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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s Amendment filed June 24, 2026 has been fully considered and entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim recites the limitations “wherein a material of the absorption layer is silicon, a PN junction or a PIN junction is formed on the absorption material layer by an ion implantation doping process so that free carriers converted by absorption of light are removed by applying reverse bias voltage to the PN junction or the PIN junction” in lines 12-15, which appears to be grammatically incorrect. The examiner suggests inserting “and after silicon,” in line 12 of claim 1 to cure this deficiency. Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
One (1) replacement sheet of drawings was filed on June 24, 2026.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the optical absorber integrated with a dielectric optical waveguide, as defined by claim 1, comprising a dielectric optical waveguide arranged in a spiral or folded-loop shape in a plane with an absorption material located on one side of the dielectric optical waveguide core or two absorption material layers located on two sides of the dielectric optical waveguide core, and a PN junction or PIN junction formed on the absorption material layer must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
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, 2, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contain 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.
Claim 1 recites “wherein the dielectric optical waveguide is arranged in a spiral or folded-loop shape in a plane” in lines 7-8 of the claim, and further recites “the absorption material layer located on one side of the dielectric optical waveguide core, or two absorption material layers located on two sides of the dielectric optical waveguide core” in lines 9-12 of the claim.
However, the disclosure, as originally filed, provides support for a spiral or folded-shape waveguide having an absorption material layer above (i.e. on top of) the waveguide core (see Figure 7, which illustrates a top down view), or an alternative waveguide core (20) of a different shape having an absorption material (30) on one side (see Figure 4) or on two sides (see Figure 6). Thus, it appears that while the original claims were broadly written to cover multiple embodiments, the disclosure as originally filed does not support an embodiment with a spiral or folded-shape waveguide core having an absorption layer on a side or on two sides. The examiner notes that it’s not clear what shape an absorption layer provided on a side or on two sides of a spiral or folded-shape waveguide core would take as discussed below under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
The present specification discloses (emphasis added) that:
“the absorption material layer can be located on an upper layer of the waveguide, or located on a side of the waveguide, or located on a lower layer of the waveguide” (see paragraph 5 and the abstract);
“FIG. 1, including a waveguide cladding 10, a dielectric optical waveguide core 20, and an absorption material layer 30… the absorption material layer 30 is located on an upper layer of the dielectric optical waveguide core” (see paragraphs 22-23);
“as shown in FIG. 4, the absorption material layer 30 can also be located on one side of the dielectric optical waveguide core 20; or alternatively located, as shown in FIG. 5, the absorption material layer 30 is located on a lower layer of the dielectric optical waveguide core; still alternatively, as shown in FIG. 6, the absorption material layers 30 can also be located on two sides of the dielectric optical waveguide core 20” (see paragraph 26).
Thus, the specification and drawings make a clear distinction between a side as opposed to a top layer and a bottom layer, wherein the only disclosed embodiment that supports a waveguide having a spiral or folded-shape waveguide core includes an upper absorption layer located above the spiral or folded-shaped waveguide cores (see Figure 7).
Claims 2 and 7 inherently contain the deficiencies of any base and/or intervening claims from which they depend.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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, 2 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1; the claim recites “wherein the dielectric optical waveguide is arranged in a spiral or folded-loop shape in a plane” in lines 7-8 of the claim, and further recites “the absorption material layer located on one side of the dielectric optical waveguide core, or two the absorption material layers located on two sides of the dielectric optical waveguide core,” in lines 9-12 of the claim.
However, the disclosure, as originally filed, provides support for a spiral or folded-shape waveguide having an absorption material layer above the waveguide core (see Figure 7, which illustrates a top down view), or alternative a waveguide core (20) having an absorption material (30) on one side (see Figure 4) or on two sides (see Figure 6). It is unclear what shape an absorption region provided on one or two sides of a spiral shaped waveguide or folded waveguide would take.
Would the absorption region also be spiral or folded shape to be provided along both sides of a similarly shaped core?
Would the absorption region be a straight region laterally positioned with respect to the spiral or folded shaped waveguide, thereby being more distant from some sections of the waveguide than other sections of the waveguide core and on a side or sides of a waveguide core region, but not actually on a side or sides of the waveguide core?
Clarification is required.
Claims 2 and 7 inherently contain the deficiencies of any base and/or intervening claims from which they depend.
The scope of claims 1, 2 and 7 is unclear as discussed above. As a result, a meaningful formulation of art rejections cannot be done at this time. See MPEP 2173.06 II, 2nd paragraph:… where there is a great deal of confusion and uncertainty as to the proper interpretation of the limitations of a claim, it would not be proper to reject such a claim on the basis of prior art. … a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 should not be based on considerable speculation about the meaning of terms employed in a claim or assumptions that must be made as to the scope of the claims.
Therefore, claims 1, 2, and 7 have not been further considered with respect to prior art. This is not an indication of allowable subject matter.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 24, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant states that by amending claim 1, it is clear that an absorption region may be provided on one or two sides of a spiral shaped waveguide or folded waveguide.
The examiner disagrees. Applicant has not answered the following questions:
Would the absorption region also be spiral or folded shape to be provided along both sides of a similarly shaped core?
Would the absorption region be a straight region laterally positioned with respect to the spiral or folded shaped waveguide, thereby being more distant from some sections of the waveguide than other sections of the waveguide core and on a side or sides of a waveguide core region, but not actually on a side or sides of the waveguide core?
Applicant also states that by amending claim 1, it is clear that a material of the absorption material layer is silicon, a PN junction, or a PIN junction is formed on the absorption material layer by an ion implantation doping process, so that free carriers converted by absorption of light are removed by applying reverse bias voltage to the PN junction or the PIN junction.
This argument is confusing, but does highlight a grammatical error with claim 1, which has been objected to above.
This appears to be a definition of the PN junction or PIN junction operation, but does not overcome the rejections set forth in the previous Office action and noted above.
Applicant states that dependent claims 2 and 7 are patentable for at least the reason of their dependence on claim 1.
The examiner disagrees.
Applicant has submitted a corrected drawing sheet.
The corrected drawing sheet has been accepted but does not overcome the drawings objections noted above.
Applicant has amended the claim to require that the spiral or folded-shape is in a plane instead of in a space.
This change does not address the deficiencies of claim 1 noted in the rejections set forth above.
Applicant states that Figure 7 illustrates a top down view and the absorption material layer is arranged above the optical waveguide core.
The examiner agrees. This is consistent with the description in the specification and illustration of Figure 7.
Applicant states that those skilled in the art can readily understand that another absorption material layer can be arranged below the dielectric optical waveguide core.
The examiner notes that the specification does not disclose an arrangement having an absorption material layer below the optical waveguide core and above the optical waveguide core.
The difficulty arises because the specification makes a very clear distinction between embodiments and that the disclosed embodiments include embodiments having an absorption material on one or two sides or embodiments having an absorption material in an upper layer.
The present specification discloses (emphasis added) that:
“the absorption material layer can be located on an upper layer of the waveguide, or located on a side of the waveguide, or located on a lower layer of the waveguide” (see paragraph 5 and the abstract);
“FIG. 1, including a waveguide cladding 10, a dielectric optical waveguide core 20, and an absorption material layer 30… the absorption material layer 30 is located on an upper layer of the dielectric optical waveguide core” (see paragraphs 22-23);
“as shown in FIG. 4, the absorption material layer 30 can also be located on one side of the dielectric optical waveguide core 20; or alternatively located, as shown in FIG. 5, the absorption material layer 30 is located on a lower layer of the dielectric optical waveguide core; still alternatively, as shown in FIG. 6, the absorption material layers 30 can also be located on two sides of the dielectric optical waveguide core 20” (see paragraph 26).
Thus, the specification and drawings make a clear distinction between a side as opposed to a top layer and a bottom layer, wherein the only disclosed embodiment that supports a waveguide having a spiral or folded-shape waveguide core includes an upper absorption layer located above the spiral or folded-shaped waveguide cores (see Figure 7).
Applicant concludes that the disclosure as originally files can support an embodiment with a spiral or folded-shape waveguide core having an absorption layer on a side or on two sides.
The examiner disagrees for all the reasons above.
Applicant states that it is clear that an absorption region has a corresponding shape with the dielectric optical waveguide core, such as, a shape consisting of approximately parallel planes.
The waveguide core that is claimed has a spiral or folded-shape, and there is no disclosure suggesting that the absorption region may have a corresponding shape.
The examiner does concede that the upper absorption layer is located in a plane that is parallel to a plan in which the spiral or folded-shape waveguide is formed in Figure 7, but in Figure 7 the absorption layer is an upper layer above the spiral or folded-shape waveguide and is not positioned to one side or to both sides of the spiral or folded-shape waveguide.
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.
/MICHELLE R CONNELLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights