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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 3, 8-10, 25-28 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 3 requires generating the second combined signal using a second pair of optical carriers. Claim 3 depends upon claim 1 which uses splitters to split the first pair of optical carriers. Instant specification fails to teach such combination. FIG. 1 or FIG. 5A of instant specification does not teach a second pair of optical carriers. FIG. 3, FIG. 4 or FIG. 6 of instant specification teaches a second pair of optical carriers but fails to teach the splitters. Therefore, the claim contains new subject matter.
Claim 8 requires the use of splitters for the carriers, and multiplexer and same optical fiber link for transmitting the first combined signal and the second combined signal to the DUs. Instant specification fails to teach such combination. FIG. 2 or FIG. 5A of instant specification teaches using splitters but does not teach using multiplexer and same optical fiber link for transmitting the first combined signal and the second combined signal to the DUs. FIG. 3, FIG. 4 or FIG. 6 of instant specification teaches using multiplexer and same optical fiber link for transmitting the first combined signal and the second combined signal to the DUs but does not teach using splitters for the carriers. Regardless of whether the claimed invention is technically possible or not, instant specification fails to teach the claimed invention and the claim is considered to contain new subject matter.
Claim 25 requires the use of splitters for the carriers, and multiplexer and same optical fiber link for transmitting the first combined signal and the second combined signal to the DUs. Instant specification fails to teach such combination. FIG. 2 or FIG. 5A of instant specification teaches using splitters but does not teach using multiplexer and same optical fiber link for transmitting the first combined signal and the second combined signal to the DUs. FIG. 3, FIG. 4 or FIG. 6 of instant specification teaches using multiplexer and same optical fiber link for transmitting the first combined signal and the second combined signal to the DUs but does not teach using splitters for the carriers. Regardless of whether the claimed invention is technically possible or not, instant specification fails to teach the claimed invention and the claim is considered to contain new subject matter.
Claim 28 requires generating the second combined signal using a second pair of optical carriers. Claim 28 depends upon claim 12 which uses splitters to split the first pair of optical carriers. Instant specification fails to teach such combination. FIG. 1 or FIG. 5A of instant specification does not teach a second pair of optical carriers. FIG. 3, FIG. 4 or FIG. 6 of instant specification teaches a second pair of optical carriers but fails to teach the splitters. Therefore, the claim contains new subject matter.
Claim 30 requires the use of splitters for the carriers, and multiplexer and same optical fiber link for transmitting the first combined signal and the second combined signal to the DUs. Instant specification fails to teach such combination. FIG. 2 or FIG. 5A of instant specification teaches using splitters but does not teach using multiplexer and same optical fiber link for transmitting the first combined signal and the second combined signal to the DUs. FIG. 3, FIG. 4 or FIG. 6 of instant specification teaches using multiplexer and same optical fiber link for transmitting the first combined signal and the second combined signal to the DUs but does not teach using splitters for the carriers. Regardless of whether the claimed invention is technically possible or not, instant specification fails to teach the claimed invention and the claim is considered to contain new subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
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) 1-2, 4-6, 11-12 and 21-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beas et al. (Beas et al., “Millimeter-Wave Frequency Radio over Fiber Systems: A Survey”, IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, Vol. 15, No. 4, 2013) in view of Zhang et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. 2020/0119813 A1) and Bourderionnet et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. 2020/0365988 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Beas et al. teaches in FIG. 1 and FIG. 9(a) a method performed by a central unit (CU) (Beas et al. teaches in FIG. 1 central station CS) for enabling at least two distributed radio units (DUs) (Beas et al. teaches in FIG. 1 three base stations BS) to generate a radio frequency (RF) carrier, the method comprising: using a single light source (laser of FIG. 9(a)), generating at least a first pair of optical carriers (λ1 and λ2), wherein the first pair of optical carriers consists of a first optical carrier (λ1) and a second optical carrier (λ2); generating a first combined signal for a first DU using i) a first optical coupler (optical coupler OC) and ii) the first pair of optical carriers; generating a second combined signal for a second DU (it is understood that a duplication of FIG. 9(a) can be used as the transmitter for the second TX/RX module of the CS in FIG. 1 of Beas et al.); transmitting the first combined signal to the first DU (it is clear from FIG. 1 that the first TX/RX is for the first BS and the second TX/RX is for the second BS, etc.); and transmitting the second combined signal to the second DU, wherein the frequency of the RF carrier is equal to the frequency separation between the first optical carrier and the second optical carrier (Beas et al. teaches in FIG. 9(a) that fmm = λ2 – λ1, where fmm is the desired mm-wave frequency—see p.1600, left col., 3rd paragraph), generating the first combined signal using the first optical coupler and the first pair of optical carriers comprises: employing a first modulator to modulate the first optical carrier using data for the first DU (Beas et al. teaches in FIG. 9(a) external modulator EM modulated with downlink data), thereby generating a first modulated optical carrier, and using the first optical coupler to combine the first modulated optical carrier with the second optical carrier thereby generating the first combined signal (Beas et al. teaches in FIG. 9(a) coupler OC for combining the signal from the output of EM and λ2). The differences between Beas et al. and the claimed invention are (a) Beas et al. does not teach that the second optical carrier is phase coherent with the first optical carrier, (b) Beas et al. does not teach using splitters for generating the first combined signal and the second combined signal.
Zhang et al. teaches in FIG. 1 a device for generating a plurality of carrier from a single light source 118 by using a comb generator 114 and a demultiplexer 124 to separate the carriers. Zhang et al. teaches in paragraph [0093] that the tone pairs 166(1), ...166(N) are phased synchronized coherent. One of ordinary skill in the art would have combined the teaching of Zhang et al. with the system of Beas et al. because it is a simple substitution of one known, equivalent element for another to obtain predictable results. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a comb generator to generate pairs of carriers that are phased synchronized coherent, as taught by Zhang et al., in the system of Beas et al.
The combination of Beas et al. and Zhang et al. still fails to teach using splitters for generating the first combined signal and the second combined signal. Bourderionnet et al. teaches in FIG. 2 using splitters for generating combined signals. Specifically, Bourderionnet et al. teaches generating the first combined signal for the first DU using the first optical coupler and the first pair of optical carriers further comprises using a first optical splitter (FIG. 2 of Bourderionnet et al. is reproduced below with annotation indicating the splitters; the first splitter is the one before the modulators) and a second optical splitter (the splitter next to the combiner 48), the first optical splitter comprises i) an input coupled to the first optical carrier and ii) a first output coupled to the first modulator for providing the first optical carrier to the first modulator, the second optical splitter (the splitter next to the combiner 48) comprises i) an input coupled to the second optical carrier and ii) a first output coupled to the first optical coupler for providing the second optical carrier to the first optical coupler, and transmitting the first combined signal to the first DU and transmitting the second combined signal to the second DU comprises: i) transmitting the first combined signal to the first DU using a first optical fiber link (first fiber 52 counting from the top); and ii) transmitting the second combined signal to the second DU using a second optical fiber link (second optical fiber 52 counting from the top) that is distinct from the first optical fiber link. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teaching of Bourderionnet et al. with the modified system of Beas et al. and Zhang et al. because the approach reduces the number of carrier pairs. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use splitters to share carrier pair, as taught by Bourderionnet et al., in the modified system of Beas et al. and Zhang et al.
Bourderionnet et al. further teaches in FIG. 2 transmitting the first combined signal to the first DU and transmitting the second combined signal to the second DU comprises: i) transmitting the first combined signal to the first DU using a first optical fiber link (first fiber 52 counting from the top); and ii) transmitting the second combined signal to the second DU using a second optical fiber link (second optical fiber 52 counting from the top) that is distinct from the first optical fiber link.
[AltContent: textbox (splitter)][AltContent: textbox (splitter)][AltContent: textbox (splitter)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: oval][AltContent: oval][AltContent: oval]
PNG
media_image1.png
508
794
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Bourderionnet et al. teaches in FIG. 2 generating the second combined signal for the second DU comprises generating the second combined signal using the first optical carrier and the second optical carrier.
Regarding claim 4, Bourderionnet et al. teaches in FIG. 2 second modulator 32.
Regarding claim 5, Bourderionnet et al. teaches in FIG. 2 transmitting the first combined signal to the first DU and transmitting the second combined signal to the second DU comprises: i) transmitting the first combined signal to the first DU using a first optical fiber link (first fiber 52 counting from the top); and ii) transmitting the second combined signal to the second DU using a second optical fiber link (second optical fiber 52 counting from the top) that is distinct from the first optical fiber link.
Regarding claim 6, Zhang et al. teaches in FIG. 1 comb generator 114 for generating the first pair optical carriers 166(1) and second pair of optical carriers 166(2).
Regarding claim 11, Zhang et al. teaches in FIG. 1 using the unmodulated optical carrier 112B to generate a modulated signal and transmit the modulated signal to the CU; it is understood that similar process is done for the unmodulated carrier of the second combined signal.
Claim 12 is rejected for the same reason for rejecting claim 1.
Claims 21-24 cite limitations that are similar to those of claims 2 and 4-6, respectively, and are rejected based on reasons that have been cited above in regard to claims 2 and 4-6.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, the Applicant argues that the newly added feature of claim 1
was previously presented in dependent claim 29. Accordingly, Applicant will address the Office's remarks regarding claim 29.
With respect to the above features of claim 29, the Office merely contends that the combination of the Art teaches the above features but does not provide any analysis of the Art. Applicant submits that it is not proper for the Office to cite the claim features without any analysis because such action by the Office is not helpful in achieving compact prosecution and unduly burdens the Applicant with having to guess as the Office's reason for believing that the Art teaches the features in question. In any event, Applicant has not found anything in the Art that teaches the above features.
Applicant’s argument is moot in view of the new ground of rejection based on newly cited reference Beas et al.
Regarding claim 4, the Applicant argues:
Claim 4 is patentable over the Art for at least the reason that the Art does not teach or suggest:
generating the second combined signal using the first optical carrier and the second optical carrier comprises: employing a second modulator to modulate the first optical carrier using data for the second DU, thereby generating a second modulated optical carrier, and using the second optical coupler to combine the second modulated optical carrier with the second optical carrier thereby producing the second combined signal,
as required by claim 4.
The Office contends that Zhang discloses the above features and cites to Fig. 1 of Zhang to support its contention (see Office Action at page 6). Applicant respectfully disagrees.
Specifically, the Office contends that "it is understood that the second pair of optical carriers 166(2) of FIG. 1 of Zhang et al. are processed similar to that for the first pair of optical carriers 166(1)." Even if we agree for the sake of argument that the first pair and second pair of optical carriers are generated in a similar manner, i.e. employing a modulator to modulate an optical carrier thereby generating a modulated optical carrier, the Office seems to ignore the clamed second modulator. That is, requires both a first modulator for generating a first modulated optical carrier and a second modulator for generating the second modulated optical carrier (see Fig. 6 and paragraph 37 of application as filed). In contrast, Zhang et al. merely discloses of a singular modulator which generates the first modulated optical carrier and the second modulated optical carrier.
The Applicant’s argument is moot in view of the teaching of Beas et al. and Bourderionnet et al. Beas et al. teaches in FIG. 1 separate TX/RX units in the CS; each TX/RX unit contains an external modulator EM as illustrated in FIG. 9(a). Bourderionnet et al. also teaches in FIG. 2 first modulator 30 and second modulator 32. Therefore, the feature of claim 4 is clearly taught by the references.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHI K LI whose telephone number is (571)272-3031. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:53 a.m. -3:23 p.m.
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 Payne can be reached at 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 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.
skl11 February 2026
/SHI K LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2635