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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/08/2023 was filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
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 comb” in claim 7, “optical combs” in claims 14, 15 and 17, “signals having beatnotes of different frequency spacings” in claims 9, 14 and 15 as well as “the laser stabilization units are offset in frequency” in claim 18 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 Objections
Claim 1, 2, 3 and 4 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 and 9 states “a modulator”. It should be “a first modulator”.
Claim 2 and 10 states “prior to photodetection…undergoes photodetection”. It should read as “prior to a photodetection…undergoes the photodetection”.
Claim 3, 11 and 16 states “and loop filter”. It should read “and a loop filter.
Claim 5, 13 and 17 states “loop filter”. It should read “the loop filter”
Claim 3, 4, 11 and 12 states “a phase-locked loop”. It should read for claim 3 and 11“a first phase-locked loop” while claim 4 and 12 it should read “a second phase-locked loop” to distinguish them.
Claim 14 states “the system in order to obtain at least one of: a tunable frequency difference….and a tunable offset”. It should read “the system in order to obtain at least one of: a tunable frequency difference….or a tunable offset”
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-20 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.
Claim 1, 8, 9 and 19 states “desired frequency difference”. It is not clear what the Applicant mean with the term “desired” and the Specification does not provide a proper definition. For examination purposes we will consider “desired frequency difference” as any frequency difference.
Claims 4-5, 12-13 and 20 use the term “lower-frequency optical signal”. It is not clear what the Applicant mean with lower-frequency optical signal since the word “lower” is does not have a reference and the Specification does not define what is “lower-frequency”. For examination purposes, we will consider the term “lower-frequency optical signal” as any frequency optical signal.
Claim 5 states “the amplifier coupled to the phase-locked loop and loop filter”. However, there are two different “phase-locked loop” one defined in claim 3 and a second one defined in claim 4. Therefore, it is unclear if the Applicant refers to the phased locked loop from claim 3 or claim 4. For examination purposes, the Examiner will consider “the phase-locked loop” from claim 3.
Claim 13 states “the amplifier coupled to the phase-locked loop and loop filter”. However, there are two different “phase-locked loop” one defined in claim 11 and a second one defined in claim 12. Therefore, it is unclear if the Applicant refers to the phased locked loop from claim 3 or claim 4. For examination purposes, the Examiner will consider “the phase-locked loop” from claim 11.
Claims 2-3, 6-7, 10-11, 14-19 are rejected due to their dependency with claim 1, 9 or 18.
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) 1-2, 6-8 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Logan (US Patent US-5379309-A) in the view of Maker (US Patent US-20210036484-A1 cited in the IDS) hereinafter Maker.
Regarding claim 1, Logan teaches an apparatus (Fig. 9) comprising:
multiple injection-locked lasers (Fig. 9 mode locked laser 12 generates locked injected lasers 16 and 18, see also Fig. 10 ) configured to generate multiple optical signals (Fig. 9 f1 and f2 are the signals generated by 16 and 18);
a combiner (Fig. 9 beam combiner 20) configured to combine the optical signals and generate a combined optical signal (Fig. 9 output of beam combiner 20 is a combined optical signals f1 and f2); and
a feedback loop (Fig. 7 feedback loop is composed by 72, 74, 78 and 62; column 5 and lines 44-47 & 62-65 states “electrode 62 is connected to a distributed fedback current I.sub.DFB…. Each distributed feedback electrode 62 is connected in a control loop consisting of a photodetector 72 whose input is connected to a respective one of the output optical fibers 38d, 38e and whose output is connected to an analog-to-digital converter 74”) so that the optical signals generated by the injection-locked lasers (Fig. 9 f1 and f2 generated by mode locked lasers 16 and 18) have a desired frequency difference (Fig. 8 shows a frequency difference between f1 and f2).
Logan fails to teach a seed laser configured to generate a seed signal; a modulator configured to modulate the seed signal and generate multiple sideband signals; multiple injection-locked lasers configured to generate multiple optical signals based on different ones of the sideband signals; a feedback loop configured to modify frequencies of the sideband signals generated by the modulator.
