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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by
Pezeshki et al. (US 20200411587 A1).
Re claim 1: Pezeshki et al. discloses an optical coupling element (fig. 2) configured to be positioned between and optically couple a first optical component (CPU 211) configured to transmit a light beam, and a second optical component (Memory 213) configured to receive light of the light beam, the optical coupling element comprising a glass coupler body (glass, fig. 2) having a receiving side surface (microLEDs 217 side or side 231) and an opposite transmitting side surface (photodetectors 219 side or opposite side of 231), the glass coupler body comprising: lens (615, fig. 6) serves as a converging member configured to reduce, in accordance with converging characteristics, divergence of light of the light beam entering the glass coupler body via the receiving side surface; and a coupling waveguide (SiO2 waveguide) extending within the glass coupler body between the converging member (615) and an output facet on the transmitting side surface and being configured to transmit light of the light beam from the converging member to the output facet, the coupling waveguide (SiO2 waveguide) having a first end at the side of the receiving side surface (microLEDs 217 side) and a first facet (233) at the first end, the first facet lying at a non-zero angle (45 degrees) relative to the receiving side surface (par. [0045]).
Re claim 8: Pezeshki et al. discloses the optical coupling element as defined in claim 1, wherein the coupling waveguide (SiO2 waveguide) is configured to have a straight waveguide section having a substantially constant cross-section (fig. 2).
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.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pezeshki et al. in view of Geng et al. (US 20180067273 A1).
Re claim 2: Pezeshki et al. discloses the optical coupling element as defined in claim 1 above, and further teach lens (615) serves as a converging member but does not explicitly disclose lens (615) is an elliptical cylindrical lens.
Geng et al. teaches an optical coupling (110; Fig. 1) configured to be positioned between and optically couple a first optical component (140) and a second optical component (130), the optical coupling element comprising lens (150) which can be a cylindrical lens (par. [0039]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the lenses of Pezeshki et al. with cylindrical lenses of Song et al. to improve beam quality, efficiency, and intensity due to cylindrical lens’s superior control in focusing light.
Claim(s) 3-7, 9-16 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pezeshki et al. in view of Song et al. (US 8942521 B2).
Re claims 3-7: Pezeshki et al. discloses the optical coupling element as defined in claim 1, wherein the converging member forms a local extension outward of the receiving side surface, wherein the coupling waveguide is configured to narrow towards the output facet, wherein the coupling waveguide is configured to have a curved section narrowing towards the output facet.
Song et al. teaches an optical coupling element (Fig. 3) configured to be positioned between and optically couple a first optical component (300) and a second optical component (connected to combined waveguide 410), the optical coupling element comprising a coupler body (400, Fig. 3) having a receiving side surface (side facing 300) and an opposite transmitting side surface (412), the coupler body comprising: a converging member (lens 404, Figs. 3-4); and a coupling waveguide (406 and 408) extending within the coupler body between the converging member (404) and an output facet on the transmitting side surface. Song et al. further teaches the converging member forms a local extension outward of the receiving side surface (Figs. 3-4), wherein the coupling waveguide is configured to narrow towards the output facet (408 is narrower than 406; Figs. 3-4), wherein the coupling waveguide is configured to have a curved section narrowing towards the output facet (Figs. 3-4). Song et al. also discloses the width of the waveguide 408 is approximately 70 µm (col. 5, lines 15-17); thus, based on the dimensions shown in fig. 3, comparing to the width of the waveguide 408, the curved section narrowing towards the output facet is obviously having a length of less than or equal to 200 µm.
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 waveguide and lenses of Pezeshki et al. as taught by Song et al. to improve beam quality and coupling efficiency by removing/reducing optical loss (Song et al.: col. 5, lines 5-19).
Re claim 9: Pezeshki et al. discloses the optical coupling element as defined in claim 1, but is silent with respect to the coupling waveguide has a first end at the side of the receiving side surface, the converging member has an optical axis and a receiving interface having a radius of curvature R at the optical axis, the first end lying at a converging member separation distance of 0.5 to 1.5 R, as defined along the optical axis, from the receiving interface.
Song et al. teaches the first end of coupling waveguide (406 and 408) lying at a converging member (lens 404) separation distance of 0.5 to 1.5 R, as defined along the optical axis, from the receiving interface (see annotated fig. 3 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
398
432
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to optimize Pezeshki et al.’s device by providing a converging member separation distance in the claimed range as taught by Song et al. in order to minimize loss in the device, since the light beam will be most focused around these values, and since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233).
Re claims 10 and 20: Pezeshki et al. /Song et al. discloses the optical coupling element as defined in claim 9 above. Pezeshki et al. further discloses a transceiver including an optical coupling arrangement (Fig. 2) comprising: a first optical component (CPU 211) having a transmitting facet (via microLEDs 217), configured to transmit a light beam with a beam divergence corresponding to a first numerical aperture out of the transmitting facet (Fig. 6; par. [0042] and [0055]); the converging member (lens 615) being configured to reduce the beam divergence of the light beam transmitted by the first optical element (CPU 211); and a second optical component (Memory 213) with a second numerical aperture (inherent feature of memory 213), having a receiving facet, configured to receive light of the light beam via the receiving facet (the photodetector 219 has a receiving facet configured to receive light of the light beam via the receiving facet); the first and the second optical components being positioned with the transmitting and receiving facets thereof facing each other mutually misaligned by an optical component misalignment (Fig. 2); the optical coupling element being positioned between the first and the second optical components with the converging member and the transmitting facet facing each other (see Fig. 6, converging member 615 and the transmitting facet, i.e. facet of microLED 611) mutually misaligned by a coupler misalignment (to some degree, this is inherently present) to optically couple, with a coupling efficiency, the first and the second optical components by transmitting light of the light beam to the output facet and further to the receiving facet (paragraph [0041-0042]); the coupling waveguide (SiO2 waveguide) having a first end at the side of the receiving side surface (microLEDs 217 side) and a first facet (233) at the first end, the first facet lying at a non-zero angle (45 degrees) relative to the receiving side surface (par. [0045]); wherein a coupling waveguide is configured to reduce effect(s) of the misalignments, possible difference between the first and the second numerical apertures, and/or the converging characteristics on the coupling efficiency (Examiner notes that this limitation is an intended use type limitation. It has been held that “apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does” (Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc. 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990)). Furthermore, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. See In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967) and In re Otto, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963). In this case, Pezeshki et al.’s coupling waveguide (SiO2 waveguide) having the same structure as claimed, i.e., a first facet (233) at the first end, the first facet lying at a non-zero angle (45 degrees) relative to the receiving side surface (par. [0045]); therefore, the coupling waveguide is capable of performing the claimed functions).
Re claims 11-16: Pezeshki et al. /Song et al. discloses the optical coupling element as defined in claim 9 above. Pezeshki et al. further discloses the coupling waveguide has an input numerical aperture of 0.15 (col. 5, lines 15-19), but fails to explicitly discloses the first numerical aperture, the second numerical aperture, and the coupler misalignment’s offset values as claimed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to optimize Pezeshki et al. /Song et al.’s device by making the second numerical aperture to be smaller than the first numerical aperture and the coupler misalignment’s offset values as claimed in order to minimize loss in the device, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233).
Claim(s) 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pezeshki et al. in view of Song et al. (US 8942521 B2), and further in view of Geng et al. (US 20180067273 A1).
Re claims 17-18: Pezeshki et al. /Song et al. discloses the optical coupling element as defined in claim 10 above, but fails to disclose the first optical component comprises an active optical component, wherein the active optical component is a semiconductor laser, an optical amplifier, or an optical modulator, wherein at least one of the first and the second optical components comprises a waveguide of a photonic integrated circuit.
Geng et al. teaches an optical coupling (110; Fig. 1) configured to be positioned between and optically couple a first optical component (140) and a second optical component (130), the optical coupling element comprising a glass coupler body (122; par. [0036]) having a receiving side surface (112) and an opposite transmitting side surface (114), the glass coupler body comprising: a coupling waveguide (120) extending within the glass coupler body, the first optical component comprises an active optical component, wherein the active optical component is a semiconductor laser (par. [0038]), wherein at least one of the first and the second optical components comprises a waveguide of a photonic integrated circuit (par. [0038]).
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 first and second optical components of Pezeshki et al./ Song et al. to be a semiconductor laser or a waveguide of a photonic integrated circuit as taught by Geng et al. to provide Pezeshki et al./ Song et al. with a versatile system which can be applied in various applications for intended use as a matter of design choice.
Re claim 19: Pezeshki et al. /Song et al./ Geng et al. discloses the optical coupling element as defined in claim 18 above, Pezeshki et al. further discloses the first optical component and the second optical component comprise arrays of pluralities of transmitting and receiving facets, respectively (facets of microLEDs 217 and photodetectors 219 (Fig. 6; par. [0042-0043])); the coupler body comprises an array of a plurality of converging members (array 621) and a plurality of coupling waveguides between the beam converging members and output facets on the transmitting side surface facing and being aligned with the receiving facets (figs. 2-3).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Lai et al. (US 9325420 B2) discloses an electro-optical transceiver device having a coupling waveguide (figs. 2 and 4).
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 Uyen-Chau N. Le whose telephone number is (571)272-2397. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00am-5:30pm.
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, Kiesha R. Bryant can be reached at (571) 272-3606. 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.
/UYEN CHAU N LE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874