Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 optical coupler coupled to or at the end of the optical waveguide at a surface that is perpendicular to the substrate (as recited in claims 25 and 38) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter may 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 Interpretation
The term "footprint" which appears in independent claims 21, 33, and 37, but is not in the original disclosure, is interpreted to mean an outer boundary of the EIC or PIC in a plan view. See fig. 1A and the 4/23/2026 remarks at pp. 8-9.
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.
Claims 22 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contain 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, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. This is a new matter rejection (note MPEP 608.04).
Claims 22 and 34: There is no support in the original disclosure for the recitations of the PIC being on a die. The original disclosure barely mentions any die, let alone that a PIC is on it. [0052] and [0060] state that a PIC may include a silicon PIC die, but do not mention that the PIC could be on a die.
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 33 and 37-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2015/0341119 A1.
Claim 33: '119 discloses an optoelectronic system, comprising:
a substrate 14 (figs. 4-5);
a photonic integrated circuit (PIC) 1 (figs. 1 and 4-5) coupled with the substrate;
an optical waveguide 8 (the one labeled in fig. 4) coupled with the PIC;
an optical coupler 3 at an end of the optical waveguide (fig. 4, [0025]);
an electronic integrated circuit (EIC) 5 (figs. 1 and 4-5) coupled with the PIC 1 and comprising driver circuitry 10 (fig. 2) coupled with the PIC 1 ([0027] second sentence; see also [0030]), wherein a footprint of the EIC 5 is within a footprint of the PIC 1 (the four labels "1" in fig. 1 are part of the same PIC and do not represent four distinct PICs; note for example the waveguides 8 and 9 in fig. 1 are "defined in the silicon photonic fabric die 1", [0024])
a conductive interconnect 18 (fig. 4, [0030]) between the EIC 5 and the PIC 1; and
a processor (any of IC1-IC4 in fig. 3, [0028]) coupled with the EIC 5 (by strip lines 12 /13, bond wires 15, strip lines 16, and solder balls 17; see figs. 3-4 and [0028] and [0031]).
Claim 37: '119 discloses an optoelectronic system, comprising:
a substrate 14;
a photonic integrated circuit (PIC) 1 coupled with the substrate;
an electronic integrated circuit (EIC) 5 coupled with the PIC and comprising driver circuitry 10 coupled with the PIC, wherein the EIC and the PIC are stacked with respect to one another and wherein a footprint of the EIC is within a footprint of the PIC;
a conductive interconnect 18 between the EIC and the PIC; and
a processor IC1 coupled with the EIC. See above with regard to claim 33 for additional details.
Claim 38: The optoelectronic system further comprises:
an optical waveguide 8 (the one labeled in fig. 4) parallel to the substrate; and
an optical coupler 3 at an end of the optical waveguide at a surface (left edge of 1 in fig. 4) that is perpendicular to the substrate 14.
Response to Arguments
drawing objection
The objection has been repeated. The remarks refer to a microlens 360 in fig. 3A as an example of an optical coupler with respect to claims 25 and 38. However, those claims also recite that the optical coupler is "at a surface that is perpendicular to the substrate". No such surface is shown in fig. 3A. The edges of the text boxes which contain labels "360" and "370" are not regarded surfaces of the optoelectronic system.
35 U.S.C. 112 rejection
The rejection of claims 33-41 is withdrawn. The rejection of claims 22 and 34 is maintained. The remarks refer to [0052] and [0060] (which were already mentioned in the rejection) for support. However a PIC including a die is not the same thing as a PIC being on a die.
35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 rejections
The prior art rejections are withdrawn in view of the 4/23/2026 amendments. A different reference has been applied to certain amended claims in the present action.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21, 23-26, and 28-32 are allowed.
Claims 35-36 and 40-43 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 their respective base claims.
Conclusion
This action is not made final. The application of a new reference to independent claim 33 technically was prompted by a revised interpretation of a term and not by an amendment per se.
Contact Information
Examiner: 571-272-2360
Examiner's direct supervisor: 571-272-2397
Official correspondence by fax: 571-273-8300
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Should you have questions about Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Michael Stahl/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights