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
Claim Objections
Claims 1 – 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the optical path” in which the article “the” causes an insufficient antecedent basis issue. For the purposes of this Action, the limitation is interpreted as “an optical path”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “wherein position of the optical element” which has a typesetting error/omission. For the purposes of this Action, the limitation is interpreted as “wherein a position of the optical element”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the desired light beam quality and direction” in which the article “the” causes an insufficient antecedent basis issue. For the purposes of this Action, the limitation is interpreted as “desired light beam quality and direction”.
Appropriate corrections are required.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 7, 10, 11, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen et al (US 2020/0124798 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Chen discloses (Figs. 1A – 1D, 2A and 2B; Abstract; para. 0030 – 0039) a demountable connection E for an optical connector C and an optical connection point P (“The edge coupler provides a demountable, passively aligned coupling between an optical fiber array and the PIC chip” in the Abstract), comprising:
a foundation B (detailed in Fig. 1A) provided along an optical path between the optical connector E and the optical connection point P (a PIC chip), supporting the optical connector C in optical alignment (by using alignment pins A) to the optical connection point P (as shown in Fig. 1C), and to facilitate demountable connection of the optical connector C to the foundation B (“with the edge coupler E configured and structured to allow the optical fiber connector C to be removed and removably attached for reconnection to the edge coupler E in optical alignment therewith” at para. 0034), wherein the foundation B comprises at least one optical element M (light-redirecting mirrors shown in Fig. 1A) to reshape (“The structured reflective surface profile of the mirrors M and/or the mirrors MINI may be configured to reshape the light beam from the PIC chip P to produce a mode field that more closely match the mode field of the optical fibers in the optical fiber connector C” at para. 0044) and/or redirect incident light (from/to L1 to/from L2, as seen in Fig. 1A; “Each mirror M includes a structured reflective surface profile that turns light (e.g., by 90 degrees) between a first light path L1 along a first (horizontal) direction in a plane substantially parallel to the top surface and a second light path L2 along a second (vertical) direction outside the plane” at para. 0032) between the optical connector C and the optical connection point P, and passive alignment features A (alignment pins shown in Fig. 1A; “a passive alignment structure A on the base B” at para. 0032) on a (top) surface of the foundation B to provide demountable connection to matching passive alignment features AA (alignment holes shown in Figs. 2A and 2B) of the optical connector C (“In FIGS. 1B and 2B, the optical fiber connector C comprises a passive alignment structure AA complementary to the passive alignment structure A on the edge coupler E” at para. 0049; also para. 0019),
wherein a position of the optical element M is defined relative to the passive alignment features A on the foundation B so as to define optical alignment in reference to the passive alignment features A on the foundation B for maintaining optical alignment for demountable connection of the optical connector C to the foundation B (the mirrors M are accurately positioned/aligned relative to the alignment pins A of the foundation B in order to ensure optical alignment of the fibers OF in the optical connector C and the optical elements W (e.g., waveguides) in the optical connection point P, as shown in Fig. 1D; para. 0035 – 0037 and 0039 – 0043), and
wherein the foundation B is attached (e.g., by an index-matching epoxy; para. 0033 and 0035) to the optical connection point P (“The edge coupler (Examiners’ note: comprises the foundation B) is attached to an edge of the PIC chip (Examiners’ note: the optical connection point P), in optical alignment with interfacing optical elements (e.g., waveguides) in the PIC chip” at para. 0030, emphasis added).
Regarding claim 2, Chen teaches (Figs. 1A and 1C) that the foundation B comprises an optically transparent substrate G (transparent plate) having passive alignment features A integrally formed on a top surface of the foundation body B facing the optical connector C to be attached to the foundation B (“A transparent glass, quartz, or sapphire plate G covers the exposed surfaces on the bench B” at para. 0032).
Regarding claim 7, Chen teaches (Fig. 1A) that the optical element M comprises a plurality of discrete optical elements (mirror array; para. 0032).
Regarding claim 10, Chen teaches (Fig. 1D; para. 0035 – 0037) that the foundation B is configured for demountable edge coupling (by the alignment pins A) of the optical connector C to waveguides W ending at an edge of the optical connection point P (the PIC chip), wherein the foundation comprises at least one reflective (mirror) surface M.
Regarding claim 11, Chen teaches (Figs. 1A, 1D, and 2B) that the foundation B comprises a reflective (mirror) surface M on a protrusion (ramp) from a bottom of the foundation B (as seen in Fig. 1A), wherein the optical connector C has an alignment cover plate GG (para. 0041) that is formed with passive alignment features AA (alignment holes, as shown in Fig. 2B; para. 0049) facing the passive alignment features A on a top surface of the foundation B (Figs. 1C, 1D, and 2A), wherein the foundation B acts as a transparent bridge comprising the transparent plate G) to direct and reshape (by using structured surfaces of the mirrors M) the light between the optical connector C and the edge of the optical connection point P (“each mirror M is an exposed free surface of the base B (i.e., surface exposed to air, or not internal within the body of the base of the optical bench) having an exposed reflective free side facing a corresponding optical element W of the PIC chip P, and wherein the exposed reflective free side comprises the structured reflective surface profile at which light is directed to and from the corresponding optical element W in the PIC chip P. Each mirror M bends, reflects and/or reshapes an incident light. Depending on the geometry and shape (e.g., curvature) of the structured reflective surface profile, the mirrors M may collimate, expand, or focus an incident light beam. For example, the structured reflective surface profile may comprise one of the following geometrical shape/profiles: (a) ellipsoidal, (b) off-axis parabolic, or (c) other free-form optical surfaces” at para. 0037, emphasis added).
Regarding claim 14, while Fig. 1A shows, by way of example but not limitation, that the passive alignment features A may be structured as alignment pins, Chen teaches that the passive alignment features A may be structured and configured to provide mechanical alignment based on one of kinematic alignment, quasi-kinematic alignment and elastic averaging alignment (“In one embodiment, the passive alignment structure A on the edge coupler E may comprise at least one of alignment pins, alignment pin holes and surface features (not shown) to provide a kinematic coupling, a quasi-kinematic coupling or an elastic averaging coupling. The complementary passive alignment structure AA on the optical fiber connector may comprise at least one of complementary alignment pin holes, alignment pins, and surface features (not shown) to provide a kinematic coupling, a quasi-kinematic coupling or an elastic averaging coupling, complementary to the corresponding passive alignment structure of the edge coupler. US Patent Publication No. US2016/0161686A1, commonly assigned to the assignee of the present invention, discloses demountable optical connector structure including examples of kinematic coupling, quasi-kinematic coupling and elastic averaging coupling” at para. 0049).
Regarding claim 15, Chen teaches (Fig. 1A) that the foundation B is fixedly attached (e.g., by solder, epoxy, or laser welding; para. 0033 and 0035) in reference to the optical connection point P (the PIC chip) to provide an optical alignment reference to the optical connector C (para. 0034 – 0037).
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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 – 6, 9, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Howard et al (US 2010/0135618 A1).
