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 .
Response to Amendment
Examiner acknowledges the amendments made to claims 2,7,10,13, 18 and 20. No new claims have been added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/09/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the argument made on page 11 of the remarks filed 12/09/2025 that the combination of Anthon and Berger fails to provide a Fabry-Perot interferometer as producing a “plurality of resonances upon incidence of the fourth beam, the plurality of resonances equally spaced in frequency. Examiner has fully considered but respectfully finds them nonpersuasive.
Paragraph [0037] of Berger discloses that element [72] can specifically include a Fabry-Perot Etalon as shown in Fig. 5 of Berger. Further, Fig. 4 of Berger discloses a plurality of transmission peaks [84] (Para. [0037]) (equating to resonances emitting from the element 72 see Fig. 5) that are equally spaced in frequency. Fig. 4 of Berger shows the x-axis with the unit of frequency and the plurality of peaks [84] equally spaced in the frequency units by 2Δ (see Fig. 4) (Para. [0038]) showing each of the spacings of 2Δ to be extending to each side of the respective peaks [84]. Therefore, Examiner notes that the combination of Anthon and Berger does disclose
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The previous rejections of claims 2,7,10,13, 18 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) have been withdrawn in light of the amendments made to claims 2,7,10,13, 18 and 20.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1,2 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anthon et al. (hereinafter Anthon) (US 20030026302 A1) supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” (Dated 10/2020) in view of Berger et al. (hereinafter Berger) (US 20020164125 A1).
Examiner notes that paragraph [0036] of Anthon discloses that the tuning element [50] may be any of a variety of filters disclosed in a cited application Anthon labels as “the Frequency Tuning Application” which is cited in this office action as “Berger” (US 20020164125 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Anthon discloses in Fig. 2A
A discretely tunable laser system [Fig. 2A] (Para. [0019]) comprising:
a continuously tunable laser [20] (Paras. [0027,0028]) configured to output a beam tunable among a plurality of selectable frequencies (Para. [0028]), each of the plurality of selectable frequencies being separated in frequency by a plurality of discrete frequency intervals, the plurality of discrete frequency intervals including a maximum frequency interval and a minimum frequency interval, wherein a difference between the maximum frequency interval and the minimum frequency interval is 100 MHz or less (Paras. [0027,0028] See note below); and
an external stabilization circuit [Fig. 2A] (Para. [0035]) optically coupled to the continuously tunable laser [20] (Para. [0030]) and electrically coupled to a controller [23] (Para. [0035]), the controller controlling the tuning of the continuously tunable laser [20] among the plurality of selectable frequencies (Para. [0034]), the external stabilization circuit comprising:
a first tap [44] (Para. [0035]) configured to split the beam into a first beam [27’’] (Para. 0035]) and a second beam [27’] (Para. [0035]),
a second tap [47] (Para. [0036]) configured to split the second beam [27’] into a third beam [49] (Para. [0036]) and a fourth beam [48] (Para. [0036]),
a first photodiode [61] (Para. [0037]) configured to generate a first electrical signal corresponding to a transmission power of the third beam (Para. [0037]),
a tuning element [50] (Para. [0036]) in a path of the fourth beam [48], the tuning element [50] generating a transmission beam [51] (Para. [0036]) from the fourth beam [48] (Para. [0036]) and
a second photodiode [52] (Para. [0036]) configured to generate a second electrical signal corresponding to a transmission power of the transmission beam [51] (Para. [0036]) from the tuning element [50],
wherein the controller [23] (Para. [0040]) is configured to:
generate one or more tuning signals for tuning the continuously tunable laser [20] to one of the plurality of selectable frequencies based on the first electrical signal and the second electrical signal (Paras. [0042,0052]), and
transmit the one or more tuning signals to the continuously tunable laser [20] thereby causing the continuously tunable laser to output another beam having the one of the plurality of selectable frequencies (Paras. [0042-0054]).
Anthon fails to disclose,
The tuning element being a Fabry-Perot interferometer configured to produce a plurality of resonances, the plurality of resonances equally spaced in frequency, each of the plurality of resonances defining one of a plurality of selectable frequencies,
Berger discloses in Figs. 4 and 5,
a Fabry-Perot interferometer [72 Berger Fig. 5] (Para. [0037]) configured to produce a plurality of resonances [Fig. 4 Berger] (Berger Para. [0038]), the plurality of resonances [Berger 84 Fig. 4] equally spaced in frequency [Berger Fig. 4] (Berger Paras. [0037,0038])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the Fabry-Perot interferometer of Berger as the tuning element of Anthon for the purpose of having an output power that is frequency dependent and has a multi-peaked transmission spectrum. (Berger Para. [0037])
Examiner notes that paragraph [0028] of Anthon discloses the laser source [21] may be locked to a grid of frequencies also known as the 50GHz ITU grid. It is known that 50GHz ITU grids must have a tolerance between respective maximum and minimum values of the frequency intervals as further shown in the example of Table 1 shown on Pages 2-5 of “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” (See PTO-892 form).
Regarding claim 2, Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger as applied to claim 1 above further discloses in Anthon,
wherein the one or more tuning signals adjust one or more tuning elements of the continuously tunable laser [20] for outputting the beam having the one of the plurality of selectable frequencies, (Paras. [0027,0028]) including at least one of a grating and/or a laser cavity length (Para. [0052]).
Regarding claim 7, Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger as applied to claim 1 above further discloses in Anthon
wherein the continuously tunable laser [20] (Para. [0028]) is a grating tuned laser (Paras. [0013,0032]), an etalon tuned laser, or a microelectromechanical system (MEMs) tunable vertical cavity surface emitting laser (VCSEL).
Examiner notes for the purposes of examination in the instant application, the interpretation of optional limitations of claim 7 is understood to be: “wherein the continuously tunable laser is a grating tuned laser.”
Regarding claim 9, Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger as applied to claim 1 above further discloses in Anthon
wherein the plurality of selectable frequencies comprises frequencies in a near-infrared band (Para. [0028]).
It is understood that the near-infrared band is a wavelength range of approximately 750nm to 2500nm
Claims 12,13 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anthon et al. (hereinafter Anthon) (US 20030026302 A1) supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” (Dated 10/2020) in view of Berger et al. (hereinafter Berger) (US 20020164125 A1) and further in view of Le-Gall et al. (hereinafter Le-Gall) (US 20020044286 A1)
Examiner notes that paragraph [0036] of Anthon discloses that the tuning element [50] may be any of a variety of filters disclosed in a cited application Anthon labels as “the Frequency Tuning Application” which is cited in this office action as “Berger” (US 20020164125 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Anthon discloses in Fig. 2A,
A discretely tunable laser system [Fig. 2A] (Para. [0019]) comprising:
a continuously tunable laser [20] (Paras. [0027,0028]) configured to output a beam tunable among a plurality of selectable frequencies (Para. [0028]), each of the plurality of selectable frequencies being separated in frequency by a plurality of discrete frequency intervals, the plurality of discrete frequency intervals including a maximum frequency interval and a minimum frequency interval, wherein a difference between the maximum frequency interval and the minimum frequency interval is 100 MHz or less (Paras. [0027,0028] See note below); and
an external stabilization circuit [Fig. 2A] (Para. [0035]) optically coupled to the continuously tunable laser [20] (Para. [0030]) and electrically coupled to a controller [23] (Para. [0035]), the controller controlling the tuning of the continuously tunable laser [20] among the plurality of selectable frequencies (Para. [0034]), the external stabilization circuit comprising:
a first tap [44] (Para. [0035]) configured to split the beam into a first beam [27’’] (Para. 0035]) and a second beam [27’] (Para. [0035]),
a tuning element [50] optically coupled to the second beam [27’], wherein the tuning element generates a transmission beam [51] (Para. [0036]) from the second beam [Anthon 27’ Fig. 2A],
a first photodiode [61] optically coupled to the tuning element [50] and (Para. [0036]),
a second photodiode [52] (Para. [0036]) optically coupled to the transmission beam [51] (Para. [0036]) from the tuning element [50] and configured to generate a second electrical signal corresponding to a transmission power of the transmission beam [51] (Para. [0036]),
wherein the controller [23] (Para. [0040]) is configured to:
generate one or more tuning signals for tuning the continuously tunable laser [20] to one of the plurality of selectable frequencies based on the first electrical signal and the second electrical signal (Paras. [0042,0052]), and
transmit the one or more tuning signals to the continuously tunable laser [20] thereby causing the continuously tunable laser to output another beam having the one of the plurality of selectable frequencies (Paras. [0042-0054]).
Anthon fails to disclose,
The tuning element being a Fabry-Perot interferometer configured to produce a plurality of resonances, the plurality of resonances equally spaced in frequency, each of the plurality of resonances defining one of a plurality of selectable frequencies,
Berger discloses in Figs. 4 and 5,
a Fabry-Perot interferometer [72 Berger Fig. 5] (Para. [0037]) configured to produce a plurality of resonances [Fig. 4 Berger] (Berger Para. [0038]), the plurality of resonances [Berger 84 Fig. 4] equally spaced in frequency [Berger Fig. 4] (Berger Paras. [0037,0038])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the Fabry-Perot interferometer of Berger as the tuning element of Anthon for the purpose of having an output power that is frequency dependent and has a multi-peaked transmission spectrum. (Berger Para. [0037])
Examiner notes that paragraph [0028] of Anthon discloses the laser source [21] may be locked to a grid of frequencies also known as the 50GHz ITU grid. It is known that 50GHz ITU grids must have a tolerance between respective maximum and minimum values of the frequency intervals as further shown in the example of Table 1 shown on Pages 2-5 of “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” (See PTO-892 form).
Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger fails to disclose,
The interferometer producing a reflection beam and, the first photodiode optically coupled to the interferometer through a second tap configured to direct the reflection beam from the Fabry-Perot interferometer to the first photodiode, the first photodiode configured to generate a first electrical signal corresponding to a reflected power of the reflection beam reflected by the Fabry- Perot interferometer,
Le-Gall discloses in Fig. 7,
an interferometer [74] (Para. [0030]) producing a transmission and reflection beam (Para. [0030]) and, a tap [73] (Para. [0030]) configured to direct the reflection beam from the interferometer [74] to a photodiode [P3] (Paras. [0030,0032]) configured to generate an electrical signal corresponding to a reflected power of the reflection beam reflected by the interferometer [74] (Para. [0032])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the Fabry Perot interferometer emitting a transmission and reflection beam and tap configured to direct the reflection beam as shown in Le-Gall into the modified device of Anthon for the purpose of being able to read the intensity of both transmission and reflection signals from the interferometer. (Le-Gall Paras. [0030,0031])
Regarding claim 13, Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger and Le-Gall as applied to claim 12 above further discloses in Anthon
wherein the one or more tuning signals adjust one or more tuning elements of the continuously tunable laser [20] for outputting the beam having the one of the plurality of selectable frequencies (Paras. [0027,0028]) including at least one of a grating and/or a laser cavity length (Paras. [0027,0028,0052]).
Regarding claim 18, Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger and Le-Gall as applied to claim 12 above further discloses in Anthon
wherein the continuously tunable laser [20] (Para. [0028]) is a grating tuned laser (Paras. [0013,0032]), an etalon tuned laser, or a microelectromechanical system (MEMs) tunable vertical cavity surface emitting laser (VCSEL).
Examiner notes for the purposes of examination in the instant application, the interpretation of optional limitations of claim 18 is understood to be: “wherein the continuously tunable laser is a grating tuned laser.”
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Tei et al. (hereinafter Tei) (US 6144025 A)
Regarding claim 3, Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above but fails to disclose,
wherein the controller implements a proportional-integral-derivative (PID) controller configured to control the one or more tuning signals by minimizing an error signal, wherein the error signal is a difference between the second electrical signal corresponding to the transmission power of the transmission beam from the Fabry-Perot interferometer and an amplitude adjusted first electrical signal of the first electrical signal corresponding to the transmission power of the third beam.
Tei discloses in Fig. 2,
a PID controller [18] configured to control a tuning signal by minimizing an error signal (Col.4, lines 45-47), wherein the error signal is a difference between electrical signals of a first [PD1] and second photodiode [PD1] (Col. 4, lines 43-45)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement a PID controller minimizing an error signal as shown in Tei with the first and second photodiodes of Anthon for the purpose of controlling the emission wavelength of the laser light to a specified value. (Tei Col. 4, lines 47-56)
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger and Tei as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Maleki et al. (hereinafter Maleki) (US 20090210629 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger and Tei discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 3 above but fails to disclose,
a differential amplifier configured to receive the amplitude adjusted first electrical signal and the second electrical signal and, in response, generate the error signal.
Maleki discloses in Fig. 1B,
a differential amplifier [121] (Para. [0017]) generating an error signal from a first and second electrical signal (Para. [0017])
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 differential amplifier as disclosed in Maleki to create the error signal in the modified device of Anthon for the purpose of amplifying the error signal.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger and Tei as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Yry (US 5189677 A) and Harker (US 2003009265 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger and Tei further discloses in Anthon Fig. 2A,
a second tuning signal [31] for adjusting a cavity length tuning element of the tunable laser [20] (Paras. [0040,0041,0052])
The modified device of Anthon fails to disclose,
wherein the external stabilization circuit further comprises a third photodiode optically coupled to the transmission beam from the Fabry-Perot interferometer and configured to generate a third electrical signal corresponding to the transmission power of the transmission beam,
wherein the controller is further configured to:
receive the third electrical signal, and
implement a second PID controller configured to generate a tuning signal for adjusting a cavity length tuning element of the continuously tunable laser based on addition of an RMS value of the third electrical signal and the error signal.
Yry discloses in Fig. 1,
a transmission beam of a Fabry-Perot Interferometer [3] split to a first photodiode [13] and a second photodiode [23] (Col. 3, lines 34-39)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement splitting of a transmission beam of an interferometer as shown in Yry with the transmission beam to of the modified device of Anthon for the purpose of having two separate photodiode signal readings for the transmission beam.
Anthon in view of Tei and Yry fails to disclose,
Implementing a second PID controller to generate a tuning signal for adjusting a cavity length tuning element of the tunable laser
Harker discloses
The use of a PID controller to influence the generation of light of a laser where more than one current is applied to the laser (Para. [0032])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement a PID controller as disclosed in Harker to generate the tuning signal for adjusting the cavity length as disclosed in the modified device of Anthon for the purpose of ensuring the wavelength of light remains at a required wavelength. (Harker Para. [0032])
Examiner notes that Anthon discloses a tuning signal [32] from the control unit [23] for influencing the cavity length that is based on the difference of the power, course and fine tuning signals from the stabilization circuit (Paras. [0045-0052])
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger and Le-Gall as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Tei et al. (hereinafter Tei) (US 6144025 A).
Regarding claim 14, Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger and Le-Gall discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 12 above but fails to disclose,
wherein the controller implements a proportional-integral-derivative (PID) controller configured to control the one or more tuning signals by minimizing an error signal, wherein the error signal is a difference between the second electrical signal corresponding to the transmission power of the transmission beam from the Fabry-Perot interferometer and an amplitude adjusted first electrical signal of the first electrical signal corresponding to the transmission power of the third beam.
Tei discloses in Fig. 2,
a PID controller [18] configured to control a tuning signal by minimizing an error signal (Col.4, lines 45-47), wherein the error signal is a difference between electrical signals of a first [PD1] and second photodiode [PD1] (Col. 4, lines 43-45)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement a PID controller minimizing an error signal as shown in Tei with the first and second photodiodes of Anthon for the purpose of controlling the emission wavelength of the laser light to a specified value. (Tei Col. 4, lines 47-56)
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger and Le-Gall and Tei as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Maleki et al. (hereinafter Maleki) (US 20090210629 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger and Le-Gall and Tei discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 14 above but fails to disclose,
a differential amplifier configured to receive the amplitude adjusted first electrical signal and the second electrical signal and, in response, generate the error signal.
Maleki discloses in Fig. 1B,
a differential amplifier [121] (Para. [0017]) generating an error signal from a first and second electrical signal (Para. [0017])
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 differential amplifier as disclosed in Maleki to create the error signal in the modified device of Anthon for the purpose of amplifying the error signal.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid in view of Berger and Le-Gall and Tei as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Yry (US 5189677 A) and Harker (US 2003009265 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger and Le-Gall and Tei further discloses in Anthon Fig. 2A,
a second tuning signal [31] for adjusting a cavity length tuning element of the tunable laser [20] (Paras. [0040,0041,0052])
The modified device of Anthon fails to disclose,
wherein the external stabilization circuit further comprises a third photodiode optically coupled to the transmission beam from the Fabry-Perot interferometer and configured to generate a third electrical signal corresponding to the transmission power of the transmission beam,
wherein the controller is further configured to:
receive the third electrical signal, and
implement a second PID controller configured to generate a tuning signal for adjusting a cavity length tuning element of the continuously tunable laser based on addition of an RMS value of the third electrical signal and the error signal.
Yry discloses in Fig. 1,
a transmission beam of a Fabry-Perot Interferometer [3] split to a first photodiode [13] and a second photodiode [23] (Col. 3, lines 34-39)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement splitting of a transmission beam of an interferometer as shown in Yry with the transmission beam to of the modified device of Anthon for the purpose of having two separate photodiode signal readings for the transmission beam.
Anthon in view of Tei and Yry fails to disclose,
Implementing a second PID controller to generate a tuning signal for adjusting a cavity length tuning element of the tunable laser
Harker discloses
The use of a PID controller to influence the generation of light of a laser where more than one current is applied to the laser (Para. [0032])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement a PID controller as disclosed in Harker to generate the tuning signal for adjusting the cavity length as disclosed in the modified device of Anthon for the purpose of ensuring the wavelength of light remains at a required wavelength. (Harker Para. [0032])
Examiner notes that Anthon discloses a tuning signal [32] from the control unit [23] for influencing the cavity length that is based on the difference of the power, course and fine tuning signals from the stabilization circuit (Paras. [0045-0052])
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger and further in view of Kupershmidt et al. (hereinafter Kupershmidt) (US 20050220458 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above but fails to disclose,
an isolator optically coupled to the continuously tunable laser and the first tap enabling transmission of light in one direction, from the continuously tunable laser toward the first tap.
Kupershmidt discloses in Fig. 1a,
an isolator positioned between a laser and a tap (Para. [0060])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement an isolator between as laser and a tap as shown in Kupershmidt into the device of Anthon for the purpose of preventing optical power from coupling back into the laser cavity. (Kupershmidt Para. [0060])
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Pedersen et al. (hereinafter Pedersen) (US 20150029515 A1)
Regarding claim 8, Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above but fails to disclose,
wherein the Fabry-Perot interferometer is air spaced.
Pedersen discloses,
An air spaced Fabry-Perot interferometer (Para. [0022])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the air spaced interferometer of Pedersen into the device of Anthon for the purpose of having a compact sized interferometer. (Pedersen para. [0022])
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger and Le-Gall as applied to claim 12 above and further in view of Pedersen et al. (hereinafter Pedersen) (US 20150029515 A1)
Regarding claim 19, Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger and Le-Gall discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 12 above but fails to disclose,
wherein the Fabry-Perot interferometer is air spaced.
Pedersen discloses,
An air spaced Fabry-Perot interferometer (Para. [0022])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the air spaced interferometer of Pedersen into the modified device of Anthon for the purpose of having a compact sized interferometer. (Pedersen para. [0022])
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Short (US 20030081637 A1)
Regarding claim 11, Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above but fails to disclose,
wherein a power of the first beam is greater than a power of the second beam.
Short discloses,
a power of a first beam [24] that is greater than a power of a second beam [beam to detectors 22] (Para. [0028])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement a first output beam having a higher power than a second beam as disclosed in Short with the beams of Anthon for the purpose of having more power directed to the output beam of the device. (Short Para. [0028])
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger and Le-Gall as applied to claim 12 above and further in view of Kupershmidt et al. (hereinafter Kupershmidt) (US 20050220458 A1)
Regarding claim 17, Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger and Le-Gall discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 12 above but fails to disclose,
an isolator optically coupled to the continuously tunable laser and the first tap enabling transmission of light in one direction, from the continuously tunable laser toward the first tap.
Kupershmidt discloses in Fig. 1a,
an isolator positioned between a laser and a tap (Para. [0060])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement an isolator between as laser and a tap as shown in Kupershmidt into the modified device of Anthon for the purpose of preventing optical power from coupling back into the laser cavity. (Kupershmidt Para. [0060])
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kozlovsky et al. (hereinafter Kozlovsky) (US 5077748 A).
Regarding claim 10, Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above but fails to disclose,
wherein the plurality of selectable frequencies comprises frequencies between 272 THz to 430 THz.
Kozlovsky discloses,
a resonator [40 Fig. 2A] with a plurality of frequencies occurring at 10GHz intervals near 349THz (Col. 5, lines 55-62)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to operate the resonator of Anthon including the disclosed frequencies of Kozlovsky for the purpose of allowing the resonator to operate in a wavelength range of 750-860nm. (Kozlovsky Col. 1, lines 12-15)
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger and of Le-Gall as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Kozlovsky et al. (hereinafter Kozlovsky).
Regarding claim 20, Anthon supported by “Spectral grids for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid” in view of Berger and Le-Gall discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 12 above but fails to disclose,
wherein the plurality of selectable frequencies comprises frequencies between 272 THz to 430 THz.
Kozlovsky discloses,
a resonator [40 Fig. 2A] with a plurality of frequencies occurring at 10GHz intervals near 349THz (Col. 5, lines 55-62)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to operate the resonator of Anthon including the disclosed frequencies of Kozlovsky for the purpose of allowing the resonator to operate in a wavelength range of 750-860nm. (Kozlovsky Col. 1, lines 12-15)
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNTER J NELSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5318. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8:30am-5:00 ET.
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, MinSun Harvey can be reached at (571) 272-1835. 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.
/H.J.N./Examiner, Art Unit 2828 /TOD T VAN ROY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828