NON-FINAL OFFICE ACTION
Acknowledgements
1. This non-final Office Action addresses reissue U.S. Application No. 18/671,276 (“instant application”). Examiners find the actual filing date of the instant application is May 22, 2024.
2. The instant application is a broadening reissue application of U.S. Patent No. 9,008,135, (“‘135 Patent”) issued Apr. 14, 2015. The ‘135 Patent was filed on May 16, 2011 as U.S. Application No. 13/698,050 (“050 Application”), titled “TUNABLE PULSE LASER”.
3. Examiners do not find any certificates of correction, ongoing/previous proceedings before the Office, or current ongoing litigation involving the ‘135 Patent.
4. The ‘135 Patent issued with claims 1-20 (“Patented Claims”). In the preliminary amendment filed May 22, 2024 ("MAY 2024 CLAIM AMENDMENTS"), claims 1-20 are cancelled and claims 21-27 are added.
5. Claims 21-27 are pending and examined:
Priority Claims
6. The presumed effective filing date is May 16, 2010, which is the filing date of Provisional Application No. 61/345,145 (“’145 Application”).
7. The instant application (“R3”) is the third reissue of USP 9,008,135. R3 is a continuation of App. No. 16/741,186 (“R2”). R2 is a divisional of App. No. 15/486,547 (“R1”).
Application Data Sheet (“ADS”)/Filing Receipt
8. The ADS filed May 22, 2024 is objected to because it does not claim that R2 is a reissue of the ‘135 Patent. See screenshot of the domestic benefit section of the ADS, which is reproduced below.
PNG
media_image1.png
778
848
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In other words, the domestic benefit information does not properly identify the R2 as both a continuation of R3 and a reissue application of the ‘135 patent. See the Reissue Application Filing Guide at: http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/forms/uspto_reissue_ads_guide_Sept2014.pdf for more information and in particular see the screen shot on page 10 given the sample facts presented on page 9. The corrected ADS should comply with 37 CFR 1.76(c)(2), which requires that any changes to an ADS be identified with markings (underline for addition, strike through for deletion). CORRECTION IS REQUIRED.
Applicant should additionally file, as a paper separate from its next response, a Request for Corrected Filing Receipt. This is the best way to ensure that these changes are acted upon and corrected by the appropriate official.
Specification Objections
9. The specification amendment filed May 22, 2024 is objected to because matter is omitted via strikethrough. In reissue, matter is omitted via brackets. See 37 CFR 1.173.
In addition, the specification is objected to because the U.S. Application numbers that have issued as patents need to updated with the patent numbers.
Reissue Declaration
10. Claims 21-27 are rejected as being based upon a defective reissue declaration under 35 U.S.C. 251 as set forth below. See 37 CFR 1.175.
The reissue declaration is defective. There are four inventors of the ‘135 Patent: (1) Paulo Almelda, (2) John Redvers Clowes, (3) Pascal Dupriez, and (4) Borisovich Grudinin.
A reissue application declaration by the Inventor (“MAY 2024 REISSUE DECLARATION BY INVENTOR”) has been submitted with the following error description. The MAY 2024 REISSUE DECLARATION BY INVENTOR was signed by three (3) of the inventors, i.e., Paulo Almelda, John Redvers Clowes, and Borisovich Grudinin. Below is the error statement in the MAY 2024 REISSUE DECLARATION BY INVENTOR.
PNG
media_image2.png
94
802
media_image2.png
Greyscale
A substitute statement in lieu of an oath or declaration for reissue patent application was filed May 22, 2024 (“MAY 2024 SUBSTITUTE STATEMENT”) has been submitted with the following error description.
PNG
media_image3.png
66
716
media_image3.png
Greyscale
The MAY 2024 SUBSTITUTE STATEMENT was signed by Pascal Dupriez but the error description in the MAY 2024 SUBSTITUTE STATEMENT is insufficient because it does not identify a broadened ‘135 Patent claim. In contrast, the MAY 2024 REISSUE DECLARATION BY INVENTOR error description is sufficient because it identifies a ‘135 Patent claim that is broadened.
Because the MAY 2024 SUBSTITUTE STATEMENT does not contain the same error description as the MAY 2024 REISSUE DECLARATION BY INVENTOR, it is an insufficient substitute statement. As such, it does not substitute the missing signature in the MAY 2024 REISSUE DECLARATION BY INVENTOR. Thus, the MAY 2024 REISSUE DECLARATION BY INVENTOR is insufficient because it is not signed by Pascal Dupriez.
MPEP §1451(B)(2) states in-pertinent-part:
PNG
media_image4.png
268
690
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Here, the MAY 2024 REISSUE DECLARATION BY INVENTOR is a copy of the reissue declaration filed Feb. 13, 2024 in R2. Moreover, the error described, i.e., failure to present broadened additional claims drawn to laser systems, has been corrected via claims 21-34 of R2. Thus, the error statement of the instant reissue must state a different error, i.e., an error that has not been previously corrected in a previous reissue of the ‘135 Patent.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
11. Claims 21-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Specifically, it is unclear whether the “pulses” in the limitation “an output for outputting pulses having a time duration that is responsive to the change in time duration” are the “received pulses” prior to or after the introduced “change in time duration.”
In the interest of compact prosecution, these claimed “pulses” will be interpreted as the “received pulses” after the introduced “change in time duration.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
13. Claims 21-24 and 27 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by USP 8,189,971 to Vaissie et al. (“Vaissie”) filed Mar. 19, 2008, which is before the presumed effective filing date of May 16, 2010.
Claim 21 is reproduced below:
A laser system configured for providing output pulses, comprising:
a pulsed laser source for providing pulses;
a nonlinear optical waveguiding structure downstream of the pulsed laser source for providing spectral bandwidth modification of pulses;
a spectrally dispersive optical element downstream of the nonlinear optical waveguiding structure, where the spectrally dispersive optical element introduces a change in time duration of received pulses responsive to both the amount of spectral bandwidth modification provided by the nonlinear optical waveguiding structure and the amount of spectral dispersion provided by the spectrally dispersive optical element; and
an output for outputting pulses having a time duration that is responsive to the change in time duration.
PNG
media_image5.png
648
872
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
687
1022
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Vaissie’s seed source generator (#1101) reads on the claimed “pulsed laser source.”
Vaissie’s PM fiber with non-linear fiber Bragg grating (#1103) reads on the claimed “non-linear optical waveguide structure downstream of the pulsed laser source”
Vaissie’s pulse stretcher (#1105) reads on the claimed “spectrally dispersive optical element downstream of non-linear optical waveguiding structure.”
Vaissie’s output (#1113) reads on the claimed “output.”
Because there is no claimed structural difference between the above claimed elements and (#1101), (#1103), (#1105), and (#1113) of figure 4, the recitation with respect to the manner in which the claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from Vaissie.
As to claim 22, Vaissie discloses “the nonlinear waveguiding structure provides spectral bandwidth modification via self-phase modulation” at col.17:4-13.
PNG
media_image7.png
192
448
media_image7.png
Greyscale
As to claim 23, the limitation “wherein the system is configured such that one or both of the amount of spectral bandwidth modification or the amount of spectral dispersion can be selectively changed so as to selectively change the time duration of the pulses downstream of the spectrally dispersive optical element, thereby providing a tunable pulse width laser system” is disclosed at col.7:3-11.
PNG
media_image7.png
192
448
media_image7.png
Greyscale
As to claim 24, the fiber between (#1107) to (#1111) reads on the limitation “the non-linear optical waveguiding structure comprises a length of passive optical waveguide.”
As to claim 27, the Bragg grating (#1103) reads on the claim limitation “the spectrally dispersive optical element comprises a chirped fiber Bragg grating.”
Double Patenting
13. Claims 21-27 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over the following respective claims of R2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claims are merely broader than the conflicting claims.
Instant Claims
Conflicting Claims
RE50,026
21. A laser system configured for providing output pulses, comprising:
a pulsed laser source for providing pulses;
a nonlinear optical waveguiding structure downstream of the pulsed laser source
for providing spectral bandwidth modification of pulses;
a spectrally dispersive optical element downstream of the nonlinear optical waveguiding structure,
where the spectrally dispersive optical element
introduces a change in time duration of received pulses responsive to both
the amount of spectral bandwidth modification provided by the nonlinear optical waveguiding structure and
the amount of spectral dispersion provided by the spectrally dispersive optical element; and
an output for outputting pulses having a time duration that is responsive to the change in time duration.
21. A laser system configured for providing output pulses, comprising:
a pulsed laser source for providing seed pulses with a time duration;
a nonlinear optical waveguide downstream of the pulsed laser source
for providing spectral bandwidth modification of pulses; and
a spectrally dispersive optical element downstream of the nonlinear optical waveguide,
wherein the spectrally dispersive optical element comprises a grating and
wherein the grating increases the time duration of received pulses responsive to both
the amount of spectral bandwidth modification provided by the nonlinear optical waveguide and
the amount of spectral dispersion provided by the grating so as to provide output pulses of the laser system which have a time duration that is responsive to said increase in time duration and that is longer than the time duration of the associated seed pulse
22. The laser system of claim 21,
wherein the nonlinear waveguiding structure provides spectral bandwidth modification via self-phase modulation.
22. The laser system of claim 21,
wherein the nonlinear optical waveguide provides spectral bandwidth modification via self-phase modulation
23. The laser system of claim 21,
wherein the system is configured such that one or both of
the amount of spectral bandwidth modification or
the amount of spectral dispersion
can be selectively changed so as to selectively change the time duration of the pulses downstream of the spectrally dispersive optical element, thereby providing a tunable pulse width laser system.
23. The laser system of claim 21,
wherein the system is configured such that one or both of
the amount of spectral bandwidth modification or
the spectral dispersion of the grating
can be selectively changed so as to selectively change the time duration of the pulses downstream of the grating, thereby providing a tunable pulse width laser system,
wherein the system is configured to selectively change a peak power of the pulses so as to selectively change the amount of spectral bandwidth modification
24. The laser system of claim 21,
wherein the non-linear optical waveguiding structure comprises a length of passive optical waveguide.
30. The laser system of claim 29,
wherein the non-linear optical waveguide comprises a length of passive optical waveguide.
25. The laser system of claim 24, comprising
a variable optical attenuator for changing the self-phase modulation introduced by the passive optical waveguide and hence the amount of spectral bandwidth modification, thereby allowing the time duration of output pulses from the laser system to be varied.
31. The laser system of claim 30, comprising
a variable optical attenuator for changing the peak power of the pulses so as to change the self- phase modulation introduced by the passive optical waveguide and hence the amount of spectral bandwidth modification, thereby allowing the time duration of output pulses from the laser system to be varied
26. The laser system of claim 21,
wherein the non-linear optical waveguiding structure comprises an amplifier, and
wherein the laser system comprises
a controller for varying the gain of the amplifier,
thereby controlling the amount of self-phase modulation and the amount of spectral bandwidth modification so as to allow the time duration of output pulses from the laser system to be varied.
24. The laser system of claim 21,
wherein the non-linear optical waveguide comprises an optical amplifier comprising the non-linear optical waveguide, and
wherein the laser system comprises
a controller comprising a processing unit, an interface and a memory, said memory containing instructions executable by said processing unit whereby the controller is operative to vary the gain of the amplifier responsive to user instructions received via the interface,
thereby controlling a peak power of the pulses thereby controlling an amount of self phase modulation and the amount of spectral bandwidth modification so as to allow the time duration of output pulses from the laser system to be varied
27. The laser system of claim 21,
wherein the spectrally dispersive optical element comprises a chirped fiber Bragg grating.
27. The laser system of claim 26,
wherein the fiber Bragg grating comprises a chirped fiber Bragg grating.
Allowable Subject Matter
14. While claims 25-26 are rejected over obvious-type double patenting (“ODP”), it contains allowable subject matter and would be allowable if the ODP rejection is overcome and if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
As to claim 25, the prior art does not disclose or make obvious “a variable optical attenuator for changing the self-phase modulation introduced by the passive optical waveguide and hence the amount of spectral bandwidth modification, thereby allowing the time duration of output pulses from the laser system to be varied” in combination with the other limitations of the claims.
As to claim 26, the prior art does not disclose or make obvious “wherein the non-linear optical waveguiding structure comprises an amplifier, and wherein the laser system comprises a controller for varying the gain of the amplifier, thereby controlling the amount of self-phase modulation and the amount of spectral bandwidth modification so as to allow the time duration of output pulses from the laser system to be varied” in combination with the other limitations of the claims.
Conclusion
15. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEANDRA M HUGHES whose telephone number is (571)272-6982. The examiner can normally be reached Generally M-Th 8AM-6PM.
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, Hetul Patel can be reached at 571-272-4184. 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.
Signed:
/DEANDRA M HUGHES/Reexamination Specialist, Art Unit 3992
Conferees:
/CHRISTINA Y. LEUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3991
/H.B.P/
Hetul PatelSupervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3992