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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ming Li et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. 2020/0366242 A1) in view of Xuan Li et al. (Xuan Li et al., “Research on Silicon-Substrate-Integrated Widely Tunable, Narrow Linewidth External Cavity Lasers”, MDPI Crystals, 8 May 2022).
Regarding claim 1, Ming Li et al. teaches in FIG. 4 an integrated photonic apparatus, comprising: an integrated laser 1; an optical detector 8, operationally coupled to the integrated external cavity laser disposed to receive a laser output; and a radio frequency (RF) and/or microwave phase shifter 14 having an input operationally coupled to the optical detector and an output operationally coupled to the integrated laser platform. The difference between Ming Li et al. and the claimed invention is that Ming Li et al. does not teach that the laser is an external cavity laser comprising a suitable material waveguide platform incorporating a high-Q resonator and an integrated driving electrode and at least one laser-cavity end reflector disposed in/on the platform and a laser gain element coupled thereto. Xuan Li et al. teaches in FIG. 15 an external cavity laser comprising a suitable material waveguide platform incorporating a high-Q resonator (Ming Li et al. teaches microring resonant cavity can be high Q resonator) and an integrated driving electrode (the narrow lines are waveguides and the thick yellow strips are electrodes) and at least one laser-cavity end reflector (Xuan Li et al. teaches in FIG. 15 RSOA which has a reflector on the left-hand side) disposed in/on the platform and a laser gain element coupled thereto. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teaching of Xuan Li et al. with the system of Ming Li et al. and replace the laser (and the modulator) of FIG. 4 of Ming Li et al. with FIG. 15 of Xuan Li et al. because of laser of Xuan Li et al. is widely tunable with narrow linewidth. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use an external cavity laser with a RSOA, as taught by Xuan Li et al., in the system of Ming Li et al.
Regarding claim 2, Xuan Li et al. teaches in FIG. 15 ring resonator.
Regarding claim 3, Ming Li et al. teaches in FIG. 4 and paragraph [0051] microwave band-pass filter 11.
Regarding claim 4, Ming Li et al. teaches in FIG. 4 microwave amplifier.
Regarding claim 5, Ming Li et al. teaches in paragraph [0016] indium phosphide substrate.
Regarding claim 6, Xuan Li et al. teaches in FIG. 15 Sagnac loop mirror.
Regarding claim 8, Xuan Li et al. teaches in FIG. 15 a III-V (InP) RSOA. See Debregeas et al. (Debregeas et al., “2kHz linewidth C-band tunable laser by hybrid integration of reflective SOA and SiO2 PLC external cavity”, 2014 IEEE International Semiconductor Laser Conference, September 2014) which is cited by Xuan Li et al. for FIG. 15.
Regarding claim 9, Xuan Li et al. teaches in FIG. 15 that the RSOA is edge coupled to the laser cavity platform.
Regarding claim 10, Ming Li et al. teaches in FIG. 4 phase modulator 3.
Regarding claim 11, Ming Li et al. teaches in FIG. 4 and paragraph [0051] microwave band-pass filter 11.
Regarding claim 12, Ming Li et al. teaches in FIG. 4 microwave amplifier 12.
Regarding claim 13, Ming Li et al. teaches in paragraph [0016] indium phosphide substrate.
Regarding claim 14, Xuan Li et al. teaches in FIG. 15 ring resonator.
Regarding claim 15, Xuan Li et al. teaches in FIG. 15 ring resonator.
Regarding claim 17, Xuan Li et al. teaches in FIG. 15 RSOA.
Regarding claim 18, Xuan Li et al. teaches in FIG. 15 that the RSOA is edge coupled to the laser cavity platform.
Regarding claim 19, Xuan Li et al. teaches in FIG. 13 another structure for an external cavity comprising a RSOA, microring and an optical coupler (OC) adapted to couple light into and out of the resonator and to couple the laser output to the detector. One of ordinary skill in the art would have combined the teaching of FIG. 13 of Xuan Li et al. with the modified system of Ming Li et al. and Xuan Li et al. because it is a simple substitution of one known, equivalent element for another to obtain predictable results. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include an OC to couple light into and out of the resonator and to couple the laser output to the detector, as taught by FIG. 13 of Xuan Li et al., in the modified system of Ming Li et al. and Xuan Li et al.
Regarding claim 20, Ming Li et al. teaches in FIG. 4 phase modulator 3; Xuan Li et al. teaches in FIG. 15 Sagnac mirror as cavity end reflector.
Regarding claim 21, Xuan Li et al. teaches in FIG. 15 that the RSOA is edge coupled to the laser cavity platform.
Regarding claim 22, Xuan Li et al. teaches in FIG. 15 Sagnac mirror as cavity end reflector.
Regarding claim 23, Ming Li et al. teaches in FIG. 4 and paragraph [0051] microwave band-pass filter 11.
Regarding claim 24, Ming Li et al. teaches in FIG. 4 microwave amplifier 12.
Regarding claim 25, Ming Li et al. teaches in paragraph [0016] indium phosphide substrate.
Regarding claim 26-27, Xuan Li et al. teaches in FIG. 15 a III-V (InP) RSOA and a Sagnac mirror as a second cavity end reflector. See Debregeas et al. (Debregeas et al., “2kHz linewidth C-band tunable laser by hybrid integration of reflective SOA and SiO2 PLC external cavity”, 2014 IEEE International Semiconductor Laser Conference, September 2014) which is cited by Xuan Li et al. for FIG. 15.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7, 9-14, 16-18 and 20-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ming Li et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. 2020/0366242 A1) in view of Boudreau et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. 2022/0123526 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ming Li et al. teaches in FIG. 4 an integrated photonic apparatus, comprising: an integrated laser 1; an optical detector 8, operationally coupled to the integrated external cavity laser disposed to receive a laser output; and a radio frequency (RF) and/or microwave phase shifter 14 having an input operationally coupled to the optical detector and an output operationally coupled to the integrated laser platform. The difference between Ming Li et al. and the claimed invention is that Ming Li et al. does not teach that the laser is an external cavity laser comprising a suitable material waveguide platform incorporating a high-Q resonator and an integrated driving electrode and at least one laser-cavity end reflector disposed in/on the platform and a laser gain element coupled thereto. Yoffe teaches in FIG. 10 and external cavity laser comprising a resonator 1023 and an integrated driving electrode 1025, an end reflector 1029 and a RSOA 1011. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teaching of Yoffe with the system of Ming Li et al. because the laser of Yoffe allows precise tuning of the operating point of the laser and suppresses side modes. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the laser of Yoffe in the system of Ming Li et al.
Regarding claim 2, Yoffe teaches in FIG. 10 ring resonator.
Regarding claim 3, Ming Li et al. teaches in FIG. 4 and paragraph [0051] microwave band-pass filter 11.
Regarding claim 4, Ming Li et al. teaches in FIG. 4 microwave amplifier.
Regarding claim 5, Ming Li et al. teaches in paragraph [0016] indium phosphide substrate.
Regarding claim 7, Yoffe teaches in FIG. 10 Bragg grating 1029.
Regarding claim 9, Yoffe teaches in FIG. 10 that the RSOA is edge coupled to the laser cavity platform.
Regarding claim 10, Ming Li et al. teaches in FIG. 4 phase modulator 3.
Regarding claim 11, Ming Li et al. teaches in FIG. 4 and paragraph [0051] microwave band-pass filter 11.
Regarding claim 12, Ming Li et al. teaches in FIG. 4 microwave amplifier 12.
Regarding claim 13, Ming Li et al. teaches in paragraph [0016] indium phosphide substrate.
Regarding claim 14, Yoffe teaches in FIG. 10 ring resonator.
Regarding claim 16, Yoffe teaches in FIG. 10 Bragg grating 1029.
Regarding claim 17, Yoffe teaches in FIG. 10 RSOA.
Regarding claim 18, Yoffe teaches in FIG. 10 that the RSOA is edge coupled to the laser cavity platform.
Regarding claim 20, Yoffe teaches in paragraph [0038] that a phase modulator is integrated on the RSOA chip and in FIG. 10 reflective facet 1013.
Regarding claim 21, Yoffe teaches in FIG. 10 that the RSOA is edge coupled to the laser cavity platform.
Regarding claim 23, Ming Li et al. teaches in FIG. 4 and paragraph [0051] microwave band-pass filter 11.
Regarding claim 24, Ming Li et al. teaches in FIG. 4 microwave amplifier 12.
Regarding claim 25, Ming Li et al. teaches in paragraph [0016] indium phosphide substrate.
Claim(s) 28-33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ming Li et al. and Xuan Li et al. as applied to claims 1 above, and further in view of Matsko et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. 20120327497 A1).
Ming Li et al. and Xuan Li et al. have been discussed above in regard to claims 1-6, 8-15 and 17-27. The difference between Ming Li et al. and Xuan Li et al. and the claimed invention is that Ming Li et al. and Xuan Li et al. do not teach generating a multi-frequency comb-like laser output with a spectrum that matches the resonance frequencies of the high-Q resonator and feeding the RF/microwave signal back into the high-Q resonator to electro-optically modulate the resonator and phase lock the laser modes. Matsko et al. teaches in FIG. 1(b) feeding the RF signal back into the resonator 100 and in paragraph [0071] to phase lock the optical harmonics. The Examiner notes that FIG. 1(a) of Matsko et al. is similar to Ming Li et al. where a separated phase modulator is used. Matsko et al. teaches in paragraph [0087] that optical frequency combs are generated with frequency spacing corresponding to the FSR of the resonator. One of ordinary skill in the art would have combined the teaching of Matsko et al. with the modified system of Ming Li et al. and Xuan Li et al. because it is a simple substitution of one known, equivalent configuration for another to obtain predictable results. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the external phase modulator in the modified system of Ming Li et al. and Xuan Li et al. by phase modulating the resonator, as taught by Matsko et al.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHI K LI whose telephone number is (571)272-3031. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:53 a.m. -3:23 p.m.
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, David Payne can be reached at 571 272-3024. 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.
skl6 April 2026
/SHI K LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2635