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
Information disclosure statement filed 9/26/2024 has been considered.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 7-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication No. US 2020/0082291 A1 to Debnath et al. (hereinafter “Debnath”) in view of US Patent Application Publication No. US 2003/0210861 A1 to Weiss et al. (hereinafter “Weiss”).
Debnath discloses a quantum information processing system comprising a laser source (paragraph [0073]) configured to generate one or more addressing beams (210a-210d in Fig. 3), an acousto optic modulator configured to dynamically switch at least one or more addressing beams between a plurality of channels that are aligned with one or more qubits, respectively, in an ion trap (paragraph [0057]-[0059]), wherein the one or more addressing beams includes a first addressing beam and the plurality of channels includes a first channel and a second channel (Fig. 3), wherein the acousto optic modulator has a first orientation in which the first addressing beam is aligned with the first channel and not aligned with the second channel and a second orientation in which the first addressing beam is aligned with the second channel and not aligned with the first channel (paragraph [0057]).
However, Debnath does not explicitly disclose the use of a fiber switchboard to dynamically switch the addressing beams as claimed in the present application. On the other hand, the use of a fiber switchboard for dynamically switching optical beams is known in the art. For example, Weiss discloses the use of a fiber switchboard in an individually addressable laser source arrangement (102 in Fig. 4 of Weiss). One of ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize such use of optical switchboard as advantageous and desirable since fiber switchboards offer ultra-high speeds, long-distance connectivity, and low power consumption compared to other switching systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the present application to modify the device of Debnath to use a fiber switchboard to dynamically switch the addressing beams as claimed in the present application.
Regarding claim 2, Debnath discloses the use of an acousto optic modulator (AOM) as already discussed above. As such, the claimed limitations of claim 2 would have been also obvious in view of the modification of Debnath in view of Weiss in the manner discussed above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 3, Debnath discloses acousto optic modulator configured to change a polarization of the one or more addressing beams (paragraph [0054]-[0055]).
Regarding claim 7, Debnath discloses wherein the number of one or more addressing beams is smaller than the number of channels of the plurality of channels (paragraph [0057]- Debnath discloses some trapped ions (not shown) are not illuminated by any individual addressing optical beams).
Regarding claim 8, Debnath discloses wherein the laser source does not provide power to the plurality of channels that are not aligned with the one or more of addressing beams (paragraph [0057]).
Regarding claim 9, Debnath discloses a quantum information processing system including a laser source configured to generate M number of addressing beams ((paragraph [0073]), an acousto optic modulator configured to dynamically realign at least M number of addressing beams from a first channel to a second channel of a plurality of channels (210a-210d in Fig. 3) that are aligned with one or more qubits, respectively, in an ion trap (306a-306d in Fig. 3), wherein the plurality of channels includes N number of channels (Fig. 3); wherein the number M of addressing beams is less than the number of N channels (paragraph [0057]- Debnath discloses some trapped ions (not shown) are not illuminated by any individual addressing optical beams).
However, Debnath does not explicitly disclose the use of a fiber switchboard to dynamically switch the addressing beams as claimed in the present application. On the other hand, the use of a fiber switchboard for dynamically switching optical beams is known in the art. For example, Weiss discloses the use of a fiber switchboard in an individually addressable laser source arrangement (102 in Fig. 4 of Weiss). One of ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize such use of optical switchboard as advantageous and desirable since fiber switchboards offer ultra-high speeds, long-distance connectivity, and low power consumption compared to other switching systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the present application to modify the device of Debnath to use a fiber switchboard to dynamically switch the addressing beams as claimed in the present application.
Regarding claim 10, Debnath discloses wherein the laser source does not provide power to the plurality of the N channels that are not aligned with the M of addressing beams (paragraph [0057]).
Regarding claim 11, the fiber switchboard of Weiss necessarily functions such that when a particular one of the M number of addressing beam is aligned with a particular one of the N number of channels, that particular addressing beam is not aligned with the other N number of channels in the plurality of channels (see Fig. 4 of Weiss). As such when the quantum information processing system of Debnath is modified in view of Weiss as discussed above regarding claim 9, the claimed limitations of claim 11 are also rendered obvious for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 12, Debnath discloses wherein the acousto optic modulator is configured to change a polarization of the one or more addressing beams (paragraph [0054]-[0055]).
Regarding claim 13, Debnath in view of Weiss renders the claimed limitations of claim 12 obvious a discussed above. However, it does not explicitly disclose an electro optic based fiber switches in the manner claimed in claim 13 of the present application. On the other hand, the use of an electro optic switches is well known and common in the art. Electro optic switches are advantageously used in the art because they allow for extremely high switching speeds while maintaining high energy efficiency and reliability. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the present application to modify the device of Debnath to have an electro optic based fiber switches in the manner claimed in claim 13 of the present application.
Regarding claim 14, Debnath discloses a quantum information processing system including a processor and a memory (paragraph [0010]), the processor configured to execute computer executable instructions in the memory to determine that a particular addressing beam of one or more addressing beams should be aligned with a particular channel of a plurality of channels (paragraph [0057]), wherein each of the plurality of channels is aligned with a particular qubit in an ion trap (Fig. 3); and activate an acousto optic modulator to align the particular addressing beam with the particular channel (paragraph [0057]), wherein the acousto optic modulator includes a plurality of positions configured to align the particular addressing beam with one of the plurality of channels while not aligning the particular addressing beam with the others of the plurality of channels (paragraph [0057]).
However, Debnath does not explicitly disclose the use of a fiber switchboard to dynamically switch the addressing beams as claimed in the present application. On the other hand, the use of a fiber switchboard for dynamically switching optical beams is known in the art. For example, Weiss discloses the use of a fiber switchboard in an individually addressable laser source arrangement (102 in Fig. 4 of Weiss). One of ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize such use of optical switchboard as advantageous and desirable since fiber switchboards offer ultra-high speeds, long-distance connectivity, and low power consumption compared to other switching systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the present application to modify the device of Debnath to use a fiber switchboard to dynamically switch the addressing beams as claimed in the present application.
Regarding claim 15, Debnath discloses a step of determining a desired polarity of the particular addressing beam, and controlling the acousto optic modulator to configure the particular addressing beam at the desired polarity (paragraph [0054]-[0055]). As such, the claimed limitations of claim 15 are rendered obvious when the invention of Debnath is modified in view of Weiss in the manner discussed above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 16, Debnath discloses wherein commanding the acousto optic modulator to change the polarity of the particular addressing beam (paragraph [0054]-[0055]). As such, the claimed limitations of claim 16 are rendered obvious when the invention of Debnath is modified in view of Weiss in the manner discussed above regarding claim 1.
Regarding claim 17, Debnath discloses wherein the amount of the one or more addressing beams is smaller than the amount of channels of the plurality of channels (paragraph [0057]).
Regarding claim 18, the modification of Debnath in view of Weiss as discussed above in reference to claim 14 would necessarily yield a method of operating the quantum information processing system comprising the step of determining the particular addressing beam should be aligned with the second particular channel, and actuating the fiber switchboard to align the particular addressing beam with the second particular channel and not aligning with the first particular channel (paragraph [0057]). As such, the claimed limitations of claim 18 are also rendered obvious for the same reasons as discussed above in reference to claim 14.
Regarding claim 19, Debnath discloses an acousto optic modulator. As such, the claimed limitations of claim 19 are also rendered obvious over Debnath in view of Weiss as discussed above in reference to claim 14.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6 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: as discussed above, a quantum information processing system comprising a laser source configured to generate one or more addressing beams; and a fiber switchboard configured to dynamically switch at least one of the one or more addressing beams between a plurality of channels that are aligned with one or more qubits, respectively in an ion trap, is known in the art.
However, none of the prior art fairly teaches or suggests such a quantum information processing system further comprising, inter alia, a distortion correction system configured to change one or more of a position and a tilt of the one or more addressing beams, in the manner claimed in the present application.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUNG H PAK whose telephone number is (571)272-2353. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7AM- 5PM.
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, Uyen-Chau Le can be reached at 571-272-2397. 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.
/SUNG H PAK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
