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 § 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)(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) 1-7, 9-11, 13-15, and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Nakonov et al, US Pub. 2003/0112498.
Regarding claims 1, 9, and 17, Nakonov et al disclose an optical amplifier with multiple wavelength pumps comprising: a substrate 105; a cladding formed on the substrate (par. 0018, 0031); a gain medium formed inside the cladding (the core optical fiber serves as the gain, par. 0032); a pump light source 142 configured to provide a pump light through a plurality of optical paths (Fig. 4-5); wherein a first portion of the gain medium receives a first portion of the pump light through a first optical path, and a second portion of the gain medium receives a second portion of the pump light through a second optical path, the second optical path separate from the first optical path (Figs. 3-5; par. 0017-0033).
Regarding claims 2, 15, and 18, further comprising: an input portion of the cladding, the input portion configured to receive an input signal 118; and an output portion of the cladding, the output portion configured to output an amplified signal 160 in response to receipt of the input signal and the pump light (Fig. 5).
Regarding claims 3, 11, and 20, wherein the pump light source is a vertical cavity surface emitting laser (VCSEL) (par. 0023).
Regarding claims 4 and 10, wherein the pump light sources are integrated on a chip (a laser diode which is semiconductor chip, claim 3).
Regarding claim 5, further comprising: a first aperture formed on the chip, the first aperture defining the first optical path; and a second aperture formed on the chip, the second aperture defining the second optical path (Fig. 5, pump light 140, 142).
Regarding claims 6 and 19, further comprising: a grating coupler optically coupled to the pump light source, the grating coupler comprising: a first grating portion to direct the first portion of the pump light to the first portion of the gain medium through the first optical path; and a second grating portion to direct the second portion of the pump light to the second portion of the gain medium through the second optical path (the multiplexers 122, 124, serve as grating couplers, Fig. 5; par. 0032).
Regarding claims 7 and 13, a waveguide structure to accommodate the cladding serving as a waveguide cladding and the gain medium serving as a waveguide core; and a plurality of grating portions formed on the grating coupler, the plurality of grating portions including the first grating portion and the second grating portion, wherein the plurality of grating portions are arranged such that each of the plurality of grating portions is to direct a corresponding portion of the pump light to one or more corresponding portions of the gain medium (the multiplexers 122, 124, serve as grating couplers, Fig. 5; par. 0032).
Regarding claim 14, wherein a first power level of the first pump light source is different from a second power level of the second pump light source (par. 0021).
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) 8, 12, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakonov et al. The teachings of Nakonov et al have been discussed above.
Regarding claim 8, Nakonov et al fails to disclose wherein the gain medium is arranged in a spiral shape. However, spiral geometries of gain medium are commonly used to increase optical path length without making the chip larger, to create time delay, and for compact integration so long waveguides fit on a small chip. There, it would have been an obvious extension as taught by the prior art.
Regarding claim 12, Nakonov et al fails to disclose having a reflective layer disposed above or below the gain medium. However, it is common in the art to includes reflective layer above and/or below of the gain medium to provide optical feedback and to help confined the lights. Therefore, it would have been an obvious extension as taught by the prior art.
Regarding claim 16, Nakonov et al fail to disclose a tunable filter. However, tunable filters are commonly used for selecting the desired wavelength, for tuning the laser to a specific wavelength. Therefore, it would have been an obvious extension as taught by the prior art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 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.
Remarks:
In response tot the applicant’s argument that the prior art (Di) fails to disclose amplifying light wherein a first portion of the gain medium vertically receives a first portion of the pump light and a second portion of the gain medium vertically receives a second portion of the pump light through a first and second optical path, the examiner respectfully disagrees. The new prior art (Nakonov et al) discloses a Vertical Cavity Surface Emitting laser (VCSEL) where amplifying is done by vertically receiving the pump lights trough the optical paths. The applicant’s argument is not persuasive. Refer to the rejection above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL ST CYR whose telephone number is (571)272-2407. The examiner can normally be reached M to F 8:00-8:00.
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, Michael G Lee can be reached at 571-272-2398. 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.
DANIEL ST CYR
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2876
/DANIEL ST CYR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Prosecution Insights