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 .
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 1-8, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2009/0245720 (“CHOKI”) in view of US 2011/0280522 (“TAMURA”).
Regarding claim 1, CHOKI teaches an optical circuit board (FIG. 11) comprising: a wiring board (15) comprising an upper surface comprising a mounting region of an optical component (60’, 60”); and an optical waveguide (10; FIG. 1) positioned at the wiring board, wherein the optical waveguide is positioned adjacent to the mounting region and comprises a lower cladding (12b), a core (11), and an upper cladding (12a) in this order from a side of the upper surface of the wiring board, the optical waveguide comprising a first end surface facing the mounting region, and a second end surface comprising an end surface of the lower cladding, an end surface of the core, and an end surface of the upper cladding in a same plane, the second end surface being positioned on an opposite side to the first end surface (FIG. 11).
CHOKI does not teach that at the second end surface, at least a part of the end surface of the lower cladding and the end surface of the upper cladding comprises a protruding portion protruding relative to the end surface of the core. TAMURA teaches an end surface of a lower cladding (2b) and an end surface of an upper cladding (also 2b) comprising protruding portions (at 4c) protruding relative to an end surface of a core (2a) of an optical waveguide (32; FIG. 6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date to modify the optical circuit board of CHOKI such that the end sections of the lower and upper claddings protrude relative the end section of the core, as taught by TAMURA. The motivation would have been to suppress undesired cladding modes.
Regarding claim 2, CHOKI teaches that an electrical conductor layer (50’) is positioned on the upper surface of the wiring board, and the optical waveguide is positioned on the electrical conductor layer (FIG. 11).
Regarding claim 3, CHOKI teaches that the electrical conductor layer comprises an electrical conductor layer end surface positioned immediately below the second end surface, and the electrical conductor layer end surface is positioned between the end surface of the core and a front end of the protruding portion in a direction in which the protruding portion protrudes (as would be necessary in the device of FIG. 11 of CHOKI when incorporating the protruding sections of FIG. 6 of TAMURA).
Regarding claim 4, CHOKI teaches that the protruding portion comprises at least a first protruding portion positioned at the lower cladding, and the first protruding portion is positioned immediately above the electrical conductor layer (as would be necessary in the device of FIG. 11 of CHOKI when incorporating the protruding sections of FIG. 6 of TAMURA).
Regarding claim 5, TAMURA teaches that the protruding portion comprises at least a second protruding portion positioned at the upper cladding, and the second protruding portion is positioned continuously to an upper surface of the upper cladding (FIG. 6).
Regarding claim 6, CHOKI teaches that the wiring board comprises a board end surface positioned between the end surface of the core and a front end of the protruding portion in a direction in which the protruding portion protrudes (as would be necessary in the device of FIG. 11 of CHOKI when incorporating the protruding sections of FIG. 6 of TAMURA).
Regarding claims 7 and 8, CHOKI teaches the limitations set forth in parent claims 4 and 5, respectively. The remaining limitations appear to involve mere optimization. It has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date to optimize the dimensions of the optical circuit board of CHOKI as set forth in the instant claims.
Regarding claim 11, CHOKI teaches that the electrical conductor layer has a largest thickness at an end surface (FIG. 11).
Regarding claim 12, CHOKI teaches an optical component mounting structure (69, 70) comprising: an optical component (60) positioned in the mounting region, the optical component comprising an optical transmission path; wherein the end surface of the core at the first end surface and an end surface of the optical transmission path face each other (FIGs. 10).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 and 10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 9, the prior art of record, whether taken individually or in combination, when considered in light of the claimed subject matter as a whole as interpreted in light of the Specification as originally filed, fails to disclose or render obvious that, in a direction in which the protruding portion protrudes, a length from the end surface of the core at the second end surface to a front end of the second protruding portion is longer than a length from the end surface of the core at the second end surface to a front end of the first protruding portion.
Regarding claim 10, the prior art of record, whether taken individually or in combination, when considered in light of the claimed subject matter as a whole as interpreted in light of the Specification as originally filed, fails to disclose or render obvious that the second end surface comprises a curved surface portion comprising the end surface of the lower cladding, the end surface of the core, and the end surface of the upper cladding in the same plane.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERRY M BLEVINS whose telephone number is (571)272-8581. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday.
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 at 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.
/JERRY M BLEVINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights