DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 4/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
1). Applicant’s argument – Rideout, Middleton, Ryu, Deng, Mehrgardt, and Relph fail to disclose all the features of claim 1, which has been amended to include features of former claim 8 and recites, inter alia, "a digital-to-time converter (DTC) coupled between the output of the digital mixer and the input of the signal source" (emphasis added).
…
Claim 19 has been amended to recite similar features to claim 1 and is allowable over Mehrgardt and Rideout for at least the same reasons as presented above in connection with claim 1. Kim was used to show other features and cannot cure the deficiencies of Mehrgardt and Rideout.
Examiner’s response – In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., DTC is coupled between the output of the digital mixer and the input of the signal source) are not recited in the rejected claim 19. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
The claim 19 states “a digital-to-time converter (DTC) configured to generate a control signal based on the digital signal, the control signal being indicative of a phase noise of the input signal”; but, claim 19 does not recite “digital mixer”. And claim 19 also does not recite “a digital delay” and “a digital phase shifter”.
2). Applicant’s argument – … Deng simply makes no mention of a DTC coupled between the output of any digital mixer and the input of a signal source. Deng therefore fails to show or suggest "a digital-to-time converter (DTC) coupled between the output of the digital mixer and the input of the signal source," as recited by claim 1 (emphasis added).
… . Mehrgardt therefore also fails to show or suggest "a digital-to-time converter (DTC) coupled between the output of the digital mixer and the input of the signal source," as recited by claim 1 (emphasis added). Mehrgardt therefore fails to cure the deficiencies of Deng.
… . Relph therefore also fails to show or suggest "a digital-to-time converter (DTC) coupled between the output of the digital mixer and the input of the signal source," as recited by claim 1 (emphasis added). Relph therefore fails to cure the deficiencies of Mehrgardt and Deng.
In the Office Action, it was conceded that Middleton, Ryu, Mehrgardt, and Deng fail to show or suggest "a digital-to-time converter (DTC) coupled between the output of the digital mixer and the input of the signal source," as recited by claim 1 (emphasis added), and thus cannot cure the deficiencies of Mehgrardt, Relph, and Deng. See, e.g., FIG. 1 of Rideout, in which there is only a low pass filter LP2 coupled between the output of mixer M2 and the input of the master laser and no DTC coupled between the output of mixer M2 and the input of the master laser.
In sum, there is simply no teaching, in any one or any combination of Rideout, Middleton, Ryu, Deng, Mehrgardt, and Relph, to couple a DTC between the output of Rideout's digital mixer M2 and the input of Rideout's master laser. Any contention otherwise is based, at best, on impermissible hindsight in view of Applicant's disclosure.
Examiner’s response – First, in response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Rideout et al discloses a Frequency Discriminator, which output a control signal to the signal source (Master Laser). Applicant uses a digital frequency discriminator to output a control signal to the signal source (Primary Laser 150). That is, either an analog frequency discriminator or a digital frequency discriminator can be used to output a control signal to control the signal source. A digital frequency discriminator has the advantage of greater accuracy, flexibility, and noise immunity, along with benefits like easier integration into complex system; it is obvious to one skilled in the art that a digital frequency discriminator can be used in Rideout et al so to utilize the advantage of a digital frequency discriminator.
Mehrgart et al discloses a digital frequency discriminator (Figure 1 etc.) including a converter (“aw”) and a digital mixer (“ad”) etc.; when combining Mehrgart et al with Rideout et al, it is obvious to one skilled in the art that a converter, e.g., a digital-to-analog converter, should be used after the mixer (“ad”) since the control signal to the signal source is an analog signal, or a digital-to-analog converter should be implemented between the output of the digital mixer and the input of the signal source.
Deng et al discloses a phase lock loop (Figure 3 etc.) in which a TDC (202) is used to convert a clock signal (RefClk) to a digital signal, which is further processed by digital circuits (204/206/208 etc.), and then after the digital signal processing, a feedback signal is converted back to an analog signal by the DTC 217; that is a TDC and DTC should be used in pair.
Relph teaches that an analog signal is first converted a digital signal by an A/D converter 202 and then the digital signal pass through multiple digital delay lines 100-170, and then a digital to analog converter 204 converts the delayed digital signals into an analog signal (ANALOG OUT); that is, Relph teaches a scheme to perform A/D conversion, digital signal processing and then digital-to-analog (D/A) conversion; and the digital-to-analog converter (204) is implemented at the output of a digital mixer that combines digital signals from the multiple digital delay lines (100/110/170 etc.).
Therefore, the combination of Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Deng et al and Relph teaches/suggests “"a digital-to-time converter (DTC) coupled between the output of the digital mixer and the input of the signal source," as recited by claim 1”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 5-6, 10 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
1). Claim 5, and thus depending claim 6, recites the limitations “additional converter coupled between an output of the digital mixer and the input of the signal source, wherein the additional converter is configured to convert the control signal from a digital domain to an analog domain”.
Claim 1, which the claim 5 depends from, recites “a digital-to-time converter (DTC) coupled between the output of the digital mixer and the input of the signal source”; that is, a digital-to-time converter is already included in the frequency discriminator.
According to the Specification, “an output converter 122. Input converter 112 may be coupled between input 110 and digital circuitry 132. Output converter 122 may be coupled between output 126 and digital circuitry 132. Input converter 112 and output converter 122 may be used to convert signals between the analog domain (e.g., at input 100 and output 126) and the digital domain (e.g., at digital circuitry 132)” ([0085]), and “As a first example, output converter 122 may include a digital-to-time converter (DTC) that converts the digital error signal from the digital domain to the time domain (e.g., as control signal SIGIN). … . As a second example, output converter 122 may include a digital-to-analog converter (DAC) that converts the digital error signal from the digital domain to the analog domain (e.g., as control signal SIGIN). … . As a third example, output converter 122 may be omitted and DFD 104 may provide control signal SIGIN to the input of signal source 100 in the digital domain (e.g., control signal SIGIN may be a digital signal)” ([0091]-[0092]); and as shown in Applicant’s Figure 9, only one output converter (122) is implemented. That is, based on the Specification and drawing, either a DTC or a DAC is included in the frequency discriminator, but not both a DTC and a DAC.
The original disclosure does not disclose that the frequency discriminator comprises both a DTC and additional converter, which both are coupled between an output of the digital mixer and the input of the signal source.
2). Claim 10 recites the limitation “a digital-to-analog converter (DAC) coupled between the output of the digital mixer and the input of the signal source”.
Claim 1, which the claim 10 depends from, recites “a digital-to-time converter (DTC) coupled between the output of the digital mixer and the input of the signal source”; that is, a digital-to-time converter DTC is included near the output of the frequency discriminator.
According to the Specification, “an output converter 122. Input converter 112 may be coupled between input 110 and digital circuitry 132. Output converter 122 may be coupled between output 126 and digital circuitry 132. Input converter 112 and output converter 122 may be used to convert signals between the analog domain (e.g., at input 100 and output 126) and the digital domain (e.g., at digital circuitry 132)” ([0085]), and “As a first example, output converter 122 may include a digital-to-time converter (DTC) that converts the digital error signal from the digital domain to the time domain (e.g., as control signal SIGIN). … . As a second example, output converter 122 may include a digital-to-analog converter (DAC) that converts the digital error signal from the digital domain to the analog domain (e.g., as control signal SIGIN). … . As a third example, output converter 122 may be omitted and DFD 104 may provide control signal SIGIN to the input of signal source 100 in the digital domain (e.g., control signal SIGIN may be a digital signal)” ([0091]-[0092]); and as shown in Applicant’s Figure 9, only one output converter (122) is implemented. That is, based on the Specification and drawing, either a DTC or a DAC is included in the frequency discriminator, but not both a DTC and a DAC.
The original disclosure does not disclose that the frequency discriminator comprises both a DTC and a digital-to-analog converter (DAC), which both are coupled between an output of the digital mixer and the input of the signal source.
3). Claim 16 recites the limitation “the output converter is configured to convert the control signal from a digital domain to an analog domain”.
Claim 15, which the claim 16 depends from, recites “wherein the output converter comprises a digital-to-time converter (DTC)”.
According to the Specification, “output converter 122 may include a digital-to-time converter (DTC) that converts the digital error signal from the digital domain to the time domain (e.g., as control signal SIGIN). The DTC may generate a time domain signal by programming the edges of a digital signal pulse to have a selected timing, for example. The DTC may additionally or alternatively set (program) the frequency, delay, duty cycle, and/or per-clock interval of the signal pulse” ([0091]). That is, the DTC converts the digital signal from the digital domain to the time domain.
The original disclosure does not teach/disclose that a DTC converts the control signal from a digital domain to an analog domain”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-7, 9-12 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rideout et al (Rideout et al: “Discriminator-Aided Optical Phase-Lock Loop Incorporating a Frequency Down-Conversion Module”, IEEE Photonics Technology Letters, November 15, 2006, Vol. 8, No. 22, pages 2344-2346) in view of Middleton et al (US 2013/0177319) and Ryu et al (US 4,888,817) and Mehrgardt (US 4,634,989) and Relph (US 6,218,880) and Deng et al (US 9.979,405).
1). With regard to claim 1, Rideout et al discloses a circuitry (Figure 1) comprising:
a signal source (e.g., the Master Laser in Figure 1);
a loop path (the loop path from the Master laser -> PD -> Down-conversion -> Splitter -> Frequency Discriminator -> Master laser) that couples an output of the signal source (the output of the Master laser) to an input of the signal source (the input that accepts the signal from the Frequency Discriminator); and
a frequency discriminator (the Frequency Discriminator in Figure 1) disposed on the loop path, the frequency discriminator including
a mixer (the Mixer M2) having an output communicatively coupled to the input of the signal source,
a delay (the Delay Line) coupled between a splitter (the Splitter in the Frequency Discriminator) and the digital mixer (Mixer M2), and
a phase shifter coupled between the splitter and the mixer (it is common that either the mixer or the splitter would introduce a phase shift).
But, Rideout et al does not expressly disclose that the signal source generate a clock signal, and the frequency discriminator is a digital frequency discriminator including a converter having an input communicatively coupled to the output of the signal source, a digital mixer having an output communicatively coupled to the input of the signal source, a digital delay coupled between the converter and the digital mixer, and a digital phase shifter coupled between the converter and the digital mixer in parallel with the digital delay, and a digital-to-time converter (DTC) coupled between the output of the digital mixer and the input of the signal source. And Rideout et al also does not expressly state that the circuitry is a wireless circuitry.
Regarding generating a clock signal, however, first, Rideout et al discloses that the system shown in Figure 1 can be used for radio-over-fiber (RoF) (page 2344, I. Introduction, and II. Design and Analysis), and the Down-conversion circuit (the combination of Photodetector, Amp 1 and Down-conversion module in Figure 1) down-converts the optical signal (Rideout: page 2344, II. Design And Analysis, “In this new configuration, to generate a microwave signal at 11.2 GHz, S1 is chosen to operate at 12 GHz, so that the frequency discriminator now operates at the offset frequency of these two, which is 800 MHz. The discriminator, a two-tap delay line filter, is designed by controlling the delay line length such that is has an operating null at 800 MHz. A DC feedback proportional to the difference between the down-converted frequency and the 800-MHz null is generated and sent to the master laser to maintain a fixed wavelength difference corresponding to 11.2 GHz”). Following Figure O1 is a comparison between Applicant’s Figure 12 (claimed features) and Figure 1 of Rideout.
PNG
media_image1.png
690
508
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure O1 (Comparison)
As shown in Figure O1 above (comparison), Applicant discloses two lasers (primary laser and secondary laser), and Rideout et al also discloses two lasers (Master laser and Slave laser); Applicant discloses a feedback control loop path, and Rideout et al also discloses a feedback control loop path; Applicant discloses a Down-conversion circuitry, and Rideout et al also discloses a Down-conversion circuitry; Applicant discloses a Phase Detector, and Rideout et al also discloses a Phase Detector. The only different is that Applicant uses a digital frequency discriminator (DFD), but Rideout et al uses a Frequency Discriminator (may not a digital frequency discriminator). Therefore, it is obvious to one skilled in the art that the system/method disclosed by Rideout can be used to control/stabilize a laser source that generates a clock signal.
Second, to use a laser to generate a clock signal or local oscillator signal is well known in the art. E.g., Middleton et al discloses a wireless communication system/method with optical carriers et al (Figures 2 and 4), in which a laser (28 in Figure 2; or a set of CW laser 62) generates a clock signal (modulated by the local oscillator 32 via the modulator 30), “a modulated optical carrier signal commensurate of the LO frequency” ([0028]). Also, another prior art, Ryu et al, discloses a system/method (Figure 3) in which a frequency discriminator (10) is used to control the frequency of the local oscillator laser (2) (column 3 lines 29-68). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teaching of Middleton et al and Ryu et al to the system/method of Rideout et al so that the system as disclosed by Rideout et al can be used to control the frequency of local oscillator having a clock signal.
Regarding a digital frequency discriminator, a digital frequency discriminator is well known in the art and commercially available. E.g., Mehrgardt discloses a digital frequency discriminator (Figure 1 etc.) including
a converter (A/D converter “aw” in Figure 1) having an input (the input that accepts the signal “a1”) communicatively coupled to the output of a signal source (the signal source that generates the “a1” signal),
a digital mixer (the Adder “ad”) having an output communicatively coupled to the input of the signal source (Figure 1),
a digital delay (e.g., Delay “v1” etc.) coupled between the converter and the digital mixer, and
a digital phase shifter (e.g., Phase shifter “ht”) coupled between the converter and the digital mixer in parallel with the digital delay (Figure 1).
In Figure 1 of Rideout, the control signal sent from the Frequency Discriminator to the Master Laser is an analog signal, therefore, it is obvious to one skilled in the art that a digital-to-analog converter is needed after the digital mixer (e.g., the adder “ad” of Mehrgardt) so to convert a digital signal back to the analog signal to control the laser.
Relph discloses a digital delay line (Figure 2), in which an analog signal (ANALOG IN) is first converted into digital signal by an A/D converter 202 and then the digital signal pass through multiple digital delay lines 100-170, and then a digital to analog converter 204 converts the delayed digital signals into an analog signal (ANALOG OUT). That is, Relph teaches a scheme to perform analog-to-digital (A/D) conversion, digital signal processing and then digital-to-analog (D/A) conversion; and the digital-to-analog converter (204) is implemented at the output of a digital mixer that combines digital signals from the multiple digital delay lines (100/110/170 etc.).
Another prior art, Deng et al, discloses a phase lock loop (Figure 3 etc.) in which a TDC (time-to-digital conversion 202) is used to convert a clock signal (RefClk) to a digital signal, which is further processed by digital circuits (204/206/208 etc.), and then after the digital signal processing, a feedback signal is converted back to an analog signal by the digital-time conversion (DTC 217). That is, a TDC and a DTC should be used in pair.
The combination of TDC and DTC allow complex, high-speed signals to be processed digitally rather than in the analog, and has the advantage of directly outputting precisely timed pulses or manage signal synchronization using standard digital buses, and beneficial for fine-tuning clock signals. Therefore, it is obvious to one skilled in the art that the A/D converter and D/A converter of Relph can be replaced by a TDC and a DTC. By combining Deng et al with Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph, a DTC is implemented at the output of the digital mixer, or “a digital-to-time converter (DTC) is coupled between the output of the digital mixer and the input of the signal source”.
Regarding the wireless circuitry, as discussed above and shown in Figure O1, Rideout et al and Applicant disclose similar circuitries, except different frequency discriminator; and Rideout et al discloses that the system shown in Figure 1 can be used for radio-over-fiber (RoF), and Middleton et al discloses a wireless communication system/method with optical carriers et al (Figures 2 and 4), in which a laser (28 in Figure 2; or a set of CW laser 62) generates a clock signal (modulated by the local oscillator 32 via the modulator 30); therefore, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art that the circuitry of the combined Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al can be used as a wireless circuitry.
A digital frequency discriminator has the advantage of greater accuracy, flexibility, and noise immunity, along with benefits like easier integration into complex system. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al with Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al so that a digital frequency discriminator with TDC and DTC is used for controlling the time delay and the clock signal or local oscillator more accurately.
2). With regard to claim 2, Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al disclose all of the subject matter as applied to claim 1 above. And the combination of Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al further discloses
wherein the converter is configured to convert the clock signal into a digital signal, the digital delay is configured to generate a delayed signal by applying a time delay to the digital signal (Rideout and Mehrgardt: a time delay is applied to one path), the digital phase shifter is configured to generate a phase shifted signal by applying a phase shift to the digital signal (Rideout and Mehrgardt: phase delay is applied to another path), and the mixer is configured to generate a control signal by mixing the phase shifted signal with the delayed signal (Rideout: Mixer M2; and Mehrgardt: adder “ad”).
3). With regard to claim 3, Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al disclose all of the subject matter as applied to claims 1 and 2 above. And the combination of Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al further discloses
wherein the phase shift is a 90-degree phase shift (Mehrgardt: digital 90o phase shifter ht, column 2 lines 27-31)
4). With regard to claim 4, Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al disclose all of the subject matter as applied to claims 1 and 2 above. And the combination of Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al further discloses
wherein the signal source is configured to adjust the clock signal based on the control signal (Rideout: feedback control signal from the Frequency Discriminator is input to the Master Laser. Ryu: Figure 3, the control circuit 11 receives signals from the frequency discriminator 10 and then control the laser local oscillator 2).
5). With regard to claim 5, Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al disclose all of the subject matter as applied to claims 1-2 above. And the combination of Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al further discloses the frequency discriminator further comprising:
an additional converter coupled between an output of the digital mixer and the input of the signal source, wherein the additional converter is configured to convert the control signal from a digital domain to an analog domain (as discussed in claim 1 rejection, a digital-to-analog converter can be implemented at the output of the digital mixer, e.g., D/A converter in Figure 2 of Relph; and the combination of Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al further discloses the frequency discriminator further comprising: an additional converter coupled between an output of the digital mixer and the input of the signal source, wherein the additional converter is configured to convert the control signal from a digital domain to an analog domain. Also refer to 112 rejection above).
6). With regard to claim 6, Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al disclose all of the subject matter as applied to claims 1-2 and 5 above. And the combination of Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al further discloses the wireless circuitry of claim 5, the frequency discriminator further comprising:
a filter (e.g., Rideout: Low-pass filer LP1) coupled between an output of the additional converter and the input of the signal source.
7). With regard to claim 7, Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al disclose all of the subject matter as applied to claim 1 above. And the combination of Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al further discloses wherein the converter comprises a time-to-digital converter (TDC) (refer to claim 1 rejection above, the combination of Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al discloses that the TDC and DTC are used in pair).
8). With regard to claim 9, Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al disclose all of the subject matter as applied to claim 1 above. And the combination of Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al further discloses
wherein the converter comprises an analog-to-digital converter (ADC) (e.g., Mehrgardt: A/D “aw”; and A/D converter 202 in Figure 2 of Relph. Also refer to 112 rejection above).
9). With regard to claim 10, Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al disclose all of the subject matter as applied to claim 1 above. And the combination of Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al further discloses the frequency discriminator further comprising:
a digital-to-analog converter (DAC) coupled between the output of the digital mixer and the input of the signal source (as discussed in claim 1 rejection, a digital-to-analog converter can be implemented at the output of the digital mixer, e.g., D/A converter in Figure 2 of Relph; and the combination of Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al discloses the frequency discriminator further comprising: a digital-to-analog converter (DAC) coupled between the output of the digital mixer and the input of the signal source. Also refer to 112 rejection above).
10). With regard to claim 11, Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al disclose all of the subject matter as applied to claim 1 above. And the combination of Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al further discloses
wherein the digital delay comprises a set of delay stages coupled in parallel between the converter and the digital mixer (e.g., Relph discloses a digital delay line (Figure 3) comprising a set of delay stages (100 to 179) coupled in parallel between a converter (ADC 202) and a digital mixer (the combiner before the DAC 204).
11). With regard to claim 12, Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al disclose all of the subject matter as applied to claim 1 above. And the combination of Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al further discloses
wherein the digital delay comprises a set of delay stages coupled in series between the converter and the digital mixer (e.g., Mehrgardt: Figure 1, the delay element “v1” and the delay element “v2” coupled in series between the converter “A/D aw” and the digital mixer “ADDER ad”).
12). With regard to claim 21, Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al disclose all of the subject matter as applied to claim 1 above. And the combination of Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al further discloses the wireless circuitry of claim 1, further comprising a loop filter, wherein the DTC is coupled between the output of the digital mixer and an input of the loop filter (Rideout discloses that a loop filter “Low-Pass filter LP2” is used to obtain desired frequency component from the mixer M2, and send the filtered signal to the signal source, and then, the combination of Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al discloses that a DTC is used at the output of digital mixer; and then the combination of Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al teaches/suggests wherein the DTC is coupled between the output of the digital mixer and an input of the loop filter so that the loop filter can filter desired signal component and send the desired signal component to the signal source).
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim et al (US 2022/0303017).
1). With regard to claim 13, Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al disclose all of the subject matter as applied to claim 1 above. And the combination of Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al further discloses wherein the signal source comprises a laser (e.g., Master Laser in Figure 1 of Rideout. Middleton: Laser 28; and Ryu: Laser for local oscillator 2) and the clock signal is an optical local oscillator (LO) signal (refer claim 1 rejection. And Middleton: Laser 28 for local oscillator; and Ryu: Laser for local oscillator 2. And, Ryu et al teaches that a frequency discriminator (10) is used to control the frequency of the local oscillator laser; and Rideout also discloses system is used for radio-over-fiber (RoF), page 2344, I. Introduction, and II. Design and Analysis).
But, Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al do not expressly disclose the wireless circuitry further comprising: an antenna radiating element; and a photodiode configured to produce an antenna current on the antenna radiating element based on the optical LO signal.
First, as discussed above, Rideout also discloses that the system is used for radio-over-fiber (RoF), and Middleton et al discloses a wireless communication system/method with optical carriers et al (Figures 2 and 4); it is obvious to one skilled in the art that the combination of Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt can be used for radio-over-fiber hybrid wireless communications.
Second, Kim et al discloses a light-based wireless transmission system (Figure 1) comprising: an antenna radiating element (179), and a photodiode (160) configured to produce an antenna current on the antenna radiating element based on the optical LO signal (from local oscillator 110).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Kim et al to the system/method of Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al so that the system/method can be used in a RoF wireless communication system and to obtain a frequency and phase stabilized local oscillator.
2). With regard to claim 14, Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al and Kim et al disclose all of the subject matter as applied to claims 1 and 13 above. And the combination of Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al and Kim et al further discloses the wireless circuitry of claim 13, further comprising:
downconversion circuitry (e.g., Rideout: the combination of Photodetector, Amp 1 and Down-conversion module in Figure 1) disposed on the loop path between the frequency discriminator and the output of the signal source (Rideout: via a splitter that splits portion of optical signal to the Photodetector, Figure 1), the downconversion circuitry being configured to convert the optical LO signal into a radio-frequency signal (Rideout: page 2344, II. Design And Analysis, “In this new configuration, to generate a microwave signal at 11.2 GHz, S1 is chosen to operate at 12 GHz, so that the frequency discriminator now operates at the offset frequency of these two, which is 800 MHz. The discriminator, a two-tap delay line filter, is designed by controlling the delay line length such that is has an operating null at 800 MHz. A DC feedback proportional to the difference between the down-converted frequency and the 800-MHz null is generated and sent to the master laser to maintain a fixed wavelength difference corresponding to 11.2 GHz”).
Claims 15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mehrgardt (US 4,634,989) in view of Noguchi (US 2025/0167893) and Relph (US 6,218,880) and Deng et al (US 9.979,405).
1). With regard to claim 15, Mehrgardt discloses a frequency discriminator (Figure 1 etc.) comprising:
an input converter (A/D converter “aw” in Figure 1);
a digital mixer (the Adder “ad”) having a first input coupled to an output of the input converter over a first path (the input for the signal over the upper path Delay v1 -> Delay v2 -> Mult m1 -> Adder) and having a second input coupled to the output of the input converter over a second path (the input for the signal over the bottom Phase shifter ht -> Delay v3 -> Mult m2 -> Adder) parallel to the first path (Figure 1);
a digital delay circuit (Delay v1 and Delay v2) disposed on the first path;
a digital phase shifter (Phase shifter ht) disposed on the second path.
But, Mehrgardt does not expressly disclose an output converter coupled to an output of the digital mixer, wherein the output converter comprises a digital-to-time converter (DTC).
However, when the output signal from the digital frequency discriminator is used for the purpose of controlling, e.g., used to control a signal source, the output signal from the frequency discriminator normally needs to be converted back to the format as the input signal, therefore, it is obvious to one skilled in the art that an output converter, e.g., a Digital-to-Analog converter (DAC), is needed to be coupled to the output of the digital mixer so to obtain an analog signal, which is same format as the input signal. E.g., Noguchi discloses a procedure to process a signal in digital domain (Figure 14), in which an analog signal (SA1) is first converted into digital signal (SD1) and then the digital signal is processed by a digital signal processing unit (230), and then processed digital signal (SD2) is converted back to an analog signal (SA2) by a DAC (270), and then to a front-end unit (220). Another prior art, Relph discloses a digital delay line (Figure 2), in which an analog signal (ANALOG IN) is first converted to digital signal by an A/D converter 202 and then the digital signal pass through multiple digital delay lines 100-170, and then a digital to analog converter 204 converts the delayed digital signals into an analog signal (ANALOG OUT).
Another prior art, Deng et al, discloses a phase lock loop (Figure 3 etc.) in which a TDC (time-to-digital conversion 202) is used to convert a clock signal (RefClk) to a digital signal, which is further processed by digital circuits (204/206/208 etc.), and then after the digital signal processing, a feedback signal is converted back to an analog signal by the digital-time conversion (DTC 217). That is, a TDC and a DTC should be used in pair.
The combination of TDC and DTC allow complex, high-speed signals to be processed digitally rather than in the analog, and has the advantage of directly outputting precisely timed pulses or manage signal synchronization using standard digital buses, and beneficial for fine-tuning clock signals. Therefore, it is obvious to one skilled in the art that the A/D converter and D/A converter of Relph can be replaced by a TDC and a DTC. By combining Deng et al with Mehrgardt and Noguchi and Relph, a DTC is implemented at the output of the digital mixer, which performs digital to time conversion.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply an output converter, e.g., a DTC, as taught by Noguchi and Relph and Deng et al to the system of Mehrgardt so that the digitally processed signal is converted back to the same format as the input format, and to use the converted-back signal for a desired purpose.
2). With regard to claim 17, Mehrgardt and Noguchi and Relph and Deng et al disclose all of the subject matter as applied to claim 15 above. And the combination of Mehrgardt and Noguchi and Relph and Deng et al further discloses
wherein the input converter comprises a time-to-digital converter (TDC) (Deng: TDC and DTC are used in pair; the combination of Mehrgardt and Noguchi and Relph and Deng et al teaches/suggests a TDC is used as the input converter) or an analog-to-digital converter (ADC) (Mehrgardt and Noguchi and Relph: ADC is used as the input converter).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mehrgardt and Noguchi and Relph and Deng et al as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Rideout et al (Rideout et al: “Discriminator-Aided Optical Phase-Lock Loop Incorporating a Frequency Down-Conversion Module”, IEEE Photonics Technology Letters, November 15, 2006, Vol. 8, No. 22, pages 2344-2346) and Middleton et al (US 2013/0177319) and Ryu et al (US 4,888,817).
Mehrgardt and Noguchi and Relph and Deng et al disclose all of the subject matter as applied to claim 15 above. And the combination of Mehrgardt and Noguchi and Relph and Deng et al further discloses
wherein the input converter is configured to receive a signal (Mehrgardt: Figure 1, signal a1) and is configured to convert the signal into a digital signal (Mehrgardt: by the A/D converter: aw), the digital delay circuit (Mehrgardt: Delay v1 and delay v2) is configured to generate a delayed signal based on the digital signal, the digital phase shifter (Phase shifter ht) is configured to generate a phase shifted signal by applying a 90-degree phase shift (Mehrgardt: digital 90o phase shifter ht, column 2 lines 27-31) to the digital signal, and the output converter is configured to convert the digital signal, which is processed by the delay circuit and phase shift, from a digital domain to an analog domain (Relph: DAC output converter).
But, Mehrgardt and Noguchi and Relph and Deng et al do not expressly disclose that the signal received is a clock signal; and the mixer is configured to generate a control signal indicative of a phase noise of the clock signal by mixing the delayed signal with the phase shifted signal, and the output converter is configured to convert the control signal from a digital domain to an analog domain (also, refer to 112 rejection above).
However, first, Rideout et al discloses a system/method in which a low phase noise, highly frequency-stable, and frequency-tunable radio frequency signal can be generated using a discriminator-aided optical phase-lock loop (OPLL) incorporating a frequency down-conversion module to generate (Figure 1). As shown in Figure 1, a mixer (Mixer M2) is configured to generate a control signal (the signal output from the Frequency Discriminator) indicative of a phase noise of a signal (originated from a Master Laser; page 2345, B. Phase Noise Analysis and III. Results etc.) by mixing the delayed signal (via a Delay Line) with the phase shifted signal (the signal from another path from the Splitter to the Mixer M2; it is common that either the mixer or the splitter would introduce a phase shift).
Rideout et al does not state that a clock signal is received and an output converter is used.
Regarding the clock signal, however, first, Rideout et al discloses that the system shown in Figure 1 can be used for radio-over-fiber (RoF) (page 2344, I. Introduction, and II. Design and Analysis), and the Down-conversion circuit (the combination of Photodetector, Amp 1 and Down-conversion module in Figure 1) down-converts the optical signal (Rideout: page 2344, II. Design And Analysis, “In this new configuration, to generate a microwave signal at 11.2 GHz, S1 is chosen to operate at 12 GHz, so that the frequency discriminator now operates at the offset frequency of these two, which is 800 MHz. The discriminator, a two-tap delay line filter, is designed by controlling the delay line length such that is has an operating null at 800 MHz. A DC feedback proportional to the difference between the down-converted frequency and the 800-MHz null is generated and sent to the master laser to maintain a fixed wavelength difference corresponding to 11.2 GHz”). Figure O1 in page 5 of this Office-Action shows a comparison between Applicant’s Figure 12 (claimed features) and Figure 1 of Rideout.
As shown in Figure O1, Applicant discloses two lasers (primary laser and secondary laser), and Rideout et al also discloses two lasers (Master laser and Slave laser); Applicant discloses a feedback control loop path, and Rideout et al also discloses a feedback control loop path; Applicant discloses a Down-conversion circuitry, and Rideout et al also discloses a Down-conversion circuitry; Applicant discloses a Phase Detector, and Rideout et al also discloses a Phase Detector. The only different is that Applicant uses a digital frequency discriminator (DFD), but Rideout et al uses a Frequency Discriminator (may not a digital frequency discriminator). Therefore, it is obvious to one skilled in the art that the system/method disclosed by Rideout can be used to control/stabilize a laser source that generates a clock signal.
Second, to use a laser to generate a clock signal or local oscillator signal is well known in the art. E.g., Middleton et al discloses a wireless communication system/method with optical carriers et al (Figures 2 and 4), in which a laser (28 in Figure 2; or a set of CW laser 62) generates a clock signal (modulated by the local oscillator 32 via the modulator 30), “a modulated optical carrier signal commensurate of the LO frequency” ([0028]). Also, another prior art, Ryu et al, discloses a system/method (Figure 3) in which a frequency discriminator (10) is used to control the frequency of the local oscillator laser (2) (column 3 lines 29-68).
The combination of Mehrgardt and Noguchi and Relph and Deng et al discloses a digital frequency discriminator with an input converter (ADC or TDC) and an output converter (DAC or DTC). A digital frequency discriminator has the advantage of greater accuracy, flexibility, and noise immunity, along with benefits like easier integration into complex system. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art that a digital frequency discriminator can be used in the system of Rideout so to controlling the clock signal or local oscillator more accurately. And the combination of Mehrgardt and Noguchi and Relph and Deng et al discloses an output converter (DAC or DTC); therefore, while a digital frequency discriminator is incorporated into the system shown in Figure 1 of Rideout, it is obvious that an output converter (DAC or DTC), which is disclosed by Mehrgardt and Noguchi and Relph and Deng et al, can convert the control signal from a digital domain to an analog domain so to control the master laser.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Rideout et al and Middleton et al and Ryu et al with Mehrgardt and Noguchi and Relph and Deng et al so that a digital frequency discriminator is used to stabilize the frequency/phase of a local oscillator having a clock signal.
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rideout et al (Rideout et al: “Discriminator-Aided Optical Phase-Lock Loop Incorporating a Frequency Down-Conversion Module”, IEEE Photonics Technology Letters, November 15, 2006, Vol. 8, No. 22, pages 2344-2346) in view of Kim et al (US 2022/0303017) and Mehrgardt (US 4,634,989) and Relph (US 6,218,880) and Deng et al (US 9.979,405).
1). With regard to claim 19, Rideout et al discloses an electronic device comprising:
a first light source (Figure 1, the Master Laser) configured to generate a first optical signal;
a second light source (Figure 1, the Slave Laser) configured to generate a second signal; and
a frequency discriminator (the Frequency Discriminator) coupled between an output of the first light source (the output of the Master laser, and then PD -> Down-conversion -> Splitter -> Frequency Discriminator) and an input of the first light source (the input of the Master Laser that accepts the signal from the Frequency Discriminator), the frequency discriminator including
a splitter (in the Frequency Discriminator) to accept an input signal (from the Down-Conversion/Splitter)
circuitry (e.g., the Splitter/Mixer M2, Delay Line and Low-pass filter LP2 etc.) configured to generate a control signal based on the input signal, the control signal being indicative of a phase noise of the input signal (page 2345, B. Phase Noise Analysis and III. Results etc.).
But, Rideout et al does not expressly disclose: an antenna radiating element; a photodiode coupled to the antenna radiating element; the first light source configured to generate a first optical local oscillator (LO) signal that illuminates the photodiode; the second light source configured to generate a second optical LO signal that illuminates the photodiode; and the frequency discriminator including a converter configured to convert an input signal into a digital signal, and a digital-to-time converter (DTC) configured to generate a control signal based on the digital signal.
Regarding the antenna etc., first, Rideout discloses that the system shown in Figure 1 can be used for radio-over-fiber (RoF) (page 2344, I. Introduction, and II. Design and Analysis). Figure O1 in page 5 of this Office-Action shows a comparison between Applicant’s Figure 12 (claimed features) and Figure 1 of Rideout.
As shown in Figure O1, Applicant discloses two lasers (primary laser and secondary laser), and Rideout et al also discloses two lasers (Master laser and Slave laser); Applicant discloses a feedback control loop path, and Rideout et al also discloses a feedback control loop path; Applicant discloses a Down-conversion circuitry, and Rideout et al also discloses a Down-conversion circuitry; Applicant discloses a Phase Detector, and Rideout et al also discloses a Phase Detector. The only different is that Applicant uses a digital frequency discriminator (DFD), but Rideout et al uses a Frequency Discriminator (may not a digital frequency discriminator). The structure of Applicant’s system and Rideout’s system are the same. Therefore, it is obvious to one skilled in the art that the system/method disclosed by Rideout can be used for a RoF wireless communications.
Second, Kim et al discloses a light-based wireless transmission system (Figure 1) comprising: an antenna radiating element (170 in Figure 1); a photodiode (UTC-PD 160) coupled to the antenna radiating element; a first light source (e.g., laser 110, Local Oscillator) configured to generate a first optical local oscillator (LO) signal that illuminates the photodiode; a second light source (e.g., laser 120) configured to generate a second optical LO signal that illuminates the photodiode; an antenna radiating element (179), and a photodiode (160) configured to produce an antenna current on the antenna radiating element based on the optical LO signal (from local oscillator 110).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Kim et al to the system/method of Rideout et al so that the system/method can be used in a RoF wireless communication system and to obtain a frequency and phase stabilized local oscillator.
Regarding the digital frequency oscillator, a digital frequency discriminator is well known in the art and commercially available. E.g., Mehrgardt discloses a digital frequency discriminator (Figure 1 etc.) including a converter (A/D converter “aw” in Figure 1) configured to convert an input signal (signal “a1”) into a digital signal, and digital circuitry (a digital delays “v1”/“v2”, a digital phase shifter “ht”, and mixer “ad” etc.) configured to generate an output signal based on the digital signal. Mehrgardt does not expressly show a digital-to-time converter (DTC).
Relph discloses a digital delay line (Figure 2), in which an analog signal (ANALOG IN) is first converted into digital signal by an A/D converter 202 and then the digital signal pass through multiple digital delay lines 100-170, and then a digital to analog converter 204 converts the delayed digital signals into an analog signal (ANALOG OUT). That is, Relph teaches a scheme to perform analog-to-digital (A/D) conversion, digital signal processing and then digital-to-analog (D/A) conversion; and the digital-to-analog converter (204) is implemented at the output of a digital mixer that combines digital signals from the multiple digital delay lines (100/110/170 etc.).
Another prior art, Deng et al, discloses a phase lock loop (Figure 3 etc.) in which a TDC (time-to-digital conversion 202) is used to convert a clock signal (RefClk) to a digital signal, which is further processed by digital circuits (204/206/208 etc.), and then after the digital signal processing, a feedback signal is converted back to an analog signal by the digital-time conversion (DTC 217). That is, a TDC and a DTC should be used in pair.
The combination of TDC and DTC allow complex, high-speed signals to be processed digitally rather than in the analog, and has the advantage of directly outputting precisely timed pulses or manage signal synchronization using standard digital buses, and beneficial for fine-tuning clock signals. Therefore, it is obvious to one skilled in the art that the A/D converter and D/A converter of Relph can be replaced by a TDC and a DTC. By combining Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al with Rideout et al and Kim et al, a digital frequency discriminator is used for controlling the clock signal or local oscillator more accurately, and a DTC is implemented at the output of a digital mixer, and generate a control signal based on the digital signal, the control signal being indicative of a phase noise of the input signal.
A digital frequency discriminator has the advantage of greater accuracy, flexibility, and noise immunity, along with benefits like easier integration into complex system. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al with Rideout et al and Kim et al so that a digital frequency discriminator with DTC is used for controlling the clock signal or local oscillator more accurately.
2). With regard to claim 20, Rideout et al and Kim et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al disclose all of the subject matter as applied to claim 1 above. And the combination of Rideout et al and Kim et al and Mehrgardt and Relph and Deng et al further discloses the electronic device of claim 19, further comprising:
a phase detector (Rideout: Phase Detector, which includes a Reference source S2, Mixer M3 and Low Pass filter LP1) coupled between an output of the second light source (Slave Laser -> Photodetector -> Down-conversion -> Splitter -> Phase Detector) and an input of the second light source (the input of the Slave Laser); and
downconversion circuitry (Rideout: the combination of Photodetector, Amp 1 and Down-conversion module in Figure 1) coupled between the outputs of the first and second light sources, an input of the phase detector, and an input of the frequency discriminator (Maser Laser/Slave Laser -> Photodetector -> Down-conversion -> Splitter -> Phase Detector/Frequency Discriminator).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mehrgardt and Noguchi and Relph and Deng et al as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Rideout et al (Rideout et al: “Discriminator-Aided Optical Phase-Lock Loop Incorporating a Frequency Down-Conversion Module”, IEEE Photonics Technology Letters, November 15, 2006, Vol. 8, No. 22, pages 2344-2346).
Mehrgardt and Noguchi and Relph and Deng et al disclose all of the subject matter as applied to claim 15 above. But, Mehrgardt and Noguchi and Relph and Deng et al do not expressly disclose wherein an output of the DTC is coupled to an input of a loop filter.
However, Rideout et al discloses a system/method in which a low phase noise, highly frequency-stable, and frequency-tunable radio frequency signal can be generated using a discriminator-aided optical phase-lock loop (OPLL) incorporating a frequency down-conversion module to generate (Figure 1). As shown in Figure 1, a mixer (Mixer M2) is configured to generate a control signal (the signal output from the Frequency Discriminator) indicative of a phase noise of a signal (originated from a Master Laser; page 2345, B. Phase Noise Analysis and III. Results etc.) by mixing the delayed signal (via a Delay Line) with the phase shifted signal (the signal from another path from the Splitter to the Mixer M2; it is common that either the mixer or the splitter would introduce a phase shift). Rideout discloses that a loop filter “Low-Pass filter LP2” is used to obtain desired frequency component from the mixer M2, and send the filtered signal to the signal source. And the combination of Mehrgardt and Noguchi and Relph and Deng et al discloses a digital frequency discriminator with DTC at the output of a digital mixer; then based on the teachings of Rideout et al, it is obvious to one skilled in the art that a loop filter should be used at the output of the DTC so to filter desired signal from the DTC.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Rideout et with Mehrgardt and Noguchi and Relph and Deng et al so that a desired signal component can be obtained, and noise can be reduced.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 LI LIU whose telephone number is (571)270-1084. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am - 8 pm.
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, Kenneth Vanderpuye can be reached at (571)272-3078. 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.
/LI LIU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2634 May 30, 2026
Prosecution Insights