DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 04/03/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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)(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.
4. Claims 7, 8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bian (US 2024/0241314 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Bian discloses (Fig.1) a directional coupler (10) with reduced phase deviation, the directional coupler comprising: a first coupler waveguide (a waveguide core 12, Fig.1); and a second coupler waveguide (14), the directional coupler having a select phase deviation achieved with at least one of a spaced distance (G3, Fig.1 and [0028], “The segments 30 of the waveguide core 12 may be spaced from the segments 34 of the waveguide core 14 by a gap G3 in the coupling region 22”) between the first coupler waveguide (12) and the second coupler waveguide (14) along a parallel configuration (Fig.1 and [0028], “the longitudinal axis 32 may be arranged parallel to the longitudinal axis 36 in the coupling region 22”) of the first coupler waveguide (12) and the second coupler waveguide (14) and a length of the first coupler waveguide and the second coupler waveguide ([0025] “coupling region 22, the segments 30 alternate with the gaps G1 along the longitudinal axis 32”, showing the specific region 22 or the longitudinal axis 32 where the waveguides run parallel along the longitudinal axis 36, defining the interaction length) being selected based on a crossing of a phase deviation verses a length and separation curve graph to achieve the select phase deviation and a set coupling ratio (the system comprises the physical structure of two waveguides forming a directional coupler with a spaced distance between them as shown in Fig.1, it inherently includes this claimed feature. Also, paragraph [0040] discloses the system achieves “the coupling strength” or the coupling ratio), the phase deviation caused by a difference in loss coefficients between a first optical mode in the first coupler waveguide and a second optical mode in the second coupler waveguide (the system comprises the physical structure of two waveguides forming a directional coupler with a spaced distance between them as shown in Fig.1, that inherently includes the claimed feature. Also, see [0040], “The heterogenous lateral claddings of different refractive index may permit the dimension of the gap G3 between the segments 30 of the waveguide core 12 and the segments 34 of the waveguide core 14”, showing that by using the heterogenous lateral claddings of different refractive index, which is physical cause of phase deviation).
Regarding claim 8, Bian as discussed in claim 7, discloses the directional coupler being modeled to determine a phase deviation using at least a set fixed coupling ratio while the at least one of the spaced distance between the first coupler waveguide and the second coupler waveguide and the length of the first coupler waveguide and the second coupler waveguide is varied (no structure is claimed in this claim. Since the system already has the physical structure, it is inherently modeled to determine the phase deviation as claimed). No structure is claimed in the apparatus claim 8, thus the feature in the claim is not to be given patentable weight.
Regarding claim 10, Bian, as discussed in claim 7, discloses the difference in the loss coefficients between the first optical mode and the second optical mode in the directional coupler being set based on the at least one of the spaced distance between the first coupler waveguide and the second coupler waveguide and the length of the first coupler waveguide and the second coupler waveguide (since no structure is claimed in the claim, and the system already includes the relevant physical structures, it inherently includes this claimed features). No structure is claimed in the apparatus claim 10, thus the features are in the claim not to be given patentable weight.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bian in view of Wang et al., (US 2023/0349696 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Bian as discussed in claim 7, do not disclose the select phase deviation being a phase deviation used in one of a gyroscope and an internal reference system application as claimed. Wang et al., disclose a select phase deviation being a phase deviation (“ECI phase angle”, [0054]) used in one of a gyroscope [0011], “fiber-optic gyroscopes”), and an internal reference system application ([0047], “generating the signal SX to indicate the angle and speed of the rotational movement”). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bian by utilizing the teaching of Wang et al., to provide flexible design for the system.
Response to Arguments
6. Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAI THI NGOC TRAN whose telephone number is (571)-272- 3456. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 9:00-5:30pm.
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, GEORGIA EPPS can be reached on (571)-272-2328. 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. Visithttps://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.
/M.T.T./Examiner, Art Unit 2878
/GEORGIA Y EPPS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2878
Prosecution Insights