Appeal 2007-0680
Application 10/655,901
1 The references relied upon by the Examiner are:
2
3 Grubb US 6,344,922 B1 Feb. 5, 2002
4
5 Fidric US 6,603,593 B2 Aug. 5, 2003
6
7 C.R.S. Fludger et al. (Fludger), “Pump to Signal RIN transfer in
8 Raman Fibre Amplifiers” Electronics Letters, Vol. 37, No. 1, Jan. 4, 2001 pp
9 15-17.
10
11 Govind P. Agrawal, Fiber-Optic Communication Systems, 3rd Edition,
12 Wiley Interscience, May 28, 2002, pp. 243-246.
13
14
15 REJECTION AT ISSUE
16 Claims 1, 4, 11, and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 (a) as
17 being unpatentable over Grubb in view of Fludger. The Examiner’s
18 rejection is set forth on pages 3 and 4 of the Answer. Claims 5, 6, 8, 15, 16,
19 and 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
20 Grubb in view of Fludger and Fidric. The Examiner’s rejection is set forth
21 on pages 4 and 5 of the Answer. Claims 7, 9, 10, 17, 19, and 20 stand
22 rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Grubb in view
23 of Fludger and Agrawal. The Examiner’s rejection is set forth on pages 5
24 and 6 of the Answer. Throughout the opinion we make reference to the
25 Brief and Reply Brief (received May 2, 2006 and July 28, 2006
26 respectively), and the Answer (mailed June 26, 2006) for the respective
27 details thereof.
28 ISSUES
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013