DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the Applicant’s communication filed on 11/19/2025. In virtue of this communication claims 1-4, 6-12 and 15-17 are currently pending in the instant application.
Response to Amendment
In response to the action mailed on 8/19/2025, the Applicant has filed a response amending the claims.
In view of Applicant’s response the claim objections are withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
The Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but they are moot because the arguments do not apply to the newly found references and/or interpretation being made in the current rejection.
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-4, 6-7, 9-11 and 15-17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al (US Pat 5296957) in view of Marutani et al (US Pub 20020121937) in further view of Yokoyama (US Pat 6603587).
Regarding Claim 1. Takahashi discloses an optical control repeater comprising:
a first connection unit configured to be connected to a first optical transmission path and a second optical transmission path (Fig 3, where an optical control repeater comprises a first connection unit (e.g. between 103 and 104) connected to a first optical transmission path (L1) and a second optical transmission path (L2));
a second connection unit configured to be connected to the first optical transmission path and the second optical transmission path (Fig 3, where the optical control repeater comprises a second connection unit (e.g. between 106 and 101) connected to the first optical transmission path (L1) and the second optical transmission path (L2)); and
a route setting unit configured to set a first optical route in the first connection unit and a second optical route in the second connection unit to either of a conductive state and a non-conductive state (Fig 3, where the optical control repeater comprises a route setting unit (e.g. 101, 104, 107) configured to set a first optical route (e.g. for a first loop-back line) in the first connection unit (e.g. between 103 and 104) and a second optical route (e.g. for a second loop-back line) in the second connection unit (e.g. between 106 and 101) to either of a conductive state and a non-conductive state),
wherein the first optical route comprises a first attenuator (Fig 3, where the first optical route (e.g. for a first loop-back line) comprises a first attenuator (108)), and
wherein the second optical route comprises a second attenuator (Fig 3, where the second optical route (e.g. for a second loop-back line) comprises a second attenuator (109)).
Takahashi fails to explicitly disclose the repeater being an apparatus.
However, Marutani discloses
a repeater being an apparatus (Fig 1, where a repeater (23) is an apparatus).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of the repeater as described in Takahashi, with the teachings of the repeater (23) as described in Marutani. The motivation being is that as shown a repeater (23) is an apparatus and one of ordinary skill in the art can implement this concept into the repeater as described in Takahashi and better show and illustrate that the repeater is an apparatus i.e. because the repeater/apparatus has a physical structure within the repeater/apparatus which allows the repeater/apparatus to optimally perform optical amplification and which combination is being made because the systems are similar and have overlapping components (e.g. optical repeaters) and which combination is a simple implementation of a known concept of a known repeater (23) into another similar repeater, namely, for better clarifying its structure/configuration and which combination yields predictable results.
Takahashi as modified by Marutani fails to explicitly disclose the first attenuator being a first band pass filter for passing a control band, and the second attenuator being a second band pass filter for passing the control band.
However, Yokoyama discloses
a first attenuator being a first band pass filter for passing a control band (Fig 1, Fig 3, where a first attenuator (4a) (as shown in Fig 1) in a first optical route (e.g. for a first loop-back line) is changed to a first band pass filter (20a) (as shown in Fig 3) for passing a control band (e.g. of a supervisory signal light) (col 2 lines 8-10)), and
a second attenuator being a second band pass filter for passing the control band (Fig 1, Fig 3, where a second attenuator (4b) (as shown in Fig 1) in a second optical route (e.g. for a second loop-back line) is changed to a second band pass filter (20b) (as shown in Fig 3) for passing the control band (e.g. of a supervisory signal light) (col 2 lines 8-10)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the first attenuator (108) and second attenuator (109) as described in Takahashi as modified by Marutani, with the teachings of the first attenuator (4a) and second attenuator (4b) as described in Yokoyama. The motivation being is that as shown a first attenuator (4a) in a first optical route (e.g. for a first loop-back line) can be changed to a first band pass filter (20a) for passing a control band (e.g. of a supervisory signal light) and a second attenuator (4b) in a second optical route (e.g. for a second loop-back line) can be changed to a second band pass filter (20b) for passing the control band (e.g. of a supervisory signal light) and one of ordinary skill in the art can implement this concept into the first attenuator (108) and second attenuator (109) as described in Takahashi as modified by Marutani and have the first attenuator (108) in the first optical route (e.g. for a first loop-back line) be changed to a first band pass filter (20a) for passing a control band (e.g. of a supervisory signal light) and have the second attenuator (109) in the second optical route (e.g. for a second loop-back line) be changed to a second band pass filter (20b) for passing the control band (e.g. of a supervisory signal light) i.e. as an alternative so as to have the optical control repeater with a known first band pass filter (20a) and second band pass filter (20b) instead of the first attenuator (108) and second attenuator (109) for the purpose of optimally monitoring only supervisory signal lights during a loop-back testing and which technique optimally filters the supervisory signal light from other wavelengths in order to improve signal to noise ratio and reduce signal interference and which modification is being made because the systems are similar and have overlapping components (e.g. first/second optical routes, first/second optical attenuators…) and which modification is a simple implementation of a known concept of a known first attenuator (4a) and second attenuator (4b) into another similar first attenuator (108) and second attenuator (109), namely, for its improvement and for optimization and which modification yields predictable results.
Regarding Claim 2. Takahashi as modified by Marutani and Yokoyama also discloses the optical control apparatus, wherein
the route setting unit is configured to set the first optical route and the second optical route to either of:
a first returning state in which first monitoring light propagating through the first optical transmission path returns to a sending side of the first monitoring light via the second optical transmission path (Takahashi Fig 3, where the route setting unit (e.g. 101, 104, 107) sets the first optical route (e.g. for a first loop-back line) and the second optical route (e.g. for a second loop-back line) to a first returning state in which first monitoring light (e.g. first loop-back signal) propagating through the first optical transmission path (L1) returns to a sending side (AA) (as shown in Fig 2) of the first monitoring light (e.g. first loop-back signal) via the second optical transmission path (L2)); and
a second returning state in which second monitoring light propagating through the second optical transmission path in a direction opposite to a direction of the first monitoring light returns to a sending side of the second monitoring light via the first optical transmission path (Takahashi Fig 3, where the route setting unit (e.g. 101, 104, 107) sets the first optical route (e.g. for a first loop-back line) and the second optical route (e.g. for a second loop-back line) to a second returning state in which second monitoring light (e.g. second loop-back signal) propagating through the second optical transmission path (L2) in a direction opposite to a direction of the first monitoring light (e.g. first loop-back signal) returns to a sending side (BB) (as shown in Fig 2) of the second monitoring light (e.g. second loopback signal) via the first optical transmission path (L1)).
Regarding Claim 3. Takahashi as modified by Marutani and Yokoyama also discloses the optical control apparatus, wherein the route setting unit comprises:
a first optical switching unit configured to switch, in the first optical route, to either of a passing state in which the first monitoring light and the second monitoring light are allowed to pass, and a blocking state in which the first monitoring light and the second monitoring light are blocked (Takahashi Fig 3, where the route setting unit (e.g. 101, 104, 107) includes a first optical switching unit (104) configured to switch, in the first optical route (e.g. for a first loop-back line), to either of a passing state in which the first monitoring light (e.g. first loop-back signal) and the second monitoring light (e.g. second loop-back signal) are allowed to pass, and a blocking state in which the first monitoring light (e.g. first loop-back signal) and the second monitoring light (e.g. second loop-back signal) are blocked); and
a second optical switching unit configured to switch, in the second optical route, to either of the passing state and the blocking state (Takahashi Fig 3, where the route setting unit (e.g. 101, 104, 107) includes a second optical switching unit (101) configured to switch, in the second optical route (e.g. for a second loop-back line), to either of the passing state and the blocking state), and
wherein the first optical switching unit and the second optical switching unit are is configured to be complementarily operated, and in a case where one of the first optical switching unit and the second optical switching unit is switched to the passing state, another is switched to the blocking state (Takahashi Fig 3, where the first optical switching unit (104) and the second optical switching unit (101) are complementarily operated, and in a case where one of the first optical switching unit (104) and the second optical switching unit (101) is switched to the passing state, another is switched to the blocking state).
Regarding Claim 4. Takahashi as modified by Marutani and Yokoyama also discloses the optical control apparatus, wherein
the route setting unit includes a first switching control unit and a second switching control unit (Takahashi Fig 3, Fig 4, where the route setting unit (e.g. 101, 104, 107) includes a first switching control unit (171) and a second switching control unit (174)),
wherein the first switching control unit is configured to set the first optical switching unit to the passing state, and to set the second optical switching unit to the blocking state, in a case of accepting a first switching control signal propagating through the first optical transmission path (Takahashi Fig 3, Fig 4, where the first switching control unit (171) sets the first optical switching unit (104) to the passing state, and sets the second optical switching unit (101) to the blocking state, in a case of accepting a first switching control signal (e.g. first loop-back instruction) propagating through the first optical transmission path (L1)), and
where the second switching control unit is configured to set the first optical switching unit to the blocking state, and to set the second optical switching unit to the passing state, in a case of accepting a second switching control signal propagating through the second optical transmission path (Takahashi Fig 3, Fig 4, where the second switching control unit (174) sets the first optical switching unit (104) to the blocking state, and sets the second optical switching unit (101) to the passing state, in a case of accepting a second switching control signal (e.g. second loop-back instruction) propagating through the second optical transmission path (L2)).
Regarding Claim 6. Takahashi as modified by Marutani and Yokoyama also discloses the optical control apparatus, wherein the route setting unit comprises:
a wavelength selective reflection unit configured to have, as a reflection band, a wavelength band of the first monitoring light and the second monitoring light (Takahashi Fig 3, where the route setting unit (e.g. 101, 104, 107) comprises a wavelength selective unit (e.g. a band pass filter (20a/20b) instead of an attenuator (108/109)) configured to have, as a filtering band, a wavelength band of the first monitoring light (e.g. first loop-back signal) and the second monitoring light (e.g. second loop-back signal) and where it is known that the wavelength selective unit (e.g. a band pass filter (20a/20b) instead of an attenuator (108/109)) is a wavelength selective reflection unit that uses a reflection band (instead of a passband) as a filtering band in order to perform optical filtering and separation of optical signals (see for example Iwata et al (US Pat 5956167) Fig 5, col 14 lines 12-24)); and
a route switching unit configured to switch to either of a first route state in which the wavelength selective reflection unit is included in the first optical route, and a second route state in which the wavelength selective reflection unit is included in the second optical route (Takahashi Fig 3, where the route setting unit (e.g. 101, 104, 107) which includes a route switching unit (101, 104) is configured to switch to either of a first route state in which the wavelength selective unit (e.g. a band pass filter (20a/20b) instead of an attenuator (108/109)) is included in the first optical route (e.g. for a first loop-back line), and a second route state in which the wavelength selective unit (e.g. a band pass filter (20a/20b) instead of an attenuator (108/109)) is included in the second optical route (e.g. for a second loop-back line)).
Regarding Claim 7. Takahashi as modified by Marutani and Yokoyama also discloses the optical control apparatus, wherein the route setting unit comprises:
a first route control unit configured to set, in a case of accepting a first switching control signal propagating through the first optical transmission path, the route switching unit to the first route state (Takahashi Fig 3, Fig 4, where a first route control unit (171) is configured to set, in a case of accepting a first switching control signal (e.g. first loop-back instruction) propagating through the first optical transmission path (L1), the route switching unit (101, 104) to the first route state); and
a second route control unit configured to set, in a case of accepting a second switching control signal propagating through the second optical transmission path, the route switching unit to the second route state (Takahashi Fig 3, Fig 4, where a second route control unit (174) is configured to set, in a case of accepting a second switching control signal (e.g. second loop-back instruction) propagating through the second optical transmission path (L2), the route switching unit (101, 104) to the second route state).
Regarding Claim 9. Takahashi as modified by Marutani and Yokoyama also discloses the optical control apparatus, further comprising a first band control unit and a second band control unit, wherein the first band control unit and the second band control unit are a bandpass filter in which the control band is a passband (Takahashi Fig 3, where the optical control repeater further comprises a first band control unit (e.g. for first band pass filter (20a) instead of first attenuator (108)) and a second band control unit (e.g. for second band pass filter (20b) instead of second attenuator (109)) (similar to Applicant’s disclosure Fig 3), the first band control unit (e.g. for first band pass filter (20a) instead of first attenuator (108)) and the second band control unit (e.g. for second band pass filter (20b) instead of second attenuator (109)) are a bandpass filter in which the control band (e.g. of a supervisory signal light) is a passband).
Regarding Claim 10. Takahashi as modified by Marutani and Yokoyama also discloses the optical control apparatus, further comprising a first band control unit and a second band control unit, wherein the first band control unit and the second band control unit are a wavelength selective reflection filter in which the control band is a reflection band (Takahashi Fig 3, where the optical control repeater further comprises a first band control unit (e.g. for first band pass filter (20a) instead of first attenuator (108)) and a second band control unit (e.g. for second band pass filter (20b) instead of second attenuator (109)) (similar to Applicant’s disclosure Fig 3), the first band control unit (e.g. for first band pass filter (20a) instead of first attenuator (108)) and the second band control unit (e.g. for second band pass filter (20b) instead of second attenuator (109)) are a wavelength selective filter in which the control band (e.g. of a supervisory signal light) is a filtering band and where it is known that the wavelength selective filter is a wavelength selective reflection filter that uses a reflection band (instead of a passband) as a filtering band in order to perform optical filtering and separation of optical signals (see for example Iwata et al (US Pat 5956167) Fig 5, col 14 lines 12-24)).
Regarding Claim 11. Takahashi as modified by Marutani and Yokoyama also discloses the optical control apparatus, wherein each of the first connection unit and the second connection unit comprises: at least one of an optical coupler and an optical circulator; and an optical fiber (Takahashi Fig 3, where each of the first connection unit (e.g. between 103 and 104) and the second connection unit (e.g. between 106 and 101) includes an optical coupler (103, 106) and an optical fiber/line).
Regarding Claim 15. Claim 15 is similar to claims 1 and 2, therefore, claim 15 is rejected for the same reasons as claims 1 and 2.
Regarding Claim 16. Takahashi as modified by Marutani and Yokoyama also discloses the optical route control method, wherein the setting the first optical route and the second optical route comprises:
switching, in the first optical route, to either of a passing state in which the first monitoring light and the second monitoring light are allowed to pass, and a blocking state in which the first monitoring light and the second monitoring light are blocked (Takahashi Fig 3, where the route setting unit (e.g. 101, 104, 107) sets the first optical route (e.g. for a first loop-back line) and the second optical route (e.g. for a second loop-back line) and includes switching (e.g. via 104), in the first optical route (e.g. for a first loop-back line), to either of a passing state in which the first monitoring light (e.g. first loop-back signal) and the second monitoring light (e.g. second loop-back signal) are allowed to pass, and a blocking state in which the first monitoring light (e.g. first loop-back signal) and the second monitoring light (e.g. second loop-back signal) are blocked);
switching, in the second optical route, to either of the passing state and the blocking state (Takahashi Fig 3, where the route setting unit (e.g. 101, 104, 107) sets the first optical route (e.g. for a first loop-back line) and the second optical route (e.g. for a second loop-back line) and includes switching (e.g. via 101), in the second optical route (e.g. for a second loop-back line), to either of the passing state and the blocking state); and,
in a case where one of the first optical route and the second optical route is switched to the passing state, switching another to the blocking state (Takahashi Fig 3, where in a case where one of the first optical route (e.g. for a first loop-back line) and the second optical route (e.g. for a second loop-back line) is switched to the passing state, switching another to the blocking state).
Regarding Claim 17. Takahashi as modified by Marutani and Yokoyama also discloses the optical route control method, wherein the setting the first optical route and the second optical route comprises switching to either of:
a first route state in which the first monitoring light is reflected in the first optical route (Takahashi Fig 3, where the route setting unit (e.g. 101, 104, 107) sets the first optical route (e.g. for a first loop-back line) and the second optical route (e.g. for a second loop-back line) and includes switching (e.g. via 101 and 104) to a first route state in which the first monitoring light (e.g. first loop-back signal) is reflected (e.g. at 103) in the first optical route (e.g. for a first loop-back line)); and
a second route state in which the second monitoring light is reflected in the second optical route (Takahashi Fig 3, where the route setting unit (e.g. 101, 104, 107) sets the first optical route (e.g. for a first loop-back line) and the second optical route (e.g. for a second loop-back line) and includes switching (e.g. via 101 and 104) to a second route state in which the second monitoring light (e.g. second loop-back signal) is reflected (e.g. at 106) in the second optical route (e.g. for a second loop-back line)).
Claim 8 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al (US Pat 5296957) in view of Marutani et al (US Pub 20020121937) in further view of Yokoyama (US Pat 6603587) in further view of Sato et al (US Pat 6229631).
Regarding Claim 8. Takahashi as modified by Marutani and Yokoyama fails to explicitly disclose the optical control apparatus, further comprising: a first setting information sending unit configured to send, to a sending source of the first monitoring light, setting information relating to the first optical route and the second optical route being set by the route setting unit; and a second setting information sending unit configured to send, to a sending source of the second monitoring light, the setting information.
However, Sato discloses
a first setting information sending unit configured to send, to a sending source of a first monitoring light, setting information relating to a first optical route and a second optical route (Fig 14, where a repeater (22) comprises a first setting information sending unit (e.g. 14b) configured to send, to a sending source (20a, 23b) of a first monitoring light, setting/monitoring information relating to a first optical route (e.g. in an upward way) and a second optical route (e.g. in a downward way)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the optical control repeater as described in Takahashi as modified by Marutani and Yokoyama, with the teachings of the repeater (22) as described in Sato. The motivation being is that as shown a repeater (22) can comprise a first setting information sending unit (e.g. 14b) that sends, to a sending source (20a, 23b) of a first monitoring light, setting/monitoring information relating to a first optical route (e.g. in an upward way) and a second optical route (e.g. in a downward way) and one of ordinary skill in the art can implement this concept into the optical control repeater as described in Takahashi as modified by Marutani and Yokoyama and have the optical control repeater with a first setting information sending unit (e.g. 14b) that sends, to a sending source (20a, 23b) (AA) of the first monitoring light (e.g. first loop-back signal), setting/monitoring information relating to the first optical route (e.g. for a first loop-back line) and the second optical route (e.g. for a second loop-back line) set by the route setting unit (e.g. 101, 104, 107) and in a duplicate manner have the optical control repeater with a second setting information sending unit (e.g. 14) that sends, to a sending source (BB) of the second monitoring light (e.g. second loop-back signal), the setting/monitoring information i.e. as an alternative so as to have the optical control repeater with a known technique of a known repeater (22) for the purpose of optimally monitoring and reporting to a workstation the status/state of the optical control repeater in order to perform simulations and provide controls to optimize transmission quality and which modification is being made because the systems are similar and have overlapping components (e.g. local/remote stations, optical repeaters) and which modification is a simple implementation of a known concept of a repeater (22) into another similar optical control repeater, namely, for its improvement and for optimization and which modification yields predictable results.
Claim 12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al (US Pat 5296957) in view of Marutani et al (US Pub 20020121937) in further view of Yokoyama (US Pat 6603587) in further view of Koga et al (US Pat 5995254).
Regarding Claim 12. Takahashi as modified by Marutani and Yokoyama fails to explicitly disclose the optical control apparatus, wherein a wavelength of the first monitoring light, and a wavelength of the second monitoring light belong to a same wavelength band.
However, Koga discloses
a wavelength of a first monitoring light, and a wavelength of a second monitoring light belong to a same wavelength band (Fig 1, where a wavelength (e.g. λ1) of a first monitoring light (e.g. from 1A) and a wavelength (e.g. λ1) of a second monitoring light (e.g. from 1B) belong to a same wavelength band).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the first monitoring light (e.g. first loop-back signal) and second monitoring light (e.g. second loop-back signal) as described in Takahashi as modified by Marutani and Yokoyama, with the teachings of the first monitoring light (e.g. from 1A) and second monitoring light (e.g. from 1B) as described in Koga. The motivation being is that as shown a wavelength (e.g. λ1) of a first monitoring light (e.g. from 1A) and a wavelength (e.g. λ1) of a second monitoring light (e.g. from 1B) can belong to a same wavelength band and one of ordinary skill in the art can implement this concept into the first monitoring light (e.g. first loop-back signal) and second monitoring light (e.g. second loop-back signal) as described in Takahashi as modified by Marutani and Yokoyama and have a wavelength (e.g. λ1) of the first monitoring light (e.g. first loop-back signal) and a wavelength (e.g. λ1) of the second monitoring light (e.g. second loop-back signal) belong to a same wavelength band i.e. as an alternative so as to have the first monitoring light (e.g. first loop-back signal) and second monitoring light (e.g. second loop-back signal) with a known technique of a known first monitoring light (e.g. from 1A) and second monitoring light (e.g. from 1B) for the purpose of optimally transmitting upstream and downstream monitoring optical signals with a same wavelength band in order to reduce costs by using similar optical elements and reduce complexity in the system and which modification is being made because the systems are similar and have overlapping components (e.g. local/remote stations, optical repeaters) and which modification is a simple implementation of a known concept of a first monitoring light (e.g. from 1A) and second monitoring light (e.g. from 1B) into another similar first monitoring light (e.g. first loop-back signal) and second monitoring light (e.g. second loop-back signal), namely, for its improvement and for optimization and which modification yields predictable results.
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 DIBSON J SANCHEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-0868. The Examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 10:00-6:00.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s Supervisor, Kenneth Vanderpuye can be reached on 5712723078. 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.
/DIBSON J SANCHEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2634