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 .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species A1 and B1 in the reply filed on 07/02/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 7, 11-14, and 18-21 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 07/02/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/13/2023 was filed after the filing date of this application on 09/13/2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 4, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Brunet et al. (WO2009021312A1), hereafter Brunet.
Regarding claim 1, Brunet discloses an optical device (Title; Fig. 7), comprising: a section of rare-earth doped optical fiber (Fig. 7 element 330; pg. 22 ll. 6-12); and an amplified spontaneous emission (ASE) pump source configured to provide broadband ASE pump light spanning a bandwidth Δλ surrounding a selected center wavelength λpump (Fig. 7 element 332; pg. 19 ll. 12-33), the provided broadband ASE pump light coupled into the section of rare-earth doped optical fiber so as to interact with a rare-earth dopant within a core region of the section of rare-earth doped optical fiber and provide an amplified optical output therefrom (pg. 19 ll. 12-33).
Regarding claim 4, Brunet further discloses the bandwidth Δλ is no less than 10 nm (pg. 19 ll. 12-13).
Regarding claim 15, Brunet further discloses the section of rare-earth doped optical fiber includes a rare-earth dopant selected from the group consisting of: Holmium (Ho), Thulium (Tm), Erbium (Er), Ytterbium (Yb), and co-doped Er—Yb (pg. 22 ll. 8-12).
Regarding claim 16, Brunet further discloses the device comprises a rare-earth doped fiber optical amplifier (Fig. 7 element 330) and further comprises an input coupler disposed at a first end termination of the section of rare-earth doped optical fiber (Fig. 7 element 234), the input coupler for introducing an input optical signal Sin operating at a defined wavelength λ.sub.s into the section of rare-earth doped optical fiber (Fig. 7 element 252), wherein the presence of the broadband ASE pump light creates an increase in optical power of the propagating input signal as it exits the rare-earth doped optical fiber as an amplified output signal.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brunet in view of Chen et al. (CN108183386), hereafter Chen.
Regarding claim 2, Brunet does not explicitly disclose the ASE pump source generates a Gaussian-shaped output centered at about λpump. However, Chen discloses an ASE spectrum with a Gaussian shape ([0038]). An advantage is to improve optical power and output efficiency ([0038]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brunet with the ASE pump source generates a Gaussian-shaped output centered at about λpump, since Chen discloses an ASE spectrum with a Gaussian shape results in improved optical power and output efficiency.
Regarding claim 3, Brunet in view of Chen do not explicitly disclose the bandwidth Δλ comprises a 3 dB bandwidth of the Gaussian-shaped output. However, Chen discloses optimizing the output bandwidth such that a 3 dB bandwidth of the Gaussian-shaped output (Compare Figs. 3, 4, and 7). An advantage is to provide improved optical power and output efficiency based on the intended use ([0038]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brunet in view of Chen with the bandwidth Δλ comprises a 3 dB bandwidth of the Gaussian-shaped output, since Chen discloses optimizing the output bandwidth such that a 3 dB bandwidth of the Gaussian-shaped output in order to provide improved optical power and output efficiency and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Claims 5 is are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brunet in view of Huang et al. (CN109149337), hereafter Huang.
Regarding claim 5, Brunet further discloses the broadband ASE pump source comprises a laser diode selected to operate at an initial wavelength λinit (Fig. 7 elements 238 emits element 258); a section of rare-earth doped optical fiber (Fig. 7 element 336); and a wavelength division multiplexer (WDM) (Fig. 7 element 234), where the output of the laser diode is applied as an input to the WDM (Fig. 7 element 238 is applied to element 234) and thereafter directed into the section of rare-earth doped fiber and generates ASE as it propagates therealong (Fig. 7 element 336) and forming the broadband ASE pump light output of the ASE pump source (Fig. 7 element ASE). Brunet does not explicitly disclose the WDM disposed at the output of the section of rare-earth doped optical fiber or the generated ASE directed through the WDM. However, Huang discloses the WDM disposed at the output of the section of rare-earth doped optical fiber (Fig. 1 element WDM2 is at the output of EDF) and the generated ASE directed through the WDM (Fig. 1 element WDM2 outputs ASE through port 2). An advantage, as is known in the art, is to sufficiently pump the fiber to provide the desired ASE output. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify Brunet with the WDM disposed at the output of the section of rare-earth doped optical fiber and the generated ASE directed through the WDM as disclosed by Huang in order to sufficiently pump the fiber to provide the desired ASE output and since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention (e.g. the location of the WDM) involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Claims 6, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brunet in view of Huang, as applied to claim 5 above, in further view of Tench et al. (US20220021173A1), hereafter Tench.
Regarding claim 6, Brunet in view of Huang do not explicitly disclose the section of rare-earth doped fiber of the broadband ASE pump source comprises a section of single-clad optical fiber. However, Tench discloses that the selection of a single clad fiber versus a double clad fiber or vice versa ([0007]). An advantage is to allow the selection of specific characteristics known in the art at each stage of system design ([0007]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brunet in view of Huang with the section of rare-earth doped fiber of the broadband ASE pump source comprises a section of single-clad optical fiber, since Tench discloses that the selection of a single clad fiber versus a double clad fiber or vice versa is well known in the art in order to allow the selection of specific characteristics known in the art at each stage of system design.
Regarding claim 9, Brunet further discloses that ASE pump sources may be made by removing the reflective filters of the pump source (pg. 19 ll. 1-6) and other rare-earth dopants may be used in order to achieve amplification at different wavelengths (pg. 22 ll. 22-25). Brunet in view of Huang do not explicitly the section of rare-earth doped fiber of the broadband ASE pump source comprises a section of Tm-doped optical fiber, for providing broadband ASE output surrounding a center wavelength λpump of 1860 nm. However, Tench discloses that the pump may be made of a rare-earth doped fiber comprising a second of Tm-doped optical fiber, for providing a pump with a center wavelength λpump of 1860 nm (Fig. 19 element 112). An advantage, as is known in the art, is to provide the desired pump wavelength to achieve amplification in the desired range. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brunet in view of Huang with the section of rare-earth doped fiber of the broadband ASE pump source comprises a section of Tm-doped optical fiber, for providing broadband ASE output surrounding a center wavelength λpump of 1860 nm, since Tench discloses that the pump may be made of a rare-earth doped fiber comprising a second of Tm-doped optical fiber, for providing a pump with a center wavelength λpump of 1860 nm and Brunet discloses that ASE pump sources may be made by removing the reflective filters of the pump source and other rare-earth dopants may be used in order to achieve amplification at different wavelengths.
Regarding claim 10, in the same embodiment Brunet in view of Huang in further view of Tench do not explicitly disclose the laser diode of the broadband ASE pump source operates at a wavelength λinit of 1550 nm. However, Brunet discloses that the pump laser diode may operate at a wavelength λinit of 1550 nm (pg. 22 ll. 27-28). An advantage is to provide amplification at different wavelengths depending on the rare-earth materials used (pg. 22 ll. 22-25). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brunet in view of Huang in further view of Tench with the laser diode of the broadband ASE pump source operates at a wavelength λinit of 1550 nm, as disclosed in a different embodiment of Brunet in order to provide amplification at different wavelengths depending on the rare-earth materials used.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brunet in view of Huang, as applied to claim 5 above, in further view of Aozasa et al. (US20020159137A1), hereafter Aozasa.
Regarding claim 8, Brunet in view of Huang do not explicitly disclose the broadband ASE pump source further comprises a first optical isolator disposed at a far-end termination of the section of rare-earth doped optical fiber; and a second optical isolator disposed along an output signal path beyond the WDM. However, Aozasa discloses a first optical isolator disposed at a far-end termination of the section of rare-earth doped optical fiber (Fig. 3B element 112 before element 111); and a second optical isolator disposed along an output signal path beyond the WDM (Fig. 3B element 112 after element 113). An advantage is to save development costs by using a well known amplifier configuration. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brunet in view of Huang with the broadband ASE pump source further comprises a first optical isolator disposed at a far-end termination of the section of rare-earth doped optical fiber; and a second optical isolator disposed along an output signal path beyond the WDM as disclosed by Aozasa in order to save development costs by using a well known amplifier configuration.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brunet, as applied to claim 16 above, in further view of Tench et al. (US20220021173A1), hereafter Tench.
Regarding claim 17, Brunet does not explicitly disclose the input coupler comprises a WDM, with the ASE pump light applied as a second input such that both the input optical signal Sin and the broadband ASE pump light PASE are multiplexed together and introduced into the first end termination of the section of rare-earth doped optical fiber to form a co-propagating optical amplifier configuration. However, Tench discloses the input coupler comprises a WDM (Fig. 1 element 14), with the pump light applied as a second input (Fig. 1 element 16 is applied to one input of element 14) such that both the input optical signal Sin (Fig. 1 element Sin is applied to another input of 14) and the pump light are multiplexed together (Fig. 1 element 14 has a single output) and introduced into the first end termination of the section of rare-earth doped optical fiber to form a co-propagating optical amplifier configuration (Fig. 1 element 12). An advantage is to save development costs by using a well known amplifier configuration. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brunet with the input coupler comprises a WDM, with the ASE pump light applied as a second input such that both the input optical signal Sin and the broadband ASE pump light PASE are multiplexed together and introduced into the first end termination of the section of rare-earth doped optical fiber to form a co-propagating optical amplifier configuration as disclosed by Tench in order to save development costs by using a well known amplifier configuration.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached Notice of References Cited. See, e.g., “Optimum pumping configuration for L-band EDFA incorporating ASE pump source” Fig. 1; US20030035204 Fig. 2; US6233092 Fig. 1; US7876497 Fig. 1; KR20050062864 Figs. 3 and 4.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA KING whose telephone number is (571)270-1441. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 10am-5pm MT.
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, Min Sun Harvey can be reached at (571) 272-1835. 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.
/Joshua King/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828 07/24/2026
Prosecution Insights