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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Taiwan on 04/17/2023. A copy of the TW112114270 was received 06/20/2023.
Joint Inventors
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.
Response to Amendments
Applicant’s amendment filed 12/12/2025 has been considered and entered.
The rejection under 35 USC 112 set forth in the office action mailed 09/17/2025 is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments (Pages 7-10 remarks received 12/12/2025) with respect to the rejection of claims 9-15 under 35 USC 102 and 35 USC 103 have been fully considered. Arguments other than those addressed below have been rendered moot in view of the claim amendments and modified grounds for rejection.
With regards to claim 9, applicant has stated that “…it is evident that element 210c (optical waveguide element) taught in Erickson is inserted in element 210b (optical chip) instead of being "alongside" of the optical chip. Therefore, the optical waveguide element and the optical chip taught in Erickson do not meet the requirement set forth in claim 1 as being "alongside"…”. However, examiner respectfully disagrees.
Patentability is determined based on the invention as claimed. Claim 9 requires that one element (the optical waveguide element) be “alongside” another element (optical chip). The term “alongside” is being interpreted at face value as meaning “along a side of” (Examiner notes that the term could also be generally interpreted as meaning “along with”). The cavity 310b within Erickson’s element 210b is a hollow region capable of housing element 210c and thus necessarily defines at least one interior “side” which interfaces with element 210c. Erickson discloses element 210c as being located immediately adjacent to the aforementioned side. Thus, the optical waveguide element of Erickson is “…disposed on top of the interposer alongside the optical chip…”.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 objected to because of the following informalities:
Lines 3-5 of claim 11 should read “…the emergent surface is a convex surface, and wherein the light beam emitted horizontally from the light-emitting surface is totally reflected by the tilted plane mirror surface, converged through the convex lens, and output as the parallel light beam through the emergent surface.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
With regards to claim 14, lines 3-4 of the claim recite “…the incident surface is located in a direction perpendicular to the light-transmitting layer…”. The “light transmitting layer” is a physical element with three dimensions. A first direction can only be perpendicular to a physical element if there is a particular second direction - specifically associated with the physical element - with respect to which the first direction can be considered. There is no such second direction associated with the “light-transmitting layer” of claim 14. The claim is indefinite because the structure of the claimed device is unclear.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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.
Claims 9-10 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erickson (US 11668875 B2) in view of Ishikawa (US 9122025 B2).
With regards to claim 9, Erickson discloses a light-coupling device, comprising:
an interposer (Fig7a/Interposer 220 [Another optical element]) having a top recess forming a locating slot (Fig7a/Locating slot 310c [Third intersect cavity]);
an optical chip (Fig7a/Optical chip 210b) disposed on top of the interposer, the optical chip having a waveguide layer (Fig7a/Waveguide layer 340b [Second waveguide]), a light-emitting surface of the waveguide layer being located at an edge of the optical chip (Fig7a/Edge as indicated below);
PNG
media_image1.png
123
112
media_image1.png
Greyscale
an optical waveguide element (Fig7a/Waveguide element 140 [Optic]) having a bottom portion fixed in the locating slot and being disposed on top of the interposer (Fig7a) alongside the optical chip (Fig7a), the optical waveguide element including an incident surface facing the light-emitting surface (Incident surface [Leftmost surface of element 140]), an emergent surface located at a top surface of the optical waveguide element (Fig7a/Emergent surface [Upper portion of right-side surface of element 140 as outlined below]), and a reflective surface located inside the optical waveguide element (Surface of element 150b), a light beam emitted horizontally from the light-emitting surface entering the optical waveguide element through the incident surface (Fig7a/Light beam 170 [Planar path/bidirectional]; Column 3/Lines 28-34), the light beam being totally reflected through the reflective surface and outputting a light beam through the emergent surface; and
PNG
media_image2.png
508
699
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a fiber array connector disposed on top of the optical chip (Erickson/Figs2a&Fig7a/Elements 210a&110 together form fiber array connector), the fiber array connector including a carrier (210a), an optical waveguide lens fixed to the carrier (Column 4, Lines 59-60), and a plurality of fibers (Fig2a/Optical fibers 110 [Fiber optic cable]; Column 4/Lines 53-54);
wherein the optical waveguide element has two opposite sides (Fig7a/Left and right sides of element 140), the optical chip including the waveguide layer is disposed on one side of the optical waveguide element having the incident surface (Fig7a), the other side of the optical waveguide element has an adjacent area on top of the interposer below the fiber array connector for accommodating another element (Fig7a/Adjacent area outlined below).
PNG
media_image3.png
219
509
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Erickson is silent regarding the light beam being emitted in a vertical direction through the emergent surface. However, in a different embodiment, Erickson discloses a separate optical waveguide element wherein a light beam is totally reflected through the reflective surface and emitted in a vertical direction through an emergent surface (Fig3e/Optical waveguide element and emergent surface as shown below [Emergent surface as outlined below]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the optical waveguide element of Erickson with an optical waveguide element wherein the light beam being emitted in a vertical direction as suggested by Erickson since doing so would allow for vertical coupling rather than horizontal coupling.
PNG
media_image4.png
173
140
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Erickson is silent regarding the optical waveguide lens facing the emergent surface and one of two sides of the optical waveguide lens at a horizontal direction being a tilted reflective surface while the other being a light-coupling surface aligned with the fibers, the parallel light beam being totally reflected through the tilted reflective surface after entering the optical waveguide lens and coupled to the fibers in the horizontal direction. However, the practice of including the above features within a light coupling device exists in the art as exemplified by Ishikawa.
Erickson and Ishikawa are considered to be analogous in the field of optical coupling devices. Erickson discloses a light coupling device with an emergent surface and an optical waveguide lens. Ishikawa teaches a light-coupling device containing an optical waveguide lens facing an emergent surface (Ishikawa/Fig7/Emergent surface defined by top surface of element 11) and one of two sides of the optical waveguide lens at a horizontal direction being a tilted reflective surface while the other being a light-coupling surface aligned with fibers (Ishikawa/Figs3-4 and 7a/Optical waveguide lens 25 [Prism/lens array]), a parallel light beam being totally reflected through the tilted reflective surface after entering the optical waveguide lens and coupled to fibers in the horizontal direction (Ishikawa/Figs3-4 and 7). Since Erickson is silent regarding the details of the lens, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the lens element as suggested by Ishikawa to the device disclosed by Erickson since doing so would allow for further modification of the coupled light beam.
With regards to claim 10, Erickson and Ishikawa together disclose the light-coupling device according to claim 9, wherein a supporter (Erickson/Fig7a/Supporter 140a) or an electronic element is disposed in the adjacent area alongside the optical waveguide element on top of the interposer.
With regards to claim 13, Erickson and Ishikawa together disclose the light-coupling device according to claim 9, wherein at least one locating hole is disposed on the optical chip (Erickson/Fig7a/Locating hole 330b), at least one locating pole extends from the carrier at a position corresponding to the at least one locating hole (Erickson/Fig7a/Locating pole 320a), and when the at least one locating pole is adhered in the at least one locating hole, the fiber array connector is fixed on the optical chip (Erickson/Fig7a).
With regards to claim 14, Erickson and Ishikawa together disclose the light-coupling device according to claim 9, wherein the optical waveguide element includes a light-transmitting layer and a light-reflective layer of distinct refractive indices (Erickson/Column 5/Lines 43-47 [List of materials and media]; Column 6/Lines 39-43 [“…glass…”]), the incident surface is located at a direction perpendicular to the light-transmitting layer, the emergent surface is located at a top surface of the light-transmitting layer (Erickson/Fig7a), and the reflective surface of the optical waveguide element forms a junction surface between the light-reflective layer and the light-transmitting layer (Erickson/Fig7a).
With regards to claim 15, Erickson and Ishikawa together disclose the light-coupling device according to claim 14, wherein the light-reflective layer and the light-transmitting layer are fabricated with distinct materials (Erickson/Column 5/Lines 43-47 [List of materials and media]; Column 6/Lines 39-43 [“…glass…”]) to allow the light beam emitted horizontally from the light-emitting surface to be reflected through the light-reflective layer.
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erickson (US 11668875 B2) and Ishikawa (US 9122025 B2) as applied to claim 9 above, in further view of Karhade (US 20230092821 A1).
With regards to claim 11, Erickson and Ishikawa together disclose the light-coupling device according to claim 9, wherein the reflective surface of the optical waveguide element is a tilted plane mirror surface (Erickson/Fig7a), the light beam emitted horizontally from the light-emitting surface being totally reflected by the tilted plane mirror surface and output as the parallel light beam through the emergent surface.
Erickson and Ishikawa are silent regarding the emergent surface being a convex lens and the light beam being converged through said convex lens. However, the practice of forming an optical waveguide element such that it has convex lens exists in the art as exemplified by Karhade.
Erickson and Ishikawa disclose a light beam being reflected by a tilted mirror surface, then output as the parallel light beam through the emergent surface. Karhade discloses an optical waveguide element (Karhade/Fig22/Optical waveguide element [Defined by sub-elements 174, 175, and 138]) a light beam being reflected by a tilted mirror surface, then output as the parallel light beam through the emergent surface wherein the emergent surface is a convex lens and the light beam is converged through the convex lens (Karhade/Fig22/Convex lens 138). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the optical waveguide element of Erickson and Ishikawa such that the emergent surface was a convex lens since doing so would facilitate the collimation of light exiting the emergent surface.
With regards to claim 12, Erickson and Ishikawa together disclose the light-coupling device according to claim 9, wherein the emergent surface is a plane (Erickson/Fig7a) and the light beam emitted horizontally from the light-emitting surface is output through the emergent surface (Erickson/Fig7a). Erickson and Ishikawa are silent regarding the reflective surface of the optical waveguide element being a concave mirror surface and the light beam emitted horizontally from the light-emitting surface being totally reflected by the concave mirror surface. However, the practice of forming a reflective surface of an optical waveguide element as a concave mirror surface exists in the art as exemplified by Karhade.
Erickson, Ishikawa, and Karhade are considered to be analogous in the field of optical coupling devices. Erickson and Ishikawa together disclose a light coupling device comprising a light emitting surface and an optical waveguide element with a reflective surface. Karhade discloses a light emitting surface and an optical waveguide element wherein a reflective surface is a concave mirror surface and a light beam is totally reflected by the concave mirror surface (Karhade/Fig23/Concave mirror surface [Surface of element 176]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the reflective surface of the optical waveguide element of Erickson and Ishikawa as a concave mirror surface as suggested by Karhade since doing so would facilitate collimation of the light beam.
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 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 Marc E Manheim whose telephone number is (703)756-1873. The examiner can normally be reached 6:30am - 5pm E.T., Monday - Tuesday and Thursday - 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, Thomas A Hollweg can be reached at (571) 270-1739. 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.
/MARC E MANHEIM/Examiner, Art Unit 2874
/THOMAS A HOLLWEG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874