DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The Information Disclosure Statement filed on 07/22/2025 has been considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to 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 later invention.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al; (EP1137213 A2) in view of Dave (US 2003/0228150).
Regarding claim 1, Suzuki discloses an apparatus for receiving data ;(optical transmitting and receiving apparatus with plurality of pulse sources 46-1, 46-2, 46-3 and 46-4 and demultiplexer 56 for receiving the input signal from the plurality of pulse sources, see figure 4) wherein the apparatus is configured to: receive a multiplexed data stream over an optical link,(the multiplexer 50 multiplexes the output light from the optical delay devices 48-1 through 48-4 in the wavelength domain, see paragraph 44 and figure 4) the multiplexed data stream comprising: a first data stream sent from a first transmitter,(pulse light sources 46-1 through 46-4 to generate pulse light of 10 Gb/s, see paragraph 44 and figure 4) the first data stream having a minimum time interval between condition changes;( each delay time of the optical delay devices 14-1 through 14-4 is set so that the output light from the optical delay device 14-1 enters a first time slot, see paragraph 32 and figure 4) a second data stream sent from a second transmitter, the second data stream having the same minimum time interval between condition changes ;(the output light from the optical delay device 14-2 enters a second time slot, see paragraph 32 and figure 4).
However, Suzuki does not explicitly disclose wherein the second data stream is delayed by a fraction of the minimum time interval relative to the first data stream.
In a related field of endeavor, Dave discloses wherein the second data stream is delayed by a fraction of the minimum time interval relative to the first data stream ;( the input signal 1001, which is identical to output signal 903 and four copies of which are successively delayed one from the other by half of a pulse width, see paragraph 29 and 36 and figure 10).
Thus, it would be obvious for one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to combine the successively delayed copies of input signal of Dave with Suzuki to provide gap clock between the plurality of input signals and the motivation is to provide demultiplexing of the time multiplexed signals.
Regarding claim 2, Suzuki discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the minimum time interval comprises a unit interval ;( the output light from the optical delay device 14-1 enters a first time slot, the output light from the optical delay device 14-2 enters a second time slot, the output light from the optical delay device 14-3 enters a third time slot, and the output light from the optical delay device 14-4 enters a fourth time slot in the four time slots, see paragraph 32).
Regarding claim 3, Suzuki discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the multiplexed data stream comprises: a third data stream sent from a third transmitter having the same minimum time interval between condition changes, (the output light from the optical delay device 14-3 enters a third time slot, and the output light from the optical delay device 14-4 enters a fourth time slot in the four time slots, see paragraph 32).
However, Suzuki does not expclitly disclose wherein the third data stream is delayed by a second fraction of the minimum time interval relative to the first data stream, wherein the second fraction is a multiple of the fraction of the minimum time interval.
In a related field of endeavor, Dave discloses wherein the third data stream is delayed by a second fraction of the minimum time interval relative to the first data stream, wherein the second fraction is a multiple of the fraction of the minimum time interval ;( the input signal 1001, which is identical to output signal 903 and four copies of which are successively delayed one from the other by half of a pulse width, see paragraph 29 and 36 and figure 10). Motivation same as claim 1.
Regarding claim 4, Suzuki discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the apparatus is configured to: receive from the transmitter or from another device, an indication of the delay of each data stream ;( pulse light sources 46-1 through 46-4 to generate pulse light of 10 Gb/s, which are temporally adjusted in the time domain by the optical delay devices 48-1 through 48-4 respectively and applied to a multiplexer 50, see paragraph 44).
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al; (EP1137213 A2) in view of Dave (US 2003/0228150) and further in view of Lopiccolo (US 4546466).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Suzuki and Dave does not explicitly disclose the apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the apparatus is configured to: decode the data received over the optical link using a shift register and the indication of the delay of each data stream.
In a related field of endeavor, Lopiccolo discloses the apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the apparatus is configured to: decode the data received over the optical link ;(optical detectors 86, 88 and 90 for receiving the optical signal, see figure 2) using a shift register and the indication of the delay of each data stream; (the shift register for a fixed time delay, defined as the time interval between the pulsed turn-on of the particular light source 34, 35, 36 and the time at which the secondary pulse associated with the first signal bit location of the mask may be expected to appear at the output of the associated threshold detector, see column 7, lines 60-66 and figure 2).
Thus, it would be obvious for one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to combine the shift register of Lopiccolo with Suzuki and Dave to provide data storage before the decoding the received data from the plurality of pulse sources and the motivation to decode the received data bits.
Regarding claim 6, Suzuki discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the apparatus comprises: from the multiplexed data stream; from the multiplexed data stream ;(pulse light sources 46-1 through 46-4 to generate pulse light of 10 Gb/s, which are temporally adjusted in the time domain by the optical delay devices 48-1 through 48-4 respectively and applied to a multiplexer 50, see paragraph 44).
However, the combination of Suzuki and Dave does not explicitly disclose a first decoder configured to decode the first data stream a second decoder configured to decode the second data stream.
In a related field of endeavor, Lopiccolo discloses a first decoder configured to decode the first data stream a second decoder configured to decode the second data stream ;(optical detectors 86 88 and 90 coupled with control unit 50 to provide signal bits to be decoded, column 8, line 5 and figure 2).
Thus, it would be obvious for one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to combine the decoder of Lopiccolo with Suzuki and Dave to provide decoding of the received data bits and the motivation is to provide recovery of received data signal.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al; (EP1137213 A2) in view of Dave (US 2003/0228150), further in view of Lopiccolo (US 4546466) and further in view of JP (JP 2008533874 A).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Suzuki, Dave and Lopiccolo does not explicitly disclose the apparatus according to claim 6, wherein the first decoder comprises a first rising edge detector and a first falling edge detector and the second decoder comprises a second rising edge detector and a second falling edge detector.
Ina related field of endeavor, JP discloses the apparatus according to claim 6, wherein the first decoder comprises a first rising edge detector and a first falling edge detector and the second decoder comprises a second rising edge detector and a second falling edge detector ;(output signal 160 input to the threshold detector 170 uses the threshold to determine when the rising or falling edge of the ramp exceeds a predetermined threshold, see and figure 1).
Thus, it would be obvious for one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to combine the rising and filling and edge detector of JP with Suzuki, Dave and Lopiccolo to provide to synchronize the operation of the receiver to the input signal and the motivation is to recovery and synchronization of received data signal.
Claims 9-12 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al; (EP1137213 A2) in view of Dave (US 2003/0228150).
Regarding claim 9, Suzuki discloses a method of receiving data ;(optical transmitting and receiving apparatus with plurality of pulse sources 46-1, 46-2, 46-3 and 46-4 and demultiplexer 56 for receiving the input signal from the plurality of pulse sources, see figure 4) comprising: receiving a multiplexed data stream over an optical link, (the multiplexer 50 multiplexes the output light from the optical delay devices 48-1 through 48-4 in the wavelength domain, see paragraph 44 and figure 4) the multiplexed data stream comprising: a first data stream from a first transmitter ,(pulse light sources 46-1 through 46-4 to generate pulse light of 10 Gb/s, see paragraph 44 and figure 4) having a minimum time interval between condition changes;( each delay time of the optical delay devices 14-1 through 14-4 is set so that the output light from the optical delay device 14-1 enters a first time slot, see paragraph 32 and figure 4) a second data stream from a second transmitter having the same minimum time interval between condition changes ;(the output light from the optical delay device 14-2 enters a second time slot, see paragraph 32 and figure 4).
However, Suzuki does not explicitly disclose wherein the second data stream is delayed by a fraction of the minimum time interval relative to the first data stream.
In a related field of endeavor, Dave discloses wherein the second data stream is delayed by a fraction of the minimum time interval relative to the first data stream ;( the input signal 1001, which is identical to output signal 903 and four copies of which are successively delayed one from the other by half of a pulse width, see paragraph 29 and 36 and figure 10).
Thus, it would be obvious for one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to combine the successively delayed copies of input signal of Dave with Suzuki to provide gap clock between the plurality of input signals and the motivation is to provide demultiplexing of the time multiplexed signals.
Regarding claim 10, Suzuki discloses the method according to claim 9, wherein the minimum time interval comprises a unit interval ;( the output light from the optical delay device 14-1 enters a first time slot, the output light from the optical delay device 14-2 enters a second time slot, the output light from the optical delay device 14-3 enters a third time slot, and the output light from the optical delay device 14-4 enters a fourth time slot in the four time slots, see paragraph 32).
Regarding claim 11, Suzuki discloses the method according to claim 9, wherein the multiplexed data stream comprises: a third data stream from a third transmitter having the same minimum time interval between condition changes, (the output light from the optical delay device 14-3 enters a third time slot, and the output light from the optical delay device 14-4 enters a fourth time slot in the four time slots, see paragraph 32).
However, Suzuki does not explicitly disclose wherein the third data stream is delayed by a second fraction of the minimum time interval relative to the first data stream, wherein the second fraction is a multiple of the fraction of the minimum time interval.
In a related field of endeavor, Dave discloses wherein the third data stream is delayed by a second fraction of the minimum time interval relative to the first data stream, wherein the second fraction is a multiple of the fraction of the minimum time interval;( the input signal 1001, which is identical to output signal 903 and four copies of which are successively delayed one from the other by half of a pulse width, see paragraph 29 and 36 and figure 10). Motivation same as claim 9.
Regarding claim 12, Suzuki discloses the method according to claim 9, wherein the method comprises: receiving, from the transmitter, an indication of the delay of each data stream ;( pulse light sources 46-1 through 46-4 to generate pulse light of 10 Gb/s, which are temporally adjusted in the time domain by the optical delay devices 48-1 through 48-4 respectively and applied to a multiplexer 50, see paragraph 44).
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al; (EP1137213 A2) in view of Dave (US 2003/0228150) and further in view of Lopiccolo (US 4546466).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Suzuki and Dave does not explicitly disclose the method according to claim 12, wherein the method comprises: decoding the data received over the optical link using a shift register and the indication of the delay of each data stream.
In a related field of endeavor, Lopiccolo discloses the method according to claim 12, wherein the method comprises: decoding the data received over the optical link ;(optical detectors 86, 88 and 90 for receiving the optical signal, see figure 2) using a shift register and the indication of the delay of each data stream ; (the shift register for a fixed time delay, defined as the time interval between the pulsed turn-on of the particular light source 34, 35, 36 and the time at which the secondary pulse associated with the first signal bit location of the mask may be expected to appear at the output of the associated threshold detector, see column 7, lines 60-66 and figure 2).
Thus, it would be obvious for one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to combine the shift register of Lopiccolo with Suzuki and Dave to provide data storage before the decoding the received data from the plurality of pulse sources and the motivation to decode the received data bits.
Regarding claim 14, Suzuki discloses the method according to claim 9, wherein the method comprises: from the multiplexed data stream, from the multiplexed data stream ;(pulse light sources 46-1 through 46-4 to generate pulse light of 10 Gb/s, which are temporally adjusted in the time domain by the optical delay devices 48-1 through 48-4 respectively and applied to a multiplexer 50, see paragraph 44).
However, the combination of Suzuki and Dave does not explicitly disclose decoding the first data stream using a first decoder; decoding the second data stream using a second decoder.
In a related field of endeavor, Lopiccolo discloses decoding the first data stream using a first decoder; decoding the second data stream using a second decoder ;(optical detectors 86 88 and 90 coupled with control unit 50 to provide signal bits to be decoded, column 8, line 5 and figure 2).
Thus, it would be obvious for one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to combine the decoder of Lopiccolo with Suzuki and Dave to provide decoding of the received data bits and the motivation is to provide recovery of received data signal.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al; (EP1137213 A2) in view of Dave (US 2003/0228150), further in view of Lopiccolo (US 4546466) and further in view of JP (JP 2008533874 A).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Suzuki, Dave and Lopiccolo does not explicitly disclose the method according to claim 14, wherein the first decoder comprises a first rising edge detector and a first falling edge detector and the second decoder comprises a second rising edge detector and a second falling edge detector.
In a related field of endeavor, JP discloses the method according to claim 14, wherein the first decoder comprises a first rising edge detector and a first falling edge detector and the second decoder comprises a second rising edge detector and a second falling edge detector ;(output signal 160 input to the threshold detector 170 uses the threshold to determine when the rising or falling edge of the ramp exceeds a predetermined threshold, see and figure 1).
Thus, it would be obvious for one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to combine the rising and filling and edge detector of JP with Suzuki, Dave and Lopiccolo to provide to synchronize the operation of the receiver to the input signal and the motivation is to recovery and synchronization of received data signal.
Claims 17-20 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al; (EP1137213 A2) in view of Dave (US 2003/0228150).
Regarding claim 17, Suzuki discloses an apparatus for transmitting data, wherein the apparatus is configured to: send, over an optical link and from a first transmitter and to a receiver;(optical transmitting and receiving apparatus with plurality of pulse sources 46-1, 46-2, 46-3 and 46-4 and demultiplexer 56 for receiving the input signal from the plurality of pulse sources, see figure 4) a first data stream having a minimum time interval between condition changes;( each delay time of the optical delay devices 14-1 through 14-4 is set so that the output light from the optical delay device 14-1 enters a first time slot, see paragraph 32 and figure 4) send, over the optical link from a second transmitter to the receiver, (pulse light sources 46-1 through 46-4 to generate pulse light of 10 Gb/s, see paragraph 44 and figure 4) a second data stream having the same minimum time interval between condition changes ;(the output light from the optical delay device 14-2 enters a second time slot, see paragraph 32 and figure 4).
However, Suzuki does not explicitly disclose wherein the second data stream is delayed by a fraction of the minimum time interval relative to the first data stream.
In a related field of endeavor, Dave discloses wherein the second data stream is delayed by a fraction of the minimum time interval relative to the first data stream ;( the input signal 1001, which is identical to output signal 903 and four copies of which are successively delayed one from the other by half of a pulse width, see paragraph 29 and 36 and figure 10).
Thus, it would be obvious for one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to combine the successively delayed copies of input signal of Dave with Suzuki to provide gap clock between the plurality of input signals and the motivation is to provide demultiplexing of the time multiplexed signals.
Regarding claim 18, Suzuki discloses the apparatus according to claim 17, wherein the minimum time interval comprises a unit interval ;( the output light from the optical delay device 14-1 enters a first time slot, the output light from the optical delay device 14-2 enters a second time slot, the output light from the optical delay device 14-3 enters a third time slot, and the output light from the optical delay device 14-4 enters a fourth time slot in the four time slots, see paragraph 32).
Regarding claim 19, Suzuki discloses the apparatus according to claim 17, wherein the apparatus is configured to: send, over the optical link from a third transmitter to the receiver, a third data stream having the same minimum time interval between condition changes, (the output light from the optical delay device 14-3 enters a third time slot, and the output light from the optical delay device 14-4 enters a fourth time slot in the four time slots, see paragraph 32).
However, Suzuki does not explicitly disclose wherein the third data stream is delayed by a second fraction of the minimum time interval relative to the first data stream, wherein the second fraction is a multiple of the fraction of the minimum time interval.
In a related field of endeavor, Dave discloses wherein the third data stream is delayed by a second fraction of the minimum time interval relative to the first data stream, wherein the second fraction is a multiple of the fraction of the minimum time interval. ;( the input signal 1001, which is identical to output signal 903 and four copies of which are successively delayed one from the other by half of a pulse width, see paragraph 29 and 36 and figure 10). Motivation same as claim 17.
Regarding claim 20, Suzuki discloses the apparatus according to claim 17, wherein the apparatus is configured to: send, to the receiver, an indication of the delay of each data stream ;( pulse light sources 46-1 through 46-4 to generate pulse light of 10 Gb/s, which are temporally adjusted in the time domain by the optical delay devices 48-1 through 48-4 respectively and applied to a multiplexer 50, see paragraph 44).
Allowable Subject Matter
3. Claims 8 and 16 are 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.
Conclusion
4. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure as reproduced below.
a. Bosch (US 10038511) discloses apparatus for controlling delay over a data path in a device for transporting Ethernet packets over an optical transport network, see figure 2.
b. Sarashina et al; (US 8014675) discloses a passive optical network communication system transmits an optical time-division multiplexed signal from a central office through a passive optical coupler to a number of subscribers, and all operations can be synchronized with a clock signal which is generated at the central office and recovered from the optical time-division multiplexed signal by the subscribers' equipment, see figure 2.
c. Kershteyn (US 2008/0170587) discloses the multiplexer (10) has a clock module (8) creating a one fifth ratio duty cycle clock (CLK4) from a reference clock (12), and five phase shifters (18-22) phase shifting the one fifth ratio duty cycle clock by successive time periods to create five clocks (CLK5-CLK9), see figure 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMRITBIR K SANDHU whose telephone number is (571)270-1894. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kenneth Vanderpuye can be reached at 571-272-3078. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AMRITBIR K SANDHU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2634
Prosecution Insights