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 .
Response to Remarks
Regarding 112 rejections:
Based on the amendments to the claims, the outstanding 112 rejections are hereby withdrawn.
Regarding claims 1 and 7:
The examiner appreciates the amendments made to the claims, however due to the change of scope of the claims based on these amendments (for example a local bandwidth having a size consistent is different from a local bandwidth having a time duration consistent), the applicants’ remarks are now considered moot under new grounds of rejection as posted in the updated office action below.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 4, 7, 15, 16, 18 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyd (US 2015/0318950) in view of Wang (US 2004/0052274).
Regarding claim 1, Boyd teaches a method for allocating a bandwidth (paragraph [0015], [0018]), comprising: allocating, by an access network OLT, an access bandwidth for a home network ONU (paragraph [0048], the trunk OLT issues a GATE grant to a leaf ONU; paragraph [0052], the trunk OLT 502 generates GATE 504 containing a grant to a leaf ONU 506; paragraph [0058], trunk OLT 602 generates a large grant for upstream transmission), wherein the access bandwidth is reserved by an integrated device (paragraph [0045], describes the integrated OLT module containing combined OLT/ONU MACS; paragraph [0048], says the bridge receives the trunk GATE and extracts the grant; paragraph [0052], says the ONU MAC on the bridge receives the trunk grant and send the grant information to the OLT MAC), and the integrated device is configured to allocate an uplink bandwidth of the home network except the access bandwidth (paragraph [0056], states that the bridge scheduler uses the trunk grant’s start time/length to schedule upstream transmission in the lead PON and generates multiple new GATEs; paragraph [0058], says the total length of the new lead grants is equal to or less than the length of the large trunk grant); the integrated device is further configured to reserve, for the home network ONU, a local bandwidth (paragraph [0056], says the bridge scheduler schedules upstream transmission in the leaf PON and generates new GATEs for the lead LLIDs; paragraph [0061], says the bridge scheduler issues grants to leaf LLIDs and places those grants in the REPORT queue; paragraph [0063], describes converting the trunk grant into individual leaf grants) having a size consistent with that of the access bandwidth (paragraph [0058], says the bridge schedules upstream transmission in the leaf PON and generates new GATEs for the lead LLIDS and paragraph [0061] says the bridge scheduler issues grants to lead LLIDs and places those grants in the REPORT queue) and a time sequence contiguous with the access bandwidth (paragraph [0049] says the leaf data remains buffered until the trunk-side grant becomes valid), and use the local bandwidth as the allocated access bandwidth (paragraph [0048]-[0049] says the leaf ONU transmits according to the leaf GATE while the resulting data is transmitted upstream when the corresponding trunk grant becomes valid).
However, Boyd doesn’t expressly teach “a local bandwidth having a size consistent with that of the access bandwidth and a time sequence contiguous with the access bandwidth”.
Wang teaches equal sized time channels and bandwidth determined by the number of channels (paragraphs [0028]-[0029] and paragraph [0031]) a local bandwidth having a size consistent with that of the access bandwidth (paragraph [0031] shows that seven of these equal bandwidth channels can be combined to provide an STS-1 data rate thus having a size consistent with that of the access bandwidth which can be implemented by selecting the appropriate number of equal size channel) and a time sequence contiguous with the access bandwidth (paragraph [0043], to allow ONU 1 to have contiguous channels i.e. the paragraphs gives an actual allocation where ONU 1 receives channels 7 and 8, and ONU 2 is shifted to channels 9-11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the bandwidth assignments taught by Boyd and incorporate equal-sized contiguous channel allocation as taught by Wang since such channelized allocation provides a mechanism for allocating and scheduling upstream PON bandwidth and would allow the local bandwidth grants generated from the trunk/access grant to be implemented as contiguous transmission intervals.
Regarding claim 3, Boyd in view of Wang teaches the method for allocating a bandwidth according to claim 1,wherein allocating, by the access network OLT, the access bandwidth for the home network ONU, comprises: as taught by Wang, receiving, by the access network OLT, an access request initiated by the home network ONU; and sending the allocated access bandwidth to the home network ONU in response to the access request (paragraph [0042], the ONUs may utilize the OAM/Control channels to transmit requests for additional bandwidth to the OLT…The OLT, upon receiving the request, will allocate additional channels to ONU 1 and ONU 3 and re-allocate channels to the transmitting ONUs…Upon receipt of the new channel allocation, the ONUs will transmit data in their new channel allotment).
Regarding claim 4, Boyd in view of Wang teaches the method for allocating a bandwidth according to claim 1, wherein Boyd teaches sending the allocated access bandwidth to the home network ONU comprises: sending the access bandwidth to the home network ONU through an access network ONU and a home network OLT (Fig. 4A shows the ONU and OLT and see claim 5 for teaching the flow of messages).
Regarding claim 7, Boyd teaches an authentication system for a home network ONU, comprising: an access network OLT (Fig. 4A, Trunk PON), an integrated device (Fig. 4A, device 400) and a home network ONU (Fig. 4A, leaf PON side), wherein the home network ONU is configured to access the access network OLT via the integrated device to complete an access service, and is further configured to establish a home network with the integrated device to realize a service inside the home network (function of Fig. 4A); and the integrated device includes: an access network ONU (Fig. 4A, trunk side ONU) and a home network OLT (Fig. 4A, leaf side OLT); the access network OLT is further configured to allocate an access bandwidth for the home network ONU (paragraph [0048], the trunk OLT issues a GATE grant to a leaf ONU; paragraph [0052], the trunk OLT 502 generates GATE 504 containing a grant to a leaf ONU 506; paragraph [0058], trunk OLT 602 generates a large grant for upstream transmission), wherein the access bandwidth is reserved by the integrated device to obtain a slice bandwidth (paragraph [0045], describes the integrated OLT module containing combined OLT/ONU MACS; paragraph [0048], says the bridge receives the trunk GATE and extracts the grant; paragraph [0052], says the ONU MAC on the bridge receives the trunk grant and send the grant information to the OLT MAC), and the integrated device is configured to allocate an uplink bandwidth of the home network except the slice bandwidth (paragraph [0056], states that the bridge scheduler uses the trunk grant’s start time/length to schedule upstream transmission in the lead PON and generates multiple new GATEs; paragraph [0058], says the total length of the new lead grants is equal to or less than the length of the large trunk grant); the integrated device is further configured to reserve, for the home network ONU, a local bandwidth (paragraph [0056], says the bridge scheduler schedules upstream transmission in the leaf PON and generates new GATEs for the lead LLIDs; paragraph [0061], says the bridge scheduler issues grants to leaf LLIDs and places those grants in the REPORT queue; paragraph [0063], describes converting the trunk grant into individual leaf grants) having a size consistent with that of the access bandwidth (paragraph [0058], says the bridge schedules upstream transmission in the leaf PON and generates new GATEs for the lead LLIDS and paragraph [0061] says the bridge scheduler issues grants to lead LLIDs and places those grants in the REPORT queue) and a time sequence contiguous with the access bandwidth (paragraph [0049] says the leaf data remains buffered until the trunk-side grant becomes valid), and use the local bandwidth as the allocated access bandwidth (paragraph [0048]-[0049] says the leaf ONU transmits according to the leaf GATE while the resulting data is transmitted upstream when the corresponding trunk grant becomes valid).
However, Boyd doesn’t expressly teach “a local bandwidth having a size consistent with that of the access bandwidth and a time sequence contiguous with the access bandwidth”.
Wang teaches equal sized time channels and bandwidth determined by the number of channels (paragraphs [0028]-[0029] and paragraph [0031]) a local bandwidth having a size consistent with that of the access bandwidth (paragraph [0031] shows that seven of these equal bandwidth channels can be combined to provide an STS-1 data rate thus having a size consistent with that of the access bandwidth which can be implemented by selecting the appropriate number of equal size channel) and a time sequence contiguous with the access bandwidth (paragraph [0043], to allow ONU 1 to have contiguous channels i.e. the paragraphs gives an actual allocation where ONU 1 receives channels 7 and 8, and ONU 2 is shifted to channels 9-11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the bandwidth assignments taught by Boyd and incorporate equal-sized contiguous channel allocation as taught by Wang since such channelized allocation provides a mechanism for allocating and scheduling upstream PON bandwidth and would allow the local bandwidth grants generated from the trunk/access grant to be implemented as contiguous transmission intervals.
Regarding claim 15, Boyd in view of Wang teaches a computer non-transitory readable storage medium, the computer readable storage medium storing a computer program, wherein the computer program is configured to execute, when executed by a processor, the method as claimed in claim 1 (Boyd: paragraph [0069]).
Regarding claim 16, Boyd in view of Wang teaches an electronic apparatus, comprising a memory and a processor, wherein the memory stores a computer program, and the processor is configured to execute the computer program to perform the method as claimed in claim 1.
Regarding claim 18, Boyd in view of Wang teaches a computer non-transitory readable storage medium, the computer readable storage medium storing a computer program, wherein the computer program is configured to execute, when executed by a processor, the method as claimed in claim 3.
Regarding claim 21, Boyd in view of Wang teaches an electronic apparatus, comprising a memory and a processor, wherein the memory stores a computer program, and the processor is configured to execute the computer program to perform the method as claimed in claim 3.
Claim(s) 5, 19 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyd (US 2015/0318950) in view of Wu (US 2016/0294801).
Regarding claim 5, Boyd teaches an authentication method for a home network ONU (Cascaded PON architecture), comprising: an integrated device (Fig. 4A, Device 400), the integrated device including access-network ONU (Fig. 4A, trunk side ONU), home network OLT (Fig. 4A, leaf side OLT).
Boyd doesn’t teach receiving, a serial number SN sent by the home network ONU, sending the serial number SN to an access network OLT, and the access network OLT authenticating the home network ONU; acquiring a serial number SN and a user registration ID of the home network ONU by the integrated device, sending the serial number SN and the user registration ID of the home network ONU to the access network OLT, and the access network OLT authenticating the home network ONU, comprises: initiating, by the home network ONU, an access request carrying the serial number SN, sending the serial number SN to the access network OLT, and the access network OLT authenticating the home network ONU.
Wu teaches initiating by the home network ONU an access request carrying the serial number SN, sending the serial number SN to the access network OLT (paragraphs 23-26 teaches that the OLT sends a message requesting each ONU/ONT to report its serial number, the ONU/ONT reports its SN to the OLT, the OLT receives the SN and detects the ONU/ONT and the OLT compares the receives SN wit the preconfigured SN) and further teaches the SN, registration code and authentication sequence in paragraphs 79-84 which states the ONU/OLT reports its SN to the OLT, the OLT receives the SN and determines wherein it has been recorded, the OLT requests the logic registration code, the ONU/ONT reports its logic registration code to the OLT and the OLT acquires and checks the logic registration code and if it matches, the OLT determines that the ONU/ONT is valid and records its SN.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the cascaded PON system taught by Boyd and incorporate the authentication process taught by Wu thereby allowing the access-side OLT to authenticate the home-network ONU using its SN and registration information.
Regarding claim 19, Boyd in view of Wu teaches a computer non-transitory readable storage medium, the computer readable storage medium storing a computer program, wherein the computer program is configured to execute, when executed by a processor, the method as claimed in claim 5.
Regarding claim 22, Boyd in view of Wu teaches an electronic apparatus, comprising a memory and a processor, wherein the memory stores a computer program, and the processor is configured to execute the computer program to perform the method as claimed in claim 5.
Claim(s) 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyd (US 2015/0318950) in view of Wang (US 2004/0052274) in further view of Wu (US 2016/0294801).
Regarding claim 8, Boyd in view of Wang teaches the authentication system for a home network ONU according to claim 7.
Boyd doesn’t teach wherein the integrated device is further configured to receive a serial number SN sent by the home network ONU, and send the serial number SN to the access network OLT; and the access network OLT is further configured to authenticate the home network ONU.
Wu teaches initiating by the home network ONU an access request carrying the serial number SN, sending the serial number SN to the access network OLT (paragraphs 23-26 teaches that the OLT sends a message requesting each ONU/ONT to report its serial number, the ONU/ONT reports its SN to the OLT, the OLT receives the SN and detects the ONU/ONT and the OLT compares the receives SN with the preconfigured SN) and further teaches the SN, registration code and authentication sequence in paragraphs 79-84 which states the ONU/OLT reports its SN to the OLT, the OLT receives the SN and determines wherein it has been recorded, the OLT requests the logic registration code, the ONU/ONT reports its logic registration code to the OLT and the OLT acquires and checks the logic registration code and if it matches, the OLT determines that the ONU/ONT is valid and records its SN.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the cascaded PON system taught by Boyd and incorporate the authentication process taught by Wu thereby allowing the access-side OLT to authenticate the home-network ONU using its SN and registration information.
Regarding claim 9, Boyd in view of Wang teaches the authentication system for a home network ONU according to claim 7.
Boyd doesn’t teach wherein the integrated device is further configured to acquire a serial number SN and a user registration ID of the home network ONU, and send the serial number SN and the user registration ID of the home network ONU to the access network OLT; and the access network OLT is further configured to authenticate the home network ONU.
Wu teaches initiating by the home network ONU an access request carrying the serial number SN, sending the serial number SN to the access network OLT (paragraphs 23-26 teaches that the OLT sends a message requesting each ONU/ONT to report its serial number, the ONU/ONT reports its SN to the OLT, the OLT receives the SN and detects the ONU/ONT and the OLT compares the receives SN with the preconfigured SN) and further teaches the SN, registration code and authentication sequence in paragraphs 79-84 which states the ONU/OLT reports its SN to the OLT, the OLT receives the SN and determines wherein it has been recorded, the OLT requests the logic registration code, the ONU/ONT reports its logic registration code to the OLT and the OLT acquires and checks the logic registration code and if it matches, the OLT determines that the ONU/ONT is valid and records its SN.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the cascaded PON system taught by Boyd and incorporate the authentication process taught by Wu thereby allowing the access-side OLT to authenticate the home-network ONU using its SN and registration information.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyd (US 2015/0318950) in view of Wang (US 2004/0052274) in further view of Xinfeng (CN 112887851) see translated copy for relevant paragraphs.
Regarding claim 10, Boyd in view of Wang teaches the authentication system for a home network ONU according to claim 7.
Boyd in view of Wang doesn’t teach wherein the integrated device is further configured to reserve a slice bandwidth, and establish a slice channel between the home network ONU and the access network OLT; and the access network OLT is further configured to authenticate the home network ONU by the slice channel.
Xinfeng teaches wherein the integrated device is further configured to reserve a slice bandwidth and establish a slice channel between the home network ONU and the access network OLT (Page 12, paragraph 6, Specifically, the PON ONU MAC obtains a GTC frame from a downstream PON signal, then extracts a bandwidth allocation map (ie, BWmap in FIG. 8) from the GTC frame, and obtains burst control information from the bandwidth allocation map, where: The burst control information includes the burst transmission time slice sent upstream by each edge ONU. The burst transmission time slice includes the start time (Start) and the end time (End), and each edge ONU needs to be on its corresponding time slice. , To send the upstream signal to the central office OLT); and the access network OLT is further configured to authenticate the home network ONU by the slice channel (Page 12, paragraph 1, The central office OLT finds a newly added ONU through the serial number of the ONU, and assigns a unique ONU-ID to this ONU).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system taught by Boyd in view of Wang and incorporate the reserving bandwidth method taught by Xinfeng in order to comprise a reserved communication channel between the ONU and OLT for proper flow of communication.
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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See the notice of reference cited (PTO-892).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PRANESH K BARUA whose telephone number is (571)270-1017. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Sat: 11-8pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, David Payne can be reached on 5712723024. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PRANESH K BARUA/Examiner, Art Unit 2635
Prosecution Insights