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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species 1, Fig. 1, claims 1-13 in the reply filed on April 01, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-4 and 8-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brick et al. (US PG Pub 2008/0123710) in view of Behringer et al. (US 8,115,909) and Igarashi (US PG Pub 2010/0085998).
Regarding claim 1, Brick et al. disclose: a first element part (1); and a second element part (2) stacked on the first element part in a stacking direction, wherein the first element part includes a first emitter that includes a first active layer (11) and a pair of first guide layers (pair of guide layers 6) sandwiching the first active layer, and emits light along an optical axis direction, and a pair of first clad layers (7, 8) that sandwich the pair of first guide layers (Fig. 1, [0029]-[0032]), the second element part (2) includes a second emitter that includes a second active layer (12) and a pair of second guide layers (pair of guide layers 6) sandwiching the second active layer, and emits light along the optical axis direction, and a pair of second clad layers (7, 8) that sandwich the pair of second guide layers (Fig. 1, [0029]-[0032]).
Brick et al. do not disclose: a thickness of the first emitter is different from a thickness of the second emitter so that an average value of an index DB1 represented by Equation (1) and an index DB2 represented by Equation (2) is 5% or less, [Equation 1] DB1=∫|F1(θ)−F01(θ)|dθ…(1), [Equation 2] DB2=∫|F2(θ)−F02(θ)|dθ…(2), in Equation (1) and Equation (2), θ is an angle with respect to the optical axis direction, F1(θ), F2(θ), F01(θ) and F02(θ) are normalized far field patterns in the stacking direction, F01(θ) is a far field pattern of light emitted from the first emitter when it is assumed that the second emitter is not present and only the first emitter is present, and F02(θ) is a far field pattern of light emitted from the second emitter when it is assumed that the first emitter is not present and only the second emitter is present, and when only the first emitter and second emitter are present, and it is assumed that, among two modes corresponding to a fundamental mode of the light emitted from the first emitter and the second emitter, a mode with a smaller propagation constant is defined as a first mode, and a mode with a larger propagation constant is defined as a second mode, F01(θ) is a far field pattern in the first mode, and F02(θ) is a far field pattern in the second mode when the thickness of the first emitter is thinner than the thickness of the second emitter, and F01(θ) is a far field pattern in the second mode, and F02(θ) is the far field pattern in the first mode when the thickness of the first emitter is thicker than the thickness of the second emitter.
Behringer et al. disclose: thickness of the first emitter is different from a thickness of the second emitter (claim 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the invention of Brick by forming the first emitter so that the thickness is different from the second emitter and third emitter in order to output different wavelengths from the laser device.
Brick as modified do not disclose: an average value of an index DB1 represented by Equation (1) and an index DB2 represented by Equation (2) is 5% or less, [Equation 1] DB1=∫|F1(θ)−F01(θ)|dθ…(1), [Equation 2] DB2=∫|F2(θ)−F02(θ)|dθ…(2), in Equation (1) and Equation (2), θ is an angle with respect to the optical axis direction, F1(θ), F2(θ), F01(θ) and F02(θ) are normalized far field patterns in the stacking direction, F01(θ) is a far field pattern of light emitted from the first emitter when it is assumed that the second emitter is not present and only the first emitter is present, and F02(θ) is a far field pattern of light emitted from the second emitter when it is assumed that the first emitter is not present and only the second emitter is present, and when only the first emitter and second emitter are present, and it is assumed that, among two modes corresponding to a fundamental mode of the light emitted from the first emitter and the second emitter, a mode with a smaller propagation constant is defined as a first mode, and a mode with a larger propagation constant is defined as a second mode, F01(θ) is a far field pattern in the first mode, and F02(θ) is a far field pattern in the second mode when the thickness of the first emitter is thinner than the thickness of the second emitter, and F01(θ) is a far field pattern in the second mode, and F02(θ) is the far field pattern in the first mode when the thickness of the first emitter is thicker than the thickness of the second emitter.
