DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim Interpretation
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 8, 9, 12, 17, 18 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ozaki (US Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0085795).
Regarding claim 8, Ozaki discloses a relay system (fig. 3 and paragraphs 0038-0042), comprising: a receiver configured to receive first data to be transmitted (fig. 4 element 101 and paragraph 0043); a converter configured to convert the first data received by the receiver into a first optical signal having a first wavelength based on a first transmission destination to which the first data is to be transmitted among a plurality of transmission destinations (fig. 4 elements 103-105 and paragraphs 0044-0046); and an output configured to output the first optical signal to the first transmission destination via an optical transmission line (fig. 3 the outputs of OLT 10 and paragraph 0039, which is the WDM output of LDs λ1-λm, paragraph 0047, in light of fig. 8 element 109 and paragraph 0064).
Regarding claim 9, Ozaki discloses the relay system according to claim 8, further comprising a distributor between the optical transmission line and the plurality of transmission destinations, the distributor configured to distribute the first optical signal to the first transmission destination based on the first wavelength of the first optical signal (fig. 3 element 11 and paragraph 0041).
Regarding claim 12, Ozaki discloses the relay system according to claim 8, wherein transmission destination information designating the first transmission destination is included in the first data (fig. 4 element 102 and paragraphs 0043 and 0074, where “detecting the traffic of the downstream signal for each ONU” and monitoring “state of traffic toward each ONU” reads on the destination ONU information being in that traffic), and a pre-conversion circuit acquires the first wavelength corresponding to the transmission destination information based on a table, wherein the table correlates each of the plurality of transmission destinations with a respective wavelength (fig. 4 elements 103 and 103a and paragraphs 0044-0047 and 0073, where the “allocation rule” has multivariate determination –for plural ONUs, plural wavelengths, plural timeslots, and plural traffic volumes, and is stored in memory– and thus reads on a table).
Regarding claim 17, Ozaki discloses a method, comprising: receiving, by a receiver, first data to be transmitted (fig. 4 element 101 and paragraph 0043); converting the first data received by the receiver into a first optical signal having a first wavelength based on a first transmission destination to which the first data is to be transmitted among a plurality of transmission destinations (fig. 4 elements 103-105 and paragraphs 0044-0046); and outputting the first optical signal to the first transmission destination via an optical transmission line (fig. 3 the outputs of OLT 10 and paragraph 0039, which is the WDM output of LDs λ1-λm, paragraph 0047, in light of fig. 8 element 109 and paragraph 0064).
Regarding claim 18, Ozaki discloses the method according to claim 17, further comprising: distributing, by a distributor between the optical transmission line and the plurality of transmission destinations, the first optical signal to the first transmission destination based on the first wavelength of the first optical signal (fig. 3 element 11 and paragraph 0041).
Regarding claim 21, Ozaki discloses the method according to claim 17, wherein transmission destination information designating the first transmission destination is included in the first data (fig. 4 element 102 and paragraphs 0043 and 0074, where “detecting the traffic of the downstream signal for each ONU” and monitoring “state of traffic toward each ONU” reads on the destination ONU information being in that traffic), and the method further comprising: determining the first wavelength corresponding to the transmission destination information based on a table, wherein the table correlates each of the plurality of transmission destinations with a respective wavelength (fig. 4 elements 103 and 103a and paragraphs 0044-0047 and 0073, where the “allocation rule” has multivariate determination –for plural ONUs, plural wavelengths, plural timeslots, and plural traffic volumes, and is stored in memory– and thus reads on a table).
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.
Claims 10, 11, 14-16, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozaki (US Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0085795) in view of Sarashina (US Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0280851).
Regarding claim 10, Ozaki discloses the relay system according to claim 8, wherein converter is configured to: convert a plurality of first pieces of data received as the first data by the receiver, the plurality of first pieces of data having a same transmission destination, into the first optical signal having the first wavelength, and transmit the first optical signal to the optical transmission line through the output in time division multiplexing (fig. 4 elements 103-105 and paragraphs 0044-0046). Ozaki’s received data (fig. 4 Downstream Signal) is inherently sourced from somewhere, but Ozaki does not specify that the data for a transmission destination has different transmission sources. Sarashina discloses a related PON network where a host network interfaces with the OLT using a switching array that provides information to the OLT on the destinations of traffic of downstream data transmitted from the host network (fig. 3 and paragraph 0061). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide multiple sources of data destined for an ONU by using destination signaling in the data arriving to the OLT of Ozaki, as taught by Sarashina, and switching toward the respective ONU1 to ONUn assignments of Ozaki, to provide the benefit of multiple source locations being able capable of transmitting to one of the ONUs.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Ozaki and Sarashina discloses the relay system according to claim 10, wherein the converter is further configured to: convert second data received by the receiver, the second data having a second transmission destination different from the first transmission destination, into a second optical signal having a second wavelength different from the first wavelength of the first optical signal, and transmit the second optical signal to the optical transmission line through the output by superimposing the second wavelength of the second optical signal on the first wavelength of the first optical signal (Ozaki: fig. 4 elements 103-105 and paragraphs 0044-0046, for each wavelength assignment, in light of fig. 8 element 109 and paragraph 0064, where the wavelength multiplexing of the second wavelength with the first wavelength reads on “superimposing” the second wavelength onto the first wavelength).
Regarding claim 14, Ozaki discloses the relay system according to claim 8, where the relay system comprising a plurality of receivers, a plurality of converters, and a plurality of outputs (fig. 4 ONU1-ONUn receivers, converting to λi to λj, through to output to LD λ1 to LD λm). Ozaki’s received data (fig. 4 Downstream Signal) is inherently sourced from somewhere, but Ozaki does not specify that the data includes data transmitted from a plurality of transmission sources, and each of the plurality of receivers is connected to a respective one of the plurality of transmission sources. Sarashina discloses a related PON network where a host network interfaces with the OLT using a switching array that provides information to the OLT on the destinations of traffic of downstream data transmitted from the host network (fig. 3 and paragraph 0061). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide respective sources of data destined for the ONUs by using destination signaling in the data arriving to the OLT of Ozaki, as taught by Sarashina, and switching the data toward the respective ONU1 to ONUn assignments of Ozaki, where each destination value corresponds to an ONU, to provide the benefit of multiple sources being able capable of transmitting to respective ONUs.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Ozaki and Sarashina discloses the relay system according to claim 14, wherein in response to a first operation mode, a first converter of the plurality of converters and a second converter of the plurality of converters are configured to convert third data received by a first receiver of the plurality of receivers and fourth data received by a second receiver of the plurality of receivers into a third optical signal and a fourth optical signal, respectively, the third optical signal and the fourth optical signal each having a second wavelength (Ozaki: fig. 4 elements 103-105 and paragraphs 0044-0046, for the respective data feeds for ONU1-ONUn, and plural λi to λj corresponding post-TDM to λ1 and λm).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Ozaki and Sarashina discloses the relay system according to claim 15, in response to a second operation mode, changing a conversion wavelength of the plurality of converters from the second wavelength to a third wavelength different from the second wavelength, the first converter and the second converter are configured to convert fifth data received by the first receiver and sixth data received by the second receiver into a fifth optical signal and a sixth optical signal, respectively, the fifth optical signal and the sixth optical signal each having the third wavelength (Ozaki: fig. 4 elements 103-105 and paragraphs 0044-0046, for the respective data feeds for ONU1-ONUn, and plural λi to λj corresponding post-TDM to λ1 and λm, in light of paragraphs 0038 and 0050, dynamically changing the wavelength and timeslots for downstream signals depend on the state of the downstream traffic).
Regarding claim 19, Osaki discloses the method according to claim 17, wherein the first data comprises a plurality of first pieces of data, the plurality of first pieces of data having a same transmission destination, wherein each of the plurality of first pieces of data is converted into the first optical signal having the first wavelength, and wherein outputting the first optical signal to the first transmission destination comprises transmitting the first optical signal to the optical transmission line in time division multiplexing (fig. 4 elements 103-105 and paragraphs 0044-0046). Ozaki’s received data (fig. 4 Downstream Signal) is inherently sourced from somewhere, but Ozaki does not specify that the data for a transmission destination has different transmission sources. Sarashina discloses a related PON network where a host network interfaces with the OLT using a switching array that provides information to the OLT on the destinations of traffic of downstream data transmitted from the host network (fig. 3 and paragraph 0061). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide multiple sources of data destined for an ONU by using destination signaling in the data arriving to the OLT of Ozaki, as taught by Sarashina, and switching toward the respective ONU1 to ONUn assignments of Ozaki, to provide the benefit of multiple source locations being able capable of transmitting to one of the ONUs.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Ozaki and Sarashina discloses the method according to claim 19, wherein the method further comprises: receiving second data to be transmitted to a second transmission destination different from the first transmission destination; converting second data into a second optical signal having a second wavelength different from the first wavelength of the first optical signal; and transmitting the second optical signal to the optical transmission line by superimposing the second wavelength of the second optical signal on the first wavelength of the first optical signal (Ozaki: fig. 4 elements 103-105 and paragraphs 0044-0046, for each wavelength assignment, in light of fig. 8 element 109 and paragraph 0064, where the wavelength multiplexing of the second wavelength with the first wavelength reads on “superimposing” the second wavelength onto the first wavelength).
Claims 13 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozaki (US Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0085795).
Regarding claim 13, Ozaki discloses the relay system according to claim 12, but does not specifically disclose that the converter is configured to update the table in response to an instruction from outside of the converter. However, Ozaki discloses that the converter operations of the OLT are software programmable (paragraphs 0085-0088). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to program an update, using an external set of updated instructions, in additional to programming the initial settings, for the converter behavior of the Ozaki system, to provide the benefit of adapting the traffic handling to rebalance or implement required changes in traffic due to changing client contracts, equipment maintenance periods, etc.
Regarding claim 22, Ozaki discloses the method according to claim 21, but does not specifically disclose that the method further comprises: receiving an instruction, and updating the table in response to the instruction. However, Ozaki discloses that the converter operations of the OLT are software programmable (paragraphs 0085-0088). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to program an update, using an external set of updated instructions, in additional to programming the initial settings, for the converter behavior of the Ozaki system, to provide the benefit of adapting the traffic handling to rebalance or implement required changes in traffic due to changing client contracts, equipment maintenance periods, etc.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Related PON systems with wavelength assignments – US Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0259130, 2018/0131461, 2017/0250774, 2017/0207875, 2016/0056913, 2014/0294391, 2014/0161456, 2011/0091213, 2010/0221007.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN M CORS whose telephone number is (571)272-3028. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Kenneth Vanderpuye can be reached at 571-272-3078. 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.
/NATHAN M CORS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2634