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 .
Drawings
The drawings with 10 Sheets of Figs. 1-10 received on 11/13/2024 are acknowledged and accepted.
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 1-5, 7, 10-11, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yu et al., US 2020/0096672 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Yu).
As to claim 1, Yu teaches a method (Figs. 4A-47) comprising:
determining a desired phase profile of a metasurface (104, 105, 106, 107, phase dispersion profiles for metasurface lens for positions #1-4, para [0065], Fig. 1B), wherein the desired phase profile indicates a respective desired effective phase delay for each of a plurality of positions of the metasurface (101, 102, 103, the phase required for a metasurface lens as a function of radial distance away from the center of the lens through locations #1-4, para [0065], Fig. 1A); and
for each position of the plurality of positions of the metasurface, selecting a respective
metastructure (401, 402, 403, the meta-units are located from the center to the distal edge of the metasurface, para [0070], Figs. 4A and 16-26) from a metastructure library (Meta-unit library 1, Meta-unit library 2, Meta-unit library 3, three meta-unit libraries contain a few meta-unit archetypes, para [0069], Fig. 4A) based on the respective desired effective phase delay (the phase offset-dispersion space covered by the three meta-unit libraries are shown in Fig. 4B, para [0069], Fig. 4B),
wherein the metastructure library comprises a plurality of metastructures (401, 402, 403, meta-unit library 1 contains singular pillars, annular pillars and concentric rings having a height of 800 nm, meta-unit library 2 has the same three meta-unit archetypes as meta-unit library 1 but the height is 1,400 nm, meta-unit library 3 keeps the same height as meta-unit library 2 but switches to archetypes with four-fold symmetry, para [0069], Fig 4B) indexed by respective effective phase delays (the phase delays for the meta-units are indicated in the phase dispersion space shown in Fig. 4B, each marker shown below corresponding meta-units in Fig. 4A are mapped in the dispersion space and are a phase index of the meta-unit, para [0069], Figs. 4A-B) and, for at least one effective phase delay, the metastructure library comprises at least two metastructures that differ in at least one of size or shape and that are indexed by the at least one effective phase delay (as shown in Fig. 4B there is overlap in the phase distributions of meta-units from the meta-unit libraries, for example there is a phase at coordinates (1,1.5) for a meta-unit from each of the meta-unit libraries, thus two different meta-units are indexed by at least one phase).
As to claim 2, Yu teaches the method of claim 1, wherein a boundary of the metasurface defined by a collective perimeter of the plurality of positions is non-uniform (SEM images of the outer regions of the metasurface lens show a perimeter that has non-uniform position of the meta-units, para [0086], Figs. 20 and 23).
As to claim 3, Yu teaches the method of claim 2, wherein the non-uniform boundary is a perturbation of a substantially rounded boundary (SEM images of the outer regions of the metasurface lens show the non-uniform boundary is a rounded boundary with perturbations specifically shown in figures 20 and 23, para [0086], Figs. 16A-28).
As to claim 4, Yu teaches the method of claim 2, wherein the non-uniform boundary is a saw-toothed boundary (below is a close up of the SEM image of the outer region of the metasurface lens in Fig. 23 which shows a saw-tooth boundary, para [0086], Fig. 23).
PNG
media_image1.png
789
1166
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claim 5, Yu teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the at least two metastructures that are indexed by the at least one effective phase delay which are each characterized by a respective at least one variable parameter, the respective at least one variable parameter being different between the at least two metastructures (401, 402, 403, meta-unit library 2 has the same three meta-unit archetypes as meta-unit library 1 but the height of the meta-units is increased to 1,400 nm… meta-unit library 3 keeps the same height as meta-unit library 2 but switches to archetypes with four-fold symmetry instead of rotational symmetry, thus height or shape are variable parameters of the meta-units with similar phase, para [0069], Fig. 4A).
As to claim 7, Yu teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the metastructure library comprises a multi-dimensional metastructure library, wherein the multi-dimensional metastructure library comprises the at least two metastructures indexed by the at least one effective phase delay and the at least two metastructures have respective at least two variable parameters (401, 402, 403, meta-unit library 2 has the same three meta-unit archetypes as meta-unit library 1 but the height of the meta-units is increased to 1,400 nm… meta-unit library 3 keeps the same height as meta-unit library 2 but switches to archetypes with four-fold symmetry instead of rotational symmetry, thus height and shape are variable parameters of the meta-units with similar phase, para [0069], Fig. 4A).
As to claim 10, Yu teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the selecting further comprises randomly selecting the respective metastructure from the metastructure library to achieve the respective desired effective phase delay (any selection of meta-unit from the meta-unit libraries is considered random, para [0069], Fig. 4A).
As to claim 11, Yu teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the selecting further comprises selecting, based on a fixed design rule algorithmically applied to disrupt periodic structures, the respective metastructure from the metastructure library (the phase profiles for the meta-surface are given by equations (3) and (4) where the choice of meta-units can be carried out to reduce both amplitude and phase mismatch, paras [0065]- [0066], Fig. 1A).
As to claim 14, Yu teaches (Figs. 4A-47) an optical element (metasurface lens patterned on a quartz substrate, para [0087], Fig. 28) comprising:
a metasurface (optical and SEM images of metasurface lens, paras [0086]-[0087], Figs. 16A-28) comprising an array of metastructures (401, 402, 403, the meta-units are located from the center to the distal edge of the metasurface, para [0070], Figs. 4A and 16-26), wherein each metastructure of the array of metastructures is (a) associated with a respective effective phase delay (the phase offset-dispersion space covered by the three meta-unit libraries are shown in Fig. 4B, para [0069], Fig. 4B) and (b) characterized by a respective shape and a respective size (401, 402, 403, meta-unit library 1 contains singular pillars, annular pillars and concentric rings having a height of 800 nm, meta-unit library 2 has the same three meta-unit archetypes as meta-unit library 1 but the height is 1,400 nm, meta-unit library 3 keeps the same height as meta-unit library 2 but switches to archetypes with four-fold symmetry, para [0069], Fig 4B) and wherein at least two metastructures are associated with a same effective phase delay and are characterized by at least one of different sizes or different shapes (as shown in Fig. 4B there is overlap in the phase distributions of meta-units from the meta-unit libraries, for example there is a phase at coordinates (1,1.5) for a meta-unit from each of the meta-unit libraries, thus two different meta-units are indexed by at least one phase).
As to claim 15, Yu teaches the optical element of claim 14, wherein a boundary of the metastructure is defined by a collective perimeter of a plurality of positions of the metasurface (SEM images of the outer regions of the metasurface lens show a perimeter of the meta-units, para [0086], Figs. 20 and 23), each metastructure of the array of metastructures located at a respective position of the plurality of positions (401, 402, 403, the meta-units are located from the center to the distal edge of the metasurface, para [0070], Figs. 4A and 16-26), wherein the boundary is non-uniform (SEM images of the outer regions of the metasurface lens show a perimeter of the meta-units that is non-uniform, para [0086], Figs. 20 and 23).
As to claim 16, Yu teaches the optical element of claim 14, wherein the non-uniform boundary is a perturbation of a substantially rounded boundary (SEM images of the outer regions of the metasurface lens show the non-uniform boundary is a rounded boundary with perturbations specifically shown in figures 20 and 23, para [0086], Figs. 16A-28).
As to claim 17, Yu teaches the optical element of claim 14, wherein the non-uniform boundary is a saw-toothed boundary (below is a close up of the SEM image of the outer region of the metasurface lens in Fig. 23 which shows a saw-tooth boundary, para [0086], Fig. 23).
PNG
media_image1.png
789
1166
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claim 18, Yu teaches (Figs. 4A-47) an optical element (metasurface lens patterned on a quartz substrate, para [0087], Fig. 28) comprising:
a metasurface (optical and SEM images of metasurface lens, paras [0086]-[0087], Figs. 16A-28) comprising an array of metastructures (401, 402, 403, the meta-units are located from the center to the distal edge of the metasurface, para [0070], Figs. 4A and 16-26), wherein each metastructure of the array of metastructures is associated with a respective effective phase delay (the phase offset-dispersion space covered by the three meta-unit libraries are shown in Fig. 4B, para [0069], Fig. 4B) and is located at a respective position of a plurality of positions (401, 402, 403, the meta-units are located from the center to the distal edge of the metasurface, para [0070], Figs. 4A and 16-26), wherein a boundary of the metasurface is defined by a collective perimeter of the plurality of positions of the metasurface (SEM images of the outer regions of the metasurface lens show a perimeter of the meta-units, para [0086], Figs. 20 and 23), and the boundary is non-uniform (SEM images of the outer regions of the metasurface lens show a perimeter of the meta-units that is non-uniform, para [0086], Figs. 20 and 23).
As to claim 19, Yu teaches the optical element of claim 18, wherein the non-uniform boundary is a perturbation of a substantially rounded boundary (SEM images of the outer regions of the metasurface lens show the non-uniform boundary is a rounded boundary with perturbations specifically shown in figures 20 and 23, para [0086], Figs. 16A-28).
As to claim 20, Yu teaches the optical element of claim 18, wherein the non-uniform boundary is a saw-toothed boundary (below is a close up of the SEM image of the outer region of the metasurface lens in Fig. 23 which shows a saw-tooth boundary, para [0086], Fig. 23).
PNG
media_image1.png
789
1166
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
Claims 6, 8, 9, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu et al., US 2020/0096672 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Yu), and further in view of Valentine et al., US 2025/0078291 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Valentine).
As to claim 6, Yu teaches all the limitations of the instant invention as detailed above with respect to claim 5.
Yu does not teach the method of claim 5, wherein the at least one variable parameter is a diameter of each of the at least two metastructures.
Yu and Valentine are related as metasurfaces, metastructures, and metastructure data libraries.
Valentine teaches the method (choosing from a data base meta-atoms to produce a specific phase delay on a metasurface, paras [0086]-[0087], Fig. 5B) wherein at least one variable parameter is a diameter of each of the at least two metastructures (the phase delay of the circular nanopillars as a function of diameter, para [0087], Figs. 5B, 6B, and 16).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Yu with the one variable parameter being the diameter of the metastructures of Valentine, because this general architecture for meta-imagers can be highly parallel and bridge the gap between the natural world and digital systems, potentially finding use beyond machine vision in applications such as information security and quantum communications (para [0095]).
As to claim 8, Yu teaches all the limitations of the instant invention as detailed above with respect to claim 7.
Yu does not teach the method of claim 7, wherein the at least two metastructures are substantially elliptical metastructures.
Yu and Valentine are related as metasurfaces, metastructures, and metastructure data libraries.
Valentine teaches the method (choosing from a data base meta-atoms to produce a specific phase delay on a metasurface, paras [0086]- [0087], Fig. 5B) wherein the at least two metastructures are substantially elliptical metastructures (elliptical nanopillars are chosen as a base meta-atom, para [0086], Figs. 5B, 6A, and 15A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Yu with two metastructures being elliptical metastructures of Valentine, because this general architecture for meta-imagers can be highly parallel and bridge the gap between the natural world and digital systems, potentially finding use beyond machine vision in applications such as information security and quantum communications (para [0095]).
As to claim 9, Yu teaches all the limitations of the instant invention as detailed above with respect to claim 7.
Yu does not teach the method of claim 7, wherein the at least two variable parameters are a vertex distance and a co-vertex distance of the at least two substantially elliptical metastructures.
Yu and Valentine are related as metasurfaces, metastructures, and metastructure data libraries.
Valentine teaches the method (choosing from a data base meta-atoms to produce a specific phase delay on a metasurface, paras [0086]-[0087], Fig. 5B) wherein the at least two variable parameters are a vertex distance and a co-vertex distance of the at least two substantially elliptical metastructures (the width and length of the elliptical nanopillars are chosen, the zoomed in portions of Fig. 6A show a multiple elliptical nanopillars with varied lengths and widths, para [0086], Figs. 5B, 6A, and 15A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Yu with the two variable parameters being the vertex distance and a co-vertex distance of the elliptical metastructures of Valentine, because this general architecture for meta-imagers can be highly parallel and bridge the gap between the natural world and digital systems, potentially finding use beyond machine vision in applications such as information security and quantum communications (para [0095]).
As to claim 12, Yu teaches all the limitations of the instant invention as detailed above with respect to claim 1.
Yu does not teach the method of claim 1, wherein the selecting further comprises selecting, using computer-assisted design, the respective metastructure from the metastructure library, and wherein a desired design is selected, and computer assistance is used to evaluate the design for periodicity.
Yu and Valentine are related as metasurfaces, metastructures, and metastructure data libraries.
Valentine teaches the method (choosing from a data base meta-atoms to produce a specific phase delay on a metasurface, paras [0086]-[0087], Fig. 5B) wherein the selecting further comprises selecting, using computer-assisted design, the respective metastructure from the metastructure library (the meta-imager which includes computer-executable instructions selects the meta-atoms, paras [0004] and [0031], Fig. 5B), and wherein a desired design is selected, and computer assistance is used to evaluate the design for periodicity (the structure of the unit cell shown in Fig. 16 has a unit cell with a period of 470 nm, the numerical simulation chooses the periodicity for example a square lattice with a period of 0.45 mm or a hexagonal lattice with a period of 0.47 mm, paras [0042] and [0099], Fig. 16).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Yu with computer-assistance in designing and evaluating the metastructure and periodicity of Valentine, because this general architecture for meta-imagers can be highly parallel and bridge the gap between the natural world and digital systems, potentially finding use beyond machine vision in applications such as information security and quantum communications (para [0095]).
As to claim 13, Yu in view of Valentine teaches all the limitations of the instant invention as detailed above with respect to claim 12.
Yu does not teach the method of claim 12, wherein the computer assistance is further used to vary geometric shape selections.
Yu and Valentine are related as metasurfaces, metastructures, and metastructure data libraries.
Valentine teaches the method (choosing from a data base meta-atoms to produce a specific phase delay on a metasurface, paras [0086]- [0087], Fig. 5B) wherein the computer assistance is further used to vary geometric shape selections (the numerical simulation chooses the shape for example a square lattice or a hexagonal lattice, and the meta-optic process selects elliptical or circular nanopillars, paras [0086]-[0087] and [0099], Figs. 5A-6B, 15A, and 16).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Yu with the computer assistance is further used to vary geometric shape selections of Valentine, because this general architecture for meta-imagers can be highly parallel and bridge the gap between the natural world and digital systems, potentially finding use beyond machine vision in applications such as information security and quantum communications (para [0095]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Li et al. (US 2021/0263190 A1) teaches a multi-zone metalens where phase discontinuities occur at zone boundaries and within each zone are meta-atoms that can independently control phase and dispersion.
Masuda et al. (US 2025/0004170 A1) teaches a metalens including multiple microstructures with varying shapes, widths, heights, and directions and arranged to provide different phase variation.
Chalony et al. (US 2025/0076640 A1) teaches a method of designing a metasurface using a library of meta-atoms.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER A JONES whose telephone number is (703)756-4574. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM - 5 PM.
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 at (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.
/J.A.J./JENNIFER A JONES
Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/STEPHONE B ALLEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
08/19/2026
Prosecution Insights