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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed or amendment to the claims to add such structure and/or materials is needed. The current title implies a Thin Film Lithium Niobate Modulator. However, neither a thin film, not the Lithium Niobate material is claimed in the independent or dependent claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 8 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 5,751,867 to Schaffner et al.
Schaffner discloses in the abstract and figures 1 and 4, an apparatus comprising an electro-optic modulator (title) comprising:
An optical splitter (50) including:
An input port (26) configured to receive a continuous wave laser power (the prior art is configured to receive an input which can include a CW laser. A CW laser is not explicitly claimed);
A first output port (path 50); and
A second output port (path 52)
A first optical waveguide (42) including a first input port (left side of figure 1) coupled to the first output port of the splitter and a first output port (27);
A second optical waveguide (44) including a second input port (left side of figure 1) coupled to the second output port of the optical splitter and a “terminated port” (no language is claimed as to what defines a terminated port. Port 27 is an output port which results in the termination of the modulation structure);
A signal transmission line (“Vm” to 66; figure 1) extending substantially parallel with and situated laterally between the first and second waveguides (inner electrode 66 is between);
A first grounded transmission line (64) substantially parallel with the first waveguide, wherein the first waveguide is situated laterally between the signal and ground line (top two electrode portions in figure 1); and
A second grounded transmission line (68) substantially parallel with the second waveguide and the second waveguide situated laterally between the signal an second ground line (bottom two electrode portions in figure 1).
As to claims 2-4, the claim language only recites that the transmission lines are “configured to” perform a function. The disclosed electrodes are configured to receive any multitude of signals to include RF and DC voltages. No additional structure is claimed as to how these electrodes are configured to perform the claimed functions.
Claim 8 is similar to above independent claim 1 but lacks the splitter portion. Therefore, all the above structure of the prior art anticipates this claim.
Claim 15 is similar to above independent claim 1 but defines the splitter as being a Y-splitter and Y-combiner. This type of splitter is shown in figure 1.
Claim(s) 1-6, 9-13, and 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2024/0129042 to Yoshino.
Yoshino discloses in the abstract and figures 5-6, an apparatus comprising an electro-optic modulator (abstract) comprising:
An optical splitter (unlabeled Y-splitter that splits signal from P1 in figure 6) including:
An input port (left unlabeled input line in figure 6) configured to receive a continuous wave laser power (the prior art is configured to receive an input which can include a CW laser. A CW laser is not explicitly claimed);
A first output port (right of Y-splitter that is unlabeled upper path in figure 6); and
A second output port (right of Y-splitter that is unlabeled lower path in figure 6)
A first optical waveguide (upper line in figure 6) including a first input port (left side of figure 6) coupled to the first output port of the splitter and a first output port (towards P2 in figure 6);
A second optical waveguide (lower unlabeled line) including a second input port (left side of figure 6) coupled to the second output port of the optical splitter and a “terminated port” (no language is claimed as to what defines a terminated port. Port path P2 is an output port which results in the termination of the modulation structure);
A signal transmission line (“RF Electrode” 102; figure 6) extending substantially parallel with and situated laterally between the first and second waveguides (inner electrode 102 is between);
A first grounded transmission line (103) substantially parallel with the first waveguide, wherein the first waveguide is situated laterally between the signal and ground line (top two electrode portions in figure 6 with waveguide between electrodes 102 and 103); and
A second grounded transmission line (104) substantially parallel with the second waveguide and the second waveguide situated laterally between the signal an second ground line (bottom two electrode portions in figure 6 with waveguide between electrodes 102 and 104).
As to claims 2-4, 9-11 and 16-17, the claim language only recites that the transmission lines are “configured to” perform a function. The disclosed electrodes are configured to receive any multitude of signals to include RF and DC voltages. No additional structure is claimed as to how these electrodes are configured to perform the claimed functions.
As to claims 5, 12 and 19, DC bias portions configured as claimed are shown as electrodes 105-107 on the right side of figure 6 and input supplied as “DC BIAS”.
As to claims 6, 13 and 18, no structure is claimed as to how the DC bias voltage is configured to set a propagation constant nor what the propagation constant is. The prior art is configured to at least be able to set a propagation constant even if it is one that is not optimal.
Claim 8 is similar to above independent claim 1 but lacks the splitter portion. Therefore, all the above structure of the prior art anticipates this claim.
Claim 15 is similar to above independent claim 1 but defines the splitter as being a Y-splitter and Y-combiner. This type of splitter is shown in figure 6.
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.
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) 7, 14 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshino in view of US 6,621,617 to Poggiolini.
Yoshino discloses a singular MZ modulator portion but fails to explicitly disclose additional components typically used to modulate multiple optical signals. Such is common in the art.
Poggiolini discloses such additional components in the WDM MUX on the transmitter side and a WDM DEMUX on the receiver side (these would provide the Nx1 and 1xN functionality) as well as a CW laser source (110) and optical amplifiers (204).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshino in view of US 5,751,867 to Schaffner et al.
Yoshino discloses the claimed invention except for a waveguide arm that is closer to the electrode with respect to center. It is noted that such spacing is common in the art to alter an electric field for the MZ modulation function.
Schaffner discloses such a common placement and spacing to optimize an electric field (column 6, lines 28-33).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to space the waveguide from an electrode as taught by Schaffner in Yoshino to optimize an electric field for modulation.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2002/0159666 (“CW”; figure 2).
US 2005/0254743 (figure 8).
US 6,148,122 (figure 1 WDM channel addition).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Eric K Wong whose telephone number is (571)272-2363. The examiner can normally be reached M-Tu, Th-F 8A-6P.
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, Thomas Hollweg can be reached on 571-270-1739. 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.
ERIC K. WONG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2874
/Eric Wong/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874