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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/06/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Iida et al. (US 11435645 B2).
Re claim 1, Iida et al. discloses an optical waveguide device comprising an optical waveguide formed on a substrate (IL3), wherein a protuberant portion (CL1+DL) is formed on a surface of the substrate; the optical waveguide (SL1) is disposed on the protuberant portion (CL1+DL) and is formed to have a larger width (width of SLB) than a width of a top of the protuberant portion (fig. 10); a low refractive index layer (IL1 + IL2) that has a lower refractive index than the optical waveguide (IL1 and IL2 are made of the same material, SiO2; col. 5, lines 25-36 and col. 8, lines 50-56) is disposed so as to cover the optical waveguide be in contact with at least a part of the protuberant portion (fig. 10), and surround at least a portion of the lower surface side of the optical waveguide (fig. 10), and the low refractive index layer constitutes a part of a core portion of a spot size converter of the optical waveguide (fig. 10; col. 4, lines 5-19).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goi et al. (US 9529151 B2 – 3rd embodiment Fig. 7, herein after Goi III) in view of Goi et al. (US 9529151 B2 – 6th embodiment Fig. 10, herein after Goi VI).
Re claim 1, Goi III discloses an optical waveguide device comprising an optical waveguide (15) formed on a substrate (16b), wherein a protuberant portion (14 from 14b to 15b) is formed on a surface of the substrate (fig. 7b); the optical waveguide is disposed on the protuberant portion and is formed to have a larger width than a width of a top of the protuberant portion (fig. 7b); a low refractive index layer (16a made of silica (SiO.sub.2)) that has a lower refractive index than the optical waveguide (made of silicon (Si)) is disposed so as to cover the optical waveguide (col. 8, lines 12-19) be in contact with at least a part of the protuberant portion (fig. 7b), and surround at least a portion of the lower surface side (15b) of the optical waveguide (fig. 7b), the low refractive index layer constitutes a part of a core portion (fig. 7b).
Goi III is silent with respect to the low refractive index layer constitutes a part of a core portion of a spot size converter of the optical waveguide.
Goi VI teaches the waveguide include a spot size converter (19; fig. 10; col. 14, lines 47-62).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application to replace mode expansion 18 of Goi III with a spot size converter 19 of Iida VI to concurrently perform the polarization rotation and the mode conversion (col. 14, lines 47-52). Further, such modification would have been an obvious design variation, well within the ordinary skill in the art, for intended use.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iida et al. (US 20190372676 A1 – herein after Iida ‘676) in view of Iida et al. (US 11435645 B2 – herein after Iida ‘645).
Re claim 1: Iida ‘676 discloses an optical waveguide device (figs. 15-16) comprising an optical waveguide formed on a substrate (IL1), wherein a protuberant portion (as annotated below) is formed on a surface of the substrate (IL1); the optical waveguide (WG1) is disposed on the protuberant portion (figs. 15-16); and a low refractive index layer (WG2) is disposed to cover the optical waveguide (WG1) and to be in contact with at least a part of the protuberant portion (figs. 15-16), and has a lower refractive index than the optical waveguide (WG1 - since leaked light from WG1 absorbed by WG2 [0124], WG2 is necessary to have a lower refractive index than WG1); and the low refractive index layer constitutes a part of a core portion of a spot size converter of the optical waveguide ([0122-0125]).
PNG
media_image1.png
338
438
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Iida ‘676 fails to teach the optical waveguide is formed to have a larger width than a width of a top of the protuberant portion.
Iida ‘645 discloses optical waveguide (SL1) is disposed on the protuberant portion (CL1+DL) and is formed to have a larger width (width of SLB) than a width of a top of the protuberant portion (fig. 10).
Since both Iida ‘676 and Iida ‘645 are directed to a semiconductor device/module having a modulator including an optical waveguide, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the optical waveguide of Iida ‘676 to have a larger width than a width of a top of the protuberant portion by replacing optical waveguide WG1 of Iida ‘676 with the slab waveguide of Iida ‘645 for its ease of fabrication, strong confinement, and stronger on-chip light-matter interaction. Further, such modification would have been an obvious engineering variation, well within the ordinary skill in the art, for intended use such as a slab optical waveguide to use in an optical modulator, and therefore an obvious expedient.
Re claim 2: Iida ‘676/Iida ‘645 discloses the optical waveguide device according to claim 1, wherein a width of the low refractive index layer is 5 pm or lower (the thickness of the optical waveguide WG2 is 1 μm to 2 μm; [0103]).
Re claim 4: Iida ‘676/Iida ‘645 discloses the optical waveguide device according to claim 1, wherein recess portions are formed on both sides of the protuberant portion, and the low refractive index layer is disposed to be in contact with the recess portions (see annotated figs. 15-16 above).
Re claim 5: Iida ‘676/Iida ‘645 discloses the optical waveguide device according to claim 1, wherein a refractive index of the protuberant portion IL1 is lower than the refractive index of the optical waveguide WG1 ([0050]).
Re claim 6: Iida ‘676/Iida ‘645 discloses the optical waveguide device according to claim 1, wherein the substrate includes a holding substrate SB1 and a thin film layer IL1 formed on the holding substrate, and the protuberant portion is formed in the thin film layer (figs. 5, 15-16).
Claim(s) 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iida et al. (US 20190372676 A1 – herein after Iida ‘676) in view of Iida et al. (US 11435645 B2 – herein after Iida ‘645) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Moriwaki et al. (CA 2276197 C).
Re claims 7-9, Iida ‘676/Iida ‘645 discloses the optical waveguide device according to claim 1 but is silent with respect to incorporating the device in an optical modulation device comprising: a case accommodating the optical waveguide device, an optical fiber through which a light wave is input into the optical waveguide or output from the optical waveguide, a control electrode is a modulation electrode for modulating the light wave propagating through the optical waveguide, and an electronic circuit that amplifies a modulation signal to be input into the modulation electrode is provided inside the case; or incorporating the device in an optical transmission apparatus comprising a light source that inputs a light wave into the optical modulation device, and an electronic circuit that outputs a modulation signal to the optical modulation device.
Moriwaki et al. teaches an optical modulation/transmission device comprising a case accommodating the optical waveguide device, an optical fiber (4) through which a light wave is input into the optical waveguide or output from the optical waveguide (7), a control electrode (22) is a modulation electrode for modulating the light wave propagating through the optical waveguide, and an electronic circuit that amplifies a modulation signal to be input into the modulation electrode is provided inside the case; or incorporating the device in an optical transmission apparatus comprising a light source (laser 5) that inputs a light wave into the optical modulation device, and an electronic circuit that outputs a modulation signal to the optical modulation device.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to have the optical waveguide device of Iida ‘676/Iida ‘645 used in an optical modulation/transmission device since such modification would have been an intended use, well within the ordinary skill in the art, and therefore an obvious expedient.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Uyen-Chau N. Le whose telephone number is (571)272-2397. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00am-5:30pm.
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, Kiesha R. Bryant can be reached at (571) 272-3606. 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.
/UYEN CHAU N LE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights