DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is responsive to Applicant’s response submitted 06 May 2026.
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 .
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 06 May 2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of copending Application No. 18/542,868 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 12-16, 18, 25 and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2021/0018767 to Peng et al.
In regards to claims 1, 2, 14 and 15, Peng recites an optoelectronic device and a method for optical control, comprising: a substrate (102); an optical waveguide disposed on the substrate; a pair of Bragg reflectors (112 & 116) formed in the optical waveguide to define a resonant cavity between the Bragg reflectors; an electro-optical material (114) disposed on the substrate in proximity to the optical waveguide; and electrodes (120) configured to apply an electric field to the electro-optical material so as to tune a resonant wavelength of the cavity. [0065-0066] Peng further recites the electro-optical material (114) is configured as a membrane, which extends across the resonant cavity. Although Peng does not expressly recite the electro-optical material is separated from the optical waveguide by a gap containing a dielectric material, Peng does teach layers within the Bragg reflectors to be alternating TiO2 and SiO2, the SiO2 layer (Figure 1A & Applicant’s Remarks received 06 May 2026, page 5) being between the electro-optical material and the optical waveguide. Applicant further teaches the dielectric layer to be SiO2. (Applicant’s Specification) Since Applicant and Peng both teach an SiO2 layer to be a dielectric layer and between the electro-optical material and waveguide, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to a person having ordinary skill in the art for there to be a gap containing a dielectric material between the electro-optical material and optical waveguide.
In regards to claims 3 and 16, Peng recites the electro-optical material comprises barium titanate (BTO). Since barium titanate is an example of a ferroelectric perovskite, Peng also recites the electro-optical material is a ferroelectric perovskite.
In regards to claims 4 and 17, Peng recites the electro-optical material comprises barium titanate (BTO). But Peng fails to expressly recite the optical waveguide comprises diamond. However, choosing optical waveguides comprising diamonds would be advantageous since diamonds provide an exception combination of high refractive indices and superior thermal conductivity which allowed for efficient, low-loss photonics. Since optical waveguides formed of diamonds are commercially and readily available in the art, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have provided the optical waveguide to comprise diamond.
In regards to claims 5 and 18, Peng recites a further waveguide formed on the membrane from the electro-optical material, wherein the electrodes are configured to apply a further electric field to the electro-optical material so as to switch light from the resonant cavity into the further waveguide. (Figure 1B shows an array)
In regards to claims 12, 13, 25 and 26, Peng recites an optical input (101; [0065]) Although Peng does not expressly recite comprising an input waveguide, which is disposed on the substrate, the use of an input waveguide to device an optical signal would have been an obvious matter of common skill and design choice to a person having ordinary skill in the art. The use of features, such as input optical waveguides, to deliver an optical input is well known and would have been easily manufactured on the substrate of Peng. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have provided an input waveguide, which is disposed on the substrate. Furthermore, it would have been an obvious matter of common skill and design choice to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the input waveguide to be coupled to inject one or more excitation beams into the resonant cavity and wherein the input waveguide is configured to inject the one or more excitation beams through a side of the optical waveguide in the resonant cavity by free propagation through a gap between the input waveguide and the side of the optical waveguide since the use of such features in order to provide the desired resonant wavelength of the cavity for the purpose of tuning the optoelectronic device. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have provided the input waveguide to be coupled to inject one or more excitation beams into the resonant cavity and wherein the input waveguide is configured to inject the one or more excitation beams through a side of the optical waveguide in the resonant cavity by free propagation through a gap between the input waveguide and the side of the optical waveguide.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments 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.
References Cited
The documents submitted by applicant in the Information Disclosure Statement have been considered and made of record. Note attached copy of form PTO-1449. None of the references submitted by Applicant discloses or reasonably suggest the allowable subject matter discussed above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TINA M WONG whose telephone number is (571)272-2352. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:30.
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, Uyen-Chau Le can be reached at (571) 272-2397. 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.
/TINA WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights