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 1,6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Earnshaw(US 2019/0312646) in view of Zhang et al.(US 2022/0326456).
Considering Claim 1 Earnshaw discloses a bi-directional and multi-channel optical module, comprising: a location(See Paragraph 50, fig. 3 i.e. a location(4)); an optical transmitter assembly disposed in an accommodation space of the location (See Paragraph 49,50, fig. 3 i.e. an optical transmitter assembly(12) disposed in an accommodation space of the location (4)), wherein the optical transmitter assembly comprises a plurality of light emission units and a wavelength division multiplexer disposed corresponding to the plurality of light emission units(See Paragraph 39, fig. 3 i.e. wherein the optical transmitter assembly(12) comprises a plurality of light emission units(121…12N) and a wavelength division multiplexer(14) disposed corresponding to the plurality of light emission units(121…12N)); an optical receiver assembly(See Paragraph 49, fig. 3 i.e. an optical receiver assembly(301…30N,28)), disposed in the accommodation space, wherein the optical receiver assembly comprises a plurality of light receiving units and a wavelength demultiplexer disposed corresponding to the plurality of light receiving units(See Paragraph 49, fig. 3 i.e. disposed in the accommodation space(4), wherein the optical receiver assembly(301…30N,28) comprises a plurality of light receiving units(301…30N) and a wavelength demultiplexer(28) disposed corresponding to the plurality of light receiving units(301…30N)).
Earnshaw does not explicitly disclose a location is a casing; and an optical fiber adaptor disposed on the casing.
Zhang teaches a location is a casing (See Paragraph 65, fig. 7 i.e. a location is a casing which is a housing assembly(410) ); and an optical fiber adaptor disposed on the casing(See Paragraph 65, fig. 7 i.e. an optical fiber adaptor(601) disposed on the casing(410)).
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 Earnshaw, and have a location to be a casing; and an optical fiber adaptor to be disposed on the casing, as taught by Zhang, thus providing an efficient transmission system by minimizing heat dissipation, optimizing durability using a housing assembly, as discussed by Zhang (Paragraph 76).
Considering Claim 6 Earnshaw and Zhang disclose the bi-directional and multi-channel optical module according to claim 1, further comprising a first optical path folding element, wherein the first optical path folding element is disposed between the optical fiber adaptor and the wavelength division multiplexer of the optical transmitter assembly(See Zhang: Paragraph 101, fig. 20 i.e. a first optical path folding element which is convergence lens(701,702), wherein the first optical path folding element(701,702) is disposed between the optical fiber adaptor(603,604) and the wavelength division multiplexer(4601,4602) of the optical transmitter assembly).
Claims 2,3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Earnshaw(US 2019/0312646) in view of Zhang et al.(US 2022/0326456) further in view of Padovani et al.(US 2022/0117488).
Considering Claim 2 Earnshaw and Zhang do not explicitly disclose the bi-directional and multi-channel optical module according to claim 1, wherein the accommodation space is a single cavity formed by the casing.
Padovani teaches the bi-directional and multi-channel optical module according to claim 1, wherein the accommodation space is a single cavity formed by the casing(See Paragraph 39, fig.11 i.e. the accommodation space(11) is a single cavity formed by the casing(30’)).
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 Earnshaw and Zhang, and have the accommodation space to be a single cavity formed by the casing, as taught by Padovani, thus providing an efficient transmission system by improving components integration and allowing reduction in circuit size using a single cavity substrate configuration, as discussed by Padovani (Paragraph 6,39).
Considering Claim 3 Earnshaw and Zhang do not explicitly disclose the bi-directional and multi-channel optical module according to claim 1, wherein the accommodation space is a hermetic cavity formed by the casing.
Padovani teaches the bi-directional and multi-channel optical module according to claim 1, wherein the accommodation space is a hermetic cavity formed by the casing(See Paragraph 36, fig. 6 i.e. wherein the accommodation space is a hermetic cavity(44) formed by the casing(44)).
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 Earnshaw and Zhang, and have the accommodation space to be a single cavity formed by the casing, as taught by Padovani, thus providing an efficient transmission system by optimizing stability and protecting the components from environmental damage using hermetic cavity, as discussed by Padovani (Paragraph 4,6).
Claims 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Earnshaw(US 2019/0312646) in view of Zhang et al.(US 2022/0326456) further in view of Shahibe(US 2008/0130696).
Considering Claim 4 Earnshaw and Zhang do not explicitly disclose the bi-directional and multi-channel optical module according to claim 1, wherein the optical transmitter assembly further comprises a lithium niobate modulator, and the lithium niobate modulator is disposed corresponding to at least one of the plurality of light emission units.
Shahibe teaches the bi-directional and multi-channel optical module according to claim 1, wherein the optical transmitter assembly further comprises a lithium niobate modulator(See Paragraph 16, fig. 2 i.e. the optical transmitter(30) assembly further comprises a lithium niobate modulator(34)), and the lithium niobate modulator is disposed corresponding to at least one of the plurality of light emission units(See Paragraph 16, fig. 2 i.e. the lithium niobate modulator(34) is disposed corresponding to at least one of the plurality of light emission units(32)).
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 Earnshaw and Zhang, and have the optical transmitter assembly to further comprise a lithium niobate modulator, and the lithium niobate modulator is disposed corresponding to at least one of the plurality of light emission units, as taught by Shahibe, thus improving transmission quality by optimizing electro-optical response, output extinction ratio, and minimizing modulator chirp using lithium niobate modulator, as discussed by Shahibe (Paragraph 1).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5,7-10 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