Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-8 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. However, upon further consideration, Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Applicants’ arguments are rendered moot in view of the present Office Action
Claim Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 4 recites dependency to Claim 2. However, Claim 2 has been cancelled so Claim 4 currently depends on a nonexistent claim. This should be changed so Claim 4 depends on the correct claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “wherein the rule is a rule for calculating the compensation amount of each of the optical elements at a predetermined distribution rate so that a total sum of the compensation amounts is equal to inverse characteristics of transmission characteristics of the transmission path.” in Lines 1-4. However, Claim 4 is dependent on Claim 1 which now recites the limitation “wherein the rule is, based on setting pattern list information indicating a plurality of setting patterns corresponding to compensation amounts of each of the optical elements, a rule for determining each compensation amount indicated by the setting pattern that minimizes the difference as an actual compensation amount of each of the optical element” in Lines 16-20. The cited portion in Claim 4 is described in paragraph 0062 of the published specification under the section “First Example of Compensation Amount Acquisition Process” and is most closely described by Figure 8, where element S111 involves setting patterns. The cited portion in Claim 1 is mentioned in paragraph 0085 of the published specification under the section “Second Example of Compensation Amount Acquisition Process” and is most closely related to Figure 9 where on step S203, inverse characteristics are acquired. However, these two figures are distinct examples and there is no indication from the paragraphs of the specification of Figure 9 limiting Figure 8. Therefore, it is unclear how from the drawings and the specification how the two different examples would be merged under a single example as indicated by the claims.
Claims 5-6 depend from Claim 4 and are therefore rejected for the reason(s)
as indicated above.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “wherein the rule is a rule for calculating the compensation amount of each of the optical elements at a predetermined distribution rate so that a total sum of the compensation amounts is equal to inverse characteristics of transmission characteristics of the transmission path.” in Lines 1-4. However, Claim 4 is dependent on Claim 1 which now recites the limitation “wherein the rule is, based on setting pattern list information indicating a plurality of setting patterns corresponding to compensation amounts of each of the optical elements, a rule for determining each compensation amount indicated by the setting pattern that minimizes the difference as an actual compensation amount of each of the optical element” in Lines 16-20. The cited portion in Claim 4 is described in paragraph 0062 of the published specification under the section “First Example of Compensation Amount Acquisition Process” and is most closely described by Figure 8, where element S111 involves setting patterns. The cited portion in Claim 1 is mentioned in paragraph 0085 of the published specification under the section “Second Example of Compensation Amount Acquisition Process” and is most closely related to Figure 9 where on step S203, inverse characteristics are acquired. However, these two figures are distinct examples and there is no indication from the paragraphs of the specification of Figure 9 limiting Figure 8. Therefore, it is unclear how from the drawings and the specification how the two different examples would be merged under a single example as indicated by the claims.
Claims 5-6 depend from Claim 4 and are therefore rejected for the reason(s) of indefiniteness as indicated above.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “wherein the rule is a rule for calculating the compensation amount of each of the optical elements at a predetermined distribution rate so that a total sum of the compensation amounts is equal to inverse characteristics of transmission characteristics of the transmission path.” in Lines 1-4. However, Claim 4 is dependent on Claim 1 which now recites the limitation “wherein the rule is, based on setting pattern list information indicating a plurality of setting patterns corresponding to compensation amounts of each of the optical elements, a rule for determining each compensation amount indicated by the setting pattern that minimizes the difference as an actual compensation amount of each of the optical element” in Lines 16-20. The cited portion in Claim 4 is described in paragraph 0062 of the published specification under the section “First Example of Compensation Amount Acquisition Process” and is most closely described by Figure 8, where element S111 involves setting patterns. The cited portion in Claim 1 is mentioned in paragraph 0085 of the published specification under the section “Second Example of Compensation Amount Acquisition Process” and is most closely related to Figure 9 where on step S203, inverse characteristics are acquired. Figures 8 and 9 are distinct examples due to the change in the rule parameters. Therefore, Claim 4 represents a different example than Claim 1 and does not further limit the subject matter of this claim.
Claims 5-6 depend from Claim 4 and are therefore rejected for the reason(s)
as indicated above.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 7-8 allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Way (US 7577366) discloses an optical transmission system using a transmission path for transmitting an optical signal, comprising: one or more optical elements for compensating deterioration of the optical signal (Figure 2, where element 12 has compensation element 18); wherein a compensation amount of each of the optical elements for the deterioration is a predetermined amount based on a spectrum of the optical signal at a first measurement position that is a predetermined position between the transmitter and the transmission path (Figure 1, where element A represents a first measurement point, Figure 3, element 34 and Column 6, Lines 1-6 where element 34 routes optical signals through dispersion enhancement fibers before going to element 18) and a spectrum of the optical signal at a second measurement position that is a predetermined position between the transmission path and the receiver (Figure 1, where element B represents a first measurement point, Figure 3, element 34 and Column 6, Lines 1-6 where element 34 routes optical signals through dispersion enhancement fibers before going to element 18).
Miyashita (US 7359645) discloses a transmitter for transmitting the optical signal (Figure 1, element 28) and a and a receiver for receiving the optical signal (Figure 1, where element 28 receives signal via element 90).
However, Way, Miyashita and a thorough search in the art fail to disclose the following:
Claim 1: wherein the compensation amount is a predetermined amount depending on a predetermined rule that reduces a difference between a transmission side spectrum that is a spectrum of the optical signal at the first measurement position and a reception side spectrum that is a spectrum of the optical signal at the second measurement position; wherein the rule is, based on setting pattern list information indicating a plurality of setting patterns corresponding to compensation amounts of each of the optical elements, a rule for determining each compensation amount indicated by the setting pattern that minimizes the difference as an actual compensation amount of each of the optical element.
Claim 8: wherein the compensation amount is a predetermined amount depending on a predetermined rule that reduces a difference between a transmission side spectrum that is a spectrum of the optical signal at the first measurement position and a reception side spectrum that is a spectrum of the optical signal at the second measurement position; wherein the rule is, based on setting pattern list information indicating a plurality of setting patterns corresponding to compensation amounts of each of the optical elements, a rule for determining each compensation amount indicated by the setting pattern that minimizes the difference as an actual compensation amount of each of the optical element.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASIF SHAMEEM whose telephone number is (571)272-6576. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 AM EST-5:00 PM EST.
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, KENNETH VANDERPUYE can be reached at (571) 272-3078. 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.
/ASIF SHAMEEM/Examiner, Art Unit 2634
/KENNETH N VANDERPUYE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2634
Prosecution Insights