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 .
DETAILED OFFICE ACTION
Status of Claims:
Claim 1 is pending examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
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.
1. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103(a) as being unpatentable over Maleki et al. (USPUB 20080075464) in view of Hasegawa ( USPUB 20110001959).
As per claim 1, Maleki et al. teaches An RF pulse generator comprising: first and second lasers respectively generating first and second RF optical tones at first and second frequencies that are offset from one another by a set difference ( Fig. 1- First and Second Lasers ( 101 & 102) AND Paragraphs [0006-0007]- “… first and second lasers are phase locked relative to each other. A phase locking unit can be provided in this device
to lock the first and second lasers in phase and to control a difference between the first laser frequency and the second laser frequency to tune the output frequency of the receiver output signal….”) ; an optical combiner in optical communication with the first and second lasers to receive and combine the first and second optical tones to provide an optical signal comprising the combination of the first and second optical tones ( Fig. 1- Optical coupler ( 140) , Paragraph [0027]- “…The optical coupler 140 is designed to combine the beams 192 and 194 together to produce a combined beam 195. The optical detector 150 is used to receive the combined beam 195 and converts the received light into the receiver output signal 160 at an output signal frequency f.sub.out….”) ;
Maleki et al. does not explicitly teach an optical switch in optical communication with the optical combiner configured to pass the optical signal when in an on state and to block the optical signal when in an off state; an electrical signal generator configured to provide a periodic electrical signal to the optical switch to regularly switch the optical switch between the on state and the off state, wherein the optical switch passes the optical signal in the on state and blocks the optical signal in the off state to output a pulsed optical signal comprising a periodic sequence of optical pulses; and a photodetector in optical communication with the optical switch to receive the pulsed optical signal to generate a pulsed RF electrical signal comprising a periodic sequence of RF pulses, each RF pulse being generated by a corresponding optical pulse and having an RF frequency equal to the set difference.
However, within analogous art, Hasegawa teaches an optical switch in optical communication with the optical combiner configured to pass the optical signal when in an on state and to block the optical signal when in an off state ( Paragraph [0048]- “…the polarization modulator 46 is provided on the optical path of the reference light between the optical splitter 43 and the combiner 51. The polarization modulator 46 receives the reference light output from the optical splitter 43, and outputs the reference light after changing the polarization state thereof. In the case of detecting light due to interference between reflected light and reference light, …”) ; an electrical signal generator configured to provide a periodic electrical signal to the optical switch to regularly switch the optical switch between the on state and the off state ( Paragraph [0052]- “…The electric signal gate 54 receives the electrical signal gate signal D that has been output from the signal generator 65, as well as the electrical signal that has passed through the first filter 53. The electrical signal gate signal D is a periodic signal having pulses with the gate width w2 at the constant period T. The period T of the electrical signal gate signal D is equal to the period T of the probe light gate signal C….”) , wherein the optical switch passes the optical signal in the on state and blocks the optical signal in the off state to output a pulsed optical signal comprising a periodic sequence of optical pulses ( Paragraph [0043]- “The probe light gate 44 receives the probe light output from the optical coupler 43 and also receives probe light gate signal C output from the signal generator 64. The probe light gate signal C is a periodic signal having a pulse of a gate width w1 at the constant period T. The gate width w1 is approximately equal to the modulation period of the direct modulation signal A…” AND Paragraph [0065-0067]) ; and a photodetector in optical communication with the optical switch to receive the pulsed optical signal to generate a pulsed RF electrical signal comprising a periodic sequence of RF pulses ( Paragraphs [0019-0021]- “…, the detecting part may include a photoelectric converter which outputs an electrical signal having a value corresponding to the intensity of the interference light, and an electric signal gate which receives electrical signals output from the photoelectric converter and outputs the electrical signals selectively during a period of second gate width w2 at a constant period T. It is preferable that the period p, the first gate width w1 and the second gate width w2,…”) , each RF pulse being generated by a corresponding optical pulse and having an RF frequency equal to the set difference ( Paragraph [0050]- “… the balanced detector 52 functions as a photoelectric converter which outputs an electrical signal with a value according to the intensity of the interference light.”) .
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teaching of Hasegawa within the modified teaching of the Wideband receiver based on photonics technology mentioned by Maleki et al. because the Optical fibre circuit monitoring system and monitoring device included in this system mentioned by Hasegawa provides a method and system for implementation of effective monitoring of optical signal within fiber lines.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one in the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the Optical fibre circuit monitoring system and monitoring device included in this system mentioned by Hasegawa within the Wideband receiver based on photonics technology mentioned by Maleki et al. for implementing a system and method for effective monitoring of optical signal within fiber lines.
It is noted that any citations to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the reference should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2123.
Conclusion
2. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR S ISMAIL whose telephone number is (571)272-9799 and Fax # is (571)273-9799. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00am-6:00pm.
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 C. Payne can be reached on ((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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free)? If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/OMAR S ISMAIL/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2635