Appeal No. 2005-1942 Page 6
Application No. 10/173,938
the invention of claim 1. From the disclosure of Mukasa (col. 3,
lines 5-44), quoted in part on page 7 of the brief, we find that
Mukasa discloses changing from the conventional idea of having a
dispersion compensating optical fiber (DCF) in a module
exclusively for dispersion compensation, to an optical fiber
which functions both as a DCF and as a part of an optical
transmission line. We note that both appellants (brief, page 6)
and the examiner (answer, page 7) find that in Mukasa, part of
the DCF is removed from a module and used in part as a
transmission line. We additionally note that appellants (brief,
page 9) and the examiner (answer, page 7) find that Mukasa
discloses that use of a bridge fiber (intermediate mode field
optical fiber) connected between optical fibers. As noted by
appellants (id.), Mukasa discloses (col. 5, lines 15-29) a
positive dispersion optical fiber and a DCF.
From our review of Mukasa, we find, as did appellants, a
disclosure of a bridging fiber connecting a positive dispersion
value optical fiber and a DCF. We further find that Mukasa
discloses (col. 3, line 7) that it was conventional to have a DCF
made into a moduled optical fiber. In addition, we find that
Mukasa discloses (col. 8, line 60 though col. 9, line 9) that
where an intermediate mode field optical fiber (bridge fiber, see
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007