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
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin (US 2022/0045478 A1) in view of Raring (US 10,222,474 B1).
Regarding Claim 1, Lin discloses an optical transceiver, characterized by comprising:
a housing body ([0035]: “the optical transceiver module 100 includes a plurality of components disposed within housing 101,”);
a laser transceiver assembly and a thermoelectric cooler temperature control assembly, accommodated in the housing body, the laser transceiver assembly and the thermoelectric cooler temperature control assembly being stacked and in contact with each other ([0026]: “the plurality of laser assemblies (directly) thermally couple to the TEC by extending through one or a plurality of openings defined by the PCBA.”);
and a circuit board ([0037]: “The substrate 102 may comprise, for example, a printed circuit board (PCB), and preferably a PCB assembly (PCBA).”), accommodated in the housing body and disposed side by side with the stacked laser transceiver assembly and thermoelectric cooler temperature control assembly ([0026]: “the plurality of laser assemblies (directly) thermally couple to the TEC by extending through one or a plurality of openings defined by the PCBA.” If the laser assembly and the TEC are coupled through openings in the PCB, then they can be considered to be ‘side-by-side’.), and configured to electrically control the laser transceiver assembly and the thermoelectric cooler temperature control assembly ([0065]: “the temperature control device 268 can electrically couple to circuitry of the optical transceiver module 200 such as a controller and/or power rail”; [0040]: “the optical transceiver module 100 includes a transmit connecting circuit 112 to provide electrical connections to the plurality of laser assemblies 110 and drive the same.” ).
Lin does not teach and Raring does teach wherein the optical transceiver is a laser radar and (Col. 6, Lines 62-63) wherein an upper cover of a sealed chamber, accommodated in the housing body and fixedly connected on an inner wall of the housing body (Col. 68, Lines 20-25; The TO-can is identified with the upper cover of the instant application), the upper cover of the sealed chamber and the housing body together enclosing and sealing the laser transceiver assembly (Col. 68, Lines 32-35; The TO-can is hermetically sealed.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporated the teaching of Raring to hermetically seal the laser components within a chamber into the device of Lin. Sealing sensitive optical and laser component within a chamber helps to keep them clean, reducing the need for maintenance and its associated expense and downtime.
Claims 2, 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin in view of Raring as applied to Claim 1, and in view of Murry (US 2007/0189677 A1).
Regarding Claim 2, which depends from rejected Claim 1, Lin further discloses the housing body comprises a first outer housing and a second outer housing that are fixedly connected to each other ([0052]: “the housing 201 of the optical transceiver module 200 comprises first and second housing portions 201-1 and 201-2 that couple together and define a cavity 255 (See FIG. 4) therebetween.”);
the laser transceiver assembly, the thermoelectric cooler temperature control assembly, the first circuit board and the second circuit board are located between the first outer housing and the second outer housing ([0052]: “the housing 201 of the optical transceiver module 200 comprises first and second housing portions 201-1 and 201-2 that couple together and define a cavity 255 (See FIG. 4) therebetween.”; [0056]: “As shown, the substrate 202 is at least partially disposed in the cavity 255 (See FIG. 4) of the housing 201.” Thus the circuit board assembly is in the cavity and therefore between the first outer housing and the second outer housing);
and the upper cover of the sealed chamber and a portion of the second outer housing together form the sealed chamber, and enclose and seal the laser transceiver assembly and the thermoelectric cooler temperature control assembly ([0052]: “the housing 201 of the optical transceiver module 200 comprises first and second housing portions 201-1 and 201-2 that couple together and define a cavity 255 (See FIG. 4) therebetween.”).
Lin suggests but does not explicitly teach and Raring does not teach and Murry does teach wherein the circuit board comprises a first circuit board and a second circuit board that are stacked and electrically connected to each other for electrically controlling the laser transceiver assembly and the thermoelectric cooler temperature control assembly respectively ([0024], [0022]: “The temperature sensor 160 includes leads 162 that may be electrically coupled (e.g., by soldering) to the circuit board 123 to allow temperature sensor signals to be sent to and/or from control circuitry via the circuit board 123.”, Figures 2 and 3 show these leads connected to the underside of board 123; [0017]: “Pins 128a, 128b may also be coupled to external drive circuitry such that the drive circuitry is coupled via the interfacing circuitry to the leads 116a, 116b, and the laser 113.”; Figures 2 and 3 show 116a on top of the circuit board and [0018] notes that leads may be on the top; Thus, the TEC controller and the laser controller may be on opposite sides of the board, and therefore stacked.) ;
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Murry to stack the TEC and laser controllers into the device of Lin in view of Raring. Stacking the boards is an efficient use of space and uses less material overall, which therefore reduces overall device size and cost. Both of these features are highly desirable for end users.
Regarding Claim 5, which depends from rejected Claim 2, Lin does not teach and Raring does not teach and Murry does teach wherein a support plate, fixed on the second outer housing and supporting the first circuit board ([0023]: “The posts 142a, 142b and holes 146a, 146b at the other end of the mounting base 140 may receive fasteners to facilitate mounting the assembled laser module to a circuit board.” The posts are fixed on the lower housing portion and constitute a support plate.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Murry to mount the circuit board on a support plate into the device of Lin in view of Raring. The use of a support plate to stabilize a circuit board can reduce vibrational effects which serve to degrade the circuit board over time. Better vibrational characteristics result in a longer mean time to failure for the components, realizing savings for the end user.
Regarding Claim 6, which depends from rejected Claim 1, Lin further discloses wherein
the housing body comprises a first outer housing, a second outer housing and a third outer housing that are fixed together, the second outer housing being located between the first outer housing and the third outer housing ([0052]: “As shown, the housing 201 of the optical transceiver module 200 comprises first and second housing portions 201-1 and 201-2 that couple together and define a cavity 255 (See FIG. 4) therebetween.” The portion 201-2 comprises sidewalls and a bottom, which the examiner identifies with the second and third outer housings, respectively. The sidewall second portion is necessarily between the first and second portions.) ;
the laser transceiver assembly and the first circuit board are located between the first outer housing and the second outer housing (Figures 2 and 3, [0056], [0057]; the transceiver and circuit board (substrate) are located within the cavity formed by the housing portions, and reasonably taken here to be between the first and second outer housings);
the thermoelectric cooler temperature control assembly and second circuit board are located between the third outer housing and the second outer housing (Figures 2 and 3, [0056], [0043], [0063]; the cooler and the circuit board (substrate) are located within the cavity formed by the housing portions, and reasonable taken here to be between the second and third outer housings.);
and the upper cover of the sealed chamber and a portion of the second outer housing together form the sealed chamber, and enclose and seal the laser transceiver assembly ([0052]: “the housing 201 of the optical transceiver module 200 comprises first and second housing portions 201-1 and 201-2 that couple together and define a cavity 255 (See FIG. 4) therebetween.”).
Lin suggests but does not explicitly teach and Raring does not teach and Murry does teach wherein the circuit board comprises a first circuit board and a second circuit board that are stacked and electrically connected to each other for electrically controlling the laser transceiver assembly and the thermoelectric cooler temperature control assembly respectively ([0024], [0022]: “The temperature sensor 160 includes leads 162 that may be electrically coupled (e.g., by soldering) to the circuit board 123 to allow temperature sensor signals to be sent to and/or from control circuitry via the circuit board 123.”, Figures 2 and 3 show these leads connected to the underside of board 123; [0017]: “Pins 128a, 128b may also be coupled to external drive circuitry such that the drive circuitry is coupled via the interfacing circuitry to the leads 116a, 116b, and the laser 113.”; Figures 2 and 3 show 116a on top of the circuit board and [0018] notes that leads may be on the top; Thus, the TEC controller and the laser controller may be on opposite sides of the board, and therefore stacked.) ;
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Murry to stack the TEC and laser controllers into the device of Lin in view of Raring. Stacking the boards is an efficient use of space and uses less material overall, which therefore reduces overall device size and cost. Both of these features are highly desirable for end users.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin in view of Raring and in view of Murry as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of PCBWay (https://www.pcbway.com/blog/Engineering_Technical/Multilayer_PCB_Stackup_Planning.html).
Regarding Claim 3, which depends from rejected Claim 2, Lin does not teach and MURRY does not teach and PCBWay does teach a first electromagnetic shield and a second electromagnetic shield fixed on the first circuit board and the second circuit board respectively, the first electromagnetic shield and the second electromagnetic shield being located between the first circuit board and the second circuit board (Figure 4, Page 2 disclose a board with a circuit on the top layer and a circuit on the bottom layer in a stacked configuration. Between them are two conductive ground planes, which are well-known in the art to act as Faraday cages and suppress electromagnetic interference.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of PCBWay into the device of Lin in view of MURRY to include two electromagnetic shields between the first and second circuit board. PCBWay teaches that adding more plane layers can improve EMI performance, which is essential to robust data retrievals and highly important to end users.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin in view of Raring and in view of Murry as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Yeh (TWM524593U).
Regarding Claim 4, which depends from rejected Claim 2, Lin does not teach and MURRY does not teach and Yeh does teach wherein the first outer housing has a first opening, one side of the upper cover of the sealed chamber facing away from the second outer housing is provided with fins (Page 3, Para 6: “The heat dissipation structures 120a protrude from one side of the body 110 relative to the accommodating space 111, and the heat dissipation openings 24 of the assembly case 20 expose the heat dissipation structures 120a”), and the fins are exposed from the first opening (Page 3, Para 3: “The heat dissipation structure 120 is a tilted fin”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Yeh to have cooling fins protrude through an opening in the cover into the device of Lin in view of MURRY. Allowing the fins to protrude out of the cover provides better coupling of the fins to the ambient environment and more efficient convective cooling. This results in lower temperature operation of the device and means components like fans are not necessary, and a small form factor can be maintained.
[AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
460
540
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin in view of Raring and in view of Murry as applied to Claim 6, and further in view of Hosking (US 2009/0122493 A1).
[AltContent: arrow]Regarding Claim 7, which depends from rejected Claim 6, characterized in that the second outer housing comprises a second opening and a third opening, the laser transceiver assembly is in contact with the thermoelectric cooler temperature control assembly through the second opening, and the first circuit board is electrically connected to the second circuit board through the third opening (Figure 3 of Hosking (reproduced above) shows second opening and the third opening in the second outer housing portion. The second opening is called out by the green arrow at the right. The smaller third opening is called out with the red arrow at left. [0036]: “TEC driver 303 may be mounted on a substrate 301 as previously discussed.” [0038]: “As explained previously, the laser driver 304 may also be mounted inside the housing 310, either on substrate 301 or on its own substrate.” Thus both circuits are mounted to each other through the third opening; [004]: “ optical transmit assembly 300 may include an optical filter 350 that is mounted onto a second TEC 307.” The filter assembly is mounted in the second opening);.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Hosking to have to differently sized openings in the second outer housing into the device of Lin in view of Raring and in view of Murry. It has been held that changes in shape are a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed component was significant. (In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966)
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin in view of Raring and in view of Murry as applied to Claim 6, and further in view of Akimoto (US 2019/0391239 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, which depends from Claim 6, Lin in view of Raring in view of Murry do not teach and Akimoto does teach wherein the second outer housing and the first outer housing surround and form a first chamber that accommodates the first circuit board, and the second outer housing and the third outer housing surround and form a second chamber that accommodates the second circuit board. (Figure 2: The board 2 is disposed between housings 41 and 42; Figure 2: The board 32 is disposed between housings 41 and 42.)
It would have been obvious to incorporate the teaching of Akimoto to locate circuit boards in different chambers formed by the housings into the device of Lin in view of Raring and in view of Murry. Shifting the positions of the circuits would not modify the operation of the overall device. The examiner refers to MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C) and In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) which held rearrangement of parts not relevant to device operation to be an obvious matter of design choice.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin in view of Raring and in view of Murry and further in view of Akimoto as applied to Claim 8, and in view of Aoki (US 2009/0010653 A1).
Regarding Claim 9, which depends from rejected Claim 8, Lin in view of Raring and in view of Murry and further in view of Akimoto does not teach and Aoki does teach wherein the sealed chamber and the first chamber are separated by a step structure of the second outer housing protruding toward the first circuit board ([0009]: “The optical transceiver part 103 is a part that performs one or both of the transmission and reception of an optical signal to be used for optical communication and includes a laser element and/or a photodiode” This is analogous to the sealed TO-can chamber of Raring.; [0009]: “The electronic substrate 102 is a driving circuit for the optical transceiver part 103.” This corresponds to the first circuit board.; [0034] 111a and 111b form a chamber containing the board 102, which is separated from transceiver part 103 as in Figure 2.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Lin in view of Raring and in view of Murry and further in view of Akimoto with the teaching of Aoki to separate the chambers with a step. It has been held that changes in shape are a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed component was significant. (In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966)
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin in view of Raring and in view of Murry as applied to Claim 6, and further in view of Terui (US 2002/0008876 A1).
Regarding Claim 10, which depends from rejected Claim 6, Lin in view of Raring and in view of Murry do not teach and Terui does teach wherein a sealing rubber body, provided at a position where the upper cover of the sealed chamber and the second outer housing are joined to each other ([0031]: “The O-rings 142 and 144 are made of rubber and have substantially the same shapes as those of the exit and entrance windows 102 and 104, respectively. The O-rings 142 and 144 are pressed by the front of the inner casing 110 against the inner front wall of the front casing 100 to establish a hermetic seal between the protective plate 130 and the exit and entrance windows 102 and 104.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Lin in view of Raring and in view of Murry with the teaching of Terui to seal the sealed chamber to the housing with a rubber body. Rubber in the form of gaskets and o-rings are well-known mechanisms for creating seals, and a skilled worker in the art could have implemented such with a reasonable expectation of achieving a successful seal.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN WADE CLOUSER whose telephone number is (571)272-0378. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 - 5:00.
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, ISAM ALSOMIRI can be reached at (571) 272-6970. 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.
/B.W.C./ Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/ISAM A ALSOMIRI/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights