DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claims 2-7 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 2-7 recite the limitation “The method…”, however it appears that this limitation was written by accident instead of “The system…” i.e. because independent claim 1 is directed to a system. Appropriate correction is required for clarification and consistency.
Claims 19-20 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 19-20 recite the limitation “The system…”, however it appears that this limitation was written by accident instead of “The method…” i.e. because independent claim 17 is directed to a method. Appropriate correction is required for clarification and consistency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
1. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 4-6, 16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the multiplexed optical signal”, however, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. There is no previous recitation of multiplexing optical signals.
Claims 16 and 20 recite the limitation "the demodulated higher order modes”, however, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. There is no previous recitation of demodulating higher order modes.
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 1-5 and 8-15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sleiffer et al (73.7 Tb/s (96 x 3 x 256-Gb/s) mode-division-multiplexed DP-16QAM transmission with inline MM-EDFA) in view of Sleiffer 2 et al (Ultra-high Capacity Transmission with Few-mode Silica and Hollow-core Photonic Bandgap Fibers).
Regarding Claim 1. Sleiffer discloses a system, comprising:
a transmitter configured to generate a multiple polarization optical signal based on an optical input signal (Fig 1, where a transmitter (i.e. before fiber spans 1 and 2) is configured to generate a multiple polarization optical signal (which includes LP01, LP11A, LP11B) based on an optical input signal (e.g. from an ECL laser));
a fiber configured to transmit the multiple polarization optical signal (Fig 1, where a fiber (fiber spans 1 and 2) is configured to transmit the multiple polarization optical signal (which includes LP01, LP11A, LP11B));
a receiver configured to receive the multiple polarization optical signal (Fig 1, where a receiver (i.e. after fiber spans 1 and 2) is configured to receive the multiple polarization optical signal (which includes LP01, LP11A, LP11B)); and
a digital signal processor (DSP) configured to monitor one or more operating parameters of the received multiple polarization optical signal (Fig 1, where a digital signal processor (DSP) (i.e. scopes 1 and 2) is configured to monitor one or more operating parameters (e.g. bit error rate BER) (as shown in Fig 6) of the received multiple polarization optical signal (LP01, LP11A, LP11B)).
Sleiffer fails to explicitly disclose the fiber being a hollow core fiber (HCF).
However, Sleiffer 2 discloses
a fiber being a hollow core fiber (HCF) (Fig 1, where a fiber (i.e. between Mode Mux and Mode Demux) is a hollow core fiber (HC-PBGF)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the fiber (fiber spans 1 and 2) as described in Sleiffer, with the teachings of the fiber (i.e. between Mode Mux and Mode Demux) as described in Sleiffer 2. The motivation being is that as shown a fiber (i.e. between Mode Mux and Mode Demux) can be a hollow core fiber (HC-PBGF) and one of ordinary skill in the art can implement this concept into the fiber (fiber spans 1 and 2) as described in Sleiffer and have the fiber (fiber spans 1 and 2) be a hollow core fiber (HC-PBGF) i.e. as an alternative so as to have the fiber (fiber spans 1 and 2) with a known technique of a known fiber (i.e. between Mode Mux and Mode Demux) for the purpose of optimally transmitting the multiple polarization optical signal (which includes LP01, LP11A, LP11B) over a hollow core fiber and which technique implements the benefits of a hollow core fiber into the system which includes for example low loss, low nonlinearity and low latency and which modification is being made because the systems are similar and have overlapping components (e.g. optical transmitters and optical receivers) and which modification is a simple implementation of a known concept of a known the fiber (i.e. between Mode Mux and Mode Demux) into another similar fiber (fiber spans 1 and 2), namely, for its improvement and for optimization and which modification yields predictable results.
Regarding Claim 2. Sleiffer as modified by Sleiffer 2 also discloses the method, wherein the transmitter is a multimodal transmitter configured to multiplex multiple optical signals onto a single carrier frequency for transmission over the HCF (Sleiffer Fig 1, where the transmitter (i.e. before fiber spans 1 and 2) is a multimodal transmitter configured to multiplex multiple optical signals (i.e. LP01, LP11A, LP11B) onto a single carrier frequency (i.e. from an ECL laser) for transmission over the fiber spans 1 and 2 (HCF)).
