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 2024-11-05 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 1-8 and 10 are pending in this application and are under examination in this Office Action. Claim 9 is canceled. No claims have been allowed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
Claims 3 and 4 are 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 3,
Claim 1, from which claim 3 depends, positively recites one "opposing communication device" and one "optical loss value" measured in transmission of the power feeding light from the own device to that opposing communication device. Claim 3 subsequently recites that the power feeding light is transmitted to "each of the plurality of opposing communication devices" via a branching unit, that the measurement unit measures "each of the optical loss values," and that the control unit controls the output according to "the plurality of optical loss values." There is insufficient antecedent basis for "the plurality of opposing communication devices" because neither claim 1 nor an earlier portion of claim 3 introduces a plurality of opposing communication devices. There is likewise insufficient antecedent basis for "each of the optical loss values" and "the plurality of optical loss values" because claim 1 introduces only a single optical loss value and claim 3 does not first introduce a plural set of optical loss values. The missing antecedent basis makes the scope indeterminate rather than merely presenting a minor grammatical defect. Under one reasonable construction, the singular opposing communication device and singular optical loss value incorporated from claim 1 are
members of the later-recited pluralities. Under another reasonable construction, the singular device and value incorporated from claim 1 remain separate from the later-recited plurality of devices and plurality of values. The claim does not identify whether the claim-1 transmission path passes through the branching unit, whether the claim-1 optical loss value is included among the values used by the control unit, or whether one optical loss value must correspond to each member of the unidentified plurality. These alternative constructions produce different numbers and relationships of opposing communication devices, transmission paths, and optical loss values, and therefore different boundaries for the claimed output-control operation. Although paragraph [0180] of the specification describes a plural-device embodiment, it does not state that the singular device and singular value incorporated by dependency from claim 1 are necessarily included in, or separate from, the pluralities recited in claim 3. Accordingly, the identity and relationship of the devices and optical loss values cannot be determined with reasonable certainty, and claim 3 is indefinite.
Regarding claim 4,
Claim 4 depends from claim 3 and therefore incorporates all limitations of claim 3, including the indeterminate references to "the plurality of opposing communication devices," "each of the optical loss values," and "the plurality of optical loss values." Claim 4 further bases both of its output-control alternatives on that unidentified plurality of optical loss values: the first alternative requires at least one value in the
plurality to meet a predetermined value, and the second alternative requires all values in the plurality to be below the predetermined value and uses the maximum value of that plurality. Because claim 3 does not establish which optical loss values constitute the plurality, claim 4 does not establish which values must be evaluated under either alternative or which value is the claimed maximum value. The additional limitations of claim 4 therefore do not cure the uncertainty in claim 3 and instead depend upon the unidentified set. Accordingly, the metes and bounds of claim 4 are not reasonably certain, and claim 4 is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Accordingly, claims 3 and 4 are indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless -
(a)(1) The claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kobayashi (JP2021068964A, published April 30, 2021; corresponding English-language family publication US20220393514A1).
The relied-upon printed publication for purposes of 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) is JP2021068964A, published April 30, 2021. The corresponding English-language U.S. family publication is quoted only as an English counterpart for paragraph-level text and figure identification; the anticipation rejection relies on the earlier Japanese printed publication and the common disclosure of that family.
Claim 1
Kobayashi expressly teaches the claimed communication device as a first data communication device that contains the optical power-sourcing equipment and communicates through an optical fiber with an opposing second data communication device containing the powered device.
Kobayashi states: “[0039] As illustrated in FIG. 2, a power-over-fiber (PoF) system 1 according to the present embodiment is a system including an optical power supply system and an
optical communication system with an optical fiber. In a strict sense, the power-over-fiber system 1 includes a first data communication device 100 including a power sourcing equipment (PSE) 110, an optical fiber cable 200, and a second data communication device 300 including a powered device (PD) 310.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0039], p. 2; FIG. 2]
The first data communication device 100 corresponds to the claimed own communication device, and the second data communication device 300 corresponds to the claimed opposing communication device. Kobayashi further expressly teaches the claimed power feeding light transmission unit and transmission of power feeding light to the opposing device.
Kobayashi states: “[0041] The power sourcing equipment 110 includes a semiconductor laser 111 for power supply. The first data communication device 100 includes, in addition to the power sourcing equipment 110, a transmitter 120 and a receiver 130 that perform data communication. The first data communication device 100 corresponds to a data terminal equipment (DTE), a repeater, or the like.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0041], p. 2; FIG. 2]
Kobayashi further states: “[0045] The semiconductor laser 111 for power supply oscillates with electric power supplied from the power source to output feed light 112.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0045], p. 2; FIG. 2]
Kobayashi further states: “[0051] The feed light 112 and the signal light 125 output from the first data communication device 100 are input to one end 201 of the optical fiber cable 200. The feed light 112 and the signal light 125 propagate through the cladding 220 and the core 210, respectively, and are output from another end 202 of the optical fiber cable 200 to the second data communication device 300.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0051], p. 3; FIGS. 2-3]
Thus, semiconductor laser 111 for power supply is the claimed power feeding light transmission unit, and feed light 112 is the claimed power feeding light transmitted from the own device to the opposing communication device.
Kobayashi also expressly teaches the claimed measurement unit that measures a loss-related value for the feed-light path from the own device to the opposing device. The measurer emits a pulse, receives reflected feed light, determines the path distance, and then identifies the corresponding attenuation rate from stored relationship data.
