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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 February 5, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s Amendment filed February 5, 2026 has been fully considered and entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1-2, 6-9, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaneko et al. (JP 07-065656 A; hereafter Kaneko) in view of Agawa (JP 08-202920 A) and Bertz et al. (US 2006/0062907 A1; hereafter Bertz).
Regarding claim 1; Kaneko discloses a method for manufacturing a colored electrical wire (see paragraph 1), the method comprising:
a step of feeding colored resin (resin 6) into a die (die 7; see Figures 1 and 3);
a step of causing a coated electrical wire (300) to pass through the inside of the die (7) and applying the colored resin (6) to a periphery of the coated electrical wire (300) to form a colored electrical wire (300) including a colored layer;
a step of detecting a color of the colored layer (sensors 21, 22s detects the color; see paragraphs 21-22 of the provided machine translation, and see Figure 1); and
a step of determining whether the detected color is good or bad (see paragraphs 23-24 of the provided machine translation);
wherein before the step of feeding the colored resin (6) into the die (7), the method further includes:
a step of forming an electric wire (300), and
the step of feeding the colored resin (6) into the die (7) includes (see the configuration portion of the abstract of Kaneko et al.):
a step of feeding a first colored resin (6) into the die (7) from a tank (1) filled with the first colored resin and applying the first colored resin to a periphery of the wire to form a first resin layer, and
after applying the first colored resin (6) to the periphery of the wire, switching, using a valve (when changing the color of the coating resin 6 that coats the wire 300, the mode setting switch 44 is set to position b and a color change command is input to the control device 40 specifying the color to be changes and in response to the color change command input, the control device 40 outputs a color change signal to the hopper 1 which then switches the resin with the specific color to the inlet of the resin extruder 2 and a valve of the hopper 1 is opened to supply the resin of the new color; see page 10 of the machine translation of Kaneko (JP 07-065656 A)), the feeding the first color resin (6) into the die to a step of feeding second colored resin (6) having a color different from the color of the first colored resin into the die (7) from a tank (1) filled with the second colored resin and applying the second colored resin to the periphery of the wire to form a second resin layer,
in the step of detecting the color, a change of the color of the second resin layer from the color of the first colored resin to the color of the second colored resin is detected (see the configuration portion of the abstract of Kaneko et al.), and
in the step of determining whether the color is good or bad, when it is determined that the change of the color satisfies a predetermined condition, the colored wire starts to be wound up as a non-defective product (see the configuration portion of the abstract of Kaneko et al.).
Kaneko et al. does not disclose an optical fiber, wherein before the step of feeding the colored resin into the die, the method further includes:
a step of forming a glass fiber by drawing an optical fiber preform while heating the optical fiber preform, and
a step of applying primary resin to a periphery of the glass fiber to form the coated optical fiber including a primary resin layer,
the step of feeding the colored resin into the die includes applying the colored coating to the primary resin layer.
Kaneko et al. does not disclose that the coating is on optical fiber, but instead discloses that the colored coating on an electrical wire. It is known in the art that colored coatings are also extruded onto optical fibers in alternative to electrical wires for the purpose of forming an optical transmission line in alternative to an electrical transmission line. For example: Agawa and Bertz both teach that a colored coating may be extruded onto an optical fiber (see paragraph 3 of the provided machine translation of Agawa; see the abstract of Bertz). Bertz further teaches that when manufacturing a colored optical fiber, before the step of feeding the colored resin into the die (see paragraph 5), the method further includes a step of forming a glass fiber by drawing an optical fiber preform while heating the optical fiber preform (see paragraph 4), and a step of applying primary resin to a periphery of the glass fiber to form the coated optical fiber including a primary resin layer (see paragraph 4), the step of feeding the colored resin into the die includes a step of feeding first colored resin used as secondary resin into the die from a tank filled with the first colored resin and applying the first colored resin to a periphery of the primary resin layer to form a secondary resin layer (see paragraphs 5-8), and a step of feeding second colored resin having a color different from the color of the first colored resin into the die from a tank filled with the second colored resin and applying the second colored resin to the periphery of the primary resin layer to form a secondary resin layer, in the step of detecting the color, a change of the color of the secondary resin layer from the color of the first colored resin to the color of the second colored resin is detected (see paragraphs 5-8).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the present invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to apply the manufacturing method of Kaneko et al. to an optical fiber in alternative to an electrical wire, for the purpose of forming a colored optical fiber for use in an optical transmission system, wherein the method further includes a step of forming a glass fiber by drawing an optical fiber preform while heating the optical fiber preform, and a step of applying primary resin to a periphery of the glass fiber to form the coated optical fiber including a primary resin layer, the step of feeding the colored resin into the die includes applying the colored coating to the primary resin layer.
Regarding claim 2; Kaneko discloses that in the step of detecting the color, the colored optical fiber is irradiated with light including RGB components and a part of the light with which the colored optical fiber is irradiated is detected with a sensor such that a light intensity of each of the RGB components of the light is detected to detect the color (R sensor 23 detect the red light component, G sensor 24 detects the green component, and B sensor 25 depends the blue component; see paragraph 22 of the provided machine translation of Kaneko, and Figures 1, 3 and 4 of Kaneko), and in the step of determining whether the color is good or bad, whether the color is good or bad is determined based on the light intensity (this is inherent to the detection method of Kaneko; additionally, Agawa teaches that the intensities of red, green and blue components of light may be detected to detect abnormalities in the color coatings of optical fibers; see claim 1 of Agawa, thereby rendering this an obvious step).
Regarding claim 6; Kaneko discloses that in the step of detecting the color, the colored optical fiber is irradiated with light including RGB components and reflected light of the light reflected from the colored optical fiber is detected with the sensor such that a light intensity of each of the RGB components of the light is detected to detect the color (R sensor 23 detect the red light component, G sensor 24 detects the green component, and B sensor 25 depends the blue component; see paragraph 22 of the provided machine translation of Kaneko, and Figures 1, 3 and 4 of Kaneko), and in the step of determining whether the color is good or bad, whether the color is good or bad is determined based on the light intensity (this is inherent to the detection method of Kaneko; additionally, Agawa teaches that the intensities of red, green and blue components of light may be detected to detect abnormalities in the color coatings of optical fibers; see claim 1 of Agawa, thereby rendering this an obvious step).
Regarding claims 7-9; Kaneko discloses that red, green and blue sensors are provided (23, 24, 25), but does not disclose a particular type of sensor, and therefore does not disclose a line camera sensor or an area camera sensor detecting light in one, two, or three directions. The examiner takes official notices that both line camera sensors and area camera sensors are commonly used types of sensors readily available to and known to a person of ordinary skill in the art. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to, in the step of detecting the color, have the sensor that detects a part of the light with which the colored optical fiber is irradiated be either a line camera sensor or an area camera sensor, including a plurality of pixels in a width direction and/or a longitudinal direction, or in three directions of the colored optical fiber, since these are known types of sensors in the prior art and one of ordinary skill could have combined the elements by known coupling methods with no change in their respective functions to yield predictable results. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding claim 11; Kaneko, Agawa, and Bertz, as applied to claim 1 above, suggest an apparatus (see Figures 1 and 2 of Kaneko) for manufacturing a colored optical fiber (colored optical fiber in alternative to colored wire 300 of Kaneko), the apparatus comprising:
a glass fiber formed by drawing an optical fiber preform while heating the optical fiber (see paragraph 4 of Bertz et al.; the examiner notes that the glass fiber does not actually form a portion of the claimed apparatus of claim 11, wherein the apparatus is for coating a fiber, but the fiber is not a structural portion of the apparatus, and thus this limitation does not limit the claimed apparatus);
a primary resin applied to a periphery of the glass fiber to form the coated optical fiber including a primary resin layer (see paragraph 4 of Bertz et al.; the examiner notes that the primary resin layer of the optical fiber does not further limit the claimed apparatus of claim 11);
a tank (hoppers 1) that feeds colored resin (6) into a die (7), wherein (see the configuration portion of the abstract of Kaneko et al. and the rejection of claim 1 above) a first colored resin is used a secondary resin into the die from a tank (1) filled with the first colored resin and the first color resin is applied to a periphery of the primary resin layer to form a secondary resin layer, and wherein a second colored resin having a color different from the color of the first colored resin is fed into the die (7) from a tank (1) filled with a the second colored resin and the second colored resin is applied to the periphery of the primary resin layer to form a secondary resin layer (see the configuration portion of the abstract of Kaneko et al. and the rejection of claim 1 above);
a switching valve (valve; see page 10 of the machine translation of Kaneko (JP 07-065656 A)) that switches the feeding the first colored resin into the die to feeding the second color resin into the die, wherein the switching value switches the feeding after the first color resin is applied to the periphery of the primary resin layer to form the secondary resin layer (when changing the color of the coating resin 6 that coats the wire 300, the mode setting switch 44 is set to position b and a color change command is input to the control device 40 specifying the color to be changes and in response to the color change command input, the control device 40 outputs a color change signal to the hopper 1 which then switches the resin with the specific color to the inlet of the resin extruder 2 and a valve of the hopper 1 is opened to supply the resin of the new color; see page 10 of the machine translation of Kaneko (JP 07-065656 A));
the die (7) through which a coated optical fiber (fiber in place of wire 300) passes such that the colored resin (6) is applied to a periphery of the coated optical fiber (300);
a sensor (21, 22) that detects a color of a colored layer formed of the colored resin (6) on the periphery of the coated optical fiber (fiber in place of wire 300), wherein in detecting the color change, a change of the color of the secondary resin layer from the color of the first colored resin to the color of the second colored resin is detected (see the configuration portion of the abstract of Kaneko et al.); and
a controller (control device 40; see Figure 1 of Kaneko et al.) that determines whether the color detected by the sensor is good or bad, wherein, wherein it is determined that the change of the color satisfies a predetermined condition, the colored optical fiber starts to be wound up as a non-defective product (the abstract and entire disclosure of Kaneko et al.).
Claims 3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaneko et al. (JP 07-065656 A; hereafter Kaneko) in view of Agawa (JP 08-202920 A) and Bertz et al. (US 2006/0062907 A1; hereafter Bertz), and in further view of Inaoka (JP 2013-134246 A).
Regarding claim 3; Kaneko, Agawa, and Bertz teach or suggest the method for manufacturing a colored optical fiber according to claim 2, but Kaneko does not teach that in the step of detecting the color, when the colored optical fiber is irradiated with the RGB components of the light separately to detect a part of each of the RGB components with the sensor, a timing of the irradiation of each of the RGB components is synchronized with a timing of the detection with the sensor such that a light intensity of each of the RGB components of the light is detected to detect the color, and in the step of determining whether the color is good or bad, whether the color is good or bad is determined based on the light intensity.
Inaoka teaches that for a color measuring method in the step of detecting the color, the colored object is irradiated with the RGB components of the light separately to detect a part of each of the RGB components with the sensor, a timing of the irradiation of each of the RGB components is synchronized with a timing of the detection with the sensor such that a light intensity of each of the RGB components of the light is detected to detect the color based on the light intensity (see the abstract). Thus, this method of detecting color is known in the prior art. Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to in the step of detecting the color, when the colored optical fiber is irradiated with the RGB components of the light separately to detect a part of each of the RGB components with the sensor, a timing of the irradiation of each of the RGB components is synchronized with a timing of the detection with the sensor such that a light intensity of each of the RGB components of the light is detected to detect the color, and in the step of determining whether the color is good or bad, whether the color is good or bad is determined based on the light intensity for the purpose of providing light with a color detection light source and measurement method that is already known and would not produce unexpected or novel results from the known method’s practice.
Regarding claim 5; Kaneko, Agawa, and Bertz teach or suggests the method for manufacturing a colored optical fiber according to claim, wherein in the step of detecting the color, the colored optical fiber is irradiated with light including RGB components, such that a light intensity of each of the RGB components of the light is detected to detect the color, and in the step of determining whether the color is good or bad, whether the color is good or bad is determined based on the light intensity, but do not disclose transmitted light of the light transmitted through the colored optical fiber is detected with the sensor.
Inaoka teaches that the method of determining the color value of the object to be measured by measuring the transmitted light is known (see Figure 1). Thus, a person skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, could have easily adopted the method of determining the color applied to an optical fiber core, including determining the color value of the object to be measured by measuring the transmitted light with not novel or unexpected results.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaneko et al. (JP 07-065656 A; hereafter Kaneko) in view of Agawa (JP 08-202920 A) and Bertz et al. (US 2006/0062907 A1; hereafter Bertz), and in further view of Nohara et al. (JP 06-160189 A; hereafter Nohara).
Regarding claim 4; Kaneko, Agawa, and Bertz teach or suggests the method for manufacturing a colored optical fiber according to claim 2, wherein in the step of detecting the color, the colored optical fiber is irradiated with light and a part of the light is detected with the sensor such that a light intensity of each of the RGB components of the light is detected to detect the color, and in the step of determining whether the color is good or bad, whether the color is good or bad is determined based on the light intensity (Kaneko teaches that a fiber sensor (21, 22) is used to detect the RGB components of the light, and Agawa teaches that a fiber sensor (30) includes a fiber (32) for providing white light that is reflected to fibers (33) which sense RGB components), but do not specify that white light is used to irradiate the colored optical fiber.
Nohara teaches that natural light (i.e. white light) may be used for color judging methods for covered wires (see the title and abstract). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the present invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use white light to irradiate the colored optical fiber, for the purpose of providing light with a color detection light source and measurement method that is already known and would not produce unexpected or novel results from the known method’s practice.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed February 5, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant respectfully traverses the rejections.
Applicant respectfully submits that the features, as recited in the claims, uniquely
addresses challenges specific to optical fiber manufacturing, such as high-speed processes, long production runs, and the need for color transitions with minimal downtime and waste. These technical nuances are absent in the disclosures of Kaneko, Bertz, and Agawa.
Applicant explains that, specifically, claim 1, as amended, involves a color detection and switching mechanism optimized for minimizing production interruptions. By leveraging precise color detection and discarding only minimal defective portions during transitions, the claims provide for substantial operational improvements, and such advancements are thoroughly detailed in the specification. (See, paras [0058] and [0059] of the originally-filed application).
Kaneko teaches that when changing the color of the coating resin, being able to detect the completed color point without relying on visual inspection by an operator, and to extra only the portion where the old color and the new color are mixed that occurs during the color change, minimizes product loss due to failure to detect the complete color change (see the purpose statement on page 2 of the machine translation of Kaneko).
Applicant respectfully submits that Kaneko, Bertz, and Agawa fail to disclose or render obvious the synergy between switching techniques tailored for optical fiber processes and integrated color detection mechanisms that validate the transitions, and this integration enables the system to achieve unprecedented flexibility and efficiency in manufacturing.
The examiner disagrees. The claimed limitations are taught and/or suggested by the prior art as applied above.
Applicant argues that Kaneko, to the extent understood, discloses a covering resin 6 that is heated and melted in a screw cylinder 3 of a resin extruder 2 into a wire 300. (See, Kaneko at para. [0019]). A cross head 5 is connected to the screw cylinder 3, is intended to cover the covering resin 6, which was heated and melted in the screw cylinder 3 of the resin extruder 2 into wire 300, and to a tip of the crosshead 5, the die 7 is mounted, the die 7 is a flange 9 that is provided on a rear end portion of a die body 8. (Id.).
As explained in paragraph 4 of Kaneko (see page 5 of the machine translation), a resin extruder extrudes a color coating over a wire.
Applicant states that the Office Action on pages 4-5 provides:
Kaneko et al. does not disclose an optical fiber, wherein before the step of feeding the colored resin into the die, the method further includes:
o a step of forming a glass fiber by drawing an optical fiber preform while heating the optical fiber preform, and
o a step of applying primary resin to a periphery of the glass fiber to form the coated optical fiber including a primary resin layer,
o the step of feeding the colored resin into the die includes applying the colored coating to the primary resin layer.
Kaneko et al. does not disclose that the coating is on optical fiber, but instead discloses that the colored coating on an electrical wire.
The Office Action relies on Bertz and Agawa to cure these deficiencies.
Bertz, to the extent understood, discloses a method of incorporating color concentrates into coating lines to color optical fiber. Applicant respectfully submits that Bertz explicitly focuses on maintaining color uniformity throughout production and does not disclose any teaching or system for making color changes mid-production. Instead, Bertz introduces portable systems for easier setup across different production lines and does not address inline transitioning between colors on the same production line, as disclosed in the recited features of the claims.
The examiner notes that Bertz is not relied upon to teach a color changes mid-production. Kaneko teaches color changes mid-production.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Bertz is relied upon to teach that a colored coating may be extruded onto an optical fiber and further disclose the method of forming the optical fiber with a primary resin layer thereon.
Applicant states that Agawa, to the extent understood, discloses a processing unit that determines the presence or absence of an abnormality in the coating layer based on the color of the light, and emits a signal when an abnormality is present in the coating layer.
Agawa is relied upon to teach that a colored coating may be extrude onto an optical fiber.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Applicant respectfully submits that Kaneko, Bertz, and Agawa, whether taken individually or in combination, fails to disclose or render obvious at least "a step of feeding a first colored resin used as secondary resin into the die from a tank filled with the first colored resin and applying the first colored resin to a periphery of the primary resin layer to form a secondary resin layer, and after applying the first colored resin to the periphery of the primary resin layer to form the secondary resin layer, switching, using a valve, the feeding the first colored resin into the die to a step of feeding a second colored resin having a color different from the color of the first colored resin into the die from a tank filled with the second colored resin and applying the second colored resin to the periphery of the primary resin layer to form a secondary resin layer," as recited in claim 1.
The examiner disagrees.
Kaneko is relied upon to teach application of a colored coating onto a wire or cable with a color change mid-production and with the use of a switching and a valve (see the rejection above).
Bertz and Agawa are relied upon to teach that colored coatings may be extruded onto optical fibers with primary coatings.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHELLE R CONNELLY whose telephone number is (571)272-2345. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9 AM to 5 PM.
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, Uyen-Chau Le can be reached at 571-272-2397. 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.
/MICHELLE R CONNELLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874