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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 6, 10, 11, 14, 15, 20 and 22 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected specie, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/16/26.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 8 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious the optical filter comprising, among other things, wherein the second resonator is configured so that the second resonance control variable is alterable to a fifth value so as to generate a resonant wavelength in the first sub-range of the predetermined filter range if the first resonance control value cannot be altered from the first value to the second value, and/or the first resonator is configured so that the first resonance control variable is alterable to a sixth value so as to generate a resonant wavelength in the second sub-range of the predetermined filter range if the second resonance control value cannot be altered from the third value to the fourth value.
The closest relevant prior art of record, Socci et al. (WO 2008/129571), fails to teach or suggest such claimed conditions. Thus, with no teaching from the prior art, and without the benefit of applicant's teachings, there is no motivation for one of ordinary skill in the art to combine/modify the prior art of record in a manner so as to create the claimed invention.
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 4 is 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. The term “closest” has no metes or bounds. For examiner purposes examiner shall interpret any wavelength in the bandwidth to be closest as claimed.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Seyedi et al. (U.S. PG Pub. # 2022/0069829 A1).
In Re claims 1 and 2, ‘829 teaches an optical filter for an optical network, the optical filter being configured to adaptively add and/or remove a target wavelength in a predetermined filter range, the optical filter comprising: a first resonator (102) configured to have a first resonant wavelength (β01, par .0024) outside a first sub-range (λ01 – λ02) of the predetermined filter range when a first resonance control variable (heater, pars. 0044, 0060, 0073) of the first resonator is set at a first value, and a second resonant wavelength (β02) inside the first sub-range of the predetermined filter range when the first resonance control variable of the first resonator is set at a second value (par. 0024); and
a second resonator (104 or 110) configured to have a third resonant wavelength (β11 or β12) outside a second sub- range (λ11 – λ12 or λ21 – λ22) of the predetermined filter range when a second resonance control variable (tuning to β11 or β12) of the second resonator is set at a third value, and a fourth resonant wavelength (β12) inside the second sub-range of the predetermined filter range when the second resonance control variable of the second resonator is set at a fourth value (tuning to β11 or β12).
In Re claim 12, ‘829 teaches wherein at least one of: the first resonant wavelength is outside the predetermined filter range; and the third resonant wavelength is outside the predetermined filter range (par. 0024).
In Re claim 13, ‘829 teaches wherein the first sub-range and the second sub-range do not overlap (λ01 – λ02 doesn’t overlap λ21 – λ22, figs. 2 and 3).
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, 9, 12, 13, 16, 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Socci et al. (WO 2008/129571).
In Re claims 1 and 19, ‘571 teaches an optical filter for an optical network, the optical filter being configured to adaptively add and/or remove a target wavelength in a predetermined filter range (bandwidth), the optical filter comprising: a first resonator (452) configured to have a first resonant wavelength (channel 2, fig. 14) outside a first sub-range (channel 6,fig. 14 as each channel has a bandwidth) of the predetermined filter range when a first resonance control variable (tuning, pg. 9 lines 6 – 17) of the first resonator is set at a first value (tuned to channel 2), and a second resonant wavelength inside the first sub-range of the predetermined filter range (a wavelength in the bandwidth of channel 6) when the first resonance control variable of the first resonator is set at a second value (tuned to channel 6); and a second resonator (454) configured to have a third resonant wavelength (channel 2, as claim doesn’t recite a different wavelength that the first or second wavelengths) outside a second sub-range (channel 6, fig. 14 as each channel has a bandwidth) of the predetermined filter range when a second resonance control variable (tuning, pg. 9 lines 6 – 17) of the second resonator is set at a third value (tuned to channel 2), and a fourth resonant wavelength inside the second sub-range of the predetermined filter range (a wavelength in the bandwidth of channel 6) when the second resonance control variable of the second resonator is set at a fourth value.
In Re claim 2, ‘571 teaches a temperature as claimed (pg. 9).
In Re claim 3, ‘571 teaches wherein the optical filter is configured to selectively alter the first resonance control variable of the first resonator to the second value which is a value at which the second resonant wavelength moves to the target wavelength, or the second resonance control variable of the second resonator to the fourth value which is a value at which the fourth resonant wavelength moves to the target wavelength (moves to channel 6, fig. 14).
In Re claim 4, ‘571 teaches wherein when the target wavelength is closest (target is a wavelength within the bandwidth that makes up channel 2) to the first resonant wavelength (the peak of channel 2), the first resonance control variable of the first resonator is altered (the tuning stops or slows as its reached desired value), and when the target wavelength is closest to the third resonant wavelength (target is a wavelength within the bandwidth that makes up channel 2), the second resonance control variable of the second resonator is altered (the tuning stops or slows as its reached desired value).
In Re claim 5, ‘571 teaches wherein the optical filter is configured to alter the value of the first resonance control variable of the first resonator when the target wavelength is in the first sub-range (fig. 14), and the optical filter is configured to alter the value of the second resonance control variable of the second resonator when the target wavelength is in the second sub-range (fig. 14).
In Re claim 9, ‘571 teaches wherein the first sub-range extends over substantially half of the predetermined filter range and the second sub-range makes up substantially the remaining portion of the predetermined filter range (pg. 11).
In Re claim 13, ‘571 teaches distinct channels, thus channel 2 does not overlap channel 6.
In Re claim 16, ‘571 teaches wherein the optical filter comprises a plurality of resonators (452, 454) each having a resonant wavelength outside the predetermined filter range when the respective resonance control value of the resonators is at an off value, and having a resonant wavelength inside the predetermined filter range when the respective resonance control value of the resonators is at an on value (fig. 14).
In Re claim 17, ‘571 teaches wherein the target wavelength is a wavelength of a channel to be added or removed in the optical network (pg. 9).
In Re claim 1, ‘571 teaches an optical filter for an optical network, the optical filter being configured to adaptively add and/or remove a target wavelength in a predetermined filter range (bandwidth of channels 1 – 7), the optical filter comprising: a first resonator (452) configured to have a first resonant wavelength (dotted line 1720A, fig. 17) outside a first sub-range (channel 6,fig. 14 as each channel has a bandwidth) of the predetermined filter range when a first resonance control variable (tuning, pg. 9 lines 6 – 17) of the first resonator is set at a first value (above channel 7), and a second resonant wavelength inside the first sub-range of the predetermined filter range (a wavelength in the bandwidth of channel 6) when the first resonance control variable of the first resonator is set at a second value (tuned to channel 6); and a second resonator (454) configured to have a third resonant wavelength (dotted line 1730A, fig. 17) outside a second sub-range (below channel 1) of the predetermined filter range when a second resonance control variable (tuning, pg. 9 lines 6 – 17) of the second resonator is set at a third value (below channel 1), and a fourth resonant wavelength inside the second sub-range of the predetermined filter range (a wavelength in the bandwidth of channel 6) when the second resonance control variable of the second resonator is set at a fourth value.
In Re claim 12, ‘571 teaches resonant wavelength outside of the range as claimed (fig. 17A, doted line is outside of channels 1 and 7).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHAD SMITH whose telephone number is (571)270-1294. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 - 5.
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, Uyen-Chau Le can be reached at 1-571-272-2397. 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.
/CHAD H SMITH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights