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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on August 28, 2026, has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed August 28, 2026, has been entered. Claims 1-7 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every 35 U.S.C. § 112 rejection previously presented in the Final Office Action mailed June 23, 2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed August 28, 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues, see pages 4-7, that the combination of previously presented prior art reference Liu et al. (Patent Number CN 203,632,748 U), hereafter referred to as Liu, with previously presented prior art reference Rijssemus (Patent Publication Number GB 2,549,375 A), hereafter referred to as Rijssemus, fails to disclose “a microstrip directional coupler is disposed in the output path with a coupling port of the microstrip directional coupler connected to the test port” as recited by independent claim 1. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
As shown in Rijssemus, Fig. 3, the microstrip directional coupler 54 is located in the output path of the amplifiers 30 and 44, providing a connection to output 16. As suggested by the combination of Liu and Rijssemus, including the circuit of Liu at the output of Rijssemus would result in the test port of Liu being in an output path including the microstrip directional coupler of Rijssemus. Therefore, applicant’s arguments are unconvincing, and the rejections of claims 1-7 are maintained.
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.
Claims 1, 3, and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Rijssemus.
Regarding claim 1, Liu discloses:
A cable network device (Liu, Fig. 1) wherein a test port (Fig. 1, 51) is associated with the at least one output (Fig. 1, see connection between 51 and 6), and an amplifier element (Fig. 1, 5) and at least one equalizer (Fig. 1, 4) are disposed between the coupling port and the test port (Fig. 1, see connection between coupling port 1 and test port 51 via equalizer 4 and amplifier 5), but fails to disclose comprising a signal path connecting at least one input to at least one output, the signal path comprising an input path connecting the at least input to at least one amplifier for amplifying upstream and/or downstream signals, and an output path connecting the at least one amplifier to the at least one output, and wherein a microstrip directional coupler is disposed in the output path with a coupling port of the microstrip directional coupler connected to the test port.
However, Rijssemus teaches comprising a signal path (Rijssemus, Fig. 3, see path from input 12 to output 16) connecting at least one input to at least one output (Fig. 3, see connection between input 12 and output 16), the signal path comprising an input path (Fig. 3, see path between input 12 and amplifying unit 24/24’/30/44) connecting the at least input to at least one amplifier for amplifying upstream and/or downstream signals (Fig. 3, see connection between input 12 and amplifiers 30 and 44), and an output path (Fig. 3, see connection between 24’ and output 16) connecting the at least one amplifier to the at least one output (Fig. 3, see connection between amplifiers 30 and 44 and output 16), and wherein a microstrip directional coupler (Fig. 3, 54) is disposed in the output path (Fig. 3, see connection between 54 and output 16) with a coupling port of the microstrip directional coupler connected to the test port (Fig. 3, see connection between coupling port 84 of microstrip directional coupler 54 and output 16, and consider output 16 coupled to input 1 of Liu, Fig. 1, with connection between coupling port 1 and test port 51 of Liu, Fig. 1).
Liu and Rijssemus are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of improving cable network devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Liu to incorporate the teachings of Rijssemus to include the microstrip directional coupler of Rijssemus in the circuit of Liu, which would have the effect of optimizing cable loss compensation for the cable network of Liu (Rijssemus, Page 2, lines 9-12).
Regarding claim 3, Liu further discloses:
wherein the at least one equalizer is disposed between the coupling port and the test port (Liu, Fig. 1, see connection between coupling port 1 and test port 51 via equalizer 4).
Regarding claim 5, Liu fails to disclose:
wherein the output is connected to the output port of the microstrip directional coupler.
However, Rijssemus further teaches wherein the output is connected to the output port of the microstrip directional coupler (Rijssemus, Fig. 3, see connection between microstrip directional coupler 54 and output port 16, and consider input port 1 of Liu coupled to output port 6, with output port 6 of Liu coupled to output port 16 of Rijssemus via the circuit of Liu.
Liu and Rijssemus are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of improving cable network devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Liu to incorporate the teachings of Rijssemus to include the microstrip directional coupler of Rijssemus in the circuit of Liu, which would have the effect of optimizing cable loss compensation for the cable network of Liu (Rijssemus, Page 2, lines 9-12).
Regarding claim 6, Liu further discloses:
wherein the cable network device is an active device requiring electrical power to operate (Liu, Paragraph 4, lines 1-5).
Regarding claim 7, Liu fails to disclose:
when configured for signals complying with a high frequency spectrum of 1.8 GHz and above.
However, Rijssemus further teaches when configured for signals complying with a high frequency spectrum of 1.8 GHz and above (Rijssemus, Page 2, lines 14-17).
Liu and Rijssemus are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of improving cable network devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Liu to incorporate the teachings of Rijssemus to use the frequency spectrum of Rijssemus for the device of Liu, which would have the effect of enabling conversion between user and network signals (Rijssemus, Page 2, lines 14-17).
Claims 2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Rijssemus as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tomomitsu et al. (Patent Number JP 3,843,841 B2), hereafter referred to as Tomomitsu.
Regarding claim 2, Liu and Rijssemus fail to disclose:
wherein the at least one equalizer is disposed between the amplifier element and the test port.
However, Tomomitsu teaches wherein the at least one equalizer is disposed between the amplifier element and the test port (Tomomitsu, Fig. 1, see connection between amplifier 30R and test port 18R via equalizer 34R).
Liu, Rijssemus, and Tomomitsu are all considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of improving amplifier circuits. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Liu to incorporate the teachings of Tomomitsu to include the equalizer of Tomomitsu in the circuit of Liu, which would have the effect of enabling control over the gain of the circuit of Liu (Tomomitsu, Paragraph 12, lines 1-9).
Regarding claim 4, Liu further discloses:
and a second equalizer (Liu, Fig. 1, 4) disposed between the coupling port and the test port (Fig. 1, see connection between coupling port 1 and test port 51 via equalizer 4), but fails to disclose wherein two equalizers are provided, a first equalizer disposed between the amplifier element and the test port.
However, Tomomitsu teaches wherein two equalizers are provided (consider equalizer 4 of Liu, Fig. 1 as one equalizer, and equalizer 34R of Tomomitsu, Fig. 1 as the second equalizer), a first equalizer (Tomomitsu, Fig. 1, 34R) disposed between the amplifier element and the test port (Fig. 1, see connection between amplifier 30R and test port 18R via equalizer 34R).
Liu, Rijssemus, and Tomomitsu are all considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of improving amplifier circuits. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Liu to incorporate the teachings of Tomomitsu to include the equalizer of Tomomitsu in the circuit of Liu, which would have the effect of enabling control over the gain of the circuit of Liu (Tomomitsu, Paragraph 12, lines 1-9).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kinamon et al. (Patent Publication Number US 2019/0036588 A1) discloses a cable network device with a 1.8 GHz frequency band.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lance T Bartol whose telephone number is (703)756-1267. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 6:30 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. CT, Alternating Fridays 6:30 - 3:00.
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, Andrea Lindgren Baltzell can be reached at 571-272-5918. 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.
/LANCE TORBJORN BARTOL/Examiner, Art Unit 2843
/ANDREA LINDGREN BALTZELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2843
