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 statements (IDS) submitted on July 3, 2024, December 9, 2025, December 18, 2025, and April 7, 2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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.
Claim 12 is 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.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "a second end of the Rydberg sensing cell…" in ll. 5-6, without previous disclosure, resulting in a lack of antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the examiner interprets this limitation to read as “a second end of a Rydberg sensing cell…”.
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.
Claims 1-3, 6 & 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anderson et al. (US 2023/0243881 A1, Pub. Date Aug. 3, 2023, hereinafter, Anderson), in view of Deb et al. (US 10763966 B1, Pat. Date Sep. 1, 2020, hereinafter, Deb), and further in view of Kub et al. (US 2013/0121362 A1, Pub. Date May 16, 2013, hereinafter, Kub).
Regarding independent claim 1, Anderson, teaches:
A Rydberg sensor comprising ([Abstract] & [0002]-[0003]):
a probe laser source (Fig. 1; [Abstract] & [0229-][0230]: teaches the use of a probe laser beam directed into the atomic receiver);
a Rydberg sensing region within the QRF cavity and in the path of the plurality of probe laser beam passes ([Abstract], [0215] & [0229]-[0230]);
a detector downstream from the QRF cavity ([0229]-[0230]).
PNG
media_image1.png
440
858
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Anderson, is silent in regard to:
a quantum radio frequency (QRF) cavity downstream from the probe laser source and configured to define a path for a plurality of probe laser beam passes within the QRF cavity;
However, Anderson, in combination with Deb, further teach:
a quantum radio frequency (QRF) cavity downstream from the probe laser source and configured to define a path for a plurality of probe laser beam passes within the QRF cavity (Disclosed in combination: Anderson: [Abstract] & [0344]; Deb: Fig. 4; [Col. 3, ll. 25-56]);
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the atomic quantum sensor of Anderson to include the multi-pass retro-reflector configuration taught by Deb, according to known methods. The motivation for this modification is to increase the effective optical interaction length between the probe laser beam and the excited Rydberg atoms within the defined volume of the cavity. By causing the probe beam to traverse the sensing region a plurality of times as taught by Deb, a POSITA would recognize that the system would achieve a stronger absorption or phase-shift signal. This combination applies a known technique (Deb’s multi-pass retro-reflection in a Rydberg vapor cell) to a known device (Anderson’s Rydberg atom sensor) to yield the predictable result (KSR) of enhancing the signal-to-noise ratio and improving the overall RF detection sensitivity of the atomic receiver.
Anderson, in combination with Deb, are silent in regard to:
an optical amplifier within the QRF cavity and in the path of the plurality of probe laser beam passes; and
However, Kub, further teaches:
an optical amplifier within the QRF cavity and in the path of the plurality of probe laser beam passes (Fig. 1; [Abstract], [0004]-[0005], [0011], [0040], [0066]-[0067], [0081]-[0082], [Claim 1] & [Claim 34]); and
PNG
media_image2.png
483
963
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the multi-pass Rydberg sensing cavity of Anderson and Deb to include the intra-cavity optical amplifier taught by Kub, according to known methods. The motivation for this modification is to compensate for optical signal degradation. A POSITA would recognize that forcing a probe laser beam to make of plurality passes through an atomic vapor cell via retro-reflection (as taught by Deb), inherently introduces optical losses due to scattering, imperfect mirror reflectivity, and absorption by the atomic medium. By incorporating the intra-cavity optical amplifier of Kub directly into the sensing cavity of Anderson/Deb, the system can provide optical gain to the probe beam during its multiple passes. This combination applies a known technique (intra-cavity optical amplification to overcome cavity losses) to a known device (a multi-pass atomic sensing cavity) to yield the predictable result (KSR) of maintaining probe beam intensity and ensuring a robust, detectable signal reaches the downstream detector.
Regarding dependent claim 2, Anderson, teaches:
The Rydberg sensor of claim 1 comprising ([Abstract], [0002]-[0003] & [0229]-[0230])
Anderson, in combination with Deb, are silent in regard to:
a coupling laser source configured to power the optical amplifier.
However, Anderson, in combination with Kub, further teach:
a coupling laser source (Disclosed in combination: Anderson: [0229]-[0230]: teaches a “coupler laser beam” utilized within the Rydberg sensor system; Kub: [0012]: teaches the use of an “optical pump” (a laser source) to couple light into a gain medium)
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the Rydberg sensor of Anderson to include the optically pumped intra-cavity optical amplifier taught by Kub, according to known methods. A POSITA would recognize that if an optical amplifier is incorporated into a sensing cavity to overcome optical attenuation, that amplifier would fundamentally require an external energy source to achieve population inversion and provide optical gain. Kub provides the known, standard solution: utilizing an optical pump to deliver power to the optical amplifier. The motivation to implement Kub’s optical pumping mechanism using Anderson’s existing coupler laser source is to successfully provide the necessary energy to the intra-cavity amplifier. This combination applies a known technique (optically pumping a gain medium) to a known device (an atomic sensing cavity outfitted with an amplifier) to yield the predictable result (KSR) of sustaining optical amplification and ensuring a robust probe beam signal reaches the downstream detector.
However, Kub, further teaches:
configured to power the optical amplifier ([Abstract], [0005], [0014], [0039]-[0040], [0066], [0074], [0077], [0082], [Claim 1] & [Claim 34]).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the Rydberg sensor of Anderson to include the optically pumped intra-cavity optical amplifier taught by Kub, according to known methods. A POSITA would recognize that incorporating an optical amplifier into a sensing cavity introduces the need to provide energy to that amplifier. Kub provides the known solution: utilizing an optical pump (a coupling laser source) to deliver power to the optical amplifier. The motivation to implement Kub’s optical pump alongside Anderson’s sensor is to successfully power the intra-cavity amplifier, thereby compensating for optical losses in the cavity and ensuring a robust probe beam signal reaches the downstream detector. This combination applies a known technique (optically pumping a gain medium) to a known device (an atomic sensing cavity outfitted with an amplifier) to yield the predictable result (KSR) of overcoming internal optical attenuation.
Regarding dependent claim 3, Anderson, teaches:
The Rydberg sensor of claim 2 ([Abstract], [0002]-[0003] & [0229]-[0230])
Anderson, is silent in regard to:
wherein the QRF cavity comprises an arrangement of optical elements.
However, Anderson, in combination with Deb, and Kub further teach:
wherein the QRF cavity comprises an arrangement of optical elements (Disclosed in combination: Anderson: [0344]: establishes an “optical build-up cavity,” which inherently requires optical elements to construct; Deb: Fig. 4; [Col. 3, ll. 25-56]: teaches the specific arrangement of an optical element (a “corner cube used as a retro-reflector”) to define the multi-pass beam path within the sensing region; Kub: [0011], [0040], [0066]-[0067], [0074] & [0081]: teaches an arrangement of optical elements (“first and second reflective surfaces 112 and 122”) to form a resonant cavity).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the atomic quantum sensor of Anderson to include the multi-pass retro-reflector configuration taught by Deb, according to known methods. The motivation for this modification is to increase the effective optical interaction length between the probe laser beam and the excited Rydberg atoms. By forcing the probe beam to traverse the sensing region a plurality of times as taught by Deb, a POSITA would recognize that the system achieves a stronger phase-shift or absorption signal, yielding the predictable result of improving the overall RF detection sensitivity of the atomic receiver. Kub teaches an optical amplification system wherein an optical amplifier (such as a semiconductor optical amplifier) is physically disposed between the reflective surfaces of a resonant optical cavity, directly in the path of the intra-cavity light beam, and powered by an optical pump. Therefore, it would have been obvious to further modify the multi-pass Rydberg sensing cavity of Anderson and Deb to include the intra-cavity optical amplifier taught by Kub, according to known methods. The motivation for this secondary modification is to compensate for induced optical signal degradation. A POSITA would recognize that forcing a probe laser beam to make a plurality of passes through an atomic vapor (modification taught by Deb) inherently introduces optical losses due to scattering, imperfect mirror reflectivity, and atomic medium absorption. By incorporating the intra-cavity optical amplifier of Kub directly into the multi-pass sensing cavity of Anderson/Deb, and utilizing Anderson’s coupling laser as the optical pump, the system provides continuous optical gain to the probe during its multiple passes. This combination applies a known technique (intra-cavity optical amplification) to a known device (a multi-pass atomic sensing cavity) to yield the predictable result (KSR) of overcoming cavity losses, sustaining probe beam intensity, and ensuring a robust signal reaches the downstream detector.
Regarding dependent claim 6, Anderson, teaches:
The Rydberg sensor of claim 2 ([Abstract], [0002]-[0003] & [0229]-[0230])
Anderson, is silent in regard to:
comprising an optical splitter downstream from the coupling laser source, and a dichroic mirror upstream of the detector.
However, Anderson, in combination with Deb, further teach:
comprising (Deb: Figs. 3-4; [Col. 3, ll. 25-56] & [Col. 4, ll. 7-25]) an optical splitter downstream from the coupling laser source (Deb: Figs. 3-4; [Col. 5, ll. 12-35]: teaches a coupling laser source and a separating optical element (splitter), Fig. 3 illustrates the light source 32 as the coupling laser, and dichroic mirror 35 positioned downstream from the cell and coupling laser to separate/split the beams), and a dichroic mirror upstream of the detector (Disclosed in combination: Anderson: Fig. 1; [0229]-[0232]: Fig. 1 depicts the beam splitter/dichroic mirror positioned downstream of the lasers and directly upstream of the detector 160 to separate the beams; Deb: Figs. 3-4; [Col. 3, ll. 57-67], [Col. 4, ll. 1-6] & [Col. 5, ll. 12-35]: teaches dichroic mirror 35 is upstream of the detector 51, Fig. 4 illustrates the probing beam continuing from the vapor cell/dichroic separation to hit the light detector 51, dichroic mirror is positioned upstream of the detector to filter the incoming light).
PNG
media_image3.png
662
1099
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
708
1355
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to configure the Rydberg sensor with an optical splitter downstream from the coupling laser and a dichroic mirror upstream of the detector, as taught by Anderson and Deb, according to known methods. In Rydberg electrometry (EIT), it is fundamentally required to pass both a probe laser beam and a coupling laser beam through the atomic vapor. To cleanly read the absorption or transmission signal, only the probe laser must reach the photodetector. A POSITA would be motivated to implement Deb’s dichroic mirror 35 (which acts as an optical beam splitter) downstream of the coupling laser and upstream of the detector to separate the two distinct laser wavelengths. This ensures that the coupling laser is filtered out and diverted, allowing only the clean probe beam signal to reach the detector. This is a predictable (KSR), universally applied optical engineering technique for beam separation in atomic sensors to prevent detector saturation and improve signal-to-noise ratio.
Regarding dependent claim 8, Anderson, teaches:
The Rydberg sensor of claim 1 comprising ([Abstract], [0002]-[0003], [0022], [0027], [0031], [0159], [0182], [0229]-[0230], [0315] & [Claim 16])
Anderson, is silent in regard to:
a controller coupled to the probe laser source, and the detector.
However, Anderson, in combination with Deb, further teach:
a controller (Disclosed in combination: Anderson: [Title], [Abstract], [0022] & [0159]: teaches a system requiring a controller via closed-loop regulation; Deb: [Col. 5, ll. 36-65], [Col. 6, ll. 58-67] & [Col. 7, ll. 1-3]: teaches the specific electronic controller hardware (feedback loop/lock-in amplifier)) coupled to the probe laser source, and the detector (Disclosed in combination: Anderson: [Abstract], [0005], [0014], [0024], [0037]-[0038] & [0043]-[0044]: teaches the system includes a detector to provide the feedback; Deb: [Col. 3, ll. 57-67], [Col. 4, ll. 1-6], [Col. 5, ll. 36-65], [Col. 6, ll. 58-67] & [Col. 7, ll. 1-3]: teaches the feedback loop/lock-in amplifier (controller) acts on the light sources (probe/coupling lasers) to lock their frequencies based on the signal read by the photodetector 51).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to configure the closed-loop Rydberg sensor of Anderson with a specific controller (such as a lock-in amplifier or electronic feedback loop) coupled to the probe laser source and the detector, as taught by Deb, according to known methods. Anderson establishes the necessity of a closed-loop control architecture that regulates the system based on the detected response of the Rydberg atoms. A POSITA would be motivated to look to Deb to implement the specific hardware for this closed loop. Deb teaches that utilizing a controller (a lock-in amplifier and feedback loop) coupled to the laser and detector allows the system to accurately frequency-lock the probe and coupling lasers. A POSITA would integrate this controller into Anderson’s sensor to automatically track frequency variations and cancel out low-frequency noise, thereby predictably (KSR) ensuring the lasers remain resonant with the required atomic transitions to maximize the sensor’s accuracy and reliability.
Claims 4 & 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anderson, in view of Deb, in view of Kub, and further in view of Plaessmann et al. (US 5546222, Pat. Date Aug. 13, 1996, hereinafter, Plaessmann).
Regarding dependent claim 4, Anderson, teaches:
The Rydberg sensor of claim 3 ([Abstract], [0002]-[0003] & [0229]-[0230])
Anderson, in combination with Deb, and Kub, are silent in regard to:
wherein the arrangement of optical elements comprises:
a first mirror between the coupling laser source and a first end of the optical amplifier; and
a second mirror between the probe laser source and a second end of the optical amplifier.
However, Plaessmann, further teaches:
wherein the arrangement of optical elements comprises ([Abstract] & [Col. 7, ll. 53-62]: discloses a multi-pass amplifier cavity comprising an arrangement of optical elements):
a first mirror between the coupling laser source and a first end of the optical amplifier ([Col. 7, ll. 9-44] & [Col. 10, ll. 55-58]: teaches an end-pumped geometry where the energy from the external pump source (equivalent to the coupling laser) must pass through the first mirror to reach the optical amplifier (gain medium), inherently placing the first mirror physically between the coupling laser source and the amplifier); and
a second mirror between the probe laser source and a second end of the optical amplifier ([Col. 7, ll. 53-62]: places the second mirror on the opposite side of the gain medium, teaches that the external input light beam (equivalent to the probe beam being amplified) can be injected into the cavity by passing it through the second mirror, places the second mirror physically between the external probe laser source and the optical amplifier).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to configure the mirrors of the multi-pass amplified Rydberg cavity, taught by Anderson, Deb, and Kub, according to the precise end-pumped and end-injected geometry taught by Plaessmann, according to known methods. A POSITA would recognize that when utilizing an intra-cavity optical amplifier within a closed, multi-pass sensing cavity, the necessary external laser beams (the probe and coupling lasers) must cross the cavity boundaries to interact with the internal atomic vapor and gain medium. Plaessmann provides the efficient geometric solution: placing the cavity’s bounding mirrors directly between the external sources and the internal amplifier to allow for longitudinal end-pumping and probing. The motivation to implement Plaessmann’s mirror arrangement is to achieve optimal geometric overlap between the pump beam, the probe beam, and the active region of the optical amplifier while maintaining stable boundary conditions of the multi-pass cavity. This combination applies a known laser injection geometry (Plaessmann) to a known amplified sensing cavity (Anderson/Kub) to yield the predictable result (KSR) of a pumped and probed intra-cavity amplifier.
Regarding dependent claim 7, Anderson, teaches:
The Rydberg sensor of claim 1 ([Abstract], [0002]-[0003] & [0229]-[0230])
Anderson, in combination with Deb, and Kub, are silent in regard to:
wherein the optical amplifier comprises a titanium sapphire crystal body.
However, Plaessmann, further teaches:
wherein the optical amplifier comprises (Fig. 1; [Abstract], [Col. 3, ll. 43-67], [Col. 4, ll. 1-48] & [Col. 6, ll. 6-11]: teaches an optical light amplifier comprising a laser gain medium) a titanium sapphire crystal body (Fig. 1; [Abstract], [Col. 3, ll. 43-67], [Col. 4, ll. 1-48], [Col. 6, ll. 6-11], [Col. 11, ll. 66-67], [Col. 12, ll. 1-14] & [Claim 4]).
PNG
media_image5.png
731
1365
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the Rydberg sensor, taught by Anderson and Deb, to include an optical amplifier wherein the gain medium comprises a titanium sapphire crystal body, as taught by Plaessmann, according to known methods. A multi-pass or optical cavity architecture is beneficial in atomic Rydberg sensors to increase the interaction length of the laser beams. A POSITA would recognize the need to overcome optical attenuation and signal loss inherent in multiple optical passes through windows, vapor cells, and beam splitters. Plaessmann teaches efficient multi-pass light amplifiers designed for such architectures. Furthermore, Plaessmann identifies Ti: sapphire as a preferred solid-state laser gain medium for the optical amplifiers. A POSITA would be motivated to select a Ti: sapphire crystal body as the optical amplifier’s gain medium because it provides a tunable, wide-bandwidth amplification range, making it ideal for precision tuning and amplifying the probing and coupling laser wavelengths required for exciting Rydberg atomic states, and yielding expected predictable results (KSR).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anderson, in view of Deb, in view of Kub, in view of Plaessmann, and further in view of Pask et al. (US 2012/0263196 A1, Pub. Date Oct. 18, 2012, hereinafter, Pask).
Regarding dependent claim 5, Anderson, teaches:
The Rydberg sensor of claim 4 ([Abstract], [0002]-[0003], [0229]-[0230] & [0344])
Anderson, is silent in regard to:
wherein the arrangement of optical elements comprises:
However, Anderson, in combination with Deb, further teach:
wherein the arrangement of optical elements comprises (Disclosed in combination: Anderson: [0344]; Deb: Fig. 3; [Col. 3, ll. 25-56] & [Col. 5, ll. 12-35]):
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the atom-based closed-loop Rydberg system taught by Anderson to include the optical antenna architecture and arrangement of optical elements (such as gas/vapor cell and dichroic mirrors to combine and separate probing/coupling beams) as taught by Deb, according to known methods. Applying the established optical setup of Deb (which is designed to excite and probe Rydberg atoms) to the closed-loop control method of Anderson constitutes the substitution or application of a known technique (Deb’s optical antenna setup) to a known device (Anderson’s Rydberg control system) ready for improvement. Both systems rely on the exact same underlying quantum mechanical principles (Electromagnetically Induced Transparency (EIT) or similar probing of Rydberg states). The motivation to combine Anderson and Deb is to provide an optimized, optically efficient physical architecture for beam management (combining and separating probe/coupling lasers) to improve the signal detection and overall reliability of the Rydberg sensor. Therefore, a POSITA would have a high expectation of success, and the combination would yield expected predictable results (KSR): a functioning, efficient closed-loop Rydberg sensor.
Anderson, in combination with Deb, are silent in regard to:
a first reflector adjacent a first end of the Rydberg sensing region and aligned with the first mirror; and
a second reflector adjacent a second end of the Rydberg sensing region and aligned with the second mirror.
However, Deb, in combination with Kub, Plaessmann, and Pask, further teach:
a first reflector adjacent a first end of the Rydberg sensing region and aligned with the first mirror (Disclosed in combination: Deb: Fig. 3; [Col. 5, ll. 12-35]: Fig. 3 shows mirror 34 positioned adjacent to the first end of the vapor cell 33; Kub: Fig. 1; [0040]-[0042] & [0049]: teaches reflective surfaces and mirrors aligned at the first end; Plaessmann: Fig. 1; [Col. 9, ll. 45-65] & [Col. 10, ll. 1-17]; Pask: Fig. 13A; [0178]: teaches reflectors bounding a medium); and
a second reflector adjacent a second end of the Rydberg sensing region and aligned with the second mirror (Disclosed in combination: Deb: Fig. 3; [Col. 5, ll. 12-35]: Fig. 3 shows mirror 35 positioned adjacent to the second/opposite end of the vapor cell 33; Kub: Fig. 1; [0040]-[0042] & [0049]: teaches reflective surfaces and mirrors aligned at the second end; Plaessmann: Fig. 1; [Col. 9, ll. 45-65] & [Col. 10, ll. 1-17]; Pask: Fig. 13A; [0178]: teaches reflectors bounding a medium, showing the second boundary element).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the Rydberg vapor cell optical arrangement of Deb to further include a first reflector adjacent the first end aligned with the first mirror, and a second reflector adjacent the second end aligned with the second mirror, as taught by Kub, Plaessmann, and Pask, according to known methods. The motivation to modify the optical sensor of Deb with the aligned first and second reflectors taught by Kub, Plaessmann, and Pask is to establish a multi-pass or resonant optical cavity around the Rydberg sensing region. A POSITA would recognize that positioning aligned reflectors adjacent to the opposing ends of the vapor cell increases the optical interaction length between the probing lasers and the atomic gas, thereby predictably enhancing (KSR) the optical efficiency, signal-to-noise ratio, and overall sensitivity of the Rydberg sensor.
Claims 9-11, 13-17 & 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deb, in view of Plaessmann, and further in view of Kub.
Regarding independent claim 9, Deb, teaches:
A quantum radio frequency (QRF) cavity for Rydberg sensing comprising (Fig. 4; [Col. 3, ll. 25-56], [Col. 4, ll. 6-67], [Col. 5, ll. 1-11 & 36-65] & [Col. 7, ll. 4-20]: teaches the base QRF Rydberg sensor):
an arrangement of optical elements configured to define a path for a plurality of probe laser beam passes (Fig. 4; [Col. 3, ll. 25-56]: teaches optical elements forming a multi-pass path, where the retro-reflector forces the beam to pass through the region multiple times);
a Rydberg sensing region in the path of the plurality of probe laser beam passes (Fig. 4; [Col. 3, ll. 25-56]: teaches the Rydberg region (vapor cell) is in this path, the gas/vapor cell acts as the sensing region, and the beam passes through it multiple times); and
Deb, is silent in regard to:
an optical amplifier in the path of the plurality of probe laser beam passes.
However, Plaessmann, in combination with Kub, further teach:
an optical amplifier in the path of the plurality of probe laser beam passes (Disclosed in combination: Plaessmann: [Title], [Abstract], [Col. 13, ll. 60-67] & [Col. 14, ll. 1-22]: teaches an optical amplifier located directly in the multi-pass path; Kub: Fig. 1; [Abstract] & [0040]: corroborates placing amplifiers inside optical cavities).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the multi-pass Rydberg sensor of Deb to include an optical amplifier situated directly in the path of the plurality of probe laser beam passes, as taught by Plaessmann, and Kub, according to known methods. In Deb’s sensor (Fig. 4), the probe laser is passed back and forth through the vapor cell using a retro-reflector to increase the interaction length with the Rydberg atoms. Passing a weak probe beam through optical windows and atomic vapor multiple times causes significant attenuation and optical loss. A POSITA would recognize this issue and be motivated to look to the multi-pass optical cavities of Plaessmann/Kub to solve it. Plaessmann teaches that placing a single gain medium (an optical amplifier) directly in the path of the multiple passes compensates for optical losses by continuously amplifying the beam as it bounces back and forth, Kub corroborates this. Implementing Plaessmann’s multi-pass amplifier architecture into Deb’s multi-pass Rydberg cavity would be a predictable modification (KSR), ensuring the probe beam maintains sufficient intensity for high-fidelity readout at the detector without requiring dangerous high initial laser power that could cause unwanted thermal or saturation effects in the vapor cell.
Regarding dependent claim 10, Deb, teaches:
The QRF cavity of claim 9 (Fig. 4; [Col. 3, ll. 25-56], [Col. 4, ll. 6-67], [Col. 5, ll. 1-65] & [Col. 7, ll. 4-20]) a coupling laser source (Figs. 3-4; [Col. 3, ll. 25-56], [Col. 4, ll. 26-67] & [Col. 5, ll. 1-65]: teaches the system utilizes a high-intensity coupling laser source).
Deb, is silent in regard to:
wherein the optical amplifier is configured to be powered by
However, Plaessmann, in combination with Kub, further teach:
wherein the optical amplifier (Disclosed in combination: Plaessmann: [Title], [Abstract], [Col. 13, ll. 60-67] & [Col. 14, ll. 1-22]; Kub: Fig. 1; [Abstract] & [0040]: both references teach an optical amplifier disposed in an optical cavity) is configured to be powered by (Kub: [Abstract], [0011] & [0040]: teaches powering the amplifier with optical light)
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the Rydberg sensor of Deb to include an optical amplifier situated directly in the path of the plurality of probe laser beam passes, such that the optical amplifier is powered by the coupling laser source, as taught by Plaessmann, and Kub, according to known methods. Kub establishes that the optical amplifier requires a power source, teaching the use of an “optical pump” (a light/laser source) to provide energy to the amplifier’s gain medium. Deb teaches that the Rydberg sensor system inherently includes a high-power “coupling laser source” (e.g., generating intense blue light at 480 nm to couple the atomic states). A POSITA would recognize that introducing a dedicated, separate pump laser to power the optical amplifier would add unnecessary cost, weight, complexity, and power consumption to the sensor. To optimize the system for Size, Weight, and Power (SWaP), a universal goal in sensor engineering, a POSITA would be motivated to utilize the system’s existing intense coupling laser source to simultaneously act as the optical pump to power the optical amplifier. This constitutes the predictable reuse of an existing optical component to perform a known function (optically pumping a gain medium), yielding the predictable result (KSR) of a more compact, efficient QRF cavity.
Regarding dependent claim 11, Deb, teaches:
The QRF cavity of claim 10 wherein the arrangement of optical elements comprises (Figs. 3-4; [Col. 3, ll. 25-56], [Col. 4, ll. 6-67], [Col. 5, ll. 1-65] & [Col. 7, ll. 4-20]: teaches the base QRF Rydberg sensor and utilizes a microwave field coupling Rydberg states, and further teaches an arrangement of optical elements to route the beams):
Deb, is silent in regard to:
a first mirror between the coupling laser source and a first end of the optical amplifier; and
a second mirror between the probe laser source and a second end of the optical amplifier.
However, Deb, in combination with Plaessmann, and Kub, further teach:
a first mirror between the coupling laser source and a first end of the optical amplifier (Disclosed in combination: Deb: Fig. 3; [Col. 4, ll. 26-67] & [Col. 5, ll. 1-65] & [Claim 5]: teaches injecting the coupling laser into the cavity through a mirror, Fig. 3 illustrates the coupling laser 32 passing through mirror 35 into the cavity; Plaessmann: [Abstract], [Col. 7, ll. 9-44 & 53-62] & [Col. 10, ll. 55-58]; Kub: Fig. 1; [Abstract] & [0040]: teaches an optical amplifier bounded by a mirror at its first end of the semiconductor optical amplifier (SOA). When integrated, Kub’s first cavity mirror 110 acts as Deb’s input/boundary mirror, positioning it between the external coupling laser and the first end of the amplifier); and
a second mirror between the probe laser source and a second end of the optical amplifier (Disclosed in combination: Deb: Fig. 3; [Col. 4, ll. 26-67] & [Col. 5, ll. 12-65] & [Claim 5]: teaches injecting the opposing probe laser into the cavity through a mirror, Fig. 3 illustrates the probe laser 31 passing through mirror 34 into the opposite side of the cavity; Plaessmann: [Abstract], [Col. 7, ll. 9-44 & 53-62] & [Col. 10, ll. 55-58]; Kub: Fig. 1; [Abstract] & [0040]-[0042]: teaches the optical amplifier is bounded by a mirror at its second end of the semiconductor optical amplifier (SOA). Similarly, Kub’s second cavity mirror 120 is positioned between Deb’s external probe laser and the second end of the optical amplifier)).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the Rydberg sensor cavity of Deb to include a first mirror between the coupling laser source and the first end of the optical amplifier, and a second mirror between the probe laser and the second end of the optical amplifier, as taught by the combination of Deb and Kub, and further corroborated by Plaessmann, according to known methods. A POSITA would be motivated to place an optical amplifier inside the Rydberg sensing cavity to overcome optical attenuation during multi-pass probing. A POSITA would look to Kub, which provides the standard architectural blueprint for a laser cavity containing an optical amplifier. Kub teaches that the optical amplifier must be bounded by a first mirror at its first end and a second mirror at its second end for form the resonant optical cavity. Deb teaches a counter-propagating laser setup where the coupling laser and probe laser are situated outside the cavity and inject their beams into the opposing ends of the sensing region through optical mirrors 34/35. Plaessmann provides the efficient geometric solution: placing the cavity’s bounding mirrors directly between the external sources and the internal amplifier to allow for longitudinal end-pumping and probing. The motivation to implement Plaessmann’s mirror arrangement is to achieve optimal geometric overlap between the pump beam, the probe beam, and the active region of the optical amplifier while maintaining stable boundary conditions of the multi-pass cavity. A POSITA would find it predictable and obvious to align Deb’s external coupling and probe lasers such that they inject their beams directly through the respective first and second resonant cavity mirrors bounding Kub’s optical amplifier. This standard “optical injection” architecture merges the external laser sources of Deb with the closed-cavity amplifier of Kub, resulting in the arrangement as claimed. The motivation is to couple external pump/probe laser power into the resonant cavity to excite the Rydberg vapor and power the optical amplifier, yielding expected predictable (KSR) and intended optical resonance results.
Regarding dependent claim 13, Deb, teaches:
The QRF cavity of claim 9 (Figs. 3-4; [Col. 3, ll. 25-56], [Col. 4, ll. 6-67], [Col. 5, ll. 1-65] & [Col. 7, ll. 4-20]: teaches the base QRF Rydberg sensor, operating as a quantum radio frequency/microwave cavity)
Deb, is silent in regard to:
wherein the optical amplifier comprises a titanium sapphire crystal body.
However, Plaessmann, further teaches:
wherein the optical amplifier comprises (Fig. 1; [Title], [Abstract], [Col. 3, ll. 43-67], [Col. 4, ll. 1-48] & [Col. 6, ll. 6-11]: teaches an optical light amplifier comprising a laser gain medium) a titanium sapphire crystal body (Fig. 1; [Abstract], [Col. 3, ll. 43-67], [Col. 4, ll. 1-48], [Col. 6, ll. 6-11], [Col. 11, ll. 66-67], [Col. 12, ll. 1-14] & [Claim 4]: identifies Titanium Sapphire (Ti: sapphire) as the solid-state gain medium for the optical amplifier).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the QRF cavity for Rydberg sensing taught by Deb, to include an optical amplifier wherein the gain medium comprises a titanium sapphire crystal body, as taught by Plaessmann, according to known methods. When incorporating an optical amplifier into a resonant Rydberg sensing cavity to maintain probe beam intensity over multiple passes, a POSITA must select an appropriate gain medium for the amplifier. Deb relies on specific laser wavelengths (e.g., 780 nm for the probe beam and 480 nm for the coupling beam) to correctly match the precise quantum transitions of the rubidium or alkali atoms in the vapor cell. Plaessmann provides the solution by teaches the use of a Ti: sapphire crystal body as the optical amplifier’s gain medium. A POSITA would be motivated to select a Ti: sapphire crystal body as the optical amplifier’s gain medium because Titanium Sapphire is universally known in optical engineering for its broad tuning range (typically spanning ~650nm to ~1100 nm), wide-bandwidth amplification range. This makes it ideal for precision tuning and amplifying the specific near-infrared probing wavelengths (e.g., 780 nm) required in Deb’s QRF Rydberg sensor and coupling laser wavelengths required for exciting Rydberg atomic states. Substituting Plaessmann’s Ti: sapphire amplifier into Deb’s QRF cavity constitutes the predictable use of a known optical element for its primary function (tunable light amplification, yielding the expected predictable result (KSR) of an efficient, amplified Rydberg sensing cavity.
Regarding independent claim 14, Deb, teaches:
A method for Rydberg sensing comprising ([Abstract], [Col. 3, ll. 25-67] & [Col. 4, ll. 1-25]):
directing a probe laser beam from a probe laser beam source to a quantum radio frequency (QRF) cavity to define a path for a plurality of probe laser beam passes within the QRF cavity (Fig. 4; [Col. 3, ll. 25-67] & [Col. 4, ll. 1-25]: teaches directing the probe beam for multiple passes within the cavity, utilizing the retro-reflector forces the beam to traverse a path with a plurality of passes through the cell/cavity), with a Rydberg sensing region within the QRF cavity and in the path of the plurality of probe laser beam passes (Fig. 4; [Col. 3, ll. 25-67] & [Col. 4, ll. 1-25]: teaches the vapor cell (sensing region) is in the path of these passes);
operating a detector downstream from the QRF cavity (Figs. 2 & 4; [Col. 3, ll. 25-67] & [Col. 4, ll. 1-25]: teaches operating a downstream detector).
Deb, is silent in regard to:
powering an optical amplifier within the QRF cavity and in the path of the plurality of probe laser beam passes; and
However, Plaessmann, in combination with Kub, further teach:
powering an optical amplifier within the QRF cavity and in the path of the plurality of probe laser beam passes (Disclosed in combination: Plaessmann: [Title], [Abstract], [Col. 6, ll. 40-67], [Col. 8, ll. 51-65], [Col. 10, ll. 10-18 & 33-48], [Col. 11, ll. 56-65], [Col. 12, ll. 15-46], [Col. 13, ll. 41-67] & [Col. 14, ll. 1-22]: teaches operating/powering a multi-pass light amplifier inside the beam path; Kub: [0040]: teaches providing power (pumping) to an optical amplifier inside an optical cavity); and
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the multi-pass Rydberg sensing method of Deb, to include the step of powering an optical amplifier located within the QRF cavity and in the path of the plurality of probe laser beam passes, as taught by Plaessmann and Kub, according to known methods. Deb teaches an advantageous method where a probe laser is directed into a Rydberg vapor cell and retro-reflected to pass through the cell multiple times (a multi-pass architecture) before being sent to a downstream detector. A POSITA carrying out this method would recognize that passing a weak probe beam back and forth through optical windows and atomic vapor causes significant signal attenuation and optical scattering. This loss limits the signal-to-noise ratio at the downstream detector. To solve this attenuation problem, a POSITA would look to the multi-pass amplifier techniques of Plaessmann and Kub. Plaessmann teaches that placing a single gain medium (an optical amplifier) directly in the path of multiple beam passes compensates for optical losses by amplifying the beam continuously on each pass. Kub teaches the fundamental step of powering (pumping) this intra-cavity amplifier. Modifying Deb’s method by integrating and powering an optical amplifier within the multi-pass QRF cavity would be highly predictable (KSR), ensuring the probe beam maintains sufficient intensity over its multiple passes for high-fidelity readout at the downstream detector.
Regarding dependent claim 15, Deb, teaches:
The method of claim 14 comprising ([Abstract], [Col. 3, ll. 25-67] & [Col. 4, ll. 1-25]) operating a coupling laser source (Figs. 3-4; [Col. 3, ll. 25-56], [Col. 4, ll. 26-67] & [Col. 5, ll. 1-65]: teaches the step of operating a high-intensity coupling laser source to generate the coupling beam)
Deb, in combination with Plaessmann, are silent in regard to:
to power the optical amplifier.
However, Kub, further teaches:
to power the optical amplifier ([Abstract], [0011] & [0040]: teaches the method step of powering (pumping) an optical amplifier with optical light energy).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the Rydberg sensing method of Deb to include the step of operating the coupling laser source to power the optical amplifier, as taught by the combination of Deb and Kub, according to known methods. A POSITA would be motivated to operate an optical amplifier inside the Rydberg sensing cavity to overcome signal attenuation during multi-pass probing. Kub establishes the required method step of powering this optical amplifier, teaching the use of an “optical pump” (directing light/laser energy) to provide energy to the amplifier’s gain medium. Deb teaches that the Rydberg sensing method inherently requires operating a high-power “coupling laser source” (e.g., generating intense blue light) to couple the atomic states. A POSITA carrying out this method would recognize that introducing and operating a dedicated, separate pump laser to power the optical amplifier would add unnecessary cost, weight, optical complexity, and power consumption. To optimize the method for Size, Weight, and Power (SWaP) efficiency, a universal goal in sensor engineering, a POSITA would be motivated to operate the system’s existing intense coupling laser source to simultaneously serve as the optical pump to power the optical amplifier. This constitutes the predictable method of utilizing an existing optical step (firing the coupling laser) to perform an additionally required known function (optically pumping a gain medium), yielding predictable and efficient results (KSR).
Regarding dependent claim 16, Deb, teaches:
The method of claim 15 ([Abstract], [Col. 3, ll. 25-67] & [Col. 4, ll. 1-25])
Deb, in combination with Plaessmann, are silent in regard to:
wherein the QRF cavity comprises an arrangement of optical elements.
However, Deb, in combination with Kub, further teach:
wherein the QRF cavity (Deb: Fig. 4; [Col. 3, ll. 25-56], [Col. 4, ll. 26-67] & [Col. 5, ll. 1-65]: teaches the base QRF Rydberg sensor/cavity, operating as a quantum radio frequency/microwave cavity) comprises an arrangement of optical elements (Disclosed in combination: Deb: Figs. 3-4; [Col. 3, ll. 25-56], [Col. 4, ll. 26-67] & [Col. 5, ll. 1-65]: teaches configuring the cavity with an arrangement optical elements (a “corner cube used as a retro-reflector” and describes arranging additional optical elements like a retro-reflector for multi-pass sensing) to guide the beams; Kub: [0011], [0040], [0066]-[0067], [0074] & [0081]: describes arranging optical elements (“first and second reflective surfaces 112 and 122”) to form a resonant cavity).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to carry out the method for Rydberg sensing such that the QRF cavity comprises an arrangement of optical elements as taught by Deb and Kub, according to known methods. Deb teaches an efficient method for Rydberg sensing using a QRF cavity (the vapor cell interacting with microwave fields). Kub teaches an optical amplification system wherein an optical amplifier (such as a semiconductor optical amplifier) is physically disposed between the reflective surfaces of a resonant optical cavity, directly in the path of the intra-cavity light beam, and powered by an optical pump. A POSITA carrying out this method must reliably route, combine, separate, and reflect the necessary probe and coupling laser beams into and out of the cavity. Deb provides the solution by teaching the use of arrangement of optical elements (e.g., dichroic mirrors 34/35 and retro-reflector 36). Implementing this arrangement of optical elements is a necessary and predictable step in the method to properly direct laser beams through the QRF cavity to interact with the atomic vapor, allowing the successful execution of the Rydberg sensing method, thus yielding expected predictable results (KSR).
Regarding dependent claim 17, Deb, teaches:
The method of claim 16 wherein the arrangement of optical elements comprises (Fig. 3; [Abstract], [Col. 3, ll. 25-67] & [Col. 4, ll. 1-67], [Col. 5, ll. 1-65] & [Col. 7, ll. 4-20]: teaches performing the method using an arrangement of optical elements):
Deb, is silent in regard to:
a first mirror between the coupling laser source and a first end of the optical amplifier; and
a second mirror between the probe laser source and a second end of the optical amplifier.
However, Deb, in combination with Plaessmann, and Kub, further teach:
a first mirror between the coupling laser source and a first end of the optical amplifier (Disclosed in combination: Deb: Fig. 3; [Col. 4, ll. 26-67] & [Col. 5, ll. 1-65] & [Claim 5]: teaches the method of injecting the coupling laser into the sensing region through a mirror, Fig. 3 illustrates the coupling laser 32 passing through mirror 35 into the cell; Plaessmann: [Abstract], [Col. 7, ll. 9-44 & 53-62] & [Col. 10, ll. 55-58]; Kub: Fig. 1; [Abstract] & [0040]: teaches operating an optical amplifier bounded by a mirror at its first end of the semiconductor optical amplifier (SOA). When integrated, Kub’s first cavity mirror 110 acts as Deb’s input/boundary mirror, positioning it between the external coupling laser and the first end of the amplifier); and
a second mirror between the probe laser source and a second end of the optical amplifier (Disclosed in combination: Deb: Fig. 3; [Col. 4, ll. 26-67] & [Col. 5, ll. 12-65] & [Claim 5]: teaches the method of injecting the opposing probe laser into the sensing region through a mirror, Fig. 3 illustrates the probe laser 31 passing through mirror 34 into the opposite side; Plaessmann: [Abstract], [Col. 7, ll. 9-44 & 53-62] & [Col. 10, ll. 55-58]; Kub: Fig. 1; [Abstract] & [0040]-[0042]: teaches the optical amplifier is bounded by a mirror at its second end of the semiconductor optical amplifier (SOA). Similarly, Kub’s second cavity mirror 120 is positioned between Deb’s external probe laser and the second end of the optical amplifier).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to carry out the method of Rydberg sensing using an arrangement of optical elements as taught by Deb, comprising a first mirror between the coupling laser source and the first end of the optical amplifier, and a second mirror between the probe laser and the second end of the optical amplifier, as taught by the combination of Deb and Kub, and further corroborated by Plaessmann, according to known methods. A POSITA would be motivated to operate an optical amplifier inside the Rydberg sensing cavity to overcome optical attenuation during multi-pass probing. When executing this method, a POSITA would look to Kub, which provides the standard operational blueprint for a resonant cavity containing an optical amplifier. Kub teaches that the optical amplifier must be bounded by a first mirror at its first end and a second mirror at its second end to trap the light and form the resonant optical cavity. Deb teaches a method utilizing a counter-propagating laser setup where the coupling laser and probe laser are situated outside the cavity and inject their beams into the opposing ends of the sensing region through optical mirrors 34/35. Plaessmann provides the efficient geometric solution: placing the cavity’s bounding mirrors directly between the external sources and the internal amplifier to allow for longitudinal end-pumping and probing. The motivation to implement Plaessmann’s mirror arrangement is to achieve optimal geometric overlap between the pump beam, the probe beam, and the active region of the optical amplifier while maintaining stable boundary conditions of the multi-pass cavity. A POSITA carrying out this sensing method would find it predictable and obvious to align Deb’s external coupling and probe lasers such that they inject their beams directly through the respective first and second resonant cavity mirrors bounding Kub’s optical amplifier. The motivation is to execute a standard “optical injection” method, efficiently coupling the external pump and probe laser power through the boundary mirrors and into the amplifier’s gain medium to yield expected predictable (KSR), efficient optical resonance and amplification during sensing.
Regarding dependent claim 19, Deb, teaches:
The method of claim 14 (Fig. 3; [Abstract], [Col. 3, ll. 25-56], [Col. 4, ll. 6-67], [Col. 5, ll. 1-65] & [Col. 7, ll. 4-20]: teaches the method of using Rydberg atoms for sensing)
Deb, is silent in regard to:
wherein the optical amplifier comprises a titanium sapphire crystal body.
However, Plaessmann, further teaches:
wherein the optical amplifier comprises (Fig. 1; [Title], [Abstract], [Col. 3, ll. 43-67], [Col. 4, ll. 1-48] & [Col. 6, ll. 6-11]: teaches the use of an optical light amplifier comprising a laser gain medium) a titanium sapphire crystal body (Fig. 1; [Abstract], [Col. 3, ll. 43-67], [Col. 4, ll. 1-48], [Col. 6, ll. 6-11], [Col. 11, ll. 66-67], [Col. 12, ll. 1-14] & [Claim 4]: identifies Titanium Sapphire (Ti: sapphire) as the solid-state crystal body/gain medium for the optical amplifier used in the method).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to carry out the method for Rydberg sensing taught by Deb, utilizing an optical amplifier wherein the amplifier comprises a titanium sapphire crystal body, as taught by the combination of Deb and Plaessmann, according to known methods. When carrying out the method of Rydberg sensing utilizing an intra-cavity optical amplifier to maintain probe beam intensity, a POSITA must select an appropriate physical gain medium to perform the amplification step. Deb’s method relies on specific laser wavelengths (e.g., 780 nm for the probe beam and 480 nm for the coupling beam) to correctly match the precise quantum transitions of the atoms in the vapor cell. Plaessmann provides the solution by teaching the use of a Ti: sapphire crystal body as the optical amplifier’s gain medium. A POSITA would be motivated to select and operate a Ti: sapphire crystal body as the optical amplifier’s gain medium because Titanium Sapphire is universally known in optical engineering for its broad tuning range. This makes it predictably ideal for precision tuning and amplifying the specific near-infrared probing wavelengths (e.g., 780 nm) required to execute Deb’ Rydberg sensing method. Substituting Plaessmann’s Ti: sapphire amplifier into Deb’s method constitutes the predictable use of a known optical element for its established function (tunable light amplification), yielding the expected predictable result (KSR) of an efficient, amplified Rydberg sensing process.
Claims 12 & 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deb, in view of Plaessmann, in view of Kub, and further in view of Pask.
Regarding dependent claim 12, Deb, teaches:
The QRF cavity of claim 11 wherein the arrangement of optical elements comprises (Fig. 3; [Col. 3, ll. 25-56], [Col. 4, ll. 6-67], [Col. 5, ll. 1-65] & [Col. 7, ll. 4-20]: teaches the base QRF Rydberg sensor with optical elements (operating as a quantum radio frequency cavity/sensor)):
Deb, is silent in regard to:
a first reflector adjacent a first end of the Rydberg sensing region and aligned with the first mirror; and
a second reflector adjacent a second end of the Rydberg sensing cell and aligned with the second mirror.
However, Deb, in combination with Plaessmann, Kub, and Pask, further teach:
a first reflector adjacent a first end of the Rydberg sensing region and aligned with the first mirror (Disclosed in combination: Deb: Fig. 3; [Col. 5, ll. 12-35]: teaches the first end and first mirror, Fig. 3 illustrates mirror 34 positioned adjacent to the first end of the vapor cell 33; Plaessmann: Fig. 1; [Col. 9, ll. 45-65] & [Col. 10, ll. 1-17]; Kub: Fig. 1; [0040]-[0042] & [0049]: teaches reflective surfaces and mirrors aligned at the first end; Pask: Fig. 13A; [0178]: teaches reflective surfaces and mirrors aligned at the first end); and
a second reflector adjacent a second end of the Rydberg sensing cell and aligned with the second mirror (Disclosed in combination: Deb: Fig. 3; [Col. 5, ll. 12-35]: teaches the cell and second mirror, Fig. 3 shows mirror 35 positioned adjacent to the second/opposite end of the vapor cell 33; Plaessmann: Fig. 1; [Col. 9, ll. 45-65] & [Col. 10, ll. 1-17]: corroborates using multiple reflectors/mirrors facing each other along an axis bounding a medium to create a “multi-pass” architecture; Kub: Fig. 1; [0040]-[0042] & [0049]: teaches reflective surfaces and mirrors aligned at the second end; Pask: Fig. 13A; [0178]: teaches reflectors bounding a medium, showing the second boundary element).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the QRF Rydberg sensing cavity taught by Deb to include a first reflector adjacent the first end aligned with the first mirror, and a second reflector adjacent the second end aligned with the second mirror, as taught by Plaessmann, Kub, and Pask, according to known methods. In atomic sensors like Deb, the strength of the readout signal depends on the interaction length between the probing/coupling lasers and the Rydberg atomic vapor inside the sensing cell. Deb relies on a single pass or a simple retro-reflected pass. A POSITA would be motivated to modify Deb’s arrangement to establish a proper resonant optical cavity or multi-pass cell around the vapor cell. Plaessmann, Kub, and Pask teach the advantages of placing a first reflector and a second reflector adjacent to opposing ends of an active medium. By aligning these reflectors with existing entry/exit mirrors at the first and second ends of Deb’s sensing cell, the system traps and resonates the light beams. This resonance increases the optical interaction length and amplifies the localized optical field, predictably (KSR) allowing for more efficient excitation of the atoms into Rydberg states, improving the QRF cavity’s sensitivity to incident microwave/RF fields.
