NON-FINAL REJECTION
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 § 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.
Claims 1-5, 7, 9, 12-16, 18, 20 and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Ping Lu et al. (“Distributed optical fiber sensing: Review and perspective”, Applied Physics Reviews 6, 041302 (2019), cited by Applicants, “Ping”).
Regarding Claim 1, Ping teaches a distributed fibre optic sensing (DFOS) method [Abstract], the method including: repeatedly transmitting interrogating optical signals into at least one optical fibre (Fig.4a; “laser”, Section II. C. “Phase-sensitive OTDR”); receiving backscattered optical signals in a distributed manner along the at least one optical fibre (Fig.4a; “PD&DAQ”, Section II. C. “Phase-sensitive OTDR”); combining the backscattered optical signals and an optical reference signal (Fig.4a; “the second coupler”, Section II. C. “Phase-sensitive OTDR”); processing the combined signals to determine at least one polarisation state change of the backscattered optical signals along the at least one optical fibre (Section II. C. “Phase-sensitive OTDR” and D. “Polarization-sensitive OTDR”); determining at least one birefringence event based on the at least one polarisation state change (Section II. D. “Polarization-sensitive OTDR”).
Regarding Claim 2, the DFOS method of claim 1 is taught by Ping.
Ping further teaches the method further including distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) and processing the backscattered optical signals in parallel to determine at least one acoustic and/or weight-induced strain disturbance in addition to the at least one birefringence event (Section II.C, D, & V. “APPLICATIONS OF DISTRIBUTED OPTICAL FIBER SENSING” C. “Distributed vibration and acoustic wave sensing”).
Regarding Claim 3, the DFOS method of claim 2 is taught by Ping.
Ping further teaches the method wherein determining the at least one acoustic disturbance is based on a spatial differentiation of phase difference between the backscattered optical signals and the optical reference signal (Section II. C, “The distributed dynamic strain sensor was demonstrated in Ref. 24, which is based on measuring the relative phase between the Rayleigh scattered light from two neighboring spatial lengths of the fiber in the same pulse”).
Regarding Claim 4, the DFOS method of claim 1 is taught by Ping.
Ping further teaches the method wherein determining the at least one birefringence event is based on the at least one polarisation state change exceeding a predetermined threshold; and wherein the at least one birefringence event is caused by anisotropic stress on the at least one optical fibre (Section II. C, D “an appropriate threshold algorithm to reject the random noise induced by varying polarization”).
Regarding Claim 5, the DFOS method of claim 1 is taught by Ping.
Ping further teaches the method wherein: the at least one optical fibre forms at least part of a fibre-optic communications network; step (e) includes determining at least one network error or outage or flap event in physical layer according to the at least one birefringence event, including determining location of the at least one network error or outage or flap event; and the method includes notifying a control centre of the at least one network error or outage or flap event associated with the at least one birefringence event (Section V. A(v)).
Regarding Claim 7, the DFOS method of claim 1 is taught by Ping.
Ping further teaches the method wherein step (c) includes: dividing the backscattered optical signals into a first polarisation channel and a second polarisation channel, orthogonal to the first polarisation channel; dividing the optical reference signal into a third polarisation channel, parallel to the first polarisation channel, and a fourth polarisation channel, parallel to the second polarisation channel; combining the first polarisation channel of the backscattered optical signals and the third polarisation channel of the optical reference signals; and/or combining the second polarisation channel of the backscattered optical signals and the fourth polarisation channel of the optical reference signals (Section II. C&D, Fig. 4a (With the first and second coupler, circulator, PBS, two PDs, backscattered signal and reference signal will be inherently divided into two orthogonal polarizations, then combined in each of orthogonal polarization, and received by each of PDs)).
Regarding Claim 9, the DFOS method of claim 1 is taught by Ping.
Ping further teaches the method wherein determining the at least one polarisation state change is based on determination of at least one of instantaneous magnitude and instantaneous phase change over time (Section I, “... temperature and strain can be detected by variations in amplitude, frequency, polarization, or phase of the backscattered sensing light.”, Section III.D, “the amplitude and phase of the backscattered light are measured using a vector network analyzer”).
Regarding Claim 12, Ping teaches a distributed fibre optic sensing (DFOS) system (Fig. 4), the system including: an optical signal transmitter arrangement (Fig.4a; “laser”) configured to repeatedly transmit interrogating optical signals into at least one optical fibre (Fig.4a; “laser”, Section II. C. “Phase-sensitive OTDR”); an optical signal receiver arrangement (Fig.4a; “PD&DAQ”) configured to: receive backscattered optical signals in a distributed manner along the at least one optical fibre (Fig.4a; “PD&DAQ”, Section II. C. “Phase-sensitive OTDR”); wherein the optical signal receiver arrangement includes: at least one optical combiner (Fig.4a; “the second coupler”) configured to combine the backscattered optical signals and an optical reference signal (Fig.4a; “the second coupler”, Section II. C. “Phase-sensitive OTDR”); and at least one photodetector (Fig.4a; “PD&DAQ”) configured to provide electrical signals based on the combined optical signals (Fig.4a; “PD&DAQ”, Section II. C. “Phase-sensitive OTDR”); and a processing system (Fig.4a; “DAQ”) configured to: process the electrical signals to determine at least one polarisation state change of the backscattered optical signals along the at least one optical fibre (Section II. D. “Polarization-sensitive OTDR”); and determine at least one birefringence event based on the at least one polarisation state change (Section II. D. “Polarization-sensitive OTDR”).
Regarding Claim 13, the DFOS system of claim 12 is taught by Ping.
Ping further teaches the system further including a distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) capability, the processing system being further configured to process the backscattered optical signals in parallel to determine at least one acoustic and/or weight-induced strain disturbance in addition to the at least one birefringence event (Section II.C, D, & V. “APPLICATIONS OF DISTRIBUTED OPTICAL FIBER SENSING” C. “Distributed vibration and acoustic wave sensing”).
Regarding Claim 14, the DFOS system of claim 13 is taught by Ping.
Ping further teaches the system wherein determining at least one acoustic disturbance is based on a spatial differentiation of phase difference between the backscattered optical signals and the optical reference signal across the optical fibre space domain (Section II. C, “The distributed dynamic strain sensor was demonstrated in Ref. 24, which is based on measuring the relative phase between the Rayleigh scattered light from two neighboring spatial lengths of the fiber in the same pulse”).
Regarding Claim 15, the DFOS system of claim 14 is taught by Ping.
Ping further teaches the system wherein determining the at least one birefringence event is based on the at least one polarisation state change exceeding a predetermined threshold; and wherein the at least one birefringence event is caused by anisotropic stress on the at least one optical fibre (Section II. C, D “an appropriate threshold algorithm to reject the random noise induced by varying polarization”).
Regarding Claim 16, the DFOS system of claim 12 is taught by Ping.
Ping further teaches the system wherein: the at least one optical fibre forms at least part of a fibre-optic communications network; and the processing system is further configured to: determine at least one network error or outage or flap event in physical layer according to the at least one birefringence event, including determining location of the at least one network error or outage or flap event; and notify a control centre of the at least one network error or outage or flap event associated with the at least one birefringence event (Section V. A(v)).
Regarding Claim 18, the DFOS system of claim 12 is taught by Ping.
Ping further teaches the system further including: a first optical polariser configured to divide the backscattered optical signals into a first polarisation channel and a second polarisation channel, orthogonal to the first polarisation channel; and a second optical polariser configured to divide the optical reference signal into a third polarisation channel, parallel to the first polarisation channel, and a fourth polarisation channel, parallel to the second polarisation channel; wherein the at least one optical combiner includes at least one of: a first optical combiner configured to combine the first polarisation channel of the backscattered optical signals and the third polarisation channel of the optical reference signal; and a second optical combiner configured to combine the second polarisation channel of the backscattered optical signals and the fourth polarisation channel of the optical reference signals (Section II. C&D, Fig. 4a (With the first and second coupler, circulator, PBS, two PDs, backscattered signal and reference signal will be inherently divided into two orthogonal polarizations, then combined in each of orthogonal polarization, and received by each of PDs)).
Regarding Claim 20, the DFOS system of claim 12 is taught by Ping.
Ping further teaches the system wherein determining the at least one polarisation state change is based on determination of at least one of instantaneous magnitude and instantaneous phase change over time (Section I, “... temperature and strain can be detected by variations in amplitude, frequency, polarization, or phase of the backscattered sensing light.”, Section III.D, “the amplitude and phase of the backscattered light are measured using a vector network analyzer”).
Regarding Claim 24, the DFOS method of claim 4 is taught by Ping.
Ping further teaches the method further comprising: determining a location of the at least one birefringence event; and/or determining a location of the physical handling of the at least one optical fibre (Section V. A(v)).
Regarding Claim 25, the DFOS method of claim 24 is taught by Ping.
Ping further teaches the method wherein: notifying the control centre of the at least one birefringence event and/or physical handling of the at least one optical fiber includes notifying the control center of the location of the at least one birefringence event and/or the location of the physical handling of the at least one optical fibre associated with the at least one birefringence event (Section V. A(v)).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 22-23, 28 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ping in view of Murphy et al. (US 7,142,737 B1, cited by applicants, “Murphy”).
Regarding Claim 22, the DFOS method of claim 4 is taught by Ping.
Ping does not explicitly teach wherein the anisotropic stress on the at least one optical fibre is caused by physical handling of the at least one optical fibre, including at least one of moving, pulling, bending, twisting of the at least one optical fibre.
However, Morphy teaches detection of movement of a single mode optical fiber wherein the anisotropic stress on the at least one optical fibre is caused by physical handling of the at least one optical fibre, including at least one of moving, pulling, bending, twisting of the at least one optical fibre (col. 4, line 40-57: moving).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ping’s system with the teaching of Morphy since this is a known technique to detect intrusion by detecting movement of a fiber.
Regarding Claim 23, the DFOS method of claim 22 is taught by Ping in view of Morphy.
Ping further teaches the method comprising notifying a control centre of the at least one birefringence event and/or the physical handling of the at least one optical fibre associated with the at least one birefringence event (Section V. A(v)).
Regarding Claim 28, the DFOS method of claim 22 is taught by Ping in view of Morphy.
Ping further teaches the method further including: determining liability of the at least one network error or outage or flap event in the physical layer, wherein determining the liability includes processing non-distributed-fibre-optic-sensing (non- DFOS) data, and wherein processing the non-DFOS data including correlating the non-DFOS data with DFOS data derived from the backscattered optical signals based on time and/or location information (Section V. A(v)).
Regarding Claim 31, the DFOS method of claim 28 is taught by Ping in view of Morphy.
Ping further teaches the method wherein: the non-DFOS data includes (1) visual information captured by one or more one or more visual media capturing devices/systems and/or (2) log data recorded by the control centre in relation to physical handling of the at least one optical fibre (Section V.B, Fig. 20 {thermal image (Non-DFOS) & red-line for 20 mins (DFOS) are compared and correlated for external environment variation measurement}; Fig. 19, Section V.B, the measured distributed fibre sensor (DFOS) data is verified by data from 'installed termal couples' (Non-DFOS) for approvement of measurement accuracy; Fig. 17, Section V.B, strain is measured by distributed optics fibre sensing (DFOS data) before, during, and after a thunderstorm in the region (NonDFOS data)).
Conclusion
The following prior arts made of record and not relied upon, are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Xu et al. (US 2021/0351558 A1) teaches a tunable narrow-linewidth photo-generated microwave source based on polarization control includes a high-reflectivity fiber grating, a high-gain fiber, a low-reflectivity polarization-maintaining fiber grating, a stress adjusting device, a single-mode semiconductor pump laser, an optical wavelength division multiplexer, a polarization beam splitter, a polarization controller, an optical coupler, and a photoelectric detector. Birefringence distribution in the low-reflectivity polarization-maintaining fiber grating is controlled by adjusting a stress magnitude of the stress adjusting device to the low-reflectivity polarization fiber grating, thereby controlling a laser frequency working in different polarization modes in a resonant cavity, and a tunable narrow-linewidth photo-generated microwave source is generated by a beat-frequency technology using a dual-wavelength narrow-linewidth laser with variable frequency intervals [Abstract].
Zadok et al. (US 2014/0083197 A1) teaches methods and devices for distributed sensing of a measurable parameter employing stimulated Brillouin scattering in an optical fiber. A frequency-modulated or phase-modulated light wave is transmitted into the optical fiber. A scattered light wave in the optical fiber is monitored for sensing a measurable parameter. In some embodiments, the calculating step may include calculating a distance of a sensed location along the optical fiber using the monitored time of arrival [Abstract].
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUMAN NATH whose telephone number is (571)270-1443. The examiner can normally be reached on M to F 9:00 am to 5:00 pm.
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, JOHN BREENE can be reached on 571-272-4107. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SUMAN K NATH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights