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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1, 9, 21, 22, 23, 26, 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable US 20200249121 A1 (hereinafter He), and in view of US10591385B2 (hereinafter Perron).
Regarding claim 1, He teaches an apparatus for polarity detection of a cabling-under-test, the apparatus comprising: a first port comprising a first plurality of optical fibers (fig. 10B element 506; para [0067] lines 1-6), the first plurality of optical fibers operably coupled to receive light from a light source (fig. 5 element 508; para [0067] lines 1-6; or fig. 6 para [0076]); a second port comprising a second plurality of optical fibers (fig. 10B element 512; para [0068] lines 1-6), the second plurality of optical fibers operably coupled to an optical power meter (fig. 10B element 514; para [0068] lines 1-6); a test cable operably coupling the first port and the second port to the cabling-under-test (fig. 10B element 560; para [0093] lines 1-7), “the cabling-under-test configured to operably couple the first port and the light source to the second port and the optical power meter” (this is shown in fig. 10B); and “a controller, the controller configured to store instructions that, when executed by one or more processing devices, performs operations” (figs. 8 and 12), the operations comprising; transmitting light from the light source (para [0081]); adjusting a light signal parameter of the light, wherein adjusting the light signal parameter of the light comprises electronically adjusting a modulation frequency of the light (para [0075]); obtaining a fiber output light signal parameter pattern of the cabling-under-test based on the numerical data array representing patterned variations of output light signal parameter between fibers (para [0105] lines 5-17; the numerical data refers to type A-C arrangement similar to fig. 16B of the instant application).
He fails to teach a light splitter assembly configured to split the light from the light source into the first plurality of optical fibers of the first port; generating a light signal parameter polarity pattern template based on a numerical data array representing patterned variations of light signal parameter between fibers at the first port; “comparing an output light signal parameter pattern of the cabling-under-test with the light signal parameter polarity pattern template”; and
determining the polarity of the cabling-under-test based at least on a best-fit of the output light signal parameter pattern to the polarity pattern template, wherein determining the polarity of the cabling-under-test comprises: determining a correlation coefficient between the obtained fiber light signal parameter pattern of the cabling-under-test and the light signal parameter polarity pattern template; and identifying the highest correlation coefficient to determine the polarity of the cabling-under-test.
Perron, from the same field of endeavor as Perron, teaches a light splitter assembly configured to split the light from the light source into the first plurality of optical fibers of the first port (col 10 lines 40-49); generating a light signal parameter polarity pattern template based on a numerical data array representing patterned variations of light signal parameter between fibers at the first port (col 11 lines 55-62; the numerical data array is Table I); “comparing an output light signal parameter pattern of the cabling-under-test with the light signal parameter polarity pattern template” (col 9 lines 15-24; col 20 lines 29-40, the algorithms maps the cabling-under-test with Table I); determining the polarity of the cabling-under-test based at least on a best-fit of the output light signal parameter pattern to the polarity pattern template, wherein determining the polarity of the cabling-under-test (col 9 lines 15-24) comprises: determining “a correlation coefficient between the obtained fiber light signal parameter pattern of the cabling-under-test and the light signal parameter polarity pattern template; and identifying the highest correlation coefficient to determine the polarity of the cabling-under-test” (col 9 lines 15-24, col 9 lines 25-45; the highest correlation coefficient represents overall polarity of the cabling-under-test that is closest Table I). Note also, the entire limitation “wherein determining the polarity of the cabling-under-test comprises: determining a correlation coefficient between the obtained fiber light signal parameter pattern of the cabling-under-test and the light signal parameter polarity pattern template; and identifying the highest correlation coefficient to determine the polarity of the cabling-under-test” is also disclose by US20150124246A1; the highest coefficient is equated to the matching in the database. See evidentiary reference US20200279383A1 matching or mapping the overall pattern using the highest coefficient (para [0094] lines 18-28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Perron to He to have a light splitter assembly configured to split the light from the light source into the first plurality of optical fibers of the first port; generating a light signal parameter polarity pattern template based on a numerical data array representing patterned variations of light signal parameter between fibers at the first port; “comparing an output light signal parameter pattern of the cabling-under-test with the light signal parameter polarity pattern template”; and determining the polarity of the cabling-under-test based at least on a best-fit of the output light signal parameter pattern to the polarity pattern template, wherein determining the polarity of the cabling-under-test comprises: determining a correlation coefficient between the obtained fiber light signal parameter pattern of the cabling-under-test and the light signal parameter polarity pattern template; and identifying the highest correlation coefficient to determine the polarity of the cabling-under-test in order to have a reliable and accurate techniques for optical fiber characterization (col 1 lines 23-25).
Regarding claim 9, He does not teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein adjusting a signal parameter of the light comprises optically or electronically adjusting a power level of the light split by a splitter.
Perron, from the same field of endeavor as He, teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein adjusting a signal parameter of the light comprises optically or electronically adjusting a power level of the light split by a splitter (col 10 lines 45-49).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Perron to He to have the apparatus of claim 1, wherein adjusting a signal parameter of the light comprises optically or electronically adjusting a power level of the light split by a splitter in order to split the test light to all optical fibers from a single optical source (col 10 lines 45-49).
Regarding claim 21, He does not teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the plurality of light sources is fewer than the first plurality of fibers at the first port or the second plurality of fibers at the second port.
Perron, from the same field of endeavor as He, teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the plurality of light sources is fewer than the first plurality of fibers at the first port (Fig. 4 shows 3 light sources, col 10 lines 26-29) or the second plurality of fibers at the second port.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Perron to He to have the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the plurality of light sources is fewer than the first plurality of fibers at the first port or the second plurality of fibers at the second port in order to reduce the overall cost of the device.
Regarding claim 22, He teaches the apparatus of claim 21, wherein the light source comprises three light sources operably coupled to the first plurality of fibers at the first port (fig. 10B element LS1-12; there are more than 3 light sources).
Regarding claim 23, He does not teach the apparatus of claim 21, the apparatus comprising: a light splitting assembly configured to distribute light from the plurality of light sources to the first plurality of optical fibers at the first port or the second plurality of optical fibers at the second port.
Perron, from the same field of endeavor as He, teaches the apparatus of claim 21, the apparatus comprising: a light splitting assembly configured to distribute light from the plurality of light sources to the first plurality of optical fibers at the first port (“power splitter”, col 10 lines 45-49) or the second plurality of optical fibers at the second port.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Perron to He to have the apparatus of claim 21, the apparatus comprising: a light splitting assembly configured to distribute light from the plurality of light sources to the first plurality of optical fibers at the first port or the second plurality of optical fibers at the second port in order to split the test light to all optical fibers from a single optical source (col 10 lines 45-49).
Regarding claim 26, He does not teach the apparatus of claim 21, wherein adjusting a signal parameter of the light comprises optically or electronically adjusting a power level of the light split by the light splitter assembly.
Perron, from the same field of endeavor as He, teaches the apparatus of claim 21, wherein adjusting a signal parameter of the light comprises optically or electronically adjusting a power level of the light split by the light splitter assembly (“power splitter”, col 10 lines 45-49; the power splitter controls the power level of the device).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Perron to He to have the apparatus of claim 21, wherein adjusting a signal parameter of the light comprises optically or electronically adjusting a power level of the light split by the light splitter assembly in order to split the test light to all optical fibers from a single optical source (col 10 lines 45-49).
Regarding claim 27, He does not teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the light source comprises a single light source configured for single, dual or multiple wavelengths, and wherein a light splitting assembly is configured to distribute light to N quantity of first fibers, wherein N is the maximum fiber position number of a connector operably coupled to the N quantity of first fibers.
Perron, from the same field of endeavor as He, teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the light source comprises a single light source configured for single, dual or multiple wavelengths, and wherein a light splitting assembly is configured to distribute light to N quantity of first fibers, wherein N is the maximum fiber position number of a connector operably coupled to the N quantity of first fibers (col 10 lines 45-49).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Perron to He to have the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the light source comprises a single light source configured for single, dual or multiple wavelengths, and wherein a light splitting assembly is configured to distribute light to N quantity of first fibers, wherein N is the maximum fiber position number of a connector operably coupled to the N quantity of first fibers in order to reduce the overall cost of the device.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He and Perron as applied to claim(s) 1 above, and further in view of Wong, R. et al., US 5062703 A (hereinafter Wong).
Regarding claim 2, the modified device of He fails to teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein adjusting a signal parameter of the light comprises electronically or optically adjusting a modulation frequency, a pulse repetition rate, or a digital signal formations of the light split by a splitter.
Wong, from the same field of endeavor as He, teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein adjusting a signal parameter of the light comprises electronically or optically adjusting a modulation frequency, a pulse repetition rate, or a digital signal formations of the light split by a splitter (fig. 4 element 14 electronically or optically adjusting a modulation frequency, col 7 lines 26-28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Wong to the modified device of He to have the apparatus of claim 1, wherein adjusting a signal parameter of the light comprises electronically or optically adjusting a modulation frequency, a pulse repetition rate, or a digital signal formations of the light split by a splitter in order to obtain time-domain data are both stable and accurate, since they are calculated from highly-stable, high-precise frequency-domain information (Abstract lines 10-13).
Claim(s) 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He and Perron as applied to claim(s) 1 above, and further in view of US20150124246A1 (hereinafter Collier).
Regarding claim 3, the modified device of He does not teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein: comparing the output optical signal parameter pattern of the cabling-under-test with the polarity pattern template comprises comparing a fiber digital signature pattern of the cabling- under-test with the polarity pattern template; and wherein determining the polarity of the cabling-under-test based at least on a best-fit of the output optical signal parameter pattern to the polarity pattern template comprises determining the polarity of the cabling-under-test based at least on a best-fit of the fiber digital signature pattern to a polarity template. Regarding claim 4, the modified device of He does not teach the apparatus of claim 1, the operations comprising: obtaining a fiber digital signature pattern of the cabling-under-test; and generating a numerical data array corresponding to the fiber digital signal pattern. Regarding claim 5, the modified device of He does not teach the apparatus of claim 4, the operations comprising: generating a polarity pattern template; and generating a numerical data array corresponding to the polarity pattern template.
Collier, from the same field of endeavor as He, teaches “the apparatus of claim 1, wherein: comparing the output optical signal parameter pattern of the cabling-under-test with the polarity pattern template comprises comparing a fiber digital signature pattern of the cabling- under-test with the polarity pattern template; and wherein determining the polarity of the cabling-under-test based at least on a best-fit of the output optical signal parameter pattern to the polarity pattern template comprises determining the polarity of the cabling-under-test based at least on a best-fit of the fiber digital signature pattern to a polarity template” (this entire limitation is disclosed in para [0043]; the best-fit corresponds to the matching in the database), the apparatus of claim 1, the operations comprising: obtaining a fiber digital signature pattern of the cabling-under-test; and generating a numerical data array corresponding to the fiber digital signal pattern (the database have the data array, para [0043]), the apparatus of claim 4, the operations comprising: generating a polarity pattern template; and generating a numerical data array corresponding to the polarity pattern template (the database have the data array, para [0043]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Collier to the modified device of He, to have the apparatus of claim 1, wherein: comparing the output optical signal parameter pattern of the cabling-under-test with the polarity pattern template comprises comparing a fiber digital signature pattern of the cabling- under-test with the polarity pattern template; and wherein determining the polarity of the cabling-under-test based at least on a best-fit of the output optical signal parameter pattern to the polarity pattern template comprises determining the polarity of the cabling-under-test based at least on a best-fit of the fiber digital signature pattern to a polarity template, the apparatus of claim 1, the operations comprising: obtaining a fiber digital signature pattern of the cabling-under-test; and generating a numerical data array corresponding to the fiber digital signal pattern, the apparatus of claim 4, the operations comprising: generating a polarity pattern template; and generating a numerical data array corresponding to the polarity pattern template in order to determine the fiber polarity with high accuracy.
Regarding claim 6, the modified device of He does not teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein determining the polarity of the cabling- under-test comprises: determining a correlation coefficient between the obtained fiber digital signature pattern of the cabling-under-test and the polarity pattern template. Regarding claim 7, He does not teach the apparatus of claim 6, wherein determining the polarity of the cabling- under-test comprises: identifying the highest correlation coefficient to determine the polarity of the cabling- under-test.
Collier, from the same field of endeavor as He, teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein determining the polarity of the cabling- under-test comprises: determining a correlation coefficient between the obtained fiber digital signature pattern of the cabling-under-test and the polarity pattern template (this entire limitation is disclosed in para [0043]; the best-fit corresponds to the matching in the database; see evidentiary reference US20200279383A1 matching the overall pattern using the highest coefficient (para [0094] lines 18-28), the apparatus of claim 6, wherein determining the polarity of the cabling- under-test comprises: identifying the highest correlation coefficient to determine the polarity of the cabling- under-test (this entire limitation is disclosed in para [0043]; the best-fit corresponds to the matching in the database; see evidentiary reference US20200279383A1 matching the overall pattern using the highest coefficient (para [0094] lines 18-28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Collier to He, when modified by Perron, to have teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein determining the polarity of the cabling- under-test comprises: determining a correlation coefficient between the obtained fiber digital signature pattern of the cabling-under-test and the polarity pattern template, the apparatus of claim 6, wherein determining the polarity of the cabling- under-test comprises: identifying the highest correlation coefficient to determine the polarity of the cabling- under-test in order to determine the fiber polarity with high accuracy.
Regarding claim 10, the modified device of He does not teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein: comparing the output optical signal parameter pattern of the cabling-under-test with the polarity pattern template comprises comparing an output power pattern of the cabling-under-test with the polarity pattern template; and determining the polarity of the cabling-under-test based at least on a best-fit of the output optical signal parameter pattern to the polarity pattern template comprises determining the polarity of the cabling-under-test based at least on a best-fit of the output power pattern to the polarity template.
Collier, from the same field of endeavor as He, teaches “the apparatus of claim 1, wherein: comparing the output optical signal parameter pattern of the cabling-under-test with the polarity pattern template comprises comparing an output power pattern of the cabling-under-test with the polarity pattern template; and determining the polarity of the cabling-under-test based at least on a best-fit of the output optical signal parameter pattern to the polarity pattern template comprises determining the polarity of the cabling-under-test based at least on a best-fit of the output power pattern to the polarity template” (this entire limitation is disclosed in para [0043]; the best-fit corresponds to the matching in the database; see evidentiary reference US20200279383A1 matching the overall pattern using the highest coefficient (para [0094] lines 18-28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Collier to He, when modified by Perron, to have “the apparatus of claim 1, wherein: comparing the output optical signal parameter pattern of the cabling-under-test with the polarity pattern template comprises comparing an output power pattern of the cabling-under-test with the polarity pattern template; and determining the polarity of the cabling-under-test based at least on a best-fit of the output optical signal parameter pattern to the polarity pattern template comprises determining the polarity of the cabling-under-test based at least on a best-fit of the output power pattern to the polarity template” in order to determine the fiber polarity with high accuracy.
Regarding claim 11, the modified device of He does not teach the apparatus of claim 1, the operations comprising: obtaining a reference output power to generate a polarity power pattern template; and obtaining an output power pattern of the cabling-under-test; and generating the power polarity pattern template.
Collier, from the same field of endeavor as He, teaches “the apparatus of claim 1, the operations comprising: obtaining a reference output power to generate a polarity power pattern template; and obtaining an output power pattern of the cabling-under-test; and generating the power polarity pattern template” (the reference output power corresponds to the database of the fiber sequence, in para [0043]; the best-fit corresponds to the matching in the database; see evidentiary reference US20200279383A1 matching the overall pattern using the highest coefficient (para [0094] lines 18-28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Collier to He, when modified by Perron, to have “the apparatus of claim 1, the operations comprising: obtaining a reference output power to generate a polarity power pattern template; and obtaining an output power pattern of the cabling-under-test; and generating the power polarity pattern template” in order to determine the fiber polarity with high accuracy.
Regarding claim 13, the modified device of He does not teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein determining the polarity of the cabling-under-test comprises: determining a correlation coefficient between the obtained output power pattern of the cabling-under-test and the polarity power pattern template; and identifying the highest correlation coefficient to determine the polarity of the cabling- under-test.
Collier, from the same field of endeavor as He, teaches “the apparatus of claim 1, wherein determining the polarity of the cabling-under-test comprises: determining a correlation coefficient between the obtained output power pattern of the cabling-under-test and the polarity power pattern template; and identifying the highest correlation coefficient to determine the polarity of the cabling- under-test” (para [0043]; the best-fit corresponds to the matching in the database; see evidentiary reference US20200279383A1 matching the overall pattern using the highest coefficient (para [0094] lines 18-28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Collier to He, when modified by Perron, to have “the apparatus of claim 1, wherein determining the polarity of the cabling-under-test comprises: determining a correlation coefficient between the obtained output power pattern of the cabling-under-test and the polarity power pattern template; and identifying the highest correlation coefficient to determine the polarity of the cabling- under-test” in order to determine the fiber polarity with high accuracy.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He and Perron as applied to claim(s) 1 above, and further in view of Žuti and A. Kompanć, "Testing optical splitters," 2014 37th International Convention on Information and Communication Technology, Electronics and Microelectronics (MIPRO), Opatija, Croatia, 2014, pp. 1650-1653, doi: 10.1109/MIPRO.2014.6859831 (hereinafter Zuti).
