Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/742,724

MEASURING AND ANALYZING DATA TO GENERATE RECOMMENDATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH A DIGITAL SUBSCRIPTION LINE (DSL)

Non-Final OA §103§DP
Filed
Jun 13, 2024
Examiner
WANG, YAOTANG
Art Unit
2409
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
VIAVI SOLUTIONS INC.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
373 granted / 469 resolved
+21.5% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
499
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.8%
-35.2% vs TC avg
§103
68.8%
+28.8% vs TC avg
§102
13.3%
-26.7% vs TC avg
§112
5.9%
-34.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 469 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §DP
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 . The instant First Office Action on the merits is in response to claims filed on 6/13/2024. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 9 and 15 are the base independent claims. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/13/2024 was filed before the mailing of a first Office action on the merits. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97(b). Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Priority Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c) is acknowledged. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,040,847. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference patent is in essence a “species” of the generic invention of examined application, see below. Instant Application US Patent 12,040,847 1. A testing device operable to measure and analyze at least one performance counter and to determine an issue with a digital subscriber line (DSL), the testing device comprising: 1. A testing device operable to measure and analyze performance counters and to determine an issue with a digital subscriber line (DSL), the testing device comprising: a display; a transceiver; a first measurement circuit to measure and analyze modem-based measurements associated with the DSL; a second measurement circuit to measure and analyze copper wire-based measurements associated with the DSL; and a processor to: access at least one threshold associated with the at least one performance counter; a display; a battery module; a transceiver; a physical connector; a first measurement circuit to measure and analyze modem-based measurements associated with the DSL; a second measurement circuit to measure and analyze copper wire-based measurements associated with the DSL; and a processor to: access thresholds associated with the performance counters; detect an anomalous performance event based on the at least one performance counter and the at least one threshold associated with the at least one performance counter; enable an analysis mode to determine the issue with the DSL and to generate a recommendation to address the issue with the DSL, including implementing an analysis sequence comprising at least one testing protocol to follow an issue associated with a modem connection of the DSL through a DSL layer stack; and detect an anomalous performance event based on the performance counters and the thresholds; and enable an analysis mode to determine the issue with the DSL and to generate a recommendation to address the issue with the DSL, wherein enabling the analysis mode includes implementing an analysis sequence comprising one or more testing protocols to: follow an issue associated with a modem-based connection of the DSL through a DSL layer stack; determine a performance counter for a copper wire connection of the DSL related to the issue associated with the modem-based connection, wherein the performance counter for the copper wire connection of the DSL is included in the performance counters; and determine a corresponding performance issue with a copper wire connection of the DSL. determine a corresponding performance issue with the copper wire connection of the DSL utilizing the performance counter for the copper wire connection of the DSL. 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. 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. Claims 1-3, 5-9, 13-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irenze et al (US 2010/0150318) in view of Zahedi et al (US 2017/0180549) and/or Mohseni et al (US 2018/0027113). Regarding claim 1, Irenze discloses a testing device (fig. 2; e.g. test set 204) operable to measure and analyze at least one performance counter and to determine an issue with a digital subscriber line (DSL), the testing device comprising: a display; a transceiver (par 45-46 & fig. 3A; test set 300 may include display 302, connector 306, status LED indicator 308 for battery; also par 48, test set may perform various communication tests, thus obviously a transceiver); a first measurement circuit to measure and analyze modem-based measurements associated with the DSL (par 48; e.g. technician who is sent to a customer premise may utilize the test set 300 of FIG. 3 to emulate the ADSL modem 412); and a processor (fig. 2 & par 40; processing unit 222) to: access at least one threshold (par 49; in one embodiment, thresholds in the test) associated with the at least one performance counter (par 45, par 49; e.g. test result); detect an anomalous performance event based on the at least one performance counter and the at least one threshold associated with the at least one performance counter (par 49, par 54; pass/fail is detected based on the tests); and enable an analysis mode (par 42; e.g. execute the test set) to determine the issue with the DSL and to generate a recommendation to address the issue with the DSL (par 63 & fig. 13A; in another embodiment, possible cause and recommended sections are indicated; also see par 65, fig. 27 & par 83-84). Reference does not explicitly disclose: a second measurement circuit to measure and analyze copper wire-based measurements associated with the DSL; implementing an analysis sequence comprising at least one testing protocol to follow an issue associated with the DSL through a DSL layer stack; and determine a corresponding performance issue with a copper wire connection of the DSL. However, it is obvious in view of Zahedi because Zahedi discloses: a second measurement circuit to measure and analyze copper wire-based measurements associated with the DSL (fig. 3 & par 57; e.g. the fault detection server 170 may perform various algorithms to identify cable-level faults in a copper plant of a DSL system including wet cables detection algorithms); implementing an analysis sequence comprising at least one testing protocol to follow an issue associated with the DSL through a DSL layer stack; and determine a corresponding performance issue with a copper wire connection of the DSL (fig. 4 & par 58-80; e.g. instructions run on a processing device to perform various operations such as interfacing functions, measuring, analyzing…in such embodiments e.g. if a problem exists for the majority of the lines in the common cable identified based on the short-interval period analyzed then the cable will be flagged as a wet cable; also par 136). In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of communication component configured for the electronic system of Zahedi with the electronic system of Irenze. One is motivated as such to identify a problematic cable to better optimize DSL communications (Zahedi, par 6). Regarding claim 9, Irenze discloses a method for measuring and analyzing performance counters and determining a performance issue with a digital subscriber line (DSL), the method comprising: measuring and analyzing measurement data associated with the performance counters (fig. 27 & par 83-84; e.g. measuring operation parameters; also par 44; e.g. test result measured); accessing thresholds associated with the performance counters (par 49; in one embodiment, thresholds in the test); detecting an anomalous performance event based on the performance counters and the thresholds (par 49, par 54; pass/fail is detected based on the tests); and enabling an analysis mode of a testing device (par 42; e.g. execute the test set), including: determining the performance issue with the DSL based on the analyzing of the feature data; and generating a recommendation to address the performance issue with the DSL (par 63 & fig. 13A; in another embodiment, possible cause and recommended sections are indicated; also see par 65, fig. 27 & par 83-84). Reference does not explicitly disclose: generating a data graph utilizing the measurement data; determining one or more features of the data graph; analyzing feature data associated with the one or more features of the data graph; implementing an analysis sequence including implementing at least one testing protocol to follow an issue associated with a modem connection of the DSL through a DSL layer stack; and determining a corresponding performance issue with a copper wire connection of the DSL utilizing a performance counter for the copper wire connection of the DSL. However, it is obvious in view of Mohseni because Mohseni discloses: generating a data graph utilizing the measurement data; determining one or more features of the data graph; analyzing feature data associated with the one or more features of the data graph (fig. 3 & par 37, par 49; e.g. plotting the Difference (D) for distance (d) then it can be observed that the smaller the number then the further out the fault is from the end of the DSL loop and at the end of the line. Therefore, if the value is larger than a given threshold then the fault is nearer to the CO whereas a smaller number is indicative that the fault is nearer to the NID or customer premises). In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of communication component configured for the electronic system of Mohseni with the electronic system of Irenze. One is motivated as such to improve fault detection and localization for the DSL line (Mohseni, par 43). The combination dose not explicitly disclose: implementing an analysis sequence including implementing at least one testing protocol to follow an issue associated with a modem connection of the DSL through a DSL layer stack; and determining a corresponding performance issue with a copper wire connection of the DSL utilizing a performance counter for the copper wire connection of the DSL. However, it is obvious in view of Zahedi because Zahedi discloses: implementing an analysis sequence including implementing at least one testing protocol to follow an issue associated with a modem connection of the DSL through a DSL layer stack; and determining a corresponding performance issue with a copper wire connection of the DSL utilizing a performance counter for the copper wire connection of the DSL (fig. 4 & par 58-80; e.g. instructions run on a processing device to perform various operations such as interfacing functions, measuring, analyzing…in such embodiments e.g. if a problem exists for the majority of the lines in the common cable identified based on the short-interval period analyzed then the cable will be flagged as a wet cable; also par 136). In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of communication component configured for the electronic system of Zahedi with the electronic system of Irenze and Mohseni. One is motivated as such to identify a problematic cable to better optimize DSL communications (Zahedi, par 6). Regarding claim 15, Irenze discloses a testing device (fig. 2; e.g. test set 204) operable to measure and analyze at least one performance counter and to determine an issue with a digital subscriber line (DSL), the testing device comprising: a battery module; a transceiver; a physical connector (par 45-46 & fig. 3A; test set 300 may include display 302, connector 306, status LED indicator 308 for battery; also par 48, test set may perform various communication tests, thus obviously a transceiver); a first measurement circuit to measure and analyze modem-based measurements associated with the DSL (par 48; e.g. technician who is sent to a customer premise may utilize the test set 300 of FIG. 3 to emulate the ADSL modem 412); and a processor (fig. 2 & par 40; processing unit 222) to: access the modem-based measurements based on at least one threshold (par 49; in one embodiment, thresholds in the test) associated with the at least one performance counter (par 45, par 49; e.g. test result); detect an anomalous performance event based on the at least one performance counter and the at least one threshold (par 49, par 54; pass/fail is detected based on the tests); and determine the issue with the DSL (par 49, par 54; pass/fail is detected based on the tests; also par 82, 84, e.g. the test parameters are values that are used to determine whether a communications line is functioning properly at a customer premise based on the test results). Reference does not explicitly disclose: a second measurement circuit to measure and analyze copper wire-based measurements associated with the DSL; implementing an analysis sequence having at least one testing protocol to follow an issue associated with a modem connection of the DSL through a DSL layer stack and determine a corresponding performance issue with a copper wire connection of the DSL. However, it is obvious in view of Zahedi because Zahedi discloses: a second measurement circuit to measure and analyze copper wire-based measurements associated with the DSL (fig. 3 & par 57; e.g. the fault detection server 170 may perform various algorithms to identify cable-level faults in a copper plant of a DSL system including wet cables detection algorithms); implementing an analysis sequence having at least one testing protocol to follow an issue associated with a modem connection of the DSL through a DSL layer stack and determine a corresponding performance issue with a copper wire connection of the DSL (fig. 4 & par 58-80; e.g. instructions run on a processing device to perform various operations such as interfacing functions, measuring, analyzing…in such embodiments e.g. if a problem exists for the majority of the lines in the common cable identified based on the short-interval period analyzed then the cable will be flagged as a wet cable; also par 136). In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of communication component configured for the electronic system of Zahedi with the electronic system of Irenze. One is motivated as such to identify a problematic cable to better optimize DSL communications (Zahedi, par 6). Regarding claim 2, Irenze discloses: wherein the processor is further to initialize the testing device (par 50; e.g. the test server 202 may initiate downloading any of the testing information to the test set 300). Regarding claims 3 and 16, Irenze discloses: wherein the thresholds include user-based thresholds and analysis-based thresholds (par 49; e.g. The thresholds in the tests may be empirically determined except for signal quality (i.e., noise margin) where industry standard values may be used; hence based on user input or set by a standard value). Regarding claim 5, Irenze discloses: the at least one testing protocol includes a testing protocol related to asymmetrical digital subscriber line (ADSL), a testing protocol related to very high-speed digital subscriber line (VDSL), and a testing protocol related to G.fast protocol (par 48; e.g. ADSL sync test). Regarding claim 6, Irenze discloses: wherein the processor is further to analyze measurement data associated with the at least one performance counter (par 43, 46; e.g. test data). Regarding claim 7, Irenze discloses: implement a testing protocol to generate a testing protocol result (par 82; e.g. test results are collected from the test sets that are test sets used by technicians for testing communications lines at customer premises); and compare a key performance indicator (KPI) to the testing protocol result (par 82; e.g. the test parameters are values that are used to determine whether a communications line is functioning properly at a customer premise based on the test results). Regarding claim 8, Zahedi discloses: the processor is further to determine an associated performance counter associated with a copper line connection (par 70-71; e.g. observed values of other cables; also par 123). Regarding claims 13 and 18, Zahedi discloses: determining the performance counter for the copper wire connection of the DSL related to the issue associated with the modem connection, wherein the performance counter for the copper wire connection of the DSL is included in the at least one performance counter (par 70-71; e.g. observed values of other cables; also par 123). Regarding claims 14 and 20, Mohseni discloses: wherein the anomalous performance event is related to one of a modem line of the DSL and the modem connection of the DSL (par 46; to determine if the DELT testing returns no result because there is no reply from a modem due to the modem being faulty or not in synchronization or because, alternatively, there is a fault on the DSL line). Regarding claim 19, Irenze discloses: wherein the processor is further to provide a notification element to indicate the anomalous performance event (par 65; e.g. a textual notification). Claims 4, 12 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irenze et al (US 2010/0150318) in view of Zahedi et al (US 2017/0180549) and/or Mohseni et al (US 2018/0027113) and further in view of Lv et al (US 2008/0292021). Regarding claims 4, 12 and 17, the combination discloses the subject matter of claims 1, 9 and 15, without explicitly discloses: wherein the performance counters include one or more of upstream and downstream cyclical redundancy check (CRC), upstream and downstream forward error correction (FEC), upstream and downstream errored seconds (ES), upstream and downstream uncorrected retransmissions (RTX-UC}, upstream and downstream severely errored seconds (SES), upstream and downstream unavailable seconds (UAS), upstream and downstream loss of frame (LOF), upstream and downstream loss of signal (LOS) and upstream and downstream loss of margin (LOM). However, Lv discloses: In par 41 & Table 1, the operation parameters relating to code error include ES, SES, UAS, and UncorrectBlks, and the operation parameters relating to loss of line include LOLS, SSC, and SFC. In addition, persistent low STNM may also cause loss of line. Therefore, the operation parameters relating to loss of line may also include SNRM. In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of communication component configured for the electronic system of Lv with the electronic system of Irenze, Zahedi and Mohseni. One is motivated as such to acquiring DSL parameters and a line management system (Lv, par 15). Claims 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irenze et al (US 2010/0150318) in view of Zahedi et al (US 2017/0180549) and/or Mohseni et al (US 2018/0027113) and further in view of Delaby et al (US 2023/0035180). Regarding claim 10, the combination discloses the subject matter of claim 9, without explicitly discloses: wherein the measurement data includes modem-based measurements and copper wire-based measurements. However, Delaby discloses: wherein the measurement data includes modem-based measurements and copper wire-based measurements (par 2 and par 70; e.g. the channel frequency response is a measurement performed by a modem). In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of communication component configured for the electronic system of Delaby with the electronic system of Irenze, Zahedi and Mohseni. One is motivated as such to analyze QoS of the electrical wires (Delaby, par 2). Regarding claim 11, the combination discloses the subject matter of claim 9, without explicitly discloses: wherein the one or more features of the data graph include one or more of a dip in the data graph, a curve in the data graph or a length in the data graph. However, Delaby discloses: wherein the one or more features of the data graph include one or more of a dip in the data graph, a curve in the data graph or a length in the data graph (fig. 4 & par 113, e.g. a measured QLN curve and a measured HLOG curve for the upstream bands of a DSL line affected by an impairment are shown. the QLN curve 402 exhibits similar patterns, i.e., dips, at the same locations as the dips observed in the channel frequency response curve 401 caused by a "bridge tap" impairment). In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of communication component configured for the electronic system of Delaby with the electronic system of Irenze, Zahedi and Mohseni. One is motivated as such to analyze QoS of the electrical wires (Delaby, par 2). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YAOTANG WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-4023. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00-18:00 ET (M, W, TH & alternate F). 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, HADI ARMOUCHE can be reached at 571-270-3618. 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. /YAOTANG WANG/SCE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2409
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 13, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598535
TECHNIQUES FOR SUBSCRIPTION BASED OR NETWORK SLICE BASED TRAFFIC DIFFERENTIATION AND ROUTING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12581543
METHOD FOR PERFORMING SIDELINK COMMUNICATION IN UNLICENSED BAND BY UE IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM AND APPARATUS THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12580858
ACCELERATED DATA TRANSMISSION METHOD AND APPARATUS, COMPUTER DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574925
ENHANCED UPLINK GRANT SCHEDULING FOR USER EQUIPMENT IN 5G CELLULAR COMMUNICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12562850
IMPROVEMENT IN NETWORK CODING FOR DUAL CONNECTIVITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+16.4%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 469 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month