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) 1-6, 14-17 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. 2023/0291537 A1) in view of Zhong et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. 2020/0328767 A1) and G.8312 (ITU-T G.8312, “Interfaces for metro transport networks”, ITU-T, December 2020).
Regarding claim 1, Jiang et al. teaches in FIG. 2 and FIG. 3 a method for receiving OAM information blocks (the overhead blocks of FIG. 2 is equivalent to the OAM information blocks of instant claim), comprising: determining a reference position (slot 0 of the stream which comprises the first 20-block of the 1023 20-blocks) and a delivery cycle value of reception of the OAM information block (cycle value is every 1023 20-blocks) in a client service code block stream in a Metro Transport Network (MTN) (Jiang et al. teaches in paragraph [0016] MTN); determining an expected reception position of a next OAM information block according to the reference position and the delivery cycle value (1023 times 20 slots from the current slot); and synchronizing a sequence relationship of the OAM information blocks according to a type and a sorting result of the extracted OAM information blocks (Jiang et al. teaches in FIG. 3 and paragraph [0064] that eight FlexE overhead blocks form one FlexE overhead frame; these blocks have to be extracted and aligned —i.e. synchronized—to form the FlexE overhead frame), and extracting content of the OAM information blocks after synchronization. The differences between Jiang et al. and the claimed invention are (a) Jiang et al. does not teach determining an effective reception range according to the expected reception position, and extracting an OAM information block in a client service code block stream within the effective reception range; and (b) Jiang et al. does not teach that the type of the OAM information blocks comprises: base code block, APS code block and low-priority code block. Zhong et al. teaches in paragraph [0112] that idle code blocks may be added or deleted from a code block stream to adapt the rate difference of a data pipe. In other words, in the 1023 20-blocks data stream of Jiang et al., idle blocks may be added. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teaching of Zhong et al. with the system of Jiang et al. because the idle blocks can be used to account for the rate difference of a pipe. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use add idle blocks, as taught by Zhong et al., in the in the 1023 20-blocks data stream of Jiang et al.
The combination of Jiang et al. and Zhong et al. still fails to teach that the type of the OAM information blocks comprises: base code block, APS code block and low-priority code block. G.8312 teaches the interfaces for MTNs. G.8312 teaches in Section 8.2.1: “The MTNP overhead is a set of messages that organizes the OAM information elements based on the OAM function and the required transmission frequency of that information. The three classes of message are: basic, automatic protection switching (APS) and low priority.” One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teaching of G.8312 with the modified system of Jiang et al. and Zhong et al. because G.8312 is an international standard. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use OAM for conveying basic, APS and low priority messages, as taught by G.8312, in the modified system of Jiang et al. and Zhong et al.
Regarding claim 2, Jiang et al. teaches in FIG. 2 that the current actually received OAM information block serves as the reference position.
Regarding claim 3, Jiang et al. teaches in FIG. 2 that the delivery cycle value of the OAM information block is determined according to a device configuration value.
Regarding claim 4, Zhong et al. suggests that the next OAM block may be found after expected reception position and depends upon the number of idle blocks in the 1023 20-blocks data stream (i.e., the rate difference of the pipe).
Regarding claim 5, Zhong et al. teaches that the effective reception range is based on deviation of client services caused by idle block addition and deletion during network carrying
Regarding claim 6, under normal condition, the OAM information block received within the effective reception range is an OAM information block with a legal position, and is extracted from the client service code block stream.
Regarding claim 14, Jiang et al. teaches in FIG. 7 receiving module 701 and synchronization module 702. Together, they perform the functions of the determining module, extraction module and synchronization module of instant claim. It has been held that the use of a one-piece construction instead of the structure comprising several pieces would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice. In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965).
Regarding claim 15, Jiang et al. teaches in FIG. 2 that the current actually received OAM information block serves as the reference position.
Regarding claim 16, Jiang et al. teaches in FIG. 2 that the delivery cycle value of the OAM information block is determined according to a device configuration value.
Regarding claim 17, Zhong et al. suggests that the next OAM block may be found after expected reception position and depends upon the number of idle blocks in the 1023 20-blocks data stream (i.e., the rate difference of the pipe).
Regarding claim 19, Jiang et al. teaches in FIG. 8 and paragraph [0157] computer program stored in memory 1503 for implement steps of a process.
Regarding claim 20, Jiang et al. teaches in FIG. 8, memory 1503 and processor 1502.
Claim(s) 8-9 and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al., Zhong et al. and G.8312 as applied to claims 1-6, 14-17 and 19-20 above, and further in view of Li et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. 2023/0337212 A1) and Shan et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. 2022/0217067 A1).
Jiang et al., Zhong et al. and G.8312 have been discussed above in regard to claims 1-6, 14-17 and 19-20. Regarding claim 8, Jiang et al. further teaches extracting an OAM information block within each effective reception range and performing OAM information block carrying sequence synchronization and sequence relationship detection. The difference between Jiang et al., Zhong et al. and G.8312 and the claimed invention is Jiang et al., Zhong et al. and G.8312 do not teach performing a synchronous judgment process on a receiving-end OAM sequence in a case that a sequence state of the OAM information blocks at a receiving end is a step-out state; and monitoring the service quality of the carrying pipeline according to the content of the OAM information code blocks in a case the sequence state of the OAM information blocks at the receiving end is a synchronization state. Li et al. teaches in paragraph [0029] that the extraction of the OAM code block can be implemented as a state machine—i.e., assigning states at various stage of the extraction. For example, a lock state (equivalent to step-out state of instant claim) can be assigned when a first OAM block of an OAM frame has been extracted and a synchronization state can be assigned when all eight OAM blocks of an OAM frame have been extracted. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teaching of Li et al. with the modified system of Jiang et al., Zhong et al. and G.8312 because Li et al. teaches details of implementation that are missing from Jiang et al. and Zhong et al. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a state machine for helping the extraction of the OAM overhead frame, as taught by Li et al., in the modified system of Jiang et al., Zhong et al. and G.8312.
The combination of Jiang et al., Zhong et al., G8312 and Li et al. still fails to teach monitoring the service quality. Shan et al. teaches in paragraph [0052] that the OAM block may include signal quality information. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teaching of Shan et al. with the modified system of Jiang et al., Zhong et al., G8312 and Li et al. because Shan et al. teaches details of implementation that are missing from Jiang et al., Zhong et al. and Li et al. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to monitor the service quality based on the OAM frame, as taught by Shan et al., in the modified system of Jiang et al., Zhong et al., G8312 and Li et al.
Regarding claim 9, Li et al. teaches a state machine comprising at least two states.
Regarding claim 11, it is obvious from the teaching of FIG. 3 and the teaching of Li et al. and Shan et al. that only when the complete OAM frame has been received, the contents of the frame can be decoded or interpreted.
Regarding claim 12, it is obvious when a complete OAM frame has been extracted and the frame does not match the format of FIG. 3 of Jiang et al.—e.g., CRC does not match the calculated value—an error has occurred.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 10, 13 and 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 19 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues:
Note that the concept of the FlexE overhead block is totally different from the OAM information block. It is well known for the skilled person in the art that the FlexE overhead block is a fixed component of the FlexE protocol, and it provides functions such as slot allocation and synchronization through these overhead blocks, which are statically configured. In contrast, as defined in the MTN standard specification, the OAM information block is in a client service transmission code stream for channel carrying quality monitoring, which are used to detect the service quality state of a client service carrying pipeline, such as a bit error rate, delay time, service discard, and other functions, and as shown in fig. 7 of the present application, the type of the OAM information blocks comprises: base code block, APS code block and low-priority code block.
The argument is not persuasive. ITU-T G.8312 teaches in Section 7.1: “The MTNS frame is the flex Ethernet (FlexE) overhead frame as specified in [OIF FLEXE IA]” and in Section 8: “An MTNP is carried over an integer number of 5 Gbit/s calendar slots within the MTNS layer.” That is, ITU-T G.8312 clearly teach that OAM information block uses FlexE overhead block.
The argument continues:
As disclosed in Jiang, the FlexE overhead blocks are strictly and fixedly spaced, with a size of 1023 * 20 * 8 bytes. Due to their strict spacing, the receiver can easily locate the next overhead block after receiving one, without needing a new scheme to find the next FlexE overhead block.
However, the OAM block in the present application does not have a strict, fixed spacing; instead, its spacing varies randomly within a certain range around the periodic interval. Therefore, after receiving an OAM block, the receiver can only roughly estimate the position of the next OAM block but cannot determine its exact location. This makes it impossible for the receiver to directly find the next OAM block, necessitating the specific solution provided by the present application to locate the next OAM block accurately, thereby avoiding incorrect identification of the next OAM block.
The argument is not persuasive. Zhong et al. teaches FlexE and in paragraph [0112] that idle code blocks may be added or deleted from a code block stream to adapt the rate difference of a data pipe. In other words, in the 1023 20-blocks data stream of Jiang et al., idle blocks may be added.
The argument continues:
As explained in the above, the FlexE overhead block is totally different from the OAM information block, obviously, Jiang does not any features related to the OAM information block required in claim 1 of the present application, such as, Jiang does not disclose that determining a reference position and a delivery cycle value of reception of the OAM information block [Not FlexE overhead block], and Jiang also does not disclose that determining an expected reception position of a next OAM information block [Not next FlexE overhead block] according to the referencee position and the delivery cycle value.
The argument is not persuasive. As explained above, The MTNS frame is the flex Ethernet (FlexE) overhead frame as specified in [OIF FLEXE IA], as taught in Section 7.1 of ITU-T G.8312.
The argument continues:
As indicated in the Office Action, Jiang does not disclose determining an effective reception range according to the expected reception position, and extracting an OAM information block in a client service code block stream within the effective reception range, but the office action indicated that Zhong disclosed these features. Applicant disagree with that. note that Zhong also does these features, because Zhong only relates to the FlexE overhead block, and Zhong has nothing to do with the OAM block.
The argument is not persuasive. Zhong et al. teaches FlexE overhead blocks which is used as MTN OAM blocks, as taught by ITU-T G.8312.
The argument continues:
Jiang also does not disclose synchronizing a sequence relationship of the OAM information blocks according to the type and a sorting result of the extracted OAM information blocks, and extracting content of the OAM information blocks after synchronization, wherein the type of the OAM information blocks comprises: base code block, APS code block and low-priority code block, because as explained in the above, Jiang has nothing to do with the OAM information blocks.
The argument is not persuasive. Jiang et al. teaches in FIG. 3 and paragraph [0064] that eight FlexE overhead blocks form one FlexE overhead frame; these blocks have to be extracted and aligned —i.e. synchronized—to form the FlexE overhead frame. Furthermore, ITU-T G.8312 teaches in Section 8.2.1 that OAM supports three classes of message, namely, basic, automatic protection switching (APS) and low priority.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHI K LI whose telephone number is (571)272-3031. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:53 a.m. -3:23 p.m.
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 Payne can be reached at 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 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.
skl27 January 2026
/SHI K LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2635