However, Maker teaches:
a seed laser configured to generate a seed signal (Fig. 4 seed laser 4; seed laser 4 is configured to generate continuous-wave output field 4);
a modulator (Fig. 4 modulator 5a-b) configured to modulate the seed signal and generate multiple sideband signals ([0122] states “the optical modulator 5 effectively applies sidebands to the continuous-wave output field 4 at plus and minus the modulation frequency and it is these sidebands that are employed as the first 6 and second 7 seed optical fields.”; therefore, modulator 5a generates multiple sideband signals; also see Fig. 3 where several sidebands are generated in the upper and lower branch 5a-f);
multiple injection-locked lasers (Fig. 4 amplifier 8a-b consist of a plurality of injection locked lasers, see Fig. 3 upper branch) configured to generate multiple optical signals (Fig. 4 amplifier 8a-c generated multiple optical signals 12a-f as seen in Fig. 3) based on different ones of the sideband signals (Fig. 3 shows optical signals 12a-f are based on the side signals 5a-c);
a feedback loop Fig. 4 feedback signal 29a-b) configured to modify frequencies of the sideband signals generated by the modulator ([0153] states “Phase lock control loop 27a is employed to provide a feedback signal 29a for the optical amplifier 8a”; therefore feedback signal 29a is configured to modify frequencies of the sideband signals generated by modulator 5a) so that the optical signals generated by the injection-locked lasers Fig. 3 12a-c are the signals generated by Fig. 8 amplifiers 8a).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Logan’s device to include a seed laser, and a modulator (e.g. having a seed laser from Maker to generate the seed signal and a modulator from Maker between the seed laser and mode locked laser 12 from Logan so that the feedback loop from Logan can be configured to modify frequencies of the sideband signals generated by the modulator) as taught by Maker because having a seed laser would allow to have a continuous wave-output (from Maker [0118]), therefore enhancing the stability of the frequency, while a modulator would allow to modulate the signal from the seed laser (from Maker Fig. 4 as well as [0122]).
Regarding claim 2, Logan’s modified device teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the feedback loop (Logan’s modified feedback loop in the view of Maker) is configured to perform photonic down-conversion of a portion of the combined optical signal prior to photodetection (from Logan Fig. 9 is a photonic conversion system perform photonic down-conversion of optical signal output of beam combiner 20 prior photodetector 92) in order to decrease a frequency of a signal that undergoes photodetection (from Logan column 7 lines states 1-2 “The output beam from the electrooptic intensity modulator 92 is detected by a photodiode 96 of the conventional type having a pronounced frequency roll-off”).
Regarding claim 6, Logan’s modified device teaches the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising: a controller (from Logan Fig. 7 microprocessor 76) configured to adjust one or more components of the apparatus in order to obtain a tunable frequency difference between the optical signals generated by the injection- locked lasers (from Logan column 6 lines 1-4 states “A microprocessor 76 employs a conventional feedback control algorithm to generate a distributed feedback current value from the converted detector output. A digital-to-analog converter 78 converts the distributed feedback current value to a distributed feedback current I.sub.DFB applied to the electrode 62”).
Regarding claim 7, Logan’s modified device teaches the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising: a comb generator configured to generate an optical comb based on the combined optical signal (from Logan Fig. 8 is a comb generated by f1 and f2; therefore it is inherent that there is a com generator that generates the comb in Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 8, Logan’s modified device teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the desired frequency difference of the optical signals generated by the injection-locked lasers is about 200 GHz or more (from Logan Fig. 8 shows a frequency difference between f1 and f2 more than 200GHz).
Regarding claim 19, Logan’s device teaches a method comprising:
generating multiple optical signals (Fig. 9 f1 and f2) based on different ones of the sideband signals using multiple injection-locked lasers (Fig. 9 f1 and f2 are based on different ones of the side band signals coming out of splitter 14 using cw lasers 16 and 18);
combining the optical signals to generate a combined optical signal (Fig. 9 beam combiner 20 combines the optical signals F1 and f2); and
modifying frequencies of the sideband signals (Fig. 9 output of 14 also seen as 38c-b in Fig. 7 are modified by the control loop in Fig. 7 formed by 72, 74, 76 & 78 ) based on the combined optical signal (Fig. 9 baseband signal is integrated to the loop to modified f1 and f2, as seen in Fig. 7) so that the optical signals generated by the injection-locked lasers (Fig. 9 f1 and f2 generated by cw 16 and cw 18) have a desired frequency difference (Fig. 8 shows the frequency different between f1 and f2).
Logan’s modified device fails to teach generating a seed signal; modulating the seed signal to generate multiple sideband signals.
However, Maker teaches generating a seed signal (Fig. 4 signal 6 is a seed signal generated by seed laser 2); modulating the seed signal (Fig. 4 modulator 5a modulates the seed signal 6).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Loagn’s device generating a seed signal and modulating the seed signal as taught by Maker (e.g. having a seed laser from Maker and a modulator from Maker between the seed laser and mode locked laser 12 from Logan) because the seed signal would allow to have a continuous wave-output (from Maker [0118]) while modulating the seed signal would allow to control the seed signal to obtain the desired frequencies (from Maker Fig. 4 as well as [0122]).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Logan (US Patent US-5379309-A) in the view of Maker (US Patent US-20210036484-A1 cited in the IDS), as per claim 19, in further view of Abedin (US Patent US-20020044574-A1) hereinafter Abedin.
Regarding claim 20, Logan’s modified device teaches the method of Claim 19, wherein modifying the frequencies of the sideband signals (from Logan Fig. 9 output of 14 also seen as 38c-b in Fig. 7 are modified by the control loop in Fig. 7 formed by 72, 74, 76 & 78 )) comprises:
generating a reference signal (from Logan Fig. 1 reference frequency oscillator 10 generated a reference signal);
performing photonic down-conversion of a portion of the combined optical signal (from Logan Fig. 9 is a photonic conversion system perform photonic down-conversion of optical signal output of beam combiner 20 prior photodetector 92) to generate a lower-frequency optical signal ((Fig. 9 from Logan Fig. 9 modulator 92 generates an optical signal to goes to photodiode 96);
performing photodetection to sense the lower-frequency optical signal (Fig. 9 photodiode 96 performs photodetection to sense the frequency from 92); and
Logan’s modified device fails to teach modifying a frequency of a signal used to modulate the seed signal based on the reference signal and results of the photodetection.
However, Abedin teaches a filter (Fig. 8 bandpass filter 314/316) configured to modify a frequency of a signal (Fig. 8 shows the optical signal coming out from 313 is filtered by the bandpass filter 314/317; Fig. 8 shows the frequency that is filtered by 314/316; therefore it modifies the frequency of the signal 330/340); and results of the photodetection (Fig. 8 photodetector 316/318 is used to sense the filtered lower-frequency optical signal, see [0107]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Logan’s device in the view of Maker with a bandpass prior photodetection as taught by Abedin (e.g. having one bandpass filter from Abedin connected to the photodiode 96 from Logan so that the banpass filter modifies the frequency generated from 92 which is used to modulate the seed signal as per Logan’s modification in claim 19) because having a bandpass connected to the photodiode would allow to filter the desired frequency prio photodetection.
Claim(s) 3 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Logan (US Patent US-5379309-A) in the view of Maker (US Patent US-20210036484-A1 cited in the IDS), as per claim 1, in further view of Zhao (US Patent US-20210226418-A1) hereinafter Zhao.
Regarding claim 3, Logan’s modified device teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the feedback loop (Logan’s modified feedback loop in the view of Maker) comprises:
a reference oscillator (from Logan Fig. 1 reference frequency oscillator 10) configured to generate a reference signal (from Logan Fig. 1 reference frequency oscillator 10 generates fosc reference signal).
Logan’s modified device fails to teach a first voltage-controlled oscillator (VCO) configured to generate a signal provided to the modulator for use in modulating the seed signal; and a phase-locked loop and loop filter configured to modify a frequency of the signal generated by the first VCO based on the reference signal and a portion of the combined optical signal received by the feedback loop.
However, Maker further teaches:
a first voltage-controlled oscillator VCO (Fig. 4 first VCO 41a) configured to generate a signal (Fig. 4 output signal 42a from VCO 41a) provided to the modulator for use in modulating the seed signal ([0153] “An output signal 42a from the VCO 41a is then passed through a first frequency synthesiser 43a which is configured to multiply the output signal 42a from the VCO 41 to produce the desired feedback signal 29a.”);
a phase-locked loop (Fig. 4 first phase lock control 27a) configured to modify a frequency of the signal generated by the first VCO based on the reference signal ([0153] states “The phase lock control loop 27b further comprises a reference oscillator 35 employed to generate a first reference signal 36a having a frequency Δf… The first frequency mixer 37a is employed to mix down the first electrical beat signal 33a and the first reference signal 36a to provide a first error signal 38a that is converted by phase locking electronics 39a to provide a control signal 40a for a first voltage-controlled oscillator (VCO) 41a”…” frequency synthesiser 43a which is configured to multiply the output signal 42a from the VCO 41 to produce the desired feedback signal 29a”; hence 27a modifies the signal generated by VCO 41a based on the reference signal 36a to generate signal 42a) and a portion of the combined optical signal received by the feedback loop ([0154] states “The phase lock control loop 27a uses this information to phase lock the frequency offset Δf between the first seed optical field 6 and the output field 12a of optical amplifier 8a and so further suppress the phase noise within the first output field 12a”; therefore phase lock control 27a modifies portion of output field 12a).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Logan’s device in the view of Maker with a first voltage-controlled oscillator VCO and a phase-locked loop as taught by Maker above (e.g. having the VCO 41a from Maker to send an output signal to the added modulator from Logan’s modified device to modulate and having the PLL 37a being connected to VCO 41a as taught by Maker) because a VCO would allow to output a signal from the VCO to produce the desired feedback signal (from Maker [0153]) while a phase-locked loop would allow to provide a control signal for a VCO (from Maker [0153]).
Logan’s modified device above fails to teach a loop filter.
However, Zhao teaches a phase-locked loop (Fig. 7 phase-locked loop 701) and a loop filter (Fig.7 loop filter 702).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Logan’s device in the view of Maker with a loop filter within the phase-locked loop as taught by Zhao because the loop filter would allow to add a loop gain to the frequency difference signal and filter the frequency difference signal (from Zhao see [0053]).
Regarding claim 4, Logan’s modified device teaches the apparatus of claim 3, wherein the feedback loop (Logan’s modified feedback loop in the view of Maker) further comprises:
a second modulator (from Logan Fig. 9 modulator 92) configured to modulate the portion of the combined optical signal (from Logan Fig. 9 modulator 92 modulates the output of the combiner 20) and generate a lower-frequency optical signal (Fig. 9 from Logan Fig. 9 modulator 92 generates an optical signal to goes to photodiode 96);
Logan’s modified device fails to teach a second VCO configured to generate a signal provided to the second modulator for use in modulating the portion of the combined optical signal; a phase-locked loop configured to modify a frequency of the signal generated by the second VCO based on the reference signal.
However, Maker teaches:
a second VCO (Fig. 4 VCO 41b) configured to generate a signal (Fig. 4 output of VCO 41b) provided to the second modulator (Fig. output of VCO 41b is provided to modulator 5b )
a phase-locked loop (Fig. 4 second phase lock control loop 27b) configured to modify a frequency of the signal generated by the second VCO based on the reference signal (Fig. 4 second phase lock control loop 27b is configured in similar manner as first phase lock control loop 27b, see [0155]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Logan’s device in the view of Maker with a second VCO and a phase-locked loop as taught by Maker above (e.g. having the VCO 41b and PLL 27b connected to modulator 92 from Logan to modified the signal from VCO41b based on the reference signal fosc from Logan) because a second VCO would allow to output a signal from the VCO to produce the desired feedback signal (from Maker [0153]) while a phase-locked loop would allow to provide a control signal for a VCO (from Maker [0153]).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Logan (US Patent US-5379309-A) in the view of Maker (US Patent US-20210036484-A1 cited in the IDS) and Zhao (US Patent US-20210226418-A1), as per claims 3-4, in further view of Abedin (US Patent US-20020044574-A1) hereinafter Abedin.
Regarding claim 5, Logan’s modified device teaches the apparatus of claim 4, wherein the feedback loop (Logan’s modified feedback loop in the view of Maker) further comprises:
a photodetector (from Logan Fig. 9 photodiode 96).
Logan’s modified device fails to teach a filter configured to filter the lower-frequency optical signal; a photodetector configured to sense the filtered lower-frequency optical signal; an amplifier configured to amplify an output of the photodetector, and an output of the amplifier coupled to the phase-locked loop and loop filter.
However, Abedin teaches a filter (Fig. 8 bandpass filter 314/316) configured to filter a lower-frequency optical signal (Fig. 8 shows the optical signal coming out from 313 is filtered by the bandpass filter 314/317; Fig. 8 shows the frequency that is filtered by 314/316); a photodetector (Fig. 8 photodetector 316/318 ) configured to sense the filtered lower-frequency optical signal (Fig. 8 photodetector 316/318 is used to sense the filtered lower-frequency optical signal, see [0107]); an amplifier (Fig. 8 amplifier 319) configured to amplify an output of the photodetector (Fig. 8 amplifier 319 amplifies the output of photodetector 316/317); the output of the amplifier coupled to phase mode loop (Fig. 8 is a phase mode locked laser; [0113] states “a phase modulator (for example, one with a waveguide of lithium niobate) is used”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Logan’s device in the view of Maker and Zhao with a bandpass and amplifier as taught by Abedin (e.g. having one bandpass from Abedin connected to the photodiode 96 from Logan and connecting the output from the photodiode to the amplifier from Abedin to further coupled the output of the amplifier to the phase-locked loop and loop filter as Logan’s modified device in claim 3) because having a bandpass connected to the photodiode would allow to filter the desired frequency prio photodetection while having the amplifier would amplify the output signal coming out from the photodetector and having an output the amplifier coupled to the phase-locked loop and loop filter would allow to have the desired laser signal.
Claim(s) 9-10 and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Logan (US Patent US-5379309-A) in the view of Maker (US Patent US-20210036484-A1 cited in the IDS), hereinafter Maker, and Paudel (US Patent US-20230004091-A1), hereinafter Paudel.
Regarding claim 9, Logan teaches a system comprising:
a laser stabilization unit (Fig. 9 is a single laser stabilization unit) configured to generate a signal (Fig. 9 output from photodiode 96),
the laser stabilization unit (Fig. 9 is a single laser stabilization unit) comprising:
multiple injection-locked lasers (Fig. 9 cw 16 and 18) configured to generate multiple optical signals (Fig. 9 f1 and f2);
a combiner (Fig. 9 beam combiner 20) configured to combine the optical signals (Fig. 9 combiner 20 combines f1 and f2) and generate a combined optical signal (Fig. 9 output of combiner 20); and
a feedback loop (Fig. 7 feedback loop is composed by 72, 74, 78 and 62; column 5 and lines 44-47 & 62-65 states “electrode 62 is connected to a distributed fedback current I.sub.DFB…. Each distributed feedback electrode 62 is connected in a control loop consisting of a photodetector 72 whose input is connected to a respective one of the output optical fibers 38d, 38e and whose output is connected to an analog-to-digital converter 74”) so that the optical signals generated by the injection-locked lasers (Fig. 9 f1 and f2 generated by mode locked lasers 16 and 18) have a desired frequency difference (Fig. 8 shows a frequency difference between f1 and f2).
Logan fails to teach a seed laser configured to generate a seed signal; multiple laser stabilization units to generate signals having beatnotes of different frequency spacings; each laser stabilization unit comprising: a modulator configured to modulate the seed signal or a sideband of the seed signal and generate multiple sideband signals; multiple injection-locked lasers configured to generate multiple optical signals based on different ones of the sideband signals; a feedback loop configured to modify frequencies of the sideband signals generated by the modulator.
However, Maker teaches:
a seed laser configured to generate a seed signal (Fig. 4 seed laser 4; seed laser 4 is configured to generate continuous-wave output field 4);
a modulator (Fig. 4 modulator 5a-b) configured to modulate the seed signal (Fig. 4 modulator 5a-b the seed signal 4 coming from seed laser 2) and generate multiple sideband signals ([0122] states “the optical modulator 5 effectively applies sidebands to the continuous-wave output field 4 at plus and minus the modulation frequency and it is these sidebands that are employed as the first 6 and second 7 seed optical fields.”; therefore, modulator 5a generates multiple sideband signals; also see Fig. 3 where several sidebands are generated in the upper and lower branch 5a-f);
multiple injection-locked lasers (Fig. 4 amplifier 8a-b consist of a plurality of injection locked lasers, see Fig. 3 upper branch) configured to generate multiple optical signals (Fig. 4 amplifier 8a-c generated multiple optical signals 12a-f as seen in Fig. 3) based on different ones of the sideband signals (Fig. 3 shows optical signals 12a-f are based on the side signals 5a-c);
a feedback loop Fig. 4 feedback signal 29a-b) configured to modify frequencies of the sideband signals generated by the modulator ([0153] states “Phase lock control loop 27a is employed to provide a feedback signal 29a for the optical amplifier 8a”; therefore feedback signal 29a is configured to modify frequencies of the sideband signals generated by modulator 5a) so that the optical signals generated by the injection-locked lasers Fig. 3 12a-c are the signals generated by Fig. 8 amplifiers 8a).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Logan’s device to include a seed laser, and a modulator (e.g. having a seed laser from Maker to provide the seed signal and modulator from Maker between the seed laser and mode locked laser 12 from Logan so that the feedback loop from Logan can be configured to modify frequencies of the sideband signals generated by the modulator) as taught by Maker because having a seed laser would allow to have a continuous wave-output (from Maker [0118]), therefore enhancing the stability of the frequency, while a modulator would allow to modulate the signal from the seed laser (from Maker Fig. 4 as well as [0122]).
Logan’s modified device above fails to teach multiple laser stabilization units configured to generate signals having beatnotes of different frequency spacings.
However Paudel teaches multiple laser stabilization units (Fig. 2 first stabilization module 62 and second stabilization module 64) configured to generate signals (Fig. 2 output of 62 and 64 are the signals generated).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Logans in the view of Maker to have multiple laser stabilization units as taught by Paudel (e.g. have multiple Fig. 9 systems that generate signals) to generate signals having beatnotes of different frequency spacings (e.g. having multiple systems Logan’s device in the view of Makes that comprises the same characteristics as the Applicant would result in generating signals having beatnotes of different frequency spacings) because it would allow to have a plurality of stable frequencies.
Regarding claim 10, Logan’s modified system teaches the system of claim 9, wherein, in each laser stabilization unit (from Logan modified device in Fig. 9 in the view of Maker is a single laser stabilization unit), the feedback loop is configured to perform photonic down-conversion of a portion of the combined optical signal prior to photodetection (from Logan Fig. 9 is a photonic conversion system perform photonic down-conversion of optical signal output of beam combiner 20 prior photodetector 92) in order to decrease a frequency of a signal that undergoes photodetection (from Logan column 7 lines states 1-2 “The output beam from the electrooptic intensity modulator 92 is detected by a photodiode 96 of the conventional type having a pronounced frequency roll-off”).
Regarding claim 14, Logan’s modified system teaches the system of Claim 9, further comprising:
a controller (from Logan Fig. 7 microprocessor 76) configured to adjust one or more components of the system in order to obtain at least one of:
a tunable frequency difference between the optical signals generated by the injection-locked lasers in each laser stabilization unit (from Logan column 6 lines 1-4 states “A microprocessor 76 employs a conventional feedback control algorithm to generate a distributed feedback current value from the converted detector output. A digital-to-analog converter 78 converts the distributed feedback current value to a distributed feedback current I.sub.DFB applied to the electrode 62”); and a tunable offset between optical combs generated using the signals having the beatnotes of the different frequency spacings.
Regarding claim 15, Logan’s modified system teaches the system of claim 9, further comprising: multiple comb generators (from Logan Fig. 8 is a comb generated by f1 and f2; therefore it is inherent that there is a com generator that generates the comb in Fig. 8; hence, having a multiple laser stabilization systems as per Logan’s modification in claim 9 would result in multiple comb generators) configured to generate multiple optical combs (it is inherent that having multiple comb generators would result in generating multiple optical combs) based on the signals (from Logan Fig. 8 is a comb generated by f1 and f2 would be the signal of a single laser stabilization; therefore the other signals would be the ones generated by the multiple laser stabilization units) having the beatnotes of the different frequency spacings (it is inherent that the signals would have the beatnotes of the different frequency spacings).
Claim(s) 11 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Logan (US Patent US-5379309-A) in the view of Maker (US Patent US-20210036484-A1 cited in the IDS) and Paudel (US Patent US-20230004091-A1), as per claim 9, in further view of Zhao (US Patent US-20210226418-A1), hereinafter Zhao.
Regarding claim 11, Logan’s modified system teaches the system of claim 9, further comprising:
a reference oscillator (from Logan Fig. 1 reference frequency oscillator 10) configured to generate a reference signal (from Logan Fig. 1 reference frequency oscillator 10 generates fosc reference signal);
wherein, in each laser stabilization unit (from Logan modified device in Fig. 9 in the view of Maker is a single laser stabilization unit) comprises the feedback loop (Logan’s modified feedback loop in the view of Maker) .
