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 .
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.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 9/10/2026 has been entered. Claims 21-29 and 40-50 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/10/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 21-29 and 40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-25 of U.S. Patent No. 11,985,641. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-25 of the patent teaches all the limitations of claims 21-29 and 40.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 21-29 and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2021/0028915 (hereinafter Jia) in view of US 2019/0320322 (hereinafter Jayawardene).
Regarding claims 21 and 40, Jia teaches a Computerized node apparatus for use within a hybrid network topology, the computerized node apparatus comprising: a first port for interfacing with a first portion of the network topology using at least a first type of network medium for data transmission (Fig. 3-7, [0057]: details optical fiber); first network interface logic in communication with the first port (Fig. 3-7, [0057]); at least one RF integrated circuit in data communication with the first network interface logic, (Fig. 3-7, [0044], [0057]-[0058]: details RFoG analog optics technology transmits RF over fiber); amplification logic configured to amplify the shifted RF waveforms (Fig. 3-7, [0057]: details amplifiers); and a second port for interfacing with a second portion of the network topology using at least a second type of network medium for data transmission, the second port in communication with the amplification logic (Fig. 3-7, [0057]: details coaxial cable).
Jia does not explicitly teach the at least one RF integrated circuit configured to at least generate RF waveforms within a prescribed frequency band; frequency shifter apparatus configured to shift the RF waveforms within the prescribed frequency band to a frequency lower than the prescribed frequency band.
However, Jayawardene teaches the at least one RF integrated circuit configured to at least generate RF waveforms within a prescribed frequency band (Fig. 7-8a, 830, 832; [0229]: details 5G/4G RF-IF block converters generate RF waveforms in prescribed frequencies); frequency shifter apparatus configured to shift the RF waveforms within the prescribed frequency band to a frequency lower than the prescribed frequency band (Fig. 7-8a, 830, 832; [0229]: details 5G/4G RF-IP block converters).
Therefore, 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 Jia to incorporate the teachings of Jayawardene and include the at least one RF integrated circuit configured to at least generate RF waveforms within a prescribed frequency band; frequency shifter apparatus configured to shift the RF waveforms within the prescribed frequency band to a frequency lower than the prescribed frequency band of Jayawardene with of Jia. Doing so would provide lower loss (Jayawardene, paragraph [0232]).
Regarding claims 22, Jia teaches wherein the first portion of the network topology comprises a fiber-optic distribution portion of the network topology, and the second portion comprises a coaxial cable portion of the network topology ([0057]-[0058]).
Regarding claims 23, Jia teaches wherein the network topology comprises a hybrid fiber coaxial (HFC) cable television network topology operated by a multiple systems operator (MSO) ([0057] and [0066]).
Regarding claim 24, Jia does not explicitly teach a plurality of bi-directional amplifier apparatus; a plurality of signal splitting apparatus; and a plurality of diplexer apparatus.
However, Jayawardene teaches bi-directional amplifier apparatus (FIG. 5, 509; FIG. 7-8a: details TILT); signal splitting apparatus (FIG. 5, 509; FIG. 7-8a: details split paths); and diplexer apparatus (FIG. 5, 509; FIG. 7-8a: details diplexer).
Therefore, 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 Jia to incorporate the teachings of Jayawardene and include bi-directional amplifier apparatus; signal splitting apparatus; and diplexer apparatus of Jayawardene with the amplifiers of Jia. Doing so would provide lower loss (Jayawardene, paragraph [0232]).
Regarding claims 25, Jia does not explicitly teach wherein the at least one RF integrated circuit comprises two IEEE-Std. 802.11ax compliant ICs or chipsets, a first of the two ICs or chipsets configured to generate at least part of the RF waveforms within a first sub-band of the prescribed frequency band, and a second of the two ICs or chipsets configured to generate at least part of the RF waveforms within a second sub-band of the prescribed frequency band, the first and second sub-bands being non-overlapping in frequency.
However, Jayawardene teaches wherein the at least one RF integrated circuit comprises two IEEE-Std. 802.11ax compliant ICs or chipsets, a first of the two ICs or chipsets configured to generate at least part of the RF waveforms within a first sub-band of the prescribed frequency band, and a second of the two ICs or chipsets configured to generate at least part of the RF waveforms within a second sub-band of the prescribed frequency band, the first and second sub-bands being non-overlapping in frequency (FIG. 8a, 830 and 832: details: ICs or chipsets; coupled to 802.11ax router so they are IEEE-Std. 802.11ax compliant; 5G/4G RF-IF block converters port 0 IF: 10-30 MHz, port 1 IF: 30-50 MHz, port 0 IF: 50-850 MHz and port 1 IF: 850-1650 MHz, as non-overlapping in frequency).
Therefore, 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 Jia to incorporate the teachings of Jayawardene and include wherein the at least one RF integrated circuit comprises two IEEE-Std. 802.11ax compliant ICs or chipsets, a first of the two ICs or chipsets configured to generate at least part of the RF waveforms within a first sub-band of the prescribed frequency band, and a second of the two ICs or chipsets configured to generate at least part of the RF waveforms within a second sub-band of the prescribed frequency band, the first and second sub-bands being non-overlapping in frequency of Jayawardene with of Jia. Doing so would provide lower loss (Jayawardene, paragraph [0232]).
Regarding claims 26, Jia does not explicitly teach wherein the first of the two ICs or chipsets are configured to generate the at least part of the RF waveforms within the first sub-band for output via four (4) first ports or spatial diversity channels, and the second of the two ICs or chipsets are configured to generate the at least part of the RF waveforms within the second sub-band for output via four (4) second ports or spatial diversity channels.
However, Jayawardene teaches wherein the first of the two ICs or chipsets are configured to generate the at least part of the RF waveforms within the first sub-band for output via four (4) first ports or spatial diversity channels, and the second of the two ICs or chipsets are configured to generate the at least part of the RF waveforms within the second sub-band for output via four (4) second ports or spatial diversity channels (FIG. 8a, 830 and 832: details: 5G/4G RF-IF block converters generate RF waveform; spatial diversity may be utilized at the CPEe, as spatial diversity channels).
Therefore, 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 Jia to incorporate the teachings of Jayawardene and include wherein the first of the two ICs or chipsets are configured to generate the at least part of the RF waveforms within the first sub-band for output via four (4) first ports or spatial diversity channels, and the second of the two ICs or chipsets are configured to generate the at least part of the RF waveforms within the second sub-band for output via four (4) second ports or spatial diversity channels of Jayawardene with of Jia. Doing so would provide lower loss (Jayawardene, paragraph [0232]).
Regarding claims 27, Jia does not explicitly teach an RF waveform IC, wherein the RF waveform IC is configured to generate a plurality of RF waveforms with a cellular frequency band.
However, Jayawardene teaches an RF waveform IC, wherein the RF waveform IC is configured to generate a plurality of RF waveforms with a cellular frequency band (FIG. 7-8a; Table 1: details: 5G/4G RF-IF block converters generate RF waveform; 4G as cellular frequency band).
Therefore, 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 Jia to incorporate the teachings of Jayawardene and include an RF waveform IC, wherein the RF waveform IC is configured to generate a plurality of RF waveforms with a cellular frequency band of Jayawardene with Jia. Doing so would provide lower loss (Jayawardene, paragraph [0232]).
Regarding claims 28, Jia does not explicitly teach wherein the plurality of RF waveforms within the cellular frequency band are coupled to the second port via a signal path comprising at least a second frequency shifter apparatus and at least a portion of the amplification.
However, Jayawardene teaches wherein the plurality of RF waveforms within the cellular frequency band are coupled to the second port via a signal path comprising at least a second frequency shifter apparatus and at least a portion of the amplification logic (FIG. 7-8: details: RF-IF block converters port 0 IF: 50-850 MHz and port 1 IF: 850-1650 MHz; TILT).
Therefore, 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 Jia to incorporate the teachings of Jayawardene and include wherein the plurality of RF waveforms within the cellular frequency band are coupled to the second port via a signal path comprising at least a second frequency shifter apparatus and at least a portion of the amplification of Jayawardene with Jia. Doing so would provide lower loss (Jayawardene, paragraph [0232]).
Regarding claims 29, Jia does not explicitly teach wherein the second frequency shifter apparatus is configured to shift the RF waveforms within the cellular band to a third sub-band within the prescribed frequency band.
However, Jayawardene teaches wherein the second frequency shifter apparatus is configured to shift the RF waveforms within the cellular band to a third sub-band within the prescribed frequency band (FIG. 7-8a: details: 5G/4G RF-IF block converters port 0 IF: 10-30 MHz, port 1 IF: 30-50 MHz, port 0 IF: 50-850 MHz and port 1 IF: 850-1650 MHz).
Therefore, 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 Jia to incorporate the teachings of Jayawardene and include wherein the second frequency shifter apparatus is configured to shift the RF waveforms within the cellular band to a third sub-band within the prescribed frequency band of Jayawardene with Jia. Doing so would provide lower loss (Jayawardene, paragraph [0232]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 9/10/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 21-29 and 40 under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Jayawardene.
Regarding Applicant’s arguments for the double patenting rejection, Applicant alleges that the rejection does not identify conflicting claims. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Claims 1-25 of the patent and claims 21-29 and 40 of the present application are identified. It is clearly obvious that one or more of the limitations of one or more of the patent claims maps to the limitations of the pending claims. For example, claim 1 of the patent recites “a first port…”, “first network interface logic…”, “first RF integrated circuit…”, “frequency shifter apparatus”, “a second port…” and claim 7 recites “amplification logic”, which are equivalent and/or teach “a first port…”, “first network interface logic…”, “at least one RF integrated circuit…”, “frequency shifter apparatus”, “amplification logic” and “a second port…” of claim 21 of the present application. The other claims can be similarly mapped.
Regarding the Applicant’s arguments for election by original presentation, Applicant's election with traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 9/10/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the record established no serious search or examination burden. This is not found persuasive because the record does not explicitly recite no serious search or examination burden. For example, the record does not state that the groups would not require unique text search. Also, a CPC symbol is not a complete search. Because the groups are combination and subcombination and independent and distinct with different limitations and unique text search, there is serious burden even if one or more CPC symbols are shared.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Conclusion
Applicant's submission of an information disclosure statement under 37 CFR 1.97(c) with the timing fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(p) on 9/10/2026 prompted the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 609.04(b). 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 Jasper Kwoh whose telephone number is (408)918-7644. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday through Friday, 10am to 4pm Pacific.
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, Jeffrey Rutkowski can be reached at (571) 270-1215. 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.
/JASPER KWOH/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2415
