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 .
Specification
Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become
aware in the specification.
Inventorship
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims
the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the
effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is
advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of
each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in
order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35
U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Response to Amendment
Applicants amendment filed July 06, 2026 has been fully considered and entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-3, 6, and 9-10 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. Specifically, the applicant's arguments (see page 8 of the amendment filed July 6, 2026) are directed to amended claim 1, which introduces a new combination of limitations not previously presented together. Consequently, a new ground of rejection was necessitated by this amendment to claim 1.
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 1-3, 6, and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kharel et al. (US20220390777A1) hereafter Kharel.
Regarding claim 1, Kharel discloses an optical waveguide element(FIG. 1A-1D. Optical Element 100, 100’, 100’’,100’’’,100’’’’ ), comprising:
an optical waveguide(Waveguide 110’) arranged on a main surface of an optical substrate(FIG 1B. Substrate 101); and
a control electrode(electrodes 120’, 130’,FIG. 1B) configured to control light waves propagating through the optical waveguide(Par. [0046]: electrodes provide a modulated optical signal),
wherein the control electrode comprises a first control electrode (Electrode 120’) and a second control electrode (Electrode 130’) facing each other across the optical waveguide on the main surface of the optical substrate (FIG 1B),
each of the first control electrode and the second control electrode comprises a common electrode (Channel regions 132’ and 122’ - [0052] and [0053] extending along the optical waveguide (FIG. 1B), a plurality of segment electrodes (Retrograde portion 124B/134B) arranged closer to the optical waveguide than the common electrode and divided along an extending direction of the optical waveguide and a plurality of connection electrodes (connecting portion 124A/134A) connecting each of the plurality of segment electrodes to the common electrode (FIG 1B), and
a low dielectric layer having a relative dielectric constant lower than a relative dielectric constant of the optical substrate is arranged between the common electrode and the optical substrate (Par. [0079]. FIG. 2-5 Interlayer 202 , 302, 402 and 502)).
In a separate but analogous embodiment (FIG. 12A-12D) Kharel further discloses wherein the low dielectric layer (silicon Dioxide layer) extends from below the common electrode (FIG. 12D. electrodes 1230D and 1240D) to below each of the segment electrodes (FIG.12D extensions 1234D and 1244D. Par. [0092]: Optical device 1200D is analogous to optical device 100, 100’, 100’’,100’’’,100’’’’).
In a separate but analogous embodiment (FIG. 3) Kharel further discloses at least a lower portion of a surface , adjacent to the optical waveguide, of each of the segment electrode (electrodes 320) is formed on the optical substrate (silicon dioxide layer) without the low dielectric layer there between.
Before the effective filing date of the present invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the segmented electrode configuration of Kharel’s embodiment in FIG. 12D to ensure that at least a lower portion of the surface of the segment electrodes adjacent to the optical waveguide is formed directly on the optical substrate without the low dielectric layer therebetween, as taught by Kharel’s alternative embodiment in FIG. 3. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine these embodiments because eliminating the low-dielectric insulating layer directly beneath the innermost edges of the segment electrodes allows the driving electric field to penetrate much more intensely into the optical waveguide structure. This maximizes the electro-optic overlap effect, which significantly reduces the driving voltage required to operate the device. A person or ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the localized substrate-contacting electrode configuration of Kharel's FIG. 3 embodiment to the segmented structure of FIG. 12D would yield the predictable result of concentrating the electric field within the optical waveguide to lower operating voltage, while successfully maintaining high-speed device performance by utilizing known structural components according to their established functions.
Regarding claim 2, Kharel discloses the device of claim 1. Kharel further discloses the low dielectric layer (silicon Dioxide layer) extends to below the connection electrodes and the segment electrodes (FIG.12D extensions 1234D and 1244D. Par. [0092]: Optical device 1200D is analogous to optical device 100, 100’, 100’’,100’’’,100’’’’).
PNG
media_image1.png
356
1200
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Kharel discloses the device of claim 1. Kharel further discloses the optical waveguide comprises a Mach-Zehnder type optical waveguide (FIGs. 22-24) that comprises two parallel waveguides(FIG. 1D. Waveguides 110’ and 150), and the control electrode (FIG. 1D. Optical device 100’’’) comprises: one first control electrode arranged between the two parallel waveguides(Electrode 120); and two second control electrodes facing the first control electrode respectively across the two parallel waveguides(Electrodes 130’ and 140).
Regarding claim 6, Kharel discloses the device of claim 1. Kharel further discloses an other main surface of the optical substrate, opposite to the main surface on which the optical waveguide is arranged (Opposite in this instance is being interpreted as the bottom surface of the main surface. FIG. 18), is in contact with a low dielectric substrate ( additional layer 1803) Kharel fails to disclose the dielectric substrate is composed of a low dielectric material with a relative dielectric constant of 1 or more and 10 or less.
Before the effective filing date of the present invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the low dielectric substrate (1803) of Kharel to have a relative dielectric constant of 1 or more and 10 or less. Such a modification represents a conventional objective of minimizing capacitance and signal loss in high-frequency devices. Utilizing a low-k material (e.g., PTFE or similar glass) in this range is a simple substitution of known materials that yields predictable results. Such a modification falls within the ordinary skill in the art, resulting in optimized optical confinement without unexpected challenges.
Regarding claim 9, Kharel discloses the device of claim 1. Kharel further discloses an optical modulator(FIG. 26. Modulator 2610), comprising: the optical waveguide element according to claim 1, which is an optical modulation element (Par. [0142]: Optical modulator 2610 is analogous to one or more of the optical devices depicted in FIGS. 1A-25); a housing configured to accommodate the optical waveguide element(Par. [0038]: The largest dimension of an optical modulator limits the reduction in size of the package in which the optical modulator can be provided); an optical fiber configured to input light to the optical waveguide element(Optical signal source 2602); and an optical fiber configured to guide light output by the optical waveguide element to outside of the housing(Modulated optical signal).
Regarding Claim 10, Kharel discloses the device of claim 1. Kharel further discloses an optical transmission device(FIG. 26 . Transmission optical subassembly 2600), comprising: the optical modulator according to claim 9(Modulator 2610); and an electronic circuit(2620) configured to generate an electrical signal for causing the optical waveguide element to perform an optical modulation operation(Par. [0143]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s
disclosure:
Mattis et al. (US20240008271A1) see the entire disclosure.
Kataoka et al. (US20220100010A1) see the entire disclosure.
Shinji et al. (CN-109073920-A) see figure 2.
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 TAJANAE N GREEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2188. The examiner can normally be reached Tues-Fri. 5:30a-3:30p.
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, Uyen-Chau Le can be reached at (571) 272-2397. 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.
/TAJANAE NICOLE GREEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2874
/MICHELLE R CONNELLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
