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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-14,16,17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a as being anticipated by Xu et al (US 20150168803)
Regarding Claim 1,
Xu et al discloses (Fig. 1) a resonant photonic element comprising [0025]: a propagation waveguide defining a propagation direction; and a guided mode resonator (116,118) comprising a periodically perturbed waveguide (104) (silicon photonic waveguides is a perturbed waveguide), wherein the periodically perturbed waveguide (104) is a waveguide that extends a first length (going vertical) in a resonator direction, the resonator direction is transverse to the propagation direction, and the periodically perturbed waveguide (104) intersects the waveguide (102).
Regarding Claim 2,
Xu et al discloses (Fig. 1) wherein the periodically perturbed waveguide (104) has a first surface and a second surface, the first surface of the periodically perturbed waveguide being opposite the second surface of the periodically perturbed waveguide with respect to the propagation direction, and the periodically perturbed waveguide is a waveguide comprising at least one of: notches in at least one of the first surface of the periodically perturbed waveguide or the second surface of the periodically perturbed waveguide, holes along a center of the periodically perturbed waveguide, bumps along at least one of the first surface or the second surface, or a periodic structure in a refractive index or absorption of the periodically perturbed waveguide.( [0025], seeing how the waveguides are of a silicon photonic material, the photonic material does inherently include resonant structures such as “teeth” or “fins” along the edges of the waveguides which are structures used to manipulate light at specific wavelengths)
Regarding Claim 3,
Xu et al discloses (Fig. 1) wherein the guided mode resonator (116,118) is formed of material that has an index of refraction that can be actively modified/controlled [0029].
Regarding Claim 4,
Xu et al discloses (Fig. 1) further comprising a modification material disposed in proximity to the guided mode resonator, wherein the modification material is actively modifiable, and modification of the modification material causes a change in a resonance of the guided mode resonator [0027].
Regarding Claim 5,
Xu et al discloses (Fig. 1) wherein the guided mode resonator and at least a portion of the propagation waveguide are at least partially embedded in an active material [0036-0039].
Regarding Claim 6,
Xu et al discloses (Fig. 1) wherein the guided mode resonator is formed of active material and the resonant photonic element is a laser or optical amplifier [0036-0039].
Regarding Claim 7,
Xu et al discloses (Fig. 1) wherein the guided mode resonator is formed of a non-linear material and the resonant photonic element is configured to perform down- conversion or up-conversion [0036-0039].
Regarding Claim 8,
Xu et al discloses (Fig. 1) wherein the resonant photonic element is an amplitude modulator or a switch [0042].
Regarding Claim 9,
Xu et al discloses (Fig. 1) wherein the resonant photonic element is a frequency filter [0052].
Regarding Claim 10,
Xu et al discloses (Fig. 1) wherein the periodically perturbed waveguide (104) comprises a first periodically perturbed waveguide arm and a second periodically perturbed waveguide arm, the first periodically perturbed waveguide arm and the second periodically perturbed waveguide arm overlap where the first periodically perturbed waveguide arm and the second periodically perturbed waveguide arm intersect the propagation waveguide (102), and the first periodically perturbed waveguide arm and the second periodically perturbed waveguide arm are transverse to one another (as shown in Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 11,
Xu et al discloses (Fig. 1) wherein the resonant photonic element is a phase modulator [0029].
Regarding Claim 12,
Xu et al discloses (Fig. 1) wherein the phase modulator is part of a Mach-Zehnder interferometer [0027] facilitating the shifting of the resonant wavelength).
Regarding Claim 13,
Xu et al discloses (Fig. 1) wherein the periodically perturbed waveguide (104) is symmetric with respect to an axis that is transverse or perpendicular to the propagation direction.
Regarding Claim 14,
Xu et al discloses (Fig. 1) wherein the periodically perturbed waveguide (104) comprises a first surface and a second surface, the first surface being opposite the second surface with respect to the propagation direction, and a periodic perturbation of the periodically perturbed waveguide is present on only one of the first surface or the second surface. One would have recognized the periodic perturbation of the periodically perturbed waveguide is present on only one of the first surface or the second surface as a result-effective variable able to be optimized to manipulate light at specific wavelengths.
Regarding Claim 16,
Xu et al discloses (Fig. 1) wherein at least one of: the propagation waveguide (104) is a Huygens waveguide or a sub-wavelength grating waveguide, or the periodically perturbed waveguide (104) is a sub-wavelength grating waveguide.
Regarding Claim 17,
Xu et al discloses (Fig. 1) wherein a perturbation of the periodically perturbed waveguide (104) is the sub-wavelength grating waveguide with respect to the propagation direction.
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.
Claim(s) 15 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al (US 20150168803) in view of Schunk et al (US 20120007005)
Regarding Claim 15,
Xu et al discloses everything as disclosed above.
Xu et al does not disclose wherein the resonant photonic element is an optical isolator.
Schunk et al discloses wherein the resonant photonic element is an optical isolator (abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Xu et al to include Schunk et al’s wherein the resonant photonic element is an optical isolator motivated by the desire to couple optical signals between the transmitter and receiver modules [0004].
Claim(s) 18-20 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al (US 20150168803) in view of Bohn et al (US 20220327414)
Regarding Claim 18,
Xu et al discloses everything as disclosed above. Xu et al discloses the beam path system comprising a resonant photonic element comprising: a propagation waveguide (104) defining a propagation direction; and a guided mode resonator (116,118) comprising a periodically perturbed waveguide (104), wherein the periodically perturbed waveguide (104) is a waveguide that extends a first length in a resonator direction, the resonator direction is transverse to the propagation direction, and the periodically perturbed waveguide (104) intersects the waveguide (102).
Xu et al does not disclose A system comprising: a confinement apparatus configured to confine manipulatable objects and defining, at least in part, at least one target location; a manipulation source configured to generate and provide a manipulation signal; and a beam path system, the beam path system configured to guide the manipulation signal generated by the manipulation source to the at least one target location.
Bohn et al discloses a system comprising: a confinement apparatus configured to confine manipulatable objects and defining, at least in part, at least one target location; a manipulation source configured to generate and provide a manipulation signal; and a beam path system, the beam path system configured to guide the manipulation signal generated by the manipulation source to the at least one target location [0140][0165].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Xu et al to include A system comprising: a confinement apparatus configured to confine manipulatable objects and defining, at least in part, at least one target location; a manipulation source configured to generate and provide a manipulation signal; and a beam path system, the beam path system configured to guide the manipulation signal generated by the manipulation source to the at least one target location motivated by the desire to provide optical beams to and/or receive optical signals from confined atomic objects
Regarding Claim 19,
In addition to Xu et al and Bohn et al, Xu et al discloses (Fig. 1) wherein the periodically perturbed waveguide (104) has a first surface and a second surface, the first surface of the periodically perturbed waveguide being opposite the second surface of the periodically perturbed waveguide with respect to the propagation direction, and the periodically perturbed waveguide is a waveguide comprising at least one of: notches in at least one of the first surface of the periodically perturbed waveguide or the second surface of the periodically perturbed waveguide, holes along a center of the periodically perturbed waveguide, bumps along at least one of the first surface or the second surface, or a periodic structure in a refractive index or absorption of the periodically perturbed waveguide([0025], seeing how the waveguides are of a silicon photonic material, the photonic material does inherently include resonant structures such as “teeth” or “fins” along the edges of the waveguides which are structures used to manipulate light at specific wavelengths).
Regarding Claim 20,
In addition to Xu et al and Bohn et al, Xu et al discloses (Fig. 1) wherein the resonant photonic element [0025] is at least one of a modulator or a frequency filter.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUCY P CHIEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8579. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM PST M-F.
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, Michael Caley can be reached at 571-272-2286. 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.
/LUCY P CHIEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights