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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed March 9, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 15 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Specifically, applicant’s argument that Wang fails to teach a first bitrate that is greater than a second bitrate wherein the first wavelength is shorter than the second wavelength (p. 6, ¶ 6; p. 8-9). Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of the claimed invention being obvious in light of Wang in view of Sambo.
Applicant's arguments regarding claim 9 and the combination of prior arts Wang and Sambo have been considered, but they are not persuasive. (p. 8). First, Wang is ready to be modified by a PHOSITA in view of Sambo to initially provide four wavelengths instead of two. Applicant argues that Wang cannot be properly combined with Sambo because “Wang teaches the goal of reducing (not increasing) a quantity of multiplexed wavelengths down to two wavelengths” (p. 8, ¶ 1). Applicant then cites to paragraph 150 of Wang and alleges that this paragraph teaches away from providing more than two wavelengths. (Id.). Claim 9, however, does not claim an increase or decrease of wavelengths until the multiplexing takes place. Instead, claim 9 claims “providing a first optical signal… providing a second optical signal…” and so on. With the current claim language, how those optical signals are provided to the multiplexer is irrelevant as long as they are “provided.” Even if providing four wavelengths instead of two increases the quantity of initial wavelengths, Wang is merely “providing” additional wavelengths as is claimed. And paragraph 150 of Wang merely discusses the benefits of reducing the “quantity of wavelengths transmitted in a multimode optical fiber.” In other words, Wang is describing the reduction that takes place after the signals have been multiplexed together. (FIG. 7: “Multimode optical fiber” (located after the multiplexer)). Thus, the cited portion of Wang does not teach away from providing four optical signals.
Applicant also alleges that Torres-Ferrera is deficient because “Torres-Ferrera teaches multiple (e.g., four) wavelengths on a fiber that all have the same bitrate.” (p. 8, ¶ 2). Applicant has correctly restated what was stated in the first office action. Torres-Ferrera indeed teaches four wavelengths that all have the same bitrate. Wang, however, teaches two wavelengths with different bitrates, and by combining both of these prior arts, a PHOSITA could produce four wavelengths with different bitrates. Thus, an obvious combination of the prior arts has been established, and applicants arguments merely describe the established combination, and, to conclude, examiner maintains that the 103 rejection of claim 9 using Wang and Torres-Ferrera is proper.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (US Pat. Pub. No. 2018/0331776) in view of Sambo (CN 103053126 A).
Regarding claim 1, Wang teaches A method comprising: providing a first optical signal of a first wavelength with a first bitrate to a multiplexer (FIG. 7; "second transmitter 850 nm"; "20 Gbps NRZ"); providing a second optical signal of a second wavelength with a second bitrate to the multiplexer (FIG. 7; "first transmitter 1310 nm"; "30 Gbps NRZ"); multiplexing the first optical signal and the second optical signal to form a multiplexed signal (FIG. 7; "short wavelength division multiplex"); and transmitting the multiplexed signal via an optical fiber (FIG. 7; "Multimode optical fiber").
Wang does not teach wherein the first bitrate is greater than the second bitrate and the first wavelength is shorter than the second wavelength;
Sambo teaches wherein the first bitrate is greater than the second bitrate (claim 9: “wherein lightpaths in the multiplex operate at different wavelengths at two different bitrates… determine an existing lightpath operating at the higher of the two bitrates and having a shortest wavelength among the lightpaths operating at the higher bitrate in the wavelength multiplex”) and the first wavelength is shorter than the second wavelength (Id.)
Before the filing date of the instant application, it would have obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the multiplex transmitter taught in Wang such that the shorter wavelength was combined with a higher bitrate based on the technique taught by Sambo. Such a combination would merely be applying a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield a predictable result. Wherein the predictable result is a transmitter capable of transmitting the higher bitrate using the shorter wavelength.
Wang and Sambo both relate to optical communication systems and are therefore analogous art.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Wang and Sambo further teaches wherein the first wavelength is less than 940 nm and the second wavelength is greater than 910 nm. (Wang, FIG. 7; "second transmitter 850 nm"; "first transmitter 1310 nm")
Before the filing date of the instant application, it would have obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the multiplex transmitter taught in Wang such that the shorter wavelength was combined with a higher bitrate based on the technique taught by Sambo. Such a combination would merely be applying a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield a predictable result. Wherein the predictable result is a transmitter capable of transmitting the higher bitrate using the shorter wavelength.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Wang and Sambo further teaches wherein the optical fiber comprises a multimode optical fiber. (Wang, FIG. 7; "Multimode optical fiber")
Before the filing date of the instant application, it would have obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the multiplex transmitter taught in Wang such that the shorter wavelength was combined with a higher bitrate based on the technique taught by Sambo. Such a combination would merely be applying a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield a predictable result. Wherein the predictable result is a transmitter capable of transmitting the higher bitrate using the shorter wavelength.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Wang and Sambo further teaches wherein the multimode optical fiber comprises an OM3 or OM4 optical fiber. (Wang, FIG. 7; "Wideband OM4")
Before the filing date of the instant application, it would have obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the multiplex transmitter taught in Wang such that the shorter wavelength was combined with a higher bitrate based on the technique taught by Sambo. Such a combination would merely be applying a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield a predictable result. Wherein the predictable result is a transmitter capable of transmitting the higher bitrate using the shorter wavelength.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Wang and Sambo further teaches wherein multiplexing the first optical signal and the second optical signal comprises performing wavelength division multiplexing. (Wang, FIG. 7; "Short Wavelength Division Multiplexer")
Before the filing date of the instant application, it would have obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the multiplex transmitter taught in Wang such that the shorter wavelength was combined with a higher bitrate based on the technique taught by Sambo. Such a combination would merely be applying a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield a predictable result. Wherein the predictable result is a transmitter capable of transmitting the higher bitrate using the shorter wavelength.
Claim(s) 6-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (US Pat. Pub. No. 2018/0331776) in view of Sambo (CN 103053126 A) and in further view of Torres-Ferrera (P. Torres-Ferrera et al., "Statistical Analysis of 100 Gbps per Wavelength SWDM VCSEL-MMF Data Center Links on a Large Set of OM3 and OM4 Fibers," in Journal of Lightwave Technology, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 1018-1026, Feb. 15, 2022).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Wang and Sambo teaches the method of claim 1 and wherein a central wavelength of the first wavelength is selected from the group consisting of 850 nm (Wang, FIG. 7; “Second Transmitter 850 nm”; [132]).
the combination of Wang and Sambo does not teach central wavelengths of 910 nm, and 940 nm.
Torres-Ferrera however, teaches using wavelengths of 910 nm, and 940 nm (p. 1019, ¶ 1).
Because Wang already discloses multiplexing two optical signals with different wavelengths and bitrates together, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to multiplex additional optical signals with different wavelengths in view of what Torres-Ferrera teaches. The suggestion/motivation would have been to multiplex more optical signals in order to carry more data within one multiplexed signal.
Wang and Torres-Ferrera are from the same art with respect to multiplexing optical communications and are therefore analogous art.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Wang and Sambo teaches the method of claim 1
The combination of Wang and Sambo does not teach wherein a central wavelength of the second wavelength is selected from the group consisting of 880 nm, 910 nm, and 940 nm.
Torres-Ferrera however, teaches wherein a central wavelength of the second wavelength is selected from the group consisting of 880 nm, 910 nm, and 940 nm. (p. 1019, ¶ 1).
Because Wang already discloses multiplexing two optical signals with different wavelengths and bitrates together, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to multiplex additional optical signals with different wavelengths in view of what Torres-Ferrera teaches. The suggestion/motivation would have been to multiplex more optical signals in order to carry more data within one multiplexed signal.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Wang and Sambo teaches the method of claim 1
the combination of Wang and Sambo does not teach wherein providing the first optical signal comprises providing the first optical signal via a first vertical cavity surface emitting laser; and providing the second optical signal comprises providing the second optical signal via a second vertical cavity surface emitting laser.
Torres-Ferrera however, teaches providing the first optical signal comprises providing the first optical signal via a first vertical cavity surface emitting laser. (p. 1018, ¶ 1) and providing the second optical signal comprises providing the second optical signal via a second vertical cavity surface emitting laser. (Id.)
Before the filing date of the instant application, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the arts to replace the emitter taught in Wang with the vertical cavity surface emitting laser taught in Torres-Ferrera. The suggestion/motivation would have been to provide the system in Wang with the advantages provided by a vertical cavity surface emitting over a conventional emitter.
Regarding claim 9, Wang teaches A method comprising: providing a first optical signal of a first wavelength at a first bitrate (FIG. 7; "second transmitter 850 nm"; "20 Gbps NRZ"); providing a second optical signal of a second wavelength at a second bitrate, (FIG. 7; "first transmitter 1310 nm" "30 Gbps NRZ") multiplexing the first optical signal, the second optical signal, the third optical signal, and the fourth optical signal to form a multiplexed signal (FIG. 7; "short wavelength division multiplex"); and transmitting the multiplexed signal via an optical fiber. (FIG. 7; "Multimode optical fiber").
Wang does not teach wherein the second wavelength is longer than the first wavelength and the second bitrate is less than the first bitrate; providing a third optical signal of a third wavelength at a third bitrate, wherein the third wavelength is longer than the second wavelength and the third bitrate is less than the second bitrate; providing a fourth optical signal of a fourth wavelength at a fourth bitrate, wherein the fourth wavelength is longer than the third wavelength and the fourth bitrate is less than the third bitrate;
Sambo teaches wherein the second wavelength is longer than the first wavelength and the second bitrate is less than the first bitrate (claim 9: “wherein lightpaths in the multiplex operate at different wavelengths at two different bitrates… determine an existing lightpath operating at the higher of the two bitrates and having a shortest wavelength among the lightpaths operating at the higher bitrate in the wavelength multiplex”); wherein the third wavelength is longer than the second wavelength and the third bitrate is less than the second bitrate; (Id.) wherein the fourth wavelength is longer than the third wavelength and the fourth bitrate is less than the third bitrate (Id.)
Sambo does not teach providing a third optical signal of a third wavelength at a third bitrate and providing a fourth optical signal of a fourth wavelength at a fourth bitrate
Before the filing date of the instant application, it would have obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the multiplex transmitter taught in Wang such that the shorter wavelength was combined with a higher bitrate based on the technique taught by Sambo. Such a combination would merely be applying a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield a predictable result. Wherein the predictable result is a transmitter capable of transmitting the higher bitrate using the shorter wavelength.
Torres-Ferrera teaches providing a third optical signal of a third wavelength at a third bitrate (p. 1019, ¶ 1) and providing a fourth optical signal of a fourth wavelength at a fourth bitrate, (Id.))
Because Wang already discloses multiplexing two optical signals with different wavelengths and bitrates together, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to multiplex additional optical signals with different wavelengths and bitrates in view of what Torres-Ferrera teaches. The suggestion/motivation would have been to multiplex more optical signals in order to carry more data within one multiplexed signal. The suggestion/motivation would have been to multiplex more optical signals in order to carry more data within one multiplexed signal.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Wang, Sambo and Torres-Ferrera discloses the method of claim 9, wherein a sum of the first bitrate, the second bitrate, the third bitrate and the fourth bitrate is greater than or equal to 400 Gbps. (Torres-Ferrera, p. 1018, ¶ 1).
Because Wang already discloses multiplexing two optical signals with different wavelengths and bitrates together, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to multiplex additional optical signals with different wavelengths and bitrates in view of what Torres-Ferrera teaches. The suggestion/motivation would have been to multiplex more optical signals in order to carry more data within one multiplexed signal.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Wang, Sambo, and Torres-Ferrera discloses the method of claim 9, wherein multiplexing to form the multiplexed signal comprises performing short wavelength division multiplexing. (Torres-Ferrera, p. 1019, ¶ 1; Wang FIG. 7; "Short Wavelength Division Multiplexer").
Both Wang and Torres-Ferrera teach short wavelength division multiplexing. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve the systems with the advantages provided by a vertical cavity surface emitting over a conventional emitter.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Wang, Sambo, and Torres-Ferrera discloses the method of claim 9, wherein; providing the first optical signal comprises providing the first optical signal with a first central wavelength of 850 nm. (Torres-Ferrera, p. 1019, ¶ 1; Wang FIG. 7; [132]); providing the second optical signal comprises providing the second optical signal with a second central wavelength of 880 nm(Torres-Ferrera, p. 1019, ¶ 1); providing the third optical signal comprises providing the third optical signal with a third central wavelength of 910 nm; (Id.) and providing the fourth optical signal comprises providing the fourth optical signal with a fourth central wavelength of 940 nm. (Id.)
Because Wang already discloses multiplexing two optical signals with different wavelengths and bitrates together, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to multiplex additional optical signals with different wavelengths in view of what Torres-Ferrera teaches. The suggestion/motivation would have been to multiplex more optical signals in order to carry more data within one multiplexed signal.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Wang, Sambo, and Torres-Ferrera discloses the method of claim 9, wherein the optical fiber comprises a multimode optical fiber. (Wang, FIG. 7, "Multimode optical fiber").
Wang and Torres-Ferrera both teach using multimode optical fiber. The suggestion/motivation would have been to allow for more data be carried within one multiplexed signal.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Wang, Sambo, and Torres-Ferrera discloses the method of claim 9, wherein the multimode optical fiber is 100 m or longer. (Torres-Ferrera, p. 1018, ¶ 1).
Because Wang already discloses sending a multiplexed signal over some distance, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to send a multiplexed signal 100m or further in view of what Torres-Ferrera teaches. The suggestion/motivation would have been to have a system capable of sending data longer distances.
Regarding claim 15, Wang teaches An apparatus comprising: a multiplexer; (FIG. 7; "short wavelength division multiplex") an optical fiber; (FIG. 7; "Multimode optical fiber") and one or more processors ([134]), wherein the one or more processors are configured to: control a plurality of vertical cavity surface emitting lasers to provide a first optical signal of a first wavelength with a first bitrate to the multiplexer; (FIG. 7; "second transmitter 850 nm"; "20 Gbps NRZ; [134]) control the plurality of vertical cavity surface emitting lasers to provide a second optical signal of a second wavelength with a second bitrate to the multiplexer, (FIG. 7; "first transmitter 1310 nm"; "30 Gbps NRZ"; [134]) and control the multiplexer to multiplex the first optical signal and the second optical signal to form a multiplexed signal ([134]) and transmit the multiplexed signal over the optical fiber. (FIG. 7; "Multimode optical fiber")
Wang does not teach a plurality of vertical cavity surface emitting lasers and wherein the first bitrate is greater than the second bitrate and the first wavelength is shorter than the second wavelength;
Sambo teaches wherein the first bitrate is greater than the second bitrate bitrate (claim 9 (“wherein lightpaths in the multiplex operate at different wavelengths at two different bitrates… determine an existing lightpath operating at the higher of the two bitrates and having a shortest wavelength among the lightpaths operating at the higher bitrate in the wavelength multiplex”)) and the first wavelength is shorter than the second wavelength (Id.);
Before the filing date of the instant application, it would have obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the multiplex transmitter taught in Wang such that the shorter wavelength was combined with a higher bitrate based on the technique taught by Sambo. Such a combination would merely be applying a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield a predictable result. Wherein the predictable result is a transmitter capable of transmitting the higher bitrate using the shorter wavelength.
Sambo does not teach a plurality of vertical cavity surface emitting lasers
Torres-Ferrera, however, teaches a plurality of vertical cavity surface emitting lasers. (Torres-Ferrera, p. 1018, ¶ 1).
Before the filing date of the instant application, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the arts to replace the emitter taught in Wang with the vertical cavity surface emitting laser taught in Torres-Ferrera. The suggestion/motivation would have been to provide the system in Wang with the advantages provided by a vertical cavity surface emitting over a conventional emitter.
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Wang, Sambo, and Torres-Ferrera discloses the apparatus of claim 15 wherein the optical fiber comprises a multimode optical fiber. (Wang, FIG. 7; "Multimode optical fiber")
Wang and Torres-Ferrera both teach using multimode optical fiber. The suggestion/motivation would have been to allow for more data be carried within one multiplexed signal.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Wang, Sambo, and Torres-Ferrera discloses the apparatus of claim 15 wherein the multimode optical fiber comprises an OM3 or OM4 optical fiber. (Wang, FIG. 1, “Wideband OM4").
Wang and Torres-Ferrera both teach using OM4. The suggestion/motivation would have been to allow for more data be carried within one multiplexed signal.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Wang, Sambo, and Torres-Ferrera discloses apparatus of claim 15, wherein the multiplexer is configured to multiplex the first optical signal and the second optical signal using short wavelength division multiplexing. (Wang, FIG. 7, "short wavelength division multiplex").
Both Wang and Torres-Ferrera teach short wavelength division multiplexing. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve the systems with the advantages provided by a vertical cavity surface emitting over a conventional emitter.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Wang, Sambo, and Torres-Ferrera discloses apparatus of claim 15 wherein a central wavelength of the first optical signal is selected from the group consisting of 850 nm, 880 nm, and 910 nm. (Torres-Ferrera, p. 1019, ¶ 1).
Because Wang already discloses multiplexing two optical signals with different wavelengths and bitrates together, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to multiplex additional optical signals with different wavelengths in view of what Torres-Ferrera teaches. The suggestion/motivation would have been to multiplex more optical signals in order to carry more data within one multiplexed signal.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Wang, Sambo, and Torres-Ferrera discloses apparatus of claim 15, wherein a central wavelength of the second optical signal is selected from the group consisting of 880 nm, 910 nm, and 940 nm. (Torres-Ferrera, p. 1019, ¶ 1).
Because Wang already discloses multiplexing two optical signals with different wavelengths and bitrates together, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to multiplex additional optical signals with different wavelengths in view of what Torres-Ferrera teaches. The suggestion/motivation would have been to multiplex more optical signals in order to carry more data within one multiplexed signal.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL M BROCK whose telephone number is (571)272-7257. The examiner can normally be reached 8-4:30pm.
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, Kenneth Vanderpuye can be reached at (571) 272-3078. 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.
/PAUL MORGAN BROCK/Examiner, Art Unit 2634 April 20, 2026
/KENNETH N VANDERPUYE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2634