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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “about” in claim 11 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “about” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear what the end points of the claimed thickness range is.
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 1-5, 7-9, 11-16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2020/0393547 (Noda).
For claim 1, Noda teaches a phase modulation device (fig. 37C) comprising:
an upper reflective layer onto which incident light is incident (fig. 37C, 30; [0374]);
a lower reflective layer provided on a lower portion of the upper reflective layer (fig. 37C, 40; [0374]);
an active layer provided between the upper reflective layer and the lower reflective layer (fig. 37C, 20; [0374] and [0381]; active as carrier injection changes refractive index);
a first electrode connected to an upper surface of the active layer (fig. 37C, top 62; [00374]); and
a second electrode connected to a lower surface of the active layer (fig. 37C, top 62; [00374]),
wherein the lower reflective layer comprises a first distributed Bragg reflector (DBR) layer comprising at least one first low refractive material layer and at least one first high refractive material layer that are alternately stacked, wherein the at least one first low refractive material layer has a first refractive index and the at least one first high refractive material layer has a second refractive index that is greater than the first refractive index (fig. 37C, 40; [0377]), and wherein
the active layer comprises a material having a third refractive index (waveguide layer 20 inherently has a third refractive index).
The embodiment of fig. 37C teaches several optional materials for the at least one first low refractive material, including SiO2, and the material having a third refractive index, including Si, ([0376]; [0379], and [0381]). However, while a combination of first and third materials could be chosen to meet the limitation the third refractive index is greater than the first refractive index of the at least one first low refractive material layer the embodiment of fig. 37C does not explicitly require such a combination.
However, the embodiment of fig. 3 and 4B teaches using SiO2 as the first low refractive index material with a first refractive index (fig. 3, 42; [0198], [0200]), Si as the first high refractive material second with a second refractive index greater than the first refractive index (fig. 3, 44; [0198], [0200]), and Si as the material having a third refractive index greater than the first refractive index of the at least one first low refractive material layer (fig. 3, 20; [0202]). The materials allow for a large emission angle change even with a small change in refractive index ([0204]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the particular active layer material, low refractive material layer and high refractive material layer of the embodiment of fig. 3 and 4C as a simple substitution for the generic layers of the embodiment of fig. 37C as the substituted components and their functions were known in the art and the substitution would have yielded predictable results. In the present case, the substituted component provides a particular DBR and waveguide material with the added benefit of allowing for a large emission angle change even with a small change in refractive index. See MPEP 2143 I.B.
For claim 2, Noda as applied to the rejection of claim 1 above, inherently teaches the active layer comprises a material having a first thermo-optic coefficient that is greater than a second thermo-optic coefficient of the at least one first low refractive material layer (the thermo-optic coefficient of Si is greater than that of SiO2).
For claim 3, Noda teaches the phase modulation device is configured to change a refractive index of the active layer based on a current injected into the active layer through the first and second electrodes ([0381]).
For claim 4, Noda teaches the active layer comprises Si or Ge ([0202], [0381]).
For claim 5, Noda teaches a thickness of the active layer is greater than a thickness of the at least one first high refractive material layer ([0200]-[0201]).
For claim 7, Noda teaches the upper reflective layer comprises a second DBR layer (fig. 3 and 37, 30), wherein the second DBR layer comprises at least one second low refractive material layer and at least one second high refractive material layer that are alternately stacked, and wherein the at least one second low refractive material layer has a fourth refractive index and the at least one second high refractive material layer has a fifth refractive index that is greater than the fourth refractive index ([0198] and [0377]).
For claim 8, Noda teaches a number of alternately stacked layers in the second DBR layer is less than a number of alternately stacked layers in the first DBR layer (fig. 37C and fig. 3; and [0198]) in order to transmit mainly from the second DBR [0186].
For claim 9, Noda teaches a protection layer provided between the upper reflective layer and the active layer (fig. 37C, layer 62 between upper reflective layer 30 and active layer 20).
For claim 11, Noda does not teach a thickness of the protection layer is in a range of about 20 nm to about 200 nm. However, the examiner takes official notice that thickness was a known results effective variable before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and influences the resistance of an electrode.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to determine a suitable thickness of the protection layer, including between about 20 nm-200 nm, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
For claim 12, Noda teaches a wavelength of the incident light is not limited ([0196]) and provides a specific example where the wavelength of the incident light is in a range of about 900 nm to about 1,000 nm ([0242]).
For claim 13, Noda teaches a phase modulation device (fig. 37C) comprising:
a first distributed Bragg reflector (DBR) layer comprising at least one first layer and at least one second layer that are alternately stacked, the at least one first layer comprising a first low refractive index material having a first refractive index, the at least one second layer comprising a first high refractive index material having a second refractive index that is greater than the first refractive index (fig. 37C, 40; [0374] and [0377]);
a third layer provided on the first DBR layer, the third layer having a third refractive index (waveguide layer 20 inherently has a third refractive index);
a first electrode connected to an upper surface of the third layer (fig. 37C, top 62; [00374]); and
a second electron connected to a lower surface of the third layer (fig. 37C, top 62; [00374]).
The embodiment of fig. 37C teaches several optional materials for the at least one first low refractive material, including SiO2, and the material having a third refractive index, including Si, ([0376]; [0379], and [0381]). However, while a combination of first and third materials could be chosen to meet the limitation the third refractive index is greater than the first refractive index of the at least one first low refractive material layer the embodiment of fig. 37C does not explicitly require such a combination. The embodiment of fig. 37C also does not teach the relative thickness of the third and at least one second layer.
However, the embodiment of fig. 3 and 4B teaches using SiO2 as the first low refractive index material with a first refractive index (fig. 3, 42; [0198], [0200]), Si as the first high refractive material second with a second refractive index greater than the first refractive index (fig. 3, 44; [0198], [0200]), and Si as the material having a third refractive index greater than the first refractive index of the at least one first low refractive material layer (fig. 3, 20; [0202]). The embodiment in fig. 3 also teaches a thickness of the third layer is greater than a thickness of the at least one second layer ([0200]-[0201]). The materials and dimensions allow for a large emission angle change even with a small change in refractive index ([0204]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the particular materials and dimensions of the embodiment of fig. 3 and 4C as a simple substitution for the generic layers and thicknesses of the embodiment of fig. 37C as the substituted components and their functions were known in the art and the substitution would have yielded predictable results. In the present case, the substituted component provides a particular DBR and waveguide with the added benefit of allowing for a large emission angle change even with a small change in refractive index. See MPEP 2143 I.B.
For claim 14, Noda as applied to the rejection of claim 13 above, inherently teaches the third layer has a first thermo-optic coefficient that is greater than a second thermo-optic coefficient of the first low refractive material layer of the at least one first layer (the thermo-optic coefficient of Si is greater than that of SiO2).
For claim 15, Noda teaches the third layer comprises Si or Ge ([0202], [0381]).
For claim 16, Noda teaches a protection layer provided on the third layer (fig. 37C, layer 62 between upper reflective layer 30 and third layer 20 may be considered a protection layer).
For claim 18, Noda teaches a second DBR layer provided on the third layer (fig. 3 and 37C, 30; [0374])
the second DBR layer comprises at least one fourth layer and at least one fifth layer that are alternately stacked
wherein the at least one fourth layer comprises a second low refractive index material having a fourth refractive index, and
the at least one fifth layer comprises a second high refractive index material layer having a fifth refractive index that is greater than the fourth refractive index ([0198] and [0377]).
For claim 19, Noda teaches an electronic apparatus (fig. 37C) comprising:
a phase modulation device (fig. 37C) comprising:
an upper reflective layer onto which incident light is incident (fig. 37C, 30; [0374]);
a lower reflective layer provided on a lower portion of the upper reflective layer (fig. 37C, 40; [0374]);
an active layer provided between the upper reflective layer and the lower reflective layer (fig. 37C, 20; [0374] and [0381]; active as carrier injection changes refractive index);
a first electrode connected to an upper surface of the active layer (fig. 37C, top 62; [00374]); and
a second electrode connected to a lower surface of the active layer (fig. 37C, top 62; [00374]),
wherein the lower reflective layer comprises a first distributed Bragg reflector (DBR) layer comprising at least one first low refractive material layer and at least one first high refractive material layer that are alternately stacked, wherein the at least one first low refractive material layer has a first refractive index and the at least one first high refractive material layer has a second refractive index that is greater than the first refractive index (fig. 37C, 40; [0377]), and wherein
the active layer comprises a material having a third refractive index (waveguide layer 20 inherently has a third refractive index).
The embodiment of fig. 37C teaches several optional materials for the at least one first low refractive material, including SiO2, and the material having a third refractive index, including Si, ([0376]; [0379], and [0381]). However, while a combination of first and third materials could be chosen to meet the limitation the third refractive index is greater than the first refractive index of the at least one first low refractive material layer the embodiment of fig. 37C does not explicitly require such a combination.
However, the embodiment of fig. 3 and 4B teaches using SiO2 as the first low refractive index material with a first refractive index (fig. 3, 42; [0198], [0200]), Si as the first high refractive material second with a second refractive index greater than the first refractive index (fig. 3, 44; [0198], [0200]), and Si as the material having a third refractive index greater than the first refractive index of the at least one first low refractive material layer (fig. 3, 20; [0202]). The materials allow for a large emission angle change even with a small change in refractive index ([0204]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the particular active layer material, low refractive material layer and high refractive material layer of the embodiment of fig. 3 and 4C as a simple substitution for the generic layers of the embodiment of fig. 37C as the substituted components and their functions were known in the art and the substitution would have yielded predictable results. In the present case, the substituted component provides a particular DBR and waveguide material with the added benefit of allowing for a large emission angle change even with a small change in refractive index. See MPEP 2143 I.B.
The embodiment of fig. 37C does not tech the electronic apparatus comprising a laser light source configured to emit light of a predetermined wavelength; and a phase modulation device configured to modulate a phase of the light of the predetermined wavelength that is incident thereon from the laser light source.
However, the embodiment of fig. 102 teaches an electronic apparatus comprising a laser light source configured to emit light of a predetermined wavelength (fig. 102, 130; [0655]); and a phase modulation device configured to modulate a phase of the light of the predetermined wavelength that is incident thereon from the laser light source (fig. 102, 80A and 10A; 10A is an array of elements 10 such as those in fig. 37C) in order to provide scanning over a wide area in a small device ([0656]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the phase modulation device of fig. 37C as modified above as the 10A array elements with a laser light source configured to emit light of a predetermined wavelength as shown in the embodiment of fig. 102 in order to provide scanning over a wide area in a small device.
For claim 20, Noda teaches a wavelength of the incident light is not limited ([0196]) and provides a specific example where the wavelength of the incident light is in a range of about 900 nm to about 1,000 nm ([0242]).
Claims 6 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2020/0393547 (Noda) in view of US 2011/0280269 (Chang-Hasnain).
For claim 6 and 17, Noda teaches an upper reflective layer on the active/third layer (fig. 37C, 30). Noda teaches the particular layer is not critical ([0377]), does not teach the upper reflective layer comprises a high contrast grating (HCG) layer
However, Chang-Hasnain teaches a HCG is a known substitution for a DBR ([0014]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the HCG of Chang-Hasnain as a simple substitution for the DBR of Noda as the substituted components and their functions were known in the art and the substitution would have yielded predictable results. In the present case, the substituted component provides an alternative top mirror. See MPEP 2143 I.B.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2020/0393547 (Noda) in view of US 2020/0025711 (Kajisa).
For claim 10, Noda does not teach the protection layer comprises at least one of silicon oxide, silicon nitride, aluminum oxide, hafnium oxide, and titanium oxide.
However, Kajisa teaches an electrode may be formed from at least one of silicon oxide, silicon nitride, aluminum oxide, hafnium oxide, and titanium oxide ([0013]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use one of Kajisa’a material layers for the protection layer in Noda as a simple substitution for the material of layer 62 in Noda as the substituted components and their functions were known in the art and the substitution would have yielded predictable results. In the present case, the substituted component provides an alternative electrode material. See MPEP 2143 I.B.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael W Carter whose telephone number is (571)270-1872. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:00-5:30.
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 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.
/Michael Carter/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Prosecution Insights