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 .
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 of this title, 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 factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1-2 and 4-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barchers (US Pub 20070176077).
Regarding Claim 1. Barchers Fig 1A discloses a communication method executed by a communication device, the communication method comprising:
detecting a distortion of a wavefront of a light signal (Fig 1A, where a sensor (e.g. 27, 31) detects a distortion of a wavefront of a light signal (e.g. incoming beam));
deriving each of components from a higher-order component to a lower-order component in the distortion of the wavefront (Fig 1A, where an analyzer (e.g. 28, 30) derives each of components from a higher-order component (e.g. higher order mode) to a lower-order component (e.g. low order mode) in the distortion of the wavefront);
controlling an inclination of a reflection surface of a first optical device that changes a propagation direction of the light signal, according to the lower-order component (Fig 1A, where a first controller (e.g. 16, 15) controls an inclination of a reflection surface of a first optical device (e.g. 14) that changes a propagation direction of the light signal (e.g. incoming beam) that has arrived, according to the lower-order component (e.g. low order mode) (para [40])); and
controlling a phase correction operation using a second optical device of the light signal of which the propagation direction has been changed, according to the higher-order component (Fig 1A, where a second controller (e.g. 16, 22) controls a phase correction operation using a second optical device (e.g. 21) of the light signal (e.g. incoming beam) of which the propagation direction has been changed, according to the higher-order component (e.g. higher order mode) (para [40])).
Barchers Fig 1A fails to explicitly disclose the phase correction operation being a phase modulation operation that modulates a phase of the wavefront of the signal light.
However, Barchers (para [35]) discloses
a phase correction operation being a phase modulation operation that modulates a phase of a wavefront of a signal light (para [35] where a phase correction operation (e.g. at 21) is a phase modulation operation that modulates a phase of a wavefront of a signal light).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the second optical device (e.g. 21) as described in Barchers Fig 1A, with the teachings of the phase modulation operation as described in Barchers para [35]. The motivation being is that as shown a phase correction operation (e.g. at 21) can be a phase modulation operation that modulates a phase of a wavefront of a signal light and one of ordinary skill in the art can implement this concept into the second optical device (e.g. 21) as described in Barchers Fig 1A and have the second optical device (e.g. 21) with a phase correction operation that is a phase modulation operation and that modulates a phase of a wavefront of a signal light i.e. as an alternative so as to have the second optical device (e.g. 21) with a known technique of a known phase modulation operation in order to optimally correct a phase of an incoming beam by using a known wavefront phase modulator and which technique optimally implements the benefits of using a wavefront phase modulator into the system which includes for example being faster, easier to manipulate and more efficient and which modification is being made because the systems are similar and have overlapping components and which modification is a simple implementation of a known concept of a known phase modulation operation into a known second optical device (e.g. 21), namely, for its improvement and for optimization and which modification yields predictable results.
Regarding Claim 2. Barchers also discloses the communication method, wherein the first optical device is at least one of a tip-tilt mirror and a deformable mirror, and the second optical device is a spatial light phase modulator (Fig 1A, where the first optical device (e.g. 14) is a tip-tilt mirror (para [34]) and where the second optical device (e.g. 21) is a deformable mirror (para [35]) which can be a spatial light phase modulator (see Wirth et al (US Pub 20060024061) para [154]) in order to perform a phase correction operation).
Regarding Claim 4. Barchers also discloses the communication method, wherein the light signal is a signal arriving at the communication device or a signal transmitted from the communication device (Fig 1A, where the light signal (e.g. incoming beam) is a signal arriving at a communication device (e.g. an optical receiver 14, 21, 25)).
Regarding Claim 5. Claim 5 is similar to claim 1, therefore, claim 5 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 1.
Regarding Claim 6. Barchers Fig 1A discloses a communication system comprising:
a first communication device (Fig 1A, where a system comprises a first communication device (e.g. an optical transmitter 13)); and
a second communication device (Fig 1A, where the system comprises a second communication device (e.g. an optical receiver 14, 21, 25)),
wherein the first communication device includes
a transmitter that transmits a light signal (Fig 1A, where the first communication device (e.g. an optical transmitter 13) includes a transmitter that transmits a light signal (e.g. incoming beam)), and
the second communication device includes
a sensor that detects a distortion of a wavefront of a light signal arriving from the first communication device (Fig 1A, where the second communication device (e.g. an optical receiver 14, 21, 25) includes a sensor (e.g. 27, 31) that detects a distortion of a wavefront of a light signal (e.g. incoming beam) arriving from the first communication device (e.g. an optical transmitter 13)),
an analyzer that derives each of components from a higher-order component to a lower-order component in the distortion of the wavefront (Fig 1A, where the second communication device (e.g. an optical receiver 14, 21, 25) comprises an analyzer (e.g. 28, 30) that derives each of components from a higher-order component (e.g. higher order mode) to a lower-order component (e.g. low order mode) in the distortion of the wavefront),
a first controller that controls an inclination of a reflection surface of a first optical device that changes a propagation direction of the light signal that has arrived, according to the lower-order component (Fig 1A, where the second communication device (e.g. an optical receiver 14, 21, 25) comprises a first controller (e.g. 16, 15) that controls an inclination of a reflection surface of a first optical device (e.g. 14) that changes a propagation direction of the light signal (e.g. incoming beam) that has arrived, according to the lower-order component (e.g. low order mode) (para [40])), and
a second controller that controls a phase correction operation using a second optical device of the light signal of which the propagation direction has been changed, according to the higher-order component (Fig 1A, where the second communication device (e.g. an optical receiver 14, 21, 25) comprises a second controller (e.g. 16, 22) that controls a phase correction operation using a second optical device (e.g. 21) of the light signal (e.g. incoming beam) of which the propagation direction has been changed, according to the higher-order component (e.g. higher order mode) (para [40])).
Barchers Fig 1A fails to explicitly disclose the phase correction operation being a phase modulation operation that modulates a phase of the wavefront of the signal light.
However, Barchers (para [35]) discloses
a phase correction operation being a phase modulation operation that modulates a phase of a wavefront of a signal light (para [35] where a phase correction operation (e.g. at 21) is a phase modulation operation that modulates a phase of a wavefront of a signal light).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the second optical device (e.g. 21) as described in Barchers Fig 1A, with the teachings of the phase modulation operation as described in Barchers para [35]. The motivation being is that as shown a phase correction operation (e.g. at 21) can be a phase modulation operation that modulates a phase of a wavefront of a signal light and one of ordinary skill in the art can implement this concept into the second optical device (e.g. 21) as described in Barchers Fig 1A and have the second optical device (e.g. 21) with a phase correction operation that is a phase modulation operation and that modulates a phase of a wavefront of a signal light i.e. as an alternative so as to have the second optical device (e.g. 21) with a known technique of a known phase modulation operation in order to optimally correct a phase of an incoming beam by using a known wavefront phase modulator and which technique optimally implements the benefits of using a wavefront phase modulator into the system which includes for example being faster, easier to manipulate and more efficient and which modification is being made because the systems are similar and have overlapping components and which modification is a simple implementation of a known concept of a known phase modulation operation into a known second optical device (e.g. 21), namely, for its improvement and for optimization and which modification yields predictable results.
Regarding Claim 7. Barchers Fig 1A discloses a communication system comprising:
a first communication device (Fig 1A, where a system comprises a first communication device (e.g. an optical transmitter 13, 14, 21)); and
a second communication device (Fig 1A, where the system comprises a
second communication device (e.g. an optical receiver 25)),
wherein the first communication device includes
a transmitter that transmits a light signal (Fig 1A, where the first
communication device (e.g. an optical transmitter 13, 14, 21) includes a transmitter (e.g. 13) that transmits a light signal (e.g. incoming beam));
a sensor that detects a distortion of a wavefront of a reference light signal transmitted from the second communication device (Fig 1A, where the first communication device (e.g. an optical transmitter 13, 14, 21) includes a sensor (e.g. 27, 31) that detects a distortion of a wavefront of a reference light signal transmitted from the second communication device (e.g. an optical receiver 25)),
an analyzer that derives each of components from a higher-order component to a lower-order component in the distortion of the wavefront (Fig 1A, where the first communication device (e.g. an optical transmitter 13, 14, 21) comprises an analyzer (e.g. 28, 30) that derives each of components from a higher-order component (e.g. higher order mode) to a lower-order component (e.g. low order mode) in the distortion of the wavefront),
a first controller that controls an inclination of a reflection surface of a first optical device that changes a propagation direction of the transmitted light signal, according to the lower-order component (Fig 1A, where the first communication device (e.g. an optical transmitter 13, 14, 21) comprises a first controller (e.g. 16, 15) that controls an inclination of a reflection surface of a first optical device (e.g. 14) that changes a propagation direction of the transmitted light signal (e.g. incoming beam), according to the lower-order component (e.g. low order mode) (para [40])), and
a second controller that controls a phase correction operation using a second optical device of the light signal of which the propagation direction has been changed, according to the higher-order component (Fig 1A, where the first communication device (e.g. an optical transmitter 13, 14, 21) comprises a second controller (e.g. 16, 22) that controls a phase correction operation using a second optical device (e.g. 21) of the light signal of which the propagation direction has been changed, according to the higher-order component (e.g. higher order mode) (para [40])), and
the second communication device includes
a receiver that receives the light signal of which the phase has been corrected (Fig 1A, where the second communication device (e.g. an optical receiver 25) includes a receiver that receives the light signal of which the phase has been corrected).
Barchers Fig 1A fails to explicitly disclose the phase correction operation being a phase modulation operation that modulates a phase of the wavefront of the signal light.
However, Barchers (para [35]) discloses
a phase correction operation being a phase modulation operation that modulates a phase of a wavefront of a signal light (para [35] where a phase correction operation (e.g. at 21) is a phase modulation operation that modulates a phase of a wavefront of a signal light).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the second optical device (e.g. 21) as described in Barchers Fig 1A, with the teachings of the phase modulation operation as described in Barchers para [35]. The motivation being is that as shown a phase correction operation (e.g. at 21) can be a phase modulation operation that modulates a phase of a wavefront of a signal light and one of ordinary skill in the art can implement this concept into the second optical device (e.g. 21) as described in Barchers Fig 1A and have the second optical device (e.g. 21) with a phase correction operation that is a phase modulation operation and that modulates a phase of a wavefront of a signal light i.e. as an alternative so as to have the second optical device (e.g. 21) with a known technique of a known phase modulation operation in order to optimally correct a phase of an incoming beam by using a known wavefront phase modulator and which technique optimally implements the benefits of using a wavefront phase modulator into the system which includes for example being faster, easier to manipulate and more efficient and which modification is being made because the systems are similar and have overlapping components and which modification is a simple implementation of a known concept of a known phase modulation operation into a known second optical device (e.g. 21), namely, for its improvement and for optimization and which modification yields predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is/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 additional prior art considered pertinent to the Applicant’s disclosure and not relied upon is the following:
Davies (US Pat 6163381) and more specifically Fig 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to DIBSON J SANCHEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-0868. The Examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 10:00-6:00.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s Supervisor, Kenneth Vanderpuye can be reached on 5712723078. 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.
/DIBSON J SANCHEZ/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2634
Prosecution Insights