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 .
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 1-11 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 word “optionally" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). In particular, it is not clear whether the optional part of the claim is merely the second substrate or every limitation following the word optionally.
Claims 2-11 are rejected only for their dependence on claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-11 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claims 12-22 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The prior art does not disclose or make obvious a confinement assembly configured for confining one or more quantum objects, the confinement assembly comprising a first substrate having a plurality of potential generating elements formed thereon, the potential generating elements operable for generating one or more confinement regions configured for confining the one or more quantum objects; and either a) a laser formed on the first substrate or a mounted second substrate comprising gain media and a resonant structure, wherein the confinement assembly at least partially defines an optical path for causing an optical beam to interact with the laser and the optical beam is one of a seeding laser beam to control a property of light emitted by the laser or an optical pumping beam configured to power the lasing activity of the laser, or b) respective portions of a plurality of lasers formed as part of the confinement assembly, wherein at least one laser of the plurality of lasers is configured to provide a respective seed laser beam to at least one other laser of the plurality of lasers.
In the prior art, Scherer (US 20050152429 A1) teaches a laser having a gain media and a resonant structure which is pumped by an optical beam, where the laser is formed in a substrate that contains quantum objects (quantum dots). However the quantum dots are embedded in a substrate and not confined within confinement regions generated by potential generating elements. Roessler (US 20220102134 A1) and King (US 11,586,968 B2) separately teach a substrate having trapped quantum objects but does not teach an integrated laser substrate or a second substrate mounted to the first substrate, the apparatus defining an optical path for seeding laser beam or an optical pumping beam. Mehta (Mehta, et al., “Integrated Optical Addressing of an Ion Qubit”, submitted Oct. 19 2015 to Cornell University Library Archive, https://arXiv.org/abs/1510.05618v1) teaches an ion confinement apparatus having an electrode substrate with an integrated waveguide for guiding a laser beam to the ion but not an integrated laser structure in the substrate or a path for an optical seeding or pumping beam.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID E SMITH whose telephone number is (571)270-7096. The examiner can normally be reached M to F 8:30 AM-5:00 PM.
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, Robert Kim can be reached at 22293. 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.
/DAVID E SMITH/Examiner, Art Unit 2881