Regarding claims 3 and 9, Chen states, by way of example but not limitation, that the substrate G of the foundation B is formed of a transparent material (para. 0032), while the base of the foundation B can be formed by stamping (para. 0016 and 0070) as a unitary, monolithic body that is provided with the optical element M (redirecting/focusing mirrors) and the passive alignment features A (alignment pins). While Chen does not expressly teach that the entire foundation B can be formed by molding as a unitary, monolithic body/substrate that is provided with the optical element and the passive alignment features, Howard discloses (Figs. 2, 3, 11, and 12; Abstract; para. 0033 – 0037, 0040, and 0041) a foundation 20 that is provided along an optical path between an optical fiber array 90 and an optical connection point 80 (e.g., a laser/VCSEL or a photodetector array 102, para. 0043 and 0046) and supports the optical fiber array 90 in optical alignment to the optical connection point (by using alignment pins 42; “The main body 22 also has at least two guide pins 42 to align the unitary fiber optic ferrule 20 with respect to the adapter 60 and the optical component portion 80, as described below” at para. 0033). Howard expressly teaches (Figs. 11 and 12) that the entire foundation 20 can be formed by molding as a unitary, monolithic body/substrate that is provided with an optical element (redirecting/focusing mirrors 34 in Fig. 11) and passive alignment features (alignment pins 42 in Fig. 12) (“The unitary fiber optic ferrule 20 is molded in a single mold and does not require any assembly. The main body 22, lenses 34, the first opening 30, and pocket 38 are all molded at the same time” at para. 0034, emphasis added).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the entire foundation in Chen, including the plate and the base, can be modified, in accordance with the teachings of Howard, to comprises a unitary, monolithic body that is formed in a step of molding and provided with the optical element (redirecting/focusing mirrors) and the passive alignment features (alignment pins). The motivation for such monolithic implementation is that it does not require any assembly (para. 0034 of Howard) and improves alignment accuracy between the optical fibers of the optical connector and the optical waveguides of the optical connection point by reducing/eliminating possible misalignment between the alignment marks X of the plate G and the alignment pins A if they are formed in separate steps.
Further for claim 9, the Chen – Howard combination considers that the passive alignment features (alignment pins) and the optical element (redirecting/focusing mirrors) are integrally defined on the foundation body with geometries and relative positions defined in a final forming step (of a molding process), so as to accurately define the alignment relationship of the passive alignment features (alignment pins) relative to the optical element (redirecting/focusing mirrors), as detailed above for the motivation of the Chen – Howard combination.
As an aside and relevant comment, it is also noted that the instant application also uses a molding process for making the claimed foundation, the molding process described in an NPL reference by Zhou et al which is referenced by the instant specification, but not cited by the 9/5/24 IDS.
Regarding claim 4, the Chen – Howard combination considers that the optical element (redirecting/focusing mirrors) of the foundation comprises at least one of a lens and a reflective surface to reshape (focus) and/or redirect light between the optical connector (fiber connector) and the optical connection point (a PIC chip) (“Each mirror M bends, reflects and/or reshapes an incident light” at para. 0037 of Chen).
Regarding claim 5, the Chen – Howard combination considers that the foundation further comprises passive alignment features integrally formed on a bottom surface of the foundation body which will be attached to the optical connection point. Such passive alignment features integrally formed on a bottom surface of the foundation body comprises at least one of the alignment marks X (shown in Fig. 1A of Chen) and alignment pins 42 (shown in Fig. 12 of Howard). Indeed, Chen “passive alignment can be accomplished using an extended glass plate provided with a pattern of fiducials to be optically aligned with complementary pattern of fiducials provide on the top of the PIC chip P” (para. 0061) and renders obvious an embodiment wherein the alignment marks (fiducials) X are formed on the bottom surface of the plate G in order to reduce a distance to the respective alignment marks (fiducials) on the top surface of the optical connection point and thereby improve alignment accuracy. While Chen considers only permanent/non-demountable connections of the foundation B to the optical connection point P (e.g., by solder, epoxy, or laser welding; para. 0033 and 0035), the Chen – Howard combination considers alternative embodiments wherein demountable connections of the foundation to the optical connection point by using complementary alignments features (e.g., pins and holes) formed by the bottom surface of the foundation and the top surface of the optical connection point.
Regarding claim 6, the Chen – Howard combination considers that the passive alignment features are grouped in two sets: one set (alignment pins A, according to Fig. 1A of Chen) is formed on the top surface of the foundation B and used for demountable connection of the foundation B and the optical connector C, while the other set (e.g., alignment pins 42, according to Fig. 12 of Howard) is formed on the bottom surface of the foundation B and used for demountable connection of the foundation B and the optical connection point P. Each set of passive alignment features is near the opposite ends on the respective (top and bottom) surfaces of the longitudinal plate, and wherein between the passive alignment features, the optical element (redirecting/focusing mirrors) is integrally formed on the foundation (as in Figs. 11 and 12 of Howard).
Regarding claim 19, the teachings of Chen and Howard combine (see the arguments and motivation for combining, as provided above for claims 3 and 9) to teach expressly or render obvious all of the recited limitations, as detailed above for claims 7 and 9.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Steijer et al (EP 2581776 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Chen states (para. 0038) that the optical elements M can provide light reflection and focusing, but illustrates only embodiments wherein both functions are performed by the same optical elements. However, Steijer discloses (Figs. 8 and 11 – 13; para. 0038 – 0044) a foundation 102 that a comprises an optically transparent body/substrate having passive alignment features 126 (alignment pins) integrally formed on a surface of the foundation body facing an optical connector to be attached to the foundation 102. Steijer expressly teaches that the foundation 102 comprises a combination of different optical elements (redirecting mirrors 128 and lenses 110) having combined optical properties that produce a desired light beam quality and direction: the redirecting mirrors 128 and the lenses 110 collectively perform the functions of light reflection and focusing (para. 0044).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the functions of light reflection and focusing, as intended by Chen, can be implemented, in accordance with the teachings of Steijer, by a combination of different optical elements (redirecting mirrors and lenses) having combined optical properties that produce a desired light beam quality and direction. The motivation for using spatially separate mirrors and lenses is that their performance can be independently optimized.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of O’Brien (US 2019/0377142 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Chen illustrates (e.g., Fig. 1A) only embodiments wherein a central portion of the foundation B (with the optical elements M) is integrally formed with a peripheral portion of the foundation B (with passive alignment features/pins A). Chen does not illustrate an alternative embodiment wherein the central portion and the peripheral portion are formed as spatially separate bodies. However, O’Brien discloses (Figs. 4A and 9 – 12; para. 0057 – 0065) a demountable connection for an optical fiber connector 2 and an optical connection point 1 (photonic chip, identified 1 in Fig. 4A and 24 in Fig. 11), the demountable connection comprising a foundation 20,21,22, wherein the foundation 20,21,22 comprises separate bodies (3 separate bodies, as shown in Figs. 10 and 11), which are separately provided with passive alignment features 21,22 (alignment pins which correspond to the alignment pins A in Fig. 1A of Chen) and the optical element 20 (which corresponds to focusing elements M in Fig. 1A of Chen).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the foundation B in Chen can be modified, in accordance with the teachings of O’Brien, to comprises separate bodies which are separately provided with the passive alignment features and the optical element. Such an arrangement with separate bodies uses less material (as evident from comparing Fig. 1A of Chen and Fig. 10 of O’Brien) while still providing alignment between the optical fiber connector and the optical connection point. It is also noted that it has been held by courts that making parts integral or separate is within ordinary skill in the art (In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965); In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961) (MPEP 2144.04, Section V, B and C).
As an aside, it is also noted that the arrangement in Fig. 10 of O’Brien has essential structural features (passive alignment features 21,22 flanking a lens array 20 that is separate from them) substantially similar/identical to those in Fig. 6 of the instant application (passive alignment features 101A flanking a lens array L1/101 that is separate from them).
Claims 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen.
Regarding claims 16 and 17, Chen teaches (Fig. 1A) that the optical connection point P comprises a photonic integrated circuit (PIC) chip (“FIG. 1D is a schematic sectional view of the mirrors M optically aligned with the optical elements W of the PIC chip P” at para. 0033), while the latter typically comprises optical waveguide W and at least one optoelectronic device (e.g., a laser or photodetector; para. 0004). Hence, Chen at the very least renders obvious that the optical connection point P is PIC chip comprising an optoelectronic device, such as a laser and/or photodetector.
