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 .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention/Group I, corresponding claims 1 – 6, 9 – 13 and 16 – 18 in the reply filed on July 20, 2026 is acknowledged.
Drawings
The drawing submitted on November 03, 2023, has been considered and accepted by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1, 4 – 6, 9, 12 – 13 and 16 – 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Michael D. Fraser (“Coherent exciton-polariton devices) in view of Malpuech et al. (US 8,498,318).
PNG
media_image1.png
806
1606
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Fraser disclose a microcavity comprising:
a top layer (see Figure 2a, character “top DBR”, on page 4, section 3.1 III-IV and II-VI material and structure, right column first full paragraph) having a tuned photon energy (see on page 8, section 4.10 Proton implantation-induced interdiffusion, first full paragraph. When the current or ion implantation enters through the top DBR or top layer, that produce a wavelength tuning and tuned photon energy);
a bottom layer (see Figure 2a, character “bottom DBR”, on page 4, section 3.1 III-IV and II-VI material and structure, right column first full paragraph); and
a quantum well layer (see Figure 2a, character “quantum well”, on page 4, section 3.1 III-IV and II-VI material and structure, right column first full paragraph) in between the top layer (see Figure 2a, character “top DBR”) and the bottom layer (see Figure 2a, character “top DBR”).
Fraser discloses the claimed invention except for a quantum well layer having a tuned exciton energy independent of the tuned photon energy. Malpuech teaches a quantum well layer having a tuned exciton energy independent of the tuned photon energy. However, it is well known in the art to apply and/or modify the quantum well layer having a tuned exciton energy independent of the tuned photon energy as discloses by Malpuech in (see column 2, lines 22 – 28). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was to apply and/or modify the quantum well layer having a tuned exciton energy independent of the tuned photon energy as suggested to the device of Fraser, the choice of geometry and material constituting the quantum wells allows for the definition of energy levels for electrons, excitons, holes, and other particles. These particles can move between energy levels and, consequently, emit and absorb photons with specific energies. Therefore, the exciton energy of the quantum well could be tuned by varying the geometry or the material of said quantum well.
Regarding claim 4, Fraser and Malpuech, Fraser disclose the microcavity is configured to have a resonant frequency based on at least one of the tuned photon energy or the tuned exciton energy (see Figures 2a-2c and 4, and on pages 4 – 5, section 3.1 III-IV and II-VI material and structure, right column first full paragraph).
Regarding claim 5, Fraser and Malpuech, Fraser disclose the microcavity is configured to generate a coherent radiation at a resonant frequency based on at least one of the tuned photon energy or the tuned exciton energy (see Figures 2a-2c and 4, Abstract, on pages 4 – 5, section 3.1 III-IV and II-VI material and structure, right column first full paragraph, page 12, section 5.2 Unconventional and Low-threshold lasing first and third full paragraphs).
Regarding claim 6, Fraser and Malpuech, Fraser disclose the coherent radiation at the resonant frequency is based on optical lasing radiation (see Figures 2a-2c and 4, Abstract, on pages 4 – 5, section 3.1 III-IV and II-VI material and structure, right column first full paragraph, page 12 section 5.2 Unconventional and Low-threshold lasing first and third full paragraphs).
Regarding claim 9, Fraser disclose an optical chip comprising:
microcavity (see Figures 2a and 4) comprising:
a top layer (see Figure 2a, character “top DBR”, on page 4, section 3.1 III-IV and II-VI material and structure page 4, right column first full paragraph) having a tuned photon energy (see on page 8, section 4.10 Proton implantation-induced interdiffusion, first full paragraph. When the current or ion implantation enters through the top DBR or top layer, that produce a wavelength tuning and tuned photon energy);
a bottom layer (see Figure 2a, character “bottom DBR”, on page 4, section 3.1 III-IV and II-VI material and structure, right column first full paragraph); and
a quantum well layer (see Figure 2a, character “quantum well”, on page 4, section 3.1 III-IV and II-VI material and structure, right column first full paragraph) in between the top layer (see Figure 2a, character “top DBR”) and the bottom layer (see Figure 2a, character “top DBR”).
wherein the corresponding resonant frequency is based on at least one of the tuned photon energy or the tuned exciton energy (see Figures 2a-2c and 4 and on pages 4 – 5, section 3.1 III-IV and II-VI material and structure, right column first full paragraph).
Fraser discloses the claimed invention except for a plurality of microcavities, each microcavity configured for a corresponding resonant frequency. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was to apply and/or modify the plurality of microcavities as suggested to the device of Fraser, in order to mass-produce, thereby saving material, time, and money, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Fraser discloses the claimed invention except for a quantum well layer having a tuned exciton energy independent of the tuned photon energy. Malpuech teaches a quantum well layer having a tuned exciton energy independent of the tuned photon energy. However, it is well known in the art to apply and/or modify the quantum well layer having a tuned exciton energy independent of the tuned photon energy as discloses by Malpuech in (see column 2, lines 22 – 28). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was to apply and/or modify the quantum well layer having a tuned exciton energy independent of the tuned photon energy as suggested to the device of Fraser, the choice of geometry and material constituting the quantum wells allows for the definition of energy levels for electrons, excitons, holes, and other particles. These particles can move between energy levels and, consequently, emit and absorb photons with specific energies. Therefore, the exciton energy of the quantum well could be tuned by varying the geometry or the material of said quantum well.
Regarding claim 12, Fraser and Malpuech, Fraser disclose each microcavity (see claim 9 rejection) is configured to generate a coherent radiation at a resonant frequency based on at least one of the tuned photon energy or the tuned exciton energy (see Figures 2a-2c and 4, Abstract, on pages 4 – 5, section 3.1 III-IV and II-VI material and structure, right column first full paragraph, page 12, section 5.2 Unconventional and Low-threshold lasing first and third full paragraphs).
Regarding claim 13, Fraser and Malpuech, Fraser disclose the coherent radiation at the resonant frequency is based on optical lasing radiation (see Figures 2a-2c and 4, Abstract, on pages 4 – 5, section 3.1 III-IV and II-VI material and structure, right column first full paragraph, page 12, section 5.2 Unconventional and Low-threshold lasing first and third full paragraphs).
Regarding claim 16, Fraser disclose a method of generating a coherent radiation comprising:
exciting a microcavity using a source radiation (see page 1, section 1. Overview, first full paragraph), wherein the microcavity comprises:
a top layer (see Figure 2a, character “top DBR”, on page 4, section 3.1 III-IV and II-VI material and structure page 4, right column first full paragraph) having a tuned photon energy (see on page 8, section 4.10 Proton implantation-induced interdiffusion, first full paragraph. When the current or ion implantation enters through the top DBR or top layer, that produce a wavelength tuning and tuned photon energy);
a bottom layer (see Figure 2a, character “bottom DBR”, on page 4, section 3.1 III-IV and II-VI material and structure page 4, right column first full paragraph); and
a quantum well layer (see Figure 2a, character “quantum well”, on page 4, section 3.1 III-IV and II-VI material and structure page 4, right column first full paragraph) in between the top layer (see Figure 2a, character “top DBR”) and the bottom layer (see Figure 2a, character “top DBR”); and
generating, by the microcavity, a coherent radiation based on at least one of the tuned photon energy or the tuned exciton energy (see Figures 2a-2c and 4, Abstract, on pages 4 – 5, section 3.1 III-IV and II-VI material and structure, right column first full paragraph, page 12, section 5.2 Unconventional and Low-threshold lasing first and third full paragraphs).
Fraser discloses the claimed invention except for a quantum well layer having a tuned exciton energy independent of the tuned photon energy. Malpuech teaches a quantum well layer having a tuned exciton energy independent of the tuned photon energy. However, it is well known in the art to apply and/or modify the quantum well layer having a tuned exciton energy independent of the tuned photon energy as discloses by Malpuech in (see column 2, lines 22 – 28). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was to apply and/or modify the quantum well layer having a tuned exciton energy independent of the tuned photon energy as suggested to the device of Fraser, the choice of geometry and material constituting the quantum wells allows for the definition of energy levels for electrons, excitons, holes, and other particles. These particles can move between energy levels and, consequently, emit and absorb photons with specific energies. Therefore, the exciton energy of the quantum well could be tuned by varying the geometry or the material of said quantum well.
Regarding claim 17, Fraser and Malpuech, Fraser disclose generating the coherent radiation further comprises: generating, by the microcavity, the coherent radiation at a resonant frequency based on at least one of the tuned photon energy or the tuned exciton energy (see Figures 2a-2c and 4, Abstract, on pages 4 – 5, section 3.1 III-IV and II-VI material and structure, right column first full paragraph, page 12, section 5.2 Unconventional and Low-threshold lasing first and third full paragraphs).
Regarding claim 18, Fraser and Malpuech, Fraser disclose the coherent radiation at the resonant frequency is an optical lasing radiation (see Figures 2a-2c and 4, Abstract, on pages 4 – 5, section 3.1 III-IV and II-VI material and structure, right column first full paragraph, page 12, section 5.2 Unconventional and Low-threshold lasing first and third full paragraphs).
Claims 2 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Michael D. Fraser (“Coherent exciton-polariton devices) in view of Malpuech et al. (US 8,498,318), further in view of Jikutani et al. (US 20080043796).
Regarding claim 2 and 10, Fraser and Malpuech discloses the claimed invention except for the top layer comprises structural changes induced by implanted hydrogen ions that tune the photon energy independent of the tuned exciton energy. Jikutani teaches a top layer comprises structural changes induced by implanted hydrogen ions. However, it is well known in the art to apply and/or modify the top layer comprises structural changes induced by implanted hydrogen ions as discloses by Jikutani in (see paragraph [1245]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was to apply and/or modify the top layer comprises structural changes induced by implanted hydrogen ions as suggested to the device of Fraser and Malpuech, to provide excellent heat radiation, easiness of burying, excellent physics strength, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claims 3 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Michael D. Fraser (“Coherent exciton-polariton devices) in view of Malpuech et al. (US 8,498,318), further in view of Jin et al. (KR 101997787).
Regarding claims 3 and 11, Fraser and Malpuech discloses the claimed invention except for the quantum well layer comprises structural changes induced by implanted hydrogen ions that tune the exciton energy independent of the tuned photon energy. Jin teaches a quantum well layer comprises structural changes induced by implanted hydrogen ions. However, it is well known in the art to apply and/or modify the quantum well layer comprises structural changes induced by implanted hydrogen ions as discloses by Jin in (see paragraph [0010]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was to apply and/or modify the quantum well layer comprises structural changes induced by implanted hydrogen ions as suggested to the device of Fraser and Malpuech, to form an insulator so that current injection flows to a desired region, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references “Independent Tuning of Exciton and Photon Energies in an Exciton–Polariton Condensate by Proton Implantation-Induced Interdiffusion” by Michael Fraser et al. disclose The use of high energy proton implantation is demonstrated to precisely and independently shift the energies of both exciton and photon components of GaAs microcavity exciton–polaritons. The technique applies post-growth proton implantation and annealing steps in order to create a small local interdiffusion across either the quantum well–barrier material interfaces, or between the layers of the cavity distributed Bragg reflector mirrors to induce energy shifts to the exciton or photon components, respectively. The polariton mode is tunable by an energy exceeding 10 meV with a corresponding increase (decrease) in effective mass for photon (exciton) energy shifts, while maintaining narrow-linewidth polariton photoemission and condensation for both photonic and excitonic polaritons. This technique uniquely enables new opportunities to explore coherent polariton matter with narrow-linewidth and heavy masses in tight-binding, non-Hermitian, and topological landscapes with sub-µm feature-sizes, while also being a simple post-growth process
“Proton implantation in just above active region for improvement of power conversion efficiency of VCSELs” by Miyamoto et al. disclose improving the power conversion efficiency of vertical cavity surface-emitting lasers (VCSELs) by three dimensionally control of the carrier concentration, which is the main mechanism of the electrical resistance and optical absorption has been investigated using the proton implantation technique just above the active region. The fabricated VCSELs showed improved power conversion efficiency of approximately 3points without serious deterioration of threshold current and operating voltage. Improvement of slope efficiency from 0.5 W/A to 0.6 W/A is the main cause and these improved the output power by 1.2 times.
"All-optical control of excitons in semiconductor quantum wells" by V M Kovalev et al. disclose applying the Floquet theory, we developed the method to control excitonic properties of semiconductor quantum wells (QWs) by a high-frequency electromagnetic field. It is demonstrated, particularly, that the field induces the blue shift of exciton emission from the QWs and narrows width of the corresponding spectral line. As a consequence, the field strongly modifies optical properties of the QWs and, therefore, can be used to tune characteristics of the optoelectronic devices based on them.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Delma R. Forde whose telephone number is (571)272-1940. The examiner can normally be reached M - TH 7:00 AM - 4:00 PM.
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 O 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.
/Delma R Forde/Examiner, Art Unit 2828
/TOD T VAN ROY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Prosecution Insights