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. 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. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement s (IDS) submitted on 04/30/2024 and 08/26/2024 w ere filed after the f iling date of th is application on 08/17/2023 . The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. The Office notes that applicant has submitted two NPL documents which are not cited on either IDS. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale , or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1, 3, 5, 6, 9-11, 19, 20, and 2 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Hoving (US20090003390A1), hereafter Hoving . Regarding claim 1 , Hoving discloses a semiconductor laser assembly (Title; Fig. 4) comprising: an array of surface emitting lasers having a light emitting surface and an opposing surface (Fig. 4 elements 21(R), 21(G), and 21(B); See also annotated Fig. 4 below) ; at least one electrical contact electrically connected to provide to the array of surface emitting lasers an electrical bias from an external electrical source (Implicit from [0001] “ The present invention specifically relates to a technology platform utilizing frequency conversion of electrically-pumped Vertical Cavity Surface Emitting Lasers ("VCSELs") ; [0026] “e.g. battery”; See also [0023]-[0026], Table 1 and Table 2 discussing the electrical efficiency of the various lasers. Since the devices are electrically pumped, a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that some type of electrode is necessary present to allow the electrical bias to be applied to the lasers from the battery) ; and an optical waveguide over the light emitting surface, wherein the optical waveguide comprises lithium (Fig. 4 elements 32(R), 32(G), and 32(B); [0017] “ three (3) optical waveguides 32 (e.g., periodically poled lithium niobate frequency-doubling crystals) ”) . Regarding claim 3 , Hoving further discloses the optical waveguide comprises lithium niobate ([0017] “ three (3) optical waveguides 32 (e.g., periodically poled lithium niobate frequency-doubling crystals) ”). Regarding claim 5 , Hoving further discloses the optical waveguide is periodically poled 180 o ([0021] implicitly discloses this feature. The definition of periodic poling involves a process which generates periodic reversals in the domain orientation of a non-linear crystal so the sign of the nonlinear coefficient changes. Accordingly, a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand the poling to be 180 o or there would not be a “reversal”). Regarding claim 6 , Hoving further discloses the array of surface emitting lasers comprises a plurality of vertical cavity surface emitting lasers or a plurality of photonic crystal surface emitting lasers ([0017] “ including three (3) infrared VCSELs 21 ”). Regarding claim 9 , Hoving further discloses the array of surface emitting lasers comprises at least one emitter configured to emit electromagnetic radiation at a wavelength between 1200nm and 1300nm ([0018] discloses the IRR beam is frequency double to create an RLB beam at approximately 630 nm meaning the IRR beam must be at a wavelength of ~1260 nm ). Regarding claim 10 , Hoving further discloses the array of surface emitting lasers comprises at least one emitter configured to emit electromagnetic radiation at a wavelength between 1000nm and 1100nm ([0019] discloses the IRG beam is frequency double to create an GLB beam at approximately 540 nm meaning the IRG beam must be at a wavelength of ~1080 nm ). Regarding claim 11 , Hoving further discloses the array of surface emitting lasers comprises at least one emitter configured to emit electromagnetic radiation at a wavelength between 900nm and 1000nm ([0020] discloses the IRB beam is frequency double to create an BLB beam at approximately 450 nm meaning the IRB beam must be at a wavelength of ~900 nm ). Regarding claim 19 , Hoving discloses a method for emitting electromagnetic radiation, the method comprising: coupling an optical waveguide comprising lithium (Fig. 4 elements 32(R), 32(G), and 32(B); [0017] “ three (3) optical waveguides 32 (e.g., periodically poled lithium niobate frequency-doubling crystals) ”) with a semiconductor laser ([0015]); and emitting electromagnetic radiation at a first wavelength (Fig. 4 elements IRR, IRG, or IRB) from the semiconductor laser to the optical waveguide (Fig. 4 elements 21 emit light to elements 32) , wherein the electromagnetic radiation is emitted from the optical waveguide at a second wavelength (Fig. 4 element RLB, GLB, or BLB) , and wherein the second wavelength is shorter than the first wavelength ([0018]-[0020] disclose IRR, IRG, or IRB are frequency doubled to create RLB, GLB, or BLB which results in RLB, GLB, or BLB having half the wavelength of IRR, IRG, or IRB ) . Regarding claim 20 , Hoving further discloses the second wavelength is about half the first wavelength ([0018]-[0020] disclose IRR, IRG, or IRB are frequency doubled to create RLB, GLB, or BLB which results in RLB, GLB, or BLB having half the wavelength of IRR, IRG, or IRB ) . Regarding claim 2 2 , Hoving further discloses the emitting comprises emitting electromagnetic radiation at a wavelength between 1200nm and 1300nm from the semiconductor laser to the optical waveguide whereupon the frequency is doubled or substantially doubled upon passing through the optical waveguide ([0018] discloses the IRR beam is frequency double to create an RLB beam at approximately 630 nm meaning the IRR beam must be at a wavelength of ~1260 nm ). 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, 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. 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. Claim s 2, 7, 15, 16, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoving in view of Joseph et al. (US20110148328A1), hereafter Joseph . Regarding claim 2 , Hoving does not explicitly disclose the at least one electrical contact includes: a contact over the light emitting surface and another contact over the opposing surface, or a pair of contacts over the opposing surface. However, Joseph discloses at least one electrical contact includes: a contact over the light emitting surface and another contact over the opposing surface, or a pair of contacts over the opposing surface (Fig. 9 elements 902 is on the light emitting surface and element 906 is on the opposite surface ). An advantage is to electrical connection with the VCSEL while promoting direct transfer of heat to the heatsink ([0135]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoving with at least one electrical contact includes: a contact over the light emitting surface and another contact over the opposing surface, or a pair of contacts over the opposing surface as disclosed by Joseph in order to provide electrical connection with the VCSEL while promoting direct transfer of heat to the heatsink. Regarding claim 7 , Hoving does not explicitly disclose the array of surface emitting lasers comprises top emitting lasers or bottom emitting lasers. However, Joseph discloses the array of surface emitting lasers comprises top emitting lasers (Fig. 6) or bottom emitting lasers (Fig. 9). An advantage of bottom emitting lasers is better thermal management ([0022]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoving with the array of surface emitting lasers comprises top emitting lasers or bottom emitting lasers as disclosed by Joseph in order to provide better thermal management. Regarding claim 15 , Hoving does not explicitly disclose a semi-insulating substrate positioned between the surface emitting laser and the optical waveguide. However, Joseph discloses a semi-insulating substrate positioned between the surface emitting laser and the optical waveguide (Fig. 9 element 900; Fig. 8 element 700; [0084]). An advantage of bottom emitting lasers is better thermal management ([0022]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoving with a semi-insulating substrate positioned between the surface emitting laser and the optical waveguide as disclosed by Joseph in order to provide better thermal management. Regarding claim 16 , Hoving in view of Joseph do not explicitly disclose the semi-insulating substrate comprises gallium arsenide (GaAs). However, Joseph further discloses the substrate may be made of GaAs ([0084]) and that a heavily doped n-contact layer on a substrate may improve the design of the device by not requiring deep implant into the substrate ([0085]). Accordingly, a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would further modify Hoving in view of Joseph with the semi-insulating substrate comprises gallium arsenide (GaAs), since Joseph discloses that doped GaAs may be used in a different embodiment and that undoped (i.e. semi-insulating) substrates, such as undoped GaAs, may be beneficial in designing the device and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Regarding claim 21 , Hoving does not explicitly disclose the coupling comprises bonding or regrowth. However, Joseph discloses coupling a laser and a harmonic crystal via bonding (Fig. 11; [0106]-[0107]). An advantage is to create a single device with multiple optical elements that will remain aligned during operation ([0106]-[0107]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoving with the coupling comprises bonding or regrowth as disclosed by Joseph in order to create a single device with multiple optical elements that will remain aligned during operation. Claim s 4 , 8, 12, 17, 18, 23 - 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoving in view of Yumoto et al. (US20060013270A1), hereafter Yumoto . Regarding claim 4 , Hoving does not explicitly disclose the optical waveguide comprises lithium tantalate. However, Yumoto discloses the optical waveguide comprises lithium tantalate ([0103] discloses lithium niobate and lithium tantalate are known alternatives). An advantage, as is known in the art, is to select a known material to achieve the desired wavelength and power output based on the intended use of the device. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoving with the optical waveguide comprises lithium tantalate as disclosed by Yumoto in order to select a known material to achieve the desired wavelength and power output based on the intended use of the device and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin , 125 USPQ 416. Regarding claim 8, Hoving in view of Yumoto do not explicitly disclose at least one emitter configured to emit electromagnetic radiation at a wavelength between 1850nm and 1950nm. However, However, Yumoto discloses optimizing the wavelength to be combined (See, e.g., [0111]-[0113]). An advantage, as is known in the art, is to achieve the desired output wavelength via sum frequency generation based on the intended use of the device. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to further modify Hoving in view of Yumoto with at least one emitter configured to emit electromagnetic radiation at a wavelength between 1850nm and 1950nm since Yumoto discloses optimizing the wavelength to be combined which is known in the art to achieve the desired output wavelength via sum frequency generation based on the intended use of the device and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch , 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Regarding claim 12 , Hoving does not explicitly disclose at least one emitter configured to emit electromagnetic radiation at a wavelength between 1500nm and 1600nm. However, Yumoto discloses at least one emitter configured to emit electromagnetic radiation at a wavelength between 1500nm and 1600nm ([0113]). An advantage is to access wavelengths in bands where semiconductor lasers cannot readily access directly (Abstract). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoving with at least one emitter configured to emit electromagnetic radiation at a wavelength between 1500nm and 1600nm as disclosed by Yumoto in order to access wavelengths in bands where semiconductor lasers cannot readily access directly and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch , 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) . Regarding claim 17 , Hoving does not explicitly disclose an optical beam combiner positioned between the array of surface emitting lasers and the optical waveguide. However, Yumoto discloses an optical beam combiner positioned between the array of emitters and the optical waveguide ( Fig. 6 element 143). An advantage is to access wavelengths in bands where semiconductor lasers cannot readily access directly (Abstract). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoving with an optical beam combiner positioned between the array of surface emitting lasers and the optical waveguide as disclosed by Yumoto in order to access wavelengths in bands where semiconductor lasers cannot readily access directly. Regarding claim 18 , Hoving does not explicitly disclose an anti-reflective coating over the optical waveguide. However, Yumoto discloses an anti-reflective coating over the optical waveguide ([0245]). An advantage , as is known in the art, is to allow converted light to be readily emitted from the waveguide. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoving with an anti-reflective coating over the optical waveguide as disclosed by Yumoto in order to allow converted light to be readily emitted from the waveguide. Regarding claim 23 , Hoving does not explicitly disclose emitting electromagnetic radiation at a first wavelength from a first emitter of the semiconductor laser to an optical beam combiner; emitting electromagnetic radiation at a second wavelength from a second emitter of the semiconductor laser to the optical beam combiner; and emitting from the optical beam combiner the electromagnetic radiation at the first and second wavelengths to the optical waveguide which sums the first and second wavelengths upon passing through the optical waveguide. However, Yumoto discloses emitting electromagnetic radiation at a first wavelength from a first emitter of the semiconductor laser ([0088]; Fig. 6 element 140) to an optical beam combiner (Fig. 6 element 143); emitting electromagnetic radiation at a second wavelength from a second emitter of the semiconductor laser ([0088]; Fig. 6 element 141) to the optical beam combiner (Fig. 6 element 143); and emitting from the optical beam combiner the electromagnetic radiation at the first and second wavelengths to the optical waveguide which sums the first and second wavelengths upon passing through the optical waveguide ([0116]). An advantage is to access wavelengths in bands where semiconductor lasers cannot readily access directly (Abstract). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoving with emitting electromagnetic radiation at a first wavelength from a first emitter of the semiconductor laser to an optical beam combiner; emitting electromagnetic radiation at a second wavelength from a second emitter of the semiconductor laser to the optical beam combiner; and emitting from the optical beam combiner the electromagnetic radiation at the first and second wavelengths to the optical waveguide which sums the first and second wavelengths upon passing through the optical waveguide as disclosed by Yumoto in order to access wavelengths in bands where semiconductor lasers cannot readily access directly. Regarding claim 24 , Yumoto further discloses the first wavelength is between 900nm and 1000nm ([0111]; [0113]). Hoving in view of Yumoto do not explicitly disclose the second wavelength is between one of: (1) 900nm and 1000nm, or (2) 1850nm and 1950nm. However, Yumoto discloses that the second wavelength may be optimized (See, e.g., lambda2 in [0111]-[0113]). An advantage, as is known in the art, is to achieve the desired output wavelength via sum frequency generation based on the intended use of the device. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to further modify Hoving in view of Yumoto with the second wavelength is between one of: (1) 900nm and 1000nm, or (2) 1850nm and 1950nm since Yumoto discloses optimizing the second wavelength which is known in the art to achieve the desired output wavelength via sum frequency generation based on the intended use of the device and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch , 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Regarding claim 25 , Hoving further discloses the optical waveguide comprises lithium niobate ([0017] “ three (3) optical waveguides 32 (e.g., periodically poled lithium niobate frequency-doubling crystals) ”) having 180 o periodically inverted domains ([0021] implicitly discloses this feature. The definition of periodic poling involves a process which generates periodic reversals in the domain orientation of a non-linear crystal so the sign of the nonlinear coefficient changes. Accordingly, a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand the poling to be 180 o or there would not be a “reversal”). Hoving does not explicitly disclose poling a lithium niobate or lithium tantalate thin film to yield a periodically poled optical waveguide having 180 o periodically inverted domains (emphasis added) . However, Yumoto discloses poling a lithium niobate or lithium tantalate thin film to yield a periodically poled optical waveguide having 180 o periodically inverted domains ([0103]; [0246]). An advantage is to create a non-linear crystal that can efficiently access additional wavelengths using sum frequency generation efficiently ([0103]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoving with poling a lithium niobate or lithium tantalate thin film to yield a periodically poled optical waveguide having 180 o periodically inverted domains as disclosed by Yumoto in order to create a non-linear crystal that can efficiently access additional wavelengths using sum frequency generation efficiently. Claim s 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoving in view of Takeda (US20080174738A1), hereafter Takeda . Regarding claim 13 , Hoving further discloses that each emitter having a mirror that polarizes the emitted light ([0018]-[0020]). Hoving does not explicitly disclose at least one emitter having a polarization aligned with a width of the optical waveguide. However, Takeda discloses that light may be polarized in the width (z-direction) of the wavelength conversion element so long as the poling domains are oriented in the same direction ([0092]). An advantage, as is known in the art, to use a known material to allow efficient conversion based on the polarization direction of the light. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoving with at least one emitter having a polarization aligned with a width of the optical waveguide as disclosed by Takeda in order to use a known material to allow efficient conversion based on the polarization direction of the light and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. . Regarding claim 1 4 , Hoving further discloses that each emitter having a mirror that polarizes the emitted light ([0018]-[0020]). Hoving does not explicitly disclose at least one emitter having a polarization perpendicular to a width of the optical waveguide. However, Takeda discloses that light may be polarized in the height direction (y-direction) of the wavelength conversion element so long as the poling domains are oriented in the same direction ([0062]). An advantage, as is known in the art, to use a known material to allow efficient conversion based on the polarization direction of the light. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoving with at least one emitter having a polarization perpendicular to a width of the optical waveguide as disclosed by Takeda in order to use a known material to allow efficient conversion based on the polarization direction of the light and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 . Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached Notice of References Cited. See, e.g., WO2023158635A1 disclosing a multiwavelength VCSEL array coupled/bonded with a PPLN waveguide ([076]-[077]; Figs. 20 and 21). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT JOSHUA KING whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-1441 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday to Friday 10am-5pm MT . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Min Sun Harvey can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (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. /Joshua King/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828 03/24/2026