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 .
DETAILED OFFICE ACTION
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending examination.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
1. Claims 1,7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103(a) as being unpatentable over LAM et al. ( USPUB 20240192427) in view of Huber et al. ( USPUB 20090174931) .
As per claim 1, LAM et al. teaches An optical element for channel dispersion compensation ( FIG. 6A and Paragraphs [0084-0085]- “…Due to the opposite Bragg conditions (e.g., +1 order and −1 order diffractions) for the diffractions at first portion 632 and second portion 634 of middle grating 630, first portion 632 and second portion 634 may compensate for the light dispersion caused by each other to reduce the overall light dispersion….”) , comprising:
a prism region configured to receive one or more optical signals having multiple wavelengths ( Paragraph [0074]- “…Combiner 415 may transmit light in a first wavelength range, such as visible light from about 400 nm to about 650 nm. Input coupler 430 may include a volume holographic grating, a diffractive optical element (DOE) (e.g., a surface-relief grating), a slanted surface of substrate 420, or a refractive coupler (e.g., a wedge or a prism). …”) ;
LAM et al. does not explicitly teach a chirped volume Bragg grating (CVBG) region formed within the prism region.
However, within analogous art, Huber et al. teaches a chirped volume Bragg grating (CVBG) region formed within the prism region ( Paragraph [0095]- “…The GVD of the laser cavity is induced by the employed optical components, such as the optical filter, amplifier/gain (G) 5', and delay line 91. A dispersion compensator (DC) 92, such as
the dispersion compensation fiber, chirped fiber Bragg grating,and grating pair, prism compressors, … can reduce the GVD effect…”) .
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teaching of Huber et al. within the modified teaching of the Reflector orientation of geometrical and mixed waveguide for reducing grating conspicuity mentioned by LAM et al. because the Fourier Domain Mode Locking: Method And Apparatus For Control And Improved mentioned by Huber et al. provides a method and system for implementation of stabilization of dispersion within optical communication elements.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one in the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the Fourier Domain Mode Locking: Method And Apparatus For Control And Improved mentioned by Huber et al. within the modified teaching of the Fourier Domain Mode Locking: Method And Apparatus For Control And Improved mentioned by Huber et al. for implementation of stabilization of dispersion within optical communication elements.
As per claim 7, Combination of LAM et al. and Huber et al. teaches claim 1,
LAM et al. teaches wherein the prism region and CVBG region are formed with matching angles ( Paragraphs [0075-0076]- “… couplers 440 may have a high diffraction efficiency for light 450 and may diffract light 450 in certain desired directions (i.e., diffraction angles) with little loss. As a result, the user may be able to view combined images of the environment in front of combiner 415 and images of virtual objects projected by projector 410….”) .
As per claim 10, Combination of LAM et al. and Huber et al. teaches claim 1,
LAM et al. teaches wherein the CVBG region is a diffraction free region to limit dispersion for one or more of the multiple wavelengths ( Paragraph [0087]- “…the limited angular and spectral bandwidth of the diffraction gratings. Some diffraction gratings such as VBGs may have limited diffraction efficiencies due to, for example, the limited achievable refractive index modulation of the holographic recording material. In addition, multiple gratings used for one-dimensional or two-dimensional pupil expansion as described above with respect to FIG. 6A may perform multiple times of optical filtering (e.g., Bragg filtering due to limited bandwidths of the VBGs) on the display images, which may lead to optical artifacts such as intercepting optical line patterns that may reduce the quality of the display images. Furthermore, diffraction gratings may have large dispersion between light of different colors and may have different diffraction angles for light of different colors….”) .
2. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103(a) as being unpatentable over LAM et al. ( USPUB 20240192427) in view of Huber et al. ( USPUB 20090174931) in further view of Chen et al. ( USPUB 20040013361 ).
As per claim 2, Combination of LAM et al. and Huber et al. teaches claim 1,
Combination of LAM et al. and Huber et al. does not explicitly teach wherein the prism region is further configured to separate the one or more optical signals into the multiple wavelengths.
Within analogous art, Chen et al. teaches wherein the prism region is further configured to separate the one or more optical signals into the multiple wavelengths ( FIG. 4 and FIG. 10 and Paragraph [0077]- “…The incidence angle .theta. therefore varies with wavelength. In particular, for light of each WDM channel .lambda..sub.i, there exists a specific incidence angle .theta..sub.i. Angular spreading of the light beam inside the optical phaser 62 is enabled by the angular dispersion produced by the prism 77 or bulk diffraction grating 77a of the collimating means 61….”) .
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teaching of Chen et al. within the combined modified teaching of the Reflector orientation of geometrical and mixed waveguide for reducing grating conspicuity mentioned by LAM et al and the Fourier Domain Mode Locking: Method And Apparatus For Control And Improved mentioned by Huber et al. because the Compensating For Chromatic Dispersion In Optical Fibers mentioned by Chen et al. provides a method and system for implementation of compensation of optical signal dispersion within optical communication system.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one in the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the Compensating For Chromatic Dispersion In Optical Fibers mentioned by Chen et al. within the combined modified teaching of the Reflector orientation of geometrical and mixed waveguide for reducing grating conspicuity mentioned by LAM et al. and the Fourier Domain Mode Locking: Method And Apparatus For Control And Improved mentioned by Huber et al. for implementation of compensation of optical signal dispersion within optical communication system..
3. Claims 11,18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103(a) as being unpatentable over Myers et al. ( USPUB 20020131100) in view of LAM et al. ( USPUB 20240192427) in further view of Huber et al. ( USPUB 20090174931).
As per claim 11, Myers et al. teaches System for channel dispersion compensation ( Paragraph [0277]- “… The resulting reduction in signal dispersion is an important factor in photonic systems, particularly long-haul systems. By placing frequency inverting transceivers at the beginning and midpoint of a transmission leg the dispersion of a signal may be greatly reduced….”) , comprising: an optical transceiver configured to generate multiple dimensional optical signals ( Paragraphs [0280-0282]- “…replicated-spectrum transceiver 160 may receive a photonic signal 18 and provide a channelized photonic signal 20. The channelized photonic signals 20 may be combined with a combiner 108 to provide a multiplexed photonic signal 109….”) , the optical transceiver comprising: one or more lasers( Paragraphs [0103-0104]- “…The wavelength shifter 10 enables stabilization of a single channel or group of channels without requiring direct control of a laser or light source. Separating stabilization from the actual laser device facilitates greater flexibility in designing and deploying photonic systems…”) ; one or more photodetectors ( FIG. 10- PD AND Paragraph [0157]- “…differential detector 52 may include a pair of photo detectors and a comparator. Photodetectors may convert photonic signals to electrical signals. The pair of photo detectors within the differential detector 52 may convert the pair of filtered signals 56 to a pair of electrical signals 57….”) ; and
Myers et al. does not explicitly teach an optical element, comprising: an angled prism region configured to receive the optical signals having multiple wavelengths; and a chirped volume Bragg grating (CVBG) region formed with the angled prism region.
However, within analogous art, LAM et al. teaches an optical element, comprising: an angled prism region configured to receive the optical signals having multiple wavelengths( Paragraph [0074]- “…Combiner 415 may transmit light in a first wavelength range, such as visible light from about 400 nm to about 650 nm. Input coupler 430 may include a volume holographic grating, a diffractive optical element (DOE) (e.g., a surface-relief grating), a slanted surface of substrate 420, or a refractive coupler (e.g., a wedge or a prism). …”); and a chirped volume Bragg grating (CVBG) region formed with the angled prism region.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teaching of LAM et al. within the modified teaching of the Method For Photonic Wavelength Error Detection mentioned by Myers et al. because the Reflector orientation of geometrical and mixed waveguide for reducing grating conspicuity mentioned by LAM et al. provides a method and system for implementation of diffraction grating within optical networking element.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one in the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the Reflector orientation of geometrical and mixed waveguide for reducing grating conspicuity mentioned by LAM et al. within the modified teaching of the Method For Photonic Wavelength Error Detection mentioned by Myers et al. for implementation of diffraction grating within optical networking element.
Combination of Myers et al. and LAM et al. does not explicitly teach a chirped volume Bragg grating (CVBG) region formed with the angled prism region.
However, within analogous art, Huber et al. teaches a chirped volume Bragg grating (CVBG) region formed with the angled prism region ( Paragraph [0095]- “…The GVD of the laser cavity is induced by the employed optical components, such as the optical filter, amplifier/gain (G) 5', and delay line 91. A dispersion compensator (DC) 92, such as
the dispersion compensation fiber, chirped fiber Bragg grating,and grating pair, prism compressors, acousto optic or liquid crystal based shaper devices, can reduce the GVD effect…”) .
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teaching of Huber et al. within the combined modified teaching of the Method For Photonic Wavelength Error Detection mentioned by Myers et al. and the Reflector orientation of geometrical and mixed waveguide for reducing grating conspicuity mentioned by LAM et al. because the Fourier Domain Mode Locking: Method And Apparatus For Control And Improved mentioned by Huber et al. provides a method and system for implementation of stabilization of dispersion within optical communication elements.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one in the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the Fourier Domain Mode Locking: Method And Apparatus For Control And Improved mentioned by Huber et al. within the combined modified teaching of the Method For Photonic Wavelength Error Detection mentioned by Myers et al. and the Reflector orientation of geometrical and mixed waveguide for reducing grating conspicuity mentioned by LAM et al. for implementation of stabilization of dispersion within optical communication elements.
As per claim 18, Combination of Myers et al. , LAM et al. and Huber et al. teach claim 11,
Combination of Myers et al. and Huber et al. does not explicitly teach wherein the CVBG region is a diffraction free region to reduce additional dispersion.
Within analogous art, LAM et al. teaches wherein the CVBG region is a diffraction free region to reduce additional dispersion ( Paragraph [0087]- “…the limited angular and spectral bandwidth of the diffraction gratings. Some diffraction gratings such as VBGs may have limited diffraction efficiencies due to, for example, the limited achievable refractive index modulation of the holographic recording material. In addition, multiple gratings used for one-dimensional or two-dimensional pupil expansion as described above with respect to FIG. 6A may perform multiple times of optical filtering (e.g., Bragg filtering due to limited bandwidths of the VBGs) on the display images, which may lead to optical artifacts such as intercepting optical line patterns that may reduce the quality of the display images. Furthermore, diffraction gratings may have large dispersion between light of different colors and may have different diffraction angles for light of different colors….”) .
As per claim 19, Combination of Myers et al. , LAM et al. and Huber et al. teach claim 11,
Combination of Myers et al. and Huber et al. does not explicitly teach further comprising multiple filters connected to the optical element.
Within analogous art, LAM et al. teaches further comprising multiple filters connected to the optical element ( Paragraph [0087]- “… FIG. 6A may perform multiple times of optical filtering (e.g., Bragg filtering due to limited bandwidths of the VBGs) on the display images, which may lead to optical artifacts such as intercepting optical line patterns that may reduce the quality of the display images…”) .
4. Claims 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103(a) as being unpatentable over Myers et al. ( USPUB 20020131100) in view of LAM et al. ( USPUB 20240192427) in further view of Huber et al. ( USPUB 20090174931) and Chen et al. ( USPUB )
As per claim 16, Combination of Myers et al. , LAM et al. and Huber et al. teach claim 11,
Combination of Myers et al. , LAM et al. and Huber et al. does not explicitly teach further comprising high-reflection (HR) coatings on a back surface of the CVBG region to limit additional dispersion.
Within analogous art, Chen et al. teaches further comprising high-reflection (HR) coatings on a back surface of the CVBG region to limit additional dispersion ( Paragraph [0063]- “… preferably coated with a high reflectivity film, for example a film having a reflectivity greater than ninety-eight percent (98%) at the wavelength of light impinging thereon. Consequently, the surface 64 is herein referred to as the "reflective surface."…”) .
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teaching of Chen et al. within the combined modified teaching of the Method For Photonic Wavelength Error Detection mentioned by Myers et al. and the Reflector orientation of geometrical and mixed waveguide for reducing grating conspicuity mentioned by LAM et al. and the Fourier Domain Mode Locking: Method And Apparatus For Control And Improved mentioned by Huber et al. because the Compensating For Chromatic Dispersion In Optical Fibers mentioned by Chen et al. provides a method and system for implementation of compensation of optical signal dispersion within optical communication system.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one in the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the Compensating For Chromatic Dispersion In Optical Fibers mentioned by Chen et al within the combined modified teaching of the Method For Photonic Wavelength Error Detection mentioned by Myers et al. and the Reflector orientation of geometrical and mixed waveguide for reducing grating conspicuity mentioned by LAM et al. and the Fourier Domain Mode Locking: Method And Apparatus For Control And Improved mentioned by Huber et al. for implementation of compensation of optical signal dispersion within optical communication system.
As per claim 17, Combination of Myers et al. , LAM et al. and Huber et al. and Chen et al. teach claim 16,
Combination of Myers et al. , LAM et al. and Huber et al. does not explicitly teach wherein the HR coatings are positioned on an incident surface of the optical element.
Within analogous art, Chen et al. teaches wherein the HR coatings are positioned on an incident surface of the optical element ( Paragraph [0085]- “… Light entering the entrance window 63 of the prism 82 reflects internally within the prism 82 before impinging for a first time on one of the parallel parallel surfaces 64 or 65. As illustrated for the various alternative embodiments, the reflective surface 64 may either be coated with a high-reflectivity film or be partially transparent. If the surface 64 is partially transparent, the optical phaser 62 exhibits greater optical loss. …”) .
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teaching of Chen et al. within the combined modified teaching of the Method For Photonic Wavelength Error Detection mentioned by Myers et al. and the Reflector orientation of geometrical and mixed waveguide for reducing grating conspicuity mentioned by LAM et al. and the Fourier Domain Mode Locking: Method And Apparatus For Control And Improved mentioned by Huber et al. because the Compensating For Chromatic Dispersion In Optical Fibers mentioned by Chen et al. provides a method and system for implementation of compensation of optical signal dispersion within optical communication system.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one in the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the Compensating For Chromatic Dispersion In Optical Fibers mentioned by Chen et al within the combined modified teaching of the Method For Photonic Wavelength Error Detection mentioned by Myers et al. and the Reflector orientation of geometrical and mixed waveguide for reducing grating conspicuity mentioned by LAM et al. and the Fourier Domain Mode Locking: Method And Apparatus For Control And Improved mentioned by Huber et al. for implementation of compensation of optical signal dispersion within optical communication system.
It is noted that any citations to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the reference should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2123.
Allowable Subject Matter
5. Claims 3,4,5,6,9,12,13,14,15 and 20 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.
6. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for objecting the claims as allowable subject matter:
As to claim 3, prior art of record does not teach or suggest the limitation mentioned within claim 3: “wherein the CVBG region is configured to: compensate for communication link dispersion of the multiple wavelengths, wherein compensating the communication link dispersion of the multiple wavelengths comprises dispersing the one or more signals using one or more gratings in the CVBG region.”
As to claims 4 and 5 , claims 4 and 5 depends on objected allowable claim 3, therefore the following claims are not taught by the prior art of record.
As to claim 6, claim 6 depends on objected allowable claim 5, therefore the following claims are not taught by the prior art of record.
As to claim 8, prior art of record does not teach or suggest the limitation mentioned within claim 8: “wherein the CVBG region comprises one or more segments, each of the segments comprising a pattern of gratings, each of the pattern of gratings having a spatial chirp.”
As to claim 9, claim 9 depends on objected allowable claim 8, therefore the following claims are not taught by the prior art of record.
As to claim 12, prior art of record does not teach or suggest the limitation mentioned within claim 12: “wherein the CVBG region is configured to: disperse one or more of the optical signals using the one or more gratings to compensate for dispersion; and combine the dispersed signals with other dispersed signals.”
As to claim 13, prior art of record does not teach or suggest the limitation mentioned within claim 13: “wherein the CVBG region comprises one or more segments, each of the segments comprising a pattern of gratings, each of the pattern of gratings having a spatial chirp.”
As to claim 14, claim 14 depends on objected allowable claim 13, therefore the following claims are not taught by the prior art of record
As to claim 15, prior art of record does not teach or suggest the limitation mentioned within claim 15: “the CVBG region is configured based on at least one parameter associated with at least one of polarities of dispersion, orders of dispersion, or passband characteristics.”
As to claim 20, claim 20 depends on objected allowable claim 12, therefore the following claims are not taught by the prior art of record.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Examiner’s Notes
7. The Examiner acknowledges the following prior arts below as pertinent to the current applications claim limitations and inventive concept, although the following prior arts shown below were not relied upon to address the limitations within the claim , they are analogous art mentioning the inventive concept key points on ( Dispersion compensation , Bragg Gratings , Prism , Optical transceiver , integrated optical element etc.).
1) Michael John Strain et al.," Design and Fabrication of Integrated Chirped Bragg Gratings for On-Chip Dispersion Control,” 30th March 2010, IEEE JOURNAL OF QUANTUM ELECTRONICS, VOL. 46, NO. 5, MAY 2010, Pages 774-779.
2) Alexei L. Glebov et al.," Volume Bragg Gratings as Ultra-Narrow and Multiband Optical Filters," 8th May 2012, Proc. of SPIE Vol. 8428,Pages 84280C-1 - 84280C-10.
3) M. Sumetsky et al.," Fiber Bragg gratings for dispersion compensation in optical communication systems," 27th July 2005 , Journal of Optical and Fiber Communications Reports ,Pages 257-269.
4) Aasif Bashir Dar et al.," Chromatic dispersion compensation techniques and characterization of fiber Bragg grating for dispersion compensation,"17th February 2017, Opt Quant Electron (2017) 49, Pages 107-109.
5) Jacobowitz et al. (USPUB 20030072528)
6) Koch et al. (USPUB 20030123776)
7) Moon et al. (USPUB 20030174939)
8) Luo et al. (USPUB 20030190121)
9) Fermann et al. (USPUB 20030202547)
10) HONMA HIROSHI et al. (JP 2004233485)
11) LEVNER et al. ( CN 1692295)
12) Volodin et al. (USPUB 20060215972 )
13 ) Huber et al. (USPUB 20090174931)
14) Dong et al. ( USPUB 20110069723)
15) Vaissie et al. ( USPAT 8189971)
16) OGAWA et al. ( CN 101952755)
17) DU et al. ( CN 116256848)
18) XU et al. ( USPUB 20240231103)
Conclusion
8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to PTO-892, Notice of Reference Cited for a listing of analogous art.
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR S ISMAIL whose telephone number is (571)272-9799 and Fax # is (571)273-9799. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00am-6:00pm.
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, David C. Payne can be reached on (571) 272-3024. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571)273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free)? If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/OMAR S ISMAIL/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2635
Prosecution Insights