DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination
1- 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/23/2026 has been entered.
Amendment
2- The Request for Continued Examination amendment filed has been entered and fully considered. Claims 1-4, 6-10, 12-14 and 16-20 remain pending in the application, where the independent claims have been amended. New claim 21 is added.
Response to Arguments
3- Applicant’s amendments and their corresponding arguments, with respect to the rejection of the pending claims under 102 and 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.
However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection, based on the change of scope of the claimed invention, is over the prior art, Jia and Li, used in the previous office action in view of Tani (JP 2001281092, cited by Applicants).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4- 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
5- Claims 1-2, 6, 21 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia et al. (CN 105510005, cited by Applicants)
As to claim 1, Jia teaches an optical device metrology system, its method of use and the corresponding controller with the instructions to operate it (Abstract and Fig. 1), comprising:
a substrate support (element 13 or chip 14) operable to retain a waveguide (the waveguide is claimed as an article acted upon by the device and not as an integral part of the device as is the substrate -see MPEP § 2115. The waveguide needs to be claimed separately as part of the device and not as a possible article acted upon and supported by the claimed substrate. Moreover, material of chip 14 is considered as a waveguide since it is providing reflections/transmissions from/through its surfaces necessarily presents internal reflections, which are construed as guiding the light within the substrate);
a light source operable to emit a light (¶ 15-17); a non-polarizing beam splitter (3) disposed in a path of the light, the non-polarizing beam splitter operable to split the light into a first photodetector light path and an optical light path (¶ 15-17); a first photodetector (4) disposed in the first photodetector light path operable to calculate a total power of the light (Fig. 1; the total power of the light is necessarily calculated to calculate transmittance/reflectance values); a second photodetector (5) disposed in a second photodetector light path from the waveguide when retained on the substrate (waveguide within 14), wherein the waveguide is disposed in the optical light path and operable to split the light in optical light path into the second photodetector light path and a third photodetector light path (Fig. 1; light is split towards detectors 5 and 6), the second photodetector operable to measure a reflected power of the light (Fig. 1 and ¶ 15-17) ; a third photodetector (6) disposed in the third photodetector light path, the third photodetector operable to measure a transmitted power of the light (Fig. 1 and ¶ 15-17); and a controller (15 and amplifiers 7-12), comprising an input for the first photodetector, an input for the second photodetector, an input for the third photodetector (Fig. 1; controller 15 appears to connect to all three PDs 1-3 after amplification of the signals thereof), wherein the controller is operable to receive a plurality of measurements from the first photodetector, the second photodetector, and the third photodetector to calculate a percentage light loss within the waveguide (Fig. 1 and ¶ 17-23) by: calculating the total power of the light at the first photodetector (Fig. 1; the total power of the light is necessarily calculated to calculate transmittance/reflectance values); measuring the reflected power of the light at the second photodetector (Fig. 1 and ¶ 15-17); measuring the transmitted power of the light at the third photodetector (Fig. 1 and ¶ 15-17); and collecting the plurality of measurements from the first photodetector, the second photodetector, and the third photodetector at the controller (Abstract and ¶ 14, 23 for ex; to measure the transmittance and reflectance).
Jia does not teach expressly the controller comprising a common ground between the first photodetector, the second photodetector, and the third photodetector.
However, the Examiner submits that, under BRI, the controller 15 appears to be a common point to all three PDs 1-3 after amplification of the signals thereof. One PHOSITA would find it obvious to use a common electric ground to the detectors for comparable measurements (See MPEP 2143 Sect. I. B-D).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use the apparatus, method and controller of Jia in view of general conditions so that the controller comprises a common ground for the plurality of measurements, with the advantage of effectively optimizing the optical measurements.
(claim 6) the optical device metrology system is non-mode excitation (across the reference, no excitation, and no fluorescence, phosphorescence, or luminescence in general, is emitted from the sample after being illuminated by the light from light source 1.)
(claim 21) wherein the controller is operable to receive a plurality of measurements from the first photodetector, the second photodetector, and the third photodetector to calculate a percentage light loss within the waveguide by: determining a level of DC offset between the first photodetector, the second photodetector, and the third photodetector using the common ground; and eliminating the level of DC offset using the controller (under BRI, the controller 15 appears to be a common point to all three PDs 1-3 after amplification of the signals thereof, and therefore suggests a common electric ground to the detectors for comparable measurements. Moreover, Jia clearly teaches, Abstract and ¶ 12, 23, detecting/measuring DC voltages from the phase-locking amplification process. One PHOSITA would also consider the filtering, i.e. eliminating, of the DC component in a phase lock-in amplifier type of measurement to increase the SNR of the measurements. See MPEP 2143 Sect. I. B-D).
As to claim 2, Jia teaches the optical device metrology system of claim 1, the method of claim 7 and the controller of claim 14.
Jia does not teach expressly wherein the second photodetector is positioned at an incident angle of about 5.50 to about 6.50 from the optical light path;
However, one PHOSITA would find it obvious, given the high similarities between the claimed invention and Jia’s disclosure, to select the angle of the second PD at the claimed ranges to optimize the measurements of the reflected light at low angle values of back-scattered/reflected light, rather than large values, since it has been held that where thegeneral condition of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum orworking ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 or In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use the apparatus, method and controller of Jia in view of general conditions so that the second photodetector is positioned at an incident angle of about 5.50 to about 6.50 from the optical light path, with the advantage of effectively optimizing the optical measurements.
6- Claim 4 is rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia in view of Li et al. CN 111982286 (cited by Applicants).
As to claim 4, Jia teaches the optical device metrology system of claim 1.
Jia does not teach expressly further comprising: a half-wave plate; and a polarizing beam splitter, wherein the half-wave plate and polarizing beam splitter are operable to align the polarization of the first light emitted from the light source; passing the first light from the light source through a fiber coupler.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Li teaches a system and method measuring thin optical properties (Figs. 1- 3 and Abstract) comprising: a half-wave plate (3); and a polarizing beam splitter (4), wherein the half-wave plate and polarizing beam splitter are operable to align the polarization of the light emitted from the light source (Fig. 1, ¶ 4, 13 for ex.). As to the optical fiber, it is an official notice that the free space propagation in Jia and/or Li can be replaced by a fibered optical propagation using optical fibers for optimizing the light signals and controlling its polarization in the case of using polarization maintaining fibers (see MPEP 2143 Sect. I. B-D)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use the apparatus, method and controller of Jia in view of Li’s suggestions so that comprising: a half-wave plate; and a polarizing beam splitter, wherein the half-wave plate and polarizing beam splitter are operable to align the polarization of the first light emitted from the light source; passing the first light from the light source through a fiber coupler, with the advantage of effectively optimizing the measurements of the optical polarization properties.
7- Claims 3, 7, 9-10, 12-14, 16, 19-20, 22-23 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia in view of Tani (JP 2001281092, cited by Applicants)
As to claims 14, 7, 3, 22-23, Jia teaches a controller of an optical device metrology system storing instructions, and its method of use (Abstract and Fig. 1, controller 15 and amplifiers 7-12), that, when executed by a computer processor, cause the controller to: calculate a first percentage light loss of a waveguide of the optical device metrology system for a first light having a first wavelength range using a first plurality of measurements from a first photodetector, a second photodetector, and a third photodetector (see rejection of claim 1, and Fig. 1 and ¶ 17-23), wherein the first plurality of measurements are collected by: projecting the first light from a light source operable to project the first light of the first wavelength range toward a non-polarizing beam splitter, wherein the non-polarizing beam splitter splits the first light into a first photodetector light path and an optical light path; calculating a total power of the first light at the first photodetector in the first photodetector light path; measuring a reflected power of the first light at the second photodetector in a second photodetector light path, wherein the second photodetector light path is formed from the first light reflecting off the waveguide disposed in the optical light path; and measuring a transmitted power of the first light at the third photodetector in a third photodetector light path, wherein the third photodetector light path is formed from the first light transmitted through the waveguide disposed in the optical light path; wherein the first plurality of measurements comprises the total power, the reflected power, and the transmitted power (see rejection of claim 1, and Fig. 1 and ¶ 17-23);
Jia does not teach expressly calculate a second percentage light loss of the waveguide of the optical device metrology system for a second light having a second wavelength range using a second plurality of measurements from a first photodetector, a second photodetector, and a third photodetector, wherein the second plurality of measurements are collected by at least: projecting of the second light having from the light source, wherein the second plurality of measurements comprises the total power, the reflected power, and the transmitted power of the light having the second wavelength range, the second wavelength range being different from the first wavelength range; (Claim 3) wherein: the light source is operable to alternately emit a first light having a first wavelength range, a second light having a second wavelength range, and a third light having a third wavelength range; and the controller operable to receive the plurality of measurements from the first photodetector, the second photodetector, and the third photodetector to calculate the percentage light loss within the waveguide for each of the first light, the second light, and the third light; (Claim 22) wherein the controller is operable to select the first light, the second light, or the third light emitted from the light source; (Claim 23) further comprising: projecting a third light having a third wavelength range from the light source, wherein the third wavelength range is different from the first wavelength range and the second wavelength range; and calculating a third percentage light loss at the waveguide using a third plurality of measurements from the first photodetector, the second photodetector, and the third photodetector for the third light.
However, and in a similar field of endeavor, Tani teaches an optical characteristic measuring apparatus and method (Abstract and Fig. 1) wherein, as stated in ¶ 4 for ex., a second (193 nm) and a third wavelength (157 nm) are considered as possible manufacturing light wavelengths, i.e. also as characterization light wavelengths, in addition to the first wavelength (248 nm). One PHOSITA would find it obvious to consider Jia’s method of measurement to be repeated for all the wavelengths for a full spectral characterization of the waveguide at higher resolution wavelengths (See MPEP 2143, Sect. I. B-D).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use the method and controller of Jia in view of Tani’s suggestions so that calculate a second percentage light loss of the waveguide of the optical device metrology system for a second light having a second wavelength range using a second plurality of measurements from a first photodetector, a second photodetector, and a third photodetector, wherein the second plurality of measurements are collected by at least: projecting of the second light having from the light source, wherein the second plurality of measurements comprises the total power, the reflected power, and the transmitted power of the light having the second wavelength range, the second wavelength range being different from the first wavelength range; wherein: the light source is operable to alternately emit a first light having a first wavelength range, a second light having a second wavelength range, and a third light having a third wavelength range; and the controller operable to receive the plurality of measurements from the first photodetector, the second photodetector, and the third photodetector to calculate the percentage light loss within the waveguide for each of the first light, the second light, and the third light; wherein the controller is operable to select the first light, the second light, or the third light emitted from the light source, with the advantage, taught by Tani of effectively optimizing the optical characterization measurements of the waveguide at higher resolution wavelengths (¶ 4).
Moreover, Jia teaches:
(claim 9) wherein the method is a fully-optical method (Fig. 1, the whole process of measurement is optical, besides the optoelectronics in the photodetectors).
(Claim 12) wherein a substrate support (clamp 13) is operable to support waveguide (Fig .1)
(claims 10, 20) wherein the percentage light loss of the waveguide can be measured before a processing of the waveguide, during the processing of the waveguide, after the processing of the waveguide, or a combination thereof (¶ 3, during coating process).
(Claims 13, 16) further comprising: determining a level of DC offset using a common ground between the first photodetector, the second photodetector, and the third photodetector; and eliminating the level of DC offset using the controller; (Claim 16) wherein calculating the percentage light loss of a waveguide further comprises: determining a level of DC offset using a common ground between the first photodetector, the second photodetector, and the third photodetector; and eliminating the level of DC offset using the controller (under BRI, the controller 15 appears to be a common point to all three PDs 1-3 after amplification of the signals thereof, and therefore suggests a common electric ground to the detectors for comparable measurements. Moreover, Jia clearly teaches, Abstract and ¶ 12, 23, detecting/measuring DC voltages from the phase-locking amplification process. One PHOSITA would also consider the filtering, i.e. eliminating, of the DC component in a phase lock-in amplifier type of measurement to increase the SNR of the measurements. See MPEP 2143 Sect. I. B-D).
As to claim 19, Jia teaches the controller of claim 14.
Jia does not teach expressly wherein the second photodetector is positioned at an incident angle of about 5.50 to about 6.50 from the optical light path;
However, one PHOSITA would find it obvious, given the high similarities between the claimed invention and Jia’s disclosure, to select the angle of the second PD at the claimed ranges to optimize the measurements of the reflected light at low angle values of back-scattered/reflected light, rather than large values, since it has been held that where thegeneral condition of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum orworking ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 or In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use the apparatus, method and controller of Jia in view of general conditions so that the second photodetector is positioned at an incident angle of about 5.50 to about 6.50 from the optical light path, with the advantage of effectively optimizing the optical measurements.
8- Claims 8, 17-18 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia and Tani in view of Li et al. CN 111982286 (cited by Applicants).
As to claim 8, the combination of Jia in view of Tani teaches the method of claim 7.
The combination does not teach expressly further comprising: passing the first light from the light source through a fiber coupler; projecting the first light from the fiber coupler to a half-wave plate; projecting the first light from the half-wave plate to a polarizing beam splitter; and projecting the first light from the polarizing beam splitter toward the non-polarizing beam splitter.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Li teaches a system and method measuring thin optical properties (Figs. 1- 3 and Abstract) comprising: a half-wave plate (3); and a polarizing beam splitter (4), wherein the half-wave plate and polarizing beam splitter are operable to align the polarization of the light emitted from the light source (Fig. 1, ¶ 4, 13 for ex.). As to the optical fiber, it is an official notice that the free space propagation in Jia and/or Li can be replaced by a fibered optical propagation using optical fibers for optimizing the light signals and controlling its polarization in the case of using polarization maintaining fibers (see MPEP 2143 Sect. I. B-D)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use the method of Jia and Tani in view of Li’s suggestions so that the method further comprising: passing the first light from the light source through a fiber coupler; projecting the first light from the fiber coupler to a half-wave plate; projecting the first light from the half-wave plate to a polarizing beam splitter; and projecting the first light from the polarizing beam splitter toward the non-polarizing beam splitter, with the advantage of effectively optimizing the measurements of the optical polarization properties.
As to claims 17-18, the combination of Jia in view of Tani teaches the controller of claim 14.
The combination does not teach expressly wherein the controller is operable to select the first wavelength range of light or the second wavelength range that is emitted from the light source; wherein the first wavelength range and the second wavelength range of light comprises a blue light, a red light, or a green light.
However, Li teaches the controller is operable to select a wavelength, or wavelength range given the spectral width of any physical spectral light, that is emitted from the light source; wherein the wavelength of light comprises a blue light, a red light, a green light, or a combination thereof (¶ 4-6, 15; Li teaches using spectrometric device and method to characterize the sample. Spectrophotometry is known to use variations of the wavelength of the source, in the visible, i.e. RGB)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use the apparatus, method and controller of Jia/Tani in view of Li’s suggestions so that the controller is operable to select the first wavelength range of light or the second wavelength range that is emitted from the light source; wherein the first wavelength range and the second wavelength range of light comprises a blue light, a red light, or a green light, with the advantage of effectively characterize spectrally the measured sample.
Conclusion
Spectrophotometry
Thomas A. Germer, et al. in Experimental Methods in the Physical Sciences, 2014
1.1 Opening Remarks
Spectrophotometry is the quantitative measurement of the interaction of ultraviolet (UV), visible, and infrared (IR) radiation with a material and has an impact on a wide field of science and technology. The nature of this interaction depends upon the physical properties of the material, for example, transparent or opaque, smooth or rough, pure or contaminated, and thin or thick. Thus, spectrophotometric measurements can be used to quantify, in turn, these important physical properties of the material. 1, and fluorescence and can be classified as phenomenological optical properties of the material.
Downloaded from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/physics-and-astronomy/spectrophotometry
The examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record in the body of this action for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. Applicant should consider the entire prior art as applicable as to the limitations of the claims. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the response, to consider fully the entire references as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMED K AMARA whose telephone number is (571)272-7847. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday: 9:00-17:00.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Tarifur Chowdhury can be reached on (571-272-2287. 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 only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/Mohamed K AMARA/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877