Logan’s modified device fails to teach a first voltage-controlled oscillator (VCO) configured to generate a signal provided to the modulator for use in modulating the seed signal; and a phase-locked loop and loop filter configured to modify a frequency of the signal generated by the first VCO based on the reference signal and a portion of the combined optical signal received by the feedback loop.
However, Maker further teaches:
a first voltage-controlled oscillator VCO (Fig. 4 first VCO 41a) configured to generate a signal (Fig. 4 output signal 42a from VCO 41a) provided to the modulator for use in modulating the seed signal ([0153] “An output signal 42a from the VCO 41a is then passed through a first frequency synthesiser 43a which is configured to multiply the output signal 42a from the VCO 41 to produce the desired feedback signal 29a.”);
a phase-locked loop (Fig. 4 first phase lock control 27a) configured to modify a frequency of the signal generated by the first VCO based on the reference signal ([0153] states “The phase lock control loop 27b further comprises a reference oscillator 35 employed to generate a first reference signal 36a having a frequency Δf… The first frequency mixer 37a is employed to mix down the first electrical beat signal 33a and the first reference signal 36a to provide a first error signal 38a that is converted by phase locking electronics 39a to provide a control signal 40a for a first voltage-controlled oscillator (VCO) 41a”…” frequency synthesiser 43a which is configured to multiply the output signal 42a from the VCO 41 to produce the desired feedback signal 29a”; hence 27a modifies the signal generated by VCO 41a based on the reference signal 36a to generate signal 42a) and a portion of the combined optical signal received by the feedback loop ([0154] states “The phase lock control loop 27a uses this information to phase lock the frequency offset Δf between the first seed optical field 6 and the output field 12a of optical amplifier 8a and so further suppress the phase noise within the first output field 12a”; therefore phase lock control 27a modifies portion of output field 12a).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Logan’s device in the view of Maker with a first voltage-controlled oscillator VCO and a phase-locked loop as taught by Maker above (e.g. having the VCO 41a from Maker to send an output signal to the added modulator from Logan’s modified device to modulate and having the PLL 37a being connected to VCO 41a as taught by Maker) because a VCO would allow to output a signal from the VCO to produce the desired feedback signal (from Maker [0153]) while a phase-locked loop would allow to provide a control signal for a VCO (from Maker [0153]).
Logan’s modified device above fails to teach a loop filter.
However, Zhao teaches a phase-locked loop (Fig. 7 phase-locked loop 701) and a loop filter (Fig.7 loop filter 702).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Logan’s device in the view of Maker with a loop filter within the phase-locked loop as taught by Zhao because the loop filter would allow to add a loop gain to the frequency difference signal and filter the frequency difference signal (from Zhao see [0053]).
Regarding claim 12, Logan’s modified system teaches the system of claim 11,
wherein, in each laser stabilization unit (from Logan modified device in Fig. 9 in the view of Maker is a single laser stabilization unit), the feedback loop (Logan’s modified feedback loop in the view of Maker) further comprises:
a second modulator (from Logan Fig. 9 modulator 92) configured to modulate the portion of the combined optical signal (from Logan Fig. 9 modulator 92 modulates the output of the combiner 20) and generate a lower-frequency optical signal (Fig. 9 from Logan Fig. 9 modulator 92 generates an optical signal to goes to photodiode 96);
Logan’s modified device fails to teach a second VCO configured to generate a signal provided to the second modulator for use in modulating the portion of the combined optical signal; a phase-locked loop configured to modify a frequency of the signal generated by the second VCO based on the reference signal.
However, Maker teaches:
a second VCO (Fig. 4 VCO 41b) configured to generate a signal (Fig. 4 output of VCO 41b) provided to the second modulator (Fig. output of VCO 41b is provided to modulator 5b )
a phase-locked loop (Fig. 4 second phase lock control loop 27b) configured to modify a frequency of the signal generated by the second VCO based on the reference signal (Fig. 4 second phase lock control loop 27b is configured in similar manner as first phase lock control loop 27b, see [0155]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Logan’s device in the view of Maker with a second VCO and a phase-locked loop as taught by Maker above (e.g. having the VCO 41b and PLL 27b connected to modulator 92 from Logan to modified the signal from VCO41b based on the reference signal fosc from Logan) because a second VCO would allow to output a signal from the VCO to produce the desired feedback signal (from Maker [0153]) while a phase-locked loop would allow to provide a control signal for a VCO (from Maker [0153]).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Logan (US Patent US-5379309-A) in the view of Maker (US Patent US-20210036484-A1 cited in the IDS) and Zhao (US Patent US-20210226418-A1), as per claims 11-12, in further view of Abedin (US Patent US-20020044574-A1) hereinafter Abedin.
Regarding claim 13, Logan’s modified system teaches the system of claim 12,
wherein, in each laser stabilization unit (from Logan modified device in Fig. 9 in the view of Maker is a single laser stabilization unit), the feedback loop (Logan’s modified feedback loop in the view of Maker) further comprises:
a photodetector (from Logan Fig. 9 photodiode 96).
Logan’s modified device fails to teach a filter configured to filter the lower-frequency optical signal; a photodetector configured to sense the filtered lower-frequency optical signal; an amplifier configured to amplify an output of the photodetector, and an output of the amplifier coupled to the phase-locked loop and loop filter.
However, Abedin teaches a filter (Fig. 8 bandpass filter 314/316) configured to filter a lower-frequency optical signal (Fig. 8 shows the optical signal coming out from 313 is filtered by the bandpass filter 314/317; Fig. 8 shows the frequency that is filtered by 314/316); a photodetector (Fig. 8 photodetector 316/318 ) configured to sense the filtered lower-frequency optical signal (Fig. 8 photodetector 316/318 is used to sense the filtered lower-frequency optical signal, see [0107]); an amplifier (Fig. 8 amplifier 319) configured to amplify an output of the photodetector (Fig. 8 amplifier 319 amplifies the output of photodetector 316/317); the output of the amplifier coupled to phase mode loop (Fig. 8 is a phase mode locked laser; [0113] states “a phase modulator (for example, one with a waveguide of lithium niobate) is used”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Logan’s device in the view of Maker and Zhao with a bandpass and amplifier as taught by Abedin (e.g. having one bandpass from Abedin connected to the photodiode 96 from Logan and connecting the output from the photodiode to the amplifier from Abedin to further coupled the output of the amplifier to the phase-locked loop and loop filter as Logan’s modified device in claim 3) because having a bandpass connected to the photodiode would allow to filter the desired frequency prio photodetection while having the amplifier would amplify the output signal coming out from the photodetector and having an output the amplifier coupled to the phase-locked loop and loop filter would allow to have the desired laser signal.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-18 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
For claim 16:
Logan’s modified system teaches the system of claim 15. Logan’s modified device failed to teach an amplitude modulator, a voltage-controlled oscillator (VCO) configured to generate a signal provided to the amplitude modulator and a phase-locked loop and loop filter configured to modify a frequency of the signal generated by the VCO.
LaChapelle (US Patent US-20220291349-A1) teaches an amplitude modulator (Fig. 26 amplitude modulator 495) configured to modulate the seed signal ([0205] states “amplitude modulator 495 configured to change a…amplitude of seed light 440”) and generate a sideband of the seed signal (Fig. 26 local oscillator LO light 430). LaChapelle fails to teach a voltage-controlled oscillator (VCO) configured to generate a signal provided to the amplitude modulator.
Aflatouni (US Patent US-20130215919-A1) teaches a voltage-controlled oscillator VCO (Fig. 7 VCO 709) configured to generate a signal provided to the amplitude modulator (Fig. 7 output of VCO 709 is used by amplitude modulator 707). Aflatouni fails to teach a phase-locked loop and loop filter configured to modify a frequency of the signal generated by the VCO.
Maker (US Patent US-20210036484-A1) and Zhao (US Patent US-20210226418-A1) teaches the phase-locked loop and loop filter, see claim 3.
However, the number of changes need it on Logan’s device to read on claim 16 is unreasonable.
Claim 17 depends on claim 16.
For claim 18:
Logan’s modified system teaches the system of claim 9. Logan’s modified system fails to teach the laser stabilization units are offset in frequency based on the sideband of the seed signal (Logan’s device modified in the view of Maker teaches the optical modulator modulates the seed signal as per claim 9; however, the modification fails to teach the optical modulator modulates a sideband of the seed laser since Logan only teaches that the optical modulator 5 modulates the operating frequency of the seed signal 2, see [0120] from Maker).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FERNANDA ADRIANA CAMACHO ALANIS whose telephone number is (703)756-1545. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-5:30pm Friday off.
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.
/FERNANDA ADRIANA CAMACHO ALANIS/Examiner, Art Unit 2828
/MINSUN O HARVEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2828