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 .
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wittenberger (Publication No.: US 2004/0208597 A1).
Regarding claim 1, 10, Wittenberger teaches A free-space optical communication apparatus, comprising: a light emission unit (e.g. “T1” as illustrated in Figure 1); at least one memory storing instructions (e.g. inherent in the “system controller” in conjunction with the “servo detector circuit” as in paragraph [0019] for “collecting data” as in paragraph [0028], and executing a “search pattern” as in paragraph [0039], and configured to generate control information” as in claim 3, 15, and 27) , at least one processor (e.g. “system controller” as in paragraph [0021] and throughout) , the light emission unit including (i) a light source (reference numeral 16 in Figure 2) that outputs a single laser beam and (ii) an emission direction control section (reference numeral 26 in Figure 2) that controls an emission direction in which a laser beam is emitted from the light emission unit after being outputted from the light source in the form of the single laser beam, the at least one processor (e.g. “system controller” as in paragraph [0021] and throughout) configured to execute the instructions to: control the light emission unit to divide the single laser beam into a plurality of laser beams which are in respective different emission directions, and control the light emission unit to construct a plurality of free-space optical communication links based on the plurality of laser beams.
Regarding claim 3, 12, Wittenberger teaches The free-space optical communication apparatus according to claim 1, wherein: the at least one processor (e.g. “system controller” as in paragraph [0021] and throughout) is further configured to execute the instructions to acquire respective received powers of the plurality of laser beams at free-space optical communication apparatuses (e.g. “measures the average power” as in paragraph [0022]), the free-space optical communication apparatuses respectively receiving the plurality of laser beams via the plurality of free-space optical communication links (e.g. as illustrated in Figure 1); and the at least one processor (e.g. “system controller” as in paragraph [0021] and throughout) is further configured to execute the instructions to adjust at least one of (i) a ratio in which the single laser beam is divided into the plurality of laser beams or (ii) output of the light source (e.g. “adjust the power” as in paragraph [0022]) so that each of the received powers exceeds a set value.
Regarding claim 4, 13, Wittenberger teaches The free-space optical communication apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor (e.g. “system controller” as in paragraph [0021] and throughout) is further configured to execute the instructions to control the light emission unit to emit the single laser beam in a plurality of emission directions at respective different timings (e.g. “to maintain servo lock” as in paragraph [0021]).
Regarding claim 5, 14, Wittenberger teaches The free-space optical communication apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor (e.g. “system controller” as in paragraph [0021] and throughout) is further configured to execute the instructions to control the light emission unit to transmit communication content via at least one free-space optical communication link among the plurality of free-space optical communication links (e.g. “data signal” as in paragraph [0020] and throughout) and transmit, via another free-space optical communication link among the plurality of free-space optical communication links, a control signal for maintaining the another free-space optical communication link (e.g. “control signal” as in paragraph [0020] and throughout).
Regarding claim 6, 15, Wittenberger teaches The free-space optical communication apparatus according to claim 5, the at least one processor (e.g. “system controller” as in paragraph [0021] and throughout) is further configured to execute the instructions to control the light emission unit to transmit the communication content via the another free-space optical communication link in a case where the at least one free-space optical communication link is cut off (e.g. “signal loss problem due to fog or poor weather conditions is solved” as in paragraph [0046]).
Regarding claim 7, 16, Wittenberger teaches The free-space optical communication apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor (e.g. “system controller” as in paragraph [0021] and throughout) is further configured to execute the instructions to cause the same communication content to be transmitted via the plurality of free-space optical communication links (e.g. “control signal” and/or “received signal strength” as in paragraphs [0031] - [0032]).
Regarding claim 8, 17, Wittenberger teaches The free-space optical communication apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to control the light emission unit to transmit communication content portions (e.g. “data signal” and “control signal” as in paragraph [0027] and throughout) , into which one communication content is divided, respectively via the plurality of free-space optical communication links.
Regarding claim 9, Wittenberger teaches A free-space optical communication system, comprising not less than three of the free-space optical communication apparatus according to claim 1 (e.g. four illustrated in Figure 1).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/19/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues Wittenberger fails to teach that the "transmitter system controller" divides a single laser beam into a plurality of laser beams. However, examiner contends that Wittenberger teaches exactly this limitation as illustrated in Figure 2 and described in the associated paragraphs of the specification. In Figure 2, Wittenberger clearly illustrates a single beam being expanded into at least three beams and further explicitly describes that “dichroic mirror 34 which severs the beam into two” as in paragraph [0028] and further that “beam splitter 22' splits an incoming beam into two beams” as in paragraph [0031]. Furthermore, Applicant’s assertion that Wittenberger fails to “control the light emission unit to divide a single light beam into a plurality of light beams” relies on an overly broad interpretation of the terms “control the light emission unit.” In what sense is the light emission unit controlled? Examiner asserts that in operation of Wittenberger’s light emission unit the at least one processor will execute instruction which will result in a single beam being split into a plurality of different beams as illustrated in Figure 2 and described in the specification.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 AGUSTIN BELLO whose telephone number is (571)272-3026. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 9 AM - 5 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, 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.
/AGUSTIN BELLO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2635