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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mahgerefteh et al. (USPGPub 2016/0131837, from hereinafter “Mahgerefteh”) in view of Menard et al. (US Patent No. 10,481,336, from hereinafter “Menard”).
Regarding claims 1, 3, 13, and 15, Mahgerefteh teaches an optical device (and optical transmitter as in claim 13 and receiver as recited in claim 15) comprising a substrate (Si substrate 3102); a first assembly layer (3106) that is provided on the substrate on a side away from the substrate; a second assembly layer (3112) that is provided on the substrate on a side closer to the substrate; and a third assembly layer (3116) that is provided between the first assembly layer and the second assembly layer, wherein the optical device further includes a first waveguide (3108) that is arranged in the first assembly layer, a second waveguide (3114) that is arranged in the second assembly layer, a third waveguide (3118) that is arranged in the third assembly layer, wherein the third waveguide is arranged at a position in which at least the first waveguide and a part of the second waveguide are overlapped in a surface direction of the substrate, and has a structure in which a waveguide width of the third waveguide is set to be narrower (see tapered waveguides, Figure 31A) than a waveguide width of each of the first waveguide and the second waveguide (see Figure 31A, paragraphs 212-214). Further regarding claim 13, Mahgerefteh teaches a light source (laser-see paragraph 80) and an optical modulator that performs optical modulation on light received from the light source (see paragraphs 59 and 74). Further regarding claim 15, Mahgerefteh teaches an optical receiver, e.g. a photodiode (see paragraph 80).
Regarding claims 1, 3, 13, and 15, Mahgerefteh fails to specifically teach a fourth waveguide that is arranged between the second assembly layer and the substrate.
Menard teaches a device that recites that a non-suspended optical waveguide section comprises a fourth 3D optical waveguide upon the carrier layer; wherein the first 3D optical waveguide and the fourth 3D optical waveguide each comprises a core formed from a first predetermined material, an upper cladding formed from a second predetermined material and a lower cladding formed from a third predetermined material (see Figures 1 and 13A, column 30, lines 1-18).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a fourth waveguide to manage efficiency and reducing power required which leads to lower distortion.
Regarding claims 2, 14, and 16, Mahgerefteh in view of Menard fails to teach that the fourth waveguide includes a fifth tapered waveguide that is arranged at a position in which at least a part of the fifth tapered waveguide is overlapped with the fourth tapered waveguide in the surface direction of the substrate, and in which a waveguide width is gradually wider as the fifth tapered waveguide is away from the start point of the fourth tapered waveguide, and another waveguide that is connected to a wider side of the waveguide width of the fifth tapered waveguide.
Although the combination fails to specifically teach the particulars of a fifth waveguide, Menard does teach additionally, other waveguide structures may be employed including vertical and/or lateral waveguide tapers and forming microball lenses on the ends of the waveguides via laser and/or arc melting of the waveguide tip (see paragraph 88).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have an additional waveguide to manage efficiency and reducing power required which leads to lower distortion.
Regarding claim 12, Mahgerefteh teaches that each of the first waveguide, the second waveguide, and the third waveguide is a waveguide that includes at least Silicon Nitride (SiN), and the fourth waveguide is a waveguide that includes at least Silicon (Si) (see paragraphs 57-59).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-11 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.
Regarding claims 4-11, Mahgerefteh in view of Menard does not teach the particulars of the further iterations of additional waveguides and the patterns of placement, up to a seventh waveguide. For example, claim 7 recites “a seventh tapered waveguide in which a waveguide width is gradually narrower as the seventh tapered waveguide is away from a portion that is connected to the sixth tapered waveguide when a portion that is connected to a wider side of the waveguide width of the sixth tapered waveguide is regarded as the start point of the seventh tapered waveguide” which has not been found to be taught by the prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: U.S. Patent No. 9,164,026 to Chakravarty et al. and USPGPUB 20240134116 to Sugiyama.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LISA M CAPUTO whose telephone number is (571)272-2388. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5 EST.
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.
/LISA M CAPUTO/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874