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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 13, 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fontaine et al. (PDM-DSPK Silicon Receiver with Integrated Monitor and Minimum of Controls) in view of Chen et al. (20050238367) and further in view of Melati et al. (Integrated All-Optical MIMO Demultiplexer for 8-Channel MDM-WDM Transmission, 2017 Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics Pacific Rim 2017)
With regards to claims 1, 13, Fontaine teaches an optical multi-input-multi output (MIMO) receiver configured to perform optical MIMO polarization demultiplexing (Fig 1.), the optical MIMO receiver comprising: an input port configured to receive input light (Fig 1.); a polarization-dependent splitting element configured to split the input light into a pair of optical transmission paths based on a polarization of the input light (II. Design col. 2), a 2x2 optical coupler configured to combine the pair of optical transmission paths (Fig. 1). Fontaine fails to teach an optical attenuator configured to apply a relative attenuation between the pair of optical transmission paths, Chen et al. teaches optical attenuator configured to apply a relative attenuation between the pair of optical transmission paths, (see fig. 6, 363, with a first {363, fig. 6) and second optical attenuator {365, fig. 6) that are placed with a phase shifter {361, fig. 6) along the optical line). it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Fontaine with Chen for the purpose of providing a first and a second optical attenuators, such as the ones of Chen. The motivation being to selectively adjust or attenuate power. Fontaine in view of Chen fails to teach a controller configured to control the relative attenuation that is applied by the optical attenuator. Melati teaches a controller configured to control the relative attenuation that is applied by the optical attenuator. (Fig 1(b) Controller). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a controller to control relative attenuation.
With regards to claim 3, Chen and Melati teach the optical MIMO receiver of claim 1, comprising a phase shifting element configured to apply a relative phase shift between the pair of optical transmission paths (Chen par 48 and claim 8) wherein the controller is configured to control the relative phase shift (Melati Fig. 1 controller controls the phase) However though Melati does not specifically teach controlling relative phase, it would be obvious as a matter of design to control relative phase shift since it would only require programming to the controller to achieve this result.
With regards to claim 14, Chen teaches the method of claim 13, comprising: applying a relative phase shift between the pair of optical transmission paths. (Chen par 48, see claim 3)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18-20 are allowed.
With regards to claim 18, the prior art of record fails to teach an optical multi-input-multi-output (MIMO) receiver configured to perform optical MIMO polarization demultiplexing, the optical MIMO receiver comprising, …. and wherein the third stage comprises: a third pair of optical transmission paths configured to receive light from the second pair of optical transmission paths, and a second optical attenuator configured to apply a second relative attenuation between the third pair of optical transmission paths; and a controller configured to control the first relative attenuation, the first relative phase shift, and the second relative attenuation.
Claims 2, 4-12, 15-17 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH N VANDERPUYE whose telephone number is (571)272-3078. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 6:30am-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.
/KENNETH N VANDERPUYE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2634
Prosecution Insights