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 § 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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirata et al.(US 2006/0279741) in view of Lim et al.(US 2020/0076531).
Considering Claim 1 Hirata discloses an optical communication system comprising: a polarized-light emitter comprising a source configured to generate at least one photon polarized with a predetermined polarization on a propagation path(See Paragraph 54,422, fig. 10 i.e. a polarized-light emitter(2) comprising a source configured to generate at least one photon polarized with a predetermined polarization on a propagation path(366)); a complex polarization modifier placed on the propagation path of the light generated by the emitter, configured to modify the polarization direction of said light (See Paragraph 454, 407,423, fig. 10 i.e. a complex polarization modifier which is a polarization controller(566) placed on the propagation path of the light generated by the emitter(2), configured to modify the polarization direction of said light); and a receiver arranged on the propagation path of the light, downstream of the complex polarization modifier, comprising a measuring instrument for measuring the ellipticity and the orientation of the polarization of the light using the Jones formalism(See Paragraph 9-11,407, fig. 10,14 i.e. a receiver(1) arranged on the propagation path of the light, downstream of the complex polarization modifier(566), comprising a measuring instrument which is measuring object(1) for measuring the ellipticity and the orientation of the polarization of the light using the Jones formalism).
Hirata does not explicitly disclose a complex polarization modifier configured to introduce a phase shift between two perpendicular components of the electric field of the light.
Lim teaches a complex polarization modifier configured to introduce a phase shift between two perpendicular components of the electric field of the light(See Paragraph 99, fig. 7a i.e. a complex polarization modifier which is a polarization controller(fig. 7a) configured to introduce a phase shift using polarization rotator(720) between two perpendicular components(φc,φs) of the electric field of the light).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Hirata, and have a complex polarization modifier to be configured to introduce a phase shift between two perpendicular components of the electric field of the light, as taught by Lim, thus improving transmission signal quality by optimizing signal strength by matching polarization characteristics of received signal using a polarization controller that perform phase shifting.
Considering Claim 2 Hirata and Lim disclose the system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the emitter being configured to emit the light with a predetermined polarization, in particular with a linear polarization(See Hirata: Paragraph 54,347,400, fig. 10 i.e. the emitter(2) being configured to emit the light with a predetermined polarization, in particular with a linear polarization).
Considering Claim 3 Hirata and Lim disclose the system as claimed in claim 2, wherein the emitter comprising, downstream of the source, a linear polarizer configured to select a polarization direction of the photon(See Hirata: Paragraph 426, fig. 10 i.e. the emitter(2) comprising, downstream of the source(2), a linear polarizer which is a polarization beam splitter(PBS)(1066d) configured to select a polarization direction(signal light and reference light) of the photon).
Considering Claim 4 Hirata and Lim disclose the system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the polarization modifier comprising a polarization ellipticity modifier arranged on the propagation path between the emitter and the receiver(See Hirata: Paragraph 54,62,422, fig. 10 i.e. the polarization modifier(566) comprising a polarization ellipticity modifier which is lens(466) arranged on the propagation path between the emitter(2) and the receiver(1066,1166,1266)).
Considering Claim 5 Hirata and Lim disclose the system as claimed in claim 4, wherein the polarization modifier comprising a polarization direction modifier arranged on the propagation path between the emitter and the polarization ellipticity modifier or between the polarization ellipticity modifier and the receiver(See Hirata: Paragraph 54,62,422, fig. 10 i.e. the polarization modifier(566) comprising a polarization direction modifier(1066a) arranged between the polarization ellipticity modifier(466) and the receiver(1)).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirata et al.(US 2006/0279741) in view of Lim et al.(US 2020/0076531) further in view of Kurita et al.(US 2022/0263292).
Considering claim 11 Hirata and Lim do not explicitly disclose the system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the receiver comprising an optical amplifier upstream of the measuring instrument of the receiver and the optical amplifier being a doped fiber amplifier.
Kurita teaches the system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the receiver comprising an optical amplifier upstream of the measuring instrument of the receiver and the optical amplifier being a doped fiber amplifier(See Paragraph 50,83, fig. 18 i.e. the receiver comprising an optical amplifier(61) upstream of the measuring instrument(23) of the receiver and the optical amplifier(61) being a doped fiber amplifier).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Hirata and Lim, and have the receiver to comprise an optical amplifier upstream of the measuring instrument of the receiver and the optical amplifier being a doped fiber amplifier, as taught by Kurita, thus improving transmission signal quality by optimizing gain using ER doped fiber amplifier.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirata et al.(US 2006/0279741) in view of Lim et al.(US 2020/0076531) further in view of Motoyoshi et al. (US 6,314,189).
Considering claim 12 Hirata and Lim do not explicitly disclose the system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the emitter being configured to successively generate a plurality of photons(See Paragraph 40,41, fig. 1 i.e. the emitter which is a light source(10) being configured to successively generate a plurality of photons).
Motoyoshi teaches the system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the emitter being configured to successively generate a plurality of photons(See Abstract, Col. 2 lines 55-57, Col. 8 lines 54-63, fig. 2 i.e. the emitter which is a laser source(22) being configured to successively generate a plurality of photons(first, second and third photons)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Hirata and Lim, and have the emitter to be configured to successively generate a plurality of photons, as taught by Motoyoshi, thus improving transmission signal quality by preventing noise and eavesdropping by successively transmitting photons, discussed by Motoyoshi(Col. 2 lines 6-9, Col. 9 lines 45-60).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-10,13-25 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HIBRET A WOLDEKIDAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5145. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5:30.
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 C 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.
/HIBRET A WOLDEKIDAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2635
Prosecution Insights