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 .
DETAILED OFFICE ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2024-08-14 in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 has been considered by the examiner and made of record in the application file.
Claim Status
Claims 1-13 are pending in this application and are under examination in this Office Action. No claims have been allowed.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The specification is objected to because paragraph [0049] refers to “FIG. 15” in connection with inserting portion 315. However, the drawings include only FIGS. 1-12, and no FIG. 15 is present. The second embodiment is described as being shown in FIG. 12, and FIG. 12 shows the optical signal monitoring module 31 having inserting portion 315. Accordingly, it appears that the reference to “FIG. 15” in paragraph [0049] should be corrected to “FIG. 12.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION. —The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 13,
Claim 13 recites (“each of said resilient members is disposed between said outer casing and a respective one of said locking resilient plates and biases the respective one of said locking resilient plates in a direction opposite to said push-pull handle.”) The phrase “in a direction opposite to said push-pull handle” is unclear because the claim uses the push-pull handle, which is a structural component, as if it were a direction. The claim does not recite the actual direction in which the resilient members bias the locking resilient plates. As written, it is unclear whether the claimed direction is (i) a direction away from the physical location of the push-pull handle, (ii) a direction opposite to the pulling direction of the push-pull handle, (iii) a direction opposite to the pushing
direction of the push-pull handle, or (iv) another direction defined relative to some portion of the handle. The ambiguity is not resolved by the remaining claim language. Claim 13 depends from claim 10, which introduces the push-pull handle as a component connected to the locking resilient plates and operable to be pushed and pulled. However, claim 10 does not define a directional axis for the handle, does not identify which direction is “opposite” to the handle, and does not recite the inserting portion or another structural endpoint that would objectively define the direction of bias. Therefore, the claim language does not provide a reasonably certain boundary for the direction in which the resilient members bias the locking resilient plates. The specification describes that each resilient member biases the respective locking resilient plate “in a direction opposite to the push-pull handle 52, i.e., in a direction toward the inserting portion 323.” Thus, the specification identifies a clearer structural direction, namely “toward the inserting portion 323.” Nevertheless, claim 13 does not recite “toward the inserting portion” and instead recites only “in a direction opposite to said push-pull handle.” Because the claim itself does not clearly define the direction of bias, the metes and bounds of claim 13 are not reasonably certain.
Accordingly, claim 13 is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for the 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.
As reiterated by the Supreme Court in KSR, and as set forth in MPEP 2141 (R-01.2024), II, the factual inquiries of Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103, are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and content of the prior art;
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue;
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art; and
Considering objective evidence indicative of obviousness or non-obviousness, if present.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims, the examiner presumes that the subject matter disclosed in the prior art was created by another (i.e., not by the inventive entity) unless proven otherwise. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 C.F.R. § 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim, and any
evidence of common ownership/assignment as of the effective filing date, so that the examiner may properly 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 claimed invention(s).
Claims 1-6 and 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Elahmadi et al. (US20170054507A1) in view of Woodside et al. (US20190296824A1), Zaremba (US20030198029A1), and Lu (CN213423533U).
Claim 1
As per claim 1, Elahmadi teaches a pluggable optical module architecture configured to operate in a host device/control system. More particularly, Elahmadi teaches optical transceivers implemented as MSA-defined modules that are installed in a host system, such as a router, switch, or other network device, and that include a housing containing optical transmitter/receiver components, electrical interface circuitry, a controller, and management/monitoring functions.
Elahmadi states: "Integrated performance monitoring (PM); optical layer operations, administration, maintenance, and provisioning (OAM & P): alarming; amplification, and the like is described in optical transceivers, such as multi-source agreement (MSA)-defined modules. A pluggable optical transceiver defined by an MSA agreement can include advanced integrated functions for carrier-grade operation which preserves the existing MSA specifications allowing the pluggable optical transceiver to operate with any compliant MSA
host device with advanced features and functionality, such as Forward Error Correction (FEC), framing, and OAM&P directly on the pluggable optical transceiver." [Elahmadi, Abstract].
Elahmadi states: "In an exemplary embodiment, a pluggable optical transceiver configured to operate in a host device includes a communication link configured to interface with the host device for providing a high-speed signal therebetween; framing and forward error correction circuitry configured to provide framing and forward error correction related to the high-speed signal; transmitter optical components communicatively coupled to the framing and forward error correction circuitry and configured to transmit a composite optical output signal; and receiver optical components communicatively coupled to the circuitry and configured to receive a composite optical input signal; wherein the framing and forward error correction is performed within the pluggable optical transceiver separately and independently from the host device." [Elahmadi, ¶ [0008]].
Elahmadi states: "The optical transceivers 110,160 are configured to plug into a line card, blade, or other device in the devices 101,151 to provide an optical signal for transmission. The optical transceivers 110,160 are designed to specifications such that they can be installed in any device 101,151 designed to host a optical transceiver 110,160." [Elahmadi, ¶ [0052]].
Elahmadi states: "The optical transceiver can include CFP and variants thereof (e.g., CFP2, CFP4, CFP8, CXP), CDFP and variants thereof, MSA-100 GLH, CCRX, QSFP and variants thereof (e.g., QSFP+, QSFP14, QSFP28, QSFP-DD, microQSFP), 10x10, XFP, XPAK, XENPAK, X2, XFP-E, SFP, SFP+, 300-pin, and the like." [Elahmadi, ¶ [0051]].
Accordingly, Elahmadi teaches a pluggable optical module adapted to be plugged into a control system/host device, and teaches an outer casing or housing because the MSA-compliant pluggable optical transceiver contains the optical section, electrical section, and controller within a module/housing. Elahmadi also teaches an optical signal transmission device disposed in the module/housing and adapted for receiving optical signals because Elahmadi discloses receiver optical components and transmitter optical components, including receive optics, transmit optics, optical MUX/DMUX, and optical transceiver components inside the pluggable module.
Elahmadi states: "In another exemplary embodiment, a multi-source agreement (MSA) compliant optical transceiver includes an optical section including transmit optics and receive optics; an electrical section communicatively coupled to the optical section; circuitry in the electrical section configured to provide framing and forward error correction integrated within the MSA compliant optical transceiver and transparent to a host system housing the MSA compliant optical transceiver, wherein the host system is Supports optical transceivers compliant to the MSA; a controller communicatively coupled to the optical section, the electrical section, and the host system; a housing compliant to the MSA, the housing containing the optical section, the electrical section, and the controller, and a communications port disposed on the housing and communicatively coupled to the controller, wherein the communications port is utilized to monitor and control operations, administration, maintenance, and provisioning (OAM&P) data associated with the circuitry
thereby enabling a transparent manner of operation of the circuitry with respect to the host device." [Elahmadi, ¶ [0007]].
Elahmadi states: "The host device includes a socket in which the optical transceiver 300 plugs into to connect to the host 302." [Elahmadi, ¶ [0063]].
Elahmadi states: "The optical module 310 includes a transmitter (TX)312 and a receiver (RX) 314. The TX/RX312,314 can include 850 nm, 1310 nm, 1550 nm, DWDM, CWDM, and the like depending on the application requirements." [Elahmadi, ¶ [0064]].
Elahmadi does not expressly label the module as an optical channel monitor. However, Woodside teaches an optical channel monitor (OCM) adapted for monitoring an optical signal, including optical power, frequency, wavelength-channel characteristics, and an optical power spectrum. Woodside therefore teaches the optical signal monitoring device connected to receive and monitor the optical signal.
Woodside states: "An optical channel monitor (OCM) is a device capable of measuring an optical power in a wavelength channel of an optical signal. An OCM can be connected to a point in an optical network in order to measure, for example, power, frequency, and other characteristics of an optical channel at that point. In some cases, an OCM may scan multiple wavelength channels in order to measure optical power in the multiple channels (e.g., across a range of wavelengths)." [Woodside, ¶ [0003]].
Woodside states: "In some implementations, an optical channel monitor (OCM) may include: a modulator to provide a modulation signal; a local oscillator (LO) (e.g., a wavelength tunable LO) to provide a modulated LO signal, the modulated LO signal being created by modulating
an LO signal based on the modulation signal; a mixer to generate a pair of mixed optical signals, the pair of mixed optical signals being generated based on mixing the modulated LO signal and an input optical signal; an optical detector to provide, based on the pair of mixed
optical signals, a first electrical signal corresponding to a coherent mixture of the input optical signal and the modulated LO signal; and a synchronous demodulator to provide, based on the first electrical signal and the modulation signal, a second electrical signal representative of the optical power spectrum of the input optical signal." [Woodside, ¶ [0004]].
Thus, Woodside teaches the claimed optical signal monitoring device because Woodside expressly discloses an OCM that receives an input optical signal and generates electrical information representative of the optical power spectrum of the input optical signal. In the combined device, the OCM of Woodside would be disposed in the outer casing/housing of Elahmadi because Elahmadi expressly teaches integrating advanced monitoring and management circuitry in the pluggable optical transceiver while preserving the host-device interface and housing.
Elahmadi and Woodside do not expressly teach the particular push-pull device recited in claim 1. However, within analogous art, Zaremba expressly teaches a push-pull actuator handle mounted to a pluggable optical transceiver and operable to push/release and pull/remove the module from a receptacle cage/host device.
Zaremba states: "A pluggable optical transceiver having a having a slidable actuator assembly for quickly and easily removing the transceiver from a receptacle cage assembly is provided. The actuator assembly includes a curved actuator handle and Slide member that can Slide in a
forward and rearward direction. AS force is exerted on Slide member, the actuator and Slide member slide rearwardly causing the transceiver to become disengaged from the receptacle. In this manner, the transceiver is released and can be removed easily from the receptacle." [Zaremba, Abstract].
Zaremba states: "More specifically, to remove the transceiver from the receptacle cage, a person first pushes on the body of the Slide member, thereby causing the slide member to move in a linear direction rearwardly towards the latching tab in the receptacle cage. The angled cam-Surfaces of the Slide member engage the latching tab causing the locking detent to become disengaged from the opening in the latching tab. The Spring arms move of the post and are held in the inner position. In this manner, the transceiver is released from the receptacle cage. After the transceiver is released, kick-out Springs in the receptacle cage automatically force the transceiver to slide forward. The user can then pull on the actuator handle to remove the transceiver from the receptacle cage easily and quickly." [Zaremba, ¶ [0009]].
Lu states: "The invention claims a QSFP-DD optical module shell structure, comprising: a bottom shell, an upper shell, an unlocking part and an adapter; the bottom shell and the upper shell are assembled to form an optical module cavity for containing the fixed adapter and the photoelectric part; the unlocking part can be slidingly installed on the optical module; and when pulling the unlocking part, the optical module can be unlocked and exit the host device." [Lu, Abstract].
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Woodside with Elahmadi because Elahmadi expressly recognizes that pluggable optical transceivers can include advanced integrated functions such as performance monitoring, OAM&P, alarming, and control while maintaining compatibility with MSA host devices. Woodside provides a known optical-channel-monitor circuit for measuring optical power spectrum and wavelength-channel characteristics. Integrating Woodside’s OCM into Elahmadi’s pluggable host-compatible optical module would have predictably provided the same monitored optical-channel information inside a field-replaceable module, which is directly consistent with Elahmadi’s teaching of moving advanced monitoring functions into the pluggable transceiver rather than requiring additional external equipment. Such a combination merely uses a known OCM circuit for its known purpose in the known host-pluggable optical module environment of Elahmadi, and would have improved serviceability, density, and host-based monitoring without changing the basic operating principle of either reference.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been further motivated to combine Zaremba with the Elahmadi/Woodside pluggable OCM module because Zaremba solves the same mechanical problem encountered by pluggable optical modules: allowing a user to lock, release, and remove a module from a receptacle cage or host device quickly and easily. Elahmadi teaches that pluggable modules are installed in host sockets and must preserve MSA mechanical characteristics, and Zaremba teaches a predictable push-pull actuator/handle mechanism specifically for a pluggable optical transceiver. Substituting or incorporating Zaremba’s push-pull actuator into the Elahmadi/Woodside module would have been a predictable mechanical
implementation that improves field replacement and removal of the module from the control system. Therefore, claim 1 would have been obvious.
Regarding the limitation "A pluggable optical channel monitor adapted to be plugged into a control system," Elahmadi teaches a pluggable optical transceiver configured to operate in and plug into a host device, line card, blade, router, switch, MSPP, or other network equipment. Woodside supplies the optical-channel-monitor function that is incorporated into the pluggable module form factor. Therefore, the combined Elahmadi/Woodside structure is a pluggable optical channel monitor adapted to be plugged into a control system.
Regarding the limitation "an outer casing," Elahmadi teaches that the pluggable optical transceiver is an MSA-compliant module and that the housing contains the optical section, electrical section, and controller. Zaremba independently teaches a plastic housing frame and metallic cover for a pluggable optical transceiver module.
Regarding the limitation "an optical signal transmission device disposed in said outer casing and adapted for receiving an optical signal," Elahmadi teaches an optical section including transmit optics and receive optics, optical module 310 having TX 312 and RX 314, and optical module 360 having TX 362 and RX 364. These components are disposed in the pluggable transceiver/housing and receive/transmit optical signals.
Regarding the limitation "an optical signal monitoring device disposed in said outer casing, connected to said optical signal transmission device, and adapted for monitoring the optical signal," Woodside expressly teaches OCM 100 including a modulator, local oscillator, mixer, optical detector, and synchronous demodulator that receives an input optical signal and
outputs an electrical signal representative of the optical power spectrum. Elahmadi supplies the disposition in the pluggable transceiver housing and the electrical/management integration with the host system.
Regarding the limitation "a push-pull device mounted to said outer casing, protruding outwardly of said outer casing," Zaremba expressly teaches an actuator handle/loop projecting from a slide member on the pluggable optical transceiver housing and further teaches that the handle is pushed and then pulled to unlock and remove the module from a receptacle cage. Lu likewise teaches an unlocking part having a handle that is pulled outwardly so that the optical module is unlocked and exits the host device.
Woodside states: "For example, in a typical optical system, a monitoring point may be after a booster erbium-doped fiber amplifier (EDFA). The EDFA may provide an optical signal with an optical power of approximately 24 dBm, and a tap may be used to direct 1% of the optical power of the optical signal to the OCM." [Woodside, ¶ [0015]].
Zaremba states: "The pluggable transceiver 10 includes a plastic housing frame 16 having a first end 46 with fiber optic connector ports 18 located therein, and an opposite second end 48 with an electrical edge connector (not shown) projecting therefrom." [Zaremba, ¶ [0019]].
Zaremba states: "The actuator assembly 12 comprises several components, particularly a slide member 28 and an actuator handle 34. The slide member 28 is located adjacent to the locking detent 26 on the bottom surface 52 of the transceiver 10." [Zaremba, ¶¶ [0026] - [0027]].
Zaremba states: "With the locking detent 26 and latching tab 22 disengaged, the kick-out Springs 20 automatically force the transceiver 10 to Spring outwardly. The user can then simply pull on the curved actuator handle 34 to remove the transceiver 10 from the receptacle cage 14." [Zaremba, ¶ [0031]].
These additional passages confirm the physical packaging and optical coupling arrangement. Woodside confirms that the OCM is optically connected to a monitored optical signal path by a tap or equivalent optical coupling arrangement. Zaremba confirms that the push-pull device is a mechanical structure on the pluggable module casing and is used to release and remove the module from the host cage. Thus, the combination accounts for every claim-1 structural and functional limitation.
The reason to combine is especially strong because Elahmadi expressly seeks advanced integrated functionality and performance monitoring inside MSA-compliant optical transceivers, while Woodside provides the particular OCM function and teaches compact integrated implementations. A person of ordinary skill would have had a reasonable expectation of success because both references rely on standard optical transceiver signal paths, optical/electrical interfaces, and controller/management circuitry. Substituting or adding Woodside’s OCM into the Elahmadi pluggable transceiver would have been a predictable integration of a known optical monitoring device into a known pluggable optical module for the expected benefit of providing monitored channel information to the host/control system. Incorporating Zaremba’s push-pull actuator would have predictably improved field
serviceability and module replacement without changing the monitoring or optical-transmission functions.
Claim 2
With respect to claim 2, all limitations of claim 1 are taught by Elahmadi, Woodside, Zaremba, and Lu, except wherein claim 2 further requires that the optical signal monitoring device includes an optical signal monitoring module connected to the optical signal transmission device, being a photonic integrated circuit that is based on silicon photonics technology, and having an inserting portion adapted to be inserted into the control system.
However, within analogous art, Woodside expressly teaches an OCM that can be implemented using integrated optics, PLC, silicon photonics integrated devices, or integrated optical components.
Woodside also teaches that the OCM receives the input optical signal and generates information representative of the optical power spectrum of that input optical signal. Elahmadi supplies the inserting portion and host-pluggable electrical interface because Elahmadi teaches a pluggable transceiver configured to plug into a host socket and communicate with the host device through MSA interfaces such as I2C/MDIO and an electrical communication link.
Woodside states: "As described in further detail below, the improved coherent OCM can be at least partially implemented using integrated optics, which reduces cost and complexity of the improved coherent OCM (e.g., as compared to a coherent OCM implemented using free-space optical elements)." [Woodside, ¶ [0018]].
Woodside states: "The reduction in the required optical power of the LO signal eases performance requirements for associated optics, thus enabling the potential for low-cost implementations of the improved coherent OCM (e.g., planar lightwave circuit (PLC), silicon photonics integrated devices, integrated optical components, and/or the like)." [Woodside, ¶ [0019]].
Woodside states: "In some implementations, OCM 100 may be at least partially implemented as an integrated optical device (e.g., one or more components of OCM 100 can be implemented using PLC, using silicon photonics, as integrated optical components, and/or the like)." [Woodside, ¶ [0020]].
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to implement the Woodside OCM as a silicon-photonics photonic integrated circuit in the Elahmadi pluggable module because Woodside expressly teaches that such an implementation reduces cost and complexity, and because Elahmadi expressly teaches the need to preserve pluggable module power, space, thermal, and mechanical constraints while adding advanced integrated functions. A silicon-photonics PIC OCM would predictably reduce the size and complexity of the monitoring circuitry and would fit the compact pluggable module environment of Elahmadi. Therefore, claim 2 would have been obvious.
Woodside’s disclosure is particularly strong for the "photonic integrated circuit based on silicon photonics technology" limitation because Woodside does not merely disclose an OCM generally. Woodside specifically identifies PLC, silicon photonics integrated devices, and integrated optical components as low-cost compact implementations for the improved
coherent OCM. In the combined module, this silicon-photonics OCM would constitute the claimed optical signal monitoring module, and Elahmadi’s pluggable host interface provides the claimed inserting portion because the module is inserted into the host/control system through an MSA-compliant electrical interface and housing.
Claim 3
With respect to claim 3, all limitations of claim 2 are taught by Elahmadi, Woodside, Zaremba, and Lu, except wherein claim 3 further requires the optical signal monitoring module to obtain monitored information from the optical signal, output the monitored information to the control system through the inserting portion, and receive configuration information output by the control system through the inserting portion.
However, within analogous art, Woodside teaches that the OCM obtains monitored information from the optical signal, including optical power spectrum, signal optical power, signal-to-noise ratio, channel center wavelength, channel width, and modulation format. Elahmadi teaches that the pluggable module communicates with the host device using MDIO/I2C management interfaces and that the host system can retrieve performance monitoring and alarming information from the optical transceiver.
Woodside states: "In some aspects, the optical power spectrum of input optical signal 150 may be used to derive a signal optical power associated with input optical signal 150, a signal to noise ratio associated with input optical signal 150, a channel center wavelength associated with input optical signal 150, a width of a channel wavelength in input optical
signal 150, a signal modulation format associated with input optical signal 150, and/or the like." [Woodside, ¶ [0028]].
Woodside states: "This procedure can be performed as OCM 100 scans the bandwidth associated with input optical signal 150 in order to allow optical detector 108 to detect the optical power spectrum of input optical signal 150. In some implementations, the optical power spectrum detected by OCM 100 may be used to derive an optical characteristic associated with input optical signal 150 (at a given wavelength channel), such as a signal optical power, a signal to noise ratio, a channel center wavelength, a width of a channel wavelength, a signal modulation format, and/or the like." [Woodside, ¶ [0038]].
Elahmadi states: "Additionally, the optical transceiver 300 includes management data input/output (MDIO) 316 and digital optical monitoring (DOM) 318 for communications and performance monitoring between the transceiver 300 and the host 302." [Elahmadi, ¶ [0065]].
Elahmadi states: "Further, the host device can be configured through software to retrieve the PM and alarming from the optical transceiver." [Elahmadi, ¶ [0051]].
Elahmadi further teaches that the optical transceiver can use I2C/MDIO or direct host connections to communicate overhead, control, OAM&P, and performance information to the host. Therefore, in the combined device, the OCM monitored information obtained by Woodside would be output to the host/control system through the host-pluggable interface of Elahmadi, and configuration/control information from the host would be received by the module through the same host-pluggable inserting/electrical interface.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to route Woodside’s monitored OCM information through Elahmadi’s host management interface because the entire purpose of optical-channel monitoring is to provide channel condition information to network equipment for monitoring, alarming, maintenance, and provisioning. Elahmadi already provides the MSA host-management pathway and teaches retrieving PM/alarming information from the optical transceiver by the host. It would have been a predictable implementation choice to use that same host interface to output Woodside’s OCM information and receive host configuration commands for scanning, monitoring, or reporting, thereby allowing the host control system to configure and use the internal OCM. Therefore, claim 3 would have been obvious.
The monitored information limitation is also supported by the ordinary operation of the cited pluggable module architecture. Woodside generates electrical signal 160 representative of the optical power spectrum and derives channel data such as optical power, signal-to-noise ratio, channel center wavelength, channel width, and modulation format. Elahmadi teaches that optical transceivers communicate monitoring and control information to the host through MDIO/I2C/DOM/OAM&P management structures. Thus, the path from Woodside’s OCM monitoring output to Elahmadi’s host/control interface corresponds to the claimed inserting portion outputting monitored information to the control system and receiving configuration information from that control system.
Claim 4
With respect to claim 4, all limitations of claim 1 are taught by Elahmadi, Woodside, Zaremba, and Lu, except wherein claim 4 further requires that the optical signal monitoring device include an optical signal monitoring module connected to the optical signal transmission device and being a photonic integrated circuit based on silicon photonics technology, and a control module mounted to the optical signal transmission device, electrically connected to the monitoring module, and having an inserting portion adapted to be inserted into the control system.
However, within analogous art, Woodside teaches the PIC/silicon-photonics OCM as discussed for claim 2. Elahmadi teaches the control module/circuitry aspect because the pluggable optical transceiver includes a controller communicatively coupled to the optical section, electrical section, and host system, and includes circuitry and a management interface disposed in the housing and communicating with the host device.
Elahmadi states: "a controller communicatively coupled to the optical section, the electrical section, and the host system; a housing compliant to the MSA, the housing containing the optical section, the electrical section, and the controller, and a communications port disposed on the housing and communicatively coupled to the controller, wherein the communications port is utilized to monitor and control operations, administration, maintenance, and provisioning (OAM&P) data associated with the circuitry thereby enabling a transparent manner of operation of the circuitry with respect to the host device." [Elahmadi, ¶ [0007]].
Elahmadi states: "DOM 318 is an optical monitoring scheme utilized by each MSA specification for performance monitoring on the optical transceiver. For example, the DOM 318 can provide performance monitoring data Such as optical output power, optical input power, laser bias current, etc." [Elahmadi, ¶ [0065]].
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide a control module electrically connected to the Woodside monitoring PIC in the Elahmadi pluggable module because Elahmadi already teaches a controller and electrical section for communicating monitoring, control, and OAM&P data with the host. Woodside’s OCM produces electrical signals representative of monitored optical-channel information, and Elahmadi’s controller/management circuitry provides a known host-compatible control pathway. Separating the optical monitoring PIC and controller/control circuitry into connected module portions would have been a predictable packaging and circuit-board design choice for managing optical and electrical functions within a compact pluggable module. Therefore, claim 4 would have been obvious.
In the combined structure, Woodside’s OCM/PIC corresponds to the optical signal monitoring module, and Elahmadi’s controller/electrical section/management circuitry corresponds to the claimed control module. The claim does not require a particular microcontroller model, circuit-board geometry, or connector standard. It only requires that the control module be mounted to the optical signal transmission device, electrically connected to the monitoring module, and have an inserting portion adapted to be inserted into the control system. Elahmadi’s pluggable
module places the optical section, electrical section, controller, and host interface within the same MSA-compliant housing, and therefore teaches the same integrated arrangement.
Claim 5
With respect to claim 5, all limitations of claim 4 are taught by Elahmadi, Woodside, Zaremba, and Lu, except wherein claim 5 further requires the optical signal monitoring module to obtain monitored information from the optical signal and transmit it to the control module, and the control module to transmit monitored information to the control system, receive configuration information from the control system, and transmit the configuration information to the monitoring module.
However, within analogous art, Woodside states: "Synchronous demodulator 114 receives electrical signal 158 and modulation signal 152, and generates electrical signal 160. As described above, electrical signal 160 is an electrical signal (from which the beat noise, associated with input optical signal 150, has been removed) that is representative of the optical power spectrum of input optical signal 150." [Woodside, ¶ [0033]].
Elahmadi states: "Using the MDIO 316, the optical transceiver 400 utilizes unused, undefined, reserved, or optional MDIO 316 registers to communicate overhead data in a manner fully supported by the MSA specifications." [Elahmadi, ¶ [0070]].
Elahmadi states: "Using the I2C 370, the optical transceiver 600 communicates overhead data in a manner fully supported by the MSA specifications." [Elahmadi, ¶ [0081]].
Woodside teaches obtaining the monitored optical information and generating an electrical signal representative of the optical power spectrum. Elahmadi tea controller/management path and MSA-supported MDIO/I2C communication of monitoring and overhead data to the host. It would therefore have been obvious for the Woodside OCM module to transmit its monitored information to Elahmadi’s controller/control module, and for the controller/control module to communicate that monitored information to the host/control system and receive configuration information through the same MSA management interface.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to route monitored information and configuration information in this manner because it provides the predictable and standard management architecture for a pluggable optical module: the optical monitoring circuitry produces monitored data, the internal controller/control circuitry formats and manages the data, and the host interface communicates that information with the control system. Elahmadi expressly teaches the host-facing MSA management channels, and Woodside teaches the specific OCM monitoring data to be produced. Combining these teachings would provide a compact, host-configurable OCM module that the control system can configure and from which the control system can read monitored optical-channel information. Therefore, claim 5 would have been obvious.
This motivation is not based on hindsight. Elahmadi expressly teaches that pluggable optical transceivers use management interfaces to pass overhead, OAM&P, PM, alarming, and control data between the module and the host. Woodside expressly teaches that the OCM output is electrical information representative of the monitored optical power spectrum. Combining
these teachings simply uses Elahmadi’s known host-management/control path to carry Woodside’s known OCM monitoring output and host configuration/control inputs.
Claim 6
With respect to claim 6, all limitations of claim 4 are taught by Elahmadi, Woodside, Zaremba, and Lu, except wherein claim 6 further requires that the optical signal monitoring module has a first connector and the control module has a second connector electrically connected to the first connector.
However, within analogous art, Elahmadi teaches electrical interconnection between an optical section, an electrical section, a controller, and the host device, and teaches I2C/MDIO and communication links between the internal circuitry and host. Elahmadi also illustrates module-level electrical interfaces and optical/electrical module blocks, including a host I/O, processor/controller, and optical transceiver section. The claimed first and second connectors are no more than the physical electrical interconnection between the monitoring module and the control module in the compact module architecture.
Elahmadi states: "an electrical section communicatively coupled to the optical section; circuitry in the electrical section configured to provide framing and forward error correction integrated within the MSA compliant optical transceiver and transparent to a host system housing the MSA compliant optical transceiver" [Elahmadi, ¶ [0007]].
Elahmadi states: "Additionally, the XAUI-XFI transceiver 500 includes a serial packet interface (SPI) and I2C interface 555 for communications to the host system. The MDIO 550 interface is
utilized to provide standard MSA-compliant communications to the host system." [Elahmadi, ¶ [0077]].
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide mating electrical connectors between the Woodside optical-monitoring PIC module and the Elahmadi controller/control module because electrical signals representative of monitored optical information must be transferred from the monitoring circuitry to the controller and then to the host. In compact pluggable optical modules, board-to-board or module-to-module electrical connectors are routine physical implementations for coupling a monitoring board/module to a control board/module. Such connectors would have predictably provided detachable, manufacturable, and electrically reliable coupling between the monitoring module and the control module without changing the monitoring or host-interface functions. Therefore, claim 6 would have been obvious.
Additionally, Lu provides further confirmation from the same pluggable optical module art that using a first connector portion on a functional circuit board and a second connector portion in the host/control-device interface was well known. Although Lu is not needed for the basic teaching of electrical interconnection between the optical/electrical sections and control circuitry in Elahmadi, Lu further confirms the ordinary connector implementation that a skilled artisan would use.
Lu states: "500 photoelectric part 510 functional circuit board 511 positioning groove 512 gold finger 513 gold finger 520 optoelectronic device 530 optical ribbon fiber 540 light connector
... 1000 electric connector 1001 electrically connected with the elastic sheet 1002 electrically connected with the elastic sheet" [Lu, Page 5].
Lu states: "the functional circuit board 510 of the gold finger 512, 513 and respectively connector 1000 in the electric connecting sheet 1002, 1001 phase contact to transmit the electric signal" [Lu, Page 6].
Thus, to the extent applicant argues that claim 6 requires physical mating connectors rather than only electrical communication paths, Lu expressly shows a functional circuit board having gold-finger connector portions that contact a corresponding electrical connector to transmit electrical signals in a QSFP-DD optical module environment. It would have been obvious to use the same known connector technique to electrically connect Woodside’s optical signal monitoring PIC/module to Elahmadi’s controller/control module, because such mating connector structures permit modular assembly, repair, board replacement, and reliable electrical communication inside or at the insertion interface of compact pluggable optical modules.
Claim 9
With respect to claim 9, all limitations of claim 1 are taught by Elahmadi, Woodside, Zaremba, and Lu, except wherein claim 9 further requires an outer casing having an inserting end and a docking end opposite the inserting end and adjacent to the optical signal transmission device, an accElahmadi states: "The host device includes a socket in which the optical transceiver 300 plugs into to connect to the host 302." [Elahmadi, ¶ [0063]].
Elahmadi states: "The optical transceiver 350 includes a clock and data recovery (CDR) 354 module configured to accept a serial input from a host with a 10 G serial interface 352. The CDR 354 module generates a clock by retrieving the phase information of an input signal and retiming occurs on an output signal. The CDR 354 module connects to an optical module 360 which includes a transmitter (TX) 362 and a receiver (RX) 364." [Elahmadi, ¶ [0066]].
Elahmadi states: "FIG. 33 is a perspective view of the optical transceiver of FIG. 24;" [Elahmadi, ¶ [0041]].
Elahmadi therefore teaches a module casing with opposite optical and host-interface ends, including an optical port/optical interface at one end and a host-interface/inserting end at the opposite end. To the extent the precise accommodating-groove shape is not expressly shown in Elahmadi, such groove/slot structure would have been an obvious mechanical design feature for receiving the host connector/socket or inserted electrical portion of the monitoring/control device in a pluggable optical module. Zaremba confirms the same general pluggable-module structure, with a first end having fiber optic connector ports and an opposite second end having an electrical edge connector received in a female electrical connector of a host/receptacle assembly.
Zaremba states: "The pluggable transceiver includes a first end with a fiber optic connector and a Second end with an electrical connector. For the SFP transceiver, the fiber optical connector is a LC-type duplex connector. The electrical connector is a card edge connector
that is received into a female electrical connector housed inside a receptacle." [Zaremba, ¶ [0004]].
Zaremba states: "The pluggable transceiver 10 includes a plastic housing frame 16 having a first end 46 with fiber optic connector ports 18 located therein, and an opposite second end 48 with an electrical edge connector (not shown) projecting therefrom." [Zaremba, ¶ [0019]].
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide the host-interface end of the Elahmadi/Woodside pluggable OCM with a groove/receiving space that accommodates the inserted electrical/monitoring-control portion because the module must mechanically align with and electrically connect to the host socket. Zaremba teaches the standard pluggable-transceiver architecture of an optical connector end and an opposite electrical connector end received in a host receptacle. Providing an accommodating groove at the inserting end would have been a predictable mechanical alignment and clearance feature that allows the electrical/monitoring portion to be received by the host connector while the optical end remains available for optical input/output. Therefore, claim 9 would have been obvious.
Lu further confirms that accommodating, guiding, mounting, and connector-receiving grooves at the inserting side of an optical module were conventional structural features in QSFP-DD-style pluggable optical modules. This makes the claimed accommodating groove even more predictable in the Elahmadi/Woodside module.
Lu states: "the bottom shell is further provided with a stop surface; a guide groove and a part of the mounting groove; the stop surface is set on the vertical surface of one end of the bottom shell, matched with the stop sheet in the metal cage, for locating the depth of the
light module inserted into the metal cage; the opening of the guide groove is set on the stop surface, and matched with the guide sheet on the metal cage; for guiding the light module is inserted into the metal cage" [Lu, Page 2].
Lu states: "the bottom shell 100 is further provided with a stop surface 120; guide groove 130 and part of the mounting groove 140; the stop surface 120 is set on the bottom shell 100 one end of the vertical surface, when the light module is inserted into the metal cage 900, stop surface 120 and the metal cage 900 on the stop sheet 920 against the optical module stops continuously inserted" [Lu, Page 6].
Accordingly, even if the exact word “accommodating groove” is not used by Elahmadi, the structural use of grooves at the inserting end of a pluggable optical module for receiving, guiding, mounting, and aligning a portion of the module relative to the host cage was known from Lu. Applying this to the combined Elahmadi/Woodside OCM would have predictably provided a groove at the inserting end for receiving the inserted monitoring/control portion and accurately locating the module relative to the control system.
Claim 10
With respect to claim 10, all limitations of claim 1 are taught by Elahmadi, Woodside, Zaremba, and Lu, except wherein claim 10 further requires the push-pull device to include two locking resilient plates slidably connected to the outer casing and adapted for locking the outer casing to the control system, and a push-pull handle connected to the locking resilient plates
and operable to be pushed and pulled in order to lock and release the locking resilient plates to and from the control system.
However, within analogous art, Zaremba states: "The actuator assembly of the present invention comprises Several components. One component is a slide member slidably mounted on the bottom surface of the transceiver. The Slide member is located adjacent to a locking detent on the transceiver housing. The Slide member has a forward-facing end, a rear-facing end, and two opposing Side portions. The rear end of the Slide member has angled cam Surfaces for Selectively engaging the latching tab on the receptacle cage. The forward end of the Slide member has an actuator handle projecting therefrom. The actuator handle has a loop structure comprising two lateral (side) Segments integrally connected by a curved Segment."[Zaremba, ¶ [0007]].
Zaremba states: "The actuator assembly further comprises a pair of opposing cantilevered Spring arms, each Spring arm extending along a side portion of the Slide member. The cantilevered Spring arms engage with posts on the housing in two positions, an inner position and an Outer position. The posts are formed within a channel on the bottom of the transceiver housing and the Spring arms Slide between positions forward and rearward of the posts." [Zaremba, ¶ [0008]].
Zaremba states: "The actuator assembly 12 further comprises a pair of opposing cantilevered Spring arms 36, each Spring arm 36 being adjacent to a side end 61 of the slide member 28. The cantilevered Spring arms 36 engage with triangular posts 38 on the housing in two
positions, an inner position, as shown with Transceiver A in FIG. 1 and FIG. 4, and an outer position as shown with Transceiver B in FIG. 1 and FIG. 3." [Zaremba, ¶ [0028]].
Zaremba states: "To remove the transceiver 10 from the receptacle cage 14, a the operator pushes inwardly on the front end 58 of the slide member 28. The force applied to the slide member 28 causes the cantilever Spring arms 36 to Snap over the posts 38 on the transceiver housing 16 to the rearward or inner position (FIG. 4)." [Zaremba, ¶ [0030]].
Lu states: "The invention claims a QSFP-DD optical module shell structure, comprising: a bottom shell, an upper shell, an unlocking part and an adapter; the bottom shell and the upper shell are assembled to form an optical module cavity for containing the fixed adapter and the photoelectric part; the unlocking part can be slidingly installed on the optical module; and when pulling the unlocking part, the optical module can be unlocked and exit the host device." [Lu, Abstract].
Zaremba and Lu collectively teach the claimed sliding lock/release function. Zaremba teaches a push-pull actuator handle, sliding member, cantilevered spring arms, and latching structure for locking and unlocking a pluggable optical transceiver in a receptacle cage. Lu teaches a modern QSFP-DD shell having a sliding unlocking part that unlocks and exits a host device.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use the push-pull sliding locking mechanism of Zaremba and/or the QSFP-DD unlocking structure of Lu in the Elahmadi/Woodside pluggable OCM because the combined OCM module is intended to be inserted into and removed from a host/control system, and a reliable mechanical latch/release mechanism would be required to hold the module in the host during operation while allowing
field removal. Zaremba expressly teaches that the push-pull actuator solves the problem of quickly and easily removing a pluggable optical transceiver from a receptacle cage. Lu confirms the same motivation in the QSFP-DD context by teaching a sliding unlocking part for locking/unlocking and removing the optical module from the host device. Therefore, claim 10 would have been obvious.
Lu states: "pulling handle 320 outwards, the handle 320 is firmly connected with the handle block 311-5 integrally; it is not easy to separate, so that the unlocking rod 310 and the handle 320 form an integral part as the unlocking part 300; the handheld surface 322 is set on the other end of the pull arm 321, providing external tension, to pull the unlocking part 300 for optical module unlocking" [Lu, Page 7].
Lu states: "then pulling the handle 320 by force, pulling the unlocking part 300, the unlocking part 300 compression reset spring 600 slides outwards, driving the unlocking wedge body to 311-1 outwards, the elastic locking buckle 910 which is locked on the locking surface 111 is separated from the locking surface 111, so that the optical module is unlocked" [Lu, Page 8].
These passages further provide a direct two-sided sliding locking mechanism, including the handle, sliding unlocking member, locking surface, elastic lock catch, and host metal cage. The claimed two locking resilient plates read on the two opposing sliding rods/locking arms taught by Lu and, alternatively, on the opposing cantilever spring arms taught by Zaremba. Both references teach the same type of serviceable pluggable optical module locking and release operation.
Claim 11
With respect to claim 11, all limitations of claim 10 are taught by Elahmadi, Woodside, Zaremba, and Lu, except wherein claim 11 further requires each locking resilient plate to include a sliding plate body slidably connected to the outer casing and having a terminating end, and an engaging plate body extending from the terminating end, being curved, and adapted for engaging the control system.
Zaremba states: "The slide member 28 is located adjacent to the locking detent 26 on the bottom surface 52 of the transceiver 10. Particularly, the slide member 28 slides within channel structure 30 as shown in Transceiver “C” of FIG. 1 and in FIG. 4. The slide member 28 has a forward-facing end 58, a rear-facing end 60, and two opposing Side ends 61 as illustrated in Transceiver C of FIG.1. The rear end 60 of the slide member 28 has angled cam surfaces 32 which are operative for engaging the latching tab 22 to move the latching tab 22 out of engagement with the detent 26." [Zaremba, ¶ [0027]].
Zaremba states: "The actuator assembly 12 further comprises a pair of opposing cantilevered Spring arms 36, each Spring arm 36 being adjacent to a side end 61 of the slide member 28." [Zaremba, ¶ [0028]].
Zaremba states: "In the inner position (FIG. 4), the angled cam surfaces 32 are moved to a rearward position where they engage with the latching tab 22 of the receptacle cage 14 and lift the latching tab 22 out of engagement with the detent 26." [Zaremba, ¶ [0028]].
Lu states: "the unlocking part is provided with an unlocking rod and a handle two parts; the unlocking rod is made of metal material, provided with a beam and two sliding rods; the
sliding rod is symmetrically set on the two sides of the beam; the sliding rod is provided with an unlocking wedge body, a sliding block, a spring block; a limiting block and a handle block; the unlocking wedge body is contained in the containing groove; when unlocking, the outer sliding jacking lock catch is locked on the locking surface of the elastic lock catch to unlock the optical module; the sliding block is contained in the sliding groove; when unlocking, sliding in the sliding groove; providing a sliding route for the sliding rod;" [Lu, Pages 2-3].
The sliding plate body of claim 11 corresponds to the sliding member/sliding rod of Zaremba and Lu, and the curved engaging plate body adapted to engage the control system corresponds to the angled cam surface/cantilevered spring arm/locking wedge structure that engages the latching tab or elastic lock catch of the host receptacle/metal cage.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide the locking resilient plates of the combined pluggable OCM with a sliding body and a curved or angled engaging body because those shapes are specifically used in Zaremba and Lu to translate push/pull motion into latch engagement or latch release. A sliding body provides guided linear travel along the module casing, while a curved, angled, or wedge-shaped engaging body predictably engages and deflects the host latch/catch. Using such structure in the Elahmadi/Woodside pluggable OCM would have been a routine adaptation of a known pluggable-optical-module latch design to provide stable insertion, locking, and withdrawal. Therefore, claim 11 would have been obvious.
The “curved engaging plate body” limitation is also taught or at least rendered obvious by the shape and function of Zaremba’s angled cam surfaces and Lu’s unlocking wedge body. Both are
non-flat engaging portions at a terminating end of a sliding latch member and both are used to engage, deflect, or release a corresponding host cage latch. Selecting a curved shape rather than an angled/wedge shape would have been an obvious design variation because the purpose is the same: to provide a smooth camming/engaging surface for the host latch or resilient sheet during insertion and release.
Claim 12
With respect to claim 12, all limitations of claim 10 are taught by Elahmadi, Woodside, Zaremba, and Lu, except wherein claim 12 further requires two limiting grooves, stop end surfaces at ends of the limiting grooves, and protruding sheet bodies slidably received in the limiting grooves and operable to abut the stop end surfaces to limit movement of the locking resilient plates when the push-pull handle is pulled.
Zaremba states: "The posts are formed within a channel on the bottom of the transceiver housing and the Spring arms Slide between positions forward and rearward of the posts." [Zaremba, ¶ [0008]].
Zaremba states: "As shown in Transceiver “C” of FIG. 1, the actuator assembly 12 further comprises a compression Spring 40. The compression Spring 40 is captured within a channel 42 within the slide member 28 and a retainer post 44 located on the bottom surface 52 of the transceiver housing 16 as illustrated in FIG. 5." [Zaremba, ¶ [0032]].
Lu states: "the second containing space is provided with a limiting groove; a spring cover; the limiting groove limits the travel of the unlocking part; the spring cover is matched with the spring groove to package the reset spring;" [Lu, Page 2].
Lu states: "limiting block 311-4 is contained in the limiting groove 211, limiting the sliding travel of the sliding rod 311;" [Lu, Page 6].
Lu states: "at the same time; limiting block 311-4 is also in the limiting groove 211 slides to one end of the limiting groove 211 and stops sliding, unlocking part 300 stops relative sliding with the optical module, then pulling the unlocking part 300, limiting block 311-4 will drive the whole optical module smoothly pulled out from the metal cage 900;" [Lu, Page 8].
Lu is particularly strong for claim 12 because it teaches a limiting block/protruding structure received in a limiting groove that slides to an end of the limiting groove and stops sliding, thereby limiting travel of the sliding unlocking rod. Zaremba further teaches channels/posts that guide and constrain the actuator movement in a pluggable optical transceiver.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide limiting grooves, stop surfaces, and protruding sheet/limiting blocks in the Elahmadi/Woodside/Zaremba pluggable OCM because a sliding latch mechanism requires controlled travel to prevent over-pulling, component separation, or misalignment during module removal. Lu expressly teaches that the limiting groove limits travel of the unlocking part and that the limiting block stops at an end of the limiting groove before the whole optical module is pulled out. Applying this known travel-limiting arrangement to the Zaremba push-pull actuator in the combined pluggable OCM would
have predictably improved reliability and repeatability of the unlocking operation. Therefore, claim 12 would have been obvious.
This is a strong teaching for the exact claim-12 structure because Lu expressly uses both a limiting groove and a limiting block to stop sliding movement at the end of travel. The claimed “protruding sheet body” is a broad mechanical protrusion on the locking resilient plate that slides in the limiting groove. Lu’s limiting block 311-4 is the same kind of protrusion on the sliding rod/locking member, and the end of Lu’s limiting groove 211 acts as the stop end surface that stops sliding. Therefore, the limitation is not a mere design choice in the abstract; it is directly shown in the same QSFP-DD optical module shell field.
Claim 13
For purposes of prior-art rejection only, and without withdrawing the above 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) rejection, claim 13 is interpreted as requiring that each resilient member biases the respective locking resilient plate in a direction away from the pulled handle direction and toward a restored or locked position.
With respect to claim 13, all limitations of claim 10 are taught by Elahmadi, Woodside, Zaremba, and Lu, except wherein claim 13 further requires two resilient members, each disposed between the outer casing and a respective locking resilient plate and biasing the respective locking resilient plate in a direction opposite to the push-pull handle.
Zaremba states: "As shown in Transceiver “C” of FIG. 1, the actuator assembly 12 further comprises a compression Spring 40. The compression Spring 40 is captured within a channel
42 within the slide member 28 and a retainer post 44 located on the bottom surface 52 of the transceiver housing 16 as illustrated in FIG. 5. Initially, the transceiver 10 is locked in the receptacle cage 14 with the curved actuator handle 34 and slide member 28 of the actuator assembly 12 in an outer, locked position. When an operator pushes the slide member 28 inwardly and causes the slide member 28 to move in a rearward direction, the compression Spring 40 is compressed." [Zaremba, ¶ [0032]].
Lu states: "the spring groove is used for containing the reset spring to provide the reset force of the unlocking part;" [Lu, Page 2].
Lu states: "spring block 311-3 is contained in the spring groove 113, and one end of the reset spring 600 against the unlocking movement spring block 311-3 under the drive of the sliding rod 311 compression reset spring 600, and after the unlocking, the spring block 311-3 reset spring 600 under the push; the corresponding spring block 311-3 also drives the unlocking rod 310 reset;" [Lu, Page 6].
Lu states: "after the optical module is unlocked and pulled out of the metal cage 900, the external force applied on the handle 320 disappears, due to the external force and the spring groove 133 in the compressed state of the reset spring 600 starts to release the resilience force, pushes the spring block 311-3 slides backwards, so as to push the unlocking part 300 to reset." [Lu, Page 8].
Zaremba teaches a compression spring captured between the slide member and retainer post of the transceiver housing. Lu teaches reset springs in spring grooves that provide a reset force for the unlocking part and drive the unlocking rod to reset after pulling/unlocking.
These teachings correspond to the claimed resilient members disposed between the casing and locking plates and biasing the locking plates back toward the locked/restored position, i.e., in the direction opposite the pulled handle direction.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide resilient members between the outer casing and the locking resilient plates of the combined pluggable OCM because a push-pull latch mechanism must return to its initial/locked position after actuation. Zaremba teaches a compression spring in the actuator assembly, while Lu teaches reset springs that push the sliding unlocking rod back to reset after the handle is pulled and released. Providing two resilient members corresponding to two sliding locking plates would have predictably supplied balanced reset forces on both sides of the module, improving smooth and symmetric locking and unlocking. Therefore, claim 13 would have been obvious.
The “two resilient members” limitation is strengthened by Lu because Lu places reset-spring structures in symmetrical spring grooves associated with the two sliding rods on the two sides of the module. Zaremba independently teaches a compression spring captured in the actuator assembly. In the combined structure, using two springs corresponding to two locking resilient plates would have been the most balanced implementation because each plate/rod is located on a respective side of the casing and must reset reliably after release of the push-pull handle.
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Elahmadi et al., in view of Woodside et al., Zaremba, and Lu, and further in view of Bartur et al. (WO2014025532A2).
Claim 7
With respect to claim 7, all limitations of claim 1 are taught by Elahmadi, Woodside, Zaremba, and Lu, except wherein claim 7 further requires that the optical signal transmission device include an optical signal receiving element, an optical signal output element, and an optical splitter connected among the receiving element, the output element, and the monitoring device, the splitter being adapted for splitting and outputting, in a predetermined splitting ratio, the optical signal to the monitoring device and the output element.
However, within analogous art, Elahmadi teaches optical transmitter/receiver components and optical MUX/DMUX structures in the pluggable module. Woodside teaches directing a tapped portion of optical power to an OCM.
Bartur teaches the specific optical splitter/beam splitter/fiber splitter structure that couples and splits optical traffic in a transceiver to a photodetector/monitoring path.
Woodside states: "The EDFA may provide an optical signal with an optical power of approximately 24 dBm, and a tap may be used to direct 1% of the optical power of the optical signal to the OCM. In this example, 1% of the optical power is approximately 4 dBm, meaning that an optical power of an input optical signal at the OCM is approximately 4 dBm." [Woodside, ¶ [0015]].
Bartur states: "PHOTO DETECTOR (PD) 108 that receives the light and translates it to electric current. PHOTO DETECTOR 108, typically a PIN photodiode, functions exactly the opposite of a LASER DIODE 104 where it absorbs photons and converts them into electrical current." [Bartur, ¶ [0054]].
Bartur states: "OPTICAL BEAM SPLITTER 106 is the means that directs the portion of the received signal to the PD 108 and enables coupling the LD 104 optical output into the fiber through a LENS 105. The implementation used here BY WAY OF AN EXAMPLE is not unique. It is possible to connect the power splitter outside the transceiver body and have fiber connections to the active parts - one to the Laser 104 and one to the Photo Detector 108. A simple, fiber based, optical splitter can be used in-lieu of the Beam Splitter 106." [Bartur, ¶ [0059]].
Bartur states: "A BEAM SPLITTER 106 is an optical device, positioned at about 45 degrees to the beam path, which can partially reflect and partially transmit an incident light beam such as laser beam, or receiving light beam from the external world through the FIBER CABLE 107 into two optical light beams of similar or different optical power. It can reflect 60% of the light and transmit 40% (assuming negligible absorption losses), split it even 50/50 or any other ratio." [Bartur, ¶ [0059]].
Bartur therefore teaches an optical receiving path, optical output path, and optical splitter/beam splitter that splits optical power in a predetermined ratio and directs a portion to a photodetector/monitoring path while also enabling optical output through the fiber. Woodside confirms that a tap/split portion of optical power is used for input to an OCM, and Elahmadi supplies the pluggable host-module environment.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Bartur’s optical splitter/tap arrangement with the Elahmadi/Woodside pluggable OCM because Woodside’s OCM must receive a portion of the optical signal to perform channel monitoring, and Bartur expressly teaches using an optical beam splitter or fiber-based splitter in a transceiver to direct a portion of the optical signal to a photodetector/monitoring path. This combination would have predictably allowed the OCM to monitor a portion of the optical signal while allowing the remainder of the optical signal to continue along the optical output path. Using a predetermined split ratio is a routine optical design choice driven by monitoring sensitivity and insertion-loss requirements, and Bartur expressly teaches multiple split ratios such as 60/40 or 50/50. Therefore, claim 7 would have been obvious.
Bartur states: "MICROCONTROLLER 102 monitors all the functions of the TRANSCEIVER 100, can function as the automatic power control, and provide communication means through a BUS 119 (e.g. IIC bus) to the host equipment. INTERNAL MEMORY 115 can be used to store values and events for external reporting through the BUS 119." [Bartur, ¶ [0058]].
Bartur therefore not only teaches the optical splitter and photodetector path, but also teaches host reporting through a bus, which is consistent with Elahmadi’s management interface and Woodside’s OCM monitoring output. The predetermined splitting ratio limitation is met because Bartur expressly teaches that the beam splitter can split the incident light into two beams of similar or different optical power and gives examples including 60/40 and 50/50. Using such a splitter to feed Woodside’s OCM while continuing to output the remaining optical signal would have been a routine and predictable optical tap arrangement.
Claim 8
With respect to claim 8, all limitations of claim 7 are taught by Elahmadi, Woodside, Zaremba, Lu, and Bartur, except wherein claim 8 further requires that the outer casing has an inserting end and a docking end opposite the inserting end, that the outer casing is formed with two receiving slots at the docking end extending toward the inserting end, and that a portion of the optical signal receiving element and a portion of the optical signal output element are respectively received in the receiving slots.
Zaremba states: "The pluggable transceiver 10 includes a plastic housing frame 16 having a first end 46 with fiber optic connector ports 18 located therein, and an opposite second end 48 with an electrical edge connector (not shown) projecting therefrom. For the pluggable transceiver 10, the fiber optic connector ports 18 are an LC-type duplex connector." [Zaremba, ¶ [0019]].
Zaremba states: "The two connector ports 18 are Symmetrically positioned and arranged within the rectangular outline. Latching Surfaces are provided within the connector ports 18 to permit engagement with the Standard latch members of the fiber optic cable." [Zaremba, ¶ [0021]].
Zaremba therefore teaches the claimed docking end with two receiving slots/ports for receiving optical connector portions, and an opposite inserting/electrical end that enters the host receptacle. In the combined structure, the optical signal receiving and output elements of the Elahmadi/Woodside/Lu/Bartur optical path would be received in such optical receiving slots/ports at the docking end of the pluggable module.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to apply Zaremba’s duplex optical connector-port arrangement to the Elahmadi/Woodside/Lu/Bartur pluggable OCM because pluggable optical modules routinely require physical optical connector slots at the accessible/docking end to receive optical fiber connectors and align those connectors with internal optical receiving/output components. Zaremba expressly teaches LC-type duplex connector ports in a pluggable optical transceiver housing. Providing two receiving slots for the input/receiving element and output element would have been the predictable mechanical implementation of the optical input/output path recited in claim 7. Therefore, claim 8 would have been obvious.
The two receiving slots of claim 8 are not required to have any special optical properties beyond receiving portions of the optical signal receiving element and optical signal output element. Zaremba’s LC-type duplex connector ports are two receiving openings at the docking end of a pluggable optical transceiver for receiving optical connector/fiber portions. In the combined Elahmadi/Woodside/Lu/Bartur module, one slot would be used for the input/receiving optical path and the other for the output optical path, exactly as required by claim 8.
It is noted that any citations to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the reference should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2123.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mohammed Abdelraheem, whose telephone number is (571) 272-0656. The examiner can normally be reached Monday–Thursday.
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.
/MOHAMMED ABDELRAHEEM/Examiner, Art Unit 2635
/DAVID C PAYNE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2635
Prosecution Insights