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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Information disclosure statement filed 12/12/2023 has been considered.
Response to Amendment
Preliminary claim amendment filed 12/12/2023 has been entered. Claims 1-6 has been cancelled and claims 7-23 are now pending.
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.
Claim(s) 7-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 109631961 A (hereinafter “CN’961”).
Regarding claim 7, CN’961 discloses an opto-mechanical array element, comprising: a rod-shaped matrix (Fig. 3) having a circular outer shape in a top down view (Fig. 3 shows generally circular outer shape due to the round outlines of elements 41 and 42), the rod-shaped matrix comprising: a plurality of coupling portions (not explicitly labeled but shown in the annotated Fig. 3 below) arranged at intervals; and a plurality of bottle-shaped resonance portions (41, 42 in Fig. 3), each of the plurality of bottle-shaped resonance portions being disposed between and connecting adjacent ones of the plurality of coupling portions, the plurality of bottle-shaped resonance portions being configured as a whispering-gallery-mode optical resonator (abstract of CN’961), wherein the plurality of coupling portions each have a smaller diameter than the plurality of bottle-shaped resonance portions (Fig. 3).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Coupling portions)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: oval][AltContent: oval][AltContent: oval]
PNG
media_image1.png
222
407
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 3 of CN’961
However, CN’961 does not explicitly disclose that the coupling portions are arranged at equal intervals as claimed in the present application. On the other hand, having coupling portions at equal intervals with plurality of microresonators is well known and common in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize the advantage of such an arrangement because tailoring coupling distance between microresonators allows for resonance tuning that support spectrum of optical modes with required polarization, frequency, and emission patters of the optical signals in a specified use-case. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the present application to modify the device of CN’961 to have coupling portions that are arranged at equal intervals in the manner claimed in the present application.
Regarding claim 8, CN’961 discloses wherein each of the plurality of coupling portions is configured to enable propagation of mechanical vibration of the plurality of bottle-shaped resonance portions adjacent to each other (page 3, last full paragraph of the English translation of CN’961 states the microresonator and coupling portions measure physical properties such as pressure and displacement. As such, the coupling portions of CN’961 necessarily enable propagation of mechanical vibrations).
Regarding claim 9, CN’961 discloses wherein the rod-shaped matrix is made of material allowing the coupling portions to bend (page 3, second paragraph of the English translation of CN’961 discloses that the rod-shaped matrix is made of glass or polymer material. As such the rod-shaped matrix is made of material that allows bending).
Regarding claim 10, CN’961 discloses wherein the rod-shaped matrix is made of a material allowing the coupling portions to twist around an axis (page 3, second paragraph of the English translation of CN’961 discloses that the rod-shaped matrix is made of glass or polymer material. As such the rod-shaped matrix is made of material that allows twisting around an axis).
Regarding claim 11, CN’961 discloses wherein the rod-shaped matrix is made of fibers made of glass or plastic (page 3, second paragraph of the English translation of CN’961 discloses that the rod-shaped matrix is made of glass or polymer material. Also page 3, sixth paragraph of the English translation of CN’961 discloses that the rod-shaped matrix is made of optical fiber).
Regarding claim 12, CN’961 discloses wherein the rod-shaped matrix is made of fibers made of glass or plastic as discussed above regarding claim 11.
Regarding claim 13, CN’961 discloses wherein the rod-shaped matrix is made of fibers made of glass or plastic as discussed above regarding claim 11.
Regarding claim 14, CN’961 discloses wherein the rod-shaped matrix is made of a material allowing the coupling portions to twist around an axis, as discussed above regarding claim 10.
Regarding claim 15, CN’961 discloses wherein the rod-shaped matrix is made of a material allowing the coupling portions to twist around an axis, as discussed above regarding claim 10.
Regarding claim 16, CN’961 discloses wherein the rod-shaped matrix is made of a material allowing the coupling portions to bend, as discussed above regarding claim 9.
Regarding claim 17, CN’961 discloses wherein the rod-shaped matrix is made of fibers made of glass or plastic, as discussed above regarding claim 11.
Regarding claim 18, CN’961 discloses wherein the rod-shaped matrix is cylindrical (page 3, sixth paragraph of the English translation of CN’961 discloses that the rod-shaped matrix is made of optical fiber. As such, the resulting structure of the rod-shaped matrix is necessarily cylindrical).
Regarding claim 19, CN’961 discloses an opto-mechanical array element comprising a plurality of coupling portions (not explicitly labeled but shown in the annotated Fig. 3 below) arranged at intervals; and a plurality of resonance portions (41, 42 in Fig. 3), each of the plurality of resonance portions being disposed between and connecting adjacent ones of the plurality of coupling portions, the plurality of resonance portions being configured as a whispering-gallery-mode optical resonator (abstract of CN’961), wherein each of the plurality of resonance portions has a diameter that decreases to a diameter of an adjacent one of the plurality of coupling portions (Fig. 3). Although CN’961 does not explicitly disclose that the plurality of coupling portions are arranged at equal intervals, such a feature is obvious for the same reasons discussed above regarding claim 7.
In addition, although CN’961 discloses a rod-shaped matrix, it does not explicitly disclose that this opto-mechanical array element comprises a ring structure in the manner claimed in claim 19. On the other hand, arranging a plurality of microresonators into a ring structure or a resonator loop is well known and common in the art. Such a ring or a loop resonator structure is known to be advantageous and desirable because it allows for a precise control over the resonance frequency modulation and signal shaping of the optical signals. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the present application to modify the device of CN’961to have the opto-mechanical array element comprising a ring structure, in the manner claimed in the present application.
Regarding claim 20, CN’961 discloses wherein each of the plurality of coupling portions is configured to enable propagation of mechanical vibration of the plurality of resonance portions adjacent to each other as already discussed above regarding claim 8.
Regarding claim 21, CN’961 discloses wherein the structure is made of material allowing the coupling portions to bend as already discussed above regarding claim 9.
Regarding claim 22, CN’961 discloses wherein the structure is made of a material allowing the coupling portion to twist around an axis as already discussed above regarding claim 10.
Regarding claim 23, CN’961 discloses wherein the structure is made of fibers made of glass or plastic as already discussed above regarding claim 11.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUNG H PAK whose telephone number is (571)272-2353. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7AM- 5PM.
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.
/SUNG H PAK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874