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 .
Status of Claims
Applicant’s amendment of claims 1, 3, 8, 11, 16, 20, 25, 28, 34 and 41 in “Claims - 06/22/2026” is acknowledged.
This office action considers claims 1-43 are thus pending for prosecution, of which, non-elected claims 16-43 were withdrawn, and elected claims 1-15 are presented for further examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments in “Remarks - 06/22/2026 - Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment", have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive, because of the following:
Applicant's arguments that “qubit 212A or 212D are not coupled to qubits 212B or 212C because they are not is the same row and there are not coupling devices 214A-E between them”,, has been considered, but, are moot since Sete in paragraph [0072] suggests that :the quantum computing system 200 may include additional or different features, and the components may be arranged in another manner”, which were more specific in [0073] that he devices can be deployed in another type of spatial arrangement (e.g., another type of ordered array). In some instances, the rectilinear array also extends in a third spatial dimension (e.g., in/out of the page), for example, to form a cubic array or another type of three-dimensional array. The superconducting quantum processing unit 204 may include additional devices, including additional qubit devices, coupler devices, readout resonator devices, or other quantum circuit devices; and in [0080], Sete further discloses, the coupler devices 214A, 214B, 214C, 214D, 214E, when activated or deactivated, can enable or disable coupling between two neighboring qubit devices 212, respectively. In some implementations, the coupler devices 214 may be implemented as the tunable-frequency coupler device 1106 shown in FIG. 11, or in another manner.
In view of the above, along with the guideline of MPEP § 2141.02. VI, Sete’s teaching of paragraphs [0072,0085) can be construed that qubit 212A or 212D are not coupled to qubits 212B or 212C with sufficient specificity of the criteria 102 anticipation.
As, applicant's other arguments, for other dependent claims based on the patentability of the claim 1, no further response is put forward.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Notes: when present, semicolon separated fields within the parenthesis (; ;) represent, for example, as (1100; Fig 11; [0130]) = (element 1100; Figure No. 11; Paragraph No. [0130). For brevity, the texts “Element”, “Figure No.” and “Paragraph No.” shall be excluded, though; additional clarification notes may be added within each field. The number of fields may be fewer or more than three indicated above. T The primary reference citation may not be preceded by the inventor tag, wherein the other reference citation will carry inventor tag. These conventions are used throughout this document.
Claim 1-5, 8-11 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sete; Eyob A. et al., (US 20240311671 A1, of record); hereinafter Sete.
Regarding of Claim 1, Sete teaches a quantum node (200; Fig 2; [0072]) comprising (see the entire document, any disclosure related to the implementations of (1100 along with 300 referred in [0076]) and others, specifically, as cited below):
PNG
media_image1.png
428
578
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Sete Figure 2, implementations are being read from Figs 3, 11
two or more communication qubits (any one or more of qubit device 212; i.e. 212B, 212C for example; Fig 2; [0072] which are implemented as 314 in Fig 3 and/or 1102/1104 in Fig 11 respectively);
one or more interior qubits (212A/212D, which are implemented as 312 in Fig 3, and 1106 in Fig 11) coupled to and disposed in between the two or more communication qubits (212B/212C or their instances 314 in Fig 3 or 1106 in Fig 11) with interior tunable couplers (214C, tunable is construed from [0079]: the coupler device 214 is a tunable-frequency coupler device);
a communication tunable coupler (214A; tunable is construed from [0079]: the coupler device 214 is a tunable-frequency coupler device) coupled to each of the one or more communication qubits (212B/212C); and
a communication resonator (316A/316B Fig 3; [0092] see, the equivalent circuit 300 in FIG. 3 can represent any of the qubit devices 212 and one of its coupler devices 214 in the superconducting quantum processing unit 204 in FIG. 2, or the equivalent circuit 300 in FIG. 3 can represent devices in another type of system or environment) coupled to each of the communication tunable couplers (214A).
Regarding of Claim 2, Sete as applied to the quantum node of claim 1, further teaches, wherein the one or more interior qubits (212B) comprise a set of series connected qubits ([0076]), a set of parallel connected qubits ([0076]), or an array of interconnected qubits ([0073; a cubic array or another type of three-dimensional array).
Regarding of Claim 3, Sete as applied to the quantum node of claim 1, further teaches, (the node) further comprising a readout resonator (316A/316B; [0092]; and further from [0062]:) coupled to each of the two or more communication qubits (212B/212C) and the one or more interior qubits ([0073]: the superconducting quantum processing unit 204 may include additional devices, including inter alia, readout resonator devices, or other quantum circuit devices).
Regarding of Claim 4, Sete as applied to the quantum node of claim 3, further teaches, wherein the readout resonator (316A/316B; [0092]; and further from [0062]:) is used for projective measurement to implement heralding-based entanglement ([0047]: large-scale entanglement within the quantum system).
Regarding of Claim 5, Sete as applied to the quantum node of claim 1, further teaches, (the node) further comprising a control connector coupled to each of the interior tunable couplers and the communication tunable couplers (construed from [0047]: Control signals can manipulate the quantum states of individual qubits and the joint states of multiple qubits).
Regarding of Claim 8, Sete as applied to the quantum node of claim 1, further teaches, (the node) further comprising a drive connector (qubit drive 1152A; Fig 11; [0082]) coupled to each of the two or more communication qubits (212B/212C) and the one or more interior qubits (212A).
Regarding of Claim 9, Sete as applied to the quantum node of claim 1, further teaches, wherein ([0087]) the communication resonator (316A; Fig 3) allows definition of a communication channel for high efficiency photon exchange ([0086]: photon gate to pair of qubits) between the quantum node and other quantum nodes.
Regarding of Claim 10, Sete as applied to the quantum node of claim 9, further teaches, wherein the communication resonator (316A; Fig 3) enhances a parametric photon release rate ([0086] through photon gate ) via resonance enhancement and modification to an electromagnetic density of states of the communication channel.
Regarding of Claim 11, Sete as applied to the quantum node of claim 9, further teaches, wherein the two or more communication qubits (212B,212C; Fig 2) simultaneously release into a frequency band ([0083]) in the communication channel ([0065]).
Regarding of Claim 15, Sete as applied to the quantum node of claim 1, further teaches, wherein the quantum node ((200; Fig 2; [0072]) does not require any radio-frequency single-photon-detector nodes or radio-frequency beam-splitters (because of its driven by AC; 1154A).
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 of this title, 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 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sete; Eyob A. et al., (US 20240311671 A1, of record); hereinafter Sete; in view of Hatridge; Michael et al. (US 20220269301 A1, of record) hereinafter Hatridge.
Regarding of Claim 6, Sete as applied to the quantum node of claim 5, while further teaches, wherein an alternating current (AC) (Fig 11; [0145]: configured to carry a respective current I from a respective current source 1154A, 1154B) to the interior tunable coupler (214B) or the communication tunable coupler (214A) via the control connector (206; Fig 2; [0082]) but does not expressly disclose “ to cause parametric photon swap”.
However, in the analogous art, Hatridge discloses systems for routing quantum signals in a quantum computing system utilizing parametric photon transitions ([0003], wherein (Fig 4, 5A-5CA [0068]) illustrates example modes 502 employing the parametric photon swapping scheme 400. Fig 5C illustrates an exemplary quantum computing system 503 including router 504 including the four modes w.sub.1, w.sub.2, w.sub.3, w.sub.4 and coupled to four cavity modes c.sub.1, c.sub.2, c.sub.3, c.sub.4. in various embodiments, a quantum router may have many modes (e.g., a theoretically infinite number of modes). In practical implementations, an exemplary router, as described further below, may utilize only a subset of its many modes (e.g., 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, etc.) to route quantum information.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use Hatridge configuration for Sete and thereafter the an alternating current (AC) (Fig 11; [0145] will cause to cause parametric photon swap in the conductor, at least, since this swap will enable the quantum information in one mode of the router (e.g., mode b or 2) with the quantum information in another mode (Hatridge [0070]).
Regarding of Claim 7, The combination of ( Sete and Hatridge) as applied to the quantum node of claim 6, further teaches, (the node) further comprising a controller (202; Fig 2; [0082])) coupled to the control connector (206; Fig 2), wherein the controller generates the AC/RF signal.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sete; Eyob A. et al., (US 20240311671 A1); hereinafter Sete; in view of Doi; Jun (US 20200218787 A1) hereinafter Doi
Regarding of Claim 12, Sete as applied to the quantum node of claim 1, does not expressly disclose, wherein the communication resonator (316A; Fig 3) limits noise from propagating into the quantum node (200) from a coaxial cable or coplanar waveguide.
However, in the analogous art, Doi teaches [0032] a quantum processer 130, made up of a plurality of physical quantum bits (also referred to as “qubits”). !30 comprises a plurality of superconducting transmon qubits, which is Josephson junction based qubit and are made on silicon wafers with superconducting metals such as niobium and aluminum. In the particular embodiment, quantum gates may be performed by sending electromagnetic impulses to the qubits through coaxial cables.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate Doi’s coaxial cables into Sete, and thereafter the combination of (Sete and Doi) will thereafter have noise limitation, since this will improve the performance of the node .
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sete; Eyob A. et al., (US 20240311671 A1); hereinafter Sete; in view of Finck; Aaron (US 20230179205 A1) hereinafter Finck
Regarding of Claim 13, Sete as applied to the quantum node of claim 1, is silent on, “wherein an effective loss of photon transfer ([0048]) into or out of the quantum node is reduced using a dark mode”.
However, in the analogous art, Finck teaches a quantum computing comprising superconducting structures and methods of creation thereof. [0001], wherein ([0047) a two-junction qubit can support and/or exhibit two distinct excitation modes: a dark mode and a bright mode. These two distinct excitation modes can have two different spatial symmetries and/or two different transition frequencies (e.g., a dark mode transition frequency and a bright transition frequency). More specifically, the dark mode of a two-junction qubit can be a higher frequency excitation mode that has no net dipole moment. Stated differently, the dark mode can refrain from coupling to global electric fields.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to select Finck’s dark mode for Sete photon transfer, and thereafter the combination of (Sete and Finck) node will have an effective loss of photon transfer ([0048]) into or out of the quantum node is reduced using a dark mode, sicnce , at least, dark mode can refrain from coupling to global electric fields(Finck [0047]) .
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sete; Eyob A. et al., (US 20240311671 A1 of record); hereinafter Sete; in view of Crescini; Nicolò (US 20230204647 A1 of record) hereinafter Crescini.
Regarding of Claim 14, Sete as applied to the quantum node of claim 1, but is silent on, wherein the communication resonator (316A; Fig 3) rejects an unwanted parametric sideband ([0092] because of its tunable feature).
However, in the analogous art, Crescini.teaches an interferometry of microwave signals for use with a quantum system for quantum computing ([0001]), wherein ([0047]) an interferometer device 112 can be controlled by any suitable component of the quantum system 101, such as by the processor 106. For example, such control can allow for selective tuning of the sideband frequency corresponding to a readout resonator frequency, and/or tuning of one or more relative phases and/or amplitudes to provide desired noise suppression.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to select Crescini’s tuning for Sete communication resonator, and thereafter the combination of (Sete and Crescini) communication resonator (316A; Fig 3) rejects an unwanted parametric sideband, since this selection, at least, provide desired noise suppression (Crescini [0047]).
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOAZZAM HOSSAIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7960. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 8:30AM - 6:00 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, Julio J. Maldonado can be reached on 571-272-1864. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR to register user only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MOAZZAM HOSSAIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2898
August 17, 2026
Prosecution Insights