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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Amendment
The amendment to Claim(s) 1, 2, 7, 8, and 14, filed 12/28/2025, is acknowledged and accepted.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 7 of 12, filed 12/28/2025, with respect to Claims 2, 8 and 14 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 USC § 112 of Claims 2, 8 and 14 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 7 of 12 through Page 11 of 12, filed 12/28/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-19 under 35 USC § 103 have been considered but are moot because the Applicant is arguing newly amended claims, filed 12/28/2025, not the Non-Final Rejection filed 10/02/2025. Newly amended claims are examined below.
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 applied reference has a common assignee and inventor with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Claims 1-9, 11, 13-15, 17 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Miyazaki et al., (hereafter Miyazaki) (US 10,162,201 B2) in view of Okahashi et al., (hereafter Okahashi) (US 11,333,909 B2) and Sugiyama (US 2019/0187536 A1).
With respect to Claim 1, Miyazaki teaches an optical waveguide device comprising: a substrate (10, Figure 1) on which an optical waveguide (not shown on 10, Figure 1; see column 3, lines 63-65) is formed; and a signal electrode (11, Figure 1) and a ground electrode (12, Figure 1), wherein the optical waveguide (not shown on 10, Figure 1; see column 3, lines 63-65) extending on a surface substrate (10, Figure 1), the signal electrode (11, Figure 1) has an action portion (30, Figure 1) that extends along the optical waveguide (not shown on 10, Figure 1; see column 3, lines 63-65) and controls a light wave (light waves, column 3, line 65-column 4, line 1) propagating through (column 3, line 65-column 4, line 1) the optical waveguide (not shown on 10, Figure 1; see column 3, lines 63-65).
Miyazaki fails to teach the intermediate layer, wherein an electrode is formed on an intermediate layer and the intermediate layer is formed on the substrate.
Okahashi teaches an optical waveguide element (title and abstract) comprising an intermediate layer (452, Figure 5); wherein an electrode (264b-1, Figure 4) is formed on an intermediate layer (452, Figure 5) and the intermediate layer (452, Figure 5) is formed on the substrate (230, Figure 5); the intermediate layer (452, Figure 5) is formed such that a thickness (see Figure 5 where 452 and 264b-a intersect) at the intersection is thicker than a thickness at the action portion (center area of Figure 5).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Miyazaki having the optical waveguide device with the teachings of Okahashi having the intermediate layer, wherein an electrode is formed on an intermediate layer and the intermediate layer is formed on the substrate, and the intermediate layer is formed such that a thickness at the intersection is thicker than a thickness at the action portion for the purpose of curbing distortion, column 9, lines 46-55.
Miyazaki in view of Okahashi fail to teach the optical waveguide is configured by two strip-shaped protruding portions that form a pair of parallel waveguides extending on a surface of the substrate, and the optical waveguide includes a light folded portion that folds a light propagation direction of input light by 180 degrees, the signal electrode forms an intersection by crossing over the optical waveguide at the light folded portion, and is located between the parallel waveguides.
Miyazaki in view of Okahashi teach the optical waveguide device and Sugiyama teaches an optical modulator.
Sugiyama teaches the optical waveguide (121, Figure 1) is configured by two strip-shaped protruding portions (121 is formed by forming a metal film on a portion of a substrate, ¶[0031]) that form a pair of parallel waveguides (see the 121s in Figure 1) extending on a surface (121 is formed by forming a metal film on a portion of a substrate, ¶[0031]) of the substrate (substrate of 121, Figure 1), and the optical waveguide (121, Figure 1) includes a light folded portion (see where 121s bend at 90 degrees in Figure 1) that folds a light propagation direction (see Figure 1) of input light (100a, Figure 1) by 180 degrees (100b, Figure 1, is 180 degrees from 100a; see also ¶[0031]), the signal electrode (123, Figure 1) forms an intersection (see Figure 1) by crossing over (123 overlaps 121 in Figure 1) the optical waveguide (121, Figure 1) at the light folded portion (see where 121s bend at 90 degrees in Figure 1), and is located between the parallel waveguides (121, Figure 1).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Miyazaki in view of Okahashi having the optical waveguide device with the teachings of Sugiyama having the optical waveguide is configured by two strip-shaped protruding portions that form a pair of parallel waveguides extending on a surface of the substrate, and the optical waveguide includes a light folded portion that folds a light propagation direction of input light by 180 degrees, the signal electrode forms an intersection by crossing over the optical waveguide at the light folded portion, and is located between the parallel waveguides for the purpose of miniaturization of the optical modulator, ¶[0031].
With respect to Claim 2, Miyazaki teaches the optical waveguide device according to claim 1 and the action portion (30, Figure 1).
Miyazaki fails to teach wherein the intermediate layer is formed such that the thickness of the intermediate layer stepwise and/or continuously increases from the action portion toward the intersection.
Okahashi teaches an optical waveguide element (title and abstract) comprising an intermediate layer (452, Figure 5), wherein the intermediate layer (452, Figure 5) is formed such that the thickness (cross section of Figure 5) of the intermediate layer (452, Figure 5) stepwise or continuously increases from the action portion (center area of Figure 5) toward the intersection (cross section of Figure 5).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Miyazaki having the optical waveguide device with the teachings of Okahashi having the intermediate layer stepwise and/or continuously increases from the action portion toward the intersection for the purpose of curbing distortion, column 9, lines 46-55.
With respect to Claim 3, Miyazaki teaches the optical waveguide device according to claim 1 and the action portion (30, Figure 1).
Miyazaki fails to teach wherein the intermediate layer is formed of one or a plurality of layers, and the intermediate layer is formed such that the number of layers at the intersection is larger than the number of layers at the action portion.
Okahashi teaches an optical waveguide element (title and abstract) comprising an intermediate layer (452, Figure 5) is formed of one (452, Figure 5) or a plurality of layers, and the intermediate layer (452, Figure 5) is formed such that the number of layers at the intersection (center area of Figure 5) is larger than the number of layers at the action portion (center area where 452 and 264b-1 intersect, of Figure 5).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Miyazaki having the optical waveguide device with the teachings of Okahashi having the intermediate layer for the purpose of curbing distortion, column 9, lines 46-55.
With respect to Claim 4, Miyazaki teaches the optical waveguide device according to claim 3.
Miyazaki fails to teach wherein the intermediate layer includes a resin layer at the intersection.
Okahashi teaches an optical waveguide element (title and abstract) wherein the intermediate layer (452, Figure 5) includes a resin layer (452 is resin, Figure 5) at the intersection (center area of Figure 5).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Miyazaki having the optical waveguide device with the teachings of Okahashi having the intermediate layer for the purpose of curbing distortion, column 9, lines 46-55.
With respect to Claim 5, Miyazaki teaches the optical waveguide device according to claim 1 and the optical waveguide (not shown on 10, Figure 1; see column 3, lines 63-65).
Miyazaki fails to teach wherein the intermediate layer is formed such that the thickness at the intersection is thicker than a height of the protruding portion forming the optical waveguide.
Okahashi teaches an optical waveguide element (title and abstract) wherein the intermediate layer (452, Figure 5) is formed such that the thickness at the intersection (see annotated Figure 5) is thicker than a height of the protruding portion forming the optical waveguide (232, Figure 5).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Miyazaki having the optical waveguide device with the teachings of Okahashi having the intermediate layer for the purpose of curbing distortion, column 9, lines 46-55.
With respect to Claim 6, Miyazaki further teaches wherein the ground electrode (12, Figure 1) is formed such that a clearance (area between 11 and 12, Figure 1) between the ground electrode (12, Figure 1) and the signal electrode (11, Figure 1) is wider at the intersection (see Figure 1) than at the action portion (30, Figure 1).
With respect to Claim 7, Miyazaki teaches an optical waveguide device comprising: a substrate (10, Figure 1) on which an optical waveguide (not shown on 10, Figure 1; see column 3, lines 63-65) is formed; the optical waveguide (not shown on 10, Figure 1; see column 3, lines 63-65) extending on a substrate (10, Figure 1), the signal electrode (11, Figure 1) has an action portion (30, Figure 1) that extends along the optical waveguide (not shown on 10, Figure 1; see column 3, lines 63-65) and controls a light wave (light waves, column 3, line 65-column 4, line 1) propagating through the optical waveguide (not shown on 10, Figure 1; see column 3, lines 63-65), and the ground electrode (12, Figure 1) is formed such that a clearance between the ground electrode (12, Figure 1) and the signal electrode (11, Figure 1) is wider at the intersection (see Figure 1 where 11 crosses in the center of Figure 1) than at the action portion (30, Figure 1).
Miyazaki fails to teach an intermediate layer formed on the substrate; and signal electrode and a ground electrode formed on the intermediate layer.
Okahashi teaches an optical waveguide element (title and abstract) comprising an intermediate layer (452, Figure 5), wherein the intermediate layer (452, Figure 5) is formed on the substrate (592, Figure 5).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Miyazaki having the optical waveguide device with the teachings of Okahashi having the intermediate layer, wherein an electrode is formed on an intermediate layer and the intermediate layer is formed on the substrate, and the intermediate layer is formed such that a thickness at the intersection is thicker than a thickness at the action portion for the purpose of curbing distortion, column 9, lines 46-55.
Miyazaki in view of Okahashi fail to teach the optical waveguide is configured by two strip-shaped protruding portions that form a pair of parallel waveguides extending on a surface of the substrate, and the optical waveguide includes a light folded portion that folds a light propagation direction of input light by 180 degrees, the signal electrode forms an intersection by crossing over the optical waveguide at the light folded portion, and is located between the parallel waveguides.
Miyazaki in view of Okahashi teach the optical waveguide device and Sugiyama teaches an optical modulator.
Sugiyama teaches the optical waveguide (121, Figure 1) is configured by two strip-shaped protruding portions (121 is formed by forming a metal film on a portion of a substrate, ¶[0031]) that form a pair of parallel waveguides (see the 121s in Figure 1) extending on a surface (121 is formed by forming a metal film on a portion of a substrate, ¶[0031]) of the substrate (substrate of 121, Figure 1), and the optical waveguide (121, Figure 1) includes a light folded portion (see where 121s bend at 90 degrees in Figure 1) that folds a light propagation direction (see Figure 1) of input light (100a, Figure 1) by 180 degrees (100b, Figure 1, is 180 degrees from 100a; see also ¶[0031]), the signal electrode (123, Figure 1) forms an intersection (see Figure 1) by crossing over (123 overlaps 121 in Figure 1) the optical waveguide (121, Figure 1) at the light folded portion (see where 121s bend at 90 degrees in Figure 1), and is located between the parallel waveguides (121, Figure 1).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Miyazaki in view of Okahashi having the optical waveguide device with the teachings of Sugiyama having the optical waveguide is configured by two strip-shaped protruding portions that form a pair of parallel waveguides extending on a surface of the substrate, and the optical waveguide includes a light folded portion that folds a light propagation direction of input light by 180 degrees, the signal electrode forms an intersection by crossing over the optical waveguide at the light folded portion, and is located between the parallel waveguides for the purpose of miniaturization of the optical modulator, ¶[0031].
With respect to Claim 8, Miyazaki further teaches, as best understood, wherein the ground electrode (12, Figure 1) is formed such that the clearance between the ground electrode (12, Figure 1) and the signal electrode (11, Figure 1) is stepwise or continuously widened from the action portion (30, Figure 1) toward the intersection (see Figure 1 where 11 crosses in the center of Figure 1).
With respect to Claim 9, Miyazaki further teaches wherein the ground electrode (12, Figure 1) is formed such that the clearance between the ground electrode (12, Figure 1) and the signal electrode (11, Figure 1) at the intersection (see Figure 1 where 11 crosses in the center of Figure 1) is wider than three times a width of the protruding portion forming the optical waveguide (not shown on 10, Figure 1; see column 3, lines 63-65).
Miyazaki discloses the claimed invention except for the signal electrode is three times a width of the protruding portion forming the optical waveguide. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the signal electrode is three times a width of the protruding portion forming the optical waveguide, since such a modification would involve only a mere change in size of a component. Scaling up or down of an element which merely requires a change in size is generally considered as being within the ordinary skill in the art. One would have been motivated to scale the size of the signal electrode with of the protruding portion forming the optical waveguide to be three times a width in order to provide better energy coupling and energy transfer.
With respect to Claim 11, Miyazaki further teaches an optical modulation module (Figure 1) comprising: the optical waveguide (not shown on 10, Figure 1; see column 3, lines 63-65) device according to claim 1, which is an optical modulation device that modulates light (inherent on being an optical modulator, of Miyazaki); and a drive circuit (column 1, lines 46-51) that drives the optical waveguide (not shown on 10, Figure 1; see column 3, lines 63-65) device.
With respect to Claim 13, Miyazaki further teaches an optical transmission apparatus (optical measurement, column 1, lines 14-19) comprising: the optical modulation module according to claim 11; and an electronic circuit (Figure 2) that generates an electrical signal for causing the optical waveguide (not shown on 10, Figure 1; see column 3, lines 63-65) device to perform a modulation operation (inherent on being an optical modulator).
With respect to Claim 14, Miyazaki further teaches wherein the ground electrode (12, Figure 1) is formed such that the clearance between the ground electrode (12, Figure 1) and the signal electrode (11, Figure 1) is stepwise or continuously widened from the action portion (30, Figure 1) toward the intersection.
With respect to Claim 15, Miyazaki further teaches wherein the ground electrode (12, Figure 1) is formed such that the clearance between the ground electrode (12, Figure 1) and the signal electrode (11, Figure 1) at the intersection is wider than three times a width of the protruding portion forming the optical waveguide (not shown on 10, Figure 1; see column 3, lines 63-65).
With respect to Claim 17, Miyazaki further teaches an optical modulation module comprising: the optical waveguide (not shown on 10, Figure 1; see column 3, lines 63-65) device according to claim 7, which is an optical modulation device that modulates light; and a drive circuit that drives the optical waveguide device (Figure 1).
With respect to Claim 19, Miyazaki further teaches an optical transmission apparatus (optical measurement, column 1, lines 14-19) comprising: the optical modulation module according to claim 17; and an electronic circuit (Figure 2) that generates an electrical signal for causing the optical waveguide (not shown on 10, Figure 1; see column 3, lines 63-65) device to perform a modulation operation (inherent on being an optical modulator).
Claims 10, 12, 16 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Miyazaki (US 10,162,201 B2) in view of Okahashi (US 11,333,909 B2) and Sugiyama (US 2019/0187536 A1) and in further view of Kondou et al., (hereafter Kondou) (US 2018/0164612 A1).
With respect to Claim 10, Miyazaki in view of Okahashi and Sugiyama teach an optical modulator (Figure 1) comprising: the optical waveguide device (not shown on 10, Figure 1; see column 3, lines 63-65) according to claim 1, which is an optical modulation device that modulates light (column 3, line 65-column 4, line 2); the optical waveguide (not shown on 10, Figure 1; see column 3, lines 63-65).
Miyazaki in view of Okahashi and Sugiyama fail to teach a housing that houses the optical waveguide device; an optical fiber that inputs light to the optical waveguide device; and an optical fiber that guides light output by the optical waveguide device to outside the housing.
Kondou teaches an optical control device (title and abstract) wherein a housing (housing, ¶[0038]) that houses the optical waveguide device (thin-plate LN optical waveguide, ¶[0038]); an optical fiber (optical fiber, ¶[0038]) that inputs light (¶[0037]) to the optical waveguide device (thin-plate LN optical waveguide, ¶[0038]); and an optical fiber (optical fiber, ¶[0038]) that guides light output by the optical waveguide device (thin-plate LN optical waveguide, ¶[0038]) to outside the housing (housing, ¶[0038]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Miyazaki in view of Okahashi and Sugiyama having the optical waveguide device with the teachings of Kondou having a housing that houses the optical waveguide device and an optical fiber for the purpose of the protection of the inner elements.
With respect to Claim 12, Miyazaki in view of Okahashi further teach an optical transmission apparatus (optical measurement, column 1, lines 14-19, of Miyazaki) comprising: the optical modulator (Figure 1, of Miyazaki) according to claim 10, and an electronic circuit that generates an electrical signal for causing the optical waveguide (not shown on 10, Figure 1; see column 3, lines 63-65, of Miyazaki) device to perform a modulation operation (inherent on being an optical modulator, of Miyazaki).
With respect to Claim 16, Miyazaki in view of Okahashi and Sugiyama teach an optical modulator comprising: the optical waveguide (not shown on 10, Figure 1; see column 3, lines 63-65, of Miyazaki) device according to claim 7, which is an optical modulation device that modulates light (inherent on being an optical modulator).
Miyazaki in view of Okahashi and Sugiyama fail to teach a housing that houses the optical waveguide device; an optical fiber that inputs light to the optical waveguide device; and an optical fiber that guides light output by the optical waveguide device to outside the housing.
Kondou teaches an optical control device (title and abstract) wherein a housing (housing, ¶[0038]) that houses the optical waveguide device (thin-plate LN optical waveguide, ¶[0038]); an optical fiber (optical fiber, ¶[0038]) that inputs light (¶[0037]) to the optical waveguide device (thin-plate LN optical waveguide, ¶[0038]); and an optical fiber (optical fiber, ¶[0038]) that guides light output by the optical waveguide device (thin-plate LN optical waveguide, ¶[0038]) to outside the housing (housing, ¶[0038]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the invention to modify the teachings of Miyazaki in view of Okahashi and Sugiyama having the optical waveguide device with the teachings of Kondou having a housing that houses the optical waveguide device and an optical fiber for the purpose of the protection of the inner elements.
With respect to Claim 18, Miyazaki in view of Okahashi and Sugiyama further teach an optical transmission apparatus (optical measurement, column 1, lines 14-19, of Miyazaki) comprising: the optical modulator according to claim 16; and an electronic circuit (Figure 2 of Miyazaki) that generates an electrical signal for causing the optical waveguide (not shown on 10, Figure 1; see column 3, lines 63-65 of Miyazaki) device to perform a modulation operation (inherent on being an optical modulator).
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 TAMARA Y WASHINGTON whose telephone number is (571)270-3887. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur 730-530 EST.
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, Stephone Allen can be reached at 571-272-2434. 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.
/TYW/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/STEPHONE B ALLEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights