DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 1/4/24 and 3/29/25 were filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dong et al. (US 2022/0155526 A1).
Re. Claim 10, Dong et al. discloses a package assembly, comprising:
a photonic structure 40 disposed on an interposer structure 10 (Figs. 1A-2B; [0026]-[0027]);
an encapsulation layer 17 laterally aside the photonic structure 40 (Fig. 5B; [0038], [0041]-[0042]); and
a laser written waveguide structure 60 embedded in a glass substrate 50 and disposed adjacent to the photonic structure 40, wherein the laser written waveguide structure 60 has a plurality of curved waveguide paths (Figs. 2B and 5B; [0034]-[0035]).
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-9, and 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dong et al. (US 2022/0155526 A1).
Re. Claim 15, Dong et al. discloses the package assembly as discussed above, wherein the glass substrate 50 abuts the sidewall of the photonic structure 40 (Figs. 2B and 5B; [0035], [0037]). However, Dong et al. does not disclose the glass substrate being bonded to a sidewall of the photonic structure.
Bonding adjacent components is well known in the circuit arts, and provides the advantage of maintaining proper alignment between components, and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for this advantage. The claim would have been obvious because a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Re. Claim 16, Dong et al. renders obvious the package assembly as discussed above Dong et al. also discloses an edge coupler disposed inside an optical integrated circuit of the photonic structure 40, and the laser written waveguide structure 60 inside the glass substrate 50 is laterally aligned with the edge coupler (Figs. 2B and 5B; [0035]). The claimed would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the reasons discussed above.
Re. Claim 17, Dong et al. renders obvious the package assembly as discussed above, but fails to disclose bonding a lid to the photonic structure and the glass substrate.
The use of lids to enclose circuit arrangements is well known in the art, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have found the claimed arrangement obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of permanently protecting the circuit from environmental effects and associated damage therefrom. The claim would have been obvious because a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Re. Claim 1, Dong et al. discloses a method of forming a package assembly, comprising:
bonding at least one integrated circuit structure 30 to an interposer structure 10 (Figs. 1A-2B; [0026]);
bonding a photonic structure 40 to the interposer structure 10 aside the at least one integrated circuit structure 30 (Figs. 1A-2B; [0026]-[0027]);
assembling a glass substrate 50 to a fiber array unit 70 (Fig. 2B; [0031], [0033]);
bonding the glass substrate 50 to the photonic structure 40 (Fig. 2B; [0032]); and
performing a laser writing process to the glass substrate 50, so as to form a laser written waveguide structure 60 inside the glass substrate, wherein the laser written waveguide structure 60 is optically coupled to the fiber array unit 70 and the photonic structure 40 (Fig. 2B; [0034]-[0035]).
In Dong et al., the fiber array unit 70 is coupled to the glass substrate 50 after the glass substrate 50 is bonded to the photonic structure 40 (Fig. 2B). That is, Dong et al. does not disclose an arrangement wherein the combination of the glass substrate and the fiber array unit are subsequently bonded to the photonic structure. However, one of ordinary skill would have found the claimed arrangement obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as the claimed order of steps (i.e., bonding the glass substrate with the fiber array unit to the photonic structure, as opposed to bonding the glass substrate without the fiber array block to the photonic structure and then coupling the fiber array unit to the glass substrate) does not provide new or unexpected results. See Ex parte Rubin, 128 USPQ 440 (Bd. App. 1959) (Prior art reference disclosing a process of making a laminated sheet wherein a base sheet is first coated with a metallic film and thereafter impregnated with a thermosetting material was held to render prima facie obvious claims directed to a process of making a laminated sheet by reversing the order of the prior art process steps.). See also In re Burhans, 154 F.2d 690, 69 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1946) (selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results).
Re. Claim 3, Dong et al. renders obvious the method as discussed above. Dong et al. also discloses the laser written waveguide structure 50 has a plurality of curved waveguide paths 60 (Figs. 2B, 3A, and 5B; [0030]-[0031]). The claimed arrangement would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill for the reasons discussed above.
Re. Claims 4-5, Dong et al. renders obvious the method as discussed above. Dong et al. discloses bonding the glass substrate 50 to the photonic structure 40 is performed after performing the laser writing process ([0034]), and does not disclose an arrangement wherein bonding the glass substrate to the photonic structure is performed before performing the laser writing process.
Nonetheless, one of ordinary skill would have found the claimed arrangement obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as the claimed order of steps (i.e., bonding the glass substrate to the photonic structure before the laser writing process, as opposed to bonding the glass substrate to the photonic structure after the laser writing process) does not provide new or unexpected results. See Ex parte Rubin, 128 USPQ 440 (Bd. App. 1959) (Prior art reference disclosing a process of making a laminated sheet wherein a base sheet is first coated with a metallic film and thereafter impregnated with a thermosetting material was held to render prima facie obvious claims directed to a process of making a laminated sheet by reversing the order of the prior art process steps.). See also In re Burhans, 154 F.2d 690, 69 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1946) (selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results).
Re. Claim 6, Dong et al. renders obvious the method as discussed above. Dong et al. also discloses adjusting a location (e.g., conducting passive alignment) of the glass substrate 50 before bonding the glass substrate 50 to the photonic structure and after performing the laser writing process ([0033]). The claimed arrangement would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill for the reasons discussed above.
Re. Claim 7, Dong et al. renders obvious the method as discussed above. Dong et al. also discloses forming an evanescent coupler between the photonic structure 40 and the glass substrate 50 (Figs. 2B and 5B; [0035]). The claimed arrangement would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill for the reasons discussed above.
Re. Claim 8, Dong et al. renders obvious the method as discussed above. Dong et al. also discloses forming an edge coupler inside an optical integrated circuit 46, and the laser written waveguide structure 60 inside the glass substrate 50 is laterally aligned with the edge coupler (Figs. 2B and 5B; [0035]). The claimed arrangement would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill for the reasons discussed above.
Re. Claim 9, Dong et al. renders obvious the package assembly as discussed above, but fails to disclose bonding a lid to the photonic structure and the glass substrate.
The use of lids to enclose circuit arrangements is well known in the art, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have found the claimed arrangement obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of permanently protecting the circuit from environmental effects and associated damage therefrom. The claim would have been obvious because a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Claim(s) 2 and 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dong et al. (US 2022/0155526 A1) and Patel et al (US 2020/0049890 A1).
Re. Claim 11, Dong et al. discloses the package assembly as discussed above. However, Dong et al. does not disclose a plurality of laser lenses embedded in the glass substrate and in contact with the laser written waveguide structure.
Patel et al. discloses package assembly 100 comprising a photonic structure 120, a glass substrate 110, and a fiber array block 210, the glass substrate 110 comprising a plurality of waveguides 115 and a plurality of laser lenses embedded in the glass substrate 110 and in contact with the plurality of waveguides 115 (Figs. 2A-2B; [0023], [0028]-[0029]).
The claimed arrangement would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of aiding in coupling light to the fiber array block (Patel et al.: [0029]).
Re. Claims 12-13, Dong et al. and Patel et al. renders obvious the package assembly as discussed above. In addition, Patel et al. discloses the glass substrate 110 with the plurality of waveguides 115 is bonded to a top surface of the photonic structure 120, and an evanescent coupler disposed between the photonic structure 120 and the glass substrate 110 (Figs. 3A-3D; [0033]). The claimed arrangement would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the reasons discussed above.
Re. Claim 14, Dong et al. and Patel et al. render obvious the package assembly as discussed above. However, both Dong et al. and Patel et al. fails to disclose an arrangement further comprising: a first reflector disposed adjacent an optical integrated circuit in the photonic structure; and a second reflector disposed between the photonic structure and the glass substrate and adjacent to the evanescent coupler, wherein the second reflector and the first reflector are configured to reflect and redirect a light beam received from the evanescent coupler to the optical integrated circuit.
The use of a pair of reflectors as claimed is well known in the art, and commonly utilized to redirect light to a buried photonic element. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found the claimed arrangement obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of utilizing a buried or encapsulated photonic element within the assembly. “A person of ordinary skill is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automaton” – ‘[w]hen there is a design need or market pressure to solve a problem and there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense.” KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Re. Claim 2, Dong et al, renders obvious the method as discussed above. In addition, Dong et al. does not disclose the laser writing process further forms at least one laser lens between the fiber array unit and the laser written waveguide structure.
Patel et al. discloses package assembly 100 comprising a photonic structure 120, a glass substrate 110, and a fiber array block 210, the glass substrate 110 comprising a plurality of waveguides 115 and a plurality of laser lenses embedded in the glass substrate 110 and in contact with the plurality of waveguides 115 (Figs. 2A-2B; [0023], [0028]-[0029]). Patel et al. discloses the lenses are formed with the waveguides([0084]).
The claimed arrangement would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of aiding in coupling light to the fiber array block (Patel et al.: [0029]).
Claim(s) 18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dong et al. (US 2022/0155526 A1) and Marrapode et al. (US 2022/0029712 A1).
Re. Claim 18, Dong et al. discloses a package assembly, comprising:
a photonic structure 40 disposed on an interposer structure 10 (Figs. 1A-2B; [0026]-[0027]);
a laser written waveguide structure 60 embedded in a glass substrate 50 and disposed adjacent to the photonic structure 40, wherein the laser written waveguide structure 60 has a plurality of waveguide paths (Figs. 2B-3A; [0032]); and
a fiber array unit 70 disposed laterally adjacent to the laser written waveguide structure 60, wherein the fiber array unit 70 comprises a plurality of optical fibers corresponding to the plurality of the waveguide paths (Fig. 2B; [0033]),
wherein from a cross-sectional view (e.g., Fig. 2B), the plurality of waveguide paths have overlapping profiles.
However, Dong et al. does not disclose an arrangement wherein from a cross-sectional view, the plurality of waveguide paths have different profiles.
Marrapode et al. discloses a photonic structure 120, glass substrate 110 with a plurality of waveguide paths 172 and 174, and fiber array unit 130 disposed laterally adjacent to the glass substrate 110, wherein the fiber array unit 130 comprises a plurality of optical fibers 160 corresponding to the plurality of the waveguide paths 172 and 174, and wherein from a cross-sectional view (e.g., Fig. 1B), the plurality of waveguide paths 172 and 174 have different profiles (Figs. 1A-1B; [0019]).
The claimed arrangement would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as Marrapode et al. discloses the differing waveguide profiles allows for the conversion of a 1D array from the photonic structure to a 2D array such that the plurality of optical fibers may comprise an array in two directions, thereby increasing density of the device (Marrapode et al., [0023]).
Re. Claim 20, Doug et al. and Marrapode et al. render obvious the package assembly as discussed above. Also, Dong et al. discloses a support structure 19 disposed on the interposer 10 aside the photonic structure 40 and configured to support the glass substrate 50 (Fig. 5B; [0041]). The claimed arrangement would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed arrangement for the reasons discussed above.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dong et al. (US 2022/0155526 A1) and Marrapode et al. (US 2022/0029712 A1), in further view of Patel et al. (US 2020/0049890 A1).
Re. Claim 19, Dong et al. and Marrapode et al. render obvious the package assembly as discussed above. However, Dong et al. and Marrapode et al. do not disclose a plurality of laser lenses embedded in the glass substrate, wherein the laser lenses are disposed between and in contact with the waveguide paths and the optical fibers, respectively.
Patel et al. discloses package assembly 100 comprising a photonic structure 120, a glass substrate 110, and a fiber array block 210, the glass substrate 110 comprising a plurality of waveguides 115 and a plurality of laser lenses embedded in the glass substrate 110 and in contact with the plurality of waveguides 115 (Figs. 2A-2B; [0023], [0028]-[0029]).
The claimed arrangement would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of aiding in coupling light to the fiber array block (Patel et al.: [0029]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See the attached PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to R. PEACE whose telephone number is (571)272-8580. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5 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, Uyen-Chau Le can be reached at (571) 272-2397. 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.
/RHONDA S PEACE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874 1/14/26