`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`www .uspto.gov
`
`APPLICATION NO.
`
`90/013,802
`
`
`
`
` FILING DATE
`
`08/29/2016
`
`HARNESS, DICKEY& PIERCE, PLLC.
`OE.PL.
`CK
`HAI
`P.O. BOX 828
`BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48303
`
`FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
`
`ATTORNEY DOCKETNO.
`
`CONFIRMATIONNO.
`
`8902760
`
`31AE-228691
`
`1005
`
`Lavine
`PRAMS
`FOSTER, ROLAND G
`
`ART UNIT
`
`3992
`
`MAIL DATE
`
`08/07/2017
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`PAPER
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`
`
`
`
`Control No.
`
`Patent Under Reexamination
`
` Notice of Intent to Issue 90/013,802 8902760
`
`
`
`Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate|Examiner Art Unit AIA (First Inventorto File)
`
`Status
`No
`
`ROLAND FOSTER
`
`3992
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEof this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`1. X] Prosecution on the merits is (or remains) closed in this ex parte reexamination proceeding. This proceeding is
`subject to reopening at the initiative of the Office or upon petition. Cf 37 CFR 1.318(a). A Certificate will be issued
`in view of
`(a) XX] Patent owner's communication(s) filed: 23 June 2017 and 10 May 2017.
`b)
`[_] Patent owner's failure to file an appropriate timely response to the Office action mailed:
`[_] Patent owner’sfailure to timelyfile an Appeal Brief (37 CFR 41.31).
`[] The decision on appeal by the [_] Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences [] Court dated
`[J Other:
`e Reexamination Certificate will indicate the following:
`a) Change in the Specification:
`[] Yes KJ No
`b) Change in the Drawing(s):
`L] Yes KJ No
`Status of the Claim(s):
`
`Patent claim(s) amended(including dependent on amended claim(s)): 73-100, 104-169 and 173-219
`Patent claim(s) canceled: 101-103, 170-172.
`Newly presented claim(s) patentable:
`.
`Newly presented canceled claims:
`Patent claim(s) (] previously [] currently disclaimed:
`Patent claim(s) not subject to reexamination:
`
`.
`3. A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`4. X] Note the attached statement of reasons for patentability and/or confirmation. Any comments considered necessary
`by patent owner regarding reasons for patentability and/or confirmation must be submitted promptly to avoid
`processing delays. Such submission(s) should be labeled: “Comments On Statement of Reasons for Patentability
`and/or Confirmation.”
`
`5. L] Note attached NOTICE OF REFERENCESCITED (PTO-892).
`
`6. L] Note attached LIST OF REFERENCESCITED (PTO/SB/08 or PTO/SB/08 substitute).
`7. The drawing correction requestfiled on
`is: LJapproved
`[J disapproved.
`8. L] Acknowledgmentis made ofthe priority claim under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`
`
`a)LJ All b)L]Some*—c)L] None of the certified copies have
`L] been received.
`[] not been received.
`;
`_] been filed in Application No.
`L] been filed in reexamination Control No.
`_] been received by the International Bureau in PCT Application No.
`
`“ Certified copies not received:
`[1 Note attached Examiner's Amendment.
`
`9.
`
`10. X] Note attached Interview Summary (PTO-474).
`11.(] Other: .
`
`All correspondencerelating to this reexamination proceeding should be directed to the Central Reexamination Unit at
`the mail, FAX, or hand-carry addresses given at the end of this Office action.
`
`Roland G. Foster/
`Primary Examiner
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL-469 (Rev. 08-13)
`
`Notice of Intent to Issue Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate
`
`Part of Paper No 20170719
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/013,802
`
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 2
`
`NOTICE OF INTENT TO ISSUE REEXAMINATION CERTIFICATE
`
`Summary
`
`Claims 1-100, 104-169 and 173-219 of United States Patent No. 8,902,760 B2 (the
`
`“Austermann” patent) are currently under reexamination in this ex parte reexamination
`
`proceeding 90/013,746.
`
`An Order Granting Ex Parte Reexamination (the “Order’’), mailed November 18, 2016,
`
`found that a substantial new question of patentability (“SNQ’) wasraised in the request for ex
`
`parte reexamination, August 29, 2016 (the "Request") as to claims 1-219. A non-final Office
`
`action was mailed February 10, 2017 rejecting claims 1-219, to which the Patent Owner
`
`responded on May 10, 2017 (the "Response") and a Supplemental Amendmentfiled June 23,
`
`2017 (the "Supplemental Response”) cancelling claims 101-103 and 170-172 and amending
`
`other claims.' Both the Response and Supplemental Amendment were accompanied by
`
`declaration evidence. A personal interview was also conducted on May10, 2017.
`
`In view of the Response, Supplemental Amendment, and accompanying declaration
`
`evidence, the Patent Owner's arguments of record detailing how the claims distinguish over the
`
`prior art of record, the Examiner concludesall pending claims (1.e., claims 1-100, 104-169 and
`
`173-219) are in condition for patentability over the prior art of record applied in this proceeding.
`
`See the Reasonsfor Patentability for further explanation.
`
`' The Supplemental Amendmentfiled June 23, 2017 replaced the Supplemental Amendmentfiled June 20, 2017.
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/013,802
`
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 3
`
`Reasons for Patentability
`
`Claims 1-100, 104-169 and 173-219 are patentable over the applied, prior art of record.
`
`Ofthese, claims 1, 73 and 146 are independent. Limitations important to patentability have been
`
`emphasized.
`
`1. A BaseT Ethernet system comprising: a piece of central BaseT Ethernet
`equipment; a piece of BaseT Ethernet terminal equipment; data signaling pairs
`of conductors comprising first and second pairs used to carry BaseT Ethernet
`communication signals between the piece of central BaseT Ethernet equipment and
`the piece of BaseT Ethernet terminal equipment, the first and second pairs
`physically connect between the piece of BaseT Ethernet terminal equipment and
`the piece of central BaseT Ethernet equipment, the piece of central BaseT
`Ethernet equipment havingat least one DC supply, the piece of BaseT Ethernet
`terminal equipment havingat least one path to draw different magnitudes of
`current flow from the at least one DC supply through a loop formedover at
`least one of the conductors of the first pair and at least one of the
`conductorsof the second pair, the piece of central BaseT Ethernet equipmentto
`detect at least two different magnitudes of the current flow through the loop
`and to control the application of at least one electrical condition to at least
`two of the conductors.
`
`73. A BaseT Ethernet system comprising: Ethernet cabling havingat least
`first and second individual pairs of conductors used to carry BaseT Ethernet
`communicationsignals, the at least first and second individual pairs of
`conductors physically connect between a piece of BaseT Ethernet terminal
`equipment and a piece of central network equipment;
`the piece of central
`network equipment having at least one DC supply, the piece of BaseT Ethernet
`terminal equipment havingat least one path to draw different magnitudes of
`current flow via the at least one DC supply through a loop formed overat least
`one of the conductors of the first pair of conductors and at least one of the
`conductors of the second pair of conductors, the piece of central network
`equipmentto detect at least two different magnitudes of current flow through
`the loop.
`
`146. A BaseT Ethernet system comprising: Ethernet cabling havingat least
`first and secondpairs of conductors used to carry BaseT Ethernet communication
`signals, the at least first and second pairs of conductors physically connect
`between a piece of BaseT Ethernet terminal equipment anda piece of central
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/013,802
`
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 4
`
`network equipment, the piece of central network equipment is a BaseT Ethernet hub, the
`piece of central network equipmenthaving at least one DC supply to provideat least
`one DC condition acrossat least one of the conductorsof the first pair of conductors
`andat least one of the conductorsof the second pairs of conductors, the piece of
`BaseT Ethernet terminal equipment havingat least one path to change impedance
`within a loop formedoverthe at least one of the conductorsof the first pair of
`conductors and the at least one of the conductors of the second pair of conductors by
`changing impedance within the at least one path in responseto the at least one DC
`condition across the at least one path.
`
`All independentclaims thus recite using a cabling between central BaseT Ethernet
`
`equipment and BaseT Ethernet terminal equipment, where the cabling comprisesa first and
`
`secondpairs of conductors carrying BaseT Ethernet communication signals. The cabling
`
`comprises loop formed overat least one of the conductors ofthe first pair and at least one of the
`
`conductors of the secondpair.
`
`Claim Interpretation
`
`"BaseT Ethernet” is a term of art in network communications andis interpreted as
`
`Baseband (Base) twisted pair (T) "Ethernet" signaling as is consistent with the specification.
`
`See, e.g., col. 5, Il. 20-38 and col. 12, Il. 22-30.
`
`The Cummings Prior Art
`
`The closest applied prior art of record is U.S. Patent 5,406,260 to Cummings
`
`(“Cummings”), as cited in the Request and applied in the last Office action as a base reference.
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/013,802
`
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 5
`
`Cummings teaches cabling comprising a first (e.g., 44a, 46a) and secondpairs of
`
`conductors (e.g., 44b and 46b) carrying BaseT Ethernet communication signals. See Cummings,
`
`Fig. 2 below:
`
`AAASSSSASASSO
`
`AABSSSSNSSANNSSO
`3
`
`~PyAadtng,
`:
`Rey
`NeAALS,
`ANS
`~
`Sewabes
`3
`seee
`
`3Yy
`
`Seen
`
`
`
`REAMEOMAAOAICOMSUEHEARS
`
`Ss
`SS
`
`x
`
`te
`
`+h Qh
`
`aNALA
`
`:
`
`g
`
`fpeodyprigeen,
`
`Beodbcondoe
`
`x
`
`et
`
`oS
`
`vvvoveedsPah
`
`“
`
`-
`
`corheccceareeciitypacorlifs
`iBd
`
`3‘
`
`oS.
`
`a
`
`PT
`
`Baan!
`
`Z
`
`
`
`Mig
`
`y
`
`$3tog
`
`eex
`
`Hye’
`“Rca
`~
`<Ncnmnnde
`wae
`Seen
`Soe
`ESSNSENSSSNSSASSERCSASRSTBERD
`SSS
`i
`owen
`SRAEAS
`SIPS
`SSAA OSES
`ee
`
`beucesodcesodcevovcetoncnsoveniay
`$JecannnnnacacreseccnccrisnciigcedgeeRyeererenenreeccenecarccencceetirrds
`4bcenmnndendieciecinceectepedtnetaperdgershy
`
`
`w&ApcbAng_hermmaniiinisnnnacnieegaanicpannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn,ceZéa>(ie,
` Pe3sokaoyLeonglpnechecaeetecbecmnecnncedgpeigentivcanyyMevvddrieddditiierte
`
`
`
`
`:arnengipeneaeAgannrannarnennenynMebbevererncnncetorvrricerarnrcces
`pansbpbevevibrevenvrrevirveninnrvevnessShrSineaghhv0.oot:
`nananCapnnnee2peepeepom-aehecod
`Tray
`
`sipnssonnnonvnnnanaadgon%ZAAAtts
`penechpccdyesbysteersitag,PORPNPRAODONEDR,
`
`
`soYQOCIAETI
`ASSNEEEHe. :
`
`: iS
`
`— e
`
`s
`.~
`Sy
`
`e a
`
`Beaneesnsansennnnensnnen
`ssassensseeeeussann
`S
`
`x‘
`
`westisnnsennty
`
`eS:=
`
`sx
`
`*x<tS
`
`asssnngeyAsan
`afk om
`fS8-
`
`All pairs 44/46 are transmit pairs internally coupled to an associated personal computer
`
`12 via one winding 53 of an internally located isolation transformer 52. Thus, each transmit pair
`
`44/46 (e.g., pair 44a and 46a) forms a loop through each personal computer 12 (e.g., 12a). The
`
`receive pairs are notillustrated in Fig. 2, but utilizes the same approach. Col. 3, ll. 31-52.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/013,802
`
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 6
`
`The Patent Owner howeverhas provided a declaration by the inventor himself of the
`
`Cummingprior art. See the Declaration of Marshall B. Cummings under 37 CFR 1.132,
`
`executed June 22, 2017, filed in this proceeding June 23, 2017 (hereinafter the "Cummings
`
`Declaration").
`
`Cummings declares "[t]here is no teaching or suggestion in the '260 Patent [Cummings]
`
`to use a path formed overat least one of the conductorsofthe first pair of the data signaling pairs
`
`of conductors (or Ethernet cabling) and at least one of the conductors of the second pair of the
`
`data signaling pairs of the conductors as claimed in the '760 Patent." Cummings Declaration, {
`
`10.
`
`The examinerfinds in Declarant's (the inventor of the Cummings prior art) evidence
`
`persuasive as to the teachings of the Cummings prior art. While the Cummings priorart teaches
`
`using a path formed between loops (e.g., between 44a and 46a)in the first pair or another pair
`
`(e.g., between 44b and 46b)as discussed with regard to Fig. 2 above(1.e., an intra-pair loop),
`
`Cummings fails to teach a "loop formedoverat least one of the conductors of the first pair and at
`
`least one of the conductors of the second pair”as recited (e.g., between 44a and 44b/46b)(.e., an
`
`inter-pair loop). See, e.g., independent claims 1, 73 and 146.
`
`The Patent Ownerhas also presented evidence similar to the declaration evidence
`
`discussed above in a separate Declaration of Albert McGilvra, executed and filed May 10, 2017
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/013,802
`
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 7
`
`(hereinafter the "McGilvra Declaration"). See {8,9 and 10. The examineralso findsthis
`
`evidence persuasive.
`
`See also the accompanying Patent Owner arguments on page 5 of the Supplemental
`
`Amendmentciting to the Requester's Exhibit B associated with related litigation (Report and
`
`Recommendation of Expert Advisor to the Court) (filed with the Request), which characterizes
`
`the Cumming's loop as a "single pair of transmit wires, but not pair consisting of one transmit
`
`and one receive wire. Such a current loop is knownasa differential loop." Exhibit B, p. 36.
`
`The Cummings Declarant (the inventor of the Cummings prior art) further states the
`
`above intra-pair loops are important. "The invention of the '260 Patent was predicated on the
`
`industry practice of using the existing field winding 53 of the internally located isolation
`
`transformer 52 in each personal computer 12." Cummings Declaration, { 9. Indeed, the
`
`Cummings priorart teaches (col. 3, Il. 31-52):
`
`In accordance with conventional wiring approaches, data communication link 14
`generally includes a plurality of pairs of transmit wires 44 and 46 as well as a plurality of
`pairs of receive wires (not shown) connected to each of personal computers 12a through
`12d. Each pair of transmit wires 44 and 46 are internally coupled to an associated
`personal computer 12 via one winding 53 of an internally located isolation transformer
`52. Each pair of transmit wires 44 and 46 along with isolation transformer 52 thereby
`form a current loop 50 through the personal computer 12 which is advantageously
`employed in accordance with the approach described herein.
`
`Thus, modifying Cummings such that a loop, comprising one or more transmit (or
`
`receive) pairs that bypass the isolation transformer 52 of each PC, results in adding a second or
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/013,802
`
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 8
`
`third transformerto the loop that is no longer "internally" located in each PC contrary to the
`
`"conventional wiring approaches”that are "advantageously employed" by Cummings. Such a
`
`substantial structural modification to Cummings would thus render Cummings unsuitable for its
`
`intended purpose-- using conventional wiring approachesthat rely on a loop comprising a
`
`single, internal isolation transformer for each PC.
`
`The remaining, applied prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest modifying
`
`Cummings in a way that would render Cummings suitable for its intended purpose, as discussed
`
`above. Moreover, the applied priorart fails to even teach a "loop formed overat least one of the
`
`conductors of the first pair and at least one of the conductors of the second pair"as recited, thus
`
`failing to remedy the teachings of Cummings even if Cummings could be modified in such a
`
`manner,
`
`The PCNetPrior Art
`
`Anotherclose, prior art of record is PCNET,as also applied as a base reference in the last
`
`Office action. However, PCNETis completely silent as whether the loops are formed over at
`
`least one of the conductors of the first pair and at least one of the conductors of the secondpair
`
`as recited. Moreover, PCNETdiscloses an Ethernet controller using an RJ-45 interface (one
`
`transmit pair and one receive pair) that includes auto-negotiation with Fast Line Pulses, where
`
`the "two link partners send information .
`
`.
`
`. between themselves." Page 2-3, {2.9 and page 4-2, {
`
`4.3. Thus, Fast Line Pulses cannot be transmitted through a loop formed overinter-pair
`
`conductors because a transmitting piece of Ethernet equipment (one link partner) is only
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/013,802
`
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 9
`
`connected during transmission (e.g., auto-negotiation) via a single pair of Ethernet conductors
`
`(RJ-45 interface) to the receiving piece of Ethernet equipment(secondlink partner). See also the
`
`McGilvra Declaration, { 11.
`
`Thus, modifying PCNETsuchthat a loop (e.g., a RJ-45 transmit pair or receive pair)
`
`comprises one or more transmit (or receive) pairs would render a major feature of PCNET (auto-
`
`negotiation) inoperable and thus PCNET unsuitable for one of its primary intended purposes.
`
`The remaining, applied prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest modifying
`
`PCNETin a way that would render PCNETsuitable for its intended purpose, as discussed above.
`
`Moreover, the applied prior art fails to even teach a "loop formedoverat least one of the
`
`conductors of the first pair and at least one of the conductors of the second pair"as recited, thus
`
`failing to remedy the teachings of PCNET even if PCNET could be modified in such a manner.
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/013,802
`
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 10
`
`Conclusion
`
`Extensions of time under 37 CFR 1.136(a) will not be permitted in these proceedings
`
`because the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136 apply only to "an applicant" and notto parties in a
`
`reexamination proceeding. Additionally, 35 U.S.C. 305 requires that reexamination proceedings
`
`"will be conducted with special dispatch" (37 CFR 1.550(a)). Extension of time in ex parte
`
`reexamination proceedings are provided for in 37 CFR 1.550(c).
`
`The patent owneris reminded of the continuing responsibility under 37 CFR 1.565(a) to
`
`apprise the Office of anylitigation activity, or other prior or concurrent proceeding, involving the
`
`Austermannpatent throughout the course of this reexamination proceeding. The third party
`
`requester is also remindedofthe ability to similarly apprise the Office of any such activity or
`
`proceeding throughout the course of this reexamination proceeding. See MPEP §§ 2207, 2282
`
`and 2286.
`
`All correspondencerelating to this ex parte reexamination proceeding should be directed
`as follows:
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 90/013,802
`
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 11
`
`By EFS:
`
`Registered users may submit via the electronic filing system EFS-Web, at
`hitps://ets.uspto.gov/etile/myportaVets-registered.
`
`By Mailto: Mail Stop Ex Parte Reexam
`Central Reexamination Unit
`Commissioner for Patents
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`By FAX to:
`
`(571) 273-9900
`Central Reexamination Unit
`
`By hand to:
`
`Customer Service Window
`Randolph Building
`401 DulanySt.
`Alexandria, VA 22314
`
`For EFS-Webtransmission, 37 CFR 1.8(a)(1)(1) (C) and (ii) states that correspondence
`(except for a request for reexamination and a corrected or replacement request for
`reexamination) will be considered timely if (a) it is transmitted via the Office’s electronicfiling
`system in accordance with 37 CFR 1.6(a)(4), and (b) includesa certificate of transmission for
`each piece of correspondencestating the date of transmission, whichis prior to the expiration of
`the set period of time in the Office action.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to Roland Foster at
`telephone number571-272-7538.
`
`Signed:
`[Roland G. Foster!
`Roland G. Foster
`Central Reexamination Unit, Primary Examiner
`Electrical Art Unit 3992
`(571) 272-7538
`
`Conferee:
`/Scott L.Weaver/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
`
`Conferee:
`/MICHAEL FUELLING/
`Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3992
`
`