DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1 through 22 originally filed 9 May 2023. By response to restriction requirement received 19 March 2026; Invention A is elected for examination and claims 17 through 22 are withdrawn from consideration. By amendment received 19 March 2026; claims 1, 9, 10, 13, 15, and 17 are amended and claims 6 through 8 are cancelled. Claims 1 through 5 and 9 through 16 are addressed by this 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 have been fully considered; they are addressed below.
Applicant argues that the amendments to the drawings and the disclosure overcome the previous drawing objections. This argument is persuasive and the corresponding objections are withdrawn.
Applicant argues that the combination of Tanaka et al. (Tanaka, US Pub. 2025/0149858) and Cujia Pena et al. (Cujia Pena, US Pub. 2017/0104313) is improper because, according to applicant, Tanaka teaches away from the modification involved in the combination. To support this argument, applicant contends that Tanaka sets forth that the desired suppression in position shifts between the center of a current constriction region and the center of a lens-shaped part of Tanaka can only be achieved when the constriction region of the VCSEL has the convex shape (Tanaka, ¶144).
Applicant's argument is not persuasive because it is contradicted by Tanaka. Specifically, Tanaka states "the convex-shaped part CSP may be other shapes than the lens shape and the mesa shape" (Tanaka, ¶283). Since Cujia Pena provides an alternately constructed lens structure and since Tanaka states that other shapes may be employed than the lens shape, one of ordinary skill in the art would not have been discouraged from modifying the device of Tanaka to employ the lens structure of Cujia Pena rather than the lens structure of Tanaka. As such, this argument is not persuasive.
The combination of Tanaka and Cujia Pena is maintained (see below). Applicant's argument that Tanaka teaches away from the modification involved in the combination is not persuasive because it is contradicted by Tanaka.
Applicant argues that the combination of Tanaka and Cujia Pena is improper because, according to applicant, the references are drawn to disparate devices. To support this argument, applicant contends that the components of Cujia Pena and Tanaka are taught for different purposes in different structures.
Applicant's argument is not persuasive because it is contradicted by Tanaka and Cujia Pena. Specifically, Tanaka states that the VCSEL thereof includes a tunnel junction and surrounding material functions as a light constriction region (Tanaka, ¶118 describing tunnel junction 106 shown in Figure 1). Cujia Pena states that the sub-wavelength structures are provided for confinement within the cavity (Cujia Pena, ¶28 describing the operation of sub-wavelength structures 121, 122, 123, and 124 within cavity 1 depicted in Figure 1). Cujia Pena also states that the microcavity thereof may be employed for vertical cavity lasers (Cujia Pena, ¶37 identifying that an active material may be included within the cavity and ¶54 further clarifying the use of the related microcavities of Figure 3 for an array of VCSELs). Since Tanaka employs the cited element thereof for optical confinement within a VCSEL and since Cujia Pena also employs the cited element thereof for optical confinement within a VCSEL, the teachings of Tanaka and Cujia Pena are analogous art. As such, this argument is not persuasive.
The combination of Tanaka and Cujia Pena is maintained (see below). Applicant's argument that the references are drawn to disparate devices is not persuasive because it is contradicted by Tanaka and Cujia Pena.
Applicant argues that the combined teachings of Tanaka and Cujia Pena do not teach or render obvious the limitation "Wherein the n-type material comprises a central n-type mesa and at least one outer n-type region separated from the central n-type mesa by a respective opening" because, according to applicant, Cujia Pena does not teach this feature. To support this argument, applicant contends that the material selection of Cujia Pena is critical to achieving the required refractive index difference and Cujia Pena does not recite use of the claimed material in the structure thereof.
Applicant's argument is not persuasive because it addresses Cujia Pena rather than the combined teachings of Tanaka and Cujia Pena (MPEP §2145IV). Specifically, Tanaka teaches a mesa structure including an optical confinement structure realized by a shaped tunnel junction (Tanaka, ¶118 describing the function of tunnel junction 106 depicted in Figure 1). Cujia Pena teaches that an optical confinement structure may, instead, be formed by particularly shaped lithographic structures formed in part of a multilayer structure (Cujia Pena, ¶28 describing the confinement function of the structure and ¶30 describing the formation of the structure in a sequence of material layers such as a MQW heterostructure). Further, the contemplated materials of Cujia Pena encompass the materials of Tanaka (Cujia Pena, ¶36-37 describing the various possible materials useful for providing the required refractive indices which encompass the semiconductor structure of Tanaka). Since Tanaka produces a refractive index difference for an optical confinement structure with the tunnel junction thereof and since Cujia Pena suggests forming the optical confinement structure thereof from materials that broadly encompass the materials of Tanaka, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the device of Tanaka by shaping the optical confinement structure in the manner set forth in Cujia Pena while maintaining the material system of Tanaka. As such, this argument is not persuasive.
The limitation "Wherein the n-type material comprises a central n-type mesa and at least one outer n-type region separated from the central n-type mesa by a respective opening" is rendered obvious by the combined teachings of Tanaka and Cujia Pena (see below). Applicant's argument that Cujia Pena does not teach this feature is not persuasive because it addresses Cujia Pena rather than the combined teachings of Tanaka and Cujia Pena (MPEP §2145IV).
As such, all claims are addressed as follows:
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, and 9 through 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka et al. (Tanaka, US Pub. 2025/0149858) in view of Cujia Pena et al. (Cujia Pena, US Pub. 2017/0104313).
Regarding claim 1, Tanaka discloses, "A quantum well configured to emit light" (p. [0116] and Fig. 1, pt. 104). "Wherein the quantum well defines a quantum well plane" (p. [0116] and Fig. 1, pt. 104). "Wherein an optical axis is perpendicular to the quantum well plane" (p. [0116] and Fig. 1, pt. 104). "A tunnel junction proximate the quantum well along the optical axis" (p. [0116] and Fig. 1, pts. 104 and 106). "Wherein the tunnel junction comprises a p-type material proximate the quantum well" (p. [0120] and Fig. 1, pts. 104, 106, and 106a). "Wherein the p-type material comprises a mesa region having a maximum outer dimension" (p. [0120] and Fig. 1, pt. 106a). "Wherein the mesa region has a first area in a first plane perpendicular to the optical axis" (p. [0120] and Fig. 1, pt. 106a). "An n-type material disposed on the mesa region within the first area" (p. [0120] and Fig. 1, pt. 106b). "Wherein the n-type material has a second area in a second plane parallel to the first plane" (p. [0120] and Fig. 1, pt. 106b). "Wherein the second area is equal or less than the first area" (p. [0110] and Fig. 1, pts. 106a and 106b, where the area at the top of 106a is larger than the area at the top of 106b due to the convex shape of this structure). "Wherein the p-type material and the n-type material are configured to provide a change in refractive index from the maximum outer dimension over a distance toward the optical axis" (p. [0118] and Fig. 1, pts. 106 and 107). "Wherein the change in the refractive index forms an optical aperture of the laser" (p. [0118] and Fig. 1, pts. 106 and 107). Tanaka does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the n-type material comprises a central n-type mesa and at least one outer n-type region separated from the central n-type mesa by a respective opening." "Wherein a respective width of the at least one outer n-type region is less than half of a wavelength of the light in the n-type material." "Wherein the respective opening has a width that is less than half of a wavelength of the light in the n-type material." Cujia Pena discloses, "Wherein the n-type material comprises a central n-type mesa and at least one outer n-type region separated from the central n-type mesa by a respective opening" (p. [0027] and Fig. 1, pts. 121 and 124). "Wherein a respective width of the at least one outer n-type region is less than half of a wavelength of the light in the n-type material" (p. [0028] and Fig. 1, pts. 121 and 124). "Wherein the respective opening has a width that is less than half of a wavelength of the light in the n-type material" (p. [0028] and Fig. 1, pts. 121 and 124). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Tanaka with the teachings of Cujia Pena. In view of the teachings of Tanaka regarding a VCSEL including a current and optical confinement region embodied in a tunnel junction, the alternate construction of the optical confinement region as a high contrast grating as taught by Cujia Pena would enhance the teachings of Tanaka by providing a suitably alternate manner of constructing a region that provides the desired refractive index variation.
Regarding claim 2, Tanaka discloses, "Wherein the laser is a vertical-cavity surface-emitting laser" (p. [0106] and Fig. 1, pt. 10-1).
Regarding claim 4, Tanaka discloses, "Wherein the n-type material comprises a first surface adjacent the mesa region and a second surface opposite the first surface" (p. [0120] and Fig. 1, pt. 106b). "Wherein the n-type material has an outer dimension that increases along the optical axis from the second surface to the first surface" (p. [0110] and Fig. 1, pt. 106b, where the area at the bottom of 106b is larger than the area at the top of 106b due to the convex shape of this structure).
Regarding claim 5, Tanaka discloses, "Wherein the mesa region has an outer dimension that increases along the optical axis from a third surface adjacent the n-type material toward the quantum well" (p. [0110] and Fig. 1, pt. 106, where the area at the bottom of 106 is larger than the area at the top of 106 due to the convex shape of this structure).
Regarding claim 9, Tanaka does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the at least one outer n-type region has an external dimension equal to the maximum outer dimension of the mesa region of the p-type material." Cujia Pena discloses, "Wherein the at least one outer n-type region has an external dimension equal to the maximum outer dimension of the mesa region of the p-type material" (p. [0028] and Fig. 1, pt. 124, where employing this structure for confinement structure of Tanaka involves imposing this structure on the whole of the tunnel junction). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Tanaka with the teachings of Cujia Pena for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 10, Tanaka does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the at least one outer n-type region comprises a first outer n-type region separated from the central n-type mesa by a first opening." "A second outer n-type region separated from the first outer n-type region by a second opening." Cujia Pena discloses, "Wherein the at least one outer n-type region comprises a first outer n-type region separated from the central n-type mesa by a first opening" (p. [0027] and Fig. 1, pt. 122). "A second outer n-type region separated from the first outer n-type region by a second opening" (p. [0027] and Fig. 1, pt. 124). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Tanaka with the teachings of Cujia Pena for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 11, Tanaka does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein each of the first outer n-type region, the first opening, the second outer n-type region, and the second opening have a respective width that is less than half of a wavelength of the light in the n-type material." Cujia Pena discloses, "Wherein each of the first outer n-type region, the first opening, the second outer n-type region, and the second opening have a respective width that is less than half of a wavelength of the light in the n-type material" (p. [0028] and Fig. 1, pts. 121, 122, and 124). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Tanaka with the teachings of Cujia Pena for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 12, Tanaka does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the second outer n-type region has an external dimension equal to the maximum outer dimension of the mesa region of the p-type material." Cujia Pena discloses, "Wherein the second outer n-type region has an external dimension equal to the maximum outer dimension of the mesa region of the p-type material" (p. [0028] and Fig. 1, pt. 124, where employing this structure for confinement structure of Tanaka involves imposing this structure on the whole of the tunnel junction). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Tanaka with the teachings of Cujia Pena for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka, in view of Cujia Pena, and further in view of Kuramoto et al. (Kuramoto, US Pub. 2019/0363515).
Regarding claim 3, The combination of Tanaka and Cujia Pena does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the laser is a single-mode vertical-cavity surface-emitting laser." Kuramoto discloses, "Wherein the laser is a single-mode vertical-cavity surface-emitting laser" (p. [0066], [0086], and Fig. 4, pt. 21). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of Tanaka and Cujia Pena with the teachings of Kuramoto. In view of the teachings of Tanaka regarding a VCSEL including a current and optical confinement region embodied in a tunnel junction, the additional requirement for constructing the confinement region to achieve single mode operation as taught by Kuramoto would enhance the teachings of Tanaka and Cujia Pena by allowing the device to be useful for applications requiring single mode output.
Claims 13 through 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka, in view of Cujia Pena, and further in view of Sirbu et al. (Sirbu, US Pub. 2002/0131464).
Regarding claim 13, Tanaka discloses, "A quantum well configured to emit light" (p. [0116] and Fig. 1, pt. 104). "Wherein the quantum well defines a quantum well plane" (p. [0116] and Fig. 1, pt. 104). "A p-type material proximate the quantum well" (p. [0117] and Fig. 1, pts. 104 and 105). "A first tunnel junction proximate the quantum well along a first optical axis perpendicular to the quantum well plane" (p. [0116] and Fig. 1, pts. 104 and 106). "Wherein the first tunnel junction defines a first optical aperture" (p. [0118] and Fig. 1, pt. 106). "[The tunnel junctions comprise] a distinct portion of the p-type material forming a mesa region" (p. [0120] and Fig. 1, pts. 104, 106, and 106a). "Wherein the mesa region has a maximum outer dimension" (p. [0120] and Fig. 1, pt. 106a). "Wherein the mesa region has a first area in a first plane parallel to the quantum well plane" (p. [0120] and Fig. 1, pt. 106a). "An n-type material disposed on the mesa region within the maximum outer dimension" (p. [0120] and Fig. 1, pt. 106b). "Wherein the n-type material has a second area in a second plane parallel to the first plane" (p. [0120] and Fig. 1, pt. 106b). "Wherein the second area is less than the first area" (p. [0110] and Fig. 1, pts. 106a and 106b, where the area at the top of 106a is larger than the area at the top of 106b due to the convex shape of this structure). "Wherein the first tunnel junction increases a first overlap of (i) a first current density through the first optical aperture and (ii) a first optical field of the light through the first optical aperture" (p. [0118] and Fig. 1, pts. 106 and 107). Tanaka does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the n-type material comprises a central n-type mesa and an outer n-type region separated from the central n-type mesa by an opening." "Wherein the outer n-type region has a width that is less than half of a wavelength of the light in the n-type material." "Wherein the opening has a width that is less than half of a wavelength of the light in the n-type material." Cujia Pena discloses, "Wherein the n-type material comprises a central n-type mesa and an outer n-type region separated from the central n-type mesa by an opening" (p. [0027] and Fig. 1, pts. 121 and 124). "Wherein the outer n-type region has a width that is less than half of a wavelength of the light in the n-type material" (p. [0028] and Fig. 1, pts. 121 and 124). "Wherein the opening has a width that is less than half of a wavelength of the light in the n-type material" (p. [0028] and Fig. 1, pts. 121 and 124). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Tanaka with the teachings of Cujia Pena for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
The combination of Tanaka and Cujia Pena does not explicitly disclose, "A second tunnel junction proximate the quantum well along a second optical axis perpendicular to the quantum well plane." "Wherein the second tunnel junction defines a second optical aperture." "Wherein the second tunnel junction is laterally offset from the first tunnel junction in a direction parallel to the quantum well plane." "Wherein the second tunnel junction increases a second overlap of (i) a second current density through the second optical aperture and (ii) a second optical field of the light through the second optical aperture." Sirbu discloses, "A second tunnel junction proximate the quantum well along a second optical axis perpendicular to the quantum well plane" (p. [0048], [0059], and Fig. 8, pts. 18 and 34). "Wherein the second tunnel junction defines a second optical aperture" (p. [0059] and Fig. 8, pt. 34). "Wherein the second tunnel junction is laterally offset from the first tunnel junction in a direction parallel to the quantum well plane" (p. [0059] and Fig. 8, pts. 33 and 34). "Wherein the second tunnel junction increases a second overlap of (i) a second current density through the second optical aperture and (ii) a second optical field of the light through the second optical aperture" (p. [0043] and Fig. 8, pt. 34). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of Tanaka and Cujia Pena with the teachings of Sirbu. In view of the teachings of Tanaka regarding a VCSEL including a current and optical confinement region embodied in a tunnel junction, the alternate construction of the VCSEL as a member of a VCSEL array in which emitters provide different emission wavelengths as taught by Sirbu would enhance the teachings of Tanaka and Cujia Pena by allowing emission of light having higher total output power and/or broader bandwidth.
Regarding claim 14, The combination of Tanaka and Cujia Pena does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein respective maximum outer dimensions of the mesa regions of the first tunnel junction and the second tunnel junction are different." Sirbu discloses, "Wherein respective maximum outer dimensions of the mesa regions of the first tunnel junction and the second tunnel junction are different" (p. [0059] and Fig. 8, pts. 33 and 34, where the use of different wavelength emission regions requires varying the beam waist diameter provided by the confinement regions according to the teachings of Tanaka). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of Tanaka and Cujia Pena with the teachings of Sirbu for the reasons provided above regarding claim 13.
Regarding claim 15, Tanaka discloses, "A quantum well configured to emit light" (p. [0116] and Fig. 1, pt. 104). "Wherein the quantum well defines a quantum well plane" (p. [0116] and Fig. 1, pt. 104). "Wherein an optical axis is perpendicular to the quantum well plane" (p. [0116] and Fig. 1, pt. 104). "A p-type material proximate the quantum well" (p. [0117] and Fig. 1, pts. 104 and 105). "Wherein the tunnel junction defines an optical aperture" (p. [0118] and Fig. 1, pt. 106). "Wherein the tunnel junction comprises a distinct portion of the p-type material forming a mesa region" (p. [0120] and Fig. 1, pts. 104, 106, and 106a). "Wherein the mesa region has a maximum outer dimension" (p. [0120] and Fig. 1, pt. 106a). "Wherein the mesa region has a first area in a first plane parallel to the quantum well plane" (p. [0120] and Fig. 1, pt. 106a). "An n-type material disposed on the mesa region within the maximum outer dimension" (p. [0120] and Fig. 1, pt. 106b). "Wherein the n-type material has a second area in a second plane parallel to the first plane" (p. [0120] and Fig. 1, pt. 106b). "Wherein the second area is less than the first area" (p. [0110] and Fig. 1, pts. 106a and 106b, where the area at the top of 106a is larger than the area at the top of 106b due to the convex shape of this structure). "Wherein each tunnel junction increases a respective positional overlap of (i) a respective location of maximum current density through the respective optical aperture and (ii) a respective optical field of the light through the respective optical aperture" (p. [0118] and Fig. 1, pts. 106 and 107). Tanaka does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the n-type material comprises a central n-type mesa and an outer n-type region separated from the central n-type mesa by an opening." "Wherein the outer n-type region has a width that is less than half of a wavelength of the light in the n-type material." "Wherein the opening has a width that is less than half of a wavelength of the light in the n-type material." Cujia Pena discloses, "Wherein the n-type material comprises a central n-type mesa and an outer n-type region separated from the central n-type mesa by an opening" (p. [0027] and Fig. 1, pts. 121 and 124). "Wherein the outer n-type region has a width that is less than half of a wavelength of the light in the n-type material" (p. [0028] and Fig. 1, pts. 121 and 124). "Wherein the opening has a width that is less than half of a wavelength of the light in the n-type material" (p. [0028] and Fig. 1, pts. 121 and 124). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Tanaka with the teachings of Cujia Pena for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
The combination of Tanaka and Cujia Pena does not explicitly disclose, "For each laser of the array: a tunnel junction proximate the quantum well along the optical axis." Sirbu discloses, "For each laser of the array: a tunnel junction proximate the quantum well along the optical axis" (p. [0059] and Fig. 8, pts. 33 and 34). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of Tanaka and Cujia Pena with the teachings of Sirbu for the reasons provided above regarding claim 13.
Regarding claim 16, The combination of Tanaka and Cujia Pena does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the array is formed from a single wafer comprising the quantum well, the p-type material, and the respective tunnel junction of each laser of the array." Sirbu discloses, "Wherein the array is formed from a single wafer comprising the quantum well, the p-type material, and the respective tunnel junction of each laser of the array" (p. [0047], [0059], and Figs. 2 and 8, pts. 18, 20, 33, and 34). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of Tanaka and Cujia Pena with the teachings of Sirbu for the reasons provided above regarding claim 13.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chang-Hasnain et al. (Chang-Hasnain, US Pub. 2013/0058370) is cited for teaching that high contrast gratings may provide a lens function.
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 Sean P Hagan whose telephone number is (571)270-1242. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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.
/SEAN P HAGAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Prosecution Insights