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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant has amended claim 14 and added claims 19-28.
Applicant's arguments filed 07/30/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 7 of the response, applicant indicates that Fig. 7A discloses “the resonator surface being arranged offset from the side faces extending in transverse direction of the semiconductor laser”. The Office notes that applicant points to element 11 in Fig. 7a which is also described as “side faces”. This cannot be the “side faces” discussed in the claim, because claim 14 requires “the semiconductor laser has a resonator surface at each of the side faces”. Fig. 7A shows elements 30, “a resonator surface”, and 31, “a side face”. Both 30 and 31 points to the same surface. Accordingly, side face (31) appears to be “the semiconductor laser has a resonator surface at each of the side faces”. Fig. 7a does not show element 31 to be offset from element 30. Since Fig. 7A does not show “the side faces” as claimed relative to the other limitations of the claim, the argument is not persuasive, and the objection is maintained.
On page 9, applicant contends “Fang’s disclosed widening is associated with etched end facets and window/alcove structures, not with a ridge waveguide having transversely widened portion within which a recess is arranged as now claimed”. The Office disagrees. For instance, Fig. 4 shows that the transversely widened portion extends passed the alcoves and the recess is within the extent of the transversely widened portion.
On page 10, applicant further contends that Fang does not disclose “the recess is adjacent to a semiconductor material that is at the same height at any location spaced apart from the side face extending in transverse direction”. Applicant supports this argument by contending Fang’s windows extend down through MQW layers to the substrate. While the Office does not disagree with applicant’s characterization of Fang, the claim does not support applicant’s interpretation. Applicant’s interpretation relies on the specification which uses different language to the claim. The specification states the “recess on the side opposite to the side face extending in transverse direction is surround along its circumference by semiconductor material which is at the same level”. Applicant claims, “the recess is adjacent to a semiconductor material that is at the same height at any location spaced apart from the side face extending in transverse direction”, which has a different scope. “Adjacent” is broader than side by side and does not require absolute contact and is different than “surround along its circumference”. The Office notes that applicant defines “a semiconductor material” and “a transversely widened portion” separately that supports an interpretation that “a semiconductor material” is not limited to the semiconductor material of “a transversely widened portion”. Furthermore, the broadest reasonable interpretation of “at the same height” does not require “at the same height at the top surface of the semiconductor material”. Rather, “at the same height” merely each point is selected “at the same height” which can be any point in the semiconductor stack. At each point along the recess (27), Fang shows “a semiconductor material that is at the same height at any location spaced apart from the side face extending in transverse direction”
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 08/11/2023, 05/15/2024, and 06/17/2025 were filed on or after the filing date of this application. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “the resonator surface being arranged offset from the side faces extending in transverse direction of the semiconductor laser” of claim 141 and “the recess extends continuously from one of the two side faces extending in the longitudinal direction to the other of the two side faces extending in the longitudinal direction” of claim 17 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
New claim 27 depends from claim 14. The Office cannot find support for “the recess extends continuously from one of the two side faces extending in the longitudinal direction to the other of the two side faces extending in the longitudinal direction” in combination with “the resonator region is a ridge waveguide having a transversely widened portion”2.
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.
Claims 14, 20 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.
Claim 14 recites “the side face extending in transverse direction”. “The side face” lacks antecedent basis. Applicant previously “the side faces”. Accordingly, it is unclear what face applicant is referring to. For the purpose of this Office Action, the Office will interpret the claim as “the side faces extending in transverse direction”.
Claims 15 and 19-28 are indefinite at least based on their dependence from claim 14.
Claim 20 recites “the side face” that lacks antecedent basis. The claim is indefinite, because it is unclear if “the side face” refers to one of “the side faces” or “the side face of the recess”. For the purpose of this Office Action, the Office will interpret the claim as “the side face of the recess”.
Claim 14 recites “a first section of a side face of the recess and a second section of the side face of the recess enclose an angle of more than 180° in the recess.” “Enclose an angle” is best understood as an alternative definition of “subtended”3. However, there are no two rays that can be drawn between any points on a first section of a side face of the recess and a second section of the side face of the recess that result in an angle of more than 180°.
PNG
media_image1.png
478
349
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Since applicant has not clearly redefined the term and appears to be using the term contrary to its accepted ordinary meaning, the claim is indefinite. For the purpose of this Office Action, the Office will interpret the claim as “a first section of a side face of the recess and a second section of the side face of the recess form an angle in the recess of more than 180°.”
Claims 15 and 16 are indefinite at least based on their dependence from claim 14.
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 14, 15, 19-23, 26, and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fang et al. (US20140219305A1), hereafter Fang.
Regarding claim 14, Fang discloses a semiconductor laser (Title; Abstract) comprising a semiconductor layer sequence (Fig. 6 elements 22 and 38) and a resonator region E (Fig. 5 elements 18 and 20; [0065]), wherein the resonator region is a ridge waveguide having a transversely widened portion (Fig. 4 element 24 is shown to be wider at element 26), the semiconductor laser extends along the resonator region between two side faces extending in transverse direction (See annotated Fig. 5 below); the semiconductor laser has a resonator surface at each of the side faces extending in transverse direction (See annotated Fig. 5 below), the resonator surface being arranged offset from the side faces extending in transverse direction of the semiconductor laser (See annotated Fig. 5 below), and the semiconductor laser has a recess along each of the side faces extending in transverse direction (See annotated Fig. 5 below), the recess is arranged within the transversely widened portion (Fig. 5 shows the recess, annotated below, within the transversely widened portion), the recess is adjacent to a semiconductor material that is at the same height at any location spaced apart from the side face extending in transverse direction (Fig. 4 shows the semiconductor material at the same height spaced apart from the side face), element the recess having at least one transition at which (See annotated inset in Fig. 5 below), in plan view of the semiconductor laser, a first section of a side face of the recess and a second section of the side face of the recess enclose an angle of more than 180° in the recess (See annotated inset in Fig. 5 below).
PNG
media_image2.png
391
566
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15, Fang further discloses the recess extends into a substrate of the semiconductor laser on which the semiconductor layer sequence is arranged (Fig. 6 element 27 extends into element 22).
Regarding claim 19, Fang further discloses the side face of each recess is curved or kinked at the transition (Fig. 5 inset shows at least a kinked transition).
Regarding claim 20, Fang further discloses the transition, viewed from a resonator axis of the resonator region in the transverse direction, is the first point on the side face at which the side face deviates from a straight course (See annotated inset in Fig. 5 above).
Regarding claim 21, Fang further disclose the transition is arranged between a first partial region of the recess and a second partial region of the recess, wherein the resonator surface is formed by means of the first partial region, and wherein the second partial region has, at least in places, a larger extension in the longitudinal direction than the first partial region (See annotated Fig. 4 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
237
299
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 22, Fang further discloses the angle at the transition is between 180.001 and 359, inclusive (See annotated inset in Fig. 5 above).
Regarding claim 23, Fang further discloses a distance between the transition and the resonator region is at most 100 µm (See annotated Fig. 5 above. The transition is at the resonator face which is part of the resonator region resulting in a distance of 0 µm which is less than 100 µm).
Regarding claim 26, Fang further discloses the semiconductor laser comprises a side face extending in the longitudinal direction, and wherein the recess is spaced from the side face extending in the longitudinal direction (See annotated Fig. 4 below).
PNG
media_image4.png
566
636
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 27, Fang further discloses the semiconductor laser comprises two side faces extending in the longitudinal direction, and wherein the recess extends continuously from one of the two side faces extending in the longitudinal direction to the other of the two side faces extending in the longitudinal direction (See annotated Fig. 4 below).
PNG
media_image5.png
566
636
media_image5.png
Greyscale
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.
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.
Claims 24 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fang in view of Ishida (US20010030328A1), hereafter Ishida.
Regarding claim 24, Fang does not explicitly disclose the resonator surface is a crystal plane extending perpendicular to the resonator region. However, Ishida discloses the resonator surface is a crystal plane extending perpendicular to the resonator region (Fig. 9). An advantage is to help improve the yield ([0005]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fang with the resonator surface is a crystal plane extending perpendicular to the resonator region as disclosed by Ishida in order to help improve the yield.
Regarding claim 25, Fang does not explicitly disclose the semiconductor layer sequence is based on a nitride compound semiconductor material, and wherein the resonator surface is a (1-100) plane or a (10-10) plane of the semiconductor layer sequence. Ishida further discloses the semiconductor layer sequence is based on a nitride compound semiconductor material (Abstract), and wherein the resonator surface is a (1-100) plane or a (10-10) plane of the semiconductor layer sequence (Fig. 9). An advantage is to select a known material in order to provide the desired output wavelength based on the intended use of the device ([0001]) and to help improve the yield ([0005]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fang the semiconductor layer sequence is based on a nitride compound semiconductor material, and wherein the resonator surface is a (1-100) plane or a (10-10) plane of the semiconductor layer sequence as disclosed by Ishida in order to select a known material in order to provide the desired output wavelength based on the intended use of the device and to help improve the yield.
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fang in view of Kawada et al. (JP5347566B2), hereafter Kawada.
Regarding claim 28, Fang does not explicitly disclose the second section is curved at least in places. However, Kawada discloses the second section is curved at least in places (Fig. 4 element 33a). An advantage is to increase manufacturing efficiency and reduced manufacturing cost (Abstract). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fang with the second section is curved at least in places as disclosed by Kawada in order to increase manufacturing efficiency and reduced manufacturing cost.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached Notice of References Cited. See, e.g., JP58178581A Figs. 12 and 13.
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 JOSHUA KING whose telephone number is (571)270-1441. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 10am-5pm MT.
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, Min Sun 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.
/Joshua King/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828 09/30/2026
1 Fig. 7A of the application shows the resonator surface (30) and the side faces (31). However, Fig. 7A shows the portions 31 and 30 are not offset but instead occupy the same plane.
2 The Office notes that claim 27 appears to be inconsistent with applicant’s arguments regarding the interpretation of “the recess extends continuously from one of the two side faces extending in the longitudinal direction to the other of the two side faces extending in the longitudinal direction”.
3 As explained in the Wikipedia article regarding subtended angle, in some instances “the angle is said to subtend the segment” and “enclose” is an alternative to “subtend”.
Prosecution Insights