Appeal 2007-0680
Application 10/655,901
1 of light from one pumping source into two unequal portions and counter-
2 pumping one segment with one portion of the beam and co-pumping another
3 fiber with the other portion of the beam.
4
5 ANALYSIS
6 Independent claim 1 recites “a first pump . . . to generate and transmit
7 a first light beam, a first splitter configured to receive the first light beam,
8 split the first light beam into a first portion of the first light beam and a
9 second portion of the first light beam, transfer the first portion of the first
10 light beam onto the first fiber span to backward propagate over the first fiber
11 span, and transfer the second portion of the first light beam onto the second
12 fiber span to forward propagate over the second fiber span.” Claim 1 also
13 recites a second pump and splitter which transfers light to backward
14 propagate the second fiber and forward propagate a third fiber. We find no
15 limitations that recite that the first, second or third fiber is simultaneously
16 forward and reverse propagated. We are not persuaded by Appellant’s
17 argument that the recitations of beam transmission by pumps of claim 1 must
18 be interpreted as simultaneous pumping, as the specification does not
19 contemplate one pump source to operate while the other is off. Claim 1
20 recites a system “comprising” various elements; this does not limit the claim
21 to a system containing only the recited elements, rather it is open ended and
22 encompasses any system that includes the recited elements. Further, before
23 the Office, claims are to be given their broadest reasonable interpretation.
24 We consider the Examiner’s interpretation to be reasonable and Appellant’s
25 asserted reading of simultaneous forward and backward pumping of a fiber
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013