Regarding Claim 3. Sleiffer as modified by Sleiffer 2 also discloses the method, wherein the transmitter further comprising a plurality of modulating phase plates, each of the plurality of modulating phase plates configured to generate a higher order mode of one of the multiple optical signals before the one of the multiple optical signals is multiplexed (Sleiffer Fig 1, where the transmitter (i.e. before fiber spans 1 and 2) further comprises a plurality of modulating phase plates (i.e. at Mode MUX) (as also shown in Fig 4), each of the plurality of modulating phase plates (i.e. at Mode MUX) (as also shown in Fig 4) is configured to generate a higher order mode (similar to Applicant’s disclosure Fig 1) of one of the multiple optical signals (LP01, LP11A, LP11B) before the one of the multiple optical signals (LP01, LP11A, LP11B) is multiplexed).
Regarding Claim 4. Sleiffer as modified by Sleiffer 2 also discloses the method, wherein the receiver is a multimodal receiver configured to demultiplex the multiplexed optical signal received from the HCF (Sleiffer Fig 1, where the receiver (i.e. after fiber spans 1 and 2) is a multimodal receiver configured to demultiplex a multiplexed optical signal (which includes LP01, LP11A, LP11B) received from the fiber (fiber spans 1 and 2) (HCF)).
Regarding Claim 5. Sleiffer as modified by Sleiffer 2 also discloses the method, wherein the receiver further comprising a plurality of demodulating phase plates, each of the plurality of demodulating phase plates configured to demodulate higher order modes from the demultiplexed signal (Sleiffer Fig 1, where the receiver (i.e. after fiber spans 1 and 2) further comprises a plurality of demodulating phase plates (i.e. at Mode DEMUX) (as also shown in Fig 4), each of the plurality of demodulating phase plates (i.e. at Mode DEMUX) (as also shown in Fig 4) is configured to demodulate higher order modes (similar to Applicant’s disclosure Fig 1) from the demultiplexed signal (which includes LP01, LP11A, LP11B)).
Regarding Claim 8. Sleiffer discloses an optical service channel, comprising:
a multimodal transmitter configured to generate a multiple polarization optical signal based on an optical input signal (Fig 1, where a multimodal transmitter (i.e. before fiber spans 1 and 2) is configured to generate a multiple polarization optical signal (which includes LP01, LP11A, LP11B) based on an optical input signal (e.g. from an ECL laser)), the multimodal transmitter including:
a plurality of transmitters, each of the plurality of transmitters configured to generate a polarized optical signal (Fig 1, where the multimodal transmitter (i.e. before fiber spans 1 and 2) includes a plurality of transmitters (e.g. for LP01, for LP11A, for LP11B), each of the plurality of transmitters (e.g. for LP01, for LP11A, for LP11B) is configured to generate a polarized optical signal (LP01, LP11A, LP11B));
a plurality of modulating phase plates, wherein each of the plurality of modulating phase plates is configured to shift phase of one of the polarized optical signals to generate phase shifted polarized optical signals (Fig 1, where the multimodal transmitter (i.e. before fiber spans 1 and 2) includes a plurality of modulating phase plates (i.e. at Mode MUX) (as also shown in Fig 4), each of the plurality of modulating phase plates (i.e. at Mode MUX) (as also shown in Fig 4) is configured to shift phase of one of the polarized optical signals (LP01, LP11A, LP11B) to generate phase shifted polarized optical signals); and
a multiplexer configured to multiplex the phase shifted polarized optical signals to generate a multiplexed optical signal (Fig 1, where the multimodal transmitter (i.e. before fiber spans 1 and 2) includes a multiplexer (i.e. at Mode MUX) (as also shown in Fig 4) configured to multiplex the phase shifted polarized optical signals to generate a multiplexed optical signal for transmission over fiber spans 1 and 2).
