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 .
Priority
Applicant's claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 120 is acknowledged. This application is a continuation of U.S. Patent Application No. 17/236,798, filed on 04/21/2021, and issued as U.S. Patent No. 11,916,656, which claims priority from U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 63/014,700, filed on 04/23/2020.
Information Disclosure Statement
Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 01/23/2024 was considered.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, corresponding to Claims 1-4 in the reply filed on 08/06/2025 is acknowledged (the response has incorrect Document Code as “Response After Final Action”).
Claims 1-4 are pending for examination.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the reference designator remote unit (RU) 106 in par. [0036] does not match Fig. 1; since the remote antenna unit (RAU) is a secondary reference designator, the drawing should be (RU) instead. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claim 3 is 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 claim 3, the claim recites “resetting an output port configured to be coupled to an end device based on the second synchronization signal”. The recitation is unclear. Does it mean the output port couple to an end device because of the second synchronization signal is issued or does it mean every time the second synchronization signal is issued, couple to an end device? or resetting an output port including an end device that coupled to the output port? For examination purpose the rejection is made based on best understood of the claimed invention.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Arduini et al., US Patent Publication 20210135890; hereinafter “Arduini”.
Regarding claim 1, Arduini discloses a method (Fig. 10A and 10B) comprising:
at a remote subunit (Fig. 10A, Powered Device PD), opening a switch (Fig. 10A, PD Modulator Switch 109) to disconnect a load (Fig. 10A, PD End-Point Load 108) from a power conductor (Fig. 10A, switch 109 disconnect PD End-Point Load 108 from power conductor of cable); closing the switch to connect the load to the power conductor and receive a power signal (Fig. 10A, power signal from HV sources) therefrom (Fig. 10A, switch 109 disconnect PD End-Point Load 108 from power conductor of cable coming from HV sources);
detecting a first synchronization signal comprising a periodic voltage drop in the power signal [0138]-[0139] (Fig. 10B); and
synchronizing opening the switch to the first synchronization signal [0138]-[0139] (Fig. 10B).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 2-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arduini.
Regarding claim 2, Arduini discloses the method of claim 1 above, Arduini suggest that “The PD 322a may also notify the PSE 320 of any necessary timing adjustments due to line capacitance change. If there are any timing changes, the PSE 320 and PD 322a may re-synchronize, as needed” [0206]. Arduini does not explicitly disclose the method further comprising receiving a second synchronization signal having a frequency lower than the first synchronization signal. However, according to the suggestion, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of embodiment of Fig. 10A to incorporate the teaching of and periodically re-synchronize the system to have receiving a second synchronization signal having a frequency lower than the first synchronization signal. Doing so would warranty the synchronization more efficiency without measuring and the report of timing change from the PD.
Regarding claim 3, Arduini discloses the method of claim 2 above, in the embodiment of Fig. 10A, Arduini also discloses the method further comprising resetting an output port configured to be coupled to an end device (Fig. 28, 286b) based on the second synchronization signal [0206].
Regarding claim 4, Arduini discloses the method of claim 1 above, in embodiment of Fig. 10A, Arduini does not disclose a second cascaded remote unit. However, in other embodiments such as Fig. 28, Arduini discloses providing power from the remote subunit to a second cascaded remote unit (Fig. 28, 286b). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of embodiment of Fig. 10A to incorporate the teaching of embodiment of Fig. 28 and provide power from the remote subunit to a second cascaded remote unit. Doing so would allow less cable needed since this cascaded topology is well-known in the art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THAI H TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-0668. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 8:30 - 5:00.
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, Rexford Barney can be reached at 571-272-7492. 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.
/THAI H TRAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2836
/REXFORD N BARNIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2836