Kobayashi states: “[0060] This power-over-fiber system 1A additionally includes, as the configuration that performs power supply according to a transmission distance, a measurer 150A and a control device 153A. The measurer 150A measures a distance from the power sourcing equipment 110 to the powered device 310. The control device 153A controls the power sourcing equipment 110 to output the feed light 112 after compensating for an amount of attenuation of the feed light 112 based on the distance from the power sourcing equipment 110 to the powered device 310 measured by the measurer 150A.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0060], p. 3; FIG. 5]
Kobayashi further states: “[0066] At the time of measurement of a distance from the power sourcing equipment 110 to the powered device 310, the control device 153A outputs the single-pulse feed light 112 from the semiconductor laser 111 for power supply and measures a time elapsed before the photodiode 152A detects the reflected light 112R of the feed light 112. The control device 153A calculates the distance from the power sourcing equipment 110
to the powered device 310 on the basis of the measured elapsed time.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0066], p. 4; FIG. 5]
Kobayashi further states: “[0067] Specifically, the control device 153A that has the function of calculating the distance, the separator 151A, and the photodiode 152A constitute the measurer 150A.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0067], p. 4; FIG. 5]
Kobayashi further states: “[0068] The control device 153A includes a memory that stores table data indicating a relationship between an attenuation rate of the feed light 112 and a transmission distance. With reference to the table data, the control device 153A identifies an attenuation rate corresponding to the distance from the power sourcing equipment 110 to the powered device 310 obtained through the measurement.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0068], p. 4; FIG. 5]
The attenuation rate identified for the feed-light transmission path is an optical loss value under the broadest reasonable interpretation because it quantifies the attenuation, i.e., optical loss, that occurs in transmitting the feed light from the first device to the second device. The claimed measurement does not require that the loss be obtained by only one particular mathematical technique; it requires a measured optical loss value, and Kobayashi obtains that value through pulse-based path measurement followed by the stored distance-to-attenuation relationship.
Finally, Kobayashi expressly teaches the claimed control unit and control of the feed-light output according to the measured optical loss value.
Kobayashi states: “[0069] After obtaining the attenuation rate of the feed light 112, the control device 153A controls the semiconductor laser 111 for power supply to output the feed light such that the feed light has an intensity equal to the sum of the original output and an amount of attenuation based on the attenuation rate. Alternatively, when the intensity of the feed light 112 is deficient from the intensity required by the powered device 310 because of attenuation related to the transmission distance, the control device 153A may control the semiconductor laser 111 for power supply such that the feed light 112 has an intensity obtained by adding the deficient amount.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0069], p. 4; FIG. 5]
Kobayashi further states: “[0070] After measuring the distance from the power sourcing equipment 110 to the powered device 310, the control device 153A continuously controls the semiconductor laser 111 for power supply such that the feed light 112 has an intensity obtained by compensating for the attenuation amount.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0070], p. 4; FIG. 5]
Accordingly, Kobayashi discloses every limitation of claim 1 in the claimed arrangement: a communication device; a feed-light transmitter that sends feed light to an opposing communication device; a pulse/reflection-based measurer that determines the attenuation of the path from the own device to the opposing device; and a controller that adjusts the output of the transmitted feed light according to that attenuation. Claim 1 is therefore anticipated.
Claim 2
With respect to claim 2, all limitations of claim 1 are disclosed by Kobayashi as set forth above. Claim 2 further requires that the measurement unit measures the optical loss value
using an optical pulse tester and that the control unit controls the output of the power feeding light to be larger as the optical loss value is larger.
Kobayashi further discloses both additional limitations of claim 2. Its measurer launches a single optical pulse into the feed-light path, separates and detects the returned reflected light, measures the return time, and derives the path distance and corresponding attenuation. Its controller then increases the launched feed-light intensity by an attenuation-dependent compensation amount.
Kobayashi states: “[0061] The power-over-fiber system 1A of the first configuration example described above includes a separator 151A, a photodiode 152A, and the control device 153A. The separator 151A is disposed between the power sourcing equipment 110 and the optical fiber cable 200A and extracts reflected light 112R of the feed light 112 reflected at an end face of the optical fiber cable 200A adjacent to the powered device 310. The photodiode 152A receives the reflected light 112R extracted by the separator 151A. The control device 153A controls the power sourcing equipment 110 on the basis of the detection performed by the photodiode 152A.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0061], p. 3; FIG. 5]
Kobayashi further states: “[0065] The photodiode 152A is disposed to face a direction in which the separator 151A reflects the reflected light 112R, and detects a light intensity of the reflected light 112R incident thereto. A detection signal of the photodiode 152A is input to the control device 153A.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0065], p. 4; FIG. 5]
Kobayashi further states: “[0066] At the time of measurement of a distance from the power sourcing equipment 110 to the powered device 310, the control device 153A outputs the
single-pulse feed light 112 from the semiconductor laser 111 for power supply and measures a time elapsed before the photodiode 152A detects the reflected light 112R of the feed light 112. The control device 153A calculates the distance from the power sourcing equipment 110 to the powered device 310 on the basis of the measured elapsed time.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0066], p. 4; FIG. 5]
The recited combination of a pulse light source, a separator/coupler, a returned-light detector, and a processor that derives path information from returned pulse timing is an optical pulse tester within the ordinary and broad meaning of that term. Kobayashi does not merely estimate a distance from unrelated data; it actively sends a single optical pulse into the same feed-light path and analyzes the returned optical pulse.
Kobayashi also discloses that the feed-light output becomes larger as the optical loss becomes larger because the controlled output equals an original output plus an attenuation-dependent compensation amount.
Kobayashi states: “[0068] The control device 153A includes a memory that stores table data indicating a relationship between an attenuation rate of the feed light 112 and a transmission distance. With reference to the table data, the control device 153A identifies an attenuation rate corresponding to the distance from the power sourcing equipment 110 to the powered device 310 obtained through the measurement.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0068], p. 4; FIG. 5]
Kobayashi further states: “[0069] After obtaining the attenuation rate of the feed light 112, the control device 153A controls the semiconductor laser 111 for power supply to output the
feed light such that the feed light has an intensity equal to the sum of the original output and an amount of attenuation based on the attenuation rate.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0069], p. 4; FIG. 5]
Because the added amount is based on the attenuation rate, an increase in the optical loss produces an increase in the compensation amount and therefore an increase in the controlled feed-light output. Thus, Kobayashi discloses both additional limitations of claim 2, and claim 2 is anticipated.
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).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi in view of Igarashi et al. (WO2022024270A1; English family US20230308189A1), and further in view of Kikuchi et al. (JP2019054423A).
Claim 3
With respect to claim 3, all limitations of claim 1 are taught by Kobayashi as set forth above. For purposes of the prior-art rejection only, and without withdrawing the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), claim 3 is interpreted as requiring a plurality of opposing communication devices connected through a branching unit, respective optical-loss values for the feed-light paths to
those devices, and control of the common feed-light output according to the plurality of measured values.
Kobayashi does not expressly disclose the claimed one-to-many branch topology. Igarashi expressly teaches a tree-structured optical power-feeding network having a common feeding-side unit, a plurality of downstream drop units, trunk and branch fibers, and an OTDR that observes losses associated with the respective downstream drop locations. Kikuchi independently confirms that the downstream entities in a branched optical power-feeding network may be plural communication devices, namely slave units having optical-power receivers and upstream optical transmitters.
Igarashi state: “[0038] The optical power feeding system 1 is used for feeding power to an optical communication system used for communication between an OLT and an ONU. The optical communication system configures a tree structure network having an OLT as a root node, a drop unit that branches an optical signal as an intermediate node, and an ONU as a leaf node. The optical power feeding system 1 feeds power to the drop unit 12.” [Igarashi, ¶ [0038], p. 3; FIG. 1]
Igarashi further state: “[0039] The optical power feeding system 1 includes an optical power feeding unit 10, drop units 12-1, ... , 12-N, branch fibers 13-1, ... , 13-N, and a trunk fiber 14.” [Igarashi, ¶ [0039], p. 3; FIG. 1]
Igarashi further state: “[0041] The drop units 12-1, ... , 12-N are provided on the trunk fiber 14. The branch fibers 13-1, ... , 13-N are connected to the drop units 12 provided on the trunk fiber 14. The drop unit 12 branches an optical signal transmitted from the optical power
feeding unit 10 side and outputs branched optical signals to the connected branch fiber 13 and the trunk fiber 14.” [Igarashi, ¶ [0041], p. 3; FIG. 1]
Kikuchi state: “FIG. 1 schematically illustrates a configuration example of the optical power feeding system according to the first embodiment. The optical power feeding system includes a master unit 200 and two slave units 201-1 and 201-2, which are connected in a star shape via an optical fiber 105 and an optical coupler 106. The two slave units 201-1 and 201-2 each include a feeding optical receiver 109, a current-voltage conversion circuit 205, and an upstream communication optical transmitter 111.” [Kikuchi, p. 5; FIG. 1]
Accordingly, Kikuchi supplies an express same-field example in which plural opposing communication devices are coupled to one feeding-side communication device through an optical coupler. Igarashi supplies the corresponding tree/drop architecture and the feeding-side optical measurement of the plural branch locations.
Igarashi state: “[0044] The optical power feeding unit 10 includes a power-feed light generating unit 101, an optical fiber measuring unit 102, a first optical multiplexer/demultiplexer 103, and a charging rate determining unit 106.” [Igarashi, ¶ [0044], p. 3; FIG. 1]
Igarashi further state: “[0045] The power-feed light generating unit 101 outputs power-feed light to the first optical multiplexer/demultiplexer 103. The optical fiber measuring unit 102 outputs measurement light to the first optical multiplexer/demultiplexer 103 and measures a branch ratio of the drop unit 12. As an example of the optical fiber measuring unit 102, there
is an optical time domain reflectometer (OTDR).” [Igarashi, US 2023/0308189 A1, ¶ [0045], p. 3; FIG. 1]
Igarashi further state: “[0047] The OTDR outputs measurement light (an optical pulse signal) and measures backward scattered light that is scattered inside the optical fiber and returns to the OTDR. The OTDR calculates an intensity of the measured light from the intensity of the backward scattered light. The OTDR calculates a distance between a point at which scattering occurs and the OTDR on the basis of a difference between a time at which the measurement light is output and a time at which the backward scattered light is detected.” [Igarashi, ¶ [0047], p. 3; FIG. 2]
Igarashi further state: “[0048] Light output from the OTDR and propagating through the trunk fiber 14 has a loss caused by the trunk fiber 14 in accordance with the distance. Further, the light is branched at the drop unit 12, and some of the light is caused to enter the branch fiber 13. At this branching point, the OTDR observes a loss. The loss caused by the drop unit 12 appears in a part B in which the intensity decreases in parallel with the vertical axis in the graph shown in FIG. 2. ... [T]he optical fiber measuring unit 102 can obtain the length of the trunk fiber 14 and a point at which the drop unit 12 is located ... [and] can obtain a branch ratio of the drop unit 12 by measuring an amount of attenuation of the intensity appearing in B.” [Igarashi, ¶ [0048], p. 3; FIG. 2]
Igarashi further state: “[0089] Although a case in which there is one drop unit 12 has been described above, the charging rates of power storage units 126 of a plurality of drop units 12 can be determined at once. In this case, the optical power feeding unit 10 performs
classification of whether the charging rate is equal to or lower than a predetermined value for each drop unit 12 using a result of measurement of the transmittance T1.” [Igarashi, US 2023/0308189 A1, ¶ [0089], p. 7; FIG. 8]
Kobayashi states: “[0069] After obtaining the attenuation rate of the feed light 112, the control device 153A controls the semiconductor laser 111 for power supply to output the feed light such that the feed light has an intensity equal to the sum of the original output and an amount of attenuation based on the attenuation rate.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0069], p. 4; FIG. 5]
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Kobayashi with Igarashi and Kikuchi because all three references concern optical power delivery to remote optical-network equipment. Kobayashi teaches the path-loss compensation law. Igarashi teaches that a practical optical power-feeding network may contain multiple measured branches. Kikuchi expressly places multiple slave communication units behind an optical coupler. Applying Kobayashi’s compensation law to those measured one-to-many paths would have used each reference for its established function and would have retained the operating principle of each system.
A common source serving multiple branch paths must account for the plurality of path-loss measurements if it is to provide adequate received optical power to every downstream device. Using only one arbitrarily selected loss would risk underpowering a higher-loss path. Using the available set of measured losses permits the controller to establish an output that reflects the actual branch-network conditions. The modification therefore would have predictably yielded
the claimed control of a common feed-light output according to the plurality of measured optical-loss values.
Accordingly, claim 3 would have been obvious.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi in view of Igarashi et al. and Kikuchi et al., further in view of Kim et al. (US20100008667A1), and further in view of Hirota et al. (JP2015001925A).
Claim 4
With respect to claim 4, all limitations of claim 3 are taught by Kobayashi, Igarashi, and Kikuchi as set forth above. Claim 4 further requires (i) maximum feed-light output when at least one of the measured optical-loss values is equal to or greater than a predetermined value, and (ii) when all measured optical-loss values are below that value, an output equal to a preset output plus the maximum of the measured optical-loss values.
For purposes of the prior-art rejection only, and without withdrawing the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), the recited predetermined value is interpreted as the loss-compensation value at which the calculated compensated output reaches the available maximum source output.
Igarashi teaches collective measurement of the plural drop conditions and expressly recognizes that greater optical loss reduces the optical power incident at the corresponding remote unit. Kim then teaches an OLT having a minimum-to-maximum allowable output range, an optimum output calculated as a baseline output plus an attenuation-related worst-path offset, and
saturation of the calculated result at the transmitter maximum. Kobayashi independently teaches the claimed baseline-plus-attenuation form. Hirota, in the optical power-feeding field, expressly teaches threshold-based feedback and an upper-limit source-output state.
Igarashi state: “[0060] In a case in which a loss of light between the optical power feeding unit 10 and the drop unit 12 is large, the intensity of the power-feed light incident in the drop unit 12 becomes low, and the ‘predetermined time’ required until the charging of the power storage unit 126 is completed becomes long. In other words, the optical power feeding unit 10 calculates ‘a predetermined time’ required until charging of the power storage unit 126 is completed from a branch ratio of the first optical splitter 121 of each drop unit 12, a loss in the trunk fiber 14, an output intensity of the power-feed light, and the like.” [Igarashi, ¶ [0060], p. 5; FIGS. 1-4]
Igarashi further state: “[0061] In a case in which the optical power feeding system 1 is provided with a plurality of drop units 12, the transmittance T1 of all the drop units 12 is measured, and the output of the power-feed light is continued until the transmittance T1 of all the drop units 12 becomes the lower limit.” [Igarashi, ¶ [0061], p. 5; FIG. 4]
Kim state: “[0031] In operation of 102, an allowable range of optical power of the OLT in the current PON is measured. That is, the power ranging mode is performed. The allowable range of the optical power of the OLT is defined from a minimum power level at which power is in an on-state on the current PON, i.e., data can be transmitted to ONU(s) that can transmit and receive an optical signal to a maximum power level that the OLT optical transmitter can generate.” [Kim, ¶ [0031], p. 2; FIGS. 1-2]
Kim further state: “[0032] After the allowable optical power range of the OLT is measured, in operation of 103, an optimum optical power level is selected within the measured allowable range of the optical power ... . [T]he optimum optical power level is set as Popt (dBm)=P(i)+Poffset ... . Poffset is an offset power level for one or more than one ONU additionally connected to the PON after the optical power level of the OLT is set, and Poffset (dBm) is defined as ‘Lmax × 0.2 dBm’ as shown in FIG. 4. The reference label ‘Lmax’ is a maximum allowable distance ... between one ONU located at the shortest distance from the OLT and another ONU located at the longest distance from the OLT.” [Kim, ¶ [0032], pp. 2-3; FIG. 4]
Kim further state: “[0033] When the optimum power level is set based on calculation, if the Popt value calculated as above is greater than the maximum power level P(k) at the OLT, the optimum power level is preferably determined as being Popt=P(k).” [Kim, ¶ [0033], p. 3]
Kobayashi states: “[0069] After obtaining the attenuation rate of the feed light 112, the control device 153A controls the semiconductor laser 111 for power supply to output the feed light such that the feed light has an intensity equal to the sum of the original output and an amount of attenuation based on the attenuation rate.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0069], p. 4; FIG. 5]
Hirota state: “The power feeding controller 25 holds in advance an upper limit threshold Pup that is an upper limit of an allowable range of fluctuations in the received light intensity Pr and a predetermined threshold Pdwn that is a lower limit. The power supply controller 25 reduces the transmitted light intensity Ps when the received light intensity Pr exceeds the upper threshold Pup, and increases the transmitted light intensity Ps when the received light
intensity Pr falls below the predetermined threshold Pdwn.” [Hirota, p. 3]
Hirota further state: “When the value of the received light intensity Pr decreases below the predetermined threshold value Pdwn in the normal state S1, or when the optical signal cannot be received, the power feeding device 2 transitions to the enhanced transient state S2 ... . The enhancement transient state S2 is a state in which the transmitted light intensity Ps ... is increased ... . The increase amount of the transmitted light intensity Ps may be a predetermined constant amount, but is variably adjusted according to the amount of shortage (=Pdwn−Pr) ... . ... When the value of the received light intensity Pr is reduced below the predetermined threshold value Pdwn ... and the transmitted light intensity Ps is already increased to the upper limit value in performance, the power feeding device 2 does not transition to the enhanced transient state S2.” [Hirota, p. 5; FIG. 3]
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to apply Kim’s baseline-plus-offset calculation and maximum-output cap to the plurality of measured paths taught by Igarashi and to the plural communication-device topology confirmed by Kikuchi. In a common-source branch network, the highest-loss path is the governing path: an output based on a lower-loss path can leave the highest-loss device underpowered, whereas compensation based on the maximum measured loss satisfies the worst path and necessarily covers every path having less loss. Selecting the maximum measured loss is therefore the predictable measured-loss implementation of Kim’s Lmax worst-path offset.
Hirota further demonstrates that, in an optical power-feeding controller, a measured feedback quantity is compared with a predetermined threshold, the source output is increased in
proportion to the shortage, and further increase ceases when the source has reached its upper-limit output. Because received optical intensity decreases as path loss increases, expressing Hirota’s received-intensity threshold in the equivalent measured-loss domain would have been a routine change of control variable, not a change in the control principle. Kobayashi and Igarashi already provide that measured-loss domain.
The two claim-4 operating regions follow directly from these combined teachings. Let the preset/original source output be the baseline taught by Kobayashi and Kim, let Lmax be the maximum measured path-loss value supplied by Igarashi, and let Pcap be Kim’s maximum transmitter output. While the baseline plus Lmax remains below Pcap, the controller uses the baseline-plus-loss value. When at least one measured loss reaches the value that exhausts the remaining source-output headroom, the maximum measured loss necessarily reaches that threshold and Kim’s express cap sets the source to Pcap. Hirota confirms the same threshold/upper-limit behavior in an optical power-feeding feedback loop. The combination therefore teaches both alternatives of claim 4 without changing the basic operating principle of any reference.
Accordingly, claim 4 would have been obvious.
Claims 5, 6 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi in view of Suyama (JP2021019441A; English family US20220360343A1).
The relied-upon pre-critical-date publications are JP2021068964A and JP2021019441A. The corresponding English-language U.S. family publications are cited below for paragraph-level quotation and figure citations.
Claim 5
Kobayashi teaches the first communication device, second communication device, feed-light transmitter, feed-light reception structure, measurement of feed-path attenuation, and control of the feed-light output according to the measured attenuation, as set forth for claim 1. Kobayashi also teaches that the second device receives the feed light and converts it into electrical power.
Kobayashi states: “[0039] The power-over-fiber system 1 includes a first data communication device 100 including a power sourcing equipment 110, an optical fiber cable 200, and a second data communication device 300 including a powered device 310.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0039], p. 2; FIG. 2]
Kobayashi further states: “[0043] The powered device 310 includes a photoelectric conversion element 311. The second data communication device 300 includes, in addition to the powered device 310, a transmitter 320, a receiver 330, and a data processor 340.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0043], p. 2; FIG. 2]
Kobayashi further states: “[0053] The light input/output part 350 guides the feed light 112 to the powered device 310, guides the signal light 125 to the receiver 330, and guides the signal light 325 to the core 210.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0053], p. 3; FIG. 3]
Kobayashi further states: “[0046] The photoelectric conversion element 311 converts the feed light 112 transmitted through the optical fiber cable 200 into electric power. The electric power obtained by the photoelectric conversion element 311 through the conversion is used as driving electric power for the transmitter 320, the receiver 330, and the data processor 340 and as other driving electric power needed in the second data communication device 300. The second data communication device 300 may be capable of outputting, for an external device, the electric power obtained by the photoelectric conversion element 311 through the conversion.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0046], p. 2; FIG. 2]
Kobayashi does not expressly require storage of the converted electrical power. Suyama, in the same power-over-fiber field, expressly adds a battery or capacitor that stores the power produced from the feed light.
Suyama states: “[0057] The photoelectric conversion element 311 of the powered device 310 converts the feed light 112 transmitted through the optical fiber cable 200 into electric power of a magnitude corresponding to the output level of the feed light 112.” [Suyama, ¶ [0057], p. 3; FIG. 5]
Suyama further states: “[0058] As shown in FIG. 5, the second data communication device 300 includes the power storage 370 that stores the electric power into which the photoelectric conversion element 311 of the powered device 310 has energy-converted the feed light 112.
As the power storage 370, a storage battery or a capacitor can be used, for example.” [Suyama, ¶ [0058], p. 3; FIG. 5]
Suyama further states: “[0059] The electric power stored in the power storage 370 is used as driving power for the transmitter 320, the receiver 330, the data processing unit 340, external devices, and the like.” [Suyama, ¶ [0059], p. 3; FIG. 5]
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to add Suyama’s power storage to Kobayashi’s second communication device because both systems convert remotely delivered feed light into electrical power for operating the receiving-side communication circuitry. Directly consuming the instantaneous converted power, as in Kobayashi, makes operation more sensitive to short-term optical fluctuations, interruption, changing load, and the timing of measurement or control operations. Suyama expressly teaches that storing the converted power in a battery or capacitor supplies the transmitter, receiver, processor, and external loads and permits feed-light output to be managed without either excess or deficiency.
The modification would have used a known storage element for its established purpose: buffering converted optical energy, maintaining remote-device operation, and decoupling instantaneous optical input from instantaneous electrical load. The addition would not alter Kobayashi’s loss measurement or attenuation-compensation control; it would simply place Suyama’s battery or capacitor after Kobayashi’s already-disclosed photoelectric converter. The resulting system includes every limitation of claim 5, and claim 5 would have been obvious.
Claim 6
With respect to claim 6, all limitations of claim 5 are taught by Kobayashi in view of Suyama as set forth above. Claim 6 further requires a power-storage-state-information transmission unit at the second device, a corresponding acquisition unit at the first device, transmission and acquisition of first power-storage-state information, and control of the feed-light output according to that acquired information.
However, within analogous art, Suyama further expressly teaches the receiving-side acquisition of information indicating the amount or remaining charge stored in the power storage, optical transmission of that information to the feeding-side device, feeding-side acquisition of the information, and control of the feed-light output according to that information.
Suyama states: “[0060] The second data communication device 300 includes a power-receiving-side controller 360 that obtains electric power amount information on the electric power amount stored in the power storage 370 for the process of switching the output level of the feed light 112.” [Suyama, ¶ [0060], p. 3; FIG. 5]
Suyama further states: “[0061] The first data communication device 100 includes a power-supplying-side controller 150 that performs the process of switching the output level of the feed light 112 in accordance with the electric power amount information obtained by the power-receiving-side controller 360.” [Suyama, ¶ [0061], p. 3; FIG. 5]
Suyama further states: “[0063] The power-receiving-side controller 360 obtains a voltage value of the power storage 370 corresponding to the remaining battery charge amount of the
power storage 370 as the electric power amount information.” [Suyama, ¶ [0063], p. 3; FIG. 5]
The electric power amount information, including a voltage corresponding to remaining battery charge, is the claimed first power storage state information. Suyama further identifies the transmitter and signal light used to send the information and the feeding-side controller that receives and uses it.
Suyama states: “[0068] The power-receiving-side controller 360 obtains the electric power amount information on the electric power amount stored in the power storage 370 and performs a process of notifying the obtained electric power amount information to the power-supplying-side controller 150. The power-supplying-side controller 150 determines whether to lower or raise the output level of the feed light 112 on the basis of the notified electric power amount information and performs the process of switching the output level of the feed light 112.” [Suyama, ¶ [0068], p. 4; FIG. 5]
Suyama further states: “[0069] More specifically, the power-receiving-side controller 360 outputs the obtained electric power amount information from the transmitter 320 as the signal light 325 to notify the electric power amount information to the power-supplying-side controller 150.” [Suyama, ¶ [0069], p. 4; FIG. 5]
Suyama further states: “[0047] The photodiode 131 of the receiver 130 demodulates the signal light 325 transmitted through the optical fiber cable 200 to an electric signal, and outputs the electric signal.” [Suyama, ¶ [0047], p. 3; FIG. 2]
Suyama further states: “[0070] On the basis of the electric power amount information notified by the power-receiving-side controller 360, the power-supplying-side controller 150 performs the process of lowering the output level of the feed light 112 when the electric power amount information on the electric power amount stored in the power storage 370 is equal to or higher than a predetermined threshold value, the feed light 112 being output by the semiconductor laser 111, and performs the process of raising the output level of the feed light 112 when the electric power amount information on the electric power amount stored in the power storage 370 is lower than the predetermined threshold value, the feed light 112 being output by the semiconductor laser 111.” [Suyama, ¶ [0070], p. 4; FIG. 5]
In the combined system, transmitter 320 and its associated controller constitute the claimed power storage state information transmission unit; receiver 130 and power-supplying-side controller 150 constitute the claimed acquisition unit; and the received battery-state information controls the same feed-light source whose baseline output is already set according to Kobayashi’s measured optical loss.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use both loss information and storage-state information because the two variables address different, complementary physical conditions. Optical loss determines how much launched power is required for a given amount of light to reach the remote device; battery state determines whether the remote device presently requires more charging power, less charging power, or cessation of charging. A loss-only controller may deliver the correct received level but still overcharge a nearly full storage device or under-serve a depleted storage device. Suyama expressly solves that problem by
reporting the storage state and adjusting the source output, while Kobayashi supplies the link-loss baseline. Combining the controls would have predictably produced a two-input feed-light controller: loss compensation establishes the path-dependent baseline and storage-state feedback trims or switches that baseline according to charging need. The combination preserves the operating principles of both references and yields every limitation of claim 6. Claim 6 would therefore have been obvious.
Claim 10
Claim 10 recites the method counterpart of the apparatus and system operations taught by Kobayashi in view of Suyama. Kobayashi expressly teaches the feed-light transmission, reception, pulse/reflection measurement, attenuation determination, source-output control, and photoelectric-conversion operations. Suyama expressly teaches storage of the converted power.
Kobayashi states: “[0045] The semiconductor laser 111 for power supply oscillates with electric power supplied from the power source to output feed light 112.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0045], p. 2; FIG. 2]
Kobayashi further states: “[0051] The feed light 112 and the signal light 125 output from the first data communication device 100 are input to one end 201 of the optical fiber cable 200. The feed light 112 and the signal light 125 propagate through the cladding 220 and the core 210, respectively, and are output from another end 202 of the optical fiber cable 200 to the
second data communication device 300.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0051], p. 3; FIGS. 2-3]
Kobayashi further states: “[0053] The light input/output part 350 guides the feed light 112 to the powered device 310, guides the signal light 125 to the receiver 330, and guides the signal light 325 to the core 210.” [Kobayashi, US 2022/0393514 A1, ¶ [0053], p. 3; FIG. 3]
Kobayashi further states: “[0066] At the time of measurement of a distance from the power sourcing equipment 110 to the powered device 310, the control device 153A outputs the single-pulse feed light 112 from the semiconductor laser 111 for power supply and measures a time elapsed before the photodiode 152A detects the reflected light 112R of the feed light 112. The control device 153A calculates the distance from the power sourcing equipment 110 to the powered device 310 on the basis of the measured elapsed time.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0066], p. 4; FIG. 5]
Kobayashi further states: “[0068] The control device 153A includes a memory that stores table data indicating a relationship between an attenuation rate of the feed light 112 and a transmission distance. With reference to the table data, the control device 153A identifies an attenuation rate corresponding to the distance from the power sourcing equipment 110 to the powered device 310 obtained through the measurement.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0068], p. 4; FIG. 5]
Kobayashi further states: “[0069] After obtaining the attenuation rate of the feed light 112, the control device 153A controls the semiconductor laser 111 for power supply to output the feed light such that the feed light has an intensity equal to the sum of the original output and
an amount of attenuation based on the attenuation rate.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0069], p. 4; FIG. 5]
Kobayashi further states: “[0046] The photoelectric conversion element 311 converts the feed light 112 transmitted through the optical fiber cable 200 into electric power.” [Kobayashi, ¶ [0046], p. 2; FIG. 2]
Suyama states: “[0058] As shown in FIG. 5, the second data communication device 300 includes the power storage 370 that stores the electric power into which the photoelectric conversion element 311 of the powered device 310 has energy-converted the feed light 112. As the power storage 370, a storage battery or a capacitor can be used, for example.” [Suyama, ¶ [0058], p. 3; FIG. 5]
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform these steps for the same reasons set forth for claim 5. The claimed method is the direct operation of the combined physical system: transmit optical power, measure the link attenuation, compensate the source output, receive and convert the optical power at the remote device, and store the converted energy. Adding Suyama’s storage step to Kobayashi’s method would have buffered the converted energy and maintained stable remote operation under changing optical input and load. Expressing those known apparatus functions as method steps does not change their operation or produce an unexpected result.
Accordingly, claim 10 would have been obvious.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi in view of Suyama and further in view of Silvestri et al. (WO2021189106A1; English family US20230120640A1).
The relied-upon pre-critical-date publication for Silvestri is WO 2021/189106 A1, published September 30, 2021. US 2023/0120640 A1 is the corresponding English-language national-stage publication and is quoted for its numbered paragraphs and figures.
Claim 7
With respect to claim 7, all limitations of claim 6 are taught by Kobayashi in view of Suyama as set forth above. Claim 7 further requires the power-storage-state-information transmission unit to transmit the first power-storage-state information superimposed on reflected light of the power-feeding light.
Suyama transmits battery-state information using a separately generated optical signal. Silvestri teaches a lower-power alternative in the same general remote optical-power context: incident optical light is delivered to and powers a remote unit, a passive optical transducer is driven by encoded electrical data, and the information-bearing reflected light is returned through the same fiber to a circulator and photodiode. Silvestri also expressly identifies battery level as transmitted information.
Silvestri state: “[0028] The interrogation unit 6 includes a broadband optical source 10, a circulator 11, a photodiode 12, a processor or control unit 13 and other electronic components.” [Silvestri, ¶ [0028], p. 2; FIG. 2]
Silvestri further state: “[0029] Light generated by the source 10 is coupled into a single mode fiber 5 and delivered to the sensor.” [Silvestri, US 2023/0120640 A1, ¶ [0029], p. 2; FIGS. 2-3]
Silvestri further state: “[0030] At the sensor, the incoming light 4 is split into an appropriate ratio, e.g. 10:90, by an optical coupler 21. The 90% output of the coupler goes to one inexpensive InGaAs photodiode 22, which generates a current and ... generates a suitably high voltage ... for charging a large capacitor ... . The capacitor is used to store energy and power the sensor’s electronics ... . ... This information is Manchester encoded and sent during few milliseconds by applying the corresponding voltage to a passive optical transducer 27. ... Light emitted by the passive optical transducer 27 is carried over the same single mode optical fibre 29, 4, back to the interrogation unit.” [Silvestri, ¶ [0030], p. 2; FIG. 3]
Silvestri further state: “[0031] Returning to FIG. 2, in the interrogation unit, reflected light intensity (proportional to the voltage applied to the passive optical transducer 27 of FIG. 3) is passed through circulator 11 and measured by the photodiode 12, and converted into an electrical signal. This electrical signal contains the 32 transmitted bits, that allow determining the sensor’s identity and the transmitted value.” [Silvestri, ¶ [0031], p. 2; FIGS. 2-3]
Silvestri further state: “[0049] When light comes in from the ‘Light in’ port 61 of gas sensor station about 5% of the light is diverted to an optical transducer, a passive device which converts an electrical signal to an optical signal as explained previously. ... For each gas sensor, an identifier (ID), sensor readings, operation modes, levels of optical power and battery, etc., are encoded and transmitted in 8 Manchester packets. This digital electrical signal is then translated into optical signal by the transducer 58 and transmitted via the
optical fibre back to the RTU to be decoded.” [Silvestri, ¶ [0049], p. 3; FIG. 5]
Silvestri further state: “[0051] The realtime data of each sensor includes: Gas concentrations of CH4, CO, CO2 and O2, Ambient temperature, Ambient barometric pressure, Operation modes, Optical power level, Battery level.” [Silvestri, ¶ [0051], p. 3; FIGS. 4-5]
Silvestri thus expressly teaches reflected-light communication by modulating the intensity of incident optical light and separately identifies battery level as content encoded for return through the disclosed optical-transducer architecture. Even if the battery-level passage is viewed as a later embodiment, Silvestri expressly permits combinations of the disclosed features, and a skilled artisan would have understood that the same Manchester-encoded battery field can drive the passive optical transducer described in paragraphs [0030]-[0031].
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use Silvestri’s passive reflected-light return technique for Suyama’s already-known battery-state information because the remote optical-power device has a limited energy budget. Replacing the active remote optical carrier with modulation of incident feed light reduces remote source power, circuitry, and component count while preserving the same information content and the feeding-side control function. The modification is a predictable substitution of one known optical return technique for another and would have resulted in the first power-storage-state information being carried on reflected power-feeding light.
Accordingly, claim 7 would have been obvious.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi in view of Suyama, further in view of Silvestri et al., further in view of Kikuchi et al., and further in view of Hughes et al. (US7348875B2).
The relied-upon publication for Kikuchi is JP2019054423A, published April 4, 2019. The English translation is cited for page and figure locations. Hughes issued March 25, 2008 and is cited for the known hybrid reflected-carrier/active-transmitter mode-selection principle.
Claim 8
With respect to claim 8, all limitations of claim 7 are taught by Kobayashi, Suyama, and Silvestri as set forth above. Claim 8 further requires an active communication-light transmitter at the second device and a corresponding receiver at the first device; reflected-light transmission of first storage-state information while power-feeding light is received; active communication-light transmission of second storage-state information while power-feeding light is not received; and control of feed-light output according to information acquired through either path.
Suyama expressly supplies the active optical battery-state path and the battery-responsive source controller. The remote transmitter 320 sends the stored-energy information as signal light 325; receiver 130 receives that signal light; and controller 150 raises or lowers the feed-light output according to the information.
Suyama states: “[0046] The modulator 322 of the transmitter 320 modulates laser light 323 output by the semiconductor laser 321 to signal light 325 on the basis of the transmission
data 324, and outputs the signal light 325.” [Suyama, ¶ [0046], p. 3; FIG. 2]
Suyama further states: “[0047] The photodiode 131 of the receiver 130 demodulates the signal light 325 transmitted through the optical fiber cable 200 to an electric signal, and outputs the electric signal.” [Suyama, ¶ [0047], p. 3; FIG. 2]
Suyama further states: “[0069] More specifically, the power-receiving-side controller 360 outputs the obtained electric power amount information from the transmitter 320 as the signal light 325 to notify the electric power amount information to the power-supplying-side controller 150.” [Suyama, ¶ [0069], p. 4; FIG. 5]
Suyama further states: “[0070] On the basis of the electric power amount information notified by the power-receiving-side controller 360, the power-supplying-side controller 150 performs the process of lowering the output level of the feed light 112 when the electric power amount information ... is equal to or higher than a predetermined threshold value ... and performs the process of raising the output level of the feed light 112 when the electric power amount information ... is lower than the predetermined threshold value.” [Suyama, ¶ [0070], p. 4; FIG. 5]
Silvestri supplies the reflected-light battery-information path while incident optical power is available, as explained for claim 7. Kikuchi supplies a same-field optical-power-feeding system in which a remote slave unit is battery powered and sends an active optical uplink while optical power feeding is off.
Kikuchi state: “Therefore, in one example, the slave unit transmits a command for confirming the operation of the slave unit to the master unit when the optical power supply from the
master unit is off. This operation confirmation command is an example of an uplink control command. The master unit turns on the optical power supply after receiving the operation confirmation command.” [Kikuchi, p. 3]
Kikuchi further state: “The slave units 201-1 and 201-2 may include a primary battery or a secondary battery in order to operate the operation check command generation unit 204, or may receive power from the outside. The operation confirmation command is written in, for example, a communication packet used for uplink communication, and reaches the parent device 200 via the uplink communication optical transmitter 111 and the optical fiber 105. When the reception signal analysis unit 202 in the base unit detects an operation confirmation command in the output signal of the optical receiver for uplink communication 103, it transmits an optical power supply on signal to the optical power supply control unit 203.” [Kikuchi, pp. 5-6; FIGS. 1-2]
Kikuchi further state: “In response to the instruction, the slave unit 201 turns on its own power supply and starts transmitting an operation confirmation command to the base unit 200. The slave unit 201 operates with the electric power supplied from the battery 220.” [Kikuchi, p. 10; FIGS. 7-8]
Kikuchi separately state: “The operation state information includes, for example, the self-operation check result of the slave unit 201, the amount of received light of the slave unit 201, the loss of the feed light from the master unit 200 to the slave unit 201, the output voltage of the current-voltage conversion circuit 205, the read value of the AD conversion
circuit 221, the storage amount of the battery 220, and the like.” [Kikuchi, p. 10; FIGS. 7-8]
Kikuchi therefore expressly teaches the same-field no-feed operating condition, the battery-powered remote optical transmitter, the master-side optical receiver, and battery-storage information available as uplink status content. Suyama supplies the specific use of that battery-state content to control the feed-light source.
Hughes supplies an especially direct teaching of the hybrid-mode selection rule that was missing from the earlier combination: a device includes both a backscatter modulator and a battery-powered active transmitter, and the active transmitter communicates when the carrier needed for backscatter is unavailable.
Hughes state in the Abstract: “A radio frequency beacon device for use with a backscatter interrogator includes a processor, a receiver coupled to the processor, a backscatter modulator coupled to the processor; and an active transmitter coupled to the processor, the active transmitter being configured to transmit an RF signal, in response to a trigger signal, regardless of whether the interrogator is providing a carrier wave for backscatter modulation by the backscatter modulator.” [Hughes, Abstract; FIG. 1]
Hughes further state in claim 9: “The radio frequency beacon device of claim 6 wherein the beacon device is configured to transmit the attention signal when the beacon device is not concurrently receiving a carrier wave from the interrogator.” [Hughes, claim 9, cols. 9-10]
Hughes further state in claim 22: “A radio frequency communications device, for use with a backscatter interrogator, comprising: a battery; a semi-passive radio frequency device, coupled to the battery ... including: a processor; a receiver coupled to the processor; and a
backscatter modulator coupled to the processor; and an active transmitter coupled to the processor and to the battery, the active transmitter being configured to transmit, in response to a trigger signal, regardless of whether the interrogator is providing a carrier wave for backscatter modulation by the backscatter modulator.” [Hughes, claim 22, cols. 11-12; FIG. 1]
Although Hughes uses radio-frequency rather than optical carriers, it is reasonably pertinent to the precise engineering problem addressed by claim 8: a reflected-carrier transmitter cannot operate when the interrogating carrier is absent, so a stored-energy active transmitter is used during carrier absence. That carrier-availability problem and the hybrid solution do not depend on whether the modulated carrier is RF or optical. Silvestri supplies the optical reflected-carrier implementation, Suyama supplies the active optical battery-state transmitter and the source-control use of that information, and Kikuchi supplies the same-field optical-power-off operating condition.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use the reflected-light path while power-feeding light is present because the incident light is then available as both the energy source and the return carrier, reducing remote transmitter power. When the feed light is stopped, the reflected carrier necessarily disappears. Hughes expressly teaches using the active, battery-powered transmitter when the carrier is not concurrently received, and Kikuchi confirms that this mode is practical in an optical power-feeding system by sending a battery-powered optical uplink while optical feeding is off. The result would have been the claimed conditional selection of reflected first storage-state information during feed-light reception and active optical second storage-state information during absence of feed light.
The transmitted content also would have been the claimed storage-state information rather than merely a generic attention command. Suyama expressly transmits stored-energy information through the active optical path; Silvestri expressly returns battery level through the reflected optical path; and Kikuchi expressly identifies battery storage amount as available status information. Feeding either representation of the remote storage condition into Suyama’s disclosed controller would have predictably caused the controller to raise, lower, stop, or resume feed-light output according to the information received through the corresponding acquisition unit.
Accordingly, claim 8 would have been obvious.
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