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, 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, 15, 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oliveti (US 2004/0033039).
Regarding claim 1 and similar claims 15, 19 and 20, Oliveti teaches an optical communication system (paragraph [0045]) in which a transmitter and a receiver are connected by an optical waveguide (paragraphs [0211]-[0212]; optical waveguide 10) and communicate using light of a second wavelength (850nm; paragraph [0159]), the optical waveguide propagating only a fundamental mode at a first wavelength (1310nm; paragraph [0159]), and the second wavelength being a wavelength at which the optical waveguide can propagate at least a primary mode together with the fundamental mode (850nm; paragraph [0159], wherein the primary mode operates at 850nm; tables 1-4),
the optical communication system comprising an inter-mode propagation delay difference adjustment unit that performs adjustment such that one of the fundamental mode and the primary mode is delayed by one unit interval with respect to another (paragraphs [0091]-[0101]; tables 1-4; wherein it is disclosed that a multimode delay (delta tau) is 1 ns/Km within paragraph 127; paragraphs 161 and 162 also show calculation of delays) in an optical communication path of the light of the second wavelength including the optical waveguide (see paragraphs 45 and 247-248).
Although the paragraphs above are not explicitly linked to the same embodiment, one of ordinary skill in the art would realize that these paragraphs all talk about propagation at different wavelengths within optical fiber comprising refractive index profiles to be used in a signal distribution network.
Regarding claim 2, Oliveti teaches the optical communication system according to claim 1, wherein the inter-mode propagation delay difference adjustment unit includes the optical waveguide (paragraphs [0091]-[0093], characterised in that said at least one optical fibre has such refractive index profile .DELTA.n(r) as to guarantee…macro-bending losses at 1550 nm that are less than about 0.5 dB after 100 turns on a mandrel having a 60-mm diameter; and…an intermodal delay Ar at 850 nm that is less than or equal to, about 1 ns/Km).
Regarding claim 3, Oliveti teaches the optical communication system according to claim 2, wherein in the optical waveguide, a length and refractive index distributions of a core and a cladding are set such that one of the fundamental mode and the primary mode is delayed by one unit interval with respect to the another when the light of the second wavelength propagates (paragraph [0159], The optical fibres 10 having the refractive index profiles of FIGS. 1 and 2 thus allow a single-mode propagation of optical signals in the second and in the third transmission window (respectively centred around the wavelengths of about 1310 nm and 1550 nm) and a two-mode propagation (of the fundamental mode LP.sub.01 and of the first higher-order mode LP.sub.11) at about 850 nm).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-18 are allowed.
Claims 4-14 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
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