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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, Claims 11-20 in the reply filed on 11/25/25 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-10 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/25/25.
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: a comma should be inserted between “photolithography” and “electron-beam lithography” in order to improve clarity. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 11-13, 15, 16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Sato (US PG Pub 2013/0335155 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Sato discloses a vertical cavity surface emitting laser (VCSEL) (FIG. 3), comprising:
a substrate (101, FIG. 3, [0041]);
a first distributed Bragg reflector (DBR) (102, FIG. 3, [0041]) disposed on the substrate;
an optical cavity (RESONATOR REGION, FIG. 3, [0041]), disposed on the first DBR, comprising:
an active region (103, FIG. 3, [0041]); and
a cavity layer (110, FIG. 3, [0041]) having two or more wavelength-specific regions (see annotated FIG. 3 below), each wavelength-specific region having a different filling factor (interpreted as having different thicknesses where wavelength-specific region 1 has a greater thickness than wavelength-specific region 2, see annotated FIG. 3 below) such that each wavelength-specific region of the VCSEL has a different optical thickness (the wavelength-specific regions are implicitly taught to have different optical thicknesses due to the regions having different physical thicknesses causing emission of different wavelengths λ1/λ2, FIG. 3, [0042]); and
a second DBR (104, FIG. 3, [0041]) disposed on the optical cavity.
PNG
media_image1.png
588
870
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, Sato discloses each wavelength-specific region of the optical cavity has a different physical thickness and/or refractive index ([0042]).
Regarding claim 13, Sato discloses each wavelength-specific region of the VCSEL generates optical emissions at a different wavelength (λ1/λ2, FIG. 3).
Regarding claim 15, Sato discloses the cavity layer comprises: a first cavity sublayer (111, FIG. 3, [0042]) having the wavelength-specific regions; and a second cavity sublayer (112, FIG. 3, [0042]) disposed on the first cavity sublayer.
Regarding claim 16, Sato discloses the first cavity sublayer and the second cavity sublayer have different refraction indexes (111/112 are made of different materials therefore having different refraction indexes, [0042]).
Regarding claim 20, Sato discloses the wavelength-specific regions having the different filling factors are: defined using photolithography (the use of photoresist implies photolithography, [0053]), electron-beam lithography, or nanoimprint lithography; and etched using wet etching or reactive-ion etching (wet etching, [0054]).
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.
Claims 11 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amann et al. (US PG Pub 2010/0128749 A1, 12/12/23 IDS) in view of Fattal et al. (US PG Pub 2012/0093189 A1, 12/12/23 IDS).
Regarding claim 11, Amann discloses a vertical cavity surface emitting laser (VCSEL) (100, FIG. 1), comprising:
a substrate (10, FIG. 1, [0036]);
a first distributed Bragg reflector (DBR) (20, FIG. 1, [0036]) disposed on the substrate;
an optical cavity (formed between 20/90, FIG. 1), disposed on the first DBR, comprising:
an active region (40, FIG. 1, [0036]); and
a cavity layer (80, FIG. 1, [0037]); and
a second DBR (90, FIG. 3, [0037]) disposed on the optical cavity.
Amann does not disclose the cavity layer having two or more wavelength-specific regions, each wavelength-specific region having a different filling factor such that each wavelength-specific region of the VCSEL has a different optical thickness.
Fattal discloses a VCSEL array (100, FIGS. 1A-1B, [0027]) comprising a grating layer (112, FIG. 1A-1B, [0027]) having sub-wavelength gratings (132-135, FIG. 1B, [0028]) configured to emit a plurality of wavelength (λ1-λ4, FIG. 1A, [0029]), each of the sub-wavelength grating includes a plurality of sub-patterns (301-303, FIG. 3A, [0039]) with different linewidths, periods, and thicknesses (various thicknesses between the sub-patterns can be seen in FIG. 4), wherein each of the plurality of sub-patterns includes a first plurality of sub-patterns (402/403, FIG. 4, [0044]) having a first depth (t1, FIG. 4, where t1 is equivalent to a first depth, [0044]) from the surface and a second plurality of sub-patterns (404/405, FIG. 4, [0044]) having a second depth (t2, FIG. 4, where t2 is equivalent to a second depth and t1>t2, [0044]) from the surface different from the first depth.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cavity layer (the grating layer) of Amann with the grating layer having the sub-wavelength gratings having two or more wavelength-specific regions, each wavelength-specific region having a different filling factor such that each wavelength-specific region of the VCSEL has a different optical thickness as taught by Fattal in order to obtain multiple output wavelengths and shapes one or more internal cavity modes and shapes one or more external transverse modes emitted through the grating (see abstract of Fattal).
Regarding claim 14, Amann, as modified, discloses the wavelength-specific regions of the cavity layer are selectively etched at substantially the same depth (FIG. 3A shows an enlarged view of the grating sub-patterns having substantially the same depth).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17-19 are 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.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claim 17
The cited prior art fails to disclose or suggest “each wavelength-specific region of the second cavity sublayer has a different physical thickness” as recited in claim 17. In particular, Sato discloses the second cavity sublayer 112 in each of the wavelength-specific regions having the same thickness and the combination of Amann/Fattal fails to disclose the cavity layer having any cavity sublayer. Therefore, claim 17 is allowable over the cited prior art.
Claims 18-19
The cited prior art fails to disclose or suggest “a relatively thin cavity sublayer, disposed on the first cavity sublayer, having the wavelength-specific regions with the different filling factors” as recited in claim 18. In particular, Sato discloses all cavity sublayer have the same thickness and fails to disclose or suggest any relatively thin cavity sublayer disposed between the first/second cavity sublayers with different filling factors and the combination of Amann/Fattal fails to disclose or suggest the cavity layer having any cavity sublayer. Therefore, claim 18 is allowable over the cited prior art and claim 19 is also allowable as it directly depends on claim 18.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Suzuki et al. (US PG Pub 2014/0354366 A1) discloses a multi-wavelength VCSEL having a cavity layer in an optical cavity between upper/lower DBRs similar to the claimed invention (see FIG. 2).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YUANDA ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1439. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:30 AM - 6:30 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 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.
/YUANDA ZHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Prosecution Insights