Ex Parte Maciocco et al

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Apr 30, 2010

10377580 (B.P.A.I. Apr. 30, 2010)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________

Ex parte CHRISTIAN MACIOCCO and SHLOMO OVADIA
____________

Appeal 2009-003466
Application 10/377,580
Technology Center 2600
____________

Decided: April 30, 2010
____________

Before JOHN A. JEFFERY, KENNETH W. HAIRSTON, and CARL W.
WHITEHEAD, JR., Administrative Patent Judges.

WHITEHEAD, JR., Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
Appeal 2009-003466
Application 10/377,580

2
Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the Examiner’s
rejection of claims 1-56. App. Br. 2-3. We have jurisdiction under 35
U.S.C. § 6(b) (2002). We reverse.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellants invented a system, method and/or machine readable
medium providing instructions for framing information to be transmitted
over a photonic burst switch (PBS) network. The invention includes a PBS
burst frame wherein the burst frame includes a PBS burst header that is
common to both the PBS control bursts and the PBS data bursts1

Claim 1, which further illustrates the invention, follows:
1. A system for use in a wavelength-division multiplexed
(WDM) photonic burst switched (PBS) network, the system
comprising:
a burst framer to format information in a PBS burst frame to be
transmitted over the PBS network, the PBS burst frame to include a
PBS burst header common to PBS control bursts and
PBS data bursts, the PBS burst header having fields to indicate
whether: the PBS burst frame is a PBS control burst;
the PBS control burst is transmitted on a wavelength different from
that of an associated PBS data burst; and
a label, for use in a generalized multi-protocol label swapping
(GMPLS)-based system, has been established for the PBS burst
frame.

The Rejection

1 See App. Br. 3.
Appeal 2009-003466
Application 10/377,580
3
The Examiner relies upon the following prior art references as
evidence of unpatentability:
Murakami US 5,768,274 Jun. 16, 1998
Liu US 2002/0154360 A1 Oct. 24, 2002
Yoo US 6,925,257 B2 Aug. 2, 2005

Baldine; JumpStart: A Just-in-Time Signaling Architecture for WDM Burst-
Switched Networks, IEEE Communications Magazine, February 2002

Claims 1, 3-15, 17-29, 31-43, 45-562 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103(a) as being unpatentable over Liu and Baldine (Ans. 3-8).
Claims 2, 16, 30 and 44 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Liu, Baldine and Murakami (Ans. 8-9).
Claims 3, 17, 31 and 45 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Liu, Baldine and Yoo (Ans. 9).3

Rather than repeat the arguments of Appellants or the Examiner, we
refer to the Appeal Brief (filed December 19, 2007), the Reply Brief (filed
May 12, 2008) and the Answer (mailed March 13, 2008) for their respective
details. In this decision, we have considered only those arguments actually
made by Appellants. Arguments which Appellants could have made but did
not make in the Briefs have not been considered and are deemed to be
waived. See 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii) (2008).

2 Although claims 6, 20, 34, and 48 are not listed in the grounds of the
rejection on page 3 of the Answer, they are discussed on pages 7 and 8 of the
Answer.
3 Claims 3, 17, 31 and 45 were rejected previously over Liu and Baldine
without the incorporation of Yoo.
Appeal 2009-003466
Application 10/377,580
4
Appellants contend that the common header disclosed in
Baldine is a header that is common to control bursts as opposed to the
claimed invention where the header is a PBS burst header that is
common to both control bursts and data bursts (Reply Br. 3). It is the
Examiner’s position that the application of Baldine’s architecture to
Liu’s framing structure can be seen as an improvement that would
have yielded predictable results resulting in an improved system (Ans.
13-14).
ISSUE
Does the combination of Liu and Baldine disclose a PBS burst header
that is common to both control and data bursts that includes a field to
indicate whether the control burst is on a wavelength different from the data
burst as recited in independent claims 1, 15, 29 and 43?

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Figure 20 of Liu is reproduced below:

Figure 20 discloses a diagram of a slot of information in a common slot
format. The common slot format or common slot layer is designated for
both data bursts and control (BHP for example) slots (Liu [0122]). The CSL
Preamble contains three fields: Slot Sync – slot boundary recognition; Slot
Appeal 2009-003466
Application 10/377,580
5
Type – indicates the type of slot; and Slot OAM Information – transceiver
where the loop back slot is going to be terminated (Liu Table 2).

2. Figure 4 of Baldine is reproduced below:

Figure 4 discloses a signal message structure having a common header with
protocol type and message type fields (Baldine, page 88).

ANALYSIS
Independent Claims 1, 15, 29 and 43
Appellants acknowledge that the Liu CSL Preamble is a header
portion that is common to both control bursts and data bursts (App. Br. 7).
See also FF 1. Further, both the Appellants and Examiner acknowledge that
Liu does not disclose a field to indicate whether the PBS control burst is
transmitted on a wavelength different from that of an associated PBS data
burst and that Liu also fails to disclose a label for use is a generalized multi-
protocol label swapping (GMPLS) based system, that has been established
for the PBS burst frame. See App. Br. 7-8; Ans. 3-4, 12. It is the
Appeal 2009-003466
Application 10/377,580
6
Examiner’s position that because Liu teaches there are multiple ways to
frame the transmission of data and control slots, it would have been obvious
to modify Liu based upon Baldine’s framing structure. See Ans. 3-5 and 12-
13.
Appellants argue that Baldine merely discloses the framing of the
signaling protocol carried by signaling packets (control bursts) and therefore
the common header illustrated in Figure 4 of Baldine is not a header that is
common to both control and data packets but is merely common to
signaling messages (control bursts) (App. Br. 9; see also FF 2). Appellants
conclude that Baldine cannot disclose a PBS burst header common to both
control and data bursts that include a field to indicate whether the control
burst is on a wavelength different from the data burst. See App. Br. 7.
The Examiner relies upon Baldine’s disclosure of wherein a protocol
type designates a particular wavelength for the data burst to show that
Baldine discloses wherein a PBS control burst is transmitted on a
wavelength different from that of an associated PBS data burst (field for
Protocol type, figure 4; column 2 of page 86). However, Baldine only states
that, “The SETUP message also includes the burst information and informs
that source about the channel (wavelength) to use when sending the data
burst.” Id. Therefore, Baldine does not disclose that the control and data
bursts are transmitted on different wavelengths as recited in independent
claims 1, 15, 29 and 43.
We find the Appellants’ arguments to be persuasive because Baldine
does not address the deficiencies of Liu. Moreover, Baldine does not
disclose a common header to both the control and data bursts. Lastly,
Baldine does not disclose wherein the control and data bursts are transmitted
Appeal 2009-003466
Application 10/377,580
7
on different wavelengths. We will not sustain the Examiner’s rejection of
independent claims 1, 15, 29 and 43.

Dependent Claims 2-14, 16-28, 30-42 and 44-56
We will not sustain the rejections of dependent claims 2-14, 16-28,
30-42 and 44-56 for the same reasons as we stated above.

CONCLUSION
The combination of Liu and Baldine fails to disclose wherein a PBS
burst header is common to both control and data bursts that includes a field
to indicate whether the control burst is on a wavelength different from the
data burst as recited in independent claims 1, 15, 29 and 43.

ORDER
We reverse the Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1-56.

REVERSED

gvw

LAWRENCE E. LYCKE
BLAKELY SOKOLOFF TAYLOR & ZAFMAN LLP
12400 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD
SEVENTH FLOOR
LOS ANGELES CA 90025-1026