Appeal 2007-0953 Application 10/607,466 and demultiplexing, or that such functionality in planar lightwave circuits is well known in the art. We can say, however, that no such prior art exists on this record. For the foregoing reasons, we will not sustain the Examiner’s rejection of independent claim 10. Likewise, we will not sustain claims 11- 13 which depend therefrom. CONCLUSION OF LAW Appellants have established that the Examiner erred in finding that McGreer discloses a wavelength division multiplexer/demultiplexer where (1) the input waveguide for inputting a multiplexed optical signal to the grating is respectively disposed on both sides of the substrate centering on the AWG, and (2) the output waveguides for outputting single-channel demultiplexed optical signals are respectively disposed on both sides of the substrate centering on the AWG as claimed. DECISION We have not sustained the Examiner's rejection with respect to all claims on appeal. Therefore, the Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 10-13 is reversed. REVERSED tdl/ce CHA & REITER, LLC 210 ROUTE 4 EAST STE 103 PARAMUS, NJ 07652 9Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Last modified: September 9, 2013