DETAILED ACTION
This is the first office action on the merits. Claims 1-17 are currently pending.
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 5/30/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure does not commence on a separate sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.52(b)(4) and 1.72(b). A new abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text.
Claim Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: There is an additional “4.” At the beginning of the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: “claim1” should be “claim 1”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 1, “localising” is misspelled. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-17 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.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “comprising of a unit wherein each unit” is unclear because the limitation does not define if the cascaded slow light amplifier comprises a single unit or multiple units.
Regarding claims 2, 4, 6, and 12 the limitation “time-filtration zone” is unclear. For the purpose of examination, the time-filtration zone will be interpreted as the filtration zones 2-2 in Fig. 2 and described on page 10 of the specification.
Regarding claim 8, the limitation “a final time filter” is unclear. For the purpose of examination, a final time filter will be interpreted as the filtration zones 2-3 in Fig. 2 and described on page 14 of the specification.
Regarding claim 10, the limitation “a two-level amplifier” is unclear because a two-level amplifier could refer to the distinct energy levels in the amplifier or the number of stages in the amplifier.
Regarding claim 12, the limitation “a time buffer” is unclear.
Claims 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, and 13-17 are rejected due to claim dependency.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-7 and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sumida et al., US 20050175057 A1 (“Sumida”).
Regarding claim 1, Sumida discloses A cascaded slow light amplifier, comprising of a unit wherein each unit comprising of at least one host crystal doped with ions and optically prepared to provide at least one amplification zone (Fig. 2, gain medium 10, doped gain regions 12, Paragraph [0032]).
Regarding claim 2, Sumida discloses The cascaded slow light amplifier according to claim 1, wherein said unit comprising of at least one time-filtration zone (Fig. 2, loss/passive regions 14, Paragraph [0032]).
Regarding claim 3, Sumida discloses The cascaded slow light amplifier according to claim 1, wherein each zone is made of a single crystal and wherein said unit is obtained by joining at least two crystals (Fig. 2, gain medium 10, doped gain regions 12, loss/passive regions 14, Paragraph [0032]; See also Paragraph [0045]).
Regarding claim 4, Sumida discloses The cascaded slow light amplifier according to claim 2, wherein a single crystal comprises said at least one amplification zone and said at least one time- filtration zone (Fig. 2, gain medium 10, doped gain regions 12, loss/passive regions 14, Paragraph [0032]).
Regarding claim 5, Sumida discloses The cascaded slow light amplifier according to claim 1, comprising of a chain of a plurality of said units being linked (Fig. 2, gain medium 10, doped gain regions 12, loss/passive regions 14, Paragraph [0032]).
Regarding claim 6, Sumida discloses The cascaded slow light amplifier according to claim 5, wherein said chain comprising of a plurality of said amplification zones and a plurality of said time filtration zones, wherein each of said amplification zone is subsequently followed by one of said time-filtration zone (Fig. 2, gain medium 10, doped gain regions 12, loss/passive regions 14, Paragraph [0032]).
Regarding claim 7, Sumida discloses The cascaded slow light amplifier according to claim 5, wherein said chain is made from a single crystal (Fig. 2, gain medium 10, doped gain regions 12, loss/passive regions 14, Paragraph [0032]; See also Paragraph [0045]).
Regarding claim 10, Sumida discloses The cascaded slow light amplifier according to claim 1, wherein said amplification zone is a two-level amplifier (Fig. 2, gain medium 10, doped gain regions 12, Paragraph [0032]).
Regarding claim 11, Sumida discloses The cascaded slow light amplifier according to claim 5, wherein said amplification zones in said chain are sequentially pumped and said amplification zones in said chain has an amplification level where a spontaneous emission (ASE) is lower than an incoming signal (Fig. 2, gain medium 10, doped gain regions 12, Paragraph [0032]).
Regarding claim 12, Sumida discloses The cascaded slow light amplifier according to claim 6, wherein said time-filtration zone arranged between two amplification zones acts as a time buffer (Fig. 2, loss/passive regions 14, doped gain regions 12, Paragraph [0032]).
Regarding claim 13, Sumida discloses The cascaded slow light amplifier according to claim 1, wherein said amplification has a strong suppression outside a gain bandwidth and with enhanced slow light effect (Fig. 2, loss/passive regions 14, Paragraph [0032]).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sumida in view of Q. Li, Y. Bao, A. Thuresson, A. Nilsson, L. Rippe and S. Kroll, "Slow-light- based optical frequency shifter", Phys. Rev. A 93, 043832 (2016) (“Li”).
Regarding claim 8, Sumida discloses The cascaded slow light amplifier according to claim 5.
Sumida does not teach: wherein a final time filter in said chain acts as a frequency shifter.
However, Li teaches a slow light based optical frequency shifter that where an external electric field is applied to a crystal which shifts the resonant frequency of the ions. This dynamically shifts the passband of the crystal filter. (Figs. 1, 3, and 4, page 1, 4th paragraph).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Sumida’ final loss region by applying an electric field to shift the frequency of the filter, which is disclosed by Li. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve operation in weak light situations, as suggested by Li (page 6, Conclusion).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sumida in view of Li in further view of Mikhail N. Slipchenko, Joseph D. Miller, Sukesh Roy, Terrence R. Meyer, Jason G. Mance, and James R. Gord, "100 kHz, 100 ms, 400 J burst-mode laser with dual-wavelength diode-pumped amplifiers," Opt. Lett. 39, 4735-4738 (2014) (“Mikhail”).
Regarding claim 9, Sumida, as modified in view of Li, discloses The cascaded slow light amplifier according to claim 8.
Sumida, as modified in view of Li, does not teach: wherein said amplification zone is a narrowband amplifier.
However, Mikhail teaches an amplifier that amplifies a narrowband of about 2 nm (page 2, 3rd paragraph).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Sumida’ gain region by tuning the amplification zone to amplify a narrow band, which is disclosed by Mikhail. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve beam quality and minimize ASE, as suggested by Mikhail (page 2, 2nd paragraph).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sumida in view of Jansen et al., US 20020181914 A1 (“Jansen”).
Regarding claim 14, Sumida discloses A system for regenerating an amplifier stage, comprising: a cascaded slow light amplifier according to claim 1.
Sumida does not teach: an electric source;
connectors connected to said electric source and to said amplification zones of said cascaded slow light amplifier; and
wherein said connectors are arranged to provide an electric field over one or several said amplification zones for regenerating said amplifier stage using said electric field.
However, Jansen teaches a waveguide that includes alternative amplification regions and thin film regions (Fig. 2A, effervescent regions 12 with thin film regions 16, gain regions 14, Paragraph [0070]). An electric supply is connected to each of the amplification regions to provide an electric field over the amplification regions (Fig. 16, electric supply 92, gain regions 14, Paragraph [0118]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Sumida’ gain region by using an electric supply as the pump source, which is disclosed by Jansen. One of ordinary skill in the art could have replaced one pump method for the other and the results would have been predictable (MPEP 2143 I KSR Rationale B).
Claims 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sumida in view of Jansen in further view of Igarashi et al., JP 2007216001 A (“Igarashi”).
Regarding claim 15, Sumida, as modified in view of Jansen, discloses […]; an optical subsystem comprising a system for regenerating an amplifier stage according to claim 14 (Sumida, Fig. 2, gain medium 10, doped gain regions 12, loss/passive regions 14, Paragraph [0032]; Jansen, Fig. 16, electric supply 92, gain regions 14, Paragraph [0118]); […]
Sumida, as modified in view of Jansen, does not teach: A system for localising light in light-scattering media, said system comprising:
a light source configured for transmitting a light signal having a frequency into a light-scattering medium;
an ultrasonic device configured for generating an acoustic field in said light- scattering medium;
[…];
collection light guides configured for collecting said light signal traversed through said light scattering medium; and
wherein, when in use, said system provides an amplifier roundtrip where said light signal traverses said light-scattering medium via different optical modes, wherein some modes interact with said acoustic field whereby said modes interacting with said acoustic field has a part of its power spectrum shifted in frequency, and said light collected by said collection light guides is transmitted to said optical subsystem wherein said system for regenerating an amplifier stage amplifies frequency shifted modes and suppresses all other modes before shifting said amplified modes back to said frequency of said light signal and thereafter transmitting it back into said light-scattering medium.
However, Igarashi teaches a light source for irradiating biological tissue (Fig. 14, light source device 3a, biological tissue 7, Paragraph [0101]) which interacts with the ultrasonic pulse irradiated into the biological tissue by the ultrasonic transducer (Fig. 14, ultrasonic transducer 57, biological tissue 7, Paragraph [0104]). The light reflected from the biological tissue is collected by an optical fiber (Fig. 14, optical fiber 52b, Paragraph [0106]). The reflected light signal is detected by a photodetector and input into a lock-in amplifier which amplifies the frequency phase-locked to an applied modulated signal, effectively shifting the frequency back to the reference signal (Fig. 14, photodetector 4a, amplifier 63, Paragraph [0107]). The signal extracted from the amplifier then input into a PC which controls the pulse generator for transmitting ultrasonic pulses into the biological tissue (Fig. 14, amplifier 63, PC 6c, control circuit 25, pulse generator 21’, ultrasonic transducer 57, Paragraph [0108]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Sumida and Jansen’s amplifier in Igarashi’s endoscope device. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to apply Sumida and Jansen’s known amplification technique which reduces ASE to Igarashi’s endoscope and yielded predictable results of amplified optical signals with minimized ASE contributions (MPEP 2143 I KSR Rationale D).
Regarding claim 16, Sumida, as modified in view of Jansen and Igarashi, discloses The system of claim 15, wherein a repetition rate of said ultrasonic device is timed with a time of said amplifier roundtrip (Igarashi, Fig. 14, amplifier 63, PC 6c, control circuit 25, pulse generator 21’, ultrasonic transducer 57, Paragraph [0108]).
Regarding claim 17, Sumida, as modified in view of Jansen and Igarashi, discloses The system of claim 16, wherein said repetition rate of said ultrasonic device is incrementally changed thereby shifting said acoustic field deeper into said light- scattering medium, whereby said amplified modes follow said ultrasound field deeper into said light-scattering medium for each of said amplifier roundtrip (Igarashi, Fig. 14, amplifier 63, PC 6c, control circuit 25, pulse generator 21’, ultrasonic transducer 57, Paragraph [0107]-[0108]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RACHEL N NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5405. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 5:30 pm ET.
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, Yuqing Xiao can be reached at (571) 270-3603. 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.
/RACHEL NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/YUQING XIAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights