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 foreign references identified in the Information Disclosure Statement filed on 11/05/2024 were searched for corresponding US Patents, Publications or other English equivalents. Please see below:
WO 2017/059960 = US 2018/0281324; and
WO 2022/035994 = US 2023/0203326.
Of the above, US 2018/0281324 and US 2023/0203326 are being cited in the attached PTO-892 because they are not already of record.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities:
the recitation “polymerisation” twice recited in line 7 should be amended to reflect the proper spelling such that the recitation reads “polymerization”;
the recitation “a second material photosensitive” in line 8 should be corrected such that it reads “a second photosensitive material ”;
the recitation “the first material” in line 10 should read “the first photosensitive material” as introduced in line 4 of claim 15 - one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably deduce the first material was intended to reference the first photosensitive material and therefore does not result in ambiguous claim language; however, the Examiner recommends using consistent language throughout; and
the recitation “the second material” in line 11 should read “the second photosensitive material” as introduced in line 8 of claim 15 - one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably deduce the second material was intended to reference the second photosensitive material and therefore does not result in ambiguous claim language; however, the Examiner recommends using consistent language throughout.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: the recitation “the component” in line 2 should read “the micro- or nano-structured component” as introduced in line 6 of claim 15 - one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably deduce the component was intended to reference the micro- or nano-structured component and therefore does not result in ambiguous claim language; however, the Examiner recommends using consistent language throughout. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 21 is objected to because of the following informalities: the recitation “the area of the structure” in lines 2-3 should read “the area of one end of the structure” as introduced in line 14 of claim 14 - one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably deduce the area of the structure was intended to reference the area of one end of the structure and therefore does not result in ambiguous claim language; however, the Examiner recommends using consistent language throughout. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 24-25 are objected to because of the following informalities: the recitation “the first material” and the recitation “the second material”, each recited in claims 24-25, should read “the first photosensitive material” and “the second photosensitive material” as introduced in line 4 and line 8 of claim 15, respectively - one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably deduce the first material was intended to reference the first photosensitive material, and the second material was intended to reference the second photosensitive material and therefore does not result in ambiguous claim language; however, the Examiner recommends using consistent language throughout. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 28 is objected to because of the following informalities: the recitation “the component” in line 1 should read “the micro- or nano-structured component” as introduced in line 6 of claim 15 - one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably deduce the component was intended to reference the micro- or nano-structured component and therefore does not result in ambiguous claim language; however, the Examiner recommends using consistent language throughout. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 29 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the region of a second end of the carrier with the area comprises localised fusion of region and area, respectively” in lines 2-3 should be amended such that it reads “the region of [[a]] the second end of the carrier with the area of one end comprises localized fusion of the region and the area of one end, respectively”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 15-30 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 claim 15: the recitation “a micro-structured or nano-structured component” in line 6 renders the claim indefinite as it is not clear if this recitation is referring to “a nano-structured or micro-structured component” introduced in lines 1-2 of claim 15 or an additional and different micro-structured or nano-structured component. For the purposes of prior art rejections, the recitation “a micro-structured or nano-structured component” is being interpreted to be the same as introduced in lines 1-2 of claim 15.
Similarly, the recitation “a lateral surface” in line 14 renders the claim indefinite as it is not clear if this recitation is referring to “a lateral surface” in line 2 of claim 15 or if the recitation is attempting to refer to a different and/or additional lateral surface. For the purposes of prior art rejections, the recitation “a lateral surface” is being interpreted to be the same as the lateral surface introduced in line 2 of claim 15. Claims 16-30 depend from claim 15, either directly or indirectly, and are therefore rejected due to their dependency.
Regarding claim 19: the recitation “a volume” in line 2 renders the claim indefinite. Claim 19 depends indirectly from claim 16, where claim 16 recites “a volume” in line 2, making it unclear if the recitation of “a volume” in claim 19 is referring to the volume introduced in claim 16 or if the recitation is attempting to reference an additional and/or different volume. For the purposes of prior art rejections, the recitation “a volume” is being interpreted to be “the volume” such that the recitation is referring to the volume introduced in claim 16.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 15 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the primary reason for indicating claim 15 as allowable is that the prior art fails to provide any teachings/suggestions/motivations or other rationales to arrive at the claimed method for making an optical device provided with a nano-structured or micro-structured component assembled on one end of a lateral surface of a structure, comprising: performing one or more heat treatment(s) so as to transform the first photosensitive material of the carrier and the second photosensitive material of said micro-structured or nano-structured component into a vitreous material.
GieBen et al. (US 2018/0281324; hereinafter GieBen), constitutes the closest prior art of record, and discloses: a method for making an optical device provided with a nano-structured or micro-structured component assembled on one end or a lateral surface of a structure (i.e., a method for producing at least one microstructure on an axial end of an optical fiber, the optical fiber also referred to as an optical waveguide) (GieBen at [0010], [0018]), comprising:
providing a carrier based on a first photosensitive material, the first photosensitive material being transformable into a vitreous material (i.e., step S10 – an optical fiber, or optical waveguide, is provided; the optical waveguide being made from quartz glass) (GieBen at [0018], [0069]), and, making on a first end of the carrier, a micro-structured or nano-structured component by multi-photon photopolymerization or two-photon photopolymerization the micro-structured or nano- structured component being based on a second photosensitive material and transformable into a vitreous material (i.e., step S20 – a first axial end of the optical fiber is coated with a photosensitive substance or photoresist; step S30 – the optical fiber and a writing beam or laser beam of a 3D printer are mutually aligned; and step S40 – the microstructure is formed by exposing the photoresist by means of a 3D printer), (GieBen at [0069]-[0071], [0075]-[0076], [0102]-[0103], [0104], Fig. 2, Fig. 3d).
GieBen fails to disclose the claimed performing one or more heat treatment(s) so as to transform the first material of the carrier and the second material of said micro- or nano-structured component into a vitreous material and then, assembling and securing a region of a second end of the carrier opposite to the first end with an area of one end or a lateral surface of the structure.
Wen et al. (US 2023/0203326; hereinafter Wen) discloses forming nano- or micro-structures onto a wafer via 2PP additive manufacturing using a nanocomposite ink comprised of silica nanoparticles and a photopolymer precursor mixture (Wen at [0057]-[0060]). Wen further discloses a heat treatment for the fabricated 3D nano- or micro-structure to remove the polymer, sinter the silica nanoparticles and alter the crystallinity of the produced structures, where the silica nanoparticles are converted into dense silica with different phase depending upon the specific temperature treatment steps (Wen at [0061]-[0062]).
Leatherdale et al. (US 2009/0035528; hereinafter Leatherdale) discloses a method for making structures using a multi-photon reactive composition including inorganic particles with a multiphoton curing process (Leatherdale at [0002], [0009], [0029]). Leatherdale further discloses once the photopatterned structure is formed it is then pyrolyzed to preferably remove substantially all of the organic components and further sintered (Leatherdale at [0031]-[0032]).
Accordingly, while performing one or more heat treatment(s) so as to transform the first material of the carrier and the second material of said micro- or nano-structured component into a vitreous material is known in the art given the disclosures of Wen and Leatherdale, GieBen discloses utilizing solvent-free photoresists so that no further baking processes are required, and this being particularly advantageous due to the small dimensions of the microstructures to be produced (GieBen at [0025]) and because the production takes place directly on the optical glass fiber, handling of the micro-components is very simple and there is no need for later joining of the micro-optics to the fiber (GieBen at [0033], [0035]). Consequently, one of ordinary skill in the art would not combine GieBen with Wen and/or Leatherdale given the disclosure of GieBen at paragraphs [0025], [0033], and [0035], and because of this it is the Examiner’s assessment that the prior art viewed in combination fails to teach or reasonably suggest the claimed method for making an optical device meeting every limitation of independent claim 15.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAILEIGH K. DARNELL whose telephone number is (469)295-9287. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9am-5pm, MST.
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, Galen H. Hauth can be reached at (571)270-5516. 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.
/BAILEIGH KATE DARNELL/Examiner, Art Unit 1743
Prosecution Insights