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 .
Applicant's election with traverse of claims 1-14 in the reply filed on 12/1/25 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the claimed method must be performed with a movable positioner device and not a fixed one. This is not found persuasive because the claimed method does not require a movable positioner device; thus, the claimed method can be performed by a different apparatus such as an apparatus with a fixed positioner device.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim 15 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 12/1/25.
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.
Claim(s) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barr et al (USP 2006/0137403) in view of Akarapu et al (USP 2016/0340241).
Regarding claim 1, Barr et al teach:
1. A method for at least partial fabrication of a mirror for an optical cavity (Barr et al: [0037-0044]; figs 5,6, and 10; the ablating of the end face of the optical fiber forms a polished mirrored surface), the method comprising:
positioning a surface to be processed of an optical substrate in an operating plane, which is identical to or parallel to a focal plane of a laser arrangement (Barr et al: [0037-0044]; figs 5,6, and 10; the core of the optical fiber constitutes the surface; the optical fiber constitutes the optical substrate; the plane of the focal point constitutes the operating plane); and
generating a concave surface profile of the surface by applying a sequence of multiple laser shots to the surface by using a laser of the laser arrangement (Barr et al: [0032], [0037-0038], and [0044]; figs 5,6, and 10; concave surface 150 constitutes the concave surface profile; the shooting of the laser around the end face of the fiber optic generates/forms the concave surface profile).
However, Barr et al do not teach using a quantum cascade laser. Akarapu et al teach using a quantum cascade laser to ablate an end face of an optical fiber, wherein the use of a quantum cascade laser requires a relatively low amount of average power, and generates a relatively small heat load that translates into a reduction in size, cost and complexity of device (Akarapu et al: [0007] and [0010]). Since Barr et al and Akarapu et al are analogous with respect to ablating the end face of a optical fiber, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use an quantum cascade laser as taught by Akarapu et al in the process of Barr et al in order to reduce manufacturing costs without compromising product quality.
Regarding claim 2, such is taught by Barr et al (Barr et al: [0037-0044]; figs 5,6, and 10).
Regarding claim 3, such is taught by the above combination of Barr et al and Akarapu et al since Akarapu et al teach a fiber core having a diameter of about 9 microns, about 50 microns, or about 62.5 microns (Akarapu et al: [0029]).
Regarding claim 4, such is taught by Barr et al (Barr et al: [0037-0044]; figs 5,6, and 10; the laser is rotated about the optical fiber and multiple shots are applied to core to form the concave surface)
Regarding claim 5, such is taught by the above combination of Barr et al and Akarapu et al since both Barr et al and Akarapu et al teach a deflection unit of a laser arrangement to set the lateral position of the focal point in the sequential manner to the plurality of operating points (Barr et al: figs 5 and 10; Akarapu et al: figs 3B, 3C, and 5; [0032-0044]).
Regarding claim 6, Barr et al teach rotating the laser around the optical fiber to shot the core at multiple operating points (Barr et al: [0037-0044]; figs 5,6, and 10) but do not teach the at least ten or thirty operating points. The number of operating points is well-known in the laser ablating art as an important ablating parameter and the desired number of operation points would have been obviously and readily determined through routine experimentation by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention. Further, the claimed number of operating points is generally well-known in the laser ablating art and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to set the number of operating points of Barr et al to the claimed number in order to improve the accuracy and precision of the laser ablation.
Regarding claim 7, Barr et al do not teach two or more concentric circles or on two or more concentric ellipses. Since it is well-known in the laser ablating art to ablate in at least two circular or elliptical patterns, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate two or more concentric circles or ellipses in the lasing process of Barr et al (modified) in order to the accuracy and precision of the concave surface.
Regarding claim 8, such is taught by Barr et al (Barr et al: fig 6).
Regarding claim 9, such is taught by Barr et al (Barr et al: fig 6).
Regarding claim 10, such is taught by Barr et al (Barr et al: fig 6).
Regarding claim 11, such is taught by Barr et al (Barr et al: fig 5; the concave surface has multiple cross-sectional planes having a circular shape).
Regarding claim 12, Barr et al teach designing the end faces of the optical fiber for specific applications like surgeries (Barr et al: [0008-0009], but do not teach two or more indentations. Since laser energy from optical fibers having end faces with multiple indentations are well-known in the surgical art for its effectiveness, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to design the concave surface of Barr et al to have two or more indentations in order to diversify the surgical uses of the optical fiber.
Regarding claim 13, Barr et al do not teach a reflective coating. Since optical fibers having a reflective coating thereon are well-known in the optical fiber art for its effectiveness and desired properties, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply a reflective coating onto the concave surface of the Barr et al in order to diversify the uses of the optical fibers.
Regarding claim 14, such is taught by Barr et al (Barr et al: [0037-0038] and [0040-0041]; the laser is rotated around the optical fiber to apply multiple shots to form the concave surface).
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following references teach laser ablation: AT9630 (QCL is better than CO2 lasers); US2015/0218038 (QCL and CO2 are substitutable alternatives); and CN116275535 (concave optical fibers by CO2 laser ablation).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDMUND H LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-1204. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9AM-4PM.
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, Xiao (Sam) Zhao can be reached at 571-270-5343. 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.
EHL
/EDMUND H LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744