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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendment, filed November 21, 2025, has overcome the previous rejection. The rejection based on Klein (US 2015/0009320) has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made below.
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) 1-11, 13-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Button et al. (US 5185636) in view of ‘071 (JP4018071).
In regards to claim 1, Button discloses a system for sensing presence of an optical fiber (fig. 2), the system comprising: a first illumination source (23 laser) configured to emit a first light beam (25) along an optical path aligned with a z-axis and lying in a y-z plane (z defined as up and down the page and as illustrated below); the optical fiber (13) positioned perpendicular to the optical path at a first position along the optical path, wherein the optical fiber is aligned with the y-axis (y defined as pointing out of the page as illustrated below) and a first detector (31, for example) positioned along the x-axis (x defined as left to right of the page as illustrated below) and lying in the x-z plane at a predetermined non-zero distance from the z-axis (as can be seen from fig. 2 and shown in fig. 1, detector 31 is -61.5 degrees from the Z axis); and configured to detect a portion of the first light beam refracted through the optical fiber when the optical fiber is held perpendicular to the optical path at the first position (column 6, lines 4-21).
PNG
media_image1.png
400
528
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Button is silent to a positioner configured to hold the optical fiber. However, it is inherent that something must be holding the fiber, and further, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a positioner to hold the fiber in the correct place for measurement.
For example, ‘071, in the same field of endeavor as Button of optical measurement of a fiber (technical field), shows a positioner (fig. 1, 23 and 24 “guide pulley”) configured to hold an optical fiber for measurement with an optical device (as can be seen in fig. 1, where the fiber 11 is supported by pulleys 23-24 to support the fiber between the measurement systems of 1 and 2). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art to include into Button a positioner configured to hold the optical fiber in the correct position, as taught by ‘071, in order to hold the fiber in the correct place for measurement.
In regards to claim 2, the system further comprises a collecting lens (27 for example), wherein the collecting lens is: positioned between the optical fiber and the first detector; and configured to direct the portion of the first light beam refracted through the optical fiber to the first detector when the optical fiber is in the first position (as can be seen in fig. 2, and column 6, lines 4-22).
In regards to claims 3 and 15, the combination discloses the system above which can also be applied to the method of claim 15. Button further discloses that the system can further comprise a second illumination source and a second detector (column 9, lines 33-37, wherein it is disclosed that multiples of the system of fig. 2 can be provided; as they disclose the second system being identical to the first system, the limitations, as discussed above, would be the same), wherein: the second illumination source (23 of the second system) is: configured to emit a second light beam (25 of the second system); and positioned at a second position disposed along a second optical path parallel to the optical path and lying in a second y-z plane (column 9, lines 37-39, wherein the systems would be offset from each other); and the second detector (29 of the second system) is: positioned at a third position off of the second optical path at a second non-zero distance from the second y-z plane (would be the same as discussed above in relation to the first system); and configured to detect a portion of the second light beam refracted through the optical fiber when the optical fiber is held perpendicular to the second optical path at the second position (column 6, lines 4-21).
In regards to claim 4, the combination discloses the system above. Button further discloses a second collecting lens (for example 26 of the second system, as discussed above in the rejection of claim 3), wherein the second collecting lens is: positioned between the optical fiber and the second detector (as can be seen in fig. 2); and configured to direct the portion of the second light beam refracted through the optical fiber to the second detector when the optical fiber is in the second position (as can be seen in fig. 2, and column 6, lines 4-22).
In regards to claim 5, Button discloses that the second position and the third position are characterized by an equal distance from the optical path (as the second system is disclosed as being the same as the first system, in column 9, lines 33-37, it is inherent that the distances would be the same as well).
In regards to claims 6-8, Button discloses the first illumination source comprises a first laser (column 6, lines 7-9); the first detector comprises a first photodetector (column 6, lines 13-16); the second illumination source comprises a second laser (column 9, lines 33-37 “multiple sets of laser/detector combinations shown in fig. 2); and the second detector comprises a second photodetector (column 9, lines 33-37 “multiple sets of laser/detector combinations shown in fig. 2). Button is silent to the photodetector being a photodiode. However, the examiner takes official notice that a photodiode is a well-known type of photodetector that provides fast response time and high sensitivity. Therefore, it would be obvious to choose a photodiode as the type of photodetector in order to allow for a detector that provides high response time and high sensitivity.
In regards to claim 9, Button discloses a method of detecting an optical fiber (abstract and via fig. 2), comprising: providing an optical fiber presence sensing system comprising a first illumination source (23 laser) configured to emit a first light beam (25) along an optical path aligned with a z-axis and lying in a y-z plane (z defined as up and down the page and as illustrated below); a first detector (31, for example) positioned along the x-axis (x defined as left to right of the page as illustrated below) and lying in the x-z plane at a non-zero distance from the z-axis (as can be seen from fig. 2 and shown in fig. 1, detector 31 is -61.5 degrees from the Z axis) and configured to detect the presence of light (column 6, lines 12-16); the optical fiber (13) positioned perpendicular to the optical path at a first position along the optical path, wherein the optical fiber is aligned with the y-axis (y defined as pointing out of the page as illustrated below), impinging the light beam onto at least a portion of the optical fiber (as can be seen in fig. 2, 25) refracting light from the light beam by at least a portion of the optical fiber to produce a refracted beam (column 6, lines 4-21), and detecting, by at least a portion of the refracted beam and using the first detector, the optical fiber (via 31, for example, and column 6, lines 12-16).
PNG
media_image1.png
400
528
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Button is silent to a positioner configured to position the optical fiber. However, it is inherent that something must be holding the fiber, and further, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a positioner to hold the fiber in the correct place for measurement.
For example, ‘071, in the same field of endeavor as Button of optical measurement of a fiber (technical field), shows a positioner (fig. 1, 23 and 24 “guide pulley”) configured to position an optical fiber for measurement with an optical device (as can be seen in fig. 1, where the fiber 11 is supported by pulleys 23-24 to support the fiber between the measurement systems of 1 and 2). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art to include into Button a positioner configured to hold the optical fiber in the correct position, as taught by ‘071, in order to hold the fiber in the correct place for measurement.
In regards to claim 10, the combination is disclosed above. Button further discloses detecting the optical fiber comprises detecting, using the first detector, at least a portion of the refracted beam (via 31, for example, and column 6, lines 12-16).
In regards to claim 11, the combination discloses the method above. Button further discloses that the system can further comprise a second illumination source and a second detector (column 9, lines 33-37, wherein it is disclosed that multiples of the system of fig. 2 can be provided; as they disclose the second system being identical to the first system, the limitations, as discussed above, would be the same).
In regards to claims 13-14, the combination discloses the method and system above. Button further discloses a length of the optical fiber is perpendicular to the optical path (as can be seen in fig. 2, and as shown above) and the light from the light beam is refracted through a width of the optical fiber (as shown in fig. 12, for example, and as discussed in column 6, lines 9-16).
In regards to claim 16, the combination discloses the system above (see the rejection for claims 3 and 15). Button further discloses a first collecting lens (27) positioned between the optical fiber (13) and the first detector (31) and configured to direct the portion of the first light beam refracted through the optical fiber to the first detector when the optical fiber is in the first position (as can be seen in fig. 2, and column 6, lines 4-22); and a second collecting lens positioned between the optical fiber and the second detector (for example 26 of the second system, as discussed above in the rejection of claim 3) and configured to direct the portion of the second light beam refracted through the optical fiber to the second detector when the optical fiber is in the first position (as can be seen in fig. 2, and column 6, lines 4-22).
In regards to claim 17, Button discloses the first illumination source comprises a first laser (column 6, lines 7-9); the first detector comprises a first photodetector (column 6, lines 13-16); the second illumination source comprises a second laser (column 9, lines 33-37 “multiple sets of laser/detector combinations shown in fig. 2); and the second detector comprises a second photodetector (column 9, lines 33-37 “multiple sets of laser/detector combinations shown in fig. 2). Button is silent to the photodetector being a photodiode. However, the examiner takes official notice that a photodiode is a well-known type of photodetector that provides fast response time and high sensitivity. Therefore, it would be obvious to choose a photodiode as the type of photodetector in order to allow for a detector the provides response time and high sensitivity.
In regards to claims 18-19, the combination discloses the system as discussed above. Button further discloses a length of the optical fiber is perpendicular to the first/second optical path (as can be seen in fig. 2, and as discussed above) and the portion of light from the first/second light beam is refracted through a width of the optical fiber (as shown in fig. 12, for example, and as discussed in column 6, lines 9-16).
In regards to claim 20, the combination discloses the method, as discussed above. Button further discloses that refracting light from the light beam comprises a vertical line disposed along the x-axis (as can be seen in fig. 13).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Button et al. (US 5185636) in view of ‘071 (JP4018071), as applied to claims 1-11, 13-20 above, and further in view of Atwood et al. (5,519,487).
In regards to claim 12, Button and ‘071 disclose the method, as discussed above. The combination is silent to determining, using the first detector and the second detector, a position of the optical fiber.
Atwood, in the same field of endeavor of optical inspection of a fiber (abstract) discloses using the exact same arrangement as Button and adding additional hardware to allow the further capability of determining the position of the optical fiber while still keeping the functionality of the previous device, and thus allowing control of said position to keep the fiber centered (see fig. 2, column 2, lines 32-40 and column 3, lines 23-29 and 50-56). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include the hardware discussed by Atwood, into the device of Button in view of ‘071 in order to allow additional functionality of the device to determine the position of the fiber, and thus allow the system to control the position of the fiber to keep it centered while performing the other measurements of Button.
Additional Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Huang et al. (6717659, fig. 1), Fischer et al. (5309221, fig. 2), Dotson et al. (5283628, fig. 2), and Frazee Jr, et al. (4027977, fig. 1 and 3) all disclose a similar system for sensing an optical fiber.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 KARA E GEISEL whose telephone number is (571)272-2416. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10am-6pm.
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, Allana Bidder can be reached at 571-272-5560. 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.
/KARA E. GEISEL/
Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights