DETAILED ACTION
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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grudinin (US Pat. App. Pub. 2024/0085538 A1) in view of Winzer et al. (US-20160065311-A1) (hereinafter "WINZER").
Regarding Claims 1, 9, and 13, Grudinin teaches An integrated circuit, comprising: an optical transmit circuit configured to output optical signals having a carrier-frequency pattern as a function of time (FIG. 2), wherein a modulation signal, associated with an optical source and corresponding to the carrier-frequency pattern (Id.: 218), comprises a predistortion to reduce a nonlinearity associated with the optical transmit circuit (Id.: 210; [0008, 0011]); and a feedback circuit configured to measure the nonlinearity (FIG. 2: 238, 244; [0048-49]) and `that dynamically adjust the predistortion based at least in part on the measured nonlinearity (FIG. 5A: 510, 522). Grudinin fails to teach wherein the non-linearity is associated with a change in ambient temperature or aging of one of more components in the optical transmission circuit.
WINZER teaches that the hardware distortions (nonlinearity) change over time due to component aging ([0039]). This is supported by WINZER's disclosure that "the shape of the hardware-imposed signal-transfer function 502 may change over time, e.g., due to the device aging, etc." ([0039]), which demonstrates that the measured nonlinearity is associated with component aging in the transmit circuit It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Winzer with Grudinin because understanding how aging causes non-linearity is key to accurate reliability prediction, system design, and failure prevention.
Regarding Claims 2, 10, and 14, Grudinin teaches The integrated circuit of claim 1, wherein the integrated circuit is configured to provide closed-loop adjustment of the predistortion. (FIG. 2: 244)
Regarding Claims 3, 11, and 15, Grudinin teaches The integrated circuit of claim 1, wherein the predistortion comprises direct modulation of a current or voltage associated with the modulation signal. (FIG. 2: 210)
Regarding Claims 4, 12, and 16, Grudinin teaches The integrated circuit of claim 1, wherein the feedback circuit is configured to measure a carrier frequency of the output optical signals as a function of time. (FIG. 2: 244; [0048-49])
Regarding Claims 5 and 17, Grudinin teaches The integrated circuit of claim 1, wherein the feedback circuit comprises an interferometer. (FIG. 2: 210; [0048] (“The discriminator 210 can be a Fabry-Perot etalon”))
Regarding Claims 6 and 18, Grudinin teaches The integrated circuit of claim 1, wherein dynamic adjustment of the nonlinearity is performed in the frequency domain. ([0051])
Regarding Claims 7 and 19, Grudinin teaches The integrated circuit of claim 1, wherein the feedback circuit is configured to compare at least a portion of a band of frequencies associated with a Fourier Transform of the output optical signals to a target waveform. ([0065])
Regarding Claims 8 and 20, Grudinin teaches The electronic device of claim 19, wherein the feedback circuit is configured to adjust the predistortion so that a time average of the comparison is zero. (FIG. 5H: 514; [0058])
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH N VANDERPUYE whose telephone number is (571)272-3078. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 6:30am-2:30p.
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.
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.
/KENNETH N VANDERPUYE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2634
Prosecution Insights