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 .
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 5 (and all claims dependent therefrom; 6-16) rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “near” in claim 5 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “near” 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.
For purposes of examination, “near” has been interpreted as “adjacent”.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 5-9, 11, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1/2 as being anticipated by Hara (US 219/0212508).
With respect to claim 5, Hara discloses a laser chip encapsulation structure (fig.1), comprising: a first substrate (fig.3 #30); a first metal electrode layer located on the first substrate (fig.3 #34, [0030]); an electro-absorption modulated distributed feedback laser chip (fig.3/5 #31, [0032]) located on the first metal electrode layer (fig.3 atop #34, [0030]), the electro-absorption modulated distributed feedback laser chip comprising: a substrate (fig.3 #31a/b) having an upper surface (top) and a lower surface (bottom) opposite to each other, a laser-emitting portion located on the upper surface of the substrate (fig.3/5, function of laser) and configured to emit a laser, a modulating portion located on the upper surface of the substrate and configured to modulate the laser emitted by the laser-emitting portion (fig.3/5 function of modulator integrated with laser), a ground electrode located on the upper surface of the substrate (fig.5 #43/44, connected to ground lines #32d), disposed near the modulating portion (fig.5 adjacent thereto), and electrically connected to the first metal electrode layer (#43/44 electrically connected to LD device which has bottom cathode connected to #34, [0030]), and a signal electrode located on the upper surface of the substrate (fig.5 #41, connected to signal line #32c), disposed near the ground electrode and the modulating portion (fig.5 adjacent thereto), and electrically connected to the modulating portion (fig.5 directly connected thereto); a second substrate structure (fig.3 #32a/b) located on the first metal electrode layer (fig.3 attached to #34, [0046]) and disposed adjacent to the electro-absorption modulated distributed feedback laser chip (fig.3); and a plurality of transmission lines disposed on the second substrate structure (fig.5 #32c/32ds) and connected to the ground electrode and the signal electrode respectively (fig.3 via lateral connection).
With respect to claim 6, Hara discloses the second substrate structure comprises a second substrate (fig.3 #32a/b) and a second metal electrode layer ([0046]), the second substrate is located on the first metal electrode layer ([0046]), and the second metal electrode layer is located between the first metal electrode layer and the second substrate ([0046]).
With respect to claim 7, Hara discloses a thickness of the second substrate is consistent with a thickness of the electro-absorption modulated distributed feedback laser chip (fig.7 heights of #31a/b consistent with #32a/b).
With respect to claim 8, Hara discloses the electro-absorption modulated distributed feedback laser chip and the second substrate structure both have longitudinal structures and are arranged side by side (fig.2/3).
With respect to claim 9, Hara discloses the plurality of transmission lines comprises a signal line (fig.5 #32c), a first ground line (fig.5 #32d on left), and a second ground line (fig.5 #32d on right), the signal line is located between the first ground line and the second ground line (fig.5), the signal line is connected to the signal electrode (fig.5 #32c connected to #41), and the first ground line and the second ground line are both connected to the ground electrode (fig.5 #32d’s connected to #43/44).
With respect to claim 11, Hara discloses at least one of a shape of the signal line, a shape of the first ground line, and a shape of the second ground line is formed in an L-shape (fig.3/5 each #32d can be drawn as an L wherein the short ends of each L meet).
With respect to claim 13, Hara discloses the signal line is disposed on an upper surface of the second substrate (fig.3/5 #32c), and the first ground line and the second ground line are located on two sides of the second substrate (fig.3/5 #32d’s) and are both disposed on the second metal electrode layer ([0046] as #32d’s are above the metal layer connecting to #34).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hara in view of Takita et al. (US 2022/0115842).
With respect to claim 1, Hara teaches electro-absorption modulated distributed feedback laser chip (fig.3/5), comprising: a substrate (fig.3/5 #31a/b) having an upper surface (top) and a lower surface (bottom) opposite to each other; a laser-emitting portion (fig.5 lower portion of #33) located on the upper surface of the substrate and configured to emit a laser (function of laser device); a modulating portion (fig.5 upper portion of #33) located on the upper surface of the substrate and configured to modulate the laser emitted by the laser-emitting portion (function of laser integrated modulator, [0032]); a back metal electrode layer located on the lower surface of the substrate ([0030, 45] back metal connected to #34); a ground electrode located on the upper surface of the substrate (fig.5 #44/43), disposed near the modulating portion (adjacent thereto), and electrically connected to the back metal electrode layer (#43/44 electrically connected to LD device which has bottom cathode connected to #34, [0030, 45], connected to back metal layer); a signal electrode located on the upper surface of the substrate (fig.5 #41), disposed near the ground electrode and the modulating portion (adjacent thereto), and electrically connected to the modulating portion (fig.5 as seen at #37a). Hara does not teach a waveguide structure coupled to the laser-emitting portion and the modulating portion. Takita teaches a related laser integrated modulator (fig.1) which includes a waveguide structure (fig.1 #18) coupled to the laser emitting portion (fig.1 #14) and the modulating portion (fig.1 #12). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the instant application to adapt the device of Hara to make use of a waveguide structure coupling the laser and modulator as demonstrated by Takita in order to maximize light transferred from laser to modulator.
With respect to claim 2, Hara teaches there are a plurality of ground electrodes (fig.5 #32d’s), and the signal electrode is disposed between the adjacent ground electrodes (fig.5 #32c between the #32d’s).
Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hara and Takita in view of Hirayama (US 2020/0333639).
With respect to claim 3, Hara, as modified, teaches the device outlined above, including the electro-absorption modulated distributed feedback laser chip further comprises: a terminator (fig.5 #39) formed in an area on the upper surface of the substrate near the modulating portion, and an end of the terminator is configured to connect to the signal electrode ([0037]). Hara does not specify the terminator is a matching resistor. Hirayama teaches a related device (fig.3/5) which makes use of a matching resistor (fig.8 #43) as a terminator ([0075]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the instant application to adapt the device of Hara to make use of a matching resistor as the terminator as demonstrated by Hirayama in order to provide impedance matching in the device (Hirayama, [0075]).
With respect to claim 4, Hara, as modified, teaches the matching resistor and the ground electrode are located at two sides of the waveguide structure (note the modified device of Hara has the waveguide between the laser and modulator, therefore the terminator #39 would be on the left of the waveguide while the ground electrode #43/44 would be on the right as seen in fig.5 of Hara).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hara in view of Itamoto et al. (US 2022/0352690).
With respect to claim 10, Hara teaches the device outlined above, but does not teach the signal line is connected to the signal electrode via a gold wire, and the first ground line and the second ground line are connected to the ground electrode via a gold wire. Itamoto teaches a related laser integrated modulator device (fig.3 #2) which includes a separate substrate with transmission lines (fig.3 upper substrate) and the signal line (fig.3 #11/15) and ground lines (fig.3 #12s/17s) are connected to the laser integrated modulator via gold wires (fig.3 #14/16/20; [0025]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the instant application to adapt the device of Hara to make use of gold wires as connectors as demonstrated by Itamoto in order to make use of simplified connections of lower cost and complexity than the bridge wiring substrate of Hara.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hara in view of Itamoto et al. (WO 2019/195978; hereafter ‘978).
With respect to claim 12, Hara teaches the device outlined above, including the signal line, the first ground line, and the second ground line are all disposed on an upper surface of the second substrate (fig.3/5 #32c, 32d’s), but does not teach the first ground line and the second ground line penetrate the second substrate to connect with the second metal electrode layer. ‘978 teaches a related laser integrated modulator device with transmission lines (fig.4) which includes first and second ground lines penetrating the substrate to connect with a lower electrode (fig.2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the instant application to adapt the device of Hara to have the first ground line and the second ground line penetrate the second substrate to connect with the second metal electrode layer as demonstrated by ‘978 in order to provide uniform grounding performance and improve the circuit stability (‘978; “ The grounding lines 202 and 204 are connected to the ground plane 206 of the lower surface of the substrate 201 through the metallized vias 205, so that the upper surface and the lower surface of the substrate achieve uniform grounding performance, which is beneficial to improve the mechanical stability of the circuit.”).
