Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/979,212

DETACHABLE CONNECTORS FOR HIGH FIBER COUNT APPLICATIONS

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Nov 02, 2022
Examiner
HAYES, MARY A
Art Unit
2874
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Corning Research & Development Corporation
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
580 granted / 705 resolved
+14.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
730
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
48.9%
+8.9% vs TC avg
§102
34.0%
-6.0% vs TC avg
§112
12.7%
-27.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 705 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1/30/2026 has been entered. Response to Amendment Applicant's arguments filed 1/30/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The amendments to the claims have changed the scope of the claims, resulting in further search and consideration, thus resulting in a new ground of rejection outlined below. Examiner notes, for purposes of claim interpretation, the claim language, “along a length of the ferrule” does not require an element to be along the entire length of the ferrule. Therefore, any element on a circumference of the ferrule, will also necessarily have a dimension along “a length” of the ferrule, as three dimensions are necessary to exist in space, and one of those dimensions would be along a length of the ferrule. This interpretation will be applied to the claims. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph: Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. Claims 5, 9, 20, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 5 does not further limit claim 1; amended claim 1 already includes all of the limitations of claim 5. Claim 9 does not further limit claim 1; amended claim 1 already includes all of the limitations of claim 9. Claim 20 does not further limit claim 12; amended claim 12 already includes all of the limitations of claim 20. Claim 24 does not further limit claim 12; amended claim 24 already includes all of the limitations of claim 12. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claim(s) 1-10 and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Li et al. (WO 2014011283 A2, herein “Li”, cited on the PTO-892 of 3/27/2025). Regarding claims 1 and 10, Li discloses: An optical fiber connector assembly comprising: a plurality of optical fibers (24); a connector including: a ferrule (12) having an inner channel (grooves 34) in which the plurality of optical fibers (24) are secured, the ferrule (12) having at least one groove (grooves, 74, shown in Fig. 8A) and at least one protrusion (see annotated Fig. 8A, reproduced below) on an outer surface of the ferrule and along a length of the ferrule (wherein both the grooves and the protrusion have a length dimension along the ferrule); at least one stabilizing body (75) received in the at least one groove (74); and a sleeve (20) applied onto the ferrule (12); wherein the sleeve (26) engages with the at least one protrusion (shown in Fig. 8A); wherein the sleeve (26) defines or engages the at least one stabilizing body (75) and creates an interference fit between the ferrule (12) and the sleeve (26); and wherein the sleeve includes a slit (27, Figs. 6C-6E) along a length of the sleeve (26). Li discloses a slit (27, Figs. 6C-6E) along the length of the sleeve creating a gap (see Figs. 8A and 8B). Li further goes on to show different shapes and examples of slits in Figs. 9 and 11. Li teaches that this enables dividing the ferrule and also providing a secure connection for the ferrule assembly. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to provide any slits in any variety of shapes, including a helix, as necessary, along the ferrule as taught by Li, so the ferrule can be divided and separated as needed. PNG media_image1.png 259 474 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 2, Li discloses the sleeve includes at least one protrusion (75) integrally formed with the sleeve (26) to define the at least one stabilizing body (shown in Figs. 8A and 8B). Regarding claim 3, Li discloses the sleeve spans a circumference of the ferrule (shown in Figs. 8A and 8B). Regarding claims 4 and 5, Li discloses a portion of the outer surface of the ferrule (12) is in contact with the sleeve (26) and the ferrule (12) includes at least one protrusion along the outer surface of the ferrule that engages with the sleeve (see rejection of claim 1). Regarding claim 6, Li discloses the at least one stabilizing body comprises at least one pin received in the at least one groove, wherein the sleeve engages the at least one pin and creates the interference fit (wherein alignment guide pins are disclosed in para [0027]; interference fit discussed in para [0059]). Regarding claim 7, Li discloses the sleeve (26) spans a circumference of the ferrule (shown in Fig. 8A). Regarding claim 8, Li discloses a portion of the outer surface of the ferrule (12) is in contact with the sleeve (26) (shown in Fig. 8A). Regarding claim 9, Li discloses a portion of the outer surface of the ferrule (12) is in contact with the sleeve (26) (shown in Fig. 8A) and the ferrule includes at least one protrusion along the outer surface of the ferrule that engages with the sleeve (see rejection of claim 1). Regarding claim 30, Li shows the three grooves (74) as having unequal spacing about the circumference of the ferrule (see Fig. 8A), but is silent as to a second protrusion. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to include as many protrusions as necessary to ensure both a secure and optically aligned connection. Claim(s) 12-25 and 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (WO 2014011283 A2, herein “Li”, cited on the PTO-892 of 3/27/2025) in view of Theuerkorn (US 8,267,596 B2, herein “Theuerkorn”, cited on the PTO-892 of 11/12/2025) and in further view of de Jong et al. (US 8,408,811 B2, herein “de Jong”, cited on the PTO-892 of 11/12/2025). Regarding claims 12 and 25, Li discloses: An optical fiber connector assembly comprising: a plurality of optical fibers (24); a connector including: a ferrule (12) having an inner channel (grooves 34) in which the plurality of optical fibers (24) are secured, the ferrule (12) having at least one groove (grooves, 74, shown in Fig. 8A) and at least one protrusion (see annotated Fig. 8A, reproduced below) on an outer surface of the ferrule and along a length of the ferrule (wherein both the grooves and the protrusion have a length dimension along the ferrule); at least one stabilizing body (75) received in the at least one groove (74); and a sleeve (20) applied onto the ferrule (12); wherein the sleeve (26) engages with the at least one protrusion (shown in Fig. 8A); wherein the sleeve (26) defines or engages the at least one stabilizing body (75) and creates an interference fit between the ferrule (12) and the sleeve (26); and wherein the sleeve includes a slit (27, Figs. 6C-6E) along a length of the sleeve (26). Li discloses a slit (27, Figs. 6C-6E) along the length of the sleeve creating a gap (see Figs. 8A and 8B). Li further goes on to show different shapes and examples of slits in Figs. 9 and 11. Li teaches that this enables dividing the ferrule and also providing a secure connection for the ferrule assembly. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to provide any slits in any variety of shapes, including a helix, as necessary, along the ferrule as taught by Li, so the ferrule can be divided and separated as needed. PNG media_image1.png 259 474 media_image1.png Greyscale Li is silent as to a compression sleeve, and a center barrel. However, Theuerkorn teaches a fiber optic cable assemblies for coupling plurality of optical fibers (18). The assembly comprises a connector (50) including a ferrule (40) and a sleeve (50). Theuerkorn further teaches a compression sleeve (crimp band 20 may be formed from sleeve 19) received over at least a portion of the sleeve, wherein the compression sleeve includes a plurality of teeth that contact the sleeve (crimped segments would create interior protrusions wherein the examiner considers as “teeth”), a center barrel (splice housing 132 or furcation housing 142) having an inner channel that houses the connector (Figs. 23-24), wherein the center barrel includes an inward protrusion (tapering portion of 50) that defines at least one slanted surface within the channel. Providing a compression sleeve would allow for a more mechanically stable and secure device. Li in view of Theuerkorn are silent as to a connector nut. However, De Jong teaches an optical fiber connector a having a connector nut (20) secured for securing the splice housing. The nut compresses the collet/barbs into the cable jacket and secures the strength members of the fiber optic cable while providing strain relieves to the optical fibers extending therefrom (col. 2, lines 33-48 and Figs. 1 and 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include a nut as a securing mechanism as taught by De Jong, because nuts are well known to secure and fasten elements. Regarding claim 13, Li discloses the inward protrusion contacts the connector (shown in Figs. 8A and 8B). Regarding claim 14-16, De Jong teaches the use of a compression nut but is silent as to explicitly including a spring. However, De Jong already discloses compression. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a spring to provide a compressing function, as springs are well known and commonly used for compression. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to include the necessary structural elements to support such compression including a bushing to assist with transferring of the biasing force. Doing so would require only routine skill in the art and would lead to predictable results. Regarding claim 17, Li discloses the sleeve includes at least one protrusion (75) integrally formed with the sleeve to define the at least one stabilizing body (shown in Figs. 8A and 8B). Regarding claim 18, Li discloses the sleeve (26) spans a circumference of the ferrule (12) (shown in Figs. 8A and 8B). Regarding claims 19 and 20, Li discloses a portion of the outer surface of the ferrule (12) is in contact with the sleeve (26) and the ferrule (12) includes at least one protrusion along the outer surface of the ferrule that engages with the sleeve (see rejection of claim 12). Regarding claim 21, Li discloses the at least one stabilizing body comprises at least one pin received in the at least one groove, wherein the sleeve engages the at least one pin and creates the interference fit (wherein alignment guide pins are disclosed in para [0027]; interference fit discussed in para [0059]). Regarding claim 22, Li discloses the sleeve (26) spans the outer surface of the ferrule (12) (shown in Figs. 8A and 8B). Regarding claim 23, Li discloses a portion of the outer surface of the ferrule (12) is in contact with the sleeve (26). Regarding claim 24, Li discloses the ferrule (12) includes at least one protrusion along the outer surface of the ferrule that engages with the sleeve (see rejection of claim 12). Regarding claim 31, Li shows the three grooves (74) as having unequal spacing about the circumference of the ferrule (see Fig. 8A), but is silent as to a second protrusion. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to include as many protrusions as necessary to ensure both a secure and optically aligned connection. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARY A EL-SHAMMAA whose telephone number is (571)272-2469. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 9am-6pm (flexible schedule). Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Thomas Hollweg can be reached at 571-270-1739. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /MARY A EL-SHAMMAA/Examiner, Art Unit 2874 /THOMAS A HOLLWEG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 02, 2022
Application Filed
Mar 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jun 27, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 01, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jan 12, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 30, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 09, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12585118
WAVEGUIDE COMBINER WITH REDUCED LIGHT LEAKAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581996
INTERPOSER INTERCONNECTS AND ENCLOSURE FOR SILICON PHOTONICS LIDAR MODULE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12572006
POLYMER EYEPIECE ASSEMBLIES FOR AUGMENTED AND MIXED REALITY SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12554077
SEMICONDUCTOR PACKAGE WITH EMBEDDED OPTICAL DIE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12546632
DISTRIBUTED POSITION DETECTION ROPE AND DISTRIBUTED POSITION DETECTION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
82%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+9.5%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 705 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month