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 .
Drawings
The drawings submitted have been reviewed and determined to facilitate understanding of the invention. The drawings are accepted as submitted.
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.
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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication No. US 2017/0040775 A1 to Takabayashi et al. (“US1”).
Regarding Claim 1, US1 describes a device (see Figs 9-19) comprising:
first, second and third elements fabricated on a common substrate (21, 310), the first element comprising an optical source (11), the second element comprising at least one optical facet (12, 13 at 10b) coupled to free space, and the third element (24, 27 at line 9C-9D as shown in Figs 9, 10, 11B) comprising a waveguide that optically couples the first element to the second element;
wherein the optical facet, comprising a compound III-V semiconductor material as a core (23, see [0055]) and a dielectric material as a cladding (24, see [0055]); and
wherein an optical beam exiting the facet is characterized by a central beam propagation axis and a FWHM beam divergence greater than 40 degrees referred to at least one axis perpendicular to the central beam propagation axis (inherent to the materials and configuration described at [0055]-[0057]).
US1 does not describe the facet characterized by a refractive index contrast between the core and the cladding that is greater or equal to 1. US1 is silent as to the refractive indices and/or the refractive index contrast of the core and the cladding of the waveguide structure forming facets as 12 and 13. It is well known in the art to form an integrated waveguide having a refractive index contrast between the core and the cladding that is greater than 1 in order to provide strong guidance of optical signals, allowing for efficient guidance around corners and curves. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the facet of US1 characterized by a refractive index contrast between the core and the cladding that is greater or equal to 1. The motivation for doing so would have been to make use of a known technique to improve similar devices in the same way.
Regarding Claim 2, US1 further describes a fourth element fabricated on the common substrate;
wherein the fourth element (213, 215, 220, see [0075], [0080], [0096]) that comprises a photodetector that is optically coupled to the first element using a first splitter structure (212, 214).
US1 does not describe the first splitter structure coupling less than 10% of incident optical power received from the first element to the photodetector. US1 is silent as to the power received from the first element at the splitter is transmitted to the photodetector. US1 describes the splitters and detectors used to monitor the laser beam (see [0080]). It is well known in the art to use an asymmetric splitter coupling less than 10% of a signal to a monitoring detector to allow for minimal loss of the monitored output signal. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the first splitter structure of US1 such that it couples less than 10% of incident optical power received from the first element to the photodetector. The motivation for doing so would have been to make use of a known technique to improve similar devices in the same way
Regarding Claim 3, US1 further describes a fifth element fabricated on the common substrate;
wherein the second element comprises first and second facets (at 12, 13 as shown in Figs 5, 6, 9, 12);
wherein each of the first and second facets, comprising a compound III-V semiconductor material as a core (23, see [0055]) and a dielectric material as a cladding (24, see [0055]);
wherein an optical beam exiting each of the first and second facets is characterized by a central beam propagation axis and a FWHM beam divergence greater than 40 degrees referred to at least one axes perpendicular to the corresponding central beam propagation axis (inherent to the materials and configuration described at [0055]-[0057]);
wherein the fifth element comprises a second splitter structure (15) that is optically coupled to the optical source of the first element and to the first and second facets of the second element (see Figs 5, 6, 9, 12), the second splitter structure being configured to provide a first output to the first facet and a second output to the second facet, with substantially similar output power delivered to each of the first and second facets (see [0044]); and
wherein the first and second facets are separated by a distance d between 0.5 µm and 1000 µm (determined from the configurations shown in Figs 5, 6, 9, 12 and the describes dimensions (see [0056]-[0057]), the distance d determining an angular spacing of a fringe pattern characterizing an optical beam generated by the device as a device output (inherent to a structure shown in Figs 5, 6, 9, 12).
US1 does not describe the facet characterized by a refractive index contrast between the core and the cladding of the first and second facets that is greater or equal to 1. US1 is silent as to the refractive indices and/or the refractive index contrast of the core and the cladding of the waveguide structure forming facets as 12 and 13. It is well known in the art to form an integrated waveguide having a refractive index contrast between the core and the cladding that is greater than 1 in order to provide strong guidance of optical signals, allowing for efficient guidance around corners and curves. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the facets of US1 characterized by a refractive index contrast between the core and the cladding that is greater or equal to 1. The motivation for doing so would have been to make use of a known technique to improve similar devices in the same way.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-10 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.
Claim 4 describes a tuner element configured to adjust optical phase of light exiting the device at least one of the first and second facets.
These limitations represent subject matter not described or reasonably suggested, in conjunction with the further limitations of the present claims, by the prior art of record.
Claims 5-10 depend from Claim 4 and therefore contain at least the same allowable subject matter.
Conclusion
The prior art cited in the attached form PTO-892 are made of record and considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited prior art describes optical devices with optical sources, waveguides, and/or facets or optical facets with large FWHM beam divergence.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERRY RAHLL whose telephone number is (571)272-2356. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am-5:00pm.
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.
/JERRY RAHLL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights