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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-9 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 7-8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,200,413 B2 in view of Luo et al. (U.S. Patent Application Pub. 2020/0344534 A1).
The following table maps the limitations of claim 1 of instant application to claim 7 of Patent ‘413. Claim 7/1 means claim 7 depends upon claim 1.
Claim 1 of instant application
Claim 7/1 of Patent 12,200,413
A method for implementing in an Optical Network Unit (ONU), comprising:
Claim 1: A method for responding to a registration request, comprising
receiving, by the ONU, a Serial Number (SN) request from an Optical Line Terminal (OLT)
Claim 1: responding to a registration request sent by the OLT
wherein the SN request carries a target Alloc-ID; and
Claim 1: wherein the registration request carries the Alloc-ID
responding to the SN request, by the ONU to the OLT, with a SN of the ONU based on the target Alloc-ID,
Claim 7: in a case that the Alloc-ID in the registration request matches the target Alloc-ID, responding a Serial Number (SN) of the ONU to the OLT
wherein the target Alloc-ID and at least one upstream rates corresponding to the target Alloc-ID are indicated by the OLT to the ONU,
Claim 1: receiving an Alloc-ID configuration table sent by an Optical Line Terminal (OLT), wherein the Alloc-ID configuration table comprises corresponding relationships between Alloc-IDs and upstream rates; parsing the Alloc-ID configuration table to determine a target Alloc-ID from the corresponding relationships between the Alloc-IDs and the upstream rates,
the at least one upstream rates corresponding to the target Alloc-ID comprises the upstream rates supported by the ONU.
Claim 1: wherein the rate corresponding to the target Alloc-ID comprise the rate supported by an Optical Network Unit (ONU)
The difference between claim 1 of instant application and claim 7 of Patent ‘413 is that claim 7 of Patent ‘413 does not teach that the receiving entity of the SN request is the ONU. Luo et al. teaches in FIG. 2 that the messages for registration are exchanged between an OLT and an ONU. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teaching of Luo et al. with claim 7 of Patent ‘413 because claim 7 of Patent ‘413 provides a flexible way of assigning Alloc-ID to representing various upstream line rates of the ONUs. Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use method of claim 1 of Patent ‘413 for assigning Alloc-ID to different upstream line rates in the passive optical network of Luo et al. between the OLT and the ONUs.
The other claims are also taught by Patent ‘413 as indicated in the following table
Claim of instant application
Claim of Patent 12,200,413
2
7
3
7
4
7
5
8
6
8
7
7 (Luo et al. teaches in FIG. 10 that the OLT comprises a processor)
8
7
9
7 (Luo et al. teaches in paragraph [0130] and FIG. 10 computer program stored in memory 1060)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHI K LI whose telephone number is (571)272-3031. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:53 a.m. -3:23 p.m.
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.
skl5 October 2026
/SHI K LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2635
Prosecution Insights