Igarashi discloses: obtaining a good Gaussian profile of the far-field pattern ([0076]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Brick as modified by adjusting the thickness of the first, second and third emitters in order to obtain a good Gaussian profile of the far field pattern. Brick as modified disclose: an average value of an index DB1 represented by Equation (1) and an index DB2 represented by Equation (2) is 5% or less, [Equation 1] DB1=∫|F1(θ)−F01(θ)|dθ…(1), [Equation 2] DB2=∫|F2(θ)−F02(θ)|dθ…(2), in Equation (1) and Equation (2), θ is an angle with respect to the optical axis direction, F1(θ), F2(θ), F01(θ) and F02(θ) are normalized far field patterns in the stacking direction, F01(θ) is a far field pattern of light emitted from the first emitter when it is assumed that the second emitter is not present and only the first emitter is present, and F02(θ) is a far field pattern of light emitted from the second emitter when it is assumed that the first emitter is not present and only the second emitter is present, and when only the first emitter and second emitter are present, and it is assumed that, among two modes corresponding to a fundamental mode of the light emitted from the first emitter and the second emitter, a mode with a smaller propagation constant is defined as a first mode, and a mode with a larger propagation constant is defined as a second mode, F01(θ) is a far field pattern in the first mode, and F02(θ) is a far field pattern in the second mode when the thickness of the first emitter is thinner than the thickness of the second emitter, and F01(θ) is a far field pattern in the second mode, and F02(θ) is the far field pattern in the first mode when the thickness of the first emitter is thicker than the thickness of the second emitter.
PNG
media_image1.png
796
412
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1 of Brick
Regarding claim 2, Brick as modified do not disclose: wherein the thickness of the first emitter is different from the thickness of the second emitter so that the average value of the index DB1 and the index DB2 is 3% or less.
However, In accordance with MPEP 2144.05 II, Optimization of Ranges: Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In the prior art the general conditions are disclosed, a semiconductor laser element comprising first and second emitters having a DB1 value, DB2 value and each having a thickness value. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to obtain a workable range of values for the thickness of each emitter and also DB! And DB2 by routine experimentation.
Regarding claim 3, Brick as modified do not disclose: wherein the thickness of the first emitter is different from the thickness of the second emitter so that the average value of the index DB1 and the index DB2 is 1% or less.
However, In accordance with MPEP 2144.05 II, Optimization of Ranges: Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In the prior art the general conditions are disclosed, a semiconductor laser element comprising first and second emitters having a DB1 value, DB2 value and each having a thickness value. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to obtain a workable range of values for the thickness of each emitter and also DB! And DB2 by routine experimentation.
Regarding claim 4, Brick as modified do not disclose: wherein the thickness of the first emitter is different from the thickness of the second emitter by a total thickness of the pair of first guide layers being different from a total thickness of the pair of second guide layers.
However, In accordance with MPEP 2144.05 II, Optimization of Ranges: Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In the prior art the general conditions are disclosed, a semiconductor laser element comprising first and second emitters having different thickness values. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to obtain a workable range of values for the thickness of each layer of each emitter by routine experimentation.
Regarding claim 8, Brick as modified do not disclose: wherein an absolute difference between the thickness of the first emitter and the average thickness of the first emitter and the second emitter is 10% or less of the average value.
However, In accordance with MPEP 2144.05 II, Optimization of Ranges: Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In the prior art the general conditions are disclosed, a semiconductor laser element comprising first and second emitters each having a thickness value. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to obtain a workable range of values for the thickness of each emitter by routine experimentation.
Regarding claim 9, Brick as modified disclose: further comprising a third element part (3) stacked on the second element part in the stacking direction, wherein the third element part includes a third emitter that includes a third active layer (13) and a pair of third guide layers (pair of guide layers 6) sandwiching the third active layer, and emits light along the optical axis direction, and a pair of third clad layers (7, 8) sandwiching the pair of third guide layers (Brick, Fig. 1, [0029]-[0032]), and a thickness of the third emitter is different from the thickness of the second emitter so that an average value of an index DB3 represented by Equation (4) and an index DB4 represented by Equation (5) is 5% or less, [Equation 4] DB3=∫|F3(θ)−F03(θ)|dθ…(4), [Equation 5] DB4=∫|F4(θ)−F04(θ)|dθ…(5), in Equation (4) and Equation (5), F3(θ is a far field pattern of light emitted from the third emitter when it is assumed that the first and second emitters are not present and only the third emitter is present, and F4(θ is a far field pattern of light emitted from the second emitter when it is assumed that the first and third emitters are not present and only the second emitter is present, and when the first emitter is not present and only the second emitter and the third emitter are present and it is assumed that, among two modes corresponding to a fundamental mode of the light emitted from the second emitter and the third emitter, a mode with a smaller propagation constant is defined as a third mode, and a mode with a larger propagation constant is defined as a fourth mode, F03(θ) is a far field pattern in the third mode, and F04(θ) is a far field pattern in the fourth mode when the thickness of the third emitter is thinner than the thickness of the second emitter, and F03(θ) is a far field pattern in the fourth mode, and F04(θ) is a far field pattern in the third mode when the thickness of the third emitter is thicker than the thickness of the second emitter (see the rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 10, Brick as modified disclose: further comprising a substrate (9), wherein the first emitter (1) and the second emitter (2) are stacked on the substrate so that the first emitter is located on a first side closer to the substrate than the second emitter (Brick, Fig. 1, [0029]-[0032]), and the thickness of the first emitter is thinner than the thickness of the second emitter (see the rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 11, Brick as modified disclose: the semiconductor laser element according to claim 10; and a mount member (heat sink) on which the semiconductor laser element is mounted, wherein the semiconductor laser element is fixed to the mount member on a second side (bottom side of substrate 9) opposite to the first side (Brick, Fig. 1, [0038]).
Brick as modified do not disclose: a thermal expansion coefficient of the mount member is smaller than a thermal expansion coefficient of the substrate.
However, In accordance with MPEP 2144.07, Art Recognized Suitability for an Intended Purpose: The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945), see also In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use known materials such as a material with a thermal expansion coefficient that is smaller than the thermal expansion coefficient of the substrate for the heat sink based on its suitability for the device.
Regarding claim 12, Brick as modified disclose: the semiconductor laser element according to claim 1; and a mount member on which the semiconductor laser element is mounted, wherein the semiconductor laser element further includes a substrate, the first emitter and the second emitter are stacked on the substrate so that the first emitter is located on a first side closer to the substrate than the second emitter, the semiconductor laser element is fixed to the mount member on a second side opposite to the first side (Brick, Fig. 1, [0038]).
Brick as modified do not disclose: a thermal expansion coefficient of the mount member is larger than a thermal expansion coefficient of the substrate, and the thickness of the first emitter is thicker than the thickness of the second emitter.
However, In accordance with MPEP 2144.07, Art Recognized Suitability for an Intended Purpose: The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945), see also In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use known materials such as a material with a thermal expansion coefficient that is smaller than the thermal expansion coefficient of the substrate for the heat sink based on its suitability for the device.
Regarding claim 13, Brick et al. disclose: a first element part (1); and a second element part (2) stacked on the first element part in a stacking direction, wherein the first element part includes a first emitter that includes a first active layer (11) and a pair of first guide layers (pair of guide layers 6) sandwiching the first active layer, and emits light along an optical axis direction, and a pair of first clad layers (7, 8) sandwiching the pair of first guide layers (Fig. 1, [0029]-[0032]), the second element part includes a second emitter that is stacked on the first emitter in the stacking direction, includes a second active layer (12) and a pair of second guide layers (pair of guide layers 6) sandwiching the second active layer, and emits light along the optical axis direction, and a pair of second clad layers (7, 8) sandwiching the pair of second guide layers (Fig. 1, [0029]-[0032]).
Brick et al. do not disclose: a thickness of the first emitter is different from a thickness of the second emitter so that an index P represented by Equation (6) is 25 or more, [Equation 6] P=|β1−β2|/K12…(6) in Equation (6), β1 is a propagation constant of the first emitter, β2 is a propagation constant of the second emitter, and K12 is a coupling constant between the first emitter and the second emitter when it is assumed that the thickness of each of the first emitter and the second emitter is equal to an average thickness of the first emitter and the second emitter.
Behringer et al. disclose: thickness of the first emitter is different from a thickness of the second emitter (claim 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the invention of Brick by forming the first emitter so that the thickness is different from the second emitter and third emitter in order to output different wavelengths from the laser device.
Brick as modified do not disclose: so that an index P represented by Equation (6) is 25 or more, [Equation 6] P=|β1−β2|/K12…(6) in Equation (6), β1 is a propagation constant of the first emitter, β2 is a propagation constant of the second emitter, and K12 is a coupling constant between the first emitter and the second emitter when it is assumed that the thickness of each of the first emitter and the second emitter is equal to an average thickness of the first emitter and the second emitter.
Igarashi discloses: obtaining a good Gaussian profile of the far-field pattern ([0076]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Brick as modified by adjusting the thickness of the first, second and third emitters in order to obtain a good Gaussian profile of the far field pattern. Brick as modified disclose: so that an index P represented by Equation (6) is 25 or more, [Equation 6] P=|β1−β2|/K12…(6) in Equation (6), β1 is a propagation constant of the first emitter, β2 is a propagation constant of the second emitter, and K12 is a coupling constant between the first emitter and the second emitter when it is assumed that the thickness of each of the first emitter and the second emitter is equal to an average thickness of the first emitter and the second emitter.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-7 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 5 is allowable as the prior art fails to anticipate or render obvious the claimed limitations including “…wherein the thickness of the first emitter is different from the thickness of the second emitter so that an index P represented by Equation (3) is 25 or more, [Equation 6] P=|β1−β2|/K12…(6) in Equation (6), β1 is a propagation constant of the first emitter, β2 is a propagation constant of the second emitter, and K12 is a coupling constant between the first emitter and the second emitter when it is assumed that the thickness of each of the first emitter and the second emitter is equal to an average thickness of the first emitter and the second emitter.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Behringer et al. (US PG Pub 2005/0089073) disclose: the present invention relates to an arrangement of semiconductor diode lasers stacked on top of one another, which is arranged on a substrate (1). A first diode laser (12) is arranged on the substrate (1), and a second diode laser (13) is arranged on the first diode laser (12). Between the first diode laser (12) and the second diode laser (13) there is a contact layer (6). The contact layer (6) comprises a first conductive layer (18) of a first conduction type and a second conductive layer (20) of a second conduction type and an interlayer (19) which is arranged between the first and second conductive layers (18, 20) (Abstract). Muller et al. (US PG Pub 2012/0250715) disclose: in at least one embodiment of the optoelectronic semiconductor component (1), the latter comprises an epitaxially grown semiconductor body (2) with at least one active layer (3). Furthermore, the semiconductor body (2) of the semiconductor component (1) comprises at least one barrier layer (4), the barrier layer (4) directly adjoining the active layer (3). A material composition and/or a layer thickness of the active layer (3) and/or of the barrier layer (4) is varied in a direction of variation or a longitudinal direction (L), perpendicular to a direction of growth (G) of the semiconductor body (2). By varying the material composition and/or the layer thickness of the active layer (3) and/or of the barrier layer (4), an emission wavelength (.lamda.) of a radiation (R) generated in the active layer (3) is likewise adjusted in the direction of variation or in the longitudinal direction (L) (Abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XINNING(TOM) NIU whose telephone number is (571)270-1437. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:30am-6:00pm.
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.
/XINNING(Tom) NIU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Prosecution Insights