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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 11/11/2024 and 02/11/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7-11, 14-18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Younce et al. US 2020/0382217 A1 (hereinafter Younce) in view of KIKUCHI US 2014/0010538 A1 (hereinafter KIKUCHI).
Regarding Claim 1, Younce teaches an apparatus, comprising: a signal source to provide an optical signal (received AM signal light 101, Fig. 3; optical transmitter (TX) 10, Fig. 1); and a semiconductor chip to receive the optical signal (coherent optical receiver (COR) 100, Fig. 3; The PIC implementing an optical receiver front-end may be fabricated in a single chip, Par. 43), the semiconductor chip comprising: a local oscillator (LO) (LO laser 105, Fig. 3); an optical 90° hybrid optically coupled with the optical signal and the LO (first and second optical hybrid 120, Fig. 3); and a photodetector (PD) optically coupled with the optical hybrid (PDs 131, Fig. 3).
Younce does not teach an optical amplifier. However, KIKUCHI teaches that it is well-known for a coherent optical receiver to include an optical amplifier (123, Fig. 1B) coupled with the optical 90° hybrid (125, Fig. 1B), because this allows the received optical signal to be appropriately amplified after transmission along an optical fiber (Par. 17).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing dated of the claimed invention, to modify Younce to include an optical amplifier, because it is well-known for a coherent optical receiver to include an optical amplifier coupled with the optical 90° hybrid, because this allows the received optical signal to be appropriately amplified after transmission along an optical fiber.
Regarding Claim 2, Younce as modified by KIKUCHI teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the optical amplifier is configured to receive the optical signal and generate an amplified signal based on the received optical signal (KIKUCHI, Par. 17; Fig. 1B).
Regarding Claim 3, Younce as modified by KIKUCHI teaches the apparatus of claim 2, wherein the LO is configured to generate a LO optical signal (Younce, LO laser 105, Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 4, Younce as modified by KIKUCHI teaches the apparatus of claim 3, wherein the optical 90° hybrid is configured to receive the amplified signal and the LO optical signal (Younce, Fig. 3; KIKUCHI, Par. 17; Fig. 1B), and to output a tuned optical signal (Coherent optical receivers include a laser source acting as a local oscillator (LO), which boosts the received signal power through coherent mixing, Par. 3).
Regarding Claim 7, Younce as modified by KIKUCHI teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the PD comprises silicon (Younce, Par. 55; these electrical components may be implemented in a same chip with the PBS 110 and the OHs 120, for example using silicon photonics; Par. 92, the coherent optical receiver may comprising a silicon photonic chip implementing the PIC).
Regarding Claims 8-11 and 14, claims 8-11 and 14 are drawn to a semiconductor chip the same as recited in claims 1-4 and 7. As such, the limitations of claims 8-11 and 14 correspond to limitations of claims 1-4 and 7, and are therefore rejected for the same reason(s) of obviousness as stated above.
Regarding Claims 15-18 and 20, claims 15-18 and 20 are drawn to the method of forming a coherent optical receiver the same as recited in claims 1-4 and 7. As such, the limitations of claims 15-18 and 20 correspond to limitations of claims 1-4 and 7, and are therefore rejected for the same reason(s) of obviousness as stated above.
Claim(s) 5, 12, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Younce as modified by KIKUCHI, and further in view of Xu et al. US 2002/0079427 A1 (hereinafter Xu).
Regarding Claim 5, Younce as modified by KIKUCHI teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Younce as modified by KIKUCHI does not teach wherein the photodetector comprises a silicon waveguide. However, Younce teaches forming the coherent optical receiver on a silicon photonic chip (Par. 92). Additionally, Xu teaches silicon-based waveguide photodetectors (Abst.), which have high speed and high efficiency for near IR application (Abst).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing dated of the claimed invention, to modify Younce as modified by KIKUCHI such that the photodetector comprises a silicon waveguide, because Younce teaches forming the coherent optical receiver on a silicon photonic chip, and because silicon-based waveguide photodetectors have high speed and high efficiency for near IR application.
Regarding Claim 12, claim 12 is drawn to a semiconductor chip the same as recited in claim 5. As such, the limitations of claim 12 correspond to limitations of claim 5, and is therefore rejected for the same reason(s) of obviousness as stated above.
Regarding Claim 19, claim 19 is drawn to the method of forming a coherent optical receiver the same as recited in claim 5. As such, the limitations of claim 19 correspond to limitations of claim 5, and is therefore rejected for the same reason(s) of obviousness as stated above.
Claim(s) 6 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Younce as modified by KIKUCHI, and further in view of Wetle et al. US 2021/0124106 A1 (hereinafter Wetle).
Regarding Claim 6, Younce as modified by KIKUCHI teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
Younce as modified by KIKUCHI does not teach wherein the optical amplifier comprises silicon. However, Younce teaches forming the coherent optical receiver on a silicon photonic chip (Par. 92). Additionally, Wetle teaches a photonic integrated circuit comprising a silicon optical amplifier (Par. 63), because this is a suitable structure for amplifying an optical signal in a photonic integrated circuit (Par. 63).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing dated of the claimed invention, to modify Younce as modified by KIKUCHI such that the optical amplifier comprises silicon, because Younce teaches forming the coherent optical receiver on a silicon photonic chip, and because a silicon optical amplifier is a suitable structure for amplifying an optical signal in a photonic integrated circuit.
Regarding Claim 13, claim 13 is drawn to a semiconductor chip the same as recited in claim 6. As such, the limitations of claim 13 correspond to limitations of claim 6, and is therefore rejected for the same reason(s) of obviousness as stated above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID W LAMBERT whose telephone number is (571)272-7692. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 10-6.
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, Kenneth Vanderpuye can be reached at (571)272-3078. 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.
/DAVID W LAMBERT/Examiner, Art Unit 2634
Prosecution Insights