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 § 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.
Claims 1, 5, 8, 10, 11, 15, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. No. 2021/0342161 to Lauer et al. (“Lauer”).
As to independent claim 11, and similarly recited independent claims 1 and 10, a method/circuit/non-transitory computer readable medium (¶ 0005, 0010) that stores a set of instructions that is executable by one or more processors of an apparatus to cause the apparatus to perform operations (¶ 0010) comprising: controlling a high excited energy level of qubits to resonate with a target resonant cavity, the high excited energy level being an energy level greater than or equal to a second excited energy level (¶ 0051, 0054-0059, 0060-0064. Lauer teaches controlling a second or higher excited qubit state into resonance with a coupled low-Q resonator by rendering the resonator degenerate with the second excited state, thereby providing the claimed high excited state/target cavity resonance.); and applying a microwave to the qubits (¶ 0044, 0045, 0047-0051, 0055-0059. Lauer teaches applying microwave transition signals to first excited qubits, transferring the first excited population toward a second excited state coupled to a low-Q resonator, allowing the resonator associated state to rapidly decay, and thereby resetting/initializing the qubits.).
Lauer does not expressly teach: the microwave is applied in a process of continuous resonance between the high excited energy level of the qubits and the target resonant cavity, and the first excited state population “adiabatically” evolves toward the dissipative cavity state.
Premaratne teaches the missing adiabatic aspect: using overlapping microwave drives in a Stimulated Raman Adiabatic Passage (STIRAP) process to adiabatically transfer first excited qubit population into a cavity state, and expressly teaches using that process with a short lived cavity to reset the qubit to its ground state (Page 2, ¶ 3: “transfer the first excited state population of the qubit to the cavity”. Page 5, ¶ 3: “STIRAP can be used to reset the qubit”. Pages 2-3, Fig. 1(c)-(e), equation (2): STIRAP process begins with the first excited qubit state, applies overlapping microwave Stokes and pump pulses, uses an excited qubit cavity state as the intermediate state, adiabatically transfers population to the cavity state, and is expressly an all-microwave process.). This teaching is particularly applicable to Lauer because Lauer already supplies exactly the feature Premaratne identifies for reset – a low-Q, rapidly decaying resonator.
Magnard independently demonstrates the practical microwave driven reset pathway in a three-level superconducting qubit coupled to a large-bandwidth resonator. Magnard identifies the ground state, the first excited state, the second excited state, and the qubit ground stsate with one photon occupying the resonator (Pages 1-2, Fig. 1(b)). Magnard further teaches simultaneously driving the |f0> <-> |g1> (Page 2, Fig. 1(b)-(c)). That simultaneous microwave application transfers population from |e 0> and |f0> to the resonator photon state |g1> . Magnard then teaches the system then rapidly decays to the target dark state |g0> by resonator photon emission, resetting the qubit (Page 2, Fig. 1(b)-(c)). Therefore, Magnard teaches continuously applying simultaneous microwave drives during a reset interval to couple the first excited state through the second excited state to a resonator photon state followed by resonator decay to the ground state.
It would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to modify Lauer’s low-Q resonator reset process to employ Premaratne’s known adiabatic microwave transfer technique, while maintaining the resonator assisted microwave coupling during the transfer as taught by Magnard, because Premaratne expressly teaches that such STIRAP transfer through a short-lived cavity can be used to reset a qubit, and Magnard demonstrates simultaneous microwave coupling of the first and second excited states to a dissipative resonator state successfully resets a superconducting qubit. The modification would predictably provide an adiabatic, microwave driven transfer of first excited state population into Lauer’s already resonant, rapidly decaying low-Q resonator state, thereby initializing the qubit.
As to claim 15 and similarly recited claim 5, the non-transitory computer readable medium according to claim 11, wherein applying microwave to the qubits in the process of continuous resonance between the high excited energy level of the qubits and the target resonant cavity to control the first excited energy level of the qubits to adiabatically evolve towards a dissipative energy level of the target resonant cavity comprises: determining a target microwave, and microwave intensity of the target microwave increasing over time within a predetermined time period; and applying the target microwave to the qubits in a process of continuous resonance between the high excited energy level of the qubits and the target resonant cavity to control the first excited energy level of the qubits to adiabatically evolve towards the dissipative energy level of the target resonant cavity (Premaratne teaches selecting microwave STIRAP pulses having predetermined frequencies, peak amplitudes, widths, and timing, wherein the Gaussian pulse amplitude, and consequently microwave intensity, increases during a predetermined rising interval, and applying those pulses to adiabatically transfer first excited qubit population into the cavity for qubit initialization. Page 2, ¶ 3, Page 4, ¶ 3, 5, Page 5, ¶ 3.).
As to claim 18 and similarly recited claim 8, the non-transitory computer readable medium according to claim 11, wherein the target resonant cavity is a read resonant cavity coupled to the qubits, and the read resonant cavity is configured to read a quantum state of the qubits (Magnard teaches the transmon is capacitively coupled to a readout resonator and the transmon state is read by applying a gated drive to the input port of the readout resonator, and the readout resonator can be used to reset the transmon. Page 1, ¶ 6, Page 2, ¶ 2, Page 4, ¶ 3.).
Claims 9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Lauer, Premaratne, and Magnard and in further view of US Pub. No. 2023/0073224 to Shuster et al. (“Shuster”).
The combination of Lauer, Premaratne, and Magnard does not teach the qubits are Fluxonium qubits.
Shuster teaches the qubit employed in a resonator assisted initialization process may be a Fluxonium qubit (claim 3), and teaches Fluxonium reset protocol that utilizes the readout resonator and higher circuit levels to initialize the qubit (¶ 0083).
It would have been obvious to a PHOSTA to implement the superconducting qubits of the reset process taught by Lauer as Fluxonium qubits, as taught by Shuster, because Shuster expressly demonstrates that Fluxonium qubits possess a rich higher level energy structure suitable for microwave-driven, resonator-assisted reset and successfully uses higher Fluxonium levels and low-Q readout resonator to initialize the qubit (Shuster: ¶ 0005).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4, 6, 7, 12-14, 16, and 17 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claims 2-4, 6, 7, 12-14, 16, and 17 would be allowable if amended in the manner indicated because the prior art of record does not teach or suggest a method or CRM having all the combinations of steps or elements as recited in and required by these claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner SURESH MEMULA whose telephone number is (571)272-8046, and any inquiry for a formal Applicant initiated interview must be requested via a PTOL-413A form and faxed to the Examiner's personal fax phone number: (571) 273-8046. Furthermore, Applicant is invited to contact the Examiner via email (suresh.memula@uspto.gov) on the condition the communication is pursuant to and in accordance with MPEP §502.03 and §713.01. The Examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday: 9am-6pm. If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Jack Chiang, can be reached on 571-272-7483. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned (i.e., central fax phone number) is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SURESH MEMULA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2851
Prosecution Insights