DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1 through 14 originally filed 15 August 2023. By response to restriction requirement received 28 April 2026; Invention II is elected for examination and claims 12 through 14 are withdrawn from consideration. Claims 1 through 11 are addressed by this 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 listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, applications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a), subsection I. states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4).
The description uses the reference characters "42" to refer to more than one part each. The same reference character must never be used to designate different parts.
In the present case, reference character "42" is incorrectly used in ¶67.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5).
The drawings include the reference characters "5" and "0" which do not appear in the description. Reference characters not mentioned in the description must not appear in the drawings.
In the present case, Figure 20 stacks the characters "5" and "0" where it is presumed that the reference character "50" is intended.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(u)(1).
Each of figures 11, 12, 15, 17, and 19 include multiple views that are not separately labeled. Each view must be individually labeled.
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 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.
Claims 1, 4 through 9, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyata et al. (Miyata, US Pub. 2021/0091532), in view of Matsumoto et al. (Matsumoto, WO Pub. 20/22092100 A1), and further in view of Ishige et al. (Ishige, US Pub. 2018/0231724).
Regarding claim 1, Miyata discloses, "A cap having a cavity for accommodating a light-emitting element" (p. [0042] and Fig. 5A, pts. 10, 40, and 40V). "Providing a first plate for a front wall defining a front surface of the cavity" (p. [0066] and Fig. 5A, pt. 40A). "The front wall being made of a material that transmits light emitted from the light-emitting element" (p. [0062] and Fig. 5A, pt. 40A). "Providing a second plate for a rear wall defining a rear surface of the cavity" (p. [0066] and Fig. 5A, pt. 40C). "The rear wall being located opposite to the front wall" (p. [0066] and Fig. 5A, pts. 40A and 40C). "Providing a third plate for a main body defining an upper surface and a lateral surface of the cavity" (p. [0066] and Figs. 5A and 5B, pts. 40B, 40S, and 40T). "[The third plate] joined with the front wall and the rear wall" (p. [0066] and Fig. 5A, pts. 40A, 40B, 40C, and 40M). "The third plate having a plurality of through holes two dimensionally arranged along a first direction and a second direction" (p. [0068] and Fig. 7, pts. 42 and 42H). "The first direction extending in a plane orthogonal to a thickness direction" (p. [0068] and Fig. 7, pts. 42 and 42H). "The second direction extending in the plane and orthogonal to the first direction" (p. [0068] and Fig. 7, pts. 42 and 42H). "Each [sheet] having a plurality of openings has a plurality of openings" (p. [0068] and Fig. 7, pts. 42 and 42H). "Forming a metal layer on an upper surface of each of the plurality of sheets" (p. [0072] and Fig. 11, pts. 42 and 49M). "Producing a layered body comprising the third plate sandwiched by the first plate and the second plate by bonding the first plate and the third plate to each other and bonding the second plate and the third plate to each other" (p. [0066], and Fig. 5A, pts. 40A, 40B, and 40C). "Singulating the layered body to obtain a plurality of caps by cutting the layered body along the first direction and the second direction" (p. [0077], [0078], and Figs. 14 and 15). Miyata does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the step of providing the third plate comprises providing a plurality of sheets layered in the thickness direction." "Producing the third plate by bonding the plurality of sheets to each other via the metal layer." "The plurality of openings define the plurality of through holes of the third plate by the plurality of sheets being layered." Matsumoto discloses, "Wherein the step of providing the third plate comprises providing a plurality of sheets layered in the thickness direction" (p. [0049] and Fig. 1, pts. 12, 12A, 12B, 12C, and 12D). "Producing the third plate by bonding the plurality of sheets to each other via the metal layer" (p. [0049] and Fig. 1, pts. 12, 12A, 12B, 12C, and 12D, where the plates of Miyata may be joined by the joining process set forth in p. [0072] of Miyata). "The plurality of openings define the plurality of through holes of the third plate by the plurality of sheets being layered" (p. [0079] and Figs. 6C and 6D, pts. 60, 62, 601, 602, and 603). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Miyata with the teachings of Matsumoto. In view of the teachings of Miyata regarding a laser package formed of multiple glass plates, the alternate construction of the central plate as multiple layers as taught by Matsumoto would enhance the teachings of Miyata by allowing for easier construction of a long package enclosure.
The combination of Miyata and Matsumoto does not explicitly disclose, "[Forming the metal layer on] an inner wall of each of the plurality of openings of the corresponding one of the plurality of sheets." Ishige discloses, "[Forming the metal layer on] an inner wall of each of the plurality of openings of the corresponding one of the plurality of sheets" (p. [0047], [0048], and Fig. 1, pts. 103 and 151, where this metal layer is produced by extending the metal layer of Miyata into the openings of the sheets when the cap is made in the manner of Miyata). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of Miyata and Matsumoto with the teachings of Ishige. In view of the teachings of Miyata regarding a laser package formed of multiple glass plates, the additional extension of a metal layer along the top of the laser package as taught by Ishige would enhance the teachings of Miyata and Matsumoto by allowing for a reduction in thermal effects that result from stray light within the enclosure.
Regarding claim 4, Miyata discloses, "Wherein in the step of singulating, a first cutting groove is formed crossing through holes of the plurality of through holes arranged along the first direction when the layered body is cut along the first direction" (p. [0077] and Fig. 14, pt. C1). "A second cutting groove is formed at a position away from through holes of the plurality of through holes arranged along the second direction when the layered body is cut along the second direction" (p. [0078] and Fig. 15, pt. C3).
Regarding claim 5, Miyata discloses, "The inner wall extending in the first direction and the thickness direction" (p. [0068] and Fig. 7, pts. 42 and 42H).
The combination of Miyata, Matsumoto, and Ishige does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein in the step of singulating, a position of the first cutting groove is closer to an inner wall of a through hole of the through holes arranged along the first direction than a center of the through hole." It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust the positioning of the cut that passes through the cavity so as to regulate the desired depth of the cavity, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 6, Miyata discloses, "Wherein the first plate and the second plate are each made of glass" (p. [0066] and Fig. 5A, pts. 40A and 40C). "In the step of producing the layered body, the first plate and the third plate are bonded by anodic bonding" (p. [0066], and Fig. 5A, pts. 40A and 40B). "The second plate and the third plate are bonded by anodic bonding" (p. [0066], and Fig. 5A, pts. 40B and 40C).
Regarding claim 7, Miyata does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein in the step of producing the layered body, the plurality of sheets of the third plate are bonded to each other by anodic bonding." Matsumoto discloses, "Wherein in the step of producing the layered body, the plurality of sheets of the third plate are bonded to each other by anodic bonding" (p. [0049] and Fig. 1, pts. 12, 12A, 12B, 12C, and 12D, where the plates of Miyata may be joined by the joining process set forth in p. [0072] of Miyata). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Miyata with the teachings of Matsumoto for the reasons provided above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 8, Miyata discloses, "Wherein in the step of producing the layered body, the first plate, the second plate, and the third plate are collectively bonded by anodic bonding" (p. [0066], and Fig. 5A, pts. 40A, 40B, and 40C).
Regarding claim 9, Miyata discloses, "Wherein the step of providing the first plate comprises forming a plurality of antireflection films on a surface of the first plate at a position facing the plurality of the through holes of the third plate" (p. [0073] and Fig. 13B, pts. 42H and 55).
Regarding claim 11, Miyata discloses, "Providing a light-emitting element" (p. [0041] and Fig. 5A, pt. 10). "A substrate directly or indirectly supporting the light-emitting element" (p. [0041] and Fig. 5A, pts. 10 and 30). "Bonding the cap to the substrate such that the cap covers the light-emitting element" (p. [0042] and Fig. 5B, pts. 30, 32, and 40).
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyata, in view of Matsumoto, in view of Ishige, and further in view of Aruga et al. (Aruga, US Pub. 2020/0408384).
Regarding claim 2, The combination of Miyata, Matsumoto, and Ishige does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein the inner wall of each of the plurality of openings in the corresponding one of the plurality of sheets has a tapered shape." Aruga discloses, "Wherein the inner wall of each of the plurality of openings in the corresponding one of the plurality of sheets has a tapered shape" (p. [0053] and Fig. 5, pts. 14, 16, 31a-31f, and 32a-32f, where the inner sidewalls of the cap according to Miyata and Matsumoto are modified include the modified surface of Aruga so as to extract stray light from the enclosure). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of Miyata, Matsumoto, and Ishige with the teachings of Aruga. In view of the teachings of Miyata regarding a laser package formed of multiple glass plates as well as the teachings of Ishige regarding the extension of a metal layer along the interior surface of the enclosure, the additional inclusion of a corrugated interior surface with reflecting and transmissive surfaces as taught by Aruga would enhance the teachings of Miyata, Matsumoto, and Ishige by allowing stray light to be extracted from the package enclosure.
Regarding claim 3, The combination of Miyata, Matsumoto, and Ishige does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein a first metal layer formed on the inner wall of each of the plurality of openings in a corresponding first sheet of the plurality of sheets is spaced apart from a second metal layer in a second sheet of the plurality of sheets." Aruga discloses, "Wherein a first metal layer formed on the inner wall of each of the plurality of openings in a corresponding first sheet of the plurality of sheets is spaced apart from a second metal layer in a second sheet of the plurality of sheets" (p. [0054] and Fig. 5, pts. 31a-31f and 32a-32f, where forming the metal layer of Ishige provides a reflective function and is formed along the reflective surfaces of Aruga to perform the functions required by both Ishige and Aruga). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of Miyata, Matsumoto, and Ishige with the teachings of Aruga for the reasons provided above regarding claim 2.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyata, in view of Matsumoto, in view of Ishige, and further in view of Reinert et al. (Reinert, US Pub. 2016/0285232).
Regarding claim 10, The combination of Miyata, Matsumoto, and Ishige does not explicitly disclose, "Wherein in the step of singulating, the plurality of antireflection films are not cut when the layered body is cut along the first direction and when the layered body is cut along the second direction." Reinert discloses, "Wherein in the step of singulating, the plurality of antireflection films are not cut when the layered body is cut along the first direction and when the layered body is cut along the second direction" (p. [0207] and Fig. 15C, pt. ARC, where forming the antireflection coating after the cap is formed requires the antireflection coating to be formed after the cuts when the cap is formed in the manner of Miyata and, thereby, prevents the cuts from cutting the antireflection coating). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of the combination of Miyata, Matsumoto, and Ishige with the teachings of Reinert. In view of the teachings of Miyata regarding a laser package formed of multiple glass plates and including an antireflection coating, the alternate construction of the antireflection coating after the cap is constructed as taught by Reinert would enhance the teachings of Miyata, Matsumoto, and Ishige by allowing the antireflection coating to be delayed in the construction sequence and thereby avoid risk of damaging the antireflection coating.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Taniguchi et al. (Taniguchi, US Pub. 2018/0261714) is cited for teaching a laser package that includes a corrugated surface for reducing stray light within the package.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sean P Hagan whose telephone number is (571)270-1242. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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.
/SEAN P HAGAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Prosecution Insights