Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. This Office Action is sent in response to Applicant’s Communication received on 08/13/2026 for application number 18/391,773.
Response to Amendments
3. The Amendment filed 08/13/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 2, 6, 10, and 11 have been amended. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues that cited references do not disclose every feature as recited in amended independent claims 1 and 10. However, the argument is moot since this is a newly presented limitation, thus changes the scope of the claims. However, a newly found reference, Kim, is applied.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. Claims 1-4, 7, 9-13, 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erhard et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. No. US 20230420241 A1) in view of Kim et al. (Entanglement and Tunable Spin-Spin Couplings between Trapped Ions Using Multiple Transverse Modes, arXiv, published 2009, pages 1-4).
Claim 1: Erhard teaches a system configured for performing a Mølmer-Sørensen (MS) gate (i.e. A Molmer-Sorensen gate (MS-gate) entangles the internal qubits of two or more ions including the use of two laser beams detuned by a frequency δ from the first blue and the first red motional sidebands of the respective ions. In particular, the MS-gate employs stimulated Raman transitions on the internal qubit states; para. [0053]), the system comprising:
a confinement apparatus configured to confine two or more quantum objects at a defined location (i.e. the term “ion trap” refers to any device employable to trap ions, using electric and/or magnetic field. For instance, an ion trap may be a Penning trap; a Paul trap; a three dimensional, 3D, ion trap; and/or a linear 3D trap. In this disclosure, the term ion trap refers to an assembly with a plurality of electrodes which, when driven, generate an electric field that limits (traps) the freedom of movement of ions so that they may not escape a particular (preferably small) region in the vicinity of those electrodes; para. [0072, 0098]), wherein a qubit space of the one or more quantum objects is defined to comprise two qubit states (i.e. A qubit is represented by a two-state (or two-level) quantum-mechanical system; para. [0041, 0055]);
one or more manipulation sources configured to generate a first manipulation signal, a second manipulation signal, a third manipulation signal, and a fourth manipulation signal (i.e. The apparatus comprises a laser unit configured to emit a first laser beam and a second laser beam, the first laser beam having a first frequency and the second laser beam having a second frequency … the laser unit is further configured to emit a third laser beam and a fourth laser beam, the third laser beam having a third frequency and the fourth laser beam having a fourth frequency; para. [0009, 0015]), wherein the first manipulation signal and the fourth manipulation signal are configured, when the first manipulation signal and the fourth manipulation signal, to provide a red sideband signal corresponding to a Raman transition between the two qubit states and the second manipulation signal and the third manipulation signal are configured (i.e. A Molmer-Sorensen gate (MS-gate) entangles the internal qubits of two or more ions including the use of two laser beams detuned by a frequency δ from the first blue and the first red motional sidebands of the respective ions. In particular, the MS-gate employs stimulated Raman transitions on the internal qubit states … The transition from or to said (virtual) state, which has an energy difference smaller that the transition from said (virtual) state to the state |n
PNG
media_image1.png
42
8
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, is called red sideband; para. [0053, 0054, 0120]), when the second manipulation signal and the third manipulation signal, to provide a blue sideband signal corresponding to the Raman transition between the two qubit states (i.e. A Molmer-Sorensen gate (MS-gate) entangles the internal qubits of two or more ions including the use of two laser beams detuned by a frequency δ from the first blue and the first red motional sidebands of the respective ions. In particular, the MS-gate employs stimulated Raman transitions on the internal qubit states … The transition from or to said (virtual) state, which has an energy difference larger than the transition from said (virtual) state to the state |n
PNG
media_image1.png
42
8
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, is called blue sideband; para. [0053, 0054, 0123]); and
one or more beam path systems (i.e. an objective configured to focus the first laser beam and the second laser beam at a position of the trapped ion, wherein the first laser beam and the second laser beam pass through at least one common lens within the objective; para. [0009, 0083]), wherein the one or more beam path systems define a first beam path and a second beam path (i.e. To obtain parallel laser beams one or more optical components may be included in the optical path of the first laser beam 130 and/or the second laser beam 140 … The third laser beam 131 and the fourth laser beam 134 may pass through the at least one common lens 151 of the objective 150; para. [0090, 0100]), the first beam path is configured to provide the first manipulation signal and the second manipulation signal to the defined location (i.e. The apparatus 100 is further comprising an objective 150 configured to focus the first laser beam 130 and the second laser beam 140 at a position of the trapped ion 160. The first laser beam 130 and the second laser beam 140 pass through at least one common lens 151 within the objective 150. For example, when the ion 160 is trapped in a linear ion trap, the trap axis may be included in the focal plane of the objective 150; para. [0083]) and the second beam path is configured to provide the third manipulation signal and the fourth manipulation signal to the defined location (i.e. The third laser beam 131 and the fourth laser beam 134 may pass through the at least one common lens 151 of the objective 150. The laser unit 110 is controlled by a controller 120 to induce a force on the second trapped ion 661, using the third laser beam 131 and the fourth laser beam 141. Analogous to the excitation of the first trapped ion 660, the third laser beam 131 and the fourth laser beam 141 generate a moving standing wave at the position of the second trapped ion 661, which induces the force on the second trapped ion 661. The addressing unit 610 may be configured to generate pairs of parallel laser beams; para. [0015, 0016, 0100]), wherein there is a non-zero angle between the first beam path and the second beam path at the defined location (i.e. the propagation direction of the laser beams focused at the position of said specific ion may be adjusted by changing the inclination angle of the laser beams with respect to the optical axis 480 of the objective 150. In other words, the propagation direction of the first laser beam 130 and the second laser beam 131 before passing the at least one common lens 151 differs from a propagation direction of the third laser beam 140 and the fourth laser beam 141 before passing the at least one common lens 151 in a respective angle of incidence with respect to a principle plane 690 of objective 150; para. [0102]).
Erhard does not explicitly teach when the first manipulation signal and the fourth manipulation signal interact, to provide, when the second manipulation signal and the third manipulation signal interact, to provide; such that the first manipulation signal, the second manipulation signal, the third manipulation signal, and the fourth manipulation signal are incident on the two or more quantum objects at the defined location.
However, Kim teaches one or more manipulation sources configured to generate a first manipulation signal, a second manipulation signal, a third manipulation signal, and a fourth manipulation signal (i.e. We uniformly address the ions with two Raman laser beams where the wave vector difference 𝛿𝑘 of the beams points along the transverse ( 𝑥) direction of trapped ion motion. Each beam has multiple spectral components that simultaneously drive blue and red motional sideband transitions [5], but because the transverse modes of the ions are closely spaced, they all contribute to the interaction; page 1), wherein the first manipulation signal and the fourth manipulation signal are configured, when the first manipulation signal and the fourth manipulation signal interact, to provide a red sideband signal corresponding to a Raman transition between the two qubit states (i.e. We uniformly address the ions with two Raman laser beams where the wave vector difference 𝛿𝑘 of the beams points along the transverse ( 𝑥) direction of trapped ion motion. Each beam has multiple spectral components that simultaneously drive blue and red motional sideband transitions [5], but because the transverse modes of the ions are closely spaced, they all contribute to the interaction. In general, when noncopropagating laser beams have bichromatic beatnotes at frequencies 𝜔0 ±𝜇; page 1) and the second manipulation signal and the third manipulation signal are configured, when the second manipulation signal and the third manipulation signal interact, to provide a blue sideband signal corresponding to the Raman transition between the two qubit states (i.e. We uniformly address the ions with two Raman laser beams where the wave vector difference 𝛿𝑘 of the beams points along the transverse ( 𝑥) direction of trapped ion motion. Each beam has multiple spectral components that simultaneously drive blue and red motional sideband transitions [5], but because the transverse modes of the ions are closely spaced, they all contribute to the interaction. In general, when noncopropagating laser beams have bichromatic beatnotes at frequencies 𝜔0 ±𝜇; page 1); and
one or more beam path systems, wherein the one or more beam path systems define a first beam path and a second beam path (i.e. We direct two Raman laser beams onto the ions to drive spin-dependent forces, with their wave vector difference aligned along the transverse 𝑥 axis of ion motion ( 𝛿𝑘 =𝑘√2, where 𝑘 =2𝜋/𝜆). The Raman beams are set to a wavelength of 𝜆 =369.75 nm, detuned ∼500 GHz to the red of the 171Yb+ 2𝑆1/2 −2𝑃1/2 transition, and have a power of up to ∼8 mW in each beam. An electro-optic modulator impresses sidebands on the Raman beams near the 171Yb+ hyperfine splitting and each of the two Raman beams traverse an acousto-optic frequency shifter to select appropriate optical beatnotes to drive Raman transitions in the ions [15], The Raman beams are focused to a waist of ∼30 𝜇m, and when their beatnote is adjusted to drive the carrier transition at the hyperfine transition 𝜔0, we observe a carrier Rabi frequency on each ion of up to 𝛺/2𝜋 ≈300 kHz with inhomogeneities between the ions measured to be under 1%; page 2), the first beam path is configured to provide the first manipulation signal and the second manipulation signal to the defined location and the second beam path is configured to provide the third manipulation signal and the fourth manipulation signal to the defined location (i.e. We uniformly address the ions with two Raman laser beams where the wave vector difference 𝛿𝑘 of the beams points along the transverse ( 𝑥) direction of trapped ion motion. Each beam has multiple spectral components that simultaneously drive blue and red motional sideband transitions [5], but because the transverse modes of the ions are closely spaced, they all contribute to the interaction; page 1) such that the first manipulation signal, the second manipulation signal, the third manipulation signal, and the fourth manipulation signal are incident on the two or more quantum objects at the defined location (i.e. We uniformly address the ions with two Raman laser beams where the wave vector difference 𝛿𝑘 of the beams points along the transverse ( 𝑥) direction of trapped ion motion. Each beam has multiple spectral components that simultaneously drive blue and red motional sideband transitions [5], but because the transverse modes of the ions are closely spaced, they all contribute to the interaction; page 1), wherein there is a non-zero angle between the first beam path and the second beam path at the defined location (i.e. when noncopropagating laser beams have bichromatic beatnotes at frequencies 𝜔0 ±𝜇, this can give rise to a spin-dependent force at frequency 𝜇 [15]; page 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Erhard to include the feature of Kim. One would have been motivated to make this modification because it permits selection and control of the optical beatnotes used to drive the red and blue sideband Raman transitions in the trapped ions.
Claim 2: Erhard and Kim teach the system of claim 1. Erhard further teaches wherein (a) a qubit frequency is defined based on an energy difference between the two qubit states of the qubit space of the two or more quantum objects (i.e. The first laser beam has a frequency ωL1 and the second laser beam comprises two frequencies ωL2 b=ωL1+ω0+ωM+δ and ωL2 r=ωL1+ω0−ωM−δ, where the frequency ω0 corresponds to the energy difference of the two qubit states; para. [0055, 0121, 0131]), (b) a first frequency of the first manipulation signal corresponds to a Raman laser frequency (i.e. the MS-gate employs stimulated Raman transitions on the internal qubit states … the first frequency ωL1 is based on a transition from a first state 240 to a virtual state 220 of the first ion 660; para. [0053, 0118]), (c) a second frequency of the second manipulation signal corresponds to a sum of the Raman laser frequency, the qubit frequency, and a motional frequency of the two or more quantum objects (i.e. The first laser beam has a frequency ωL1 and the second laser beam comprises two frequencies ωL2 b=ωL1+ω0+ωM+δ and ωL2 r=ωL1+ω0−ωM−δ, where the frequency ω0 corresponds to the energy difference of the two qubit states; para. [0119, 0123, 0124, 0131]), (d) a third frequency of the third manipulation signal corresponds to the Raman laser frequency (i.e. Analogous to the first laser beam 130, the frequency of the third laser beam 131 (i.e. the third frequency ωL3) in the exemplary implementation of a MS-gate is based on a transition from a first state 240 to a virtual state 220 of the second ion 661. In other words, the third frequency corresponds to an energy difference ℏωL3 of the virtual state 220 and the first state 240 of the second ion 661. Furthermore, the frequency of the third laser beam ωL3 may be equal to the frequency of the first laser beam ω; para. [0125]), and (e) a fourth frequency of the fourth manipulation signal corresponds to the Raman laser frequency plus the qubit frequency minus the motional frequency (i.e. The first laser beam has a frequency ωL1 and the second laser beam comprises two frequencies ωL2 b=ωL1+ω0+ωM+δ and ωL2 r=ωL1+ω0−ωM−δ, where the frequency ω0 corresponds to the energy difference of the two qubit states; para. [0126-0131]).
Claim 3: Erhard and Kim teach the system of claim 2. Erhard further teaches wherein one of (a) the first frequency is equal to the Raman laser frequency plus a carrier detuning (i.e. The above-mentioned detuning δ corresponds to a shift in the frequency of a laser compared to a resonant frequency of a quantum system … In such an exemplary implementation of a MS-gate, the first frequency ωL1 is based on a transition from a first state 240 to a virtual state 220 of the first ion 660; para. [0057, 0118]) and the fourth frequency is equal to the Raman laser frequency plus the qubit frequency minus the motional frequency plus the carrier detuning (i.e. The first laser beam has a frequency ωL1 and the second laser beam comprises two frequencies ωL2 b=ωL1+ω0+ωM+δ and ωL2 r=ωL1+ω0−ωM−δ, where the frequency ω0 corresponds to the energy difference of the two qubit states; para. [0126-0131]) or (b) the second frequency is equal to the sum of the Raman laser frequency, the qubit frequency, and a motional frequency plus the carrier detuning (i.e. The first laser beam has a frequency ωL1 and the second laser beam comprises two frequencies ωL2 b=ωL1+ω0+ωM+δ and ωL2 r=ωL1+ω0−ωM−δ, where the frequency ω0 corresponds to the energy difference of the two qubit states; para. [0119, 0123, 0124, 0131]) and the third frequency is equal to the Raman laser frequency plus the carrier detuning (i.e. Analogous to the first laser beam 130, the frequency of the third laser beam 131 (i.e. the third frequency ωL3) in the exemplary implementation of a MS-gate is based on a transition from a first state 240 to a virtual state 220 of the second ion 661. In other words, the third frequency corresponds to an energy difference ℏωL3 of the virtual state 220 and the first state 240 of the second ion 661. Furthermore, the frequency of the third laser beam ωL3 may be equal to the frequency of the first laser beam ωL1; para. [0057, 0125]).
Claim 4: Erhard and Kim teach the system of claim 2. Erhard further teaches wherein the motional frequency is a sum of a motional mode frequency defined by the confinement apparatus and a mode detuning (i.e. The frequency of a motional transition cu m is a property of the quantum system including one or more trapped ions. It may depend, for example, on one or more of the type of the ion(s), the number of ions, the trap design, or the like. The frequency of a motional transition ωM lies typically in a frequency range of 300 kHz to 5000 kHz. The detuning may be chosen as explained above in section Quantum gates; para. [0046, 0096, 0112, 0115]).
Claim 7: Erhard and Kim teach the system of claim 1. Erhard does not explicitly teach wherein the non-zero angle is an angle between thirty degrees and one hundred fifty degrees.
However, Kim further teaches wherein the non-zero angle is an angle between thirty degrees and one hundred fifty degrees (i.e. We direct two Raman laser beams onto the ions to drive spin-dependent forces, with their wave vector difference aligned along the transverse 𝑥 axis of ion motion ( 𝛿𝑘 =𝑘√2, where 𝑘 =2𝜋/𝜆). The Raman beams are set to a wavelength of 𝜆 =369.75 nm, detuned ∼500 GHz to the red of the 171Yb+ 2𝑆1/2 −2𝑃1/2 transition, and have a power of up to ∼8 mW in each beam; page 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Erhard to include the feature of Kim. One would have been motivated to make this modification because it aligns the wave-vector difference of the Raman beams with the desired transverse motional direction of the trapped ions, thereby effectively driving the the spin dependent force used for the MS interaction.
Claim 9: Erhard and Kim teach the system of claim 1. Erhard further teaches comprising a controller (i.e. FIG. 11 shows an exemplary controller 1100, which is included in the apparatus described in the present disclosure. For example, the controller controls laser unit and may additionally control further components included in the apparatus for exciting an ion; para. [0141]) configured to control operation of one or more of the confinement apparatus, the one or more manipulation sources (i.e. The laser unit 110 is controlled by a controller 120 such that a so-called moving standing wave is generated at the position of the trapped ion 160, which induces a force on the trapped ion 160, using the first and the second laser beam; para. [0085]), or the one or more beam path systems (i.e. the controller 120 may be further configured to control one or more of the laser unit 110 and one or more optical components to adjust the optical path in order to induce a force on the first trapped ion 660 and the second trapped ion 661 simultaneously; para. [0107]) to cause the system to perform the MS gate (i.e. A Molmer-Sorensen gate (MS-gate) entangles the internal qubits of two or more ions including the use of two laser beams detuned by a frequency δ from the first blue and the first red motional sidebands of the respective ions. In particular, the MS-gate employs stimulated Raman transitions on the internal qubit states; para. [0053]).
Claims 10-13 are similar in scope to Claims 1-4 and are rejected under a similar rationale.
Claim 16: Erhard and Kim teach the method of claim 10. Erhard further teaches wherein the MS gate is part of a quantum logic operation (i.e. A Molmer-Sorensen gate (MS-gate) entangles the internal qubits of two or more ions including the use of two laser beams detuned by a frequency δ from the first blue and the first red motional sidebands of the respective ions. In particular, the MS-gate employs stimulated Raman transitions on the internal qubit states; para. [0052, 0053]).
Claim 17: Erhard and Kim teach the method of claim 10. Erhard further teaches wherein the MS gate is performed as part of a quantum circuit (i.e. A quantum gate is a basic circuit operation on one or more qubits; para. [0050]).
Claim 18: Erhard and Kim teach the method of claim 10. Erhard further teaches comprising controlling operation of one or more beam path systems (i.e. the controller is further configured to control one or more optical components to direct the first laser beam and the second laser beam to obtain a same propagation direction of the first laser beam and the second laser beam before the passing of the at least one common lens; para. [0012, 0140]) defining the first beam path and the second beam path (i.e. the propagation direction of the first laser beam 130 and the second laser beam 131 before passing the at least one common lens 151 differs from a propagation direction of the third laser beam 140 and the fourth laser beam 141 before passing the at least one common lens 151 in a respective angle of incidence with respect to a principle plane 690 of objective 150; para. [0102]) to cause the first manipulation signal and the second manipulation signal to be provided to the defined location via the first beam path (i.e. The excitation of an ion is performed, for example, by an apparatus as depicted in FIG. 1 . An apparatus 100 for exciting such a trapped ion 160 comprises a laser unit 110 that is configured to emit a first laser beam 130 and a second laser beam 140; para. [0080, 0134-0137]) and the third manipulation signal and the fourth manipulation signal to be provided to the defined location via a second beam path (i.e. The third laser beam 131 and the fourth laser beam 134 may pass through the at least one common lens 151 of the objective 150. The laser unit 110 is controlled by a controller 120 to induce a force on the second trapped ion 661, using the third laser beam 131 and the fourth laser beam 141; para. [0100]).
Claim 19: Erhard and Kim teach the method of claim 10. Erhard further teaches wherein at least a portion of the method is performed by a controller (i.e. FIG. 11 shows an exemplary controller 1100, which is included in the apparatus described in the present disclosure. For example, the controller controls laser unit and may additionally control further components included in the apparatus for exciting an ion; para. [0141]) configured to control operation of one or more of the confinement apparatus, the one or more manipulation sources (i.e. The laser unit 110 is controlled by a controller 120 such that a so-called moving standing wave is generated at the position of the trapped ion 160, which induces a force on the trapped ion 160, using the first and the second laser beam; para. [0085]), or one or more beam path systems defining the first beam path and the second beam path (i.e. the controller 120 may be further configured to control one or more of the laser unit 110 and one or more optical components to adjust the optical path in order to induce a force on the first trapped ion 660 and the second trapped ion 661 simultaneously; para. [0090, 0107, 0140]).
Claim 20 is similar in scope to Claim 7 and is rejected under a similar rationale.
8. Claims 5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erhard in view of Kim, and further in view of Monroe et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. No. US 20190205784 A1).
Claim 5: Erhard and Kim teach the system of claim 1. Erhard does not explicitly teach wherein the MS gate is a phase insensitive MS gate.
However, Monroe further teaches wherein the MS gate is a phase insensitive MS gate (i.e. the Molmer-Sorensen gate operation requires two non-co-propagating or counter-propagating directions of laser beams (A and B) with wavevectors kA and kB that together drive both the upper and lower sideband transitions. That is, one possible configuration of the bichromatic beatnotes on beam B is phase sensitive (equation (3)) and the other possible configuration is phase insensitive (equation (4). An important aspect is that the phase insensitive configuration has upper and lower sideband beatnotes of opposite signs (ω0>>ωm±δ), hence the optical phase accumulated from an interaction involving both beatnotes will cancel; para. [0039-0041]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Erhard and Kim to include the feature of Monroe. One would have been motivated to make this modification because it provides phase stability by canceling the optical phase accumulated from the upper and lower sideband beatnotes.
Claim 14 is similar in scope to Claim 5 and is rejected under a similar rationale.
8. Claims 6 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erhard in view of Kim, and further in view of Lee et al. (Phase Control of Trapped Ion Quantum Gates, arXiv, published 2005, pages 1-30).
Claim 6: Erhard and Kim teach the system of claim 1. Erhard further teaches wherein the confinement apparatus is configured to cause two quantum objects of the two or more quantum objects to be located at the defined location with a separation distance between the two quantum objects (i.e. A first and a second trapped ion may be spatially separated, for example, due to Coulomb interaction and/or ion trap design or the like. Thus, to address a specific ion out of a plurality of trapped ions, the propagation direction of the laser beams focused at the position of said specific ion may be adjusted by changing the inclination angle of the laser beams with respect to the optical axis 480 of the objective 150. In other words, the propagation direction of the first laser beam 130 and the second laser beam 131 before passing the at least one common lens 151 differs from a propagation direction of the third laser beam 140 and the fourth laser beam 141 before passing the at least one common lens 151 in a respective angle of incidence with respect to a principle plane 690 of objective 150; para. [0098, 0102]).
Erhard does not explicitly teach one of an integer multiple or a half odd integer of π divided by an amplitude of a wave vector difference between (a) one of the first manipulation signal or the second manipulation signal and (b) one of the third manipulation signal or the fourth manipulation signal.
However, Lee teaches wherein the confinement apparatus is configured to cause two quantum objects of the one or more quantum objects to be located at the defined location with a separation distance between the two quantum objects to be one of an integer multiple or a half odd integer of π divided by an amplitude of a wave vector difference between (a) one of the first manipulation signal or the second manipulation signal and (b) one of the third manipulation signal or the fourth manipulation signal (i.e. The phase difference between the force applied to the two ions is determined by the optical phase difference φ1 − φ2, which corresponds to the ion spacing at equilibrium … Therefore the phase of the force on each ion should be calibrated to be the same by setting the ion spacing (using the trap frequency as a tuning parameter) equal to X0,1 − X0,2 = 2nπ/∆k, where n in an integer; pages 12, 15).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Erhard and Kim to include the feature of Lee. One would have been motivated to make this modification because it improves gate stability and ensure the ions experience the desired in-phase or controlled-phase force relationship during the MS entangling operation.
Claim 15 is similar in scope to Claim 6 and is rejected under a similar rationale.
9. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erhard in view of Kim, and further in view of Schafer et al. (Fast quantum logic gates with trapped-ion qubits, Nature, published 2018, pages 75-78).
Claim 8: Erhard and Kim teach the system of claim 1. Erhard does not explicitly teach wherein a magnetic field direction at the defined location is configured to be substantially parallel to one of the first beam path or the second beam path at the defined location.
However, Schafer teaches wherein a magnetic field direction at the defined location is configured to be substantially parallel to one of the first beam path or the second beam path at the defined location (i.e. beam propagates parallel to the quantization axis, set by a magnetic field B ≈ 14.6 mT. The beams are perpendicular, such that their difference k vector is parallel to the z axis of the trap; fig. 1, page 75).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Erhard and Kim to include the feature of Schafer. One would have been motivated to make this modification because it provides an arrangement for defining the qubit quantization axis and controlling Raman coupling conditions in the trapped ion gate system.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Kang et al. (Pub. No. US 20230409950 A1), Raman laser beams from a laser 112, which are provided along the X-axis, perform operations on the ions. A diffractive beam splitter 114 creates an array of Raman laser beams 116 that are individually switched using a multi-channel acousto-optic modulator (AOM) 118. The AOM 118 is configured to selectively act on individual ions by individually controlling emission of the Raman laser beams 116. A global Raman laser beam 120, which is non-copropagating to the Raman laser beams 116, illuminates all ions at once from a different direction.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
It is noted that any citation to specific pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the references should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 U.S.P.Q. 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 U.S.P.Q. 275, 277 (C.C.P.A. 1968)).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAN TRAN whose telephone number is (303)297-4266. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday - 8:00 am - 5:00 pm MT.
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, Matt Ell can be reached on 571-270-3264. 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.
/TAN H TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2141