Claims 12, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Badihi et al (US 2016/0370544 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Chen illustrates (e.g., Fig. 1A) only embodiments with a single body with optical elements (redirecting/focusing mirrors M) intervening between the optical connector C and the optical connection point P. Chen does not teach a second body, such as an optically transparent glass or silicon insert. However, Badihi discloses (Figs. 1 – 3, 6 – 11, and 15; para. 0058 – 0090, 0103 – 0115, and 0119) a demountable connection for an optical connector and an optical connection point (a PIC chip in Figs. 2 and 8) and teaches both an embodiment(s) with a single body/substrate with optical elements (lenses 48 and/or reflecting/redirecting mirror 153, as in Figs. 2 and 3) and an embodiment(s) with an additional body/substrate with optical elements (lenses 57 in Fig. 6; 2 bodies/substrates with optical elements/lenses in Figs. 8 and 9). Badihi expressly teaches that such additional body/substrate (162 in Figs. 8 and 9) can be an optically transparent glass or silicon insert (“Although in the above description substrates 62 and 162 are described as being silicon substrates, other materials transparent to the wavelengths selected for the SiP communication, may be used instead of silicon. Such transparent materials may include, for example, plastic materials, Germanium, Sapphire, Glass …” at para. 0115).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the foundation in Chen can be modified to further comprise an optically transparent glass or silicon insert, as a suitable/workable design choice that is explicitly illustrated by Badihi and provides an expanded-beam arrangement (created by two sets of lenses 48) that is less sensitive to misalignment (due to an expanded beam) and has flexibility in selecting an orientation of output waveguides/fibers (as shown in Figs. 8 and 9 of Badihi).
The Chen – Badihi combination considers that the foundation further comprises an optically transparent glass or silicon insert (according to Badihi), which has an optically transparent body (as seen in Figs. 8 and 9 of Badihi). The Chen – Badihi combination considers that the optically transparent glass or silicon insert must be aligned with the optical transparent substrate and renders obvious that such alignment can be accomplished by passive alignment features (alignment pins or holes) integrally defined in the optically transparent glass or silicon insert to facilitate direct connection to the optical connection point.
In light of the foregoing analysis, the Chen – Badihi combination teaches expressly or renders obvious all of the recited limitations.
Regarding claim 18, The teachings of Chen and Badihi combine (see the arguments and motivation for combining, as provided above for claim 12) to teach expressly or render obvious all of the recited limitations, as detailed above for claim 12. Specifically, Chen – Badihi combination considers that the foundation can further comprise an interposer (an optically transparent glass or silicon insert, according to Badihi) for guiding light to/from the exit ends of an array of waveguides (W in Fig. 1D of Chen; 36 in Fig. 2 of Badihi) at a top or bottom surface of an optoelectronic device (a laser or photodetector at para. 0004 of Chen; optoelectronic devices 302,304 in Fig. 7 of Badihi which can be a laser(s) and/or a photodetector; para. 0059 and 0104), wherein the interposer comprises the array of optical elements (lenses) for guiding light from the optical connector and prongs (alignment pins) on both sides of the array of optical elements, extending outwards over the top or bottom surface of the optoelectronic device, and wherein the prongs are integrally formed with passive alignment features for passive alignment with the passive alignment features defined on the surface of the optoelectronic device, thereby optically aligning the array of optical elements to the array of waveguides.
Regarding claim 20, the teachings of Chen and Badihi combine (see the arguments and motivation for combining, as provided above for claim 12) to teach expressly or render obvious all of the recited limitations, as detailed above for claims 12, 14, 16, and 17.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2023/0130045 A1 Figs. 1 – 3
US 2019/0072720 A1 Figs. 1, 2, 5, 6
US 2022/0291461 A1 Figs. 63, 66
US 2016/0161686 A1
US 2015/0338585 A1
US 2011/0216998 A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT TAVLYKAEV whose telephone number is (571)270-5634. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 am - 6:00 pm, Monday - Friday.
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, William Kraig can be reached on (571)272-8660. 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.
/ROBERT TAVLYKAEV/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896