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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/04/26 has been entered.
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, 3-8, 10-15, 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cisneros (Patent No.: US 5157654 A).
Regarding claim 1, 8, 15, Cisneros teaches A non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions that, when executed, cause one or more processors to perform steps of: receiving network data associated with an optical network (e.g. “header” as in column 3 lines 31-52 and/or “interconnection topology” as in column 16 lines 17-47) ; identifying, from the network data, contention points and associated services that cross each contention point of the contention points (e.g. “contention” as in column 7 lines 42-60 and throughout); wherein each contention point represents a fiber in the optical network (e.g. “output port contention” as in column 43 lines 60-69 where the output port is represented by an optical fiber according to the embodiment of Figure 20) where any service thereon requires non-overlapping spectrum from any other service thereon, and wherein the fiber is one of a line fiber, an intra-node fiber in a node in the optical network, and a fiber within equipment (reference numeral 2030k, 2070k in Figure 20) at a corresponding node in the optical network; (e.g. “contention resolution unit to resolve contending requests” as in column 51 lines 27-68), identifying spectral data at each contention point of the contention points (e.g. “wavelength” as in column 50 lines 1-34); reducing the contention points and their associated spectral data to a subset of contention points (e.g. those cells having “won contention” as in column 51 lines 27-67 according to “priority field” as in column 7 lines 27-42), wherein a total number of the subset of contention points is less than a total number of the contention points (e.g. those cells of higher priority according to “priority field” as in column 7 lines 27-42 and having “won contention” being less than the total number of channels contending for output) ; and utilizing the subset of contention points and their associated spectral data for assigning spectrum in the optical network (e.g. “tunes” “tuned” as in column 51 lines 27-67) .
Regarding claim 3, 10, 17 Cisneros teaches The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the identifying the contention points utilizes a graph (e.g. “topology” as in column 16 lines 17-46 and throughout) to represent services where each vertex in the graph represents a link in the network and each edge represents relationships between vertices in the graph and where the graph is traversed (e.g. via “test cells” as in column 13 lines 13-30) to identify locations where more than one service share a vertex (e.g. “contention” as in column 7 lines 42-60 and throughout).
Regarding claim 4, 11, 18, Cisneros teaches The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the receiving network data is from different sources (reference numeral 2010k in Figure 20) , including at least network elements and a management system (reference numeral 290 in Figure 2 and/or reference numeral 510 in Figure 20) , and wherein the identifying spectral data at each contention point includes a step of masking out spectrum for each contention point where associated spectrum shows up as in use by any of the different sources (e.g. “contention resolution unit guarantees that only one input module will attempt to transmit an ATM cell to any given output module at a time through any one star coupler” as in column 52 lines 1-9) .
Regarding claim 5, 12, 19, Cisneros teaches The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the reducing the contention points and their associated spectral data includes identifying where multiple contention points are representable by a single contention point (e.g. “contention” as in column 7 lines 42-60 and throughout and/or e.g. “contention resolution unit guarantees that only one input module will attempt to transmit an ATM cell to any given output module at a time through any one star coupler” as in column 52 lines 1-9).
Regarding claim 6, 13, 20, Cisneros teaches The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the reducing the contention points and their associated spectral data includes one or more of combining a first plurality of contention points into a first single contention point (reference numeral 317 in Figure 3A) where all of the first plurality of contention points have same services thereon (e.g. services intended for a particular output), and combining a second plurality of contention points into a second single contention point where the second single contention point includes a superset of all services on all of the second plurality of contention points.
Regarding claim 7, 14, Cisneros teaches The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the assigning spectrum is for defragmenting the network where one or more services are recolored to change spectrum (e.g. “tunes” “tuned” as in column 51 lines 27-67).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/04/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Cisneros fails to teach the newly added limitation pertaining to a contention point corresponding to a fiber in the optical network where any service thereon requires non-overlapping spectrum from any other service thereon. However, examiner disagrees.
Specifically, a noted in the amended office action, Cisneros clearly discloses that a contention point corresponds to a location in the optical network, e.g. the same output module thus causing output port contention (e.g. as in column 7 lines 43-60), and further discloses that output port of contention is represented by an optical fiber (e.g. reference numeral 2030k, 2070k in Figure 20). As such, Cisneros makes clear a contention point corresponds to a fiber in the optical network where any service thereon requires non-overlapping spectrum from any other service thereon.
Furthermore, examiner notes the ATM cell contention resolution taught by Cisneros considers contention points as points in an switching apparatus where signals are not allowed to overlap. Although the signals upon which contention resolution is performed in the ATM embodiment of Cisneros are electrical signals, said electrical signals clearly occupy a portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. As such and contrary to Applicant’s arguments, Cisneros’ contention resolution method and associated contention resolution apparatus clearly discloses a contention point corresponding to a location in the network where any service thereon requires non-overlapping spectrum from any other service thereon.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., identifying locations as contention points based on co-propagation, associating multiple photonic services traversing a location with a non-overlapping spectrum constraint, and using fiber-based contention points as constraints for "assigning spectrum in the optical network" in the RMSA/RSA sense), are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Conclusion
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
Prosecution Insights