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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Invention I in the reply filed on 06/19/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the details of subcombination (Invention I) are not separately claimed from the combination (Invention II). This is found persuasive and the restriction requirement between Inventions I and II are hereby withdrawn. Non-elected Invention III, claims 17-20, have been cancelled and new claims 21-24 have been added. Accordingly, claims 1-16 and 21-24 will be examined.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 6-7, 9, and 21-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kuke et al. (DE 3914835 C1).
Re claim 1, Kuke et al. discloses a structure comprising: an upper silicon structure (10) comprising a recess (12) in a first side of the upper silicon structure, wherein the recess (12) has a sloped sidewall (14); a lower silicon structure (1) comprising a lens (5) recessed in a first side of the lower silicon structure (fig. 1 and corresponding English translation), wherein the first side of the upper silicon structure is bonded to the first side of the lower silicon structure (English translation of fig. 1), wherein the sloped sidewall (14) of the upper silicon structure is vertically aligned with the lens (5) of the lower silicon structure (fig. 1); and a waveguide structure (13) within the recess (12), wherein the waveguide structure is optically coupled to the lens by the sloped sidewall (fig. 1).
Re claim 2, Kuke et al. discloses the structure of claim 1, wherein the waveguide structure comprises an optical fiber (English translation of fig. 1).
Re claim 4, Kuke et al. discloses the structure of claim 1, wherein surfaces of the waveguide structure and the upper silicon structure are level (fig. 1).
Re claim 6, Kuke et al. discloses the structure of claim 1, wherein the sloped sidewall is planar (fig. 1).
Re claim 7, Kuke et al. discloses the structure of claim 1, wherein the sloped sidewall is a surface (fig. 1).
Re claim 9, Kuke et al. discloses the structure of claim 1, wherein the waveguide structure is attached to the recess of the upper silicon structure by an optical glue (English translation of fig. 1).
Re claim 21, Kuke et al. discloses the structure (fig. 1) comprising: a first substrate (1) comprising: a first recess (3) in a top side of the first substrate, wherein the first recess defines a lens structure (fig. 1); a second substrate (10) over the first substrate, wherein the second substrate comprises: a second recess (12) in an underside of the second substrate (10), wherein the second recess defines a mirror structure (14), wherein the mirror structure comprises a reflective sidewall (14) of the second recess, wherein the first recess (3) overlaps the second recess (12).
Re claim 22, Kuke et al. discloses the structure of claim 21, wherein sidewalls of the first substrate and the second substrate are coterminous (fig. 1).
Re claim 23, Kuke et al. discloses the structure of claim 21, further comprising an optical fiber (13) within the second recess (12), wherein the optical fiber is aligned to the mirror structure (14).
Re claim 24, Kuke et al. discloses the structure of claim 21, further comprising a waveguide (13) within the second recess (12), wherein the waveguide is aligned to the mirror structure (14).
Claim(s) 10, 13, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Doany et al. (US 9285554 B2).
Re claim 10, Doany et al. discloses a device (figs. 1-2) comprising: a photonic package (100) comprising a first waveguide (102) that is optically coupled to a first lens (132); and a fiber coupling structure (114) attached to the photonic package, wherein the fiber coupling structure comprises: a lens structure (116) comprising a second lens that is vertically aligned to the first lens (132); an optical fiber (114) attached to the lens structure; and a mirror structure (120) attached to the lens structure, wherein the mirror structure comprises a reflective surface that is laterally aligned to the optical fiber and vertically aligned to the second lens, wherein the mirror structure extends over the optical fiber (figs. 1-2).
Re claim 13, Doany et al. discloses the device of claim 10, wherein the lens structure comprises a groove adjacent the second lens, wherein the optical fiber (114) is attached to the groove (fig. 2).
Re claim 15, Doany et al. discloses the device of claim 10, wherein the optical fiber (114) is physically separated from the mirror structure (fig. 2).
Claim(s) 10-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tseng et al. (US 20240103236 A1).
The applied reference has a common Applicant and join inventor with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
Re claim 10, Tseng et al. discloses a device (114; fig. 12; [0049]) comprising: a photonic package (76) comprising a first waveguide (22A-E; fig. 2; [0022]) that is optically coupled to a first lens (58A); and a fiber coupling structure (108) attached to the photonic package, wherein the fiber coupling structure comprises: a lens structure comprising a second lens (58B) that is vertically aligned to the first lens (figs. 12 and 24); an optical fiber (106) attached to the lens structure; and a mirror structure (130) attached to the lens structure, wherein the mirror structure comprises a reflective surface that is laterally aligned to the optical fiber and vertically aligned to the second lens, wherein the mirror structure extends over the optical fiber (figs. 12 and 24).
Re claim 11, Tseng et al. discloses the device of claim 10, wherein the reflective surface comprises a surface of crystalline silicon (130 is coated on a sidewall surface of fiber platform 105 [0058] and 105 is made of crystalline silicon [0063]. Given the broadest reasonable interpretation, the reflective surface 130 comprises a surface of crystalline silicon).
Re claim 12, Tseng et al. discloses the device of claim 11, wherein the reflective surface comprises a reflective coating covering the surface of crystalline silicon (130 is coated on a sidewall surface of fiber platform 105 [0058] and 105 is made of crystalline silicon [0063]).
Re claim 13, Tseng et al. discloses the device of claim 10, wherein the lens structure comprises a groove (132) adjacent the second lens (56B), wherein the optical fiber (106) is attached to the groove (fig. 26).
Re claim 14, Tseng et al. discloses the device of claim 10, wherein the reflective surface has a roughness less than 10 nm (since the reflective surface 130 is made of the same material of the reflective surface of the claimed invention (130 is coated on a sidewall surface of fiber platform 105 [0058] and 105 is made of crystalline silicon [0063]), it inherently has the claimed roughness).
Re claim 15, Tseng et al. discloses the device of claim 10, wherein the optical fiber (106) is physically separated from the mirror structure (130; fig. 26).
Re claim 16, Tseng et al. discloses the device of claim 10, wherein the lens structure comprises a glass substrate [0062].
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuke et al. in view of Tseng et al.
Re claim 3, Kuke et al. discloses the structure of claim 1, but fails to teach the waveguide structure comprises a silicon nitride waveguide.
However, having a waveguide made of silicon nitride is well-known in the art, as evidenced by Tseng et al. [0026].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a silicon nitride waveguide in the device of Kuke et al. since 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, “for greater internal confinement. This may also allow the performance or leakage of nitride waveguides to be less sensitive to process variations, less sensitive to dimensional uniformity, and less sensitive to surface roughness (e.g., edge roughness or linewidth roughness)” (Tseng et al. [0026]).
Claim(s) 5 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuke et al.
Re claims 5 and 8, Kuke et al. discloses the structure of claim 1, but fails to disclose the sloped sidewall has an angle with respect to a bottom surface of the recess that is in the range of 42.50 to 47 OR a vertical height in the range of 50 pm to 300 pm.
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 sloped sidewall’s angle and vertical height as claimed since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ji et al. (US 10705302 B2) discloses a photonic package having a first waveguide optically coupled to a first lens and a fiber coupling structure attached to the photonic package.
Suh et al. (US 20110134679 A1), Kato et al. (US 7599277 B1), and Ishida et al. (US 7580605 B2) disclose a first substrate having a lens in a recess and a second substrate having a waveguide in a recess and a sloped mirror.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Uyen-Chau N. Le whose telephone number is (571)272-2397. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00am-5:30pm.
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, Kiesha R. Bryant can be reached at (571) 272-3606. 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.
/UYEN CHAU N LE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights