DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to applicant’s amendment filed on August 6, 2026. Claims 1-20 are under consideration.
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.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu et al. (US 2009/0028504 A1, herein “Wu”) in view of Taylor (US 9,188,798 B2, herein “Taylor”) and Scheuer et al. (US 6,885,794 B2, herein “Scheuer”).
Regarding claim 1, Wu discloses a semiconductor photonics device (Figs. 2-7 and Para [0029]), comprising: a first optical waveguide structure (segment 140); and
a second optical waveguide structure (optical waveguide segments 110 forming closed polygon, Para [0057]), adjacent to the first optical waveguide structure (140), comprising a polygonal top view shape having a plurality of segments (100 is a polygon with four segments, Para [0057]).
PNG
media_image1.png
321
407
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Wu does not teach each segment of the plurality of segments has a respective top view width that is approximately uniform between intersection points at opposing ends of the segment.
Taylor teaches the inside corner of the ninety-degree bend of the rectangular waveguide 44 is cut by a facet 51 that is parallel to the facet 50 of the respective bend. This parallel orientation between the inner facet 51 and outer facet 50 would yield a width that is approximately uniform between the intersection points at opposing ends of the segment (Col. 7 lines 23-47).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to recognize the blunt cut of the ninety-degree bend of the waveguide 44 would have been modified to the ninety-degree bend of Wu’s waveguide 110 at corners 120. One motivation is to improves the bend efficiency, which provides for improved resonance of the optical mode traveling wave propagating around the rectangular waveguide (Taylor: Col. 7, lines 23-47).
Wu and Taylor do not teach the widths of at least two segments of the plurality of segments are different from one another.
Scheuer teaches micro-ring resonator with varying width across the circumference decreases the radiation losses of the resonator (Fig. 2 and Col. 2, line 64 to Col. 3, line 12). Figs. 7 and 8 graph the radiation losses of resonators with different eccentricities. Furthermore, Scheuer teaches the width-varying region can be within a straight segment of the resonator waveguide (Col. 3, lines 3-8).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to recognize varying the straight segment width would provide more mode confinement thus reduces radiation loss of the resonators.
Wu and Taylor teach micro ring resonator having polygon shapes, wherein beveled corners having parallel inner facet and outer facet reduces bending loss. Wu and Taylor would recognize the varying waveguide widths, as taught in Scheuer’s disclosure, would apply to the polygon resonator of Wu and Taylor to decrease radiation loss in the resonator. One motivation is to decrease the loss per revolution of the ring resonator.
Claim 2. Wu in view of Taylor and Scheuer (herein “Wu / Taylor / Scheuer”) teach the semiconductor photonics device of claim 1, and Wu further discloses the polygonal top view shape of the second optical waveguide structure (Fig. 2: 100 and segment 110) comprises an approximately hexagonal top view shape (Para [0057]), an approximately octagonal top view shape, or an approximately dodecagonal top view shape.
Claim 3. Wu / Taylor / Scheuer teach the semiconductor photonics device of claim 1, Wu / Taylor / Scheuer do not explicitly teach the respective top view widths of at least two segments of the plurality of segments are approximately the same.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the dimension of waveguide 100 to have the same width in order to achieve optical characteristic uniformity throughout the waveguide. A waveguide with uniform dimension ensures high-quality signal that has not been changed or altered in a way that reduces transmission efficiency or undesired transmission characteristics induced by having width variance.
Claim 4. Wu / Taylor / Scheuer teach the semiconductor photonics device of claim 1, and Wu further discloses the semiconductor photonics device of claim 1, wherein a first subset of the plurality of segments has a first top view width (Fig. 2: 110; width along horizontal segments top and bottom); wherein a second subset of the plurality of segments has a second top view width (Fig. 2: width at the corners of 110 at element 120 gets smaller due to the corners being clipped); and wherein the first top view width is greater than the second top view width (Fig. 2: widths of 110 is larger than widths at the corner of 120 wherein the corners are clipped).
Claim 5. Wu / Taylor / Scheuer teach the semiconductor photonics device of claim 1, Wu / Taylor / Scheuer do not explicitly teach the segments are made with the same lengths. Wu indicates the lengths of the 110 can be used to control the resonance frequence of the resonator (Para [0056]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the dimension of waveguide 100 to have the same length in order to control the resonance frequency of a desired bandwidth or wavelengths throughout the waveguide. This ensure unwanted bandwidths or wavelengths in the resonance frequencies are excluded.
Claim 6. Wu / Taylor / Scheuer teach the semiconductor photonics device of claim 1, and Wu further discloses a first subset of the plurality of segments has a first top view length (Fig. 2: 110; top and bottom length); wherein a second subset of the plurality of segments has a second top view length (Fig. 2: left and right vertical length); and wherein the first top view length is greater than the second top view length (optical resonator in Fig. 2 has a rectangular shape Para [0057]; thus the lengths have subsets segments that are greater than the other, Para [0057])
Claim 7. Wu / Taylor / Scheuer teach the semiconductor photonics device of claim 1, and Wu further discloses a material composition of the first optical waveguide structure (claim 1 or Para [0030]) and a material composition of the second optical waveguide structure (Fig. 2: 100 resonator structure; Para [0030]) are approximately the same material composition (Para [0030] teaches both the resonator and its waveguide are made of silicon).
Claim 8. Wu / Taylor / Scheuer teach the semiconductor photonics device of claim 1, Wu / Taylor / Scheuer do not explicitly teach the 1st and 2nd waveguide are made of from different material composition.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the materials of the resonator 100 to be different from the waveguide 150 based on desired applications. For example, if the resonators are employed in modulation applications using an electro-optic material such as Lithium Niobate will achieve better modulation functions that silicon cannot provide. As for material selection for the coupling waveguide 150, not used for resonating function, other optical qualities such as coupling efficiency, low dispersion, low scattering, and heat dissipation are prioritized such that silicon-based waveguide would be better suited as a coupling waveguide. It has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of design choice that a mere reversal of the working parts of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 146.
Claim 9. Wu / Taylor / Scheuer teach the semiconductor photonics device of claim 1, and Wu further discloses the first optical waveguide structure is vertically adjacent to the second optical waveguide structure (Fig. 2: wherein 100 and 150 are vertically adjacent to each other).
Claim 10. Wu / Taylor / Scheuer teach the semiconductor photonics device of claim 1, and Wu further discloses the first optical waveguide structure is laterally adjacent to the second optical waveguide structure (Fig. 2: 100 and 130 are laterally adjacent to each other; Fig. 7 illustrates another example wherein the corner coupled waveguide is laterally adjacent to 100).
Claims 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Schallner (US 6,218,915 B1, herein “Schallner”).
Regarding claim 11, Wu discloses a semiconductor photonics device (Figs. 2-7 and Para [0029]), comprising: a first optical waveguide structure (Fig. 7: 100) comprising a first top view shape having a plurality of first segments (Fig. 2: 110); and a second optical waveguide structure Fig. 7: 130), adjacent to the first optical waveguide structure (Fig. 7: 100 and 130), comprising a second top view shape having a plurality of second segments (Fig. 7: 130 contain multiple segments to allow the waveguide to route in an upside down U-shape).
PNG
media_image2.png
314
396
media_image2.png
Greyscale
However, Wu does not teach adjacent first segments of the plurality of first segments are adjoined at a first intersection point at which outer sidewalls of the adjacent first segments meet one another. Wu also does not teach the second optical waveguide structure forms a closed loop, and wherein adjacent second segments of the plurality of second segments are adjoined at a second intersection point at which outer sidewalls of the adjacent second segments meet one another.
Schallner teaches in a symmetrical polygon ring resonator has dual-mode wherein one mode forms along the straight sides and another forms over the rounded corners of the square resonator (singular figure). The ring resonator in this invention functions as a flat bandpass filter. The bandwidth of the filter may be adjusted by adjusting the corners (e.g., round or sharp). The more the corners are rounded the less the difference between the resonance frequencies of both modes and the smaller the bandwidth of the filter (Col. 2, line 43 to Col. 3, line 5). Alternatively, the sharper the corners the larger the bandwidth of the filter, in other words, the filter functions as all-pass filter.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to recognize the teaching of sharp corners versus rounded corners in the square shaped ring resonator would be recognized as design principles of polygon ring resonators. Wu discloses the beveled outer sidewall of a square shaped ring resonator is adjacent to another bus waveguide having segments with beveled outer sidewall for coupling modes from the ring resonators into the bus waveguide. However, the beveled corners in Wu’s photonic device can be modified to have sharp corners (e.g., adjacent segments are adjoined at an intersection point at outer sidewall of adjacent segments meet one another) using known techniques such as etching, selective deposition, or printing (Wu: Para [0040]). Square-shaped resonator with sharp corners have applications as an all-pass filter, according to Schallner. One motivation for coupling the corner of the bus waveguide to the corner of the square-shaped ring resonator is for achieving design specific objective (i.e., avoid mode coupling at the designed node).
Claim 12. Wu discloses the semiconductor photonics device of claim 11, wherein the first top view shape is approximately symmetrical with at least a portion of the second top view shape. The segment of the first top view (solid arrow) is approximately symmetrical with at least a portion of the segment of the second top view (dotted arrow).
PNG
media_image3.png
315
357
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim 13. Wu / Schallner teach the semiconductor photonics device of claim 11, and Wu further discloses an intersection point, between two segments of the plurality of second segments of the second optical waveguide structure, is adjacent to an intersection point between two segments of the plurality of first segments of the fist optical waveguide structure (See Fig. 7 above: wherein intersection point of 130 of 1st and 2nd waveguide are adjacent to each other).
Claim 14. Wu / Schallner teach the semiconductor photonics device of claim 11, and Wu further discloses an intersection point, between two segments of the plurality of first segments of the first optical waveguide structure, is adjacent to a segment of the plurality of second segments of the second optical waveguide structure (See Fig. 2: which detailed the segments of 110 to waveguide structure 100; wherein Fig. 7 illustrates the segments to make up the intersection point at 130 are adjacent to a corresponding similar segment pair in the second waveguide).
Claim 15. Wu / Schallner teach the semiconductor photonics device of claim 11, and Wu further discloses a segment of the plurality of second segments of the second optical waveguide (Fig. 7: segments that make up 2nd waveguide 100 on the right) structure is adjacent to a segment of the plurality of first segments of the first optical waveguide structure (Fig. 7: segments that make 100 on both the left 1st waveguide, and right 2nd waveguides are adjacent to each other).
Claim 16. Wu / Schallner teach the semiconductor photonics device of claim 15, and Wu further discloses wherein the first top view shape substantially conforms to the second top view shape. The embodiment of Fig. 2 shows waveguide 140 length conforms to the long edge of rectangular ring resonator 110.
In terms of claim 17, Wu discloses a method, comprising: forming, in a semiconductor layer above a dielectric layer (Para [0062] or SOI Para [0030]), a first optical waveguide structure (Fig. 2: 150 or 130 or Fig. 7: 100 on the left) comprising a first top view shape; and forming a second optical waveguide structure (Fig. 2: 100 or Fig. 7: 100 on the right while 100 on the left is the 1st optical waveguide), adjacent to the first optical waveguide structure (Fig. 2: 100 and 130/150 are adjacent to each other), comprising a second top view shape having a plurality of segments (Fig. 2: 100 contains a plurality of segments 110).
However, Wu does not disclose the second optical waveguide structure forms a closed loop, and wherein adjacent segments of the plurality of segments are adjoined at an intersection point at which outer sidewalls of the adjacent segments meet one another.
Schallner teaches in a symmetrical polygon ring resonator has dual-mode wherein one mode forms along the straight sides and another forms over the rounded corners of the square resonator (singular figure). The ring resonator in this invention functions as a flat bandpass filter. The bandwidth of the filter may be adjusted by adjusting the corners (e.g., round or sharp). The more the corners are rounded the less the difference between the resonance frequencies of both modes and the smaller the bandwidth of the filter (Col. 2, line 43 to Col. 3, line 5). Alternatively, the sharper the corners the larger the bandwidth of the filter, in other words, the filter functions as all-pass filter.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to recognize the teaching of sharp corners versus rounded corners in the square shaped ring resonator would be recognized as design principles of polygon ring resonators. Wu discloses the beveled outer sidewall of a square shaped ring resonator is adjacent to another bus waveguide having segments with beveled outer sidewall for coupling modes from the ring resonators into the bus waveguide. However, the beveled corners in Wu’s photonic device can be modified to have sharp corners (e.g., adjacent segments are adjoined at an intersection point at outer sidewall of adjacent segments meet one another) using known techniques such as etching, selective deposition, or printing (Wu: Para [0040]). Square-shaped resonator with sharp corners have applications as an all-pass filter, according to Schallner. One motivation for coupling the corner of the bus waveguide to the corner of the square-shaped ring resonator is for achieving design specific objective (i.e., avoid mode coupling at the designed node).
Claim 18. Wu / Schallner teach the method claim 17, and Wu further discloses a cross section of the second optical waveguide structure is a deep rib waveguide cross section (“reverse ridge-loaded waveguide” Fig. 4, Para [0069] or a ridge loaded optical waveguide (Para [0032]).
Claim 19. Wu / Schallner teach the method claim 17, and Wu further discloses the first top view shape is approximately symmetrical with at least a portion of the second top view shape. The segment of the first top view (solid arrow) is approximately symmetrical with at least a portion of the segment of the second top view (dotted arrow).
PNG
media_image3.png
315
357
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim 20. Wu / Schallner teach the method claim 17, and Wu further discloses the first top view shape substantially conforms to the second top view shape. The embodiment of Fig. 2 shows waveguide 140 conforms to the long edge of rectangular ring resonator 110.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Numai (US 2002/0176087 A1) teaches laser gyroscope having a circular waveguide with an asymmetrically tapered region; Watts et al. (US 7,941,014 B1) teaches optical resonator with an adiabatically varying width.
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 Erin D Chiem whose telephone number is (571)272-3102. The examiner can normally be reached 10 am - 6 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, Thomas A. Hollweg can be reached at (571) 270-1739. 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.
/ERIN D CHIEM/Examiner, Art Unit 2874
/THOMAS A HOLLWEG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights