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 § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 7 recites in lines 6-7 the limitation “indicate that the OLT has correctly parsed the short registration signal”. Instant specification, as originally filed, does not teach any step for indicating that the OLT has correctly parsed the short registration signal.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2, 7, 10, 15 and 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites in line 6 the limitation “the error correction information”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 10 and 17 depend upon claim 2.
Claim 7 recites in lines 7-8 the limitation “the error correction information”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 15 depends upon claim 7.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5, 8-9, 11, 13, 16, 18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fang et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. 2014/0186025 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Fang et al. teaches in FIG. 2 a method for sending a short registration signal, comprising: sending, a short registration signal to an Optical Line Terminal (OLT) (Fang et al. teaches in FIG. 2, step 212 transmit register request to OLT), in order to enable the OLT to detect a position of the short registration signal within the idle bandwidth (Fang et al. teaches in FIG. 2 and paragraph [0033] that the OLT reads its clock time at step 216 when the register request message is received; since there is no collision with other messages, the bandwidth is an idle bandwidth), or, in order to enable the OLT to detect a collision position between the short registration signal and working data frames.
Regarding claim 3, Fang et al. teaches in FIG. 2, step 202 that the OLT transmit MPCP gate which is received at step 204. The CLT of Fang et al. is equivalent to the ONU of instant claim.
Regarding claim 5, Fang et al. teaches in FIG. 2, step 220 calculating RTT which is a measurement of distance in light-travelling-time.
Regarding claim 8, Fang et al. teaches in FIG. 9 a transmitter 932 as a sending module.
Regarding claims 9, 11 and 13, Fang et al. teaches in FIG. 9 and paragraph [0058] software stored in memory 922.
Regarding claims 16, 18 and 20, Fang et al. teaches in FIG. 9 and paragraph [0058] logic unit 920 (equivalent to processor of instant claim) running software stored in memory 922.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 6, 12, 14 and 19 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 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.
skl20 April 2026
/SHI K LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2635
Prosecution Insights