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 .
Note by the Examiner
For clarity, the reference to specific claim numbers are presented in bold. Cited claim limitations are presented in bold the first time they are associated with a particular prior art disclosing the cited limitations, and subsequent reference to the already disclosed claim limitations are presented un-bolded. Certain elements from prior art which are not required by the claims are also presented un-bolded if they are particularly pertinent to understanding how the references are being combined. Item-to-item matching and Examiner explanations for 102 &/or 103 rejections have been provided in parenthesis.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species A in the documents filed on April 9th, 2026, identified as encompassing Claims 1-16, and 18-21 is acknowledged. The amended claims and newly added Claim 21 are accepted.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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 11, 12, 15, 16, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen (US 2021/0005772 A1), hereinafter as C1.
Regarding Claim 11, C1 discloses an optical package structure (see FIG. 4, element 1c, and [0065] ln. 2 “optical device 1C”), comprising:
a carrier (see FIG. 4 [0039] “substrate 2”);
an optical emitter (see FIG. 4, element 15, [0041] ln. 1 “light emitting component 15”) and an optical receiver (see FIG. 4, element 14, [0040] ln. 1 “light receiving component 14”) over the carrier (see FIG. 4 where the emitter and receiver are on the substrate 2);
an encapsulant (see FIG. 4, elements 3 and 4, [0042] ln. 2 “encapsulant 3…encapsulant 4”) encapsulating the optical emitter and the optical receiver (see FIG. 4 and [0042] ln. 2 “encapsulant 3 covering the light receiving component 14, and a second encapsulant 4 covering the light emitting component 15”); and
an optical blocking structure (see FIG. 4, element 5b, and [0061] ln. 4 “outer encapsulant 5b” and [0056] ln. 1“outer encapsulant 5 can be made of a material which does not transmit light, and may thus be opaque”) embedded in the encapsulant (see FIG. 4 where outer encapsulant 5b is within the encapsulants 3 and 4) and between the optical emitter and the optical receiver (see FIG. 4 where the element 5b is disposed between and around the emitter and receiver), wherein
the encapsulant comprises an optical transmitting structure (see FIG. 4 and [0042] ln. 13 “first encapsulant 3 may be transparent or translucent” and [0043] ln. 12 “A material of the first encapsulant 3 may be the same as or different from a material of the second encapsulant 4”) and a degradation layer (see FIG. 4, element 17c, [0066] ln. 5 “light shielding layer 17c” ) between the optical transmitting structure and the optical blocking structure (see FIG. 4 where the light shielding layer 17c is between the optical transmitting structure of 3 and 4, and the optical blocking structure 5b).
Regarding Claim 12, C1 discloses the optical package structure (element 1C) as claimed in claim 11, wherein the degradation layer (element 17c) directly contacts the optical transmitting structure (see FIG. 4 where element 17c is in contact with the optical transmitting structure of encapsulant 3 and 4).
Regarding Claim 15, C1 discloses the optical package structure as claimed in claim 11, wherein the encapsulant defines a trench (see FIGs. 4 and 10 where a trench is formed during the manufacturing process between encapsulant elements 3 and 4), the optical blocking structure is disposed in the trench (see FIG. 4 where the optical blocking element 5b is disposed between in this trench), and the degradation layer (element 17c) extends along at least a portion of the trench (see FIG. 4 where element 17c extends along optical blocking element 5b).
Regarding Claim 16, C1 discloses the optical package structure as claimed in claim 15, wherein an upper surface (see FIG. 4, elements 32 and 42, [0076] ln. 8 “surface 32…surface 42”) of the carrier has a recess portion (see FIG. 4, element 173c, and [0068] ln. 4 “the light shielding layer 17c further includes a third portion 173c”), and the recess portion and the degradation layer collectively define the trench of the encapsulant (see FIG. 4 where elements 17c and 173c cover the defined trench).
Regarding Claim 18, C1 discloses an optical package structure (see FIG. 4, element 1c, and [0065] ln. 2 “optical device 1C”), comprising:
a carrier (see FIG. 4 [0039] “substrate 2”);
an optical emitter (see FIG. 4, element 15, [0041] ln. 1 “light emitting component 15”) and an optical receiver (see FIG. 4, element 14, [0040] ln. 1 “light receiving component 14”) over the carrier (see FIG. 4 where the emitter and receiver are on the substrate 2);
an encapsulant (see FIG. 4, elements 3 and 4, [0042] ln. 2 “encapsulant 3…encapsulant 4”) encapsulating the optical emitter and the optical receiver (see FIG. 4 and [0042] ln. 2 “encapsulant 3 covering the light receiving component 14, and a second encapsulant 4 covering the light emitting component 15”);
an optical barrier (see FIG. 4, element 17c, [0066] ln. 5 “light shielding layer 17c” ) over the carrier (element 17c is on the carrier element 2) and between the optical emitter and the optical receiver (see FIG. 4 where element17c is between the emitter 15 and receiver 14); and
a supporting structure embedded in the optical barrier (see FIG. 4, element 5b, and [0061] ln. 4 “outer encapsulant 5b” and [0056] ln. 1“outer encapsulant 5 can be made of a material which does not transmit light, and may thus be opaque….the outer encapsulant 5 may be made of an epoxy molding” where this element is within the confines of element 17c) and configured to increase an uniformity of a compressive strength of an upper surface of the optical package structure (The inclusion of epoxy molding of element 5b would provide structural support to the device package due to the rigidity that comes with epoxy molding, and would provide further strength in tandem with the encapsulant already present within elements 3 and 4) .
Regarding Claim 20, C1 discloses the optical package structure as claimed in claim 18, wherein the optical barrier is configured to reflect a light (see [0046] ln. 1 “the light shielding layer 17 may be made if a material which does not transmit light” therefore the element would reflect light), and the supporting structure is configured to absorb the light (see [0056] ln. 1“outer encapsulant 5 can be made of a material which does not transmit light, and may thus be opaque” and would therefore absorb light).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-10 and 21 are allowable. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art made of record, either singularly or in combination, does not disclose or suggest at least the claim limitations of:
Claim 1, “An optical package structure, comprising: a carrier[[ (10)]];an optical emitter [[(20)]] and an optical receiver [[(30)]] over the carrier[[ (10)]];an optical barrier barrier(50) over the carrier [[(10)]] and between the optical emitter [[(20)]] and the optical receiver[[ (30)]], wherein the optical barrier [[(50)]] defines a cavity[[ (50C)]]; and an insulating structure [[(60)]] filled in the cavity, wherein an elevation of a top surface [[(601)]] of the insulating structure [[(60)]] is lower than an elevation of a top surface [[(501)]] of the optical barrier [[(50)]] with respect to a surface [[(101)]] of the carrier[[ (10)]]” – as instantly claimed and in combination with the additionally claimed limitations.
All depending claims on the current claim incorporate the same allowable subject matter. Claims 2-10 and 21 are dependent on Claim 1 are therefore allowable due to Claim 1 overcoming the prior art of record at the time of filing.
Claims 13, 14, and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reason for indicating allowable subject matter:
The prior art made of record, either singularly or in combination, does not disclose or suggest at least the claim limitations of:
Claim 13, “further comprising an intermediate layer [[(720)]] between the degradation layer [[(710)]] and the optical blocking structure[[ (50+60)]], wherein the intermediate layer [[(720)]] is distinct from the degradation layer[[ (710)]]” – as instantly claimed and in combination with the additionally claimed limitations.
Claim 14, “wherein the intermediate layer [[(720)]] is directly connected to the optical transmitting structure [[(70)]] through an opening of the degradation layer[[ (710)]]” – as instantly claimed and in combination with the additionally claimed limitations.
Claim 19, “wherein a rigidity of the supporting structure [[(60)]] is greater than a rigidity of the encapsulant[[ (70A)]]” - as instantly claimed and in combination with the additionally claimed limitations.
All claims depending on the current claim incorporate the same allowable subject matter.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRENNEN STUART CUDA whose telephone number is (571)272-6563. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Steven Loke can be reached at (571) 272-1657. 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.
/B.S.C./Examiner, Art Unit 2818
/STEVEN H LOKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Prosecution Insights