Ex Parte Popp et alDownload PDFPatent Trial and Appeal BoardMay 26, 201612769289 (P.T.A.B. May. 26, 2016) Copy Citation UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE 121769,289 04/28/2010 26710 7590 05/31/2016 QUARLES & BRADYLLP Attn: IP Docket 411 E. WISCONSIN A VENUE SUITE 2350 MILWAUKEE, WI 53202-4426 FIRST NAMED INVENTOR Gregor Popp UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www .uspto.gov ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 138404.00003 7295 EXAMINER TAVLYKAEV, ROBERT FUATOVICH ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2883 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 05/31/2016 ELECTRONIC Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication. Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the following e-mail address( es): pat-dept@quarles.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte GREGOR POPP and MATTHIAS RANK Appeal2014-000494 Application 12/769,289 Technology Center 2800 Before BEYERL YA. FRANKLIN, MARK NAGUMO, and JAMES C. HOUSEL, Administrative Patent Judges. FRANKLIN, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appellants seek our review under 35 U.S.C. § 134 of the Examiner's decision rejecting claims 1-20. We have jurisdiction over the appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). Appeal2014-000494 Application 12/769,289 STATEMENT OF THE CASE Claim 1 is illustrative of Appellants' subject matter on appeal and is set forth below (with text in bold for emphasis): 1. A polarization-maintaining optical rotary data transmission device configured to transmit linearly polarized light between first and second rotatably interconnected waveguides, having two collimator assemblies that are optically directed to each other and aligned along a rotational axis, and defining an optical path between said collimator assemblies, each collimator assembly including: a plate to which a corresponding waveguide is affixed; a polarization converter located at a first side of the plate opposing said corresponding waveguide such as to be separated from said corresponding waveguide by the plate and in optical communication with said corresponding waveguide through the plate; a micro-optic collimator located at a side of the polarization converter opposing the plate such as to be separated from the plate by said polarization converter, said micro-optic collimator including a plurality of lenses monolithically attached to one another to form a lens unit, said lens unit adapted to couple light between the corresponding waveguide and free space while transmitting circularly polarized light, said lens unit having a surface at which said micro-optic collimator is affixed to the polarization converter; wherein the polarization converter is mounted between the collimator and the plate by a means including one of glue, bond, and, weld. The Examiner relies on the following prior art references as evidence of unpatentability: Popp US 2007 /0237528 Al Oct. 11, 2007 (hereinafter "Popp '528") Popp DE 10 2006 022 023 Al Nov. 16, 2006 (hereinafter "Popp '023") 2 Appeal2014-000494 Application 12/769,289 THE REJECTION Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Popp '023 in view of Popp '528. ANALYSIS We have carefully reviewed the record, including the Final Office Action, the Appeal Brief, the Answer, and the Reply Brief. We reverse the rejection for essentially the reasons provided by Appellants in the record, and add the following for emphasis. Appellants' Figure 1 illustrates the subject matter of the claimed invention, and is reproduced below: FIG.1 2 \15 c:: __ -·-··c __ I c::_--1 I 6a / .3 14 , / 10 12 11 ~?.+. ~-1 +~ 32 •>< 33 >< 34 Figure 1 depicts an arrangement for multiple channel transmission according to Appellants' invention. A determinative issue in this appeal 1 is whether the applied art teaches 1 We need not address other issues raised in the record since this issue is outcome determinative in this appeal. 3 Appeal2014-000494 Application 12/769,289 the claimed element pertaining to "a plate to which a corresponding waveguide is affixed". Figure 1 above shows the claimed plate (items 15 or 16) to which a corresponding waveguide (2 or 5) is affixed. The Examiner finds that Popp '023 teaches a plate 1 to which optical waveguides (2) are affixed, and refers to Figure 9 of Popp '023 in this regard. Ans. 4, 12. Appellants submit that the applied art does not teach the use of a plate to which a corresponding waveguide is affixed, which plate is separated from a micro-optic collimator by a polarization converter. Appeal Br. 9; Reply Br. 2--4. Appellants dispute the Examiner's findings regarding the plate of Popp '023. Appellants explain that there are 2 types of structures taught by Popp '023 (as set forth by Appellants at the bottom of page 9 and at the top of page 10 of the Appeal Brief), and submit that neither meets this aspect of the claimed subject matter, for the reasons stated therein. In response, the Examiner then refers to Figure 12 of Popp '023, and states that this figure shows that lenses ( 4b) are monolithically attached to each other and form an element (3b ), the latter being disposed on a separately formed plate (3a). Ans. 11. In reply, Appellants argue that in fact Figure 12 of Popp '023 shows waveguides (2a, 2b) attached directly to a surface of a monolithic micro lens array, and not attached to a plate. Reply Br. 3, citing Popp '023, paragarphs [0052] and [0067]. Figure 12 of Popp '023 is reproduced below: 4 Appeal2014-000494 Application 12/769,289 Figure 12 shows a device according to Popp '023 with two interconnected MLAs. Paragraph [0060] of Popp '023 (on page 7 of the machine translation) indicates that item 3a of Figure 12 is a respective MLA (monolithic micro lens array, e.g. collimator) with small lenses 4, and that item 3b is a respective MLA with large lenses 4b. Paragraph [0043] of Popps '023 also indicates that Figure 12 depicts two interconnected ivILAs (these being items 3a and 3b) (see page 5 of the machine translation). Hence, we agree with Appellants that waves guides (2a, 2b) are attached to an MLA, and not to a plate2 , as required by the claims. The Examiner does not rely upon the secondary reference of Popp '528 to cure the aforementioned deficiencies of Popp '023. Ans. 5---6. Indeed, neither of the applied Popp references teaches or suggests a plate to which the waveguide( s) is attached separated from the collimator by a polarization converter. We therefore reverse the rejection. 2 The plate according to Appellant's Specificfation is shown in Figure 1 (reproduced, supra) as an item that is separate/different from item 7 (converter) or item 1 (collimator) including the lenses. Spec. p. 5. 5 Appeal2014-000494 Application 12/769,289 The rejection is reversed. DECISION ORDER REVERSED 6 Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation