CTNF 18/765,447 CTNF 79232 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Winzer et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. 2019/0190231 A1) in view of Yuan et al. (2008/0126596 A1) and Sarwar (U.S. Patent Application Pub. 2020/0067887 A1) . Regarding claim 1, Winzer et al. teaches in FIG. 7 an optical transmission system comprising a site 702 which receives optical signal from other sites such as 220 and generates local traffic by transmitter 210 N+1 . The locally generated traffic and the remotely generated traffic are transmitted over different optical fiber transmission paths in an optical fiber cable (see abstract). It is understood that cite 702 is in a station building and the transmitters 210 1 is in another cite outside the station building of cite 702. The difference between Winzer et al. and the claimed invention are (a) Winzer et al. does not teach interface units and (b) Winzer et al. does not teach transponders. Yuan et al. teaches in paragraph [0025] the function of an interface unit including signal routing, signal aggregation and/or separation, analog-to-digital and/or digital-to- analog conversion, encoding and/or decoding, and/or signal transformation to satisfy different protocols. Yuan et al. also teaches in FIG. 1 using fibers 26 to connect between modules. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teaching of Yuan et al. with the system of Winzer et al. and include interface units in site 702, for example, to separate part of the remotely generated traffic for local drop and to convert the locally generated traffic to satisfy required protocols. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include interface unit for both the remotely generated traffic and the locally generated traffic, as taught by Yuan et al., in the system of Winzer et al. The combination of Winzer et al. and Yuan et al. still fails to teach transponders. Sarwar teaches in FIG. 1 an optical transmission system similar to one half (one direction) of the optical transmission system of FIG. 1 of Winzer et al. Sarwar teaches in paragraph [0049] that transmitter can be implemented using transponder. One of ordinary skill in the art would have combined the teaching of Sarwar with the modified system of Winzer et al. and Yuan et al. because it is a simple substitution of one known, equivalent element for another to obtain predictable results. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use transponders to replace transmitters and receivers, as taught by Sarwar, in the modified system of Winzer et al. and Yuan et al . Double Patenting 08-33 AIA 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. 08-34 AIA Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,057,929 B2 . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the limitations of claims 1 of instant application are taught by claim 1 of Patent ‘929. Following is a mapping between the limitations of claim 1 of instant application and that of claim 1 of Patent ‘929 . Claim 1 of instant application Claim 1 of Patent ‘929 An optical transmission device comprising: An optical transmission device installable inside a station building and connectable to another station building via an optical fiber cable, the optical transmission device comprising: a plurality of interface units configured to include first and second interface units being connected to mutually different first optical fiber transmission paths accommodated in an optical fiber cable; a plurality of interface units including first, second, and third interface units configured to respectively connect to mutually different first optical fiber transmission paths accommodated in the optical fiber cable; a second optical fiber transmission path configured to mediate an optical signal to be transmitted between the first interface unit and a first transponder installed inside a station building; and a second optical fiber transmission path configured to mediate an optical signal to be transmitted between the first interface unit and a first transponder installed inside the station building; a third optical fiber transmission path configured to mediate an optical signal to be transmitted between the second interface unit and a second transponder installed outside the station building, a third optical fiber transmission path configured to mediate an optical signal to be transmitted between the second interface unit and a second transponder installed outside the station building; wherein the optical transmission device is installed inside the station building. (See preamble above) Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHI K LI whose telephone number is (571)272-3031. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:53 a.m. -3:23 p.m.. 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, David Payne can be reached at 571 272-3024. 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. skl15 May 2026 /SHI K LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2635 Application/Control Number: 18/765,447 Page 2 Art Unit: 2635 Application/Control Number: 18/765,447 Page 3 Art Unit: 2635 Application/Control Number: 18/765,447 Page 4 Art Unit: 2635 Application/Control Number: 18/765,447 Page 5 Art Unit: 2635 Application/Control Number: 18/765,447 Page 6 Art Unit: 2635 Application/Control Number: 18/765,447 Page 7 Art Unit: 2635 Application/Control Number: 18/765,447 Page 8 Art Unit: 2635 Application/Control Number: 18/765,447 Page 9 Art Unit: 2635 Application/Control Number: 18/765,447 Page 10 Art Unit: 2635
Prosecution Insights