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 .
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 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.
DETAILED ACTION
This is an AIA application filed June 30, 2023.
The earliest effective filing date of this AIA application is seen as June 30, 2023, the actual filing date, there being no earlier priority applications.
The present application is also related to the applications giving rise to the following patent publication(s):
none are seen.
The claims originally filed June 30, 2023 are entered, currently outstanding, and subject to examination.
This action is in response to the information disclosure statement/IDS filing of August 24, 2026.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and outstanding.
No claims have been amended, cancelled, withdrawn, or added.
Claims 1-20 are currently outstanding and subject to examination.
This is a non-final action and is the first action on the merits.
Allowable subject matter is not indicated below.
Often, in the substance of the action below, formal matters are addressed first, claim rejections second, and any response to arguments third.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b/¶ 2)
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 11 and 14 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 11 and 14 both have “the shelf is recessed by 50-250 micrometers” but no landmark or other indicator is seen by which the recession is measured.
Special Definitions for Claim Language - MPEP § 2111.01(IV)
No special definitions are seen as present in the specification regarding the language used in the claims. Consequently, the words and phrases of the claims are given their plain meaning. MPEP §§ 2173.01, 2173.05(a), and 2111.01.
If special definitions are present, Applicant should bring those to the attention of the examiner and the prosecution history with its next response in a manner both specific and particular. In doing so, there will be no mistake, confusion, and/or ambiguity as to what constitutes the special definition(s).
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.
Claims 1, 2, 10, 12, 13, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20190391350 of Evans et al. (Evans, cited by Applicant).
With respect to claim 1, Evans discloses an apparatus (optoelectronic package 10, ¶ 59, Figs. 2, 5, 8A/B, 12A/B, 17, 19, and 21B) comprising:
a substrate (Fig. 2, interposer 200) comprising a top surface, a bottom surface, and one or more edges (per the figures); and
an optical interposer (optical adaptor 300) mounted on the substrate (200),
wherein a cavity (cut-out regions 220) is defined in the substrate (200),
wherein the cavity (220) extends from the top surface to the bottom surface (per the figures),
wherein the cavity (220) extends to one of the one or more edges (per the figures),
wherein the cavity (220) defines one or more alignment features (the shapes and edges/corners thereof) to align an optical cable (optical cable 40) to the optical interposer (300),
wherein the optical interposer (300) extends at least partially over the cavity (220, Figs. 12A/17).
With respect to claim 2, Evans as set forth above discloses the apparatus (10) of claim 1, including one wherein
the one or more alignment features comprise one or more straight edges of the cavity (220, per the figures).
With respect to claim 10, Evans as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 1, including one wherein
a shelf (receptacle housing 400) is defined in the substrate (200, per Figs. 8A/B),
wherein the shelf (400) is recessed from the top surface (per Fig. 8B),
wherein the optical interposer (300) is disposed on the shelf (400).
¶ 59, "The receptacle housing 400 comprise a tunnel 420 to receive the optical connector 30 and the optical adaptor 300."
¶ 71, "When the optical adaptor 300 is arranged within the tunnel 420 of the receptacle housing 400 and the optical connector 30 is inserted in the tunnel 420, the portion 352 of the alignment pin 350 is received in the cavity 523 of the ferrule 520 so that the optical waveguides 340 of the optical adaptor 300 and the optical fibers 41 of the optical cable 40 which terminate at an end of the ferrule 520 are aligned to each other for coupling light there between with low loss."
¶ 111, "The optical adaptor 300 is mechanically coupled to the receptacle housing 400 by inserting the second portion 352 of the at least one alignment pin 350 of the optical adaptor 300 in the at least one slot 430 of the receptacle housing 400."
With respect to claim 12, Evans as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 1, including one further comprising
a lid (Fig. 11, top of receptacle housing 400) disposed above the substrate (200), wherein the lid comprises a rib orientation key (shown as fitting in the depression/valley of body 500).
With respect to claim 13, Evans as set forth above discloses an apparatus (10) including one comprising:
a substrate (200) comprising a top surface and a bottom surface (per the figures),
wherein a cavity (220) is defined in the substrate (200),
the cavity (220) extending from the bottom surface to the top surface (per the figures),
wherein a shelf (400) is defined in the substrate (200),
wherein the shelf (400) is recessed from the top surface (per Fig. 8B); and
an optical interposer (300),
wherein the optical interposer (300) is mounted on the shelf (per claim 10, above),
wherein the optical interposer (300) extends at least partially over the cavity (220, Figs. 12A/17).
With respect to claim 17, Evans as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 13, including one further comprising
a lid (Fig. 11, top of receptacle housing 400) disposed above the substrate (200), wherein
the lid comprises a rib orientation key (shown as fitting in the depression/valley of body 500).
With respect to claim 18, Evans as set forth above discloses an apparatus (10) including one comprising:
a substrate (200) comprising a top surface, a bottom surface, and one or more edges; and
an optical interposer (300) mounted on the substrate (200),
wherein a cavity (220) is defined in the substrate (200),
wherein the cavity (220) extends from the top surface to the bottom surface (per the figures),
wherein the cavity (220) comprises means for aligning (the shapes and edges/corners thereof) an optical plug (30) to the optical interposer (300).
With respect to claim 19, Evans as set forth above discloses the apparatus (10) of claim 18, including one wherein
the means for aligning the optical plug (30) comprise one or more straight edges of the cavity (220).
Per the figures.
With respect to claim 20, Evans as set forth above discloses the apparatus (10) of claim 18, including one wherein
a shelf (receptacle housing 400) is defined in the substrate (200, per Figs. 8A/B),
wherein the shelf (400) is recessed from the top surface (per Fig. 8B),
wherein the optical interposer (300) is disposed on the shelf (400).
Per claim 10, above.
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 of this title, 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims, the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 3-9, 11, and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Evans as set forth above.
With respect to claim 3, Evans as set forth above discloses the apparatus (10) of claim 1, including one wherein
one or more indents (engagement structure 440) are defined,
further comprising an optical plug (optical connector 30) mated with the optical interposer (300, Fig. 12A via receptacle housing 400),
wherein the optical plug (30) comprises one or more protrusions (engagement element 540) mated with the one or more indents (440).
Evans as set forth above does not disclose:
one or more indents are defined in the substrate (200) as part of the cavity (220).
Evans provides protrusions/ears 522 on ferrule 520 that fit into guiding slot 510.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide detents/indents along the lines of the protrusions/ears 522 on ferrule 520 that fit into guiding slot 510 according to Evans in a substrate system according to Evans as set forth above in order to releasably connect the . This provides one rationale to combine the references.
Another completely independent and separately sufficient rationale arises as follows. In making the combination (above), prior art elements (listed above) are combined according to known methods (per the reference) to yield predictable results (an electro-optical) would occur as each element merely performs the same function in combination as it does separately. MPEP § 2141(III). This additional rationale is a sufficient, a complete, and an explicitly-recognized rationale to combine the references and conclude that the claim is obvious both under the controlling KSR Supreme Court case and MPEP § 2141(III)(A). Current Office policy regarding the determination of obviousness is set forth in the Federal Register notice at 89 Fed. Reg. 14449 (Feb. 27, 2024).
Further, the combination would then provide:
one or more indents are defined in the substrate (200) as part of the cavity (220),
wherein the optical plug (30) comprises one or more protrusions (540) mated with the one or more indents.
With respect to claim 4, Evans as set forth above discloses the optical cable (40) of claim 3, including one wherein
the optical plug (30) comprises a pull tab (actuation element 550),
wherein, when a pulling force is applied to the pull tab (550), the pull tab (550) releases the one or more protrusions (540) from the one or more indents (440, but reversed per the analysis of claim 3, above).
With respect to claim 5, Evans as set forth above discloses the optical cable (40) of claim 3, including one wherein the optical plug (30) comprises:
a ferrule (ferrule 520); and
one or more optical fibers (optical fibers 41) mated with the ferrule (520),
wherein the ferrule (520) is pressed against the optical interposer (300 per Figs. 12A/B).
With respect to claim 6, Evans as set forth above discloses the apparatus (10) of claim 5, including one wherein
the one or more optical fibers (41) comprise at least eight optical fibers.
Fig. 12B shows twelve.
With respect to claim 7, Evans as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 5, including one wherein
one or more waveguides (340; ¶ 65, "The optical adaptor 300 comprises a plurality of short optical waveguides 340 which are arranged in grooves of a glass plate 310.") are defined in the optical interposer (300),
wherein the one or more optical fibers (41) are aligned to the one or more waveguides (per Figs. 12A/B).
With respect to claim 8, Evans as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 7, including one further comprising
one or more photonic integrated circuit (PIC) dies (optical subassembly 100, ¶ 61) coupled to the optical interposer (300),
wherein the one or more waveguides (340) of the optical interposer (300) are to carry light between the optical cable (40) and the one or more PIC dies (100).
¶ 59, "The package further comprises a receptacle housing 400 being configured to couple the optical subassembly 100 to an optical connector 30 terminating the optical cable 40."
With respect to claim 9, Evans as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 8, including one further comprising
one or more electronic integrated circuit (EIC) dies (ASIC 600, Fig. 5),
wherein the one or more EIC dies (600) are electrically coupled to the one or more PIC dies (100).
¶ 60, "The interposer 200 is configured to provide data transmission paths 210 for the transmission of the data in the electrical format between the optical subassembly 100 and the electronic chip 600."
With respect to claim 11, Evans as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 10, but not one wherein
the shelf (400) is recessed by 50-250 micrometers.
Where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). MPEP § 2144.04(IV)(A).
As the scope of claim 11 departs from that of claim 10 only with regards to the relative dimensions, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device of Evans as set forth above.
Such dimensions are consistent with optical fiber arts where the width of such optical fibers are approximately 125µm in diameter.
Herein, this analysis is referred to as “relative dimensions/size”.
With respect to claim 14, Evans as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 13, including one wherein
the shelf (400) is recessed by 50-250 micrometers.
Per claim 11, above.
With respect to claim 15, Evans as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 13, including one wherein
one or more indents (440) are defined in the substrate (200) as part of the cavity (220),
further comprising an optical plug (30) mated with the optical interposer (300),
wherein the optical plug (30) comprises one or more protrusions (540) mated with the one or more indents (440).
Per claim 3, above.
With respect to claim 16, Evans as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 15, including one wherein the optical plug (30) comprises:
a ferrule (ferrule 520); and
one or more optical fibers (optical fibers 41) mated with the ferrule (520),
wherein the ferrule (520) is pressed against the optical interposer (300 per Figs. 12A/B).
Per claim 5, above.
Conclusion
Applicant’s publication US 20250004225 A1 published January 2, 2025 is cited.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited references have elements related to Applicant’s disclosure and/or claims or are otherwise associated with the other cited references, particularly with respect to optoelectronic systems and connection systems therefor.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW JORDAN whose telephone number is (571) 270-1571. The examiner can normally be reached most days 1000-1800 PACIFIC TIME ZONE (messages are returned).
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. While examiner does not examine over the phone (see 37 C.F.R. § 1.2), examiner is glad to clarify or discuss issues so long as it forwards prosecution.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Thomas (Tom) HOLLWEG can be reached at (571) 270-1739. 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.
/Andrew Jordan/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
V: (571) 270-1571 (Pacific time)
F: (571) 270-2571
September 12, 2026
Prosecution Insights