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 filed on 10/2/2024 has been considered.
Preliminary Amendment
The preliminary Amendment filed on 10/2/2024 has been considered. In the preliminary Amendment, Applicant amended the specification, amended claims 1, 4-5, 7, 12, 17, cancelled claims 2-3, 6, 8-11 and 13-16 and added claims 18-20.
DETAILED ACTION
The instant application having Application No. 18/853,483 filed on 10/2/2024 is presented for examination by the Examiner.
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the Applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1, 4-5, 7, 12, 17-20 are 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.
Regarding claims 1, 7, 12, the term “conventional” is a relative term which
renders the claims indefinite. The term “conventional” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Here, the phrase “where each p-n junction of the conventional differential driving scheme is driven from S or S-bar to ground” which follows the term “conventional” does not necessarily describe all the features of a “conventional” differential driving scheme. For examination purposes, “conventional” differential driving scheme will be taken to mean one that employs p-n junctions that are driven from S or S-bar to ground.
Regarding claim 7, the term “easier” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “easier” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Here, the phrase “easier impedance matching” will be taken to mean “impedance matching”.
Claims 4, 5 and 17-20 depend from claims 1, 7 and are indefinite for the reasons given above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4, 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zortman (US 9,128,308, hereinafter, “Zortman”).
Regarding claim 1, Zortman discloses a photonic differential modulator (Fig. 5, col. 12, lines 37-43) comprising;
two p-n junction diodes 518-1/520-1 and 518-2/520-2 connected to at least one signal electrode (S) and a signal bar electrode (S-bar) configured in a push-pull driving scheme (Fig. 5);
wherein p-doped and n-doped side of one p-n junction are connected to S- and S-bar electrodes, respectively (518-1 is connected to S and 520-1 is connected to S-bar, Fig. 5),
wherein the S-bar electrode is shared between the two p-n junction diodes (S-bar is coupled to 520-1 and also to 518-2, Fig. 5. Under the Broadest Reasonable Interpretation principle, an S-bar electrode providing an S-bar signal is feeding the two p-n junction diodes, that is, the S-bar electrode/signal is shared between the two p-n junctions),
wherein a driving voltage for a given phase shift is halved by driving each p-n junction from S to S-bar and vice versa in a push-pull configuration compared to a conventional differential driving scheme where each p-n junction of the conventional differential driving scheme is driven from S or S-bar to ground (col. 13, lines 54-59),
wherein the p-doped and n-doped side of other p-n junction are connected to S-bar and S electrodes, respectively (518-2 is connected to S-bar and 520-2 is connected to S, Fig. 5), and
wherein the two p-n junction diodes are reverse-biased (col. 4, lines 50-51).
Regarding claim 4, Zortman discloses the photonic differential modulator as claimed in claim 1, further comprises two or more ground electrodes (G) (Fig. 1D, col. 8, lines 48-51).
Regarding claim 17, Zortman discloses the photonic differential modulator as claimed in claim 1 is fabricated from materials selected from silicon, lithium niobate (LN), barium titanate (BTO), III-V materials, and EO-polymers (col. 7, line 12).
Regarding claim 18, Zortman discloses the photonic differential modulator as claimed in claim 4 is fabricated from materials selected from silicon, lithium niobate (LN), barium titanate (BTO), III-V materials, and EO-polymers (col. 7, line 12).
Claims 1, 4, 7, 17-18, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by
Williams et al. (US 2018/0341164, hereinafter, “Williams”) as evidenced by Zortman.
Regarding claim 1, Williams discloses a photonic differential modulator (Fig. 9, [0080]) comprising;
two p-n junction diodes 441 and 442 connected to at least one signal electrode (S) 111 and a signal bar electrode (S-bar) 112 configured in a push-pull driving scheme (Fig. 9, [0080]-[0081]);
wherein p-doped and n-doped side of one p-n junction are connected to S- and S-bar electrodes, respectively (n side of 441 is connected to 111 and p side is connected to 112, Fig. 9),
wherein the S-bar electrode is shared between the two p-n junction diodes (S-bar 112, 113, is coupled to 441 and also to 442, Fig. 9. Under the Broadest Reasonable Interpretation principle, an S-bar electrode providing an S-bar signal is feeding the two p-n junction diodes, that is, the S-bar electrode/signal is shared between the two p-n junctions),
wherein the p-doped and n-doped side of other p-n junction are connected to S-bar and S electrodes, respectively (p side is connected to 113 and n side is connected to 114, Fig. 9, [0080], the two p/n junctions may have different orientation relative to each other than the one shown in Fig. 9),
wherein the two p-n junction diodes are reverse-biased ([0084]).
Williams does not explicitly disclose wherein a driving voltage for a given phase shift is halved by driving each p-n junction from S to S-bar and vice versa in a push-pull configuration compared to a conventional differential driving scheme where each p-n junction of the conventional differential driving scheme is driven from S or S-bar to ground.
However, Zortman discloses a photonic differential modulator (Fig. 5, col. 12, lines 37-43) comprising the push-pull driving scheme of the two p/n junctions with the differential signaling as in Williams, in which a driving voltage for a given phase shift is halved by driving each p-n junction from S to S-bar and vice versa in a push-pull configuration compared to a conventional differential driving scheme where each p-n junction of the conventional differential driving scheme is driven from S or S-bar to ground (col. 13, lines 54-59).
Regarding claim 4, Williams discloses the photonic differential modulator as claimed in claim 1, further comprises two or more ground electrodes (G) (433 in Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 7, Williams discloses a photonic differential modulator (Fig. 9, [0080]) comprising;
two p-n junction diodes 441 and 442 connected to at least one signal electrode (S) 111 and a signal bar electrode (S-bar) 112 configured in a push-pull driving scheme (Fig. 9, [0080]-[0081]);
wherein the two p-n junction diodes are reverse-biased ([0084]),
wherein the modulator comprises GS(S--bar)GS(S-bar)G electrode structure 433, 111, 112, 433, 113, 114, 433 (Fig. 9, [0080]-[0081]),
wherein p-doped and n-doped side of one p-n junction are connected to S- and S-bar electrodes, respectively (n side is connected to 111 and p side is connected to 112, Fig. 9),
wherein the p-doped and n-doped side of other p-n junction are connected to S-bar and S electrodes, respectively (p side is connected to 113 and n side is connected to 114, Fig. 9, [0080], the two p/n junctions may have different orientation relative to each other than the one shown in Fig. 9),
wherein the two p-n junction diodes 441 and 442 are decoupled from their respective transmission lines from each other by the S, S-bar, and ground electrodes for easier impedance matching at cost of increased footprint (Fig. 9).
Williams does not explicitly disclose wherein a driving voltage for a given phase shift is halved by driving each p-n junction from S to S-bar and vice versa in a push-pull configuration compared to a conventional differential driving scheme where each p-n junction of the conventional differential driving scheme is driven from S or S-bar to ground.
However, Zortman discloses a photonic differential modulator (Fig. 5, col. 12, lines 37-43) comprising the push-pull driving scheme of the two p/n junctions with the differential signaling as in Williams, in which a driving voltage for a given phase shift is halved by driving each p-n junction from S to S-bar and vice versa in a push-pull configuration compared to a conventional differential driving scheme where each p-n junction of the conventional differential driving scheme is driven from S or S-bar to ground (col. 13, lines 54-59).
Regarding claim 17, Williams discloses the photonic differential modulator as claimed in claim 1 is fabricated from materials selected from silicon, lithium niobate (LN), barium titanate (BTO), III-V materials, and EO-polymers ([0063]).
Regarding claim 18, Williams discloses the photonic differential modulator as claimed in claim 4 is fabricated from materials selected from silicon, lithium niobate (LN), barium titanate (BTO), III-V materials, and EO-polymers (col. 7, line 12).
Regarding claim 20, Williams discloses the photonic differential modulator as claimed in claim 7 is fabricated from materials selected from silicon, lithium niobate (LN), barium titanate (BTO), III-V materials, and EO-polymers ([0063]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 12, 19 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 5, Zortman or Williams does not disclose the particular electrode structure GS(S-bar)SG of the modulator. Fig. 5 in Zortman only shows the electrical connections of the p and n sides of the p/n diodes and Fig. 9 in Williams only shows the ground electrodes.
Regarding claim 12, Zortman or Williams does not disclose the particular electrode structure GS(S-bar)G of the modulator and that the S and S-bar electrodes are shared between the two p/n junction diodes and the S and S-bar electrodes have interleaved electrode structure. Fig. 5 in Zortman only shows the electrical connections of the p and n sides of the p/n diodes and Fig. 9 in Williams only shows the ground electrodes.
Claim 19 depends from claim 5 and is allowable for the reason given above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kono (US 2019/0072834, hereinafter, “Kono”) discloses a Mach - Zehnder modulator (Abstract). In one embodiment, two p/n diodes are connected in a push-pull driving scheme (Fig. 7A). Kono does not disclose the electrode structure GS(S-bar)SG or GS(S-bar)G.
Vera Villarroel et al. (US 2020/0026147, hereinafter, “Vera Villarroel”) discloses a differential optical modulator (Abstract). In one embodiment, two p/n diodes are connected in a push-pull driving scheme (Fig. 5B). Vera Villarroel does not disclose the electrode structure GS(S-bar)SG or GS(S-bar)G.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEONIDAS BOUTSIKARIS whose telephone number is (703)756-4529. The Examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fr. 9.00-5.00.
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, Stephone Allen, can be reached on 571-272-2434. 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.
/L.B./
Patent Examiner, AU 2872
/STEPHONE B ALLEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights