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
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 14-16, 20-21, 24, 26, 28-31 and 33-36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. 2023/0179318 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Deng et al. teaches in FIG. 11 a Reconfigurable Optical Add/Drop Multiplexer (ROADM) node supporting integrated C and L band functionality (Deng et al. teaches in paragraph [0113] that FIG. 11 is a structure of a ROADM node including C+L-band), the ROADM node comprising: one or more ROADM modules (Deng et al. teaches in FIG. 11 the details of the ROADM module for the first direction) each including a demultiplexer Wavelength Selective Switch (WSS) having [[a common receive input and]] a plurality of output ports (Deng et al. teaches in FIG. 4 WSS 100 having a plurality of output ports), a multiplexer WSS having a plurality of input ports (Deng et al. teaches in FIG. 11 that WSS 200 has a plurality of input ports) [[and a common transmit output]], wherein, each of the demultiplexer WSS and the multiplexer WSS support both the C band and L band in an integrated manner, a plurality of amplifiers (amplifiers 600, 610, 620 and 630) that each connect to one of the demultiplexer WSS and the multiplexer WSS.
The difference between Deng et al. and the claimed invention is that Deng et al. does not teach in FIG. 11 that the demultiplexer has a common receive input and that the multiplexer has a common transmit output. Deng et al. teaches in paragraph [0106] that the 2×N WSS can be replaced by a 1×N WSS as shown in FIG. 9A. It is obvious that the same can be done in the transmit direction. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teaching of FIG. 9A of Deng et al. with the ROADM of FIG. 11 because it is suggested by Deng et al.
The modification of FIG. 11 with the 1×N WSS of FIG. 9A further teaches line ports including a transmit port and a receive port that connect to the plurality of amplifiers (FIG. 9A teaches a receive line port connected to the C+L amplifier; a similar arrangement for the multiplexer would teach a transmit line port connected to a C+L amplifier), wherein the common receive input is a single bandless receive port configured to receive a combined optical spectrum including both C-band and L- band channels, and wherein the common transmit output is a single bandless transmit port configured to output a combined optical spectrum including both C- band and L-band channels, wherein each output port of the demultiplexer WSS and each input port of the multiplexer WSS is a bandless connection port configured to carry any of the C-band channels, any of the L-band channels, or both, through a common switching fabric of the respective WSS (FIG. 11 suggests that each of the output ports of 100 and the input ports of 200 is configured to carry any of the C-band channels, any of the L-band channels, or both), wherein bandless denotes a common port comprising a common receive input or a common transmit output supporting an extended spectral range encompassing both the C-band and the L-band in an integrated manner, rather than band-dedicated C-band and L-band ports configured as separate parallel systems, and wherein the plurality of output ports and the plurality of input ports are coupled to one or more channel multiplexers/demultiplexers (WSSs 300, 310, 320 and 330) over a path that conveys a combined optical spectrum including both C-band channels and L-band channels without an intervening band splitter or waveband filter that separates the C band from the L band (it is clear from FIG. 11 with the replacement of 2×N WSS by the 1×N WSS of FIG. 9A that there is no intervening band splitters or waveband filters).
Regarding claim 15, Deng et al. teaches in FIG. 9B that two pre amplifiers, one for L-band and one for C-band, can be used. It is obvious that the same can be done in the transmit port by using two post amplifiers.
Regarding claim 16, Deng et al. teaches in FIG. 9A a single pre amplifier. It is obvious that the same can be done in the transmit port by using a single optical amplifier.
Regarding claim 20, Deng et al. teaches in FIG. 11 up modules 310 and 330 and down modules 300 and 320 that are connected to the plurality input ports and output ports of the WSS, and in paragraph [0093] that the modules may be implemented based on demultiplexer/multiplexer.
Regarding claim 21, Deng et al. teaches in paragraph [0117] that the C+L-band local down module 300 can drop an optical signal carried by any wavelength in the C-band and the L-band, and the C+L-band local up module 310 can add an optical signal carried by any wavelength in the C-band and the L-band, that is, being colorless in an entire C+L wavelength range.
Regarding claim 24, Deng et al. teaches in FIG. 11 a second direction which includes second demultiplex WSS and second multiplexer WSS similar to those for the first direction.
Regarding claim 26, the modification of FIG. 11 of Deng et al. with the 1×N WSS of FIG. 9A of Deng et al. teaches a multiplexer/demultiplexer module for a Reconfigurable Optical Add/Drop Multiplexer (ROADM) comprising: a plurality of local add/drop ports (up/down modules 300, 310, 320 and 330 of FIG. 11); degree ports (710 and 720 for the first direction of FIG. 11); and multiplexer/demultiplexer components (1×N WSS of FIG. 9A and similar N×1 WSS for multiplexer) interconnecting the plurality of local add/drop ports to the degree ports, supporting at least two bands of spectrum. wherein the multiplexer/demultiplexer components comprise an integrated C+L switching structure that treats the C band and L band as a single line system rather than parallel band-specific systems, wherein each degree port and each local add/drop port is bandless and is configurable to carry any channel in the C band, any channel in the L band, or both (FIG. 11 suggests that each of the output ports of 100 and the input ports of 200 is configured to carry any of the C-band channels, any of the L-band channels, or both), wherein the multiplexer/demultiplexer components are configured to provide colorless and directionless add/drop for channels in both the C band and the L band through a common C+L switching fabric (Deng et al. teaches in paragraph [0106] that all ports of the 1×N WSS support the C-band and the L-band; Deng et al. teaches in paragraph [0105] that the passive optical path is reversible, i.e. the 1×N demultiplexing WSS can also be used as a N×1 multiplexing WSS, i.e. the WSS is colorless and directionless), wherein the integrated C+L switching structure routes any channel in the C band and any channel in the L band to any of the degree ports and any of the local add/drop ports through the common C+L switching fabric without any band-demultiplexing element separating the C band from the L band between the degree ports and the local add/drop ports (it is clear from FIG. 11 with the replacement of 2×N WSS by the 1×N WSS of FIG. 9A that there is no demultiplexing element separating the C band from the L band between the degree ports and the local add/drop ports), and wherein bandless denotes a common port comprising a common receive input or a common transmit output supporting an extended spectral range encompassing both the C-band and the L-band in an integrated manner, rather than band-dedicated C-band and L-band ports configured as separate parallel systems (FIG. 9A teaches a common receive input; since the 1×N demultiplexing WSS is directionless, it can be used in the reverse direction as a N×1 multiplexing WSS to support a common transmit output).
Regarding claim 28, Deng et al. teaches in paragraph [0093] that the modules may be colorless, directionless, and contentionless (CDC).
Regarding claim 29-30, Deng et al. teaches in paragraph [0093] N×M WSS and that the module may be contentionless.
Regarding claim 31, the modification of FIG. 11 of Deng et al. with the 1×N WSS of FIG. 9A of Deng et al. teaches a degree (the first direction on the left-hand side of FIG. 11) in a Reconfigurable Optical Add/Drop Multiplexer (ROADM) comprising: ROADM components including a line port and a plurality of connection ports (common receive port and common transmit port as taught by FIG. 9A and the ports that connected to the up/down modules are the connection ports); channel multiplexer/demultiplexer components including degree ports and local add/drop ports (up/down modules 300, 310, 320 and 330 of FIG. 11; it is understood that they have local ports similar to the modules 400 and 410 of FIG. 3); and wherein all ports in between the ROADM components and the channel multiplexer/demultiplexer components include integrated C band and L band functionality (Deng et al. teaches in paragraph [0117] that the C+L-band local down module 300 can drop an optical signal carried by any wavelength in the C-band and the L-band, and the C+L-band local up module 310 can add an optical signal carried by any wavelength in the C-band and the L-band, that is, being colorless in an entire C+L wavelength range), wherein the ROADM components comprise an integrated C+L ROADM module having a bandless line port and a plurality of bandless connection ports each supporting an extended spectral range encompassing both the C band and the L band, wherein the channel multiplexer/demultiplexer components comprise one or more integrated C+L channel multiplexer/demultiplexer modules coupled to the plurality of bandless connection ports, wherein each of the ports in between the ROADM components and the channel multiplexer/demultiplexer components is configured to carry any channel in the C band, any channel in the L band, or both, without requiring band-dedicated intermediate ports (it is clear from FIG. 11 with the replacement of 2×N WSS by the 1×N WSS of FIG. 9A that there is no band-dedicated intermediate ports), wherein each bandless connection port of the integrated C+L ROADM module is coupled to a corresponding degree port of the one or more integrated C+L channel multiplexer/demultiplexer modules over a path that conveys a combined optical spectrum including both C-band channels and L-band channels without an intervening band splitter or waveband filter that separates the C band from the L band (it is clear from FIG. 11 that each connection between a degree port and up/down module has no intervening band splitter or waveband filter), and wherein bandless denotes a common port comprising a common receive input or a common transmit output supporting an extended spectral range encompassing both the C-band and the L-band in an integrated manner, rather than band-dedicated C-band and L-band ports configured as separate parallel systems (FIG. 9A teaches a common receive input; since the 1×N demultiplexing WSS is directionless, it can be used in the reverse direction as a N×1 multiplexing WSS to support a common transmit output).
Regarding claim 33, Deng et al. teaches in FIG. 9A Wavelength Selective Switches (WSS) that supports integrated C-band and L- band functionality.
Regarding claim 34, Deng et al. teaches in FIG. 9A C+L WSS; Deng et al. teaches in paragraph [0105] that the passive optical path is reversible, i.e. the 1×N demultiplexing WSS can also be used as a N×1 multiplexing WSS.
Regarding claim 35, Deng et al. teaches in FIG. 9A a single pre amplifier. It is obvious that the same can be done in the transmit port by using a single optical amplifier.
Regarding claim 36, Deng et al. teaches in paragraph [0093] that the modules may be colorless, directionless, and contentionless (CDC).
Claim(s) 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng et al. as applied to claims 14-16, 20-21, 24, 26, 28-31 and 33-36 above, and further in view of Dangui et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. 2018/0262292 A1).
Deng et al. has been discussed above in regard to claims 14-16, 20-21, 24, 26, 28-31 and 33-36. The difference between Deng et al. and the claimed invention is that Deng et al. does not teach that the one or more ROADM modules further include an Optical Service Channel (OSC) located between the plurality of amplifiers and the line ports. Dangui et al. teaches in FIG. 1 a ROADM comprising ROADM blocks. Dangui et al. teach in FIG. 2 the details of a ROADM block comprising OSC 262. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teaching of Dangui et al. with the modified system of Deng et al. because an OSC facilitates network management. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include an OSC, as taught by Dangui et al., in the modified system of Deng et al. The Examiner notes that Dangui et al. does not explicitly teach that the OSC is located between the plurality of amplifier and the line ports; however, positioning the OSC between the amplifier and the line port is obvious because it does not involve undue experimentation.
Regarding claim 18, Dangui et al. teaches in FIG. 2 OTDR 260.
Regarding claim 19, Dangui et al. teaches in FIG. 2 OCM 265a and 265b.
Claim(s) 23 and 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng et al. as applied to claims 14-16, 20-21, 24, 26, 28-31 and 33-36 above, and further in view of Archambault et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. 2016/0099851 A1).
Deng et al. has been discussed above in regard to claims 14-16, 20-21, 24, 26, 28-31 and 33-36. The difference between Deng et al. and the claimed invention is that Deng et al. does not teach one or more fiber interconnection modules between the one or more ROADM modules and the one or more channel multiplexers/demultiplexers. Archambault et al. teaches in FIG. 1 and ROADM comprising a fiber interconnection module (FIM) for connecting among the degree modules and the MCS modules (equivalent to add/drop modules). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teaching of Archambault et al. with the modified system of Deng et al. because FIM facilitates the interconnection among the modules. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include one or more FIMs, as taught by Archambault et al., in the modified system of Deng et al.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 27 July 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues:
Deng achieves combined C+L coverage at a single port by integrating the WSS, as shown in FIG. 9A and described at ¶0106. However, Deng's add/drop path necessarily reintroduces band separation. In Deng, a downlink combined signal is split back into a separate C-band optical signal and a separate L-band optical signal by the waveband filter array 500 before reaching the down modules, and the resulting band-separated signals are delivered to band-dedicated down modules and up modules (for example, C down module 300, L down module 400, C up module 310, and L up module 410), as described at ¶0086, ¶0089, and ¶0091, and as shown in FIG. 4. The waveband filter array 500 is expressly configured "to split an input combined signal into a C-band optical signal and an L-band optical signal" (¶0086). The C/L waveband filters 500 and 510 are therefore precisely the band-demultiplexing elements that amended claims 26 and 31 exclude from the add/drop path.
Even in Deng's more integrated figures, the band-separating structure persists. The node of FIG. 4 retains line-side C+L waveband filters 710 and 720 (¶0090 through ¶0092), and the integrated up-down modules of FIG. 10 and FIG. 11 are reached through C/L waveband filters 500, 510 that combine and split the bands (¶0089). At no point does Deng route both bands to a degree port and a local add/drop port through a common fabric without an intervening band-separating element. Deng's add/drop integration is achieved by filtering, that is, by splitting the combined spectrum back into band-dedicated paths, which is the opposite of the claimed architecture.
The argument is not persuasive. The combination of FIG. 9A and FIG. 11 of Deng et al. suggests that there is no band separation between the connection of the ports of the 1×N demultiplexing WSS and the down modules 300 and 320; and between N×1 multiplexing WSS and the up modules 310 and 330.
The Applicant argues:
The Office Action maps the claimed add/drop limitations onto Deng ¶0093, which states that the modules may be colorless, directionless, and contentionless (CDC). Applicant respectfully submits that CDC functionality is not the claimed feature. As the present specification explains at ¶0038, a colorless add/drop device supports any wavelength being added to any port; a directionless add/drop device supports any port being directed to any degree; and a contentionless add/drop device supports multiple instances of the same wavelength in the same device. None of these properties concerns whether the C band and the L band are carried together through a common fabric or are instead separated by a band-demultiplexing element. A device may be fully CDC while still employing band-dedicated ports fed by an upstream band splitter, which is exactly the Deng architecture, in which the CDC down and up modules are fed by the band- separating waveband filter array 500. Accordingly, Deng ¶0093 does not teach or suggest the band-integration limitations of amended claims 26 and 31.
The argument is not persuasive. The Examiner cannot see any reasons why the colorless, directionless and contentionless of Deng et al. are different from the colorless, directionless and contentionless of the claimed invention. These terms— colorless, directionless and contentionless—are well known in the art and well defined. The claimed invention fails to recite any structural difference between the modified structure of FIG. 11 of Deng et al. by FIG. 9A of Deng et al.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
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 SHI K LI whose telephone number is (571)272-3031. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:53 a.m. -3:23 p.m.
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.
skl8 August 2026
/SHI K LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2635
Prosecution Insights