Regarding dependent claim 18, Deb, teaches:
The method of claim 17 wherein the arrangement of optical elements comprises (Fig. 3; [Abstract], [Col. 3, ll. 25-56], [Col. 4, ll. 6-67], [Col. 5, ll. 1-65] & [Col. 7, ll. 4-20]: teaches performing the method using an arrangement of optical elements):
Deb, is silent in regard to:
a first reflector adjacent a first end of the Rydberg sensing region and aligned with the first mirror; and
a second reflector adjacent a second end of the Rydberg sensing region and aligned with the second mirror.
However, Deb, in combination with Plaessmann, and Kub, further teach:
a first reflector adjacent a first end of the Rydberg sensing region and aligned with the first mirror (Disclosed in combination: Deb: Fig. 3; [Col. 5, ll. 12-35]: teaches executing the method by injecting light at the first end through a first mirror, Fig. 3 illustrates mirror 34 positioned adjacent to the first end of the vapor cell 33; Plaessmann: Fig. 1; [Col. 9, ll. 45-65] & [Col. 10, ll. 1-17]; Kub: Fig. 1; [0040]-[0042] & [0049]: teaches the method of aligning reflective surfaces and mirrors at the first end; Pask: Fig. 13A; [0178]: corroborates the method of bounding a medium with reflectors); and
a second reflector adjacent a second end of the Rydberg sensing region and aligned with the second mirror (Disclosed in combination: Deb: Fig. 3; [Col. 5, ll. 12-35]: teaches executing the method by interacting light at the second end through a second mirror, Fig. 3 shows mirror 35 positioned adjacent to the second/opposite end of the vapor cell 33; Plaessmann: Fig. 1; [Col. 9, ll. 45-65] & [Col. 10, ll. 1-17]: corroborates the method of arranging multiple reflectors/mirrors facing each other along an axis bounding a medium to create a “multi-pass” architecture; Kub: Fig. 1; [0040]-[0042] & [0049]: teaches the method of aligning reflective surfaces and mirrors at the second end; Pask: Fig. 13A; [0178]: teaches reflectors bounding a medium, showing the second boundary element).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to carry out the method for Rydberg sensing utilizing an arrangement of optical elements comprising as taught by Deb, comprising a first reflector adjacent the first end aligned with the first mirror, and a second reflector adjacent the second end aligned with the second mirror, as taught by the combination of Deb, Plaessmann, Kub, and Pask, according to known methods. When executing the Rydberg sensing method of Deb, the strength of the readout signal depends on the interaction length between the probing/coupling lasers and the Rydberg atomic vapor inside the sensing region. A POSITA carrying out this method would be motivated to modify Deb’s arrangement to establish a proper resonant optical cavity or multi-pass cell around the vapor cell to improve this interaction. Plaessmann, Kub, and Pask teach the advantageous method of arranging a first reflector and a second reflector adjacent to opposing ends of an active medium. By aligning these reflectors with existing entry/exit mirrors at the first and second ends of Deb’s sensing cell during the setup method, the operator successfully traps and resonates the light beams. Performing this alignment increases the optical interaction length and amplifies the localized optical field, predictably (KSR) allowing for a more optically efficient method of exciting the atoms into Rydberg states, improving the overall sensitivity of the sensing method.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deb, in view of Plaessmann, in view of Kub, and further in view of Anderson.
Regarding dependent claim 20, Deb, in combination with Anderson, teach:
The method of claim 14 comprising (Disclosed in combination: Deb: Fig. 3; [Abstract], [Col. 3, ll. 25-56], [Col. 4, ll. 6-67], [Col. 5, ll. 1-65] & [Col. 7, ll. 4-20]: teaches the method of using Rydberg atoms for sensing RF fields; Anderson: [Title], [Abstract], [0002]-[0003], [0022], [0027], [0031], [0159], [0182], [0229]-[0230], [0315] & [Claim 16]) operating a controller (Disclosed in combination: Anderson: [Title], [Abstract], [0022] & [0159]: teaches the method of operating a closed-loop system to regulate outputs; Deb: [Col. 5, ll. 36-65], [Col. 6, ll. 58-67] & [Col. 7, ll. 1-3]: teaches the method of operating electronic controller hardware (feedback loop/lock-in amplifier)) coupled to the probe laser source, and the detector (Disclosed in combination: Anderson: [Abstract], [0005], [0014], [0024], [0037]-[0038] & [0043]-[0044]: teaches the method involves reading a detector to provide the feedback loop; Deb: [Col. 3, ll. 57-67], [Col. 4, ll. 1-6], [Col. 5, ll. 36-65], [Col. 6, ll. 58-67] & [Col. 7, ll. 1-3]: teaches the method where the feedback loop/lock-in amplifier (controller) acts on the light sources (probe/coupling lasers) to lock their frequencies based on the signal read by the photodetector 51).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the Rydberg sensing method to include the step of operating a controller coupled to the probe laser source and the detector, as taught by the combination of Anderson and Deb, according to known methods. Anderson establishes an advantageous method of a closed-loop control that regulates the Rydberg sensing system based on the continuously detected response of the Rydberg atoms. A POSITA carrying out Anderson’s method must implement and operate specific hardware to perform this closed-loop regulation. Deb provides the exact method step to achieve this by teaching the operation of a controller (a lock-in amplifier and electronic feedback loop) coupled to the laser sources and detector. A POSITA would be motivated to incorporate Deb’s step of operating a lock-in amplifier/feedback loop into Anderson’s closed-loop method, doing so allows the system to automatically track frequency variations and cancel out low-frequency noise. Executing this method step predictably (KSR) ensures the probe and coupling lasers remain constant with the required atomic transitions, maximizing the accuracy, stability, and reliability of the Rydberg sensing operation.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUGO NAVARRO whose telephone number is (571)272-6122. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 08:30-5:00 pm EST.
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, Eman Alkafawi can be reached at 571-272-4448. 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.
/HUGO NAVARRO/ Examiner, Art Unit 2858 April 22, 2026
/EMAN A ALKAFAWI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858 4/30/2026
Prosecution Insights