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
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 03/29/2024 is/are being considered by the Examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Avis et al, “Analysis of Multipartite Entanglement Distribution using a Central Quantum-Network Node” (published at https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.05517, February 2023, provided by Applicant via an IDS submission dated 03/29/2024).
Regarding claim 1, Avis teaches a method comprising:
entangling, by a central node (see Avis Figure 1, “factory node”), a plurality of end nodes with the central node (see caption for Figure 1 which indicates that respective Bell states are shared between the factory node and end nodes and page 1, first column, “Much research focuses on the distribution of bipartite entangled states, or Bell states, which are shared only between two nodes” indicating that a Bell state is an entangled state), wherein the plurality of end nodes includes three or more end nodes (see Figure 1, five “end nodes” and Figure 2 which shows “N” end nodes. The caption for Figure 2 indicates that a “factory node” is synonymous with a “central node”) and entangled states between the central node and the plurality of end nodes are entangled to corresponding quantum memories of the central node (see page 2, second column, “When a quantum connection creates a Bell state, it is shared between the central node and the corresponding end node, and can be stored in quantum memory” and Figure 12(a) which shows three NV centers, along with its caption which states “Within the factory node, N = 3 NV centers distribute and store entanglement with the end nodes”, indicating each NV center is a respective quantum memory); and
entangling the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories associated with the plurality of end nodes, by the central node, to distribute an entangled state to the plurality of end nodes (see Figure 12(a) and caption which states “When all these NV centers are entangled, a GHZ state is distributed between them, after which each executes a BSM to teleport the GHZ state to the end nodes.” The caption for Figure 3 also indicates that a GHZ state is an entangled state).
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) 2 and 4-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Avis et al, “Analysis of Multipartite Entanglement Distribution using a Central Quantum-Network Node” (published at https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.05517, February 2023, provided by Applicant via an IDS submission dated 03/29/2024) in view of Krastanov et al, U.S. Publication No. 2023/0208628.
Regarding claim 2, Avis teaches all the limitations of claim 1, but does not expressively teach wherein entangling the plurality of end nodes with the central node comprises:
swapping an electron state of a corresponding quantum memory of the central node entangled to an end node with a nuclear state in the corresponding quantum memory.
However, Krastanov in a similar invention in the same filed of endeavor teaches a method comprising entangling a plurality of end nodes (see Krastanov Figure 11A, Alice and Bob and paragraph [0049]) with a central node via respective quantum memories (see Figure 11A, FPSA and paragraph [0150]) as taught in Avis wherein entangling the plurality of end nodes with the central node comprises:
swapping an electron state of a corresponding quantum memory of the central node entangled to an end node with a nuclear state in the corresponding quantum memory (see paragraphs [0147] and [0150]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious as a matter of simple substitution to replace the method of entangling the plurality of end nodes with the central node as taught in Avis with that taught in Krastanov to yield the predictable results of successfully entangling the memories.
Regarding claim 4, Avis teaches all the limitations of claim 1, but does not expressively teach wherein entangling the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories comprises:
entangling an electron state of a second quantum memory having a nuclear state entangled to a second end node with an electron state of a first quantum memory having a nuclear state entangled to a first end node.
However, Krastanov in a similar invention in the same filed of endeavor teaches a method comprising entangling a plurality of end nodes (see Krastanov Figure 11A, Alice and Bob and paragraph [0049]) with a central node via respective quantum memories (see Figure 11A, FPSA and paragraph [0150]) as taught in Avis wherein entangling the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories comprises:
entangling an electron state of a second quantum memory having a nuclear state entangled to a second end node with an electron state of a first quantum memory having a nuclear state entangled to a first end node (see paragraphs [0147] and [0150]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious as a matter of simple substitution to replace the method of entangling the plurality of end nodes with the central node as taught in Avis with that taught in Krastanov to yield the predictable results of successfully entangling the memories.
Regarding claim 5, Avis in view of Krastanov teaches all the limitations of claim 4, and further teaches wherein entangling the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories further comprises:
performing a controlled NOT operation between the electron state and nuclear state of the first and second quantum memories to entangle the nuclear states of the first and second quantum memories (see Krastanov paragraph [0150]) to distribute a Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state between the first and second end nodes (see Avis, caption for Figure 12).
Regarding claim 6, Avis in view of Krastanov teaches all the limitations of claim 5, and further teaches wherein entangling the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories further comprises:
entangling an electron state of a third quantum memory with the electron state of the first quantum memory, wherein the third quantum memory has a nuclear spin entangled to a third end node (see Krastanov paragraphs [0147] and [0150] applied to each of the end nodes shown in Avis Figure 12(a)).
Regarding claim 7, Avis in view of Krastanov teaches all the limitations of claim 6, and further teaches wherein entangling the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories further comprises:
performing the controlled NOT operation between the electron state and nuclear state of the first and third quantum memories to entangle the nuclear states of the first and third quantum memories to distribute the Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state between the first, second, and third end nodes (see Krastanov paragraphs [0147] and [0150] applied to each of the end nodes shown in Avis Figure 12(a)).
Regarding claim 8, Avis teaches all the limitations of claim 1, and further teaches wherein the plurality of end nodes includes four or more end nodes (while Avis Figure 12(a) shows only three end nodes, Figures 1 and 2 make it clear that more end nodes are contemplated in their system); and distribut[ing] a Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state between the four or more end nodes (see Avis, caption for Figure 12).
Avis does not expressively teach wherein entangling the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories comprises:
entangling an electron state of a corresponding quantum memory associated with an end node j with an electron state of a quantum memory associated with an end node j+1, wherein j is an odd number greater than or equal to one and less than a quantity of end nodes; and performing a controlled NOT operation between the electron state and nuclear state of corresponding quantum memories of an initial three end nodes, and between the electron and nuclear state of quantum memories associated with nodes k, k+1 to entangle the nuclear states of the corresponding quantum memories to distribute a Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state between the four or more end nodes, wherein k is an even number greater than or equal to four and less than the quantity of end nodes.
However, Krastanov in a similar invention in the same filed of endeavor teaches a method comprising entangling a plurality of end nodes (see Krastanov Figure 11A, Alice and Bob and paragraph [0049]) with a central node via respective quantum memories (see Figure 11A, FPSA and paragraph [0150]) as taught in Avis wherein entangling the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories comprises:
entangling an electron state of a corresponding quantum memory associated with an end node with an electron state of a quantum memory associated with another end node (see paragraph [0147]) and performing a controlled NOT operation between the electron state and nuclear state of corresponding quantum memories of the end nodes (see paragraph [0150]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious as a matter of simple substitution to replace the method of entangling the plurality of end nodes with the central node as taught in Avis with that taught in Krastanov to yield the predictable results of successfully entangling the memories.
Avis in view of Krastanov further teaches entangling an electron state of a corresponding quantum memory associated with an end node j with an electron state of a quantum memory associated with an end node j+1, wherein j is an odd number greater than or equal to one and less than a quantity of end nodes (see Krastanov paragraph [0147] as applied to three nodes of Avis Figure 2); and
performing a controlled NOT operation between the electron state and nuclear state of corresponding quantum memories of an initial three end nodes, and between the electron and nuclear state of quantum memories associated with nodes k, k+1 to entangle the nuclear states of the corresponding quantum memories (see Krastanov paragraph [0150]) to distribute a Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state between the four or more end nodes, wherein k is an even number greater than or equal to four and less than the quantity of end nodes (see Avis, caption for Figure 12 as applied to Figure 2).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Avis et al, “Analysis of Multipartite Entanglement Distribution using a Central Quantum-Network Node” (published at https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.05517, February 2023, provided by Applicant via an IDS submission dated 03/29/2024) in view of Harrison et al, U.S. Publication No. 2012/0148237.
Regarding claim 3, Avis teaches all the limitations of claim 1, and further teaches wherein the entangled state includes a Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state (see Avis, caption for Figure 12).
Avis does not expressively teach measuring elapsed time to distribute the entangled state to ensure integrity of the Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state.
However, Harrison in a similar invention in the same field of endeavor teaches a method of distributing an entangled state between end nodes (see Harrison Figure 3B and paragraph [0075]) as taught for the GHZ state in Avis comprising
measuring elapsed time to distribute the entangled state to ensure integrity of the state (see paragraph [0184]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to combine the teaching of measuring elapsed time with entanglement as taught in Harrison with the method of distributing a GHZ state taught in Avis, the motivation being to quickly know if an entangled state is faulty and thereby timely correct it.
Claim(s) 9 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Avis et al, “Analysis of Multipartite Entanglement Distribution using a Central Quantum-Network Node” (published at https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.05517, February 2023, provided by Applicant via an IDS submission dated 03/29/2024) in view of Bhaskar et al, U.S. Patent No. 11,641,242.
Regarding claim 9, Avis teaches an apparatus comprising:
a network node (see Avis Figure 1, “factory node”) including a plurality of quantum memories (see page 2, second column, “When a quantum connection creates a Bell state, it is shared between the central node and the corresponding end node, and can be stored in quantum memory” and Figure 12(a) which shows three NV centers, along with its caption which states “Within the factory node, N = 3 NV centers distribute and store entanglement with the end nodes”, indicating each NV center is a respective quantum memory), the network node configured to:
entangle a plurality of end nodes with the network node (see caption for Figure 1 which indicates that respective Bell states are shared between the factory node and end nodes and page 1, first column, “Much research focuses on the distribution of bipartite entangled states, or Bell states, which are shared only between two nodes” indicating that a Bell state is an entangled state), wherein the plurality of end nodes includes three or more end nodes and entangled states between the network node (see Figure 1, five “end nodes” and Figure 2 which shows “N” end nodes. The caption for Figure 2 indicates that a “factory node” is synonymous with a “central node”) and the plurality of end nodes are entangled to corresponding quantum memories of the network node (see page 2, second column, “When a quantum connection creates a Bell state, it is shared between the central node and the corresponding end node, and can be stored in quantum memory” and caption for Figure 12(a),“Within the factory node, N = 3 NV centers distribute and store entanglement with the end nodes”); and
entangle the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories associated with the plurality of end nodes to distribute an entangled state to the plurality of end nodes (see Figure 12(a) and caption which states “When all these NV centers are entangled, a GHZ state is distributed between them, after which each executes a BSM to teleport the GHZ state to the end nodes.” The caption for Figure 3 also indicates that a GHZ state is an entangle state).
Avis does not expressively teach wherein [the] network node includes: one or more processors, wherein the one or more processors are configured to [perform operations].
However, Bashkar in a similar invention in the same field of endeavor teaches a network node (see Bashkar Figure 1B, communications hub 104) including a plurality of quantum memories (see Figure 1B, quantum memories 152-166) entangled to one of a plurality of end nodes (see Figure 1B, endpoints 118-122) as taught in Avis wherein [the] network node include[es]
one or more processors, wherein the one or more processors are configured to [perform operations] (see Figure 1B, computing device 114 and column 11, “Thus, in response to a request for distributed quantum entanglement from customer 1, computing device 114 may identify quantum memories 152 and 160 as storing photons that can be used to provide the requested distributed quantum entanglement to customer 1”).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to combine the teaching of a network node having one or more processor for performing operations as taught in Bashkar with the system taught in Avis, the motivation being to allow automation and the entanglement tasks.
Regarding claim 15, Avis teaches a network node (see Avis Figure 1, “factory node”) configured to:
entangle a plurality of end nodes with the network node (see caption for Figure 1 which indicates that respective Bell states are shared between the factory node and end nodes and page 1, first column, “Much research focuses on the distribution of bipartite entangled states, or Bell states, which are shared only between two nodes” indicating that a Bell state is an entangled state), wherein the plurality of end nodes includes three or more end nodes (see Figure 1, five “end nodes” and Figure 2 which shows “N” end nodes. The caption for Figure 2 indicates that a “factory node” is synonymous with a “central node”) and entangled states between the network node and the plurality of end nodes are entangled to corresponding quantum memories of the network node (see page 2, second column, “When a quantum connection creates a Bell state, it is shared between the central node and the corresponding end node, and can be stored in quantum memory” and Figure 12(a) which shows three NV centers, along with its caption which states “Within the factory node, N = 3 NV centers distribute and store entanglement with the end nodes”, indicating each NV center is a respective quantum memory); and
entangle the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories associated with the plurality of end nodes to distribute an entangled state to the plurality of end nodes (see Figure 12(a) and caption which states “When all these NV centers are entangled, a GHZ state is distributed between them, after which each executes a BSM to teleport the GHZ state to the end nodes.” The caption for Figure 3 also indicates that a GHZ state is an entangle state).
Avis does not expressively teach
one or more non-transitory computer readable storage media encoded with processing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of [the] network node, cause the one or more processors to [perform operations].
However, Bashkar in a similar invention in the same field of endeavor teaches a system comprising network node (see Bashkar Figure 1B, communications hub 104) including a plurality of quantum memories (see Figure 1B, quantum memories 152-166) entangled to one of a plurality of end nodes (see Figure 1B, endpoints 118-122) as taught in Avis wherein [the] system includes
one or more non-transitory computer readable storage media encoded with processing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of [the] network node, cause the one or more processors to [perform operations] (see Figure 1B, computing device 114; Figure 12, which is an embodiment of computing device 114, system memory 1220; and column 19, “System memory 1220 may be configured to store instructions and data accessible by processor(s) 1210… In the illustrated embodiment, program instructions and data implementing one or more desired functions, such as those methods, techniques, and data described above, are shown stored within system memory 1220 as code 1225 and data 1226”).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to combine the teaching of a network node one or more non-transitory computer readable storage media encoded with processing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors cause the one or more processors to [perform operations] as taught in Bashkar with the system taught in Avis, the motivation being to allow automation and the entanglement tasks.
Claim(s) 10-14 and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Avis et al, “Analysis of Multipartite Entanglement Distribution using a Central Quantum-Network Node” (published at https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.05517, February 2023, provided by Applicant via an IDS submission dated 03/29/2024) in view of Bhaskar et al, U.S. Patent No. 11,641,242 and Krastanov et al, U.S. Publication No. 2023/0208628.
Regarding claim 10, Avis in view of Bhaskar teaches all the limitations of claim 9, but does not expressively teach wherein entangling the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories comprises:
entangling an electron state of a second quantum memory having a nuclear state entangled to a second end node with an electron state of a first quantum memory having a nuclear state entangled to a first end node.
However, Krastanov in a similar invention in the same filed of endeavor teaches a method comprising entangling a plurality of end nodes (see Krastanov Figure 11A, Alice and Bob and paragraph [0049]) with a central node via respective quantum memories (see Figure 11A, FPSA and paragraph [0150]) as taught in Avis in view of Bhaskar wherein entangling the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories comprises:
entangling an electron state of a second quantum memory having a nuclear state entangled to a second end node with an electron state of a first quantum memory having a nuclear state entangled to a first end node (see paragraphs [0147] and [0150]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious as a matter of simple substitution to replace the method of entangling the plurality of end nodes with the central node as taught in Avis in view of Bhaskar with that taught in Krastanov to yield the predictable results of successfully entangling the memories.
Regarding claim 11, Avis in view of Bhaskar and Krastanov teaches all the limitations of claim 10, and further teaches wherein entangling the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories further comprises:
performing a controlled NOT operation between the electron state and nuclear state of the first and second quantum memories to entangle the nuclear states of the first and second quantum memories (see Krastanov paragraph [0150]) to distribute a Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state between the first and second end nodes (see Avis, caption for Figure 12).
Regarding claim 12, Avis in view of Bhaskar and Krastanov teaches all the limitations of claim 11, and further teaches wherein entangling the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories further comprises:
entangling an electron state of a third quantum memory with the electron state of the first quantum memory, wherein the third quantum memory has a nuclear spin entangled to a third end node (see Krastanov paragraphs [0147] and [0150] applied to each of the end nodes shown in Avis Figure 12(a)).
Regarding claim 13, Avis in view of Bhaskar and Krastanov teaches all the limitations of claim 12, and further teaches wherein entangling the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories further comprises:
performing the controlled NOT operation between the electron state and nuclear state of the first and third quantum memories to entangle the nuclear states of the first and third quantum memories to distribute the Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state between the first, second, and third end nodes (see Krastanov paragraphs [0147] and [0150] applied to each of the end nodes shown in Avis Figure 12(a)).
Regarding claim 14, Avis in view of Bhaskar teaches all the limitations of claim 9, and further teaches wherein the plurality of end nodes includes four or more end nodes (while Avis Figure 12(a) shows only three end nodes, Figures 1 and 2 make it clear that more end nodes are contemplated in their system); and distribut[ing] a Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state between the four or more end nodes (see Avis, caption for Figure 12).
Avis in view of Bhaskar does not expressively teach wherein entangling the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories comprises:
entangling an electron state of a corresponding quantum memory associated with an end node j with an electron state of a quantum memory associated with an end node j+1, wherein j is an odd number greater than or equal to one and less than a quantity of end nodes; and performing a controlled NOT operation between the electron state and nuclear state of corresponding quantum memories of an initial three end nodes, and between the electron and nuclear state of quantum memories associated with nodes k, k+1 to entangle the nuclear states of the corresponding quantum memories to distribute a Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state between the four or more end nodes, wherein k is an even number greater than or equal to four and less than the quantity of end nodes.
However, Krastanov in a similar invention in the same filed of endeavor teaches a method comprising entangling a plurality of end nodes (see Krastanov Figure 11A, Alice and Bob and paragraph [0049]) with a central node via respective quantum memories (see Figure 11A, FPSA and paragraph [0150]) as taught in Avis in view of Bhaskar wherein entangling the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories comprises:
entangling an electron state of a corresponding quantum memory associated with an end node with an electron state of a quantum memory associated with another end node (see paragraph [0147]) and performing a controlled NOT operation between the electron state and nuclear state of corresponding quantum memories of the end nodes (see paragraph [0150]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious as a matter of simple substitution to replace the method of entangling the plurality of end nodes with the central node as taught in Avis in view of Bhaskar with that taught in Krastanov to yield the predictable results of successfully entangling the memories.
Avis in view of Bhaskar and Krastanov further teaches entangling an electron state of a corresponding quantum memory associated with an end node j with an electron state of a quantum memory associated with an end node j+1, wherein j is an odd number greater than or equal to one and less than a quantity of end nodes (see Krastanov paragraph [0147] as applied to three nodes of Avis Figure 2); and
performing a controlled NOT operation between the electron state and nuclear state of corresponding quantum memories of an initial three end nodes, and between the electron and nuclear state of quantum memories associated with nodes k, k+1 to entangle the nuclear states of the corresponding quantum memories (see Krastanov paragraph [0150]) to distribute a Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state between the four or more end nodes, wherein k is an even number greater than or equal to four and less than the quantity of end nodes (see Avis, caption for Figure 12 as applied to Figure 2).
Regarding claim 16, Avis in view of Bhaskar teaches all the limitations of claim 15, but does not expressively teach wherein entangling the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories comprises:
entangling an electron state of a second quantum memory having a nuclear state entangled to a second end node with an electron state of a first quantum memory having a nuclear state entangled to a first end node.
However, Krastanov in a similar invention in the same filed of endeavor teaches a method comprising entangling a plurality of end nodes (see Krastanov Figure 11A, Alice and Bob and paragraph [0049]) with a central node via respective quantum memories (see Figure 11A, FPSA and paragraph [0150]) as taught in Avis in view of Bhaskar wherein entangling the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories comprises:
entangling an electron state of a second quantum memory having a nuclear state entangled to a second end node with an electron state of a first quantum memory having a nuclear state entangled to a first end node (see paragraphs [0147] and [0150]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious as a matter of simple substitution to replace the method of entangling the plurality of end nodes with the central node as taught in Avis in view of Bhaskar with that taught in Krastanov to yield the predictable results of successfully entangling the memories.
Regarding claim 17, Avis in view of Bhaskar and Krastanov teaches all the limitations of claim 16, and further teaches wherein entangling the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories further comprises:
performing a controlled NOT operation between the electron state and nuclear state of the first and second quantum memories to entangle the nuclear states of the first and second quantum memories (see Krastanov paragraph [0150]) to distribute a Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state between the first and second end nodes (see Avis, caption for Figure 12).
Regarding claim 18, Avis in view of Bhaskar and Krastanov teaches all the limitations of claim 17, and further teaches wherein entangling the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories further comprises:
entangling an electron state of a third quantum memory with the electron state of the first quantum memory, wherein the third quantum memory has a nuclear spin entangled to a third end node (see Krastanov paragraphs [0147] and [0150] applied to each of the end nodes shown in Avis Figure 12(a)).
Regarding claim 19, Avis in view of Bhaskar and Krastanov teaches all the limitations of claim 18, and further teaches wherein entangling the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories further comprises:
performing the controlled NOT operation between the electron state and nuclear state of the first and third quantum memories to entangle the nuclear states of the first and third quantum memories to distribute the Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state between the first, second, and third end nodes (see Krastanov paragraphs [0147] and [0150] applied to each of the end nodes shown in Avis Figure 12(a)).
Regarding claim 20, Avis in view of Bhaskar teaches all the limitations of claim 15, and further teaches wherein the plurality of end nodes includes four or more end nodes (while Avis Figure 12(a) shows only three end nodes, Figures 1 and 2 make it clear that more end nodes are contemplated in their system); and distribut[ing] a Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state between the four or more end nodes (see Avis, caption for Figure 12).
Avis in view of Bhaskar does not expressively teach wherein entangling the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories comprises:
entangling an electron state of a corresponding quantum memory associated with an end node j with an electron state of a quantum memory associated with an end node j+1, wherein j is an odd number greater than or equal to one and less than a quantity of end nodes; and performing a controlled NOT operation between the electron state and nuclear state of corresponding quantum memories of an initial three end nodes, and between the electron and nuclear state of quantum memories associated with nodes k, k+1 to entangle the nuclear states of the corresponding quantum memories to distribute a Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state between the four or more end nodes, wherein k is an even number greater than or equal to four and less than the quantity of end nodes.
However, Krastanov in a similar invention in the same filed of endeavor teaches a method comprising entangling a plurality of end nodes (see Krastanov Figure 11A, Alice and Bob and paragraph [0049]) with a central node via respective quantum memories (see Figure 11A, FPSA and paragraph [0150]) as taught in Avis in view of Bhaskar wherein entangling the entangled states of the corresponding quantum memories comprises:
entangling an electron state of a corresponding quantum memory associated with an end node with an electron state of a quantum memory associated with another end node (see paragraph [0147]) and performing a controlled NOT operation between the electron state and nuclear state of corresponding quantum memories of the end nodes (see paragraph [0150]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious as a matter of simple substitution to replace the method of entangling the plurality of end nodes with the central node as taught in Avis in view of Bhaskar with that taught in Krastanov to yield the predictable results of successfully entangling the memories.
Avis in view of Bhaskar and Krastanov further teaches entangling an electron state of a corresponding quantum memory associated with an end node j with an electron state of a quantum memory associated with an end node j+1, wherein j is an odd number greater than or equal to one and less than a quantity of end nodes (see Krastanov paragraph [0147] as applied to three nodes of Avis Figure 2); and
performing a controlled NOT operation between the electron state and nuclear state of corresponding quantum memories of an initial three end nodes, and between the electron and nuclear state of quantum memories associated with nodes k, k+1 to entangle the nuclear states of the corresponding quantum memories (see Krastanov paragraph [0150]) to distribute a Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state between the four or more end nodes, wherein k is an even number greater than or equal to four and less than the quantity of end nodes (see Avis, caption for Figure 12 as applied to Figure 2).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CASEY L KRETZER whose telephone number is (571)272-5639. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00-7:00 PM Pacific Time.
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, David Payne can be reached at (571)272-3024. 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.
/CASEY L KRETZER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2635