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.
Priority
The priority has been considered by the examiner. Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The references cited in the Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) submitted on November 15, 2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered and accepted by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawing submitted on November 15, 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 – 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (CN102324696) in view of Jida et al. (CN105429004) further in view of Wang et al. (US11,646,548).
PNG
media_image1.png
380
518
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
211
657
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Wang disclose a multi-active region cascaded Bragg reflection waveguide edge-emitting diode laser (see Figures 1 and 6), comprising:
a substrate (see Figures 1 and 6, character 1, Abstract and paragraph [0040 and 0042]);
a buffer layer (see Figures 1 and 6, character 2 and paragraph [0040 and 0043]);
an N-type cladding layer (see Figures 1 and 6, character 3 and paragraph [0040 and 0044), the reference called “lower confinement layer”);
an N-type waveguide layer (see Figures 1 and 6, character 4, Abstract and paragraph [0010 – 0011, 0040 and 0045], the reference called “lower waveguide layer”);
a cascaded multi-active region (see Figures 1 and 6, character 5, Abstract and paragraph [0010, 0011, 0040 and 0046], the reference called “central cavity”);
a P-type waveguide layer (see Figures 1 and 6, character 6, Abstract and paragraph [0010 – 0011, 0040 and 0047], the reference called “upper waveguide layer”);
a P-type cladding layer (see Figures 1 and 6, character 7 and paragraph [0040 and 0048] the reference called “upper confinement layer”); and
a capping layer (see Figures 1 and 6, character 8 and paragraph [0040 and 0049]);
wherein the substrate (see Figures 1 and 6, character 1), the buffer layer (see Figures 1 and 6, character 2), the N-type cladding layer (see Figures 1 and 6, character 3), the N-type waveguide layer (see Figures 1 and 6, character 4), the cascaded multi-active region (see Figures 1 and 6, character 5), the P-type waveguide layer (see Figures 1 and 6, character 6), the P-type cladding layer (see Figures 1 and 6, character 7) and the capping layer (see Figures 1 and 6, character 8) are sequentially arranged from bottom to top (see Figure 1);
the N-type waveguide layer (see Figures 1 and 6, character 4) is a Bragg reflection waveguide formed by periodic and alternate growth of a plurality of first refractive index layers and a plurality of second refractive index layers (see, Figures 2 and 6 – 9 paragraphs 0010 – 0013, 0041 and 0045]), and the P-type waveguide layer (see Figures 1 and 6, character 6) is a Bragg reflection waveguide formed by periodic and alternate growth of a plurality of third refractive index layers and a plurality of fourth refractive index layers (see paragraphs [0010 – 0013, 0041 and 0047]);
a refractive index of the plurality of first refractive index layers (see Figures 2 and 6 – 9, character 4a) is larger than that of the plurality of second refractive index layers (see Figure 1, character 4b and paragraph [0041 and 0045]);
a refractive index of the plurality of third refractive index layers (see Figure 1, character 6a) is larger than that of the plurality of fourth refractive index layers (see Figures 2 and 6 – 9, character 6b and paragraphs [0041 and 0047]);
the cascaded multi-active region (see Figure 1, character 5) comprises a plurality of active regions (see Figures 6 – 9, characters 5a and/or 5b and/or 5c and/or 5d, and paragraphs [0026, 0046, 0058 - 0067]):
the plurality of active regions (see Figures 6 – 9, characters 5a and/or 5b and/or 5c and/or 5d) are respectively located at peaks of a fundamental mode near field (see paragraphs [0022, 0046, 0060 – 0067]).
PNG
media_image3.png
341
705
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Wang discloses the claimed invention except for a plurality of tunnel junctions and a confinement layer; the plurality of active regions and the plurality of tunnel junctions are located in the confinement layer; each of the plurality of tunnel junctions is located between two adjacent active regions of the plurality of active regions. Jida teaches a tunnel cascade multi-active region epitaxial structure (see Figure 1) including active regions (see Figure 1, characters 5 and 12), a tunnel junction (Figure 1, characters 8 and 9) and the confinement layer (see Annotation Figure 1, character 100, the confinement layer include the lower and upper confinement layers (see Figure 1, characters 3, 7, 10 and 14) and lower and upper waveguide layers (see Figure 1, characters 4, 6, 11 and 13)) and each of the plurality of tunnel junctions (see Annotation Figure 1, characters 8 and 9) is located between two adjacent active regions (see Annotation Figure 1, characters 5 and 12) of the plurality of active regions. However, it is well own in the art to apply and/or modify the plurality of tunnel junctions and the confinement layer as discloses by Jida in (see Annotation Figure 1, Abstract and paragraphs [0012, 0015, 0017, 0038, 0041 – 0042 and 0100 – 0103]). 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 plurality of tunnel junctions and the confinement layer as suggested to the device of Wang, the tunnel junction in order to improve slope efficiency, reduce optical power density, increase output power, and greatly reduce vertical divergence angle.
PNG
media_image4.png
198
504
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Wang (‘696) discloses the claimed invention except for the plurality of tunnel junctions are respectively located at troughs of the fundamental mode near field; and the plurality of active regions are configured to share the same waveguide. Wang (‘548) teaches a plurality cascade of active regions (see Figure 3) each includes a plurality active regions (see Figure 3, character 6, 8 and 12 and 14) are respectively located at peaks of a fundamental mode near field (see Figure 3); tunnel junction (see Figure 3, character 10) are respectively located at troughs of the fundamental mode near field (see Figure 3); and the plurality of active regions (see Figure 3, character 6, 8 and 12 and 14) are configured to share the same waveguide (see Figure 3). However, it is well known in the art to apply and/or modify the plurality cascade of active regions each includes a plurality active regions are respectively located at peaks of a fundamental mode near field; tunnel junction are respectively located at troughs of the fundamental mode near field; and the plurality of active regions are configured to share the same waveguide as discloses by Wang (‘548) in (see Figure 3 and column 2, lines 20 – 29 and 38 – 40, column 3, lines 15 – 39,column 4, lines 64 – 67, column 5, lines 1 – 18 and column 6, lines 13 – 58). 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 plurality cascade of active regions each includes a plurality active regions are respectively located at peaks of a fundamental mode near field; tunnel junction are respectively located at troughs of the fundamental mode near field; and the plurality of active regions as suggested to the device of Wang (‘696), the tunnel junction is preferably positioned at a troughs (i.e. a minimum) of the longitudinal field to reduce or minimize absorption while enabling the conversion of electrons to holes for injection into the active region and the active layer should be placed at a peak (e.g. maximum) to maximize the longitudinal mode with the maximum gain, that way could to achieve even greater power and efficiency.
Regarding claims 2 and 3, Wang (‘696), Jira and Wang (‘548) discloses the claimed invention except for the confinement layer comprises: a plurality of fifth refractive index layers; and a plurality of sixth refractive index layers; wherein a refractive index of the plurality of fifth refractive index layers is larger than that of the plurality of sixth refractive index layers; the plurality of fifth refractive index layers and the plurality of sixth refractive index layers are configured to grow alternately; the plurality of active regions are respectively inserted in the plurality of fifth refractive index layers; and the plurality of tunnel junctions are respectively inserted in the plurality of sixth refractive index layers and the plurality of fifth refractive index layers vary in composition and thickness; and the plurality of sixth refractive index layers vary in composition and thickness. 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 confinement layer comprises: a plurality of fifth refractive index layers; and a plurality of sixth refractive index layers; wherein a refractive index of the plurality of fifth refractive index layers is larger than that of the plurality of sixth refractive index layers; the plurality of fifth refractive index layers and the plurality of sixth refractive index layers are configured to grow alternately; the plurality of active regions are respectively inserted in the plurality of fifth refractive index layers; and the plurality of tunnel junctions are respectively inserted in the plurality of sixth refractive index layers and the plurality of fifth refractive index layers vary in composition and thickness; and the plurality of sixth refractive index layers vary in composition and thickness to the device of Wang (‘696), Jira and Wang (‘548), to improve the function of the laser (e.g. to improve propagation within cascade active regions), since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
In addition, the selection of refractive index between confinement layers, active regions and tunnel junctions, it’s obvious because it is a matter of determining optimum process conditions by routine experimentation with a limited number of species of result effective variables. These claims are prima facie obvious without showing that the claimed ranges achieve unexpected results relative to the prior art range. In re Woodruff, 16 USPQ2d 1935, 1937 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See also In re Huang, 40 USPQ2d 1685, 1688 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (claimed ranges or a result effective variable, which do not overlap the prior art ranges, are unpatentable unless they produce a new and unexpected result which is different in kind and not merely in degree from the results of the prior art). See also In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA) (discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily within skill or art) and In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1995) (selection of optimum ranges within prior art general conditions is obvious).
Note that the specification contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of the claimed [the confinement layer comprises: a plurality of fifth refractive index layers; and a plurality of sixth refractive index layers; wherein a refractive index of the plurality of fifth refractive index layers is larger than that of the plurality of sixth refractive index layers; the plurality of fifth refractive index layers and the plurality of sixth refractive index layers are configured to grow alternately; the plurality of active regions are respectively inserted in the plurality of fifth refractive index layers; and the plurality of tunnel junctions are respectively inserted in the plurality of sixth refractive index layers and the plurality of fifth refractive index layers vary in composition and thickness; and the plurality of sixth refractive index layers vary in composition and thickness] or any unexpected results arising therefrom. Where patentability is said to be based upon particular chosen [the confinement layer comprises: a plurality of fifth refractive index layers; and a plurality of sixth refractive index layers; wherein a refractive index of the plurality of fifth refractive index layers is larger than that of the plurality of sixth refractive index layers; the plurality of fifth refractive index layers and the plurality of sixth refractive index layers are configured to grow alternately; the plurality of active regions are respectively inserted in the plurality of fifth refractive index layers; and the plurality of tunnel junctions are respectively inserted in the plurality of sixth refractive index layers and the plurality of fifth refractive index layers vary in composition and thickness; and the plurality of sixth refractive index layers vary in composition and thickness] or upon another variable recited in a claim, the Applicant must show that the chosen [the confinement layer comprises: a plurality of fifth refractive index layers; and a plurality of sixth refractive index layers; wherein a refractive index of the plurality of fifth refractive index layers is larger than that of the plurality of sixth refractive index layers; the plurality of fifth refractive index layers and the plurality of sixth refractive index layers are configured to grow alternately; the plurality of active regions are respectively inserted in the plurality of fifth refractive index layers; and the plurality of tunnel junctions are respectively inserted in the plurality of sixth refractive index layers and the plurality of fifth refractive index layers vary in composition and thickness; and the plurality of sixth refractive index layers vary in composition and thickness] are critical. In re Woodruf, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 4 , Wang (‘696), Jira and Wang (‘548), Jira disclose the number k of the plurality of active regions is equal to or larger than 2 (see Figures 6 – 9, Abstract and paragraphs [0012, 0017 and 0044]); and
the number of the plurality of tunnel junctions is k−1, wherein k is a natural number (see Figures 6 – 9, Abstract and paragraph [0102]).
Regarding claim 5, Wang (‘696), Jira and Wang (‘548), Wang (‘696) disclose the plurality of first refractive index layers are different from the plurality of third refractive index layers in composition and thickness (see paragraphs [0041 and 0056]);
the plurality of second refractive index layers are different from the plurality of fourth refractive index layers in composition and thickness (see paragraphs [0041 and 0056]); and
a period number of the plurality of third refractive index layers and the fourth refractive index layers is less than or equal to a period number of the plurality of first refractive index layers and the plurality of second refractive index layers (see Abstract and paragraph [0023)),
Regarding claim 6, Wang (‘696), Jira and Wang (‘548) discloses the claimed invention except for a refractive index of the P-type cladding layer is lower than a refractive index of the N-type cladding layer. 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 a refractive index of the P-type cladding layer is lower than a refractive index of the N-type cladding layer to the device of Wang (‘696), Jira and Wang (‘548), to improve the function of the laser (e.g. to improve propagation within the laser), since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
In addition, the selection of refractive index between cladding layers, it’s obvious because it is a matter of determining optimum process conditions by routine experimentation with a limited number of species of result effective variables. These claims are prima facie obvious without showing that the claimed ranges achieve unexpected results relative to the prior art range. In re Woodruff, 16 USPQ2d 1935, 1937 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See also In re Huang, 40 USPQ2d 1685, 1688 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (claimed ranges or a result effective variable, which do not overlap the prior art ranges, are unpatentable unless they produce a new and unexpected result which is different in kind and not merely in degree from the results of the prior art). See also In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA) (discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily within skill or art) and In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1995) (selection of optimum ranges within prior art general conditions is obvious).
Note that the specification contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of the claimed [a refractive index of the P-type cladding layer is lower than a refractive index of the N-type cladding layer] or any unexpected results arising therefrom. Where patentability is said to be based upon particular chosen [a refractive index of the P-type cladding layer is lower than a refractive index of the N-type cladding layer] or upon another variable recited in a claim, the Applicant must show that the chosen [a refractive index of the P-type cladding layer is lower than a refractive index of the N-type cladding layer] are critical. In re Woodruf, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 7, Wang (‘696), Jira and Wang (‘548), Jira disclose each of the plurality of tunnel junctions (see Annotation Figure 1, characters 8 and 9) comprises a first doped material and a second doped material (see paragraph [0102]);
a conductivity type of the first doped material is opposite to that of the second doped material (see paragraph [0102]); and
for each of the plurality of tunnel junctions (see Annotation Figure 1, characters 8 and 9), a conductivity type of a material between the first doped material and an adjacent active region (see Annotation Figure 1, characters 5 and 12) thereof is different from that of a material between the second doped material and an adjacent active region t(see Annotation Figure 1, characters 5 and 12 and paragraph [0102]) hereof.
Regarding claim 8, Wang (‘696), Jira and Wang (‘548), Wang (‘696) disclose the plurality of active regions are independently a single-layer or multi-layer quantum well, quantum dot or quantum wire (see paragraph [0021 and 0046] and claim 1 rejection).
Regarding claim 9, Wang (‘696), Jira and Wang (‘548), Wang (‘696) disclose the substrate is GaAs, InP, GaSb or GaN (see paragraph [0042]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references CN114927940 disclose a method of tunnel cascade multi-active region semiconductor laser, comprising: growing a buffer layer on the substrate; growing a first light emitting region on the buffer layer; growing a PN structure of the first reverse bias on the first light emitting region; growing a second light emitting region on the PN structure of the first reverse bias; growing a PN structure of a second reverse bias on the second light emitting region; growing a third light emitting region on the PN structure of the second reverse bias; and manufacturing an ohmic layer contact the third light emitting region, and manufacturing the electrode on the surface of the ohmic contact and the substrate, so as to finish the preparation of the tunnel cascade multi-active region semiconductor laser. The invention further claims a tunnel cascade multi-active region semiconductor laser.
CN117638644 disclose a multi-junction FP laser with non-uniform refractive index distribution and preparation method thereof, the FP laser orderly comprises: an n-type ohmic electrode, a substrate, a buffer layer, an n-type cladding layer, a light emitting region, a p-type cladding layer, a p-type cap layer, p-type ohmic electrode, the light emitting region is composed of N repeated sub-light emitting regions and N-1 tunnelling layers, N is not less than 2, the sub-light emitting region comprises a limiting layer and an active region, the material of the limiting layer is AlxGa1-xAs, the component coefficient of the Al component is not less than 0 and not more than 1; the limiting layer can be composed of Al component gradually changing layer, the Al component is linearly increased or linearly reduced in the same limiting layer. The whole refractive index of the limiting layer corresponding to the N sub-light emitting regions in the application is non-uniformly distributed, by changing the refractive index of the limiting layer to adjust and control the light field and electric field distribution of the active region in each limiting layer, realizing the strong coupling effect of the light field of the active region, reducing the absorption of the p-type cladding region to the photon, so as to improve the whole luminous efficiency of the luminous area.
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