DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 27 and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Each of claims 27 and 37 recites that the channel selection switch comprises a mirroring circuit. However, the disclosed and claimed mirroring is a form of copying or duplication, not a form of switching (i.e., selecting between). Attempting to replace the switch limitation with mirroring is a form of failing to further limit the switch limitation established in the parent claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 21-26 and 30-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Feng (US Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0119240).
Regarding claim 21, Feng discloses an apparatus, comprising: a receiver, configured to receive a first signal and output the first signal to a channel selection switch, wherein the first signal comprises a first-rate signal and a second-rate signal (fig. 5 element 100 and paragraphs 0038-0040); the channel selection switch, configured to selectively connect the receiver to at least one of a first amplification and data recovery channel or a second amplification and data recovery channel, and transmit the first signal to the at least one of the first amplification and data recovery channel or the second amplification and data recovery channel (fig. 5 element 101 and paragraphs 0038-0040); the first amplification and data recovery channel, configured to perform amplification and data recovery on the first signal transmitted to the first amplification and data recovery channel (fig. 5, upper branch and paragraphs 0038-0040); and the second amplification and data recovery channel, configured to perform amplification and data recovery on the first signal transmitted to the second amplification and data recovery channel (fig. 5, lower branch and paragraphs 0038-0040).
Regarding claim 22, Feng discloses the apparatus according to claim 21, wherein the receiver is configured to sequentially receive the first-rate signal and the second-rate signal that arrive at the receiver at different moments (paragraph 0040, TDM mode).
Regarding claim 23, Feng discloses the apparatus according to claim 21, wherein: the first amplification and data recovery channel is configured to perform limiting amplification and data recovery on the first-rate signal, and the second amplification and data recovery channel is configured to perform linear amplification and data recovery on the second-rate signal (fig. 5, elements LA and CDR and paragraph 0038).
Regarding claim 24, Feng discloses the apparatus according to claim 21, wherein the channel selection switch comprises a controller and a switch, the controller is configured to receive first control signaling, and control, based on the first control signaling, the switch to connect the receiver to the first amplification and data recovery channel or the second amplification and data recovery channel (fig. 5, element 101 switch symbol and paragraph 0040, where the MAC protocol signal is the control signal, and it inherently has to be received by some kind of switch controller not shown, to translate the MAC formatted signal to a binary switch activation ON/OFF or A/B voltage signal or the like); and when the switch connects the receiver to the first amplification and data recovery channel, the switch is configured to transmit the first-rate signal to the first amplification and data recovery channel, or when the switch connects the receiver to the second amplification and data recovery channel, the switch is configured to transmit the second-rate signal to the second amplification and data recovery channel (fig. 5 element 101 and paragraphs 0038-0040).
Regarding claim 25, Feng discloses the apparatus according to claim 24, wherein the switch comprises a single-pole double-throw switch or a transistor (fig. 5 element 101 single-pole double-throw switch symbol).
Regarding claim 26, Feng discloses the apparatus according to claim 24, wherein the first control signaling is from a medium access control (MAC) (paragraph 0040).
Regarding claim 30, Feng discloses the apparatus according to claim 21, wherein the apparatus comprises M amplification and data recovery channels, rates of the first signal comprise N rates, the M amplification and data recovery channels correspond to the N rates, and each of the N rates corresponds to one of the M amplification and data recovery channels, and the channel selection switch is configured to connect the receiver to an amplification and data recovery channel of the M amplification and data recovery channels corresponding to a rate of the first signal, wherein M and N are integers greater than or equal to 2 (fig. 5 and paragraphs 0038-0040).
Regarding claim 31, Feng discloses an apparatus, comprising: an optical signal receiver and converter, configured to: receive a first optical signal, convert the first optical signal into a first electrical signal, and output the first electrical signal to a channel selection switch, wherein the first optical signal comprises a first-rate optical signal and a second-rate optical signal, the first-rate optical signal corresponds to a first-rate electrical signal, and the second-rate optical signal corresponds to a second-rate electrical signal (fig. 5 element 100 and paragraphs 0038-0040); the channel selection switch, configured to: selectively connect the optical signal receiver and converter to at least one of a first amplification and data recovery channel or a second amplification and data recovery channel; and transmit the first electrical signal to the at least one of the first amplification and data recovery channel or the second amplification and data recovery channel (fig. 5 element 101 and paragraphs 0038-0040); the first amplification and data recovery channel, configured to perform amplification and data recovery on the first electrical signal transmitted to the first amplification and data recovery channel (fig. 5, upper branch and paragraphs 0038-0040); and the second amplification and data recovery channel, configured to perform amplification and data recovery on the first electrical signal transmitted to the second amplification and data recovery channel (fig. 5, lower branch and paragraphs 0038-0040).
Regarding claim 32, Feng discloses the apparatus according to claim 31, wherein the optical signal receiver and converter is configured to: receive the first-rate optical signal and the second-rate optical signal that arrive at different moments, convert the first-rate optical signal and the second-rate optical signal into the first-rate electrical signal and the second-rate electrical signal, and separately output the first-rate electrical signal and the second-rate electrical signal to the channel selection switch at different moments (paragraph 0040, TDM mode).
Regarding claim 33, Feng discloses the apparatus according to claim 31, wherein: the first amplification and data recovery channel is configured to perform limiting amplification and data recovery on the first-rate electrical signal; and the second amplification and data recovery channel is configured to perform linear amplification and data recovery on the second-rate electrical signal (fig. 5, elements LA and CDR and paragraph 0038).
Regarding claim 34, Feng discloses the apparatus according to claim 31, wherein the channel selection switch comprises a controller and a switch; the controller is configured to receive first control signaling, and control, based on the first control signaling, the switch to connect the optical signal receiver and converter to the first amplification and data recovery channel or the second amplification and data recovery channel (fig. 5, element 101 switch symbol and paragraph 0040, where the MAC protocol signal is the control signal, and it inherently has to be received by some kind of switch controller not shown, to translate the MAC formatted signal to a binary switch activation ON/OFF or A/B voltage signal or the like); and wherein: when the switch connects the optical signal receiver and converter to the first amplification and data recovery channel, the switch is configured to transmit the first-rate electrical signal to the first amplification and data recovery channel, or when the switch connects the optical signal receiver and converter to the second amplification and data recovery channel, the switch is configured to transmit the second-rate electrical signal to the second amplification and data recovery channel (fig. 5 element 101 and paragraphs 0038-0040).
Regarding claim 35, Feng discloses the apparatus according to claim 34, wherein the switch comprises a single-pole double-throw switch or a transistor (fig. 5 element 101 single-pole double-throw switch symbol).
Regarding claim 36, Feng discloses the apparatus according to claim 34, wherein the first control signaling is from a medium access control (MAC) (paragraph 0040).
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 40 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feng (US Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0119240) in view of McCaul et al. (“McCaul”) (US Patent No. 8160457).
Regarding claim 40, Feng discloses a chip, comprising: at least one processing group, and an optical signal receiving apparatus, wherein the optical signal receiving apparatus is configured to: receive a first signal, and transmit the first signal to the at least one processing group (fig. 5 element 100 and paragraphs 0038-0040, transmitting to processing group of elements 101-124); and wherein the at least one processing group is configured to: receive the first signal, wherein the first signal comprises a first-rate signal and a second-rate signal (fig. 5 element 101 receiving the signal from 100 and paragraphs 0038-0040); transmit the first signal to at least one of a first amplification and data recovery channel or a second amplification and data recovery channel (fig. 5 element 101 upper and lower outputs); perform amplification and data recovery on the first signal when the first signal is transmitted to the first amplification and data recovery channel (fig. 5, upper branch and paragraphs 0038-0040); and perform amplification and data recovery on the first signal when the first signal is transmitted to the second amplification and data recovery channel (fig. 5, lower branch and paragraphs 0038-0040). Feng does disclose a chip and does not disclose the processing group as a single processor. However, the difference between Feng and the claim is merely one-piece construction as known in the art. The claimed difference of making integral is prima facie obvious because the result is merely one-piece construction, which is a matter of obvious engineering choice, that does not add anything further that would be contrary to the understandings and expectations of the art. McCaul shows an example of a Feng type arrangement as an integrated circuit, which reads on “chip” and on single processor (fig. 4 and claim 8). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to realize the Feng fig. 5 arrangement as a single processor and integrated circuit, i.e., chip, since this only amounts to one-piece construction that does not add anything further that would be contrary to the understandings and expectations of the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 28, 29, 38 and 39 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Related multi-rate optical receivers - US Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0293283, 2011/0222866, 2009/0190931, 2007/0160371.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN M CORS whose telephone number is (571)272-3028. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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.
/NATHAN M CORS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2634
Prosecution Insights