiver comprises the plurality of photodiodes ([0034-0036]), and the plurality of optical fibres (Paragraphs [0020] teaches multiple of arrays of fibers) that enter the multi-port receiver are arranged in two dimensions as rows and columns of optical fibres (Paragraphs [0034-0036] teaches an optical component is coupled to a fiber, since there are multiples arrays of fibers, the corresponding arrays of photodiode will contain multiple rows and columns).
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US Patent Application Publication to Nishimura 2011/0064358US.
In regards to claims 3-4, Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson teach the device of Claim 1, Bowen does not teach wherein an end of the first optical fibre is offset from an end of the second optical fibre; and wherein: an end of the first optical fibre is offset by reasonable distance from an end of the second optical fibre.
Nishimura does teach a fiber system coupled to a photodiode ([0051]) wherein an end of the first optical fibre is offset from an end of the second optical fibre (Figure 2: 25); and wherein: an end of the first optical fibre is offset by reasonable distance from an end of the second optical fibre (Figure 2: 25). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings Bowen to have fibers aligned in staggered or offset in order to create an optical device with larger density of input/output ports. This results in in one reflecting means for a pair of fiber input/outputs, thus reducing cost and size needed for larger connection density applications.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US Patent Application Publication to Tang 2018/0269971US.
In regards to claims 5 and 6, Bowen/ Tokuse / Lawson teaches the device of claim 1. Bowen does not teach an angle between an axis of the first optical fibre and the first primary optical path exiting the first optical fibre is defined to achieve maximum responsivity, high return loss and high isolation.
Tang teaches a fiber that’s has an angled face relative to optical path (Paragraph [0062] teaches the fiber is APC type fiber or angled physical contact [0008] which means the face is angled or Figure 6: wherein the front face of the fiber angled relative to first primary optical path) coupled to a photodetector ([0013]) wherein an angle between an axis of the first optical fibre and the first primary optical path exiting the first optical fibre is defined to achieve maximum responsivity, high return loss and high isolation (0060-0062]). Though this was not claimed, the examiner would like to note that Tang disclosed the desired angle is between 2.4 to 3.7 degrees (Tang’s [0060-0064]), which overlaps the applicant’s prefer angle of 3.5 degrees to 4.5 degrees (Applicant’s Specification [0016]). Thus, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Tang’s angled fiber with the cleaved angled fiber of Bowen in order to maximize return loss (Tang’s [0062]).
Bowen and Tang do not teach wherein a distance between the first optical fiber and the first photodiode is pre-defined for maximum responsivity and high return loss. The examiner considers the acting of finding the optimum value distance between the fiber and photodiode to produce maximum responsivity and high return loss only requires reducing or increasing the distance to obtain the desired loss profile. It has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable (in this case the distance between the fiber and photodiode) involves only routine skill in the art, In re Antonie, 195 USPQ 6 (C.C.P.A. 1977).
Claims 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US Patent Application Publication to Rippon 2021/0250103US.
In regards to Claim 7, Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson teach the device of Claim 1. Bowen / Tang / Tokuse do not teach wherein the PIN diode comprises of InGaAs PIN diode.
Rippon teaches a fiber coupled to a photodiode wherein the diode comprises of InGaAs PIN diode ([0044]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Bowen PIN diode to be an InGaAs PIN diode for its low noise and high responsivity (Rippon’s [0044]).
Claims 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US Patent to US Patent Sashin 4,179,100US.
In regards to Claim 9, Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson teach the device of claim 1, wherein Bowen teaches the multi-port receiver (See Figure 3: ports on left and right side) comprises the plurality of photodiodes ([0034-0036).
Bowen does not teach wherein the plurality of photodiodes are located on a step of a stair step arrangement.
Sashin does teach a photodiode arrangement (Figure 14b: 256/254 couple to fibers 258 and 260; Column 13, lines 5-30) are located on a step of stair step arrangement (Figure 14b: photodiode 256 and 254 are arranged in a stair step arrangement in the vertical direction). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the photodiode array of 130 by Bowen to have a step staggered configuration similar to Figure 14b to accommodate fibers from both and left side as shown in Figure 3 Bowen’s disclosure. The step configuration of Sashin will increase the number of fibers that can be coupled to the photodiode array for large density connections.
Claims 11-14, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication to Bowen 2014/0029894US, in view of the US Patent Application Publication to Tokuse 2020/0260012US, in view of the US Patent Application Publication to Lawson 2023/0305232US, and further in view of US Patent Application Publication to Nishimura 2011/0064358US.
In regards to Claims 11 and 14, Bowen teaches a system (Figure 2), the system comprising: a plurality of optical fibres (Figure 2: within 110; [0020]); and a plurality of photodiodes (Figure 2: 130; [0034-0036]), wherein: a first optical fibre of the plurality of optical fibres is parallel to a second optical fibre of plurality of optical fibres (Paragraph [0020] teaches fiber within 104 are preferred to be parallel to each other), the first optical fibre (Figure 2: within 110) and the second optical fibre are each cleaved at an angle ([0029]) such that a first primary optical path exiting the first optical fibre is not parallel to a second primary optical path exiting the second optical fibre (See Figure 1: wherein multi beams or rays of light exit from 110 at different angles towards 105a; Paragraph [0020] discloses that channel 104 holding multiple fibers in an array are arranged parallel next to each other, therefore some of the beams of light due to having different angles with have orientation relative to another that is not parallel due to its incline angles off the reflector 105a).
Bowen does not teach “wherein each photodiode comprises a receiving surface that is angled according to a principal ray of the optical path of the corresponding photodiode.
Tokuse teaches a photodiode (Figure 6: 121e below), wherein the photodiode comprises a receiving surface (top surface of 121e; [0124]) that is angled according to a principal ray of the optical path of the corresponding photodiode (the top surface of 121e is angled relative to beam of light). This allows the surface to detect multiple signals with different angles of divergences see θ1 and θ2 shown in Figure 6 in order to reduce cross talk ([0127 or 0148]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to position the photodiode to be at an angle relative to divergence of light hitting the top surface of the photodiodes as shown by Tokuse in order to reduce crosstalk at the location of the photodiode. This allows the photodiode to function more accurate as a photodetector and prevent multiple signals from interfering with each other.
PNG
media_image1.png
610
504
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Bowen / Tokuse do not teach wherein first optical fiber and the second optical fiber are cleaved at angles in different directions relative to a path of a light beam in each of the first optical fiber and the second optical fiber.
Lawson does teach wherein first optical fiber and the second optical fiber are cleaved at angles in different directions relative to a path of a light beam in each of the first optical fiber and the second optical fiber ([0063] teaches a plurality of fibers can be arranged in an array ([0025], wherein the cleave ends of fiber have different cleave angles which will result in the first optical fiber and the second optical fiber being cleaved in different directions [0063]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cleave the fiber ends to have different angle directions in order to improve alignment of the fibers ends relative to the detector {[0063] and [0068]} or to tailor the angles at specific wavelengths to that channels by creating reflective surface which can allow the system to lock specific desired wavelengths of detection [0031] or [0240-0241]).
Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson do not teach wherein: an end of the first optical fibre is offset from an end of the second optical fibre; and wherein: an end of the first optical fibre is offset by reasonable distance from an end of the second optical fibre.
Nishimura does teach a fiber system coupled to a photodiode ([0051]) wherein an end of the first optical fibre is offset from an end of the second optical fibre (Figure 2: 25); and wherein: an end of the first optical fibre is offset by reasonable distance from an end of the second optical fibre (Figure 2: 25). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings Bowen to have fibers aligned in staggered or offset in order to create an optical device with larger density of input/output ports. This results in in one reflecting means for a pair of fiber input/outputs, thus reducing cost and size needed for larger connection density applications.
As for Claim 12, Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson / Nishimura teaches the device of Claim 11, wherein Bowen teaches the first optical fibre (Figure 2: within 110; [0020]) and the second optical fibre (Paragraph [0020] disclose multiple fibers within an array thus a second fiber must be present) are separated by pre-defined spacing (Figure 1: spacing of 102 contains gaps from the conduit 110 that holds the fiber [0020], hence there must be some form pre-define spacing when multiple grooves and fibers are organize in an array [0020, 0034-0036]).
As for Claim 13, Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson / Nishimura teaches the device of Claim 11, wherein: Bowen teaches wherein: a first photodiode of the plurality of photodiodes (within 130; [0034-0036]) is positioned according to the first primary optical path exiting the first optical fibre (See Figure 1: within 110 and 130), and a second photodiode of the plurality of photodiodes is positioned according to the second primary optical path exiting the second optical fibre ([0020] and [0034-0036]).
As for Claim 18, Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson / Nishimura teach the device of Claim 11, wherein Bowen teaches: a multi-port receiver (Figure 3: left and right ports on the side of 300 housing element 310) wherein comprises the plurality of photodiodes (Figure 2: 130 can contain multiple photodiodes), and the plurality of optical fibers ([0020]) enter the multi-port receiver from two sides (Figure 3: 310; [0020]).
As for Claim 20, Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson / Nishimura teach the device of Claim 11, wherein Bowen teaches: a multi-port receiver comprises the plurality of photodiodes ([0034-0036]), and the plurality of optical fibres (Paragraphs [0020] teaches multiple of arrays of fibers) that enter the multi-port receiver are arranged in two dimensions as rows and columns of optical fibres (Paragraphs [0034-0036] teaches an optical component is used to couple to a fiber, since there are multiples arrays of fibers, the corresponding arrays of photodiode will contain multiple rows and columns).
Claims 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson / Nishimura as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of US Patent Application Publication to Tang 2018/0269971US.
In regards to claims 15 and 16, Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson / Nishimura teach the device of claim 1.
Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson / Nishimura do not teach an angle between an axis of the first optical fibre and the first primary optical path exiting the first optical fibre is defined to achieve maximum responsivity and high return loss.
Tang teaches a fiber that’s has face relative to optical path (Paragraph [0062] teaches the fiber is APC type fiber or angled physical contact [0008] which means the face is angled or Figure 6: wherein the front face of the fiber angled relative to first primary optical path) coupled to a photodetector ([0013]) wherein an angle between an axis of the first optical fibre and the first primary optical path exiting the first optical fibre is defined to achieve maximum responsivity, high return loss and high isolation (0060-0062]). Though it was claimed, the examiner would like to note that Tang disclosed the desired angle is between 2.4 to 3.7 degrees (Tang’s [0060-0064]), which overlaps the applicant’s prefer angle of 3.5 degrees to 4.5 degrees (Applicant’s Specification [0016]). Thus, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Tang’s angled fiber with the cleaved angled fiber of Bowen in order to maximize return loss (Tang’s [0062]).
Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson / Nishimura / Tang do not teach wherein a distance between the first optical fiber and the first photodiode is pre-define for maximum responsivity and high return loss. The examiner considers the acting of finding the optimum value distance between the fiber and photodiode to produce maximum responsivity and high return loss only requires reducing or increasing the distance to obtain the desired loss profile. It has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable (in this case the distance between the fiber and photodiode) involves only routine skill in the art, In re Antonie, 195 USPQ 6 (C.C.P.A. 1977).
Claims 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson / Nishimura as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of US Patent Application Publication to Rippon 2021/0250103US.
In regards to Claim 17, Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson / Nishimura teaches the device of claim 11.
Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson / Nishimura do not teach wherein the PIN diode comprises of InGaAs PIN diode.
Rippon teaches a fiber coupled to a photodiode wherein the diode comprises of InGaAs PIN diode ([0044]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Bowen PIN diode to be an InGaAs PIN diode for its low noise and high responsivity (Rippon’s [0044]).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bowen/ Tokuse / Lawson / Nishimura as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of US Patent Sashin 4,179,100US.
In regards to Claim 19, Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson / Nishimura teach the device of claim 11.
Bowen / Tokuse / Lawson / Nishimura do not teach wherein the plurality of photodiodes are located on a step of a stair step arrangement.
Sashin does teach a photodiode arrangement (Figure 14b: 256/254 couple to fibers 258 and 260; Column 13, lines 5-30) are located on a step of stair step arrangement (Figure 14b: photodiode 256 and 254 are arranged in a stair step arrangement in the vertical direction). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the photodiode array of 130 by Bowen to have a step staggered configuration similar to Figure 14b to accommodate fibers from both and left side as shown in Figure 3 Bowen’s disclosure. The step configuration of Sashin will increase the number of fibers that can be coupled to the photodiode array for large density connections.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 11 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any of the combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Newly amended limitations have been rejected in view of newly cited prior art to Lawson as detailed above.
This action is therefore made FINAL for reasons detailed above.
Conclusion
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 HOANG Q TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5049. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 am - 5:30pm Monday - Friday.
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 5712722397. 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.
/HOANG Q TRAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2874
/UYEN CHAU N LE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights