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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In [0021], waveguide is labeled with numeral 108, while the same is also used to label loop mirror.
In [0023], 104 is used to designate waveguide while 104 is the photodetector.
In [0059], numerals 120 and 210 are used but are shown in the drawing.
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.
Claim 1-16 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 1, it is unclear what constitutes “one or more preset destructive interference criteria”. Whether the reflections from two photodiodes interfere destructively depends upon wavelength and modal index. In this case, neither wavelength nor modal index are claimed. As understood, the interference between same spacing between the photodetectors can either be constructive or destructive. As such, the scope of the claim is unclear, and the claim scope is deemed indefinite.
Regarding claims 3 and 4, “the plurality of superconducting wires” lacks antecedent basis. Clarification is required to determine the scope of the claims.
Regarding claim 8, each wire is not defined. Clarification is required.
Claims 2-16 are rejected because of their dependency upon rejected claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7, 11 and 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Le Coarer et al (US 20080130008/US Patent 7812958).
Regarding claim 1, as understood, Le Coarer et al teach (Figs. 1-6) An optical circuit, comprising: an optical waveguide (1); and a plurality of photodetectors (5) coupled to the optical waveguide, adjacent photodetectors of the plurality of photodetectors being spaced to meet one or more preset destructive interference criteria. That is, the reflected wave from the mirror 2 creates a destructive wave such that a destructive criteria is met.
Regarding claim 2, Le Coarer et al teach each photodetector of the plurality of photodetectors comprises a respective superconducting wire (22).
Regarding claim 3, Le Coarer et al teach the optical waveguide has a respective width at each superconducting wire of the plurality of superconducting wires that meets the one or more preset destructive interference criteria. That is, the waveguide has a width that destructive interference occurs.
Regarding claim 4, Le Coarer et al teach the one or more preset destructive interference criteria include a criterion to reduce reflections between the plurality of superconducting wires and the optical waveguide. See disclosure with respect to figure 3 where spacing are chosen to avoid Bragg grating.
Regarding claim 7, Le Coarer et al teach each photodetector of the plurality of photodetectors is sized to meet the one or more preset destructive interference criteria. That is, the detectors are smaller than the shortest analyzed wavelength (see claim 11).
Regarding claim 11, Le Coarer et al teach (see claim 7) spacing between the plurality of photodetectors is non-uniforrn.
Regarding claim 13, Le Coarer et al teach (Fig. 4) the plurality of photodetectors are vertically stacked with the optical waveguide.
Regarding claim 14, Le Coarer et al teach optical waveguide comprises a reflector (2) component configured to back propagate light through the optical waveguide.
Regarding claim 15, Le Coarer et al teach a plurality of readout circuits electrically coupled to respective photodetectors of the plurality of photodetectors, each readout circuit of the plurality of readout circuits configured to measure an electrical property of the respective photodetector, wherein the electrical property is indicative of a number of photons incident to the respective photodetector. That is, each detector delivers an electrical signal that depends on the intensity, and also the wires 23 connect to electronics that multiplex and process the signals.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TONY KO whose telephone number is (571)272-1926. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5pm.
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, Georgia Epps can be reached at 571-272-2328. 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.
/TONY KO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2878
TK