Claim(s) 15 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hara in view of Kagaya (US 2007/0248363) and Itamoto.
With respect to claim 15, Hara teaches the device outlined above including the electro-absorption modulated distributed feedback laser chip comprises a terminator (fig.5 #39), the terminator having an end connected to the first metal electrode (fig.5 left side of #39 connects to #42 which is connected to ground lines #32d’s and to the LD device cathode which are all connected to #34 via lower metal layer(s); [0030, 45, 46]) and a second end connected to the signal electrode (fig.5 right side of #39 connected to #41). Hara does not specify the terminator is a matching resistor or an end of the matching resistor has a first pad, the other end of the matching resistor has a second pad for forming the connections. Kagaya teaches a related laser integrated modulator device (fig.3) which makes use of a matching resistor (fig.3 #24) as a terminator ([0045]) and which has first and second pads for connections (fig.3 unlabeled white squares to left/right of #24). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the instant application to adapt the device of Hara to make use of a matching resistor as the terminator and first/second pads for connections as demonstrated by Kagaya in order to provide impedance matching in the device (Kagaya, [0078]) and stable connection points.
Hara, as modified, further does not teach the matching resistor connections to make use of gold wires. Itamoto teaches a related laser integrated modulator device (fig.3 #2) which includes a separate substrate with transmission lines (fig.3 upper substrate) and the signal line (fig.3 #11/15) and ground lines (fig.3 #12s/17s) are connected via gold wires (fig.3 #14/16/20; [0025]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the instant application to adapt the device of Hara to make use of gold wires as connectors as demonstrated by Itamoto in order to make use of simplified connections of lower cost and complexity than the bridge wiring substrate of Hara.
With respect to claim 16, Hara teaches the device outlined above including the electro-absorption modulated distributed feedback laser chip comprises a terminator (fig.5 #39), the terminator having first (left) and second (right) connecting ends. Hara does not specify the terminator is a matching resistor or an end of the matching resistor has a first pad, the other end of the matching resistor has a second pad for forming the connections. Kagaya teaches a related laser integrated modulator device (fig.3) which makes use of a matching resistor (fig.3 #24) as a terminator ([0045]) and which has first and second pads for connections (fig.3 unlabeled white squares to left/right of #24). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the instant application to adapt the device of Hara to make use of a matching resistor as the terminator and first/second pads for connections as demonstrated by Kagaya in order to provide impedance matching in the device (Kagaya, [0078]) and stable connection points.
Hara additionally teaches a matching capacitance (fig.4 #35), the matching capacitance is located on an upper surface of the first metal electrode layer (fig.4 #34, [0031]) and disposed adjacent to the electro-absorption modulated distributed feedback laser chip (fig.4), a first end of the matching capacitance is connected to the first pad via a wire (fig.4 #70 connects the capacitor to the LD device which is connected to #39), and a second end of the matching capacitance is connected to the first metal electrode layer ([0031]). Hara does not teach the wire connection to be a gold wire. Itamoto teaches a related laser integrated modulator device (fig.3 #2) which includes a separate substrate with transmission lines (fig.3 upper substrate) and connections using gold wires (fig.3 #14/16/20; [0025]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the instant application to adapt the device of Hara to make use of gold for the wire #70 as demonstrated by Itamoto in order to make use of a material with low resistance.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The particular details of the second substrate device, in combination with the details of the intervening claims, were not found to be obvious in view of the prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Please see the pto892 form for a list of related art.
US 2021/0044078, 2022/0352690, 2020/0333639 and WO 2019/195978 teach devices similar to claims 1/5.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TOD THOMAS VAN ROY whose telephone number is (571)272-8447. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8AM-430PM.
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, MinSun Harvey can be reached at 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 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.
/TOD T VAN ROY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Prosecution Insights