Sleiffer fails to explicitly disclose the polarized optical signals being different linear polarizations.
However, Sleiffer 2 discloses
polarized optical signals being different linear polarizations (Fig 1, section “2. Experiment setup” para [1] where polarized optical signals (LP01, LP11a, LP11b) are different linear polarizations).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of the polarized optical signals (LP01, LP11A, LP11B) as described in Sleiffer, with the teachings of the polarized optical signals (LP01, LP11a, LP11b) as described in Sleiffer 2. The motivation being is that as shown polarized optical signals (LP01, LP11a, LP11b) are different linear polarizations and one of ordinary skill in the art can implement this concept into the polarized optical signals (LP01, LP11A, LP11B) as described in Sleiffer and better show and illustrate that the polarized optical signals (LP01, LP11A, LP11B) are different linear polarizations i.e. because each optical signal LP01, LP11A and LP11B is a linearly polarized mode with its own polarization and is used as a communication channel to optimally transfer data between a transmitter and a receiver and which combination is being made because the systems are similar and have overlapping components (e.g. optical transmitters and optical receivers) and which combination is a simple implementation of a known concept of known polarized optical signals (LP01, LP11a, LP11b) into other similar polarized optical signals (LP01, LP11A, LP11B), namely, for better clarifying their operation/ configuration and which combination yields predictable results.
Regarding Claim 9. Sleiffer as modified by Sleiffer 2 also discloses the optical service channel, wherein the plurality of transmitters further comprising: a first transmitter configured to generate a polarized optical signal with LP.sub.01 polarization, a second transmitter configured to generate a polarized optical signal with LP.sub.11a polarization; and a third transmitter configured to generate a polarized optical signal with LP.sub.11b polarization (Sleiffer Fig 1, where the plurality of transmitters (e.g. for LP01, for LP11A, for LP11B) comprises: a first transmitter (e.g. for LP01) configured to generate a polarized optical signal with LP.sub.01 polarization, a second transmitter (e.g. for LP11A) configured to generate a polarized optical signal with LP.sub.11a polarization, and a third transmitter (e.g. for LP11B) configured to generate a polarized optical signal with LP.sub.11b polarization).
Regarding Claim 10. Sleiffer as modified by Sleiffer 2 also discloses the optical service channel, wherein the plurality of modulating phase plates further comprising: a first modulating phase plate configured to shift phase of the optical signal with LP.sub.11a polarization; and a second modulating phase plate configured to shift phase of the optical signal with LP.sub.11b polarization (Sleiffer Fig 1, where the plurality of modulating phase plates (i.e. at Mode MUX) (as also shown in Fig 4) comprises: a first modulating phase plate (i.e. at Mode MUX) (as also shown in Fig 4) configured to shift phase of the optical signal with LP.sub.11a polarization and a second modulating phase plate (i.e. at Mode MUX) (as also shown in Fig 4) configured to shift phase of the optical signal with LP.sub.11b polarization (see also Randel et al (6×56-Gb/s mode-division multiplexed transmission over 33-km few-mode fiber enabled by 6×6 MIMO equalization) Fig 2d)).
Regarding Claim 11. Sleiffer as modified by Sleiffer 2 also discloses the optical service channel, wherein the multiplexer is further configured to couple the multiplexed optical signal onto a hollow core fiber (HCF) (Sleiffer Fig 1, where the multiplexer (i.e. at Mode MUX) (as also shown in Fig 4) is configured to couple the multiplexed optical signal onto a fiber (fiber spans 1 and 2) (i.e. a hollow core fiber (HC-PBGF) as shown in Sleiffer 2 Fig 1)).
Regarding Claim 12. Sleiffer as modified by Sleiffer 2 also discloses the optical service channel, wherein the HCF is configured to communicate the multiplexed optical signal to a multimodal receiver (Sleiffer Fig 1, where the fiber (fiber spans 1 and 2) (i.e. a hollow core fiber (HC-PBGF) as shown in Sleiffer 2 Fig 1) is configured to communicate the multiplexed optical signal to a multimodal receiver (i.e. after fiber spans 1 and 2)).
Regarding Claim 13. Sleiffer as modified by Sleiffer 2 also discloses the optical service channel, wherein the multimodal receiver comprising a demultiplexer configured to demultiplex the multiplexed optical signal to generate three demultiplexed optical signals (Sleiffer Fig 1, where the multimodal receiver (i.e. after fiber spans 1 and 2) comprises a demultiplexer (i.e. at Mode DEMUX) (as also shown in Fig 4) configured to demultiplex the multiplexed optical signal to generate three demultiplexed optical signals (i.e. LP01, LP11A, LP11B)).
Regarding Claim 14. Sleiffer as modified by Sleiffer 2 also discloses the optical service channel, wherein the multimodal receiver further comprising: a first demodulating phase plate configured to shift phase of the optical signal with LP.sub.11a polarization; and a second demodulating phase plate configured to shift phase of the optical signal with LP.sub.11b polarization (Sleiffer Fig 1, where the multimodal receiver (i.e. after fiber spans 1 and 2) comprises: a first demodulating phase plate (i.e. at Mode DEMUX) (as also shown in Fig 4) configured to shift phase of the optical signal with LP.sub.11a polarization and a second demodulating phase plate (i.e. at Mode DEMUX) (as also shown in Fig 4) configured to shift phase of the optical signal with LP.sub.11b polarization (see also Randel et al (6×56-Gb/s mode-division multiplexed transmission over 33-km few-mode fiber enabled by 6×6 MIMO equalization) Fig 2d)).
Regarding Claim 15. Sleiffer as modified by Sleiffer 2 also discloses the optical service channel, wherein the multimodal receiver further comprising three receivers, each of the three receivers configured to depolarize the signals input there into by an amount opposite to the polarization provided by the first, the second, and the third transmitter, respectively (Sleiffer Fig 1, where the multimodal receiver (i.e. after fiber spans 1 and 2) comprises three receivers (e.g. for LP01, for LP11A, for LP11B), each of the three receivers (e.g. for LP01, for LP11A, for LP11B) is configured to depolarize the signals input there into by an amount opposite to the polarization provided by the first transmitter (e.g. for LP01), the second transmitter (e.g. for LP11A) and the third transmitter (e.g. for LP11B) respectively).
Claims 6-7 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sleiffer et al (73.7 Tb/s (96 x 3 x 256-Gb/s) mode-division-multiplexed DP-16QAM transmission with inline MM-EDFA) in view of Sleiffer 2 et al (Ultra-high Capacity Transmission with Few-mode Silica and Hollow-core Photonic Bandgap Fibers) in further view of Sleiffer 3 et al (High Capacity Mode-Division Multiplexed Optical Transmission in a Novel 37-cell Hollow-Core Photonic Bandgap Fiber).
Regarding Claim 6. Sleiffer as modified by Sleiffer 2 fails to explicitly disclose the method, wherein the DSP is further configured to determine at least one of a state of polarization (SOP), a polarization mode dispersion (PMD), and differential group delay (DGD) of the HCF based on the demodulated higher order modes from the demultiplexed signal.
However, Sleiffer 3 discloses
a DSP configured to determine at least one of a state of polarization (SOP), a polarization mode dispersion (PMD), and differential group delay (DGD) of a HCF based on demodulated higher order modes from a demultiplexed signal (Fig 2, where a receiver comprises a DSP (i.e. scopes 1 and 2) configured to receive depolarized outputs from three receivers (e.g. for LP01, for LP11A, for LP11B) and to determine differential group delay (DGD) (as shown in Fig 1(d) and Fig 1(e)) of a HCF (HC-PBGF) based on demodulated higher order modes from a demultiplexed signal (which includes LP01, LP11A, LP11B)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the receiver (i.e. after fiber spans 1 and 2) as described in Sleiffer as modified by Sleiffer 2, with the teachings of the receiver as described in Sleiffer 3. The motivation being is that as shown a receiver can comprise a DSP (i.e. scopes 1 and 2) to receive depolarized outputs from three receivers (e.g. for LP01, for LP11A, for LP11B) and to determine DGD based on demodulated higher order modes from a demultiplexed signal (which includes LP01, LP11A, LP11B) and one of ordinary skill in the art can implement this concept into the receiver (i.e. after fiber spans 1 and 2) as described in Sleiffer as modified by Sleiffer 2 and have the receiver (i.e. after fiber spans 1 and 2) comprise a DSP (i.e. scopes 1 and 2) to receive depolarized outputs from three receivers (e.g. for LP01, for LP11A, for LP11B) and to determine DGD based on demodulated higher order modes from a demultiplexed signal (which includes LP01, LP11A, LP11B) i.e. as an alternative so as to have the receiver (i.e. after fiber spans 1 and 2) with a known technique of a known receiver for the purpose of optimally measuring DGD using a known DSP and which technique optimally measures DGD in the system in order to perform proper monitoring, maintenance and/or repairs and which modification is being made because the systems are similar and have overlapping components (e.g. optical transmitters and optical receivers) and which modification is a simple implementation of a known concept of a known receiver into another similar receiver (i.e. after fiber spans 1 and 2), namely, for its improvement and for optimization and which modification yields predictable results.
Regarding Claim 7. Sleiffer as modified by Sleiffer 2 also discloses the method, wherein the transmitter is a multimodal QAM transmitter (Sleiffer Fig 1, where the transmitter (i.e. before fiber spans 1 and 2) is a multimodal QAM transmitter).
Sleiffer as modified by Sleiffer 2 fails to explicitly disclose the QAM transmitter being a quadrature phase shift keying (QPSK) transmitter.
However, Sleiffer 3 discloses
a QAM transmitter being a QPSK transmitter (Fig 2, section “A. Transmitter and Receiver” para [2] where a QAM transmitter is a QPSK transmitter).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the QAM transmitter as described in Sleiffer as modified by Sleiffer 2, with the teachings of the QAM transmitter as described in Sleiffer 3. The motivation being is that as shown a QAM transmitter can be a QPSK transmitter and one of ordinary skill in the art can implement this concept into the QAM transmitter as described in Sleiffer as modified by Sleiffer 2 and have the QAM transmitter be a QPSK transmitter i.e. as an alternative so as to have a known QPSK transmitter instead of a known QAM transmitter for the purpose of optimally communicating QPSK symbols instead of QAM symbols and which technique implements the benefits of using QPSK technology into the system which includes for example higher resilience to noise during transmission and which modification is being made because the systems are similar and have overlapping components (e.g. optical transmitters and optical receivers) and which modification is a simple implementation of a known concept of a known QAM transmitter into other similar QAM transmitter, namely, for their improvement and for optimization and which modification yields predictable results.
Claims 17-19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sleiffer et al (73.7 Tb/s (96 x 3 x 256-Gb/s) mode-division-multiplexed DP-16QAM transmission with inline MM-EDFA) in view of Sleiffer 3 et al (High Capacity Mode-Division Multiplexed Optical Transmission in a Novel 37-cell Hollow-Core Photonic Bandgap Fiber).
Regarding Claim 17. Sleiffer discloses a method, comprising:
receiving a plurality of optical signal components (Fig 1, where a transmitter (i.e. before fiber spans 1 and 2) receives a plurality of optical signal components (e.g. from an ECL laser));
changing linear polarity of one or more of the plurality of optical signal components using QAM transmitters to generate a plurality of polarized optical signals (Fig 1, where the transmitter (i.e. before fiber spans 1 and 2) changes linear polarity (LP) of one or more of the plurality of optical signal components (e.g. from an ECL laser) using QAM transmitters to generate a plurality of polarized optical signals (LP01, LP11A, LP11B));
shifting phase of at least one or more of plurality of polarized optical signal components using modulating phase plates to generate a plurality of modulated polarized optical signals (Fig 1, where the transmitter (i.e. before fiber spans 1 and 2) shifts phase of at least one or more of plurality of polarized optical signal components (LP01, LP11A, LP11B) using modulating phase plates (i.e. at Mode MUX) (as also shown in Fig 4) to generate a plurality of modulated polarized optical signals); and
multiplexing the plurality of modulated polarized optical signals to generate an open channel fiber (HCF) optical signal (Fig 1, where the transmitter (i.e. before fiber spans 1 and 2) multiplexes (i.e. at Mode MUX) (as also shown in Fig 4) the plurality of modulated polarized optical signals to generate an open channel fiber optical signal for transmission over fiber spans 1 and 2).
Sleiffer fails to explicitly disclose the QAM transmitters being QPSK transmitters.
However, Sleiffer 3 discloses
a QAM transmitter being a QPSK transmitter (Fig 2, section “A. Transmitter and Receiver” para [2] where a QAM transmitter is a QPSK transmitter).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the QAM transmitters as described in Sleiffer, with the teachings of the QAM transmitter as described in Sleiffer 3. The motivation being is that as shown a QAM transmitter can be a QPSK transmitter and one of ordinary skill in the art can implement this concept into the QAM transmitters as described in Sleiffer and have the QAM transmitters be QPSK transmitters i.e. as an alternative so as to have known QPSK transmitters instead of known QAM transmitters for the purpose of optimally communicating QPSK symbols instead of QAM symbols and which technique implements the benefits of using QPSK technology into the system which includes for example higher resilience to noise during transmission and which modification is being made because the systems are similar and have overlapping components (e.g. optical transmitters and optical receivers) and which modification is a simple implementation of a known concept of a known QAM transmitter into other similar QAM transmitters, namely, for their improvement and for optimization and which modification yields predictable results.
Regarding Claim 18. Sleiffer as modified by Sleiffer 3 also discloses the method, further comprising coupling the HCF optical signal onto HCF (Sleiffer Fig 1, where the transmitter (i.e. before fiber spans 1 and 2) couples the open channel fiber (HCF) optical signal onto an open channel fiber (HCF) (fiber spans 1 and 2)).
Regarding Claim 19. Sleiffer as modified by Sleiffer 3 also discloses the system, further comprising; receiving the HCF optical signal at a receiver; demultiplexing the HCF optical signal to generate a plurality of demultiplexed optical signal components; shifting phase of at least one or more of plurality of demultiplexed optical signal components using demodulating phase plates to generate a plurality of demodulated polarized optical signal components; and changing linear polarity of one or more of the demodulated polarized optical signal components using QPSK receiver to generate a plurality of depolarized optical signal components (Sleiffer Fig 1, where a receiver (i.e. after fiber spans 1 and 2) receives the open channel fiber (HCF) optical signal, demultiplexes the open channel fiber (HCF) optical signal to generate a plurality of demultiplexed optical signal components (i.e. LP01, for LP11A, for LP11B), shifts a phase of at least one or more of plurality of demultiplexed optical signal components (i.e. LP01, for LP11A, for LP11B) using demodulating phase plates (i.e. at Mode DEMUX) (as also shown in Fig 4) to generate a plurality of demodulated polarized optical signal components, and changes linear polarity of one or more of the demodulated polarized optical signal components using a QAM/QPSK receiver (as shown in Sleiffer 3) to generate a plurality of depolarized optical signal components for process by a digital signal processor (DSP) (i.e. scopes 1 and 2)).
Regarding Claim 16. Claim 16 is similar to claim 6, therefore, claim 16 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 6.
Regarding Claim 20. Claim 20 is similar to claim 6, therefore, claim 20 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 6.
Conclusion
The prior art considered pertinent to the Applicant’s disclosure and not relied upon is the following:
Fazal et al (US Pub 20170353241) and more specifically Fig 1.
Ip et al (US Pub 20140063592) and more specifically Fig 3.
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