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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of the invention of Group II (claims 11-18) and Species A1,B1 (Figs 1 and 5) in the reply filed on 06/25/26 is acknowledged. Applicant indicated that claims 11-18 and new claims 21, 22 read on the elected species.
Accordingly, claims 1-10 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention/embodiment, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
The term “about” in claim 16 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “about” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 13 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 13 discloses a limitation “the dielectric material further includes …”, however claim 11, on which it depends does not disclose what other elements are included in this material.
In order to overcome this rejection, claim 13 should be dependent on claim 12.
Claim 17 discloses a limitation “the third section is to modify a phase of light”. However, claim 11 on which it depends already discloses that “the second section includes a waveguide of a dielectric material” and “the third section includes a semiconductor material different from the Ill-V semiconductor material”. The specification clearly discloses that this type of third section can only be a grating and therefore does not modify a phase of light.
In order to overcome this rejection, claim 17 should be amended to remove “or a phase”.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
For the purpose of examination, the limitations as presented have been searched and considered.
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.
Claims 11-18, 21, 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Farber et al. (2006/0002443) found in IDS, hereinafter ‘443, and further in view of Happach et al. (2019/0052054) found in IDS, hereinafter ‘054.
Regarding claim 11, Fig 2 of ‘433 discloses a photonic device, comprising:
11. “a laser cavity [122]; and
a first section [106], a second section [113], and a third section [124] extending along a longitudinal axis [horizontal] of the laser cavity, wherein:
the first section [106] includes a Ill-V semiconductor material [GaAs],
the second section [113] includes a waveguide, and
the third section [124] includes a semiconductor material [Si] different from the Ill-V semiconductor material.”
‘433 discloses the device as described above, where the waveguide is silicon based, but does not disclose the material of the waveguide to be SiN dielectric material.
However, making a waveguide of this material is well known in the art as evidenced by paragraph 0044 of ‘054, which disclose that a waveguide can be made of SiN.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the of the invention incorporate the teachings of ‘054 into the device of ‘433 by making the waveguide of this known dielectric material SiN, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Regarding claims 12-17, 21, 22, combination of ‘443 and ‘054 further discloses:
12. “wherein the dielectric material includes nitrogen [SiN].”
13. “wherein the dielectric material further includes silicon [SiN].”
14. “wherein the semiconductor material [Si] different from the Ill-V semiconductor [GaAs] material is silicon.”
15. “wherein a thermo-optic coefficient (TOC) of the third section [TOC of Si is 1.86x10-4 K-1] is between a TOC of the second section [TOC of SiN is 0.25x10-4 K-1] and a TOC of the first section [TOC of GaAs is 2.35x10-4 K-1].”
16. “wherein a thermo-optic coefficient (TOC) of the second section [TOC of SiN is 0.25x10-4 K-1] is lower than about 1x10-4 K-1.”
17. “wherein the third section [grating 124] is to modify a wavelength or a phase of light emitted by the first section [106] during operation of the photonic device.”
21. “wherein the Ill-V semiconductor material [GaAs] in the first section [106] is part of an active region of the laser cavity [122].”
22. “wherein the semiconductor material [Si] in the third section [124] is part of a grating of the laser cavity [122].”
Regarding claim 18, ‘433 discloses the photonic device as described above,
18. “further comprising an additional component [multiplexer, modulator, etc., see paragraph 0047], wherein:
the third section [113] is between the second section [124] and an output of the laser cavity [120],
the output of the laser cavity [120] is between the third section [124] and the additional component [multiplexer, etc.],
the additional component [multiplexer, etc.] is one of a modulator, a wavelength combiner, or a multiplexer,”
but does not disclose:
“the additional component includes the semiconductor material different from the Ill-V semiconductor material.”
However, making a signal manipulating PIC element of Si material is well known in the art as evidenced by AAPA (paragraph 0010 of applicant’s specification), which disclose “Si may be used to fabricate waveguides, gratings, wavelength combiners, or other components of photonic integrated circuits (PICs).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the of the invention incorporate the teachings of AAPA into the device of ‘433 and ‘054 by making the multiplexer of this known Si material, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Pertinent Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant’s attention is drawn to the references cited on form PTO-892 which lists other references with similar features as the invention. However, none of them anticipate all the features of the pending claims.
Contact Info
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to M. A. GOLUB-MILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-8602. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-5.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, MinSun Harvey can be reached on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/M. A. Golub-Miller/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Prosecution Insights