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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 21-29 and 40 in the reply filed on 4/1/2026 is acknowledged. Applicant also added claims 41-50.
Newly submitted claims 41-50 are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the elected invention of Group I for the following reasons:
Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Claims 21-29 and 40, drawn to node apparatus with for use in a hybrid network, classified in H04L12/2801.
II. Claims 41-50, drawn to receive configuration data from a control entity in communication with the computerized network node apparatus and allocate first and second radio-frequency resources of the coaxial cable portion to first and second data channels associated with first and second wireless network modules of the computerized network node apparatus, classified in H04W72/20.
Inventions I and II are related as combination and subcombination. Inventions in this relationship are distinct if it can be shown that (1) the combination as claimed does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed for patentability, and (2) that the subcombination has utility by itself or in other combinations (MPEP § 806.05(c)). In the instant case, the combination as claimed does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed because invention of Group I does not rely on at least the features of receive configuration data from a control entity and allocate first and second radio-frequency resources. The subcombination has separate utility such as being used to receive configuration data from a control entity in communication with the computerized network node apparatus and allocate first and second radio-frequency resources of the coaxial cable portion to first and second data channels associated with first and second wireless network modules of the computerized network node apparatus.
The examiner has required restriction between combination and subcombination inventions. Where applicant elects a subcombination, and claims thereto are subsequently found allowable, any claim(s) depending from or otherwise requiring all the limitations of the allowable subcombination will be examined for patentability in accordance with 37 CFR 1.104. See MPEP § 821.04(a). Applicant is advised that if any claim presented in a continuation or divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application.
Since applicant has elected the invention of Group I as stated in the reply filed 4/1/2026, claims 41-50 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/6/2024, 3/7/2024, 9/2/2025 and 4/1/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
The disclosure is objected to because it contains an embedded hyperlink and/or other form of browser-executable code. Applicant is required to delete the embedded hyperlink and/or other form of browser-executable code; references to websites should be limited to the top-level domain name without any prefix such as http:// or other browser-executable code. See MPEP § 608.01.
Claim Objections
Claim 24 is objected to because of the following informalities: “bid-directional” should be changed to “bi-directional” to correct misspelling. Appropriate correction is required.
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 21-30 and 40.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 21-23, 25-29 and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2021/0028915 (hereinafter Jia).
Regarding claims 21 and 40, Jia discloses 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, the at least one RF integrated circuit configured to at least generate RF waveforms within a prescribed frequency band (Fig. 3-7, [0044], [0057]-[0058]: details RFoG analog optics technology transmits RF over fiber); frequency shifter apparatus configured to shift the RF waveforms within the prescribed frequency band to a frequency lower than the prescribed frequency band (Fig. 3-7, [0057]-[0058], [0060]: details hybrid fiber-coaxial HFC); 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).
Regarding claims 22, Jia discloses 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 discloses 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 claims 25, Jia discloses 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 ([0057], [0062]-[0063], [0067]).
Regarding claims 26, Jia discloses 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. 13, [0057]).
Regarding claims 27, Jia discloses an RF waveform IC, wherein the RF waveform IC is configured to generate a plurality of RF waveforms with a cellular frequency band ([0057][0063][0066][0074]).
Regarding claims 28, Jia discloses 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 ([0057][0063][0066][0074]).
Regarding claims 29, Jia discloses 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 ([0057][0063][0066][0074]).
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 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia in view of US 2015/0326237 (hereinafter Hamzeh).
Regarding claim 24, Jia does not explicitly teach a plurality of bid-directional amplifier apparatus; a plurality of signal splitting apparatus; and a plurality of diplexer apparatus.
However, Hamzeh teaches bi-directional amplifier apparatus (FIG. 6, 412: details bi-directional amplifiers); signal splitting apparatus (FIG. 6, 411: details splitter); and diplexer apparatus (FIG. 6, 409: 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 Hamzeh and include bi-directional amplifier apparatus; signal splitting apparatus; and diplexer apparatus of Hamzeh with the amplifiers of Jia. Doing so would provide increase capacity (Hamzeh, paragraph [0041]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Williams (US 2020/0059206) details full duplex amplification.
Li (US 2019/0052577) details MoCA connectivity between RF amplifiers or splitter devices.
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
Prosecution Insights