The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 21 November 2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show labels as described in the specification. Drawings must label the structural elements in the Figures and not merely assign numbers to the elements. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 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 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.
Claim(s) 1 and 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Komiya US 10,405,073 B2 in view of Hendriksen US 6,330,379 B1.Regarding claim 1, Komiya disclosed An optical switch comprising (An optical switch module includes: N first input ports to which a signal is input; M first output ports from which a signal is output; an M×N switch to include N second input ports and M second output ports, and to set a path between the second input ports and the second output ports, the second output ports coupling with the first output ports, respectively; a test-signal input port to which a test-signal is capable of being externally input; an expansion port from which one of the test-signal and the signal from any one of the first input ports is output; and an optical switch to selectively connect at least one of the test-signal and the signal from any one of the first input ports to at least one of the expansion port and any one of the second input ports, wherein both N and M are natural numbers., Abstract): at least one switch function unit wherein a plurality of optical switches is connected in cascade; Komiya disclosed 2x2 optical switches and not 1x2 optical switches (Fig. 13 elements 22(1) to element 22(n)). Hendriksen disclosed a cascaded 1x2 optical switch architecture (The invention pertains to a (cascaded) optical switch at least comprising one input path, a number of output paths, Abstract, Fig. 1 and Fig. 2) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the Hendriksen switch in the Komiya invention because the Hendriksen switch would function in the Komiya invention and adding/subtracting the number of ports is merely design intent. an optical coupler function unit (WDM signals received from M paths (deg 1 to deg M) are input to M 1×N optical couplers (represented as SPLs in FIG. 1) 13.sub.1 to 13.sub.m (collectively referred to below as the optical couplers 13 at appropriate points, Col.1 lines 35-43 and Fig. 13 elements 13(1) 1XN SPL to 13(m)) that an optical signal output from the switch function unit is input is connected in cascade; and at least one of a first monitoring output port (e.g. Fig 13 39B (PD)) and a second monitoring output port (e.g. Fig 13 19B (PD)), wherein the first monitoring output port is a port that transmits a first monitoring optical signal output from the switch function unit to an outside , and the second monitoring output port is a port that transmits, to an outside,. Komiya does not express the couplers (Fig. 13 1xN SPL) as a two-input/two-output optical coupler. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the number of branches on a coupler would not change radically the change the design intent of exchanging signals from one side to the next. Meaning if more or less branches are needed on either side of the coupler it would be obvious to add/subtract the number of branches needed to facilitate communication.
Regarding claim 2,the modified invention of Komiya and Hendriksen teaches further comprising a photoelectric conversion element PD (19A, 19B, 39A, 39B (Fig. 13 Komiya) that converts an optical signal transmitted from at least one of the first monitoring output port and the second monitoring output port into an electric signal.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.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 David C Payne whose telephone number is (571)272-3024. The examiner can normally be reached M-W Teleworking 6:30a -2:30p.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DAVID C PAYNE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2635
Prosecution Insights