DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. This Non-Final office action is in response to application 18/382,511, application filed on 10/22/2023. Claims 1-22 are currently pending in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/30/2023 and 10/20/2024, respectively, is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. 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.
(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.
5. Claim(s) 1-6, 8-10 and 16-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Crespi et al. (US PG Pub No. 2014/0126030).
6. With respect to independent claim 1, Crespi teaches:
A method for constructing a quantum gate (construction of a quantum computer, para 39; construction of waveguides for quantum logic gate, Abstract; production of logic gates for quantum qubits, para 16) for a unitary operation (see unitary operation, para 17, 125) in photonic quantum information processing (see photonic processing, photonic logic, photonic components, para 11, 29, 35, 37), comprising:
providing at least a first waveguide and a second waveguide (see first and second waveguides, Abstract, para 28);
calculating one or more segment parameters for segments within a coupling region (see interaction length segments as shown in Fig 1; see birefringent and short interaction length segments, para 49; see interaction region, para 94; see coupling of interaction length segments, para 49; see coupling of interaction length segment, para 109; fidelity is calculated, para 132; see determining/calculating refractive index, Abstract; determining parameters/properties to impact effective index and fidelity, para 69-72),
said one or more parameters relating to propagation constants of respective waveguides (see propagation values for waveguides, para 123),
said one or more parameters being different for said first and second waveguides
respectively (see parameters for waveguides can be different from one another, para 28; see waveguide parameters with different indices, para 45) and thereby providing detuning between said first and second waveguides to allow for unitary operation between said first and second waveguides with high fidelity in the presence of errors (selection of waveguides with high performance/fidelity but in some cases may may prevent correction operation or cause or errors, para 55-57; maintaining coherence of quantum states with concern for correct operation or for logic gates being seriously compromised, para 79);
building said segments into said respective waveguides (see portions/segments of waveguides, where portions/segments are placed closely together, para 28); and
optically coupling said first and second waveguides at said coupling region (see coupled portions/lengths of waveguides, para 28),
at least one of said building and said coupling being carried out using said one or more parameters, thereby to construct a quantum gate for a unitary operation (see optimization/tuning of parameters to improve performance of quantum gates and their states, para 69; construction of a quantum computer, para 39; construction of waveguides for quantum logic gate, Abstract; production of logic gates for quantum qubits, para 16).
7. With respect to independent claim 16, Crespi teaches:
Quantum logic for unitary operation in quantum information processing (producing quantum information, para 4-5, 12; construction of a quantum computer, para 39; construction of waveguides for quantum logic gate, Abstract; production of logic gates for quantum qubits, para 16; see unitary operation, para 17, 125; see photonic processing, photonic logic, photonic components, para 11, 29, 35, 37) comprising:
at least two optically coupled waveguides, coupled over a coupling area, the coupling area comprising at least two segments, the segments differing with respect to each other in respect of at least one segment parameter (see first and second waveguides, Abstract, para 28; see interaction length segments as shown in Fig 1; see birefringent and short interaction length segments, para 49; see interaction region, para 94; see coupling of interaction length segments, para 49; see coupling of interaction length segment, para 109; fidelity is calculated, para 132; see determining/calculating refractive index, Abstract; determining parameters/properties to impact effective index and fidelity, para 69-72; see propagation values for waveguides, para 123; see parameters for waveguides can be different from one another, para 28; see waveguide parameters with different indices, para 45).
8. With respect to independent claim 21, Crespi teaches:
A method for constructing an integrated photonic device to perform a unitary operation (construction of a quantum computer, para 39; construction of waveguides for quantum logic gate, Abstract; production of logic gates for quantum qubits, para 16; see unitary operation, para 17, 125; see photonic processing, photonic logic, photonic components, para 11, 29, 35, 37), comprising:
providing at least a first waveguide and a second waveguide (see first and second waveguides, Abstract, para 28);
calculating one or more segment parameters for segments within a coupling region (see interaction length segments as shown in Fig 1; see birefringent and short interaction length segments, para 49; see interaction region, para 94; see coupling of interaction length segments, para 49; see coupling of interaction length segment, para 109; fidelity is calculated, para 132; see determining/calculating refractive index, Abstract; determining parameters/properties to impact effective index and fidelity, para 69-72),
said one or more parameters relating to propagation constants of respective waveguides (see propagation values for waveguides, para 123),
said one or more parameters being different for said first and second waveguides said respectively and thereby providing detuning between said first and second waveguides to allow for unitary operation between said first and second waveguides with high fidelity in the presence of errors (see parameters for waveguides can be different from one another, para 28; see waveguide parameters with different indices, para 45; selection of waveguides with high performance/fidelity but in some cases may may prevent correction operation or cause or errors, para 55-57; maintaining coherence of quantum states with concern for correct operation or for logic gates being seriously compromised, para 79);
building said segments into said respective waveguides (see portions/segments of waveguides, where portions/segments are placed closely together, para 28); and
optically coupling said first and second waveguides at said coupling region (see coupled portions/lengths of waveguides, para 28),
at least one of said building and said coupling being carried out using said one or more parameters, thereby to construct a quantum gate for a unitary operation (see optimization/tuning of parameters to improve performance of quantum gates and their states, para 69; construction of a quantum computer, para 39; construction of waveguides for quantum logic gate, Abstract; production of logic gates for quantum qubits, para 16).
9. With respect to claim 2, Crespi teaches:
wherein said one or more segment parameters comprise a parameter related to one member of the group comprising a width of one of said waveguides, a height of one of said waveguides, a refractive index of one of said waveguides, a doping level of one of said waveguides, and a distance between said first and second waveguides (refractive index of waveguides, Abstract, para 43; see distance between waveguides, para 124).
10. With respect to claim 3, Crespi teaches:
providing each of said waveguides with a plurality of segments within said coupling region, each one of said segments being constructed according to a different segment parameter (see parameters for waveguides can be different from one another, para 28; see waveguide parameters with different indices/parameters, para 45).
11. With respect to claim 4, Crespi teaches:
using solutions for respective propagation constants wherein a number of said segments formed by respective calculated parameters is greater than or equal to two (see Fig 1, showing two segment/sections at/near the interaction length region, para 43).
12. With respect to claim 5, Crespi teaches:
making corrections to said one or more parameters using an analytical approach (see analysis involving correcting parameters, para 133; see optimal determination of ranges, para 82).
13. With respect to claim 6, Crespi teaches:
making corrections to said at least one parameter using a numerical approach (see unitary matrix, numerical approach, para 17).
14. With respect to claim 8, Crespi teaches:
changing a detuning parameter (δ), said δ and a change in δ being achieved by changing one of said segment parameters in said coupling region (see changing coupling coefficient, range of coupling length for coupled potions of waveguides, para 45-49).
15. With respect to claim 9, Crespi teaches:
changing a coupling parameter (Ω), a change in Ω being defined by changing one of said segment parameters in said coupling region (see changing coupling coefficient, range of coupling length for coupled potions of waveguides, para 45-49).
16. With respect to claim 10, Crespi teaches:
changing both said coupling parameter and said detuning parameter (see changing coupling coefficient, range of coupling length for coupled potions of waveguides, para 45-49; see tune/de-tuning para 69; see optimal range, para 68).
17. With respect to claim 17, Crespi teaches:
wherein said at least one segment parameter is one member of the group comprising a width of one of said waveguides, a height of one of said waveguides, a refractive index of one of said waveguides, a doping level of one of said waveguides, and a distance between said first and second waveguides (refractive index of waveguides, Abstract, para 43; see distance between waveguides, para 124).
18. With respect to claim 18, Crespi teaches:
wherein said segments and said optical coupling between said waveguides define detuning parameters δ and coupling parameters Ω, the segment parameters being selected to provide a detuned coupling between said first and second waveguides to provide reliable unitary operation between said first and second waveguides with high fidelity in the presence of errors (see first and second waveguides, Abstract, para 28; see interaction length segments as shown in Fig 1; see birefringent and short interaction length segments, para 49; see interaction region, para 94; see coupling of interaction length segments, para 49; see coupling of interaction length segment, para 109; fidelity is calculated, para 132; see determining/calculating refractive index, Abstract; determining parameters/properties to impact effective index and fidelity, para 69-72; see propagation values for waveguides, para 123; see parameters for waveguides can be different from one another, para 28; see waveguide parameters with different indices, para 45).
19. With respect to claim 19, Crespi teaches:
wherein said first and second waveguides comprise Si on SiO.sub.2, SiN, glass, or LiNBO.sub.3 waveguides (see material, SiN, SiON, para 65-69).
20. With respect to claim 20, Crespi teaches:
implementing one member of the group of logic gates comprising: an X gate, an H (Hadamard) gate, a X1ngate, a NOT gate, a CNOT gate, a Y gate, a Z gate, a CZ gate, an iX gate, and a T gate (see CNOT gate, para 18, 98).
21. With respect to claim 22, Crespi teaches:
wherein said one or more segment parameters comprise respective members of the group comprising a width of one of said waveguides, and a distance between said first and second waveguides (see distance between waveguides, para 124).
Allowable Subject Matter
22. Claims 7 and 11-15 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.
23. With respect to claim 7, the prior art made of record fails to teach the combination of steps recited in independent claim 7, including the following particular combination of steps as recited in claim 7, as follows:
wherein said numerical approach is one member of the group consisting of an iterative eigenmode expansion (EME) simulation process to approach a desired detuning level, and using a finite difference eigenmode solver (FDE) to calculate a coupling parameter.
24. With respect to claim 11, the prior art made of record fails to teach the combination of steps recited in independent claim 11, including the following particular combination of steps as recited in claim 11, as follows:
detuning values Δ normalized by a coupling parameter κ representing said optical coupling between said first and second waveguides, to obtain said δ for a given detuning modulation.
25. With respect to claims 12-13, the prior art made of record fails to teach the combination of steps recited in independent claim 12, including the following particular combination of steps as recited in claim 7, as follows:
wherein said detuning comprises changing one of the segment parameters in discrete steps.
26. With respect to claim 14-15, the prior art made of record fails to teach the combination of steps recited in independent claim 14, including the following particular combination of steps as recited in claim 14, as follows:
providing an error model based on fabrication limitations and selecting said parameters via a stepwise process to minimize errors under said model.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUCHIN PARIHAR whose telephone number is (703)756-1970. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Jack Chiang can be reached on 571-272-7483. 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. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). 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.
/SUCHIN PARIHAR/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2851
