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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 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.
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.
Claims 1, 3 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noual (“Surface Acoustic Waves-Localized Plasmon Interaction in Pillared Photonic Crystals”) in view of Witte (US Patent Publication Number 2019/0354026 A1).
Noual teaches, as in claim 1, an apparatus comprising an optical structure (Page 3, first paragraph “optomechanical structures”) having one or more sub-wavelength features (Fig. 1a; Page 5, paragraph 3 “square array of gold nanocylinders) disposed on a substrate (Fig. 1a; Page 5, paragraph 3,“substrate made of silicon”), wherein each feature has one or more corresponding plasmon resonances (“localized surface plasmon (LSP) waves supported by small metallic nanoparticles”, Page 3, paragraph 2); and an acoustic transducer (Page 4, paragraph 2 “interdigital transducers”) configured to provide an acoustic excitation (Page 4, paragraph 2 “Lamb waves”) to the optical structure; wherein each feature has an optical spectral response that can be altered by the acoustic excitation via modulation of the corresponding plasmon resonances (Abstract, “modulated by surface acoustic waves due to deformation of the structure in the vicinity of the pillars”), Noual fails to teach wherein the optical structure is configured as an optical metasurface including two or more sub-wavelength features disposed on a substrate; wherein the optical metasurface is configured to manipulate properties of incident light responsive to the acoustic excitation; wherein the properties of the incident light are manipulated with spatial variation by the acoustic excitation. In a related art, Witte teaches wherein the optical structure is configured as an optical metasurface (1014) including two or more sub-wavelength features (Fig. 12) disposed on a substrate the layer 1014 sits on); wherein the optical metasurface (1014) is configured to manipulate properties of incident light responsive to the acoustic excitation (1004), wherein the properties of the incident light are manipulated with spatial variation by the acoustic excitation (¶0092 “a modulation, which is the result of the diffraction 1016 of the acoustic wave (AW)”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art the before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the optical structure, as taught by Noual, with the piezoelectric, as taught by Witte, for the purpose of providing distinct acoustic diffraction orders can be expected at pre-defined angles (¶0097).
Noual teaches, as in claim 3, wherein each feature includes a metal-dielectric-metal layer stack (Abstract and Fig. 1a) having a gap defined by the dielectric (Page 8, first paragraph “the spacer layer situated right underneath the gold nanocylinder acts as an effective cavity”), and wherein the plasmon resonances of each feature are affected by the corresponding gaps (Page 8, first paragraph “the cavity oscillates together with the cylinder with some volume deformation occurring, especially along the axis; the deformation is much weaker than those of modes (3) and (8), so should be the plasmon-phonon coupling magnitude”).
Noual teaches, as in claim 7, wherein the apparatus is configured to provide characterization of elastic properties of the sub-wavelength features (Page 5, paragraph 3 “the elastic properties of which are represented by a Young’s modulus of E=2.5G Pa”).
Noual teaches, as in claim 8, wherein the apparatus is configured to provide an optical functionality selected from the group consisting of optical modulation (Abstract, “light modulation”).
Noual teaches, as in claim 9, wherein the acoustic excitation is selected from the group consisting of Lamb waves (Page 4, paragraph 2 “Lamb waves”).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noual (“Surface Acoustic Waves-Localized Plasmon Interaction in Pillared Photonic Crystals”) in view of Witte (US Patent Publication Number 2019/0354026 A1) and in further view of Favalora (US Patent Number 11,243,450 B2).
Noual and Witte fail to teach, as in claim 4, wherein the substrate is piezoelectric. In a related art, Favalora teaches an optical structure (32) wherein the substrate (36) is piezoelectric (Col 4. Lines 52-53).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art the before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the optical structure, as taught by Noual Witte, with the piezoelectric, as taught by Favalora, for the purpose of providing an optical power component for directing light from optical modulators (Col. 3, lines 7-8).
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noual (“Surface Acoustic Waves-Localized Plasmon Interaction in Pillared Photonic Crystals”) in view of Witte (US Patent Publication Number 2019/0354026 A1) and in further view of in view of Valette (EP Patent Number 0620470 A1).
Noual fails to teach, as in claim 5, wherein the acoustic excitation includes acoustic signals having one or more distinct periods. In a related art, Valette teaches an optical device wherein the acoustic excitation includes acoustic signals (20) having one or more distinct periods (See the distinct periods in in the wave 20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art the before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the optical structure, as taught by Noual, with the distinct periods, as taught by Valette, for the purpose of providing an acoustic wave is strongly diffracted, (Col. 3, lines 7-8).
Noual fails to teach, as in claim 6, wherein the one or more distinct periods are in one or more different lateral directions. In s related art, Valette teaches an optical device wherein the one or more distinct periods are in one or more different lateral directions. (See the distinct periods in in the wave 20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art the before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the optical structure, as taught by Noual, with the distinct periods, as taught by Valette, for the purpose of providing an acoustic wave is strongly diffracted (Col. 3, lines 7-8).
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 JOURNEY F SUMLAR whose telephone number is (571)270-0656. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4pm.
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, Ricky Mack can be reached at 571-272-2333. 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.
JOURNEY F. SUMLAR
Examiner
Art Unit 2872
11 June 2026
/SHARRIEF I BROOME/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights