Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Interpretation
2. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are: "physical coding sublayer (PCS) block" in claim 1, 9, and 16.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 6, 7, 9-14, 16, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kang (U.S. Pub. No. 20150341284A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kang teaches a first physical coding sublayer (PCS) block ([0132]: The 10GBASE-R PCS transmission unit 705 may encode 8-byte (64-bit) control block data, corresponding to the configuration ordered set received from the auto-negotiation transmission unit 701, into 66 bits.) that incorporates auto-negotiation information into a control block ([0104]: Referring to FIG. 6, the auto-negotiation messages may be encoded into 66 bits using 64B/66B to be transmitted. That is, the link establishing device may encode the auto-negotiation messages into a 66-bit block including a data code or control code that is 64-bit input data 601, a sync header 602 and a block payload 603. Here, the link establishing device may input 0b′01 into the synch header 602 of the data code. Also, the link establishing device may input 0b′10 into the synch header 602 of the control code.), wherein the control block is transmitted to a second PCS block and wherein the auto-negotiation information is used to enable negotiation between the first and the second PCS blocks ([0103]: The link establishing device and the link partner device may transmit auto-negotiation messages through a multi-core fiber cable. [0042]: the link establishing device 100 and the link partner device 101 may be partner devices connected to each other via a link as link counterparts.[0063]: The link partner device 101 may include an optical module 303, an auto-negotiation logic 302, and a multirate MAC & PHY 301. [0116]: the auto-negotiation block may include a 10GBASE-R PCS transmission unit 705, a 10GBASE-R PCS reception unit 706.).
Regarding claim 2, Kang teaches the subject matter of claim 1. Kang further teaches wherein the control block is transparent to a digital signal processor data path ([0081]: The AN 403 may exchange link information between the link establishing device and the link partner device through an auto-negotiation message encoded via 64B/66B. [0132]: The 10GBASE-R PCS transmission unit 705 may encode 8-byte (64-bit) control block data, corresponding to the configuration ordered set received from the auto-negotiation transmission unit 701, into 66 bits. Further, the 10GBASE-R PCS transmission unit 705 may randomize the 8-byte (64-bit) control block data into a signal pattern strong on a characteristic of a transmission line through scrambling, convert the signal pattern into a 16-bit unit bus signal and transmit the signal to the serialization unit 707. [0134]: The serialization unit 707 may convert the 16-bit bus signal, transmitted from the 10GBASE-R PCS transmission unit 705, into a 1-bit serial signal of 10.3125 Gbps to transmit to the path selector 709. Examiner note: [0081], [0132], and [0134] indicate how the control block is contained within the AN unit, PCS unit, and serialization unit. [0137]: When a link is established according to auto-negotiation between the link establishing device and the link partner device, the auto-negotiation arbitration unit 702 may set the control bit of the path selector 709 to 0 to control the path so that a multirate MAC/PHY processes data.). Examiner note: Examiner interprets “transparent” to mean unaware of. [0137] discloses a separate unit which decides where the digital signal processor data is selected, thereby indicating that control block is unaware of the digital signal processor data.
Regarding claim 3, Kang teaches the subject matter of claim 1. Kang further teaches wherein the negotiation between the first and the second PCS blocks is transparent to a Physical Medium Attachment (PMA) sublayer and a Physical Medium Dependent (PMD) sublayer ([0080]: The PMA 402 may conduct serialization of encoded parallel bus signals and deserialization of serial bit signals. [0083]: The PMD 404 may conduct conversion between an electrical signal and an optical signal. Examiner note: [0080] and [0081]: shows the PMA and PMD associated with non-auto-negotiation data. [0081]: The AN 403 may exchange link information between the link establishing device and the link partner device through an auto-negotiation message encoded via 64B/66B. [0132]: The 10GBASE-R PCS transmission unit 705 may encode 8-byte (64-bit) control block data, corresponding to the configuration ordered set received from the auto-negotiation transmission unit 701, into 66 bits. Further, the 10GBASE-R PCS transmission unit 705 may randomize the 8-byte (64-bit) control block data into a signal pattern strong on a characteristic of a transmission line through scrambling, convert the signal pattern into a 16-bit unit bus signal and transmit the signal to the serialization unit 707. [0134]: The serialization unit 707 may convert the 16-bit bus signal, transmitted from the 10GBASE-R PCS transmission unit 705, into a 1-bit serial signal of 10.3125 Gbps to transmit to the path selector 709. Examiner note: [0081], [0132], and [0134] indicate a self-contained auto-negotiation unit, including the PCS, and [0137], recited below, indicate that non-auto-negotiation data path is independent of the auto-negotiation path and that PMA 402 and the PMD 404 are unaware of type of traffic they handle. [0137]: When a link is established according to auto-negotiation between the link establishing device and the link partner device, the auto-negotiation arbitration unit 702 may set the control bit of the path selector 709 to 0 to control the path so that a multirate MAC/PHY processes data. Examiner note: examiner interprets transparency to mean that the PMA and PMD layers are unaware of and do not need to interpret the auto-negotiation messages.).
Regarding claim 4, Kang teaches the subject matter of claim 1. Kang further teaches wherein the control block ([0104]: Referring to FIG. 6, the auto-negotiation messages may be encoded into 66 bits using 64B/66B to be transmitted. That is, the link establishing device may encode the auto-negotiation messages into a 66-bit block including a data code or control code that is 64-bit input data 601, a sync header 602 and a block payload 603. Here, the link establishing device may input 0b′01 into the synch header 602 of the data code.) is transmitted to the second PCS block via an optical signal ([0103]: The link establishing device and the link partner device may transmit auto-negotiation messages through a multi-core fiber cable. [0042]: the link establishing device 100 and the link partner device 101 may be partner devices connected to each other via a link as link counterparts.[0063]: The link partner device 101 may include an optical module 303, an auto-negotiation logic 302, and a multirate MAC & PHY 301. [0116]: the auto-negotiation block may include a 10GBASE-R PCS transmission unit 705, a 10GBASE-R PCS reception unit 706.).
Regarding claim 6, Kang teaches the subject matter of claim 1. Kang further teaches wherein the control block ([0104]: Referring to FIG. 6, the auto-negotiation messages may be encoded into 66 bits using 64B/66B to be transmitted. That is, the link establishing device may encode the auto-negotiation messages into a 66-bit block including a data code or control code that is 64-bit input data 601, a sync header 602 and a block payload 603. Here, the link establishing device may input 0b′01 into the synch header 602 of the data code.) comprises an Optical Auto Negotiation (OAN) field and an OAN page ([0064]: For example, the optical module 303 may convert an electric signal into an optical signal to transmit data through the multi-core fiber 102. [0124]: For instance, the link partner device may transmit an auto-negotiation message as an optical signal three times. [0107]: Here, an auto-negotiation base page field may include D1 606 and D2 607. An auto-negotiation base page may include information on a link connected to the link establishing device or the link partner device. Examiner note: examiner interprets OAN base page to be the “auto-negotiation base page” sent over the optical medium.[0112]: A Remote Fault (RF) bit may include error information. For instance, the RF bit may include error information, such as remote fault state. A Next Page (NP) bit may include data input separately by an administrator or specific application. Examiner note: examiner interprets the RF bit and NP bits to be OAN fields sent over the optical medium. The link establishing device and the link partner device may exchange information, other than the link information included in the base page, using the NP bit.).
Regarding claim 7, Kang teaches the subject matter of claim 6 and claim 1. Kang further teaches wherein the OAN page comprises one or more protocol handshake variables ([0014]: The exchanging of the link information may include transmitting an auto-negotiation message of the link establishing device including a first acknowledgement (ACK) bit a preset number of times from the link establishing device to the link partner device).
Regarding claim 9, Kang teaches an optical network interface ([0064]: For example, the optical module 303 may convert an electric signal into an optical signal to transmit data through the multi-core fiber 102. Further, the optical module 303 may convert data transmitted through the multi-core fiber 102 into an electric signal.); and a physical coding sublayer (PCS) block to: transmit and/or receive optical data signals via the optical network interface ([0045]: The link establishing device 100 and the link partner device 101 may transmit auto-negotiation messages to each other via the multi-core fiber 102. [0064]: For example, the optical module 303 may convert an electric signal into an optical signal to transmit data through the multi-core fiber 102.); and perform auto-negotiation with another networking device via the optical network interface ([0124]: For instance, the link partner device may transmit an auto-negotiation message as an optical signal three times. Here, the optical module may convert the auto-negotiation messages into an electric signal to transmit to the auto-negotiation reception unit 703.).
Regarding claim 10, Kang teaches the subject matter of claim 9. Kang further teaches wherein the auto-negotiation is performed by exchanging optical symbols with the another networking device ([0124]: For instance, the link partner device may transmit an auto-negotiation message as an optical signal three times. Here, the optical module may convert the auto-negotiation messages into an electric signal to transmit to the auto-negotiation reception unit 703. [0104]: the auto-negotiation messages may be encoded into 66 bits using 64B/66B to be transmitted.).
Regarding claim 11, Kang teaches the subject matter of claim 9. Kang further teaches wherein the auto-negotiation is performed at a nominal communication rate that is also used to exchange the optical data signals via the optical network interface ([0042]: the link establishing device 100 may convert data into an optical signal to transmit to the link partner device 101 through the multi-core fiber 102. [0082]: the link establishing device and the link partner device may exchange auto-negotiation messages through a first lane among 10 lanes×10.3125 Gbps interfaces 412 between the AN 403 and the PMD 404. [0045]: The link establishing device 100 and the link partner device 101 may transmit auto-negotiation messages to each other via the multi-core fiber 102).
Regarding claim 12, Kang teaches the subject matter of claim 9. Kang further teaches wherein the auto-negotiation is performed at approximately a same speed with which the optical data signals ([0045]: The link establishing device 100 and the link partner device 101 may transmit auto-negotiation messages to each other via the multi-core fiber 102. [0082]: the link establishing device and the link partner device may exchange auto-negotiation messages through a first lane among 10 lanes×10.3125 Gbps interfaces 412 between the AN 403 and the PMD 404. [0042]: the link establishing device 100 may convert data into an optical signal to transmit to the link partner device 101 through the multi-core fiber 102.) are transmitted and/or received ([0083]: The PMD 404 may conduct conversion between an electric signal and an optical signal (xGBASE-SR PMD is used, x=10/40/100). [0084]: A 100GBASE-SR10 PMD may connect a 24-fiber MPO cable.).
Regarding claim 13, Kang teaches the subject matter of claim 9. Kang further teaches wherein an auto-negotiation state machine ([0089]: A link establishing process through auto-negotiation message exchanges may be carried out according to a procedure defined in an operational diagram of the gigabit Ethernet 1000BASE-X standard (IEEE 802.3 Clause 37, Auto-Negotiation function, type 1000BASE-X). Examiner note: the auto-negotiation message exchange is performed according to the operation diagram, which the examiner interprets to be an auto-negotiation state machine.) is included in the PCS block ([0116]: the auto-negotiation block may include an auto-negotiation transmission unit 701, an auto-negotiation reception unit 703, an auto-negotiation arbitration unit 702, an auto-negotiation register 704, a 10GBASE-R PCS transmission unit 705.).
Regarding claim 14, Kang teaches the subject matter of claim 9. Kang further teaches wherein the optical network interface comprises an Ethernet interface ([0064]: The multirate MAC & PHY 301 may transmit and receive an Ethernet frame using a transmission medium. For example, to transmit an optical signal, the transmission medium may be the multi-core fiber cable 102. [0066]: The optical module 303 may employ a 10 G transponder 311, a 40 G transponder 321 and a 100 G MSA transponder 331, wherein 40 G/100G MSAs are based on the multi-core fiber. The multirate MAC & PHY 301 may provide a multi-rate of 10×10 GE, 2×40 GE or 100 GE.).
Regarding claim 16, Kang teaches at least one communication node comprising an optical transceiver ([0063]: the link establishing device 100 may include an optical module 303. [0064]: the optical module 303 may convert an electric signal into an optical signal to transmit data through the multi-core fiber 102.) and a physical coding sublayer (PCS) block to perform auto-negotiation with another communication node ([0081]:The AN 403 may exchange link information between the link establishing device and the link partner device through an auto-negotiation message encoded via 64B/66B used for the 10 GE PCS, the 40 GE PCS and the 100 GE PCS. [0016]: the auto-negotiation block may include an auto-negotiation transmission unit 701, an auto-negotiation reception unit 703, an auto-negotiation arbitration unit 702, an auto-negotiation register 704, a 10GBASE-R PCS transmission unit.) in the optical communication system via the optical transceiver ([0045]: The link establishing device 100 and the link partner device 101 may transmit auto-negotiation messages to each other via the multi-core fiber 102 to exchange link information. [0064]: the optical module 303 may convert an electric signal into an optical signal to transmit data through the multi-core fiber 102.).
Regarding claim 17, Kang teaches the subject matter of claim 16. Kang further teaches wherein the PCS block incorporates auto-negotiation information into a control block ([0132]: The 10GBASE-R PCS transmission unit 705 may encode 8-byte (64-bit) control block data, corresponding to the configuration ordered set received from the auto-negotiation transmission unit 701, into 66 bits.) transmitted to the another communication node ([0103]: The link establishing device and the link partner device may transmit auto-negotiation messages through a multi-core fiber cable. Thus, the auto-negotiation messages may be encoded and transmitted according to a transmission medium.).
Regarding claim 20, Kang teaches the subject matter of claim 16. Kang further teaches wherein the auto-negotiation is performed at a nominal communication rate that is also used to exchange optical data signals ([0045]: The link establishing device 100 and the link partner device 101 may transmit auto-negotiation messages to each other via the multi-core fiber 102. [0082]: the link establishing device and the link partner device may exchange auto-negotiation messages through a first lane among 10 lanes×10.3125 Gbps interfaces 412 between the AN 403 and the PMD 404. [0042]: the link establishing device 100 may convert data into an optical signal to transmit to the link partner device 101 through the multi-core fiber 102.) via the optical transceiver ( [0083]: The PMD 404 may conduct conversion between an electric signal and an optical signal (xGBASE-SR PMD is used, x=10/40/100). [0084]: A 100GBASE-SR10 PMD may connect a 24-fiber MPO cable.).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
54 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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang (U.S. Pub. No. 20150341284A1) in view of Yan et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 20250125908A1).
Regarding claim 5, Kang teaches the subject matter disclosed in claim 1. Kang further teaches wherein the first PCS block is part of a transmitter device in a communication network ([0132]: The 10GBASE-R PCS transmission unit 705 may encode 8-byte (64-bit) control block data.) and between the first PCS block and the second PCS block ([0103]: The link establishing device and the link partner device may transmit auto-negotiation messages through a multi-core fiber cable. [0042]: the link establishing device 100 and the link partner device 101 may be partner devices connected to each other via a link as link counterparts.[0063]: the link establishing device 100 may include an optical module 303, an auto-negotiation (auto-nego) logic 302, and a multirate MAC & PHYsical (PHY) 301. The link partner device 101 may include an optical module 303, an auto-negotiation logic 302, and a multirate MAC & PHY 301. [0116]: the auto-negotiation block may include a 10GBASE-R PCS transmission unit 705, a 10GBASE-R PCS reception unit 706.). Kang fails to teach wherein the transmitter device further comprises a Management Data Input/Output (MDIO) register primitive that selectively bypasses or enables an inner-Forward Error Correction (FEC).
However, Yan does teach wherein the transmitter device further comprises a Management Data Input/Output (MDIO) register primitive that selectively bypasses or enables an inner-Forward Error Correction (FEC) ([0105]: the FEC layer of the optical module may communicate with the PCS of the device through the MDIO interface. [0010]: a management data input/output (MDIO) interface, and the indication signal includes a value of an MDIO control bit. [0130]: When FEC_bypass_correction_enable is set to 1, it indicates that an inner-code decoder performs error detection instead of error correction. When FEC_bypass_correction_enable is set to 0, it indicates that an inner-code decoder performs error detection and error correction. [Table 1 (MDIO control variable), Row 1]: FEC bypass correction enable…).
Kang teaches method of transmitting data and auto-negotiation messages over the same optical medium. Kang fails to specify how Forward Error Correction would be used with the auto-negotiation and data transfer method, despite FEC being a known implementation with auto-negotiation and ethernet data transfer. However, Yan does disclose a method of efficient Forward Error Correction. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kang with Yan’s Forward Error Correction method in order to reduce the transmission delay of the data stream (Yan [0007]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang (U.S. Pub. No. 20150341284A1) in view of IEEE Std 802.3-2022 (hereinafter referred to as 802.3).
Regarding claim 8, Kang teaches the subject matter disclosed in claim 1. Kang further teaches wherein the first PCS block and the second PCS block follow an auto-negotiation protocol ([0045]: The link establishing device 100 and the link partner device 101 may transmit auto-negotiation messages to each other via the multi-core fiber 102.). Kang fails to teach in which at least one of a link status check and a transmit disable step are omitted.
However, 802.3 does teach in which at least one of a link status check and a transmit disable step are omitted ([37.3.1]: Variables of the form “mr_x,” where x is a label, comprise a management interface. [37.3.1.1]: "an_sync_status": Qualified version of sync_status for use by Auto-Negotiation to detect a sync_status timeout condition. "mr_restart_an" : Controls renegotiation via management control. Values: FALSE; Do not restart Auto-Negotiation. TRUE; Restart Auto-Negotiation. Examiner note: IEEE 802.3 clause 37 details auto-negotiation function over an optical medium. Thus, the link status check and transmit disable steps are omitted).
Kang teaches an auto-negotiation method based on the IEEE 802.3 Clause 37. 802.3 teaches additional Clause 37 auto-negotiation features expanding upon Kang’s teachings. It would have been obvious to combine Yang with 802.3 teachings in order to ensure auto-negotiation compliance with IEEE 802.3 clause 37.
Claims 15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang (U.S. Pub. No. 20150341284A1) in view of IEEE Std 802.3ap-2007 (hereinafter referred to as 802.3ap).
Regarding claim 15, Kang teaches the subject matter disclosed in claim 9, but Kang fails to teach claim 15.
However, 802.3ap does teach a Forward Error Correction (FEC) unit (([74.5]: The FEC service interface is provided to allow the 10GBASE-R PCS to transfer information to and from the FEC. The FEC service interface is provided to allow the 10GBASE-R PCS to transfer information to and from the FEC.)) that locks a communication link with the another networking device ([73.6.5]: The two FEC bits are used as follows: a) F0 is FEC ability b)F1 is FEC requested. When the FEC ability bit is set to logical one, it indicates that the 10GBASE-KR PHY has FEC ability. When FEC requested bit is set to logical one, it indicates a request to enable FEC on the link. Since the local device and the link partner may have set the FEC capability bits differently and this FEC capability is only used with 10GBASE-KR, the priority resolution function is used to enable FEC in the respective PHYs. Examiner note: under BRI, “FEC unit that locks a communication link” encompasses the capability of an FEC unit to synchronize Forward error correction between the two networking devices.).
Kang teaches method of transmitting data and auto-negotiation messages over the same optical medium. Kang fails to specify an error correction method to correct faulty data – a common problem introduced through long range ethernet transmission. However, 802.3ap teaches Forward Error Correction (FEC), a process that proactively detects and repairs corrupted packets received over the transmission medium. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kang’s transmission auto-negotiation method with 802.3ap’s teachings in order to ensure effective data transmission and reception.
Regarding claim 18, Kang teaches the subject matter disclosed in claims 16 and 17, but Kang fails to teach the subject matter disclosed in claim 18.
However, 802.3ap does teach wherein the auto-negotiation information comprises one or more Forward Error Correction (FEC) fields ([73.5.2]: A DME page carries a 48-bit Auto-Negotiation page. [73.6]: a DME page shall convey the encoding shown in Figure 73–6. [73.6.5]: FEC (F0:F1) is encoded in bits D46:D47 of the base Link Codeword. The two FEC bits are used as follows: a) F0 is FEC ability b)F1 is FEC requested).
Kang teaches method of transmitting data and auto-negotiation messages over the same optical medium. Kang fails to specify an error correction method to correct faulty data – a common problem introduced through long range ethernet transmission. However, 802.3ap teaches Forward Error Correction (FEC), a process that proactively detects and repairs corrupted packets received over the transmission medium. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kang’s transmission auto-negotiation method with 802.3ap’s teachings in order to ensure effective data transmission and reception.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang (U.S. Pub. No. 20150341284A1) in view of IEEE Std 802.3ap-2007 (hereinafter referred to as 802.3ap) and further in view of Yan et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 20250125908A1).
Regarding claim 19, Kang in view of 802.3ap teaches the subject matter disclosed in claims 16-18. Kang fails to teach the subject matter disclosed in claim 19.
However, 802.3ap does teach wherein the one or more FEC fields ([73.5.2]: A DME page carries a 48-bit Auto-Negotiation page. [73.6]: a DME page shall convey the encoding shown in Figure 73–6. [73.6.9]: Next Page (NP) is encoded in bit D15 of Link Codeword. [73.7.7]: Multiple Next Pages with Unformatted Codes can be transmitted to send extended messages.).
Kang teaches method of transmitting data and auto-negotiation messages over the same optical medium. Kang fails to specify an error correction method to correct faulty data – a common problem introduced through long range ethernet transmission. However, 802.3ap teaches Forward Error Correction (FEC), a process that proactively detects and repairs corrupted packets received over the transmission medium. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kang’s transmission auto-negotiation method with 802.3ap’s teachings in order to ensure effective data transmission and reception. Kang in view of 802.3ap fails to teach indicate an inner-FEC bypass logic and/or a convolutional interleaver logic to be used for a communication link established with the another communication node.
However, Yan does teach indicate an inner-FEC bypass logic ([0130]: When FEC_bypass_correction_enable is set to 1, it indicates that an inner-code decoder performs error detection instead of error correction. When FEC_bypass_correction_enable is set to 0, it indicates that an inner-code decoder performs error detection and error correction. [Table 1, Row 1]: FEC bypass correction enable…) and/or a convolutional interleaver logic to be used ([0131]: When Inner-CI-2 bypass indication enable is set to 1, it indicates that a function of the 2nd level of convolutional interleaver (CI 2) is bypassed. When Inner-CI-2 bypass indication enable is set to 0, it indicates that a function of the 2nd level of convolutional interleaver is not bypassed.) for a communication link established with the another communication node (Examiner note: Convolutional interleaving is a method of distributing burst errors incurred by the physical medium and is, thus, applied to data transmitted over a communication link with another communication node. It would have been to person of ordinary skill in the art that convolutional interleaving is necessarily configured for use on a communication link to another communication node.).
The combination of Kang and 802.3ap teach a method of transmitting auto-negotiation messages over an optical medium using forward error correction to detect and repair corrupted data over the medium. The use of forward error correction incurs additional latency hindering effective data transfer. Yan teaches an FEC method which uses FEC bypass and/or convolutional interleaving to control the additional latency in view of the quality of error correction. It would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the combined teachings of Kang and 802.3ap with Yan’s FEC method in order to reduce the transmission delay of the data stream (Yan [0007]).
Conclusion
5. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a.) US20220007092A1 (Yang et al.) – discloses two optical channels for auto-negotiation and normal data traffic, auto-negotiation information about the FEC state and type, and auto-negotiation information fields.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VIJAY K MANNAVA whose telephone number is (571)272-9505. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-5 M-F.
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, Jae Y. Lee can be reached at (571) 270-3936. 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.
/VIJAY K MANNAVA/ Examiner, Art Unit 2479 /JAE Y LEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2479
Prosecution Insights