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 .
Drawings
Eighteen (18) sheets of drawings were filed on 02/08/2024 and have been objected to by the examiner.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “…the second optical waveguide is in an active device layer of the substrate…” of claims 3 and 14 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 3 and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities:
With regards to claims 3 and 14, the claims each recite “…in which the second optical waveguide is in an active device layer of the substrate…” (Lines 1-2 of both claims). However, the only instances in which this limitation is supported by the specification are the two respective instances on pages 14 and 15 which merely constitute recitations of the claim limitations themselves. Furthermore, the content of the drawings and the content of the specification (beyond that referenced above) both actively suggest structure wherein the second optical waveguide is not in any layer of the substrate. Drawings inclusive of element 250 all show element 250 as being within a number of device layers, but not within element 202. Similarly, passages of the specification such as paragraph 30 describe the second optical waveguide as extending from the first waveguide through the BEOL layers, but not the substrate. Claims 3 and 14 are objected to because they contain limitations which appear to clash with the content of the drawings and/or the specification.
Examiner’s note: For the purposes of further examination, the examiner has broadly interpreted the term “active device layer of the substrate” to mean any layer inclusive of an active device.
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.
Claims 1-4, 7-15, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tsai (US 20230417993 A1).
With regards to claims 1 and 12, Tsai discloses a chip and method of fabricating the same, the chip comprising:
a substrate (Fig23/Substrate [as indicated below]) including an active device in the substrate (Fig23/Active device 162);
PNG
media_image1.png
521
707
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a first optical waveguide on the substrate (Fig23/First optical waveguide 110);
a second optical waveguide on the first optical waveguide and extending from the first optical waveguide though back-end-of-line (BEOL) layers of the chip (Figs4-10&23/Second optical waveguide 115 and BEOL layers 117); and
a waveguide photo detector (PD) on the first optical waveguide and communicably coupled to the active device through the BEOL layers of the chip (Fig23/PD 106; Paragraph 14/Lines 5-7).
With regards to claims 2 and 13, Tsai discloses the chip and method of claims 1 and 12, in which the active device is coupled to the waveguide PD through the BEOL layers to integrate an electric signal path of the active device (Fig23/Electrical signal path 154 [Instance immediately adjacent to element 162]) with the first optical waveguide and the second optical waveguide (Fig23 [Elements 104, 115, 117, 126, 154, and 162 are all physically integrated within the same structure]).
With regards to claims 3 and 14, Tsai discloses the chip and method of claims 1 and 12, in which the second optical waveguide is in an active device layer of the substrate (Fig23/Active device layer 126 [Element 122 is an active device]; See the 35 USC 112 section of this office action) and the waveguide PD is directly on the first optical waveguide (Fig23).
With regards to claims 4 and 15, Tsai discloses the chip and method of claims 3 and 14, in which the active device layer comprises a silicon-on-insulator (SOI) layer (Paragraph 17/Lines 6-11) (Fig23; Paragraph 22/“…dielectric layers 117…”; Paragraph 27/Lines 3-5).
With regards to claims 7 and 18, Tsai discloses the chip and method of claims 1 and 12, further comprising a metal communicably coupled between the first optical waveguide and the second optical waveguide (Paragraph 21/Lines 22-25; Figs4&23/Metal 113).
With regards to claims 8 and 19, Tsai discloses the chip and method of claims 1 and 12, further comprising a fiber optic cable coupled to the second optical waveguide (Fig23/Fiber optic cable 170).
With regards to claims 9 and 20, Tsai discloses the chip and method of claims 1 and 12, further comprising a grating coupler between the first optical waveguide and the second optical waveguide (Fig23/Grating coupler 107).
With regards to claim 10, Tsai discloses the chip of claim 1, in which the first optical waveguide and the second optical waveguide are composed of a same material (Paragraph 17/Lines 1-11; Paragraph 31/Lines 3-6).
With regards to claim 11, Tsai discloses the chip of claim 10, in which the same material comprises silicon nitride (Paragraph 17/Lines 1-11; Paragraph 31/Lines 3-6).
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.
Claims 5 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai (US 20230417993 A1) as respectively applied to claims 1 and 12 above, and further in view of Furuyama (US 20190123231 A1).
With regards to claims 5 and 16, Tsai discloses the chip and method of claims 1 and 12, but is silent regarding the waveguide PD comprising a multiple quantum well (MQW). However, the practice of incorporating a MQW into a PD exists in the art as exemplified by Furuyama.
Tsai and Furuyama are considered to be analogous in the field of optoelectronic assemblies. Furuyama teaches a waveguide coupled PD comprising a MQW (Furuyama/Fig2a/ PD 24; Paragraph 68). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a MQW into the PD of Tsai as suggested by Furuyama since doing so would facilitate wavelength selection and access to superior operating speeds.
Claims 6 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai (US 20230417993 A1) as respectively applied to claims 1 and 12 above, and further in view of Hsu (US 20200319405 A1).
With regards to claims 6 and 17, Tsai discloses the chip and method of claims 1 and 12, but is silent regarding an air gap communicably coupled between the first optical waveguide and the second optical waveguide. However, the practice of placing an airgap between two waveguides exists in the art as exemplified by Hsu.
Tsai and Hsu are considered to be analogous in the field of optoelectronic assemblies. Tsai discloses a device and method wherein two waveguides are configured such that they are optically coupled. Hsu teaches an airgap between two optically coupled waveguides (Hsu/Figs1a&2a/Airgap 40). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include an airgap between the first and second optical waveguides of Tsai as suggested by Hsu since doing so would facilitate the reduction of losses in a lateral direction.
Conclusion
This prior art, made of record, but not relied upon, is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure since the following references have similar structure and/or use similar structure and/or similar optical elements to what is disclosed and/or claimed in the instant application:
Ahn (US 20250306268 A1) [Fig3]
Shao (US 20240393549 A1) [Fig2a]
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Marc E Manheim whose telephone number is (703)756-1873. The examiner can normally be reached 6:30am - 5pm E.T., Monday - Tuesday and Thursday - Friday.
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, Thomas A Hollweg can be reached at (571) 270-1739. 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.
/MARC E MANHEIM/Examiner, Art Unit 2874
/THOMAS A HOLLWEG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874