Regarding claim 18, He does not teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the light source comprises a plurality of light sources operably coupled to the first plurality of fibers at the first port, wherein the plurality of light sources is fewer than the first plurality of fibers at the first port or the second plurality of fibers at the second port, and wherein the apparatus comprises: a plurality of planar light circuit splitters operably coupled to the first plurality of fibers or the second plurality of fibers, the plurality of planar light circuit splitters configured to generate a plurality of distinct power, frequency, or wavelength levels.
Perron, from the same field of endeavor as He, teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the light source comprises a plurality of light sources (Fig. 4 shows 3 light sources, col 10 lines 26-29) operably coupled to the first plurality of fibers at the first port (fig. 4 shows element 26 is connected to element 34), “wherein the plurality of light sources is fewer than the first plurality of fibers at the first port or the second plurality of fibers at the second port” (fig. 4 shows the fibers are more than the light sources).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Perron to He to have the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the light source comprises a plurality of light sources operably coupled to the first plurality of fibers at the first port, “wherein the plurality of light sources is fewer than the first plurality of fibers at the first port or the second plurality of fibers at the second port” in order to reduce the overall cost of the device.
He, when modified by Perron, fails to teach wherein the apparatus comprises: a plurality of planar light circuit splitters operably coupled to the first plurality of fibers or the second plurality of fibers, the plurality of planar light circuit splitters configured to generate a plurality of distinct power, frequency, or wavelength levels.
Zuti, from the same field of endeavor as Perron, teaches wherein the apparatus comprises: a plurality of planar light circuit splitters operably coupled to the first plurality of fibers or the second plurality of fibers, the plurality of planar light circuit splitters configured to generate a plurality of distinct power, frequency, or wavelength levels (this is shown in fig. 1, fig. 4 p. 3 col 2 para 5, this is a general teaching).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Zuti to Perron to have wherein the apparatus comprises: a plurality of planar light circuit splitters operably coupled to the first plurality of fibers or the second plurality of fibers, the plurality of planar light circuit splitters configured to generate a plurality of distinct power, frequency, or wavelength levels in order to properly plan and maintain the device from signal loss (p. 1 col 2 para 1).
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He and Perron as applied to claim(s) 1 above, and further in view of Yamamoto, F., et al. "In-service remote access and measurement methods for passive double star networks." Proceedings of 5th Conference on Optical Hybrid Access Networks. IEEE, 1993 (hereinafter Yamamoto).
Regarding claim 24, the modified device of He fails to teach the apparatus of claim 23, wherein the apparatus comprises: a plurality of planar light circuit splitters operably coupled to the first plurality of fibers or the second plurality of fibers, the plurality of planar light circuit splitters configured to generate a plurality of distinct power, frequency, or wavelength levels.
Yamamoto, from the same field of endeavor as He, teaches the apparatus of claim 23, wherein the apparatus comprises: a plurality of planar light circuit splitters operably coupled to the first plurality of fibers (Fig. 3 “branched-fiber-group”) or the second plurality of fibers, the plurality of planar light circuit splitters configured to generate a plurality of distinct power (the optical splitter in Fig. 3 generates distinct power), frequency, or wavelength levels (the optical splitter in Fig. 3 generates distinct wavelength).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Yamamoto to the modified device of He to have the apparatus of claim 23, wherein the apparatus comprises: a plurality of planar light circuit splitters operably coupled to the first plurality of fibers or the second plurality of fibers, the plurality of planar light circuit splitters configured to generate a plurality of distinct power, frequency, or wavelength levels in order to for the system to determine the fault detection and location (p. 6 “Conclusion” lines 3-4).
Claim(s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He and Perron as applied to claim(s) 23 above, and further in view of US 20130194566 A1 (hereinafter Schell).
Regarding claim 25, the modified device of He does not teach the apparatus of claim 23, the apparatus comprising: a fiber splice operably coupled to the first plurality of optical fibers.
Schell, from the same field of endeavor as He, teaches the apparatus of claim 23, the apparatus comprising: a fiber splice operably coupled to the first plurality of optical fibers (Fig. 6 “58”, para [0031] lines 1-10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Schell to the modified device of He to have the apparatus of claim 23, the apparatus comprising: a fiber splice operably coupled to the first plurality of optical fibers in order to control the optical signal in order to decode the polarity of the fibers under test (para [0031] lines 1-10).
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He and Perron as applied to claim(s) 1 above, and further in view of Zuti, Chuan, Ng Boon, and Mohammad Syuhaimi Ab-Rahman. "Lightwave measurement and characterization in passive optical network (PON)." 2009 International Conference on Space Science and Communication. IEEE, 2009, (Chuan), and Keiser, G. FTTX Concepts and Applications, 2006.
Regarding claim 28, the modified device of He does not teach the apparatus of claim 1, comprising: a plurality of planar light circuit splitters configured to generate three distinctive power levels; a first splitter operably coupled to a single light source by a fiber, the first splitter configured as a 1 x 8 splitter and configured to output four fibers to a port; a pair of second splitters, wherein each second splitter is configured as a 1 x 2 splitter and configured to receive a respective fiber from the first splitter and output respective pairs of fibers to the port, and; a third splitter configured as a 1 x 4 splitter and configured to receive a respective fiber from the first splitter and output four fibers to the port.
Zuti, from the same field of endeavor as He, teaches a plurality of planar light circuit splitters configured to generate three distinctive power levels (this is shown in fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Zuti to the modified device of He to have a plurality of planar light circuit splitters configured to generate three distinctive power levels in order to properly plan and maintain the device from signal loss (p. 1 col 2 para 1).
He, when modified by Perron and Zuti, fails to disclose a first splitter operably coupled to a single light source by a fiber, the first splitter configured as a 1 x 8 splitter and configured to output four fibers to a port; a pair of second splitters, wherein each second splitter is configured as a 1 x 2 splitter and configured to receive a respective fiber from the first splitter and output respective pairs of fibers to the port, and; a third splitter configured as a 1 x 4 splitter and configured to receive a respective fiber from the first splitter and output four fibers to the port.
Chuan, from the same field of endeavor as He, teaches the apparatus of claim 1, comprising: a first splitter operably coupled to a single light source by a fiber, the first splitter configured as a 1 x 8 splitter and configured to output four fibers to a port (p. 3 fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Chuan to He, when modified by Perron and Zuti, to have a first splitter operably coupled to a single light source by a fiber, the first splitter configured as a 1 x 8 splitter and configured to output four fibers to a port in order to reduce the total cost of the device.
He, when modified by Perron, Zuti and Chuan, does not teach a pair of second splitters, wherein each second splitter is configured as a 1 x 2 splitter and configured to receive a respective fiber from the first splitter and output respective pairs of fibers to the port, and; a third splitter configured as a 1 x 4 splitter and configured to receive a respective fiber from the first splitter and output four fibers to the port.
Keiser, from the same field of endeavor as He, teaches “a second splitter, wherein each second splitter is configured as a 1 x N splitter and configured to receive a respective fiber from the first splitter and output respective pairs of fibers to the port” (the second splitter is the small optical splitter in fig. 6.2, p. 116, N can be 2, see evidentiary ref. Schmidt, Kevin M., Shin S. Sumida, and Tadashi M. Miyashita. "Recent advances in single-mode 1 xn splitters using high-silica optical waveguide circuit technology." Applications of Optical Engineering: Proceedings of OE/Midwest'90 1396 (1991): 744-752, fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Keiser to He, when modified by Perron, Zuti and Chuan, to have “a second splitter, wherein each second splitter is configured as a 1 x N splitter and configured to receive a respective fiber from the first splitter and output respective pairs of fibers to the port” in order to reduce the cost of the device (p. 116 para 3 lines 3-7).
He, when modified by Perron, Zuti, Chuan, and Keiser, fails to teach plurality of second splitters and a third splitter configured as a 1 x 4 splitter and configured to receive a respective fiber from the first splitter and output four fibers to the port.
MPEP 2144.04 VI-B, In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960), states the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. This means the limitation plurality of second splitters and a third splitter configured as a 1 x 4 splitter (Zuti, fig. 4 shows 1X4 splitter) and configured to receive a respective fiber from the first splitter and output four fibers to the port is simply duplication of parts.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply plurality of second splitters and a third splitter configured as a 1 x 4 splitter and configured to receive a respective fiber from the first splitter and output four fibers to the port to He, when modified by Perron, Zuti, Chuan, and Keiser, in order to further reduce the cost of the device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERTO FABIAN JR whose telephone number is (571)272-3632. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (8-12, 1-5).
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, KARA GEISEL can be reached at (571)272-2416. 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.
/ROBERTO FABIAN JR/ Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/Kara E. Geisel/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877