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 Objections
Claims 1 and 7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1 and 7 state “…and output optical signal input from the first ports from the second ports”. This should read “from the first ports to the second ports”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2, 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2 states “wherein the one or more downlink signal port include any of…”. This part of the limitation is vague and confusing. It is unclear if “any of” comprises one, several or all of the listed options. If it does include all of the options, it is unclear how the optical communication device would function with all these connections within the same embodiment. This same issue exists for the “uplink signal ports” limitations as well. Furthermore, claim 2 also states “an electrical processor downlink signal port to which an electrical processor that processes an electrical signal is connected”. This part of the limitation is also unclear. How is an electrical processor connecting an output to an optical switch which only functions using optical signals? The downlink signal port is an optical signal port but the claim states that this is an electrical processor downlink signal port. What does this mean?
Claims 5 and 6 state “and the one or mor uplink signal ports are allocated so that the numbers of uplink and downlink signals”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation. There is no prior mention of any number of uplink and downlink signals. Furthermore, what is this number supposed to represent? Is it a number of ports, channels or simultaneously transmitted signals? Claim 5 states that the number of uplink and downlink signals are symmetric and claim 6 states that the number of uplink and downlink signals are asymmetric. What quantities are being compared here within the symmetric and asymmetric limitations and to what extent is the symmetry or asymmetry required?
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Kanai (WO 2021/131001).
Regarding claim 1 and similar claim 7, Kanai teaches an optical communication device (Fig. 2) comprising: one or more light distributors (Fig. 2, light distributor 10a) configured to include a first surface having a plurality of first ports (Fig. 2, first surface on side of 11-1) and a second surface different from the first surface having a plurality of second ports (Fig. 2, second surface on side of 11-2), have one or more subscriber transmission device ports to which n (n is an integer equal to or greater than 1) subscriber transmission devices are connected and one or more downlink signal ports allocated to the plurality of first ports (Fig. 2, subscriber transmission devices 40a connected to respective ports and downlink signal ports shown below 11-1-3), have one or more subscriber reception device ports to which n subscriber reception devices are connected and one or more uplink signal ports allocated to the plurality of second ports (Fig. 2, subscriber reception devices 40b connected to respective ports and uplink signal ports shown coupled to 40c-1 to 40c-3), and output optical signals input from the first ports from the second ports (Page 3, paragraph 6, The optical SW10a is connected to a plurality of transmission lines 50, and outputs an optical signal input from one of the transmission lines 50 to another transmission line 50); and a light distribution controller configured to control a connection relationship between the plurality of first ports and the plurality of second ports of the one or more light distributors (Page 4, paragraph 2).
Regarding claim 2, Kanai teaches the optical communication device according to claim 1, wherein the one or more downlink signal ports include a loopback communication downlink signal port used for loopback communication and the one or more uplink signal ports include a loopback communication uplink signal port used for loopback communication (Fig. 4 shows downlink signal ports 11-1 (coupled to devices 40) output to the top position port 11-2 within 58 which is looped back towards the downlink ports and in the uplink direction a loopback from the bottom 11-1 towards 71 and further outputs towards uplink ports 11-2s coupled to lines 50-2).
Regarding claim 5, Kanai teaches the optical communication device according to claim 1, wherein the number of first ports and the number of second ports are the same as each other, and the one or more subscriber transmission device ports, the one or more downlink signal ports, the one or more subscriber reception device ports, and the one or more uplink signal ports are allocated so that the numbers of uplink and downlink signals are symmetric (Fig. 2 shows the number of ports on the left of 10a and the number of ports on the right of 10a can be symmetric).
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kanai (WO 2021/131001) in view of Tajima (US 2001/0030787).
Regarding claim 4, Kanai teaches the optical communication device according to claim 1.
Kanai doesn’t teach further comprising: one or more multiplexers configured to multiplex optical signals of different wavelengths transmitted from a plurality of subscriber transmission devices; and one or more demultiplexers configured to branch or demultiplex the input optical signals, wherein the one or more multiplexers are connected to the one or more subscriber transmission device ports, and the one or more demultiplexers are connected to the one or more subscriber reception device ports.
Tajima teaches an optical communication device comprising one or more multiplexers configured to multiplex optical signals of different wavelengths transmitted from a plurality of subscriber transmission devices (Fig. 6, multiplexer 52 multiplexing from subscriber transmission devices 51); and one or more demultiplexers configured to branch or demultiplex the input optical signals (Fig. 6, demultiplexer 53 demultiplexing the input signals), wherein the one or more multiplexers are connected to the one or more subscriber transmission device ports (Fig. 6 shows the multiplexer 52 is connected to a subscriber transmission port), and the one or more demultiplexers are connected to the one or more subscriber reception device ports (Fig. 6 shows demultiplexer 53 is connected to a subscriber reception port).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the optical communication device taught by Kanai and incorporate multiplexers and demultiplexers to combine transmitting side wavelengths and demultiplex the multiplexed wavelengths as taught by Tajima in order to help reduce the port usage of the light distributor thereby improving the overhead processing required by the light distributor.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kanai (WO 2021/131001).
Regarding claim 6, Kanai teaches the optical communication device according to claim 1, wherein the number of first ports and the number of second ports are different from each other, and the one or more subscriber transmission device ports, the one or more downlink signal ports, the one or more subscriber reception device ports, and the one or more uplink signal ports are allocated so that the number of uplink and downlink signals are partially asymmetric (Fig. 2; Page 3, paragraph 6 shows right side ports P (P is an integer of 2 or more) and the left side ports Q (Q is an integer of 2 or more) and doesn’t require P = Q).
Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention could have been motivated to try and implement a layout where the number of ports on each side can be selected independently to accommodate the respective connections. Since the number of optical connections required on each side depends on the network configuration, such unequal port layout could avoid allocating unnecessary switch ports where fewer connections are required, thereby reducing unused switching capacity.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable after overcoming the issues mentioned above and 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. See the notice of reference cited (PTO-892).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PRANESH K BARUA whose telephone number is (571)270-1017. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Sat: 11-8pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, David Payne can be reached on 5712723024. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PRANESH K BARUA/Examiner, Art Unit 2635
Prosecution Insights