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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 06/18/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-5, 7-8, 11, and 13-24 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Claims have overcome each and every rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 03/19/2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see 5-6, filed 06/18/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-5, 7-8, 11, and 13-24 under 35 USC § 102 and 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of US 20090034085 A1 (Badehi et al.).
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 13, 16-19, and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200158943 A1 (Calafiore) in view of US 20090034085 A1 (Badehi et al.).
Regarding claim 1:
Calafiore discloses an apparatus comprising:
an optical grating (Optical grating of Fig. 3E) disposed on the substrate (Fig 3E, the optical grating is disposed on substrate [302]), the optical grating including a plurality of embedded, slanted optical grating structures (Fig. 3E, grating lines [318] are embedded and slanted).
Calafiore fails to disclose
a substrate comprising a tear-out arrestor, the tear-out arrestor comprising a trench
Badehi teaches,
an optical element comprising:
a substrate (Fig. 30G, Substrate [4821]) comprising a tear-out arrestor, the tear-out arrestor comprising a trench (Fig. 30G, trench [4830] in substrate [4821] is used for during dicing, see Para. [0204]); and
an embedded optical component (Fig. 30G, microlenses [4822]) disposed on the substrate [4821].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have “a substrate comprising a tear-out arrestor, the tear-out arrestor comprising a trench” as taught by Badehi in the apparatus of Calafiore for the purpose of guiding the dicing and preventing tear-out.
Regarding claim 2:
Calafiore in combination with Badehi teaches the apparatus of claim 1
Calafiore additionally teaches
wherein the grating structures [318] are embedded within a lithography resist (Para. [0031] and figs. 3A and 3B, the nanoimprint lithography layer [304] is a lithography resist.).
Regarding claim 4:
Calafiore in combination with Badehi teaches the apparatus of claim 2
Calafiore additionally teaches
wherein the grating structures [318] are slanted with respect to outer surfaces of the lithography resist (Fig. 3E, transparent matrix [326]). (Fig. 3E shows that the grating structures [318] are slanted with respect to the outer surfaces of [326])
Regarding claim 13:
Calafiore discloses a method comprising:
pressing a surface of an imprint tool (Fig. 3A & 3B, imprint tool [306]) into an imprint material (Fig. 3A & 3B, [304]) to form an imprinted structure (Fig. 3B, ridges [312]) that includes a plurality of grating supports composed of the imprint material (Fig. 3C shows that the structures [312] are used to support grating structures [318]), wherein the imprint material is disposed over the substrate (Fig. 3A, substrate [302]), and wherein the grating supports are inclined with respect to a plane of the substrate (Fig. 3B shows that the grating supports are inclined with respect to the plane of the substrate [302]); and
covering at least a portion of each of the grating supports [312] with a deposition material to form optical grating structures. (Fig. 3C shows the grating structures [318] are deposited on one side of each grating structure [312].)
Calafiore fails to disclose
The method comprises forming a tear-out arrestor comprising a trench in a substrate.
Badehi teaches a method for producing an optical element comprising:
forming a tear-out arrestor comprising a trench (Fig. 30E and 30F shows the formation of trench [4830] in substrate [4821]) in a substrate;
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the step of “forming a tear-out arrestor comprising a trench in a substrate” as taught by Badehi in the method of Calafiore for the purpose of preventing tear-out when dicing the optical grating.
Regarding claim 16:
Calafiore in combination with Badehi teaches the method of claim 13
Calafiore additionally teaches
wherein the deposition material is an inorganic material. (Para. [0032] the material of grating lines may be an inorganic material such as silicon oxide.)
Regarding claim 17:
Calafiore in combination with Badehi teaches the method of claim 13
Calafiore additionally teaches
wherein the imprint material [304] comprises a lithography resist. (Para. [0031] and figs. 3A and 3B, the nanoimprint lithography layer [304] is a lithography resist.).
Regarding claim 18:
Calafiore in combination with Badehi teaches the method of claim 13
Calafiore additionally teaches
wherein covering at least a portion of each of the grating supports with a deposition material includes performing an angled deposition in which the deposition material is evaporated onto the grating supports. (Para. [0033] the diffraction grating is produced by evaporating the material onto the grating supports of the resin at an oblique angle.)
Regarding claim 19:
Calafiore in combination with Badehi teaches the method of claim 18
Calafiore additionally teaches
wherein performing an angled deposition (Fig. 4A & 4B showing angled deposition [420]) includes performing e-beam evaporation (Para. [0042], the deposition may be performed by electron beam evaporation.).
Regarding claim 24:
Calafiore in combination with Badehi teaches the apparatus of claim 1,
However they fail to teach
the trench having a stepped depth profile. (Badehi teaches that the trenches have an inclined profile, see Para. [0204])
The prior art and the instant claim differ by the shape of the depth profile of the trench.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the trench having a stepped depth profile, since it has been held that a mere change in shape of an element is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art when the change in shape is not significant to the function of the combination, In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966), MPEP §2144.04(IV)(B). In the instant case, the change in shape does not appear to be significant to the function because both stepped depth profile of the instant invention and the depth profile of the trench of Badehi would function identically as a tear-out arrestor.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 7-8, 13-15, 18, 20, and 22-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20050078374 A1 (Taira et al.) in view of US 20090034085 A1 (Badehi et al.).
Regarding claim 1:
Taira discloses an apparatus comprising:
a substrate (Fig 1, substrate [11])
an optical grating disposed on the substrate (Fig. 1, the optical grating (grating structures [13] and supports [12]) on the substrate [11]), the optical grating including a plurality of embedded, slanted optical grating structures (Fig. 1, the optical grating structures [13]).
Taira fails to disclose
The substrate comprising a tear-out arrestor, the tear-out arrestor comprising a trench
Badehi teaches,
an optical element comprising:
a substrate (Fig. 30G, Substrate [4821]) comprising a tear-out arrestor, the tear-out arrestor comprising a trench (Fig. 30G, trench [4830] in substrate [4821] is used for during dicing, see Para. [0204]); and
an embedded optical component (Fig. 30G, microlenses [4822]) disposed on the substrate [4821].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have “a substrate comprising a tear-out arrestor, the tear-out arrestor comprising a trench” as taught by Badehi in the apparatus of Taira for the purpose of guiding the dicing and preventing tear-out.
Regarding claim 5:
Taira in combination with Badehi teaches the apparatus of claim 1
Taira additionally teaches
wherein the grating structures [23] are embedded within a material (Fig. 4, Resin [22]), and wherein the grating structures [23] are slanted with respect to outer surfaces of the material [22]. (Fig. 4 shows that grating structures [23] are slanted with respect to the surfaces of material [22]. Also Para. [0064] discloses that the structures [23] are inclined at an angle.)
Regarding claim 7:
Taira in combination with Badehi teaches the apparatus of claim 1
Taira additionally teaches
wherein the grating structures [23] have a refractive index that is higher than a refractive index of a material [22] in which the grating structures [23] are embedded. (Para. [0065] the grating structures [23] are described as having a high refractive index while in Para. [0091] the refractive index of resin [22] is described as low.)
Regarding claim 8:
Taira in combination with Badehi teaches the apparatus of claim 1
Taira additionally teaches
wherein the grating structures [23] are composed of an inorganic material. (Para. [0064] describe the grating structures [23] as metallic)
Regarding claim 13
Taira discloses a method comprising:
pressing a surface of an imprint tool (Para. [0065] the mold used for formation) into an imprint material (Para. [0065] Resin layer [22a]) to form an imprinted structure (Fig. 5a structure of resin layer [22a]) that includes a plurality of grating supports composed of the imprint material (Fig. 5b shows that the structure of resin layer [22a] is used to support grating structures [23]), wherein the imprint material is disposed over the substrate (Para. [0065], the resin layer [22a] is formed on a substrate), and wherein the grating supports are inclined with respect to a plane of the substrate (Fig. 5a-c shows that the grating supports are inclined with respect to the plane of the substrate (not labeled)); and
covering at least a portion of each of the grating supports with a deposition material to form optical grating structures. (Fig. 5b-c and para. [0065] the grating structures [23] are deposited on one side of each diffraction grating surface.)
Taira fails to disclose the method comprising:
forming a tear-out arrestor comprising a trench in a substrate;
Badehi teaches a method for producing an optical element comprising:
forming a tear-out arrestor comprising a trench (Fig. 30E and 30F shows the formation of trench [4830] in substrate [4821]) in a substrate;
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the step of “forming a tear-out arrestor comprising a trench in a substrate” as taught by Badehi in the method of Taira for the purpose of preventing tear-out when dicing the optical grating.
Regarding claim 14:
Taira in combination with Badehi teaches the method of claim 13
Taira additionally teaches
depositing a backfill material (Fig. 5a, resin [22b]) onto the grating supports (Fig. 5b, grating supports of [22a]) and the grating structures (Fig. 5b, grating structures [23]) to cover previously exposed surfaces of the grating structures so that the grating structures are embedded between the imprint material and the backfill material (Fig. 5c shows the completed optical grating with grating structures [23] embedded), and are inclined with respect to the plane of the substrate (Fig. 5c shows the grating structures [23] are inclined with respect to the plane of the substrate (not labelled)).
Regarding claim 15:
Taira in combination with Badehi teaches the method of claim 14
Taira additionally teaches
the backfill material has a same composition as the imprint material. (Para. [0065], “The resin layer [22a] and the resin layer [22b] can be made of the same type of resin, for example.”)
Regarding claim 18:
Taira in combination with Badehi teaches the method of claim 13
Taira additionally teaches
wherein covering at least a portion of each of the grating supports with a deposition material includes performing an angled deposition in which the deposition material is evaporated onto the grating supports. (Para. [0046] the diffraction grating is produced by evaporating the material onto the grating supports of the resin at an oblique angle.)
Regarding claim 20:
Taira in combination with Badehi teaches the method of claim 14
Taira additionally teaches
wherein the grating structures [23] have a refractive index that is higher than a refractive index of the imprint material [22a] and a refractive index of the backfill material [22b]. (Para. [0065] the grating structures [23] are described as having a high refractive index while in Para. [0091] the refractive index of resin [22] is described as low.)
Regarding claim 22:
Taira in combination with Badehi teaches the method of claim 13
Taira additionally teaches
wherein covering at least a portion of each of the grating supports with a deposition material to form optical grating structures [23] includes covering only a portion of each of the grating supports with the deposition material. (Fig. 5b shows that grating structures [23] are formed on only one surface of the grating supports of resin [22a])
Regarding claim 23:
Taira in combination with Badehi teaches the method of claim 13
Badehi additionally teaches
The method further comprising dicing along the tear-out arrestor to form a plurality of optical components. (Fig. 30G shows dicing along the trenches [4830] to form a plurality of optical components.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a step of dicing along the tear-out arrestor to form a plurality of optical grating structures as taught by Badehi in the method of Taira for the purpose of separating a plurality of optical components from a single substrate.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200158943 A1 (Calafiore) in combination with US 20090034085 A1 (Badehi et al.) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of US 20060001969 A1 (Wang).
Regarding claim 3:
Although Calafiore in combination with Badehi teaches the apparatus of claim 2
They fails to teach
wherein the lithography resist comprises a polymethyl methacrylate resist. (Calafiore teaches that the lithography resist may include an acrylic acid but does not teach that it is PMMA)
Wang teaches an optical grating with a lithography resist (See para. [0105])
wherein the lithography resist (Fig. 6A [630]) comprises a polymethyl methacrylate resist. (Para. [0105] teaches that the resist can be PMMA)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the lithography resist comprise a polymethyl methacrylate resist as taught by Wang in the apparatus of Calafiore in combination with Badehi for the purpose of providing a transparent lithography resist for forming the optical grating.
Claims 11 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20050078374 A1 (Taira et al.) in view of US 20090034085 A1 (Badehi et al.) and further in view of US 20150162244 A1 (Holden et al.).
Regarding claim 11:
Although Taira in combination with Badehi teaches the apparatus of claim 11
They fail to teach
wherein the flexible layer is composed of a UV-release or thermal-release dicing tape.
Holden teaches a lithographic process for forming layered structures further including
the flexible layer is composed of a UV-release or thermal-release dicing tape. (Para. [0039] teaches the use of a UV or thermal release dicing tape for the purpose of releasing the substrate after production.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the flexible layer is composed of a UV-release or thermal-release dicing tape as taught by Holden in the apparatus of Taira in combination with Badehi for the purpose of allowing release of the substrate after production.
Regarding claim 21:
Although Taira in combination with Badehi teaches the method of claim 14
They fail to teach
removing the substrate after depositing the backfill material.
Holden teaches a lithographic process for forming layered structures further including
removing the substrate after depositing the backfill material. (Para. [0070] teaches that after completion of the lithographic process the substrate [614] may be removed)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to removing the substrate after depositing the backfill material as taught by Holden in the method of Taira in combination with Badehi for the purpose of using the substrate as a support during manufacturing.
Conclusion
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 SETH D MOSER whose telephone number is (703)756-5803. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 10am-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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571)270-1782. 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.
/SETH D MOSER/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/BUMSUK WON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights