DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1 through 20 originally filed 31 August 2023. By amendment received 18 September 2025; claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 9 through 11, 14 through 18, and 20 are amended and claim 13 is cancelled. Claims 1 through 12 and 14 through 20 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's remarks state that corrected drawings have been filed herewith. It is understood from the interview held 30 September 2025 that these documents are still being prepared. In light of the amendments that have been received, the objections to the drawings have been reformulated as set forth below.
Applicant argues that the amendments to the claims overcome the previous rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). The submitted amendments resolve the corresponding rejection of claim 11 but do not address the corresponding rejections of claims 18 and 19. As such, the corresponding rejection of claim 11 is withdrawn and the corresponding rejections of claims 18 and 19 are maintained.
Further, in light of the amendments to the claims, new rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been formulated as set forth below.
Applicant argues that the amendments to the claims overcome the previous rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(d). The submitted amendments resolve the corresponding rejection of claim 11 but do not address the corresponding rejection of claim 16. As such, the corresponding rejection of claim 11 is withdrawn and the corresponding rejection of claim 16 is maintained.
Further, in light of the amendments to the claims, new rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) have been formulated as set forth below.
Applicant argues that the amendments to the claims overcome the previous rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103. This argument is persuasive and the corresponding rejections are withdrawn. However, upon further search and consideration, additional art has been located which, in light of the previously cited art, renders obvious the claims as written. As such, new rejections have been formulated as set forth below.
As such, all claims are addressed as follows:
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4).
The description uses the reference characters "3", "10", "19", "24", "26", "36", "310", and "312" to refer to more than one part each. The same reference character must never be used to designate different parts.
In the present case, these reference characters or similar numbers appear in the following locations: "3" is mentioned in ¶66, ¶99, ¶105, and ¶130, "10" is mentioned in ¶54, ¶55, ¶57, ¶60, ¶63, ¶64, ¶65, ¶69, ¶70, ¶72, ¶73, ¶74, ¶91, ¶93, ¶94, ¶95, ¶98, ¶100, ¶102, ¶103, ¶104, ¶106, ¶110, ¶111, ¶112, ¶118, ¶122, ¶133, ¶134, ¶135, ¶136, ¶137, ¶138, ¶139, ¶141, ¶144, ¶148, ¶151, ¶155, ¶156, ¶157, ¶158, ¶159, ¶160, ¶162, and ¶214, "19" is mentioned in ¶102, ¶141, and ¶162, "24" is mentioned in ¶55, ¶71, and ¶106, "26" is mentioned in ¶55, ¶56, ¶59, ¶66, ¶70, ¶71, ¶81, ¶88, ¶93, ¶96, and ¶99, "36" is mentioned in ¶65 and ¶98, "310" is mentioned in ¶214, ¶217, and ¶218, and "312" is mentioned in ¶214, ¶217, and ¶218.
The drawings refer to more than one part each with the reference characters "20", "22", "24", "28", "42", "44", "110", "126", "134", and "144". The same part of an invention must be designated with the same reference character throughout the drawings.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5).
The drawings include the reference characters "100", "126", "134", "142", "144", "145", "146", "147", "149", "151", "214", "224", "230", "260", and "270" which do not appear in the description. Reference characters not mentioned in the description must not appear in the drawings.
The description includes the reference characters "2", "3", "11", "16", "19", "29", "30", "32", "45", "116", "118", "120", "226", "M1", and "M2" which do not appear in the drawings. Reference characters mentioned in the description must appear in the drawings.
In the present case, these reference characters or similar numbers appear in the following locations: "2" is mentioned in ¶73, ¶105, and ¶174, "3" is mentioned in ¶66, ¶99, ¶105, and ¶130, "11" is mentioned in ¶180, "16" is mentioned in ¶55, ¶71, and ¶102, "19" is mentioned in ¶102, ¶141, and ¶162, "29" is mentioned in ¶59, ¶60, ¶67, and ¶97, "30" is mentioned in ¶58, ¶65, ¶71, ¶74, ¶93, ¶99, ¶115, and ¶117, "32" is mentioned in ¶58, ¶60, ¶98, ¶104, ¶145, and ¶146, "45" is mentioned in ¶146, "116" is mentioned in ¶122, ¶126, ¶129, and ¶131, "118" is mentioned in ¶122, "120" is mentioned in ¶122, "226" is mentioned in ¶178 and ¶179, "M1" is mentioned in ¶29, ¶30, ¶31, ¶32, and ¶130, and "M2" is mentioned in ¶131.
Due to the extent of the deficiencies related to 37 CFR 1.84(p), please submit a clean substitute specification in the next response to facilitate determining whether or not every deficiency is addressed.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as "amended." If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either "Replacement Sheet" or "New Sheet" pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The disclosure includes a typo in which the word "grading" is used rather than the word "grating" in several locations.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 through 20 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 is objected to for using the word "grading". It is understood that this is a typographical error with the correct word being "grating".
Claims 1, 2, and 4 are objected to for not ending in a period. Claims must end in a period.
Claim 7 is objected to for the construction of the phrase "bonding and metal contacts". Use of the word "bonding" in this manner does not make grammatical sense. Given context, it is understood that a reference to the previously introduced "bonding pads" was intended where the lone word "bonding" appears.
Each of claims 3, 5, 6, and 8 through 20 depend properly from claim 1 and inherit the above noted deficiency thereof.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 through 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1, this claim requires "One or more buried tunnel junctions (BTJ), additional TJ's, planar structures and additional BTJ's are created during a regrowth process that is independent of a first growth process of the first mirror, the active region and the one or more TJs." However, the original disclosure only requires these elements as alternate elements within an individual VCSEL. It is not clear from the original disclosure that each of these elements could simultaneously appear in a single VCSEL. As such, this claim contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Further, this claim requires both "The HCG structure being layered on the selected shape structure" and "A tunable MEMS bonded to the VCSEL." However, in every configuration that includes a tunable MEMS bonded to the VCSEL, the HCG is provided on the tunable MEMS rather than layered on structure that includes the selected shape structure. As such, this claim contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claims 2 through 20, each of these claims depend properly from claim 1 and inherit all limitations thereof. As such, these claims also subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 through 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Regarding claim 1, this claim requires "A first vertical resonator cavity disposed over the electrical confinement aperture." However, the "electrical confinement aperture" must be located within the "first vertical resonator cavity" to meet every requirement of the claimed invention. Since the "electrical confinement aperture" must be within the "vertical resonator cavity", the configuration outlined by this limitation is impossible. As such, this claim contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Regarding claims 2 through 20, each of these claims depend properly from claim 1 and inherit all limitations thereof. As such, these claims also contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
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.
Claims 1 through 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 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.
Regarding claim 1, this claim requires "One or more buried tunnel junctions (BTJ), additional TJ's, planar structures and additional BTJ's are created during a regrowth process that is independent of a first growth process of the first mirror, the active region and the one or more TJs." However, it is unclear if this construction is intended to list a set of alternatives from which at least one element must be selected or a set of different elements that are each required. As such, this claim is 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. For the remainder of this action, this claim will be interpreted as listing a set of alternatives on the basis that it conforms to the disclosed invention.
Further, this claim separately introduces 1) a "first mirror" and a "DBR" and 2) two elements referred to as an "HCG". The terms used in each of group 1 and group 2 appear to refer to the same structural elements of the present invention. However, introduction of multiple terms implies the presence of multiple elements. The implication of multiple elements when only a single element renders the present claim unclear. As such, this claim is 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. For the remainder of this action, this claim will be interpreted such that the "first mirror" and the "DBR" are the same element and the elements referred to as the "HCG" are also the same element.
Further, this claim introduces "p-n junctions", a "tunnel junction", and "buried tunnel junctions" before referring to the "junctions". Since the claim uses a term that could refer to multiple different previous terms, it is unclear which previous term is being referred to by the claim. As such, this claim is 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. For the remainder of this action, this claim will be interpreted as meaning that each of the p-n junctions, the tunnel junction, and the buried tunnel junctions are in the location of the "junctions" claimed.
Further, this claim includes "A tunable MEMS bonded to the VCSEL." In all disclosed instances in which a tunable MEMS is present, the tuning operation of the MEMS is achieved by moving an HCG provided thereon. However, the claim already introduces two separate "HCG" elements which are implied as being present as part of the VCSEL rather than the MEMS. It is unclear how the MEMS could provide the claimed tuning function within the claimed device due to the simultaneous requirements imposed on the HCG elements by the claim. As such, this claim is 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. For the remainder of this action, this claim will be interpreted as meaning that the device includes a single HCG element provided as a part of the tunable MEMS.
Regarding claim 10, this claim requires "Wherein the HCG MEMS is produced on the Si sub mount." However, there is no antecedent basis for an "HCG MEMS" and the "HCG" and the "MEMS" are set forth in parent claim 1 as different elements. Since the "HCG MEMS" could refer to two different elements, it is unclear which element this term refers to. As such, this claim is 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. For the remainder of this action, the "HCG" of parent claim 1 will be interpreted as present as a component of the "MEMS" of parent claim 1 such that these elements may, jointly, be referred to as an "HCG MEMS".
Regarding claim 18, this claim requires "A dielectric coating that improves a broadening of a tuning range of the full VCSEL." However, the characterization by the claim of an "improvement" presupposes an unlimited comparison to devices outside of the scope of the claims or the disclosure. By requiring the claim to meet this comparison, the scope of the claim becomes unclear because it is not clear what the claimed arrangement is being compared to. As such, this claim is 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. For the remainder of this action, this requirement will be interpreted as merely requiring the structure set forth as providing the "improvement".
Regarding claim 19, this claim requires "Wherein a wavelength of the VCSEL laser output can be swept to provide improved resolution." However, the characterization by the claim of an "improvement" presupposes an unlimited comparison to devices outside of the scope of the claims or the disclosure. By requiring the claim to meet this comparison, the scope of the claim becomes unclear because it is not clear what the claimed arrangement is being compared to. As such, this claim is 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. For the remainder of this action, this requirement will be interpreted as merely requiring the structure set forth as providing the "improvement".
Further regarding this claim, this claim requires "Wherein a wavelength of the VCSEL laser output can be swept to provide improved resolution." However, the phrase "can be" is understood as prefacing optional elements. Description of examples or preferences is properly set forth in the specification rather than the claims (MPEP §2173.05(d)). Since it is not clear if any of the features following the "can" statement are strictly required by this claim or not, this claim is 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. For the remainder of this action, the elements of this limitation will be interpreted as not being required by the claim.
Regarding claims 2 through 9, 11 through 17, and 20, each of these claims depend properly from claim 1 and inherit all limitations thereof. As such, these claims are also indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. For the remainder of this action, these claims will also be interpreted as noted above regarding claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 14 and 16 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Regarding claim 14, this claim only requires "Wherein an active region is between two mirrors." However, parent claim 1 already requires "A first mirror", "One or more active regions", and "A high contrast grating (HCG) operating as a second mirror" in a configuration that positions the active region between the first and second mirrors. Accordingly, parent claim 1 already requires every feature set forth in this claim. As such, this claim is of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends.
Regarding claim 16, this claim only requires "Wherein the VCSEL laser operates in a single mode or a multi-mode operation." This requirement exhaustively lists the possible modes of operation necessarily present in the device of parent claim 1. As such, this claim is of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 through 12 and 14 through 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang-Hasnain et al. (Chang-Hasnain, US Pub. 2011/0280269), in view of Deppe et al. (Deppe, US Pub. 2005/0063440), in view of Coldren et al. (Coldren, WO Pub. 02/084826 A1), and further in view of Kaneko (US Pub. 2002/0176468).
Regarding claim 1, Chang-Hasnain discloses, "A tunable VCSEL laser" (p. [0064] and Fig. 1). "A first mirror" (p. [0064] and Fig. 1, pt. 20). "One or more active regions with a first active region adjacent to the first mirror" (p. [0064] and Fig. 1, pts. 14 and 20). "Each of an active region including quantum wells and barriers" (p. [0064] and Fig. 1, pts. 24). "Each of an active region surrounded by one or more p-n junctions" (p. [0064] and Fig. 1, pts. 22, 24, and 26). "One or more buried tunnel junctions (BTJ), additional TJ's, planar structures and additional BTJ's are created during a regrowth process that is independent of a first growth process of the first mirror, the active region and the one or more TJs" (p. [0064] and Fig. 1, pt. 28, where this fabrication step is not understood as necessarily imposing any structural distinction from the tunnel junction of Chang-Hasnain). "One or more electrical confinement apertures defined by the one or more BTJ's, additional TJ's, planar structures and additional BTJ" (p. [0064] and Fig. 1, pts. 28, 46, and 48). "A vertical resonator cavity disposed over the electrical confinement aperture" (p. [0064] and Fig. 1, pts. 23, 34, and 46). "A high contrast grating (HCG) operating as a second mirror positioned over the vertical resonator cavity" (p. [0023] and Fig. 1, pt. 34). "The HCG configured to reflect a first portion of light back into the vertical resonator cavity" (p. [0023] and Fig. 1, pt. 34). "A second portion of the light as an output beam from the tunable VCSEL laser" (p. [0023] and Fig. 1, pt. 34). "The HCG structure being layered on the selected shape structure" (p. [0064] and Fig. 1, pts. 22, 24, 26, 28, and 36). "Wherein a shape of the output beam of the tunable VCSEL laser is determined by a geometric shape of the one or more BTJ apertures, apertures for additional TJ's, planar structures and additional BTJ's, with a transmission function of the HCG and is designed according to the desired optical transmission function of the application" (p. [0066] and Fig. 1, pts. 24, 28, and 48, where the aperture defines the current injection region which defines the shape of the light emission region). "A DBR on one side of the junctions" (p. [0064] and Fig. 1, pts. 20 and 24). "An HCG grading on the other side of the junctions" (p. [0023] and Fig. 1, pts. 24 and 34). Chang-Hasnain does not explicitly disclose, "The one or more active regions including a selected shape structure each with a tunnel junction (TJ)." "One or more apertures provided with the selected shape structure." Deppe discloses, "The one or more active regions including a selected shape structure each with a tunnel junction (TJ)" (p. [0059] and Fig. 2, pts. 250, 260, and 290). "One or more apertures provided with the selected shape structure" (p. [0059] and Fig. 2, pts. 250, 260, and 290). 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 Chang-Hasnain with the teachings of Deppe. In view of the teachings of Chang-Hasnain regarding a VCSEL device including a current constricting region, the alternate construction of the current constriction region to include a protrusion as well as the additional inclusion of dielectric layers with the mirror layers as taught by Deppe would enhance the teachings of Chang-Hasnain by allowing the optical mode to be laterally confined within the vicinity of the current injection and by allowing the reflectivity of the mirror to be improved.
The combination of Chang-Hasnain and Deppe does not explicitly disclose, "A tunable MEMS bonded to the VCSEL." Coldren discloses, "A tunable MEMS bonded to the VCSEL" (pgs. 20-21, lines 24-6 and Fig. 1,pts. 10, 12, and 140). 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 Chang-Hasnain and Deppe with the teachings of Coldren. In view of the teachings of Chang-Hasnain regarding a VCSEL with a movable tuning reflector, the alternate construction of the reflector on a separate substrate that is attached to the remainder of the VCSEL as taught by Coldren would enhance the teachings of Chang-Hasnain and Deppe by allowing the reflector to be separately fabricated and thereby allowing fabrication techniques and materials not compatible with the remainder of the VCSEL device.
The combination of Chang-Hasnain, Deppe, and Coldren does not explicitly disclose, "The tunable MEMS including a detector." Kaneko discloses, "The tunable MEMS including a detector" (p. [0064] and Fig. 1, pt. 7, where implementing this detector in a device according to the combined teachings of Chang-Hasnain and Coldren results in the detector being positioned below the HCG in the substrate holding the HCG). 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 Chang-Hasnain, Deppe, and Coldren with the teachings of Kaneko. In view of the teachings of Chang-Hasnain and Coldren regarding tunable VCSELs, the additional inclusion of a sensor to receive light from the laser cavity as taught by Kaneko would enhance the teachings of Chang-Hasnain, Deppe, and Coldren by allowing the operation of the device to be controlled by monitoring laser output.
Regarding claim 2, Chang-Hasnain discloses, "Wherein the VCSEL has a partial top mirror" (p. [0064] and Fig. 1, pt. 30).
Regarding claim 3, Chang-Hasnain discloses, "A bottom DBR with an active region" (p. [0064] and Fig. 1, pts. 20 and 24).
Regarding claim 4, Chang-Hasnain does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the VCSEL includes a mesa etch for one or more of: electrical current and optical field confinement." Deppe discloses, "Wherein the VCSEL includes a mesa etch for one or more of: electrical current and optical field confinement" (p. [0035] and Fig. 2, pt. 150). 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 Chang-Hasnain with the teachings of Deppe for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 5, The combination of Chang-Hasnain and Deppe does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the VCSEL includes metal contacts for electrical current injection in the VCSEL." "[The VCSEL includes] bonding pads." Coldren discloses, "Wherein the VCSEL includes metal contacts for electrical current injection in the VCSEL" (pgs. 15-16, lines 3-8 and Fig. 5, pts. 84 and 86). "[The VCSEL includes] bonding pads" (pgs. 15-16, lines 3-8 and Fig. 5, pts. 84 and 86). 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 Chang-Hasnain and Deppe with the teachings of Coldren for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 6, The combination of Chang-Hasnain and Deppe does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the bonding pads and metal contacts provide electrical current injection." Coldren discloses, "Wherein the bonding pads and metal contacts provide electrical current injection" (pgs. 15-16, lines 3-8 and Fig. 5, pts. 84 and 86). 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 Chang-Hasnain and Deppe with the teachings of Coldren for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 7, The combination of Chang-Hasnain and Deppe does not explicitly disclose, "Bonding and metal contacts are coupled to a shared pad." Coldren discloses, "Bonding and metal contacts are coupled to a shared pad" (pgs. 15-16, lines 3-8 and Fig. 5, pts. 84 and 86). 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 Chang-Hasnain and Deppe with the teachings of Coldren for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 8, The combination of Chang-Hasnain and Deppe does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the shared pad is coupled to an external source through lines defined on a Si sub-mount." Coldren discloses, "Wherein the shared pad is coupled to an external source through lines defined on a Si sub-mount" (pg. 20, lines 11-23 and Fig. 6, pts. 86 and 184). 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 Chang-Hasnain and Deppe with the teachings of Coldren for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 9, The combination of Chang-Hasnain and Deppe does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the Si sub-mount is a substrate that serves as a base for bonding the VCSEL." Coldren discloses, "Wherein the Si sub-mount is a substrate that serves as a base for bonding the VCSEL" (pg. 16, lines 14-15 and Fig. 1, pt. 90). 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 Chang-Hasnain and Deppe with the teachings of Coldren for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 10, The combination of Chang-Hasnain and Deppe does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the HCG MEMS is produced on the Si sub mount." "[The HCG MEMS] acts as tunable mirror for the VCSEL." Coldren discloses, "Wherein the HCG MEMS is produced on the Si sub mount" (pg. 16, lines 14-15 and Fig. 1, pt. 90, where mirror 140 is formed as an HCG when the construction method of Coldren implemented for assembling the device of Chang-Hasnain). "[The HCG MEMS] acts as tunable mirror for the VCSEL" (pgs. 20-21, lines 24-6 and Fig. 1, pt. 90, where mirror 140 is formed as an HCG when the construction method of Coldren implemented for assembling the device of Chang-Hasnain). 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 Chang-Hasnain and Deppe with the teachings of Coldren for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 11, The combination of Chang-Hasnain, Deppe, and Coldren does not explicitly disclose, "The detector is integrated on the Si sub-mount under the HCG." Kaneko discloses, "The detector is integrated on the Si sub-mount under the HCG" (p. [0064] and Fig. 1, pt. 7, where implementing this detector in a device according to the combined teachings of Chang-Hasnain and Coldren results in the detector being positioned below the HCG in the substrate holding the HCG). 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 Chang-Hasnain, Deppe, and Coldren with the teachings of Kaneko for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 12, The combination of Chang-Hasnain, Deppe, and Coldren does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the detector provides for power control of an integrated VCSEL." Kaneko discloses, "Wherein the detector provides for power control of an integrated VCSEL" (p. [0022]). 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 Chang-Hasnain, Deppe, and Coldren with the teachings of Kaneko for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, Chang-Hasnain discloses, "Wherein an active region is between two mirrors" (p. [0064] and Fig. 1, pts. 20, 24, and 34).
Regarding claim 15, Chang-Hasnain discloses, "Wherein an HCG actuation is done by one or more of: electrostatic, piezoelectric, thermal" (p. [0081]).
Regarding claim 16, Chang-Hasnain discloses, "Wherein the VCSEL operates in a single mode or a multi-mode operation" (p. [0019]).
Regarding claim 17, Chang-Hasnain discloses, "Wherein the VCSEL operates in a single mode" (p. [0019]).
Regarding claim 18, Chang-Hasnain does not explicitly disclose, "A dielectric coating that improves a broadening of a tuning range of the full VCSEL." Deppe discloses, "A dielectric coating that improves a broadening of a tuning range of the full VCSEL" (p. [0042]). 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 Chang-Hasnain with the teachings of Deppe for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 19, Chang-Hasnain discloses, "Wherein a wavelength of the VCSEL laser output can be swept to provide improved resolution" (p. [0081], where this tuning ability allows the laser output to be swept in frequency).
Regarding claim 20, Chang-Hasnain discloses, "Wherein the VCSEL laser output is swept by modulating the MEMS up and down" (p. [0081], where this tuning ability allows the laser output to be swept in frequency). "Wherein when the MEMS moves closes to a non-extended original position, the output wavelength(s) of the VCSEL laser changes and returns closer to an original output of the VCSEL laser when the HCG is not extended" (p. [0081]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to 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