DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
In the Reply filed 09/03/2025, Applicant has amended claims 1, 6, and 11 to include “a target area that includes a type identifier” and argues that this/those limitation(s) was/were not taught with the reference(s) cited in the previous action dated 06/04/2025. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees for the reasons laid out below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/03/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
As noted above, Applicant has amended independent claims 1, 6, and 11 to include “a target area that includes a type identifier” and argues that this/those limitation(s) was/were not taught in Zhao et al, U.S. Publication No. 2012/0301147. However, this is not persuasive because Table 1 of Zhao shows an embodiment of a synchronization packet/header where the second data field is “Message ID” which per paragraph [0066] is used to identify the type of message being sent. Therefore, Zhao still meets the language of the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 2-5, 7-10, 11-15, 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.
Regarding claims 2, 7, and 12 each have been amended to recite that a passive optical network (PON) data frame includes a target field with a type identifier including a type of information carried in the target field, wherein the type of information includes non-time information. However, independent claims 1, 6, and 11 all positively recite that overhead in the PON data frame must carry at least a part of a first timestamp (i.e. time information). When looking to the Specification, particularly Figures 3-10 and 12-18 which feature different embodiments of a PON data frame, each show that the only section of the PON overhead which carries time information is the target field. This appears to be a contradiction similar to the one pointed out in the previous action regarding claims 5, 10, and 15. One of ordinary skill in the art would therefore find the meets and bounds of claims 2-5, 7-10, and 12-15 to be unclear. The same inconsistency also applies to claim 20 as it also specifies that the target field can contain non-time information.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhao et al, U.S. Publication No. 2012/0301147.
Regarding claim 1, Zhao teaches a communication method, wherein the method comprises:
generating a passive optical network PON data frame (see Zhao Figure 7A, step 72), wherein the PON data frame comprises includes an overhead area, the overhead area includes a target area that includes a type identifier (see Table 1, second data field is “Message ID” which per paragraph [0066] is used to identify the type of message being sent in a synchronization packet, and paragraph [0026] which uses this packet interchangeably with “header”) and at least a part of a first timestamp (see Figure 15 and paragraph [0205]), and the first timestamp is for time synchronization (see paragraph [0204]); and
sending the PON data frame (see Figure 7A, step 73).
Regarding claim 6, Zhao teaches a communication method, wherein the method comprises:
receiving a passive optical network PON data frame (see Zhao Figure 7A, step 74)), wherein the PON data frame includes an overhead area, the overhead area includes a target area that includes a type identifier (see Table 1, second data field is “Message ID” which per paragraph [0066] is used to identify the type of message being sent in a synchronization packet, and paragraph [0026] which uses this packet interchangeably with “header”) and at least a part of a first timestamp, and the first timestamp is for time synchronization (see paragraph [0204])), and
parsing the PON data frame to obtain the first timestamp (see paragraph [0159]).
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 11, 12, 16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al, U.S. Publication No. 2012/0301147 in view of Zheng, U.S. Publication No. 2011/0052206.
Regarding claim 11, Zhao teaches a computer device, comprising:
a communication interface configured to communicate with another device (see Zhao Figure 9, downlink sending module 933 and paragraph [0172]);
a memory; and a processor connected to the memory, wherein the processor is configured to (see claim 16):
generate a passive optical network PON data frame, wherein the PON data frame comprises includes an overhead area, the overhead area includes a target area that includes a type identifier (see Table 1, second data field is “Message ID” which per paragraph [0066] is used to identify the type of message being sent in a synchronization packet, and paragraph [0026] which uses this packet interchangeably with “header”) and at least a part of a first timestamp, and the first timestamp is for time synchronization (see Figure 21, which shows more details of Figure 17 in the OLT, “master clock packet time stamp generating module” and paragraph [0102]); and
send the PON data frame using the communication interface (see paragraph [0154]).
Zhao does not expressively teach the memory stor[es] computer instructions; and wherein the processor is configured to execute the computer instructions to perform operations.
However, Zheng in a similar invention in the same field of endeavor teaches a system comprising a processor and memory (see Zheng paragraph [0151]) configured for generating a passive optical network PON data frame, wherein the PON data frame comprises includes an overhead area, the overhead area includes at least a part of a first timestamp, and the first timestamp is for time synchronization (see Figure 21, which shows more details of Figure 17 in the OLT, “master clock packet time stamp generating module” and paragraph [0102]); and sending the PON data frame (see Figure 17, “sending unit” and paragraph [0154]) as taught in Zhao and further teaches
the memory stor[es] computer instructions; and wherein the processor is configured to execute the computer instructions to perform operations (see paragraph [0151]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to combine the teaching of the memory storing instructions executable by the processor as taught in Zheng with the system taught in Zhao, the motivation being to automate the operations for future use.
Regarding claim 16, Zhao in view of Zheng teaches all the limitations of claim 11, and further teaches wherein the processor is further configured to:
generate two PON data frames, wherein an overhead area of each PON data frame includes a target field, and the target field carries time information (See Zhao paragraph [0206], “The timestamp TMt1i may also be carried in two EPON frames. At this time, specific structures of the preambles are as listed in Table 14 and 15 respectively”); and
the two PON data frames includes a first PON data frame and a second PON data frame, time information of the first PON data frame includes a first part of the first timestamp, and time information of the second PON data frame includes a second part of the first timestamp (see Zhao Tables 14 and 15 which shows different bits of the timestamp TS_of_S are sent over the two frames per paragraph [0206]).
Regarding claim 19, Zhao in view of Zheng teaches all the limitations of claim 16, and further teaches wherein the time information further includes a content indication identifier, and the content indication identifier indicates a category of the time information (see Zhao Table 1, “identify SYC PLOAM” and paragraph [0066]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17 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.
Conclusion
Although no prior art is used against claims 2-5, 7-10, 11-15, and 20, this is not an indication that it/they is/are allowable. See MPEP 2173.06, section II, second paragraph. The 112 issues cause a great deal of confusion and uncertainty as to the proper interpretation of the limitations of the claim(s). It is therefore difficult for the Examiner to properly search for prior art for the invention.
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 CASEY L KRETZER whose telephone number is (571)272-5639. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00-7:00 PM Pacific Time.
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.
/CASEY L KRETZER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2635
Prosecution Insights