Appeal 2007-0490
Application 10/095,716
1 and 3, plot (b) depicts the gain characteristics of the type 4 amplifier. These
2 figures show the EDF filter has a negative tilt gain profile and when
3 combined with a Raman amplifier, the combined amplifier provides a flat
4 gain profile over a wide 80.0 nm bandwidth.
5
6 ANALYSIS RELATING TO § 102 REJECTION OVER MASUDA
7 Initially we note that Appellants’ arguments group claims 1 through 4,
8 8, 9, and 13 together. In accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii) we
9 select claim 4 as representative of the group. Appellants’ claim 4 recites a
10 step “applying at least a portion of the output of at least one pump laser to
11 both the erbium doped fiber and the Raman amplifier, such that a gain slope
12 of said Raman amplifier and gain slope of said erbium doped fiber combine
13 to produce a desired gain profile.” Thus, claim 4 clearly recites that one
14 pump laser provides light to two fibers (the Raman amplifier is a fiber
15 segment). However, we do not find that the limitation “a portion of the
16 output of at least one pump laser” limits the scope of the claim to a
17 configuration where only one pump laser is used to provide pumping power
18 to the fiber segments. Similarly, we do not find that the scope of the claim is
19 limited to the desired gain being produced by the output of just one pumping
20 laser. Accordingly, we find that claim 4 is limited to a device where one
21 pumping laser is used to provide power to two amplifier segments, but do
22 not find that it precludes use of additional pumping power sources.
23 Thus, we find for the Examiner as we find that claim 4 is not limited
24 to an amplifier which uses only one pump. Further, we find ample evidence
25 to support the Examiner’s determination that Masuda teaches one pump
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013