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 Objections
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 3 reads “formed form” instead of “formed from”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 11-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gill et al. (EP 4080272 A1), hereinafter “Gill”, in view of Gunn, III et al. (USP No. 7,039,258), hereinafter “Gunn”.
Regarding claim 11, Gill discloses a modulator (500) (see Fig. 5) comprising: a plurality of modulators (510, 520) electrically connected in series wherein a cathode (113c) of one of the plurality of modulators is directly connected to an anode (123a) of an adjacent one (520) of the plurality of modulators (see Fig. 5, Paragraphs 35, 37, Lines 15-24); and a voltage driver (350) to drive the plurality of modulators (Paragraph 33, Lines 12-22). Gill discloses the claimed invention but does not specify and wherein the plurality of modulators connected in series provide a combined equivalent capacitance that is less than a capacitance of any individual modulator of the plurality of modulators. It has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d - 164 7 (1987). In the same field of endeavor, Gunn discloses and wherein the plurality of modulators connected in series provide a combined equivalent capacitance that is less than a capacitance of any individual modulator of the plurality of modulators (Col. 1, Lines 54-67, Col. 2, Line 65 – Col. 3, Line 5). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modulator of Gill with and wherein the plurality of modulators connected in series provide a combined equivalent capacitance that is less than a capacitance of any individual modulator of the plurality of modulators of Gunn for the purpose of providing high speed modulation (Col. 1, Lines 54-55). Furthermore, the end result produced by the configuration of the modulators is absent of a new or unexpected result.
Regarding claim 12, Gill further discloses wherein the plurality of modulators comprise: PN junctions (see Figs. 15, 16).
Regarding claim 13, Gill and Gunn teach the modulator set forth above for claim 11, Gunn further discloses wherein the plurality of modulators comprise: capacitors (Col. 5, Lines 1-4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to provide the modulator of Gill with the teachings of Gunn for at least the same reasons as those set forth above with respect to claim 11.
Regarding claim 14, Gill further discloses wherein the plurality of modulators are formed from at least one of silicon, lithium niobate, or barium titanate (Paragraph 23).
Regarding claim 15, Gill further discloses wherein at least some of the plurality of modulators comprise: a travelling-wave modulator (Paragraph 18).
Regarding claim 16, Gill and Gunn teach the modulator set forth above for claim 11, Gunn further discloses wherein at least some of the plurality of modulators comprise: a ring modulator (see Figs. 6, 7, Col. 5, Lines 54-60). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to provide the modulator of Gill with the teachings of Gunn for at least the same reasons as those set forth above with respect to claim 11.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gill (EP 4080272 A1) in view of Gunn (USP No. 7,039,258) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Elliott (USP No. 9,900,021)
Regarding claim 17, Gill and Gunn disclose the claimed invention but do not specify further comprising: two or more cascaded modulator devices, wherein each of the two or more cascaded modulator devices is formed from1 two or more of the plurality of modulators. In the same field of endeavor, Elliott discloses further comprising: two or more cascaded modulator devices, wherein each of the two or more cascaded modulator devices is formed from two or more of the plurality of modulators (see Fig. 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modulator of Gill and Gunn with further comprising: two or more cascaded modulator devices, wherein each of the two or more cascaded modulator devices is formed from two or more of the plurality of modulators of Elliott for the purpose of providing high resolution modification (Col. 1, Lines 21-26).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/04/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argued that Gill does not disclose or teach the claims as presented.
Fig. 5 of Gill, and Paragraph 37, teach an electro-optical modulator “EOM” (500) including optical modulator segments “OMS” (510, 520), interpreted as the recited modulator and the plurality of modulators, respectively, connected in series. The dual directional RF “DDRF” coupler (540) comprises two segments (541, 542), wherein Paragraph 35 teaches that each DDRF includes an input electrode segment and a coupling electrode segment, thus creating an electrical connection between the two modulators (510, 520). Paragraph 37 further teaches that the DDRF coupler (500) couples the output ends of electrodes 113 of modulator (510) to the input ends of electrodes (123) of the modulator (520), thus coupling the anode and cathode electrodes (113a, 113c) to, respectively, the cathode and anode electrodes (123c, 123a). Paragraph 17 adds further clarity to terms used within the reference to encompass direct connections and electrical connections; thus, direct and indirect connections or electrical and optical connections are within the level of ordinary skill in the art. Additionally, Gunn teaches modulating elements (240-1 to 240-k), directly connected in series (see Fig. 2). Gill meets the structural requirements of the claim language but does not specify that the combined equivalent capacitance is less than a capacitance of any individual modulator of the plurality of modulators. This end result is well known in the art and is absent of a new or unexpected result. Gunn provides further evidence of this knowledge (see Col. 2, Line 65 – Col. 3, Line 5). Applicant also admitted in Paragraph 38 of the current application that this is a well known end result. In addition, the fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985). Lastly, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. For these reasons, the claims remain rejected.
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 MAHIDERE S SAHLE whose telephone number is (571)270-3329. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00 AM to 5:00 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, Ricky Mack can be reached at 571 272-2333. 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.
/MAHIDERE S SAHLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 9/5/2026
1 See claim objection above
Prosecution Insights