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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 8/03/2026 has been 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 1-6, and 8-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WIPO Publication to Kachmar WO2013/103502 in view of the US Patent to Guan 6,741,784US.
In terms of Claim 1, Kachmar teaches a fiber optic cable bending device (Figures 1-6) comprising: a first piece (Figure 6: 220) forming a first portion of a groove (Figure 6: 220 forms the right sidewall 230 to cavity 210 located on the right side groove) with a first radius of curvature and configured to receive an optical fiber (Figure 4: 500 within groove; Page 5, lines 20-30), a curve of the groove configured to bend the fiber optic cable (Figure 4: cavity 210 has a grove opening on the right and left side. The walls of 230 and 330 are both curved) to generate a first level of attenuation on the optical fiber (bends produce loss known as bending loss of which are present when a fiber is bent); a second piece (Figure 6: 300) forming a second portion of the groove (Figure 6: walls on 330 and 316 for the inner side walls to the two grooves within cavity 210), the second piece being slidably attached to the first piece (Figure 6: wherein 300 and 220 are slidably coupled to each other via its up and down insertion); and a tensioning mechanism (Figure 4: 400; Page 8, lines 20-30) configured to apply a pressure when optical fiber is in the groove such that the bend of the optical fiber is maintained within the groove (See Figure 4: 400 and 500).
Kachmar does not teach a second groove formed within the first piece and within a same enclosure as the groove and with a second radius of curvature different from the first radius of curvature and configured to receive the optical fiber, a second curve of the second groove configured to bend the optical fiber to generate a second level of attenuation from the first level of attenuation on the optical fiber.
Guan does teaches semi-circular body having multiple grooves channels to house optical fiber cable (Figure 1) wherein a second groove (Figure 1: 100) formed within the first piece (Figure 1: portion entry on the left at 104 having two ports) and within a same enclosure as the groove (Figure 1: both grooves 100 are within the enclosure) with a second radius of curvature different from the first radius of curvature and configured to receive the optical fiber (Figure 1: see grooves 100 wherein the outermost groove have a different radius of curvature the inner groove), a second curve of the second groove configured to bend the fiber optic cable to generate a second level of attenuation from the first level of attenuation on the fiber optic cable (Figure 1: inner groove has a 2nd curve of the second groover [inner groove 100] will generate a different level of attenuation due to the greater bend). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device to contain a 2nd groove around circular arc body in order to house multiple inputs and outputs. This means groove 210 and 230 will have multiple channels similar to 100 on the left opening and right openings. Further the second piece 300 may be modified to have a second channel to match a second groove setup within the channels 210 and 230. The fibers are place in stack configuration on the arc body thus having different radius of curvature which correlates to different bending loss. The modification of having many arc grooves allows each fiber to have its individual channels and thus prevent tangling of the fiber cable.
As for Claim 2, Kachmar / Guan teaches the device of claim 1, wherein Kachmar teaches the curve of the groove having a predetermined bend radius (Figure 4: opening of 210 on the left and right side defined by sidewalls).
PNG
media_image1.png
384
562
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As for Claim 3, Kachmar / Guan teaches the device of claim 1, wherein Kachmar teaches the tensioning mechanism including a spring (Figure 4: 400 is a spring; Page 8, lines 20-30).
As for Claim 4, Kachmar / Guan teaches the device of claim 1, wherein Kachmar teaches the tensioning mechanism (Figure 4: 400) being configured to apply an opposing pressure (Figure 4: 400 applies a pressure on 500 within the groove) when at least of the first piece (Figure 6: 220 and 300) or the second piece is being slid to receive the optical fiber (Figure 6: when 220 is inserted via downward sliding motion into 300).
In regards to Claim 5, Kachmar / Guan teaches the device of Claim 1.
Kachmar does not teach the bend of the optical fiber causing an optical attenuation between 0.5 dB and 1 dB.
The attenuation profile of the fiber is a byproduct of the bend on the fiber within the groove. It would have been an obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the curvature dimension of the grooves in order to ensure proper coupling efficiency is met, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size (in this case the curvature radius of the bend in groove 210 on the left and right side) of the component. A change of size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
As for Claim 6, Kachmar / Guan teaches the device of claim 1, wherein Kachmar teaches the groove being configured to bend both bend-insensitive fibers and non-bend-insensitive fibers (all fibers inserted into the curve groove will have a bending orientation regardless of the type of fiber).
In terms of Claims 8 and 13, Kachmar teaches a fiber optic cable bending device (Figure 1-6) comprising: a first groove (Figure 4: right groove of 210) formed on a first side (Figure 4: right side of 210) and by a gap between slidably attached first piece and second piece (Figure 6: 220 and 300 are slidably attached to each other during assembly), the first groove having a first curve (Figure 4: right side of 210) configured to bend a first fiber optic cable of a first size (500), the first groove having a first predetermine bend radius base on the first radius of curvature (Figure 4: right side 210).
Kachmar does not teach a second groove formed on a second side, the second grooved formed within the first piece and having a second curve with a second radius of curvature different from the first radius of curvature configured to bend a second optical fiber; the second groove having a second predetermined bend radius base on the second radius of curvature.
Guan does teaches semi-circular body having multiple grooves channels to house optical fiber cable (Figure 1) wherein a second groove formed on a second side (Figure 1: right side contain an inner groove 100 that sits under an outside groove 100), the second groove formed within the first piece and having a second curve with a second radius of curvature different from the first radius of curvature (Figure 1: grooves 100 have different bending radius and bend radius of curvature base on inner one being different than the outer groove 100); the second groove having a second predetermined bend radius base on the second radius of curvature (Figure 1: the inner side groove 100 has a different radius of curvature profiled than the outermost groove 100 which forces fiber in each groove to have a first and second radius of curvature). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device to contain a 2nd groove around circular arc body in order to house multiple inputs and outputs. This means groove 210 and 230 will have multiple channels similar to 100 on the left opening and right openings. Further the second piece 300 maybe modified to have a second channel to match a 2 grooves setup within the channels 210 and 230. The fibers are place in stack configuration on the arc body thus having different radius of curvature which correlates to different bending loss. The modification of having many arc grooves allows each fiber to have its individual channels and thus prevent tangling of the fiber cable.
Kachmar and Guan does not teach wherein the fibers are of different sizes.
It would have been an obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the width dimension of the grooves to accommodate different fiber dimensions. This allows the retainer to be compatible with different type of thickness fibers use in optical communication, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size (the thickness of the fiber cable and the diameter of the groove) of the component. A change of size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
In regards to Claim 9, Kachmar / Guan teaches the device of claim 1, wherein Kachmar teaches further comprising a tensioning mechanism (Figure 4: 400) configured to apply a pressure when the first fiber optic cable (Figure 4: 500) in the first groove such that the bend of the first fiber optic cable is maintained within the first groove (Figure 4: tension mechanism 400 applies pressure to fiber 500 in groove 210 on either left or right side).
In regards to Claim 10, Kachmar / Guan teaches the device of claim 1, wherein Kachmar teaches the tensioning mechanism comprising a spring (Figure 4: 400 and Page 8, lines 20-30).
In regards to Claim 11, Kachmar / Guan teaches the device of claim 1, wherein Kachmar teaches further comprising a tensioning mechanism (Figure 4: 400) configured to apply an opposing pressure when at least of the first piece or the second piece is being slid to receive the first fiber optic cable (Figure 4: 400 applies pressure after first piece 220 and 2nd piece 300 is fully assembled).
In regards to Claim 12, Kachmar / Guan teaches the device of claim 1, wherein Kachmar teaches the bend of the fiber optic cable (Figure 4: 500) being configured to maintained within the second groove through a manual pressure (Figure 4: 500 bend is maintained by spring 400; Page 8, lines 20-30).
In regards to Claim 14, Kachmar / Guan teaches the device of Claim 8.
Kachmar does not teach the bend of the optical fiber causing an optical attenuation between 0.5 dB and 1 dB.
The attenuation profile of the fiber is a byproduct of the bend on the fiber within the groove. It would have been an obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the curvature dimension of the grooves in order to ensure proper coupling efficiency is met, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size (in this case the curvature radius of the bend in groove 210 on the left and right side) of the component. A change of size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
In terms of Claim 15, Kachmar teaches a method of causing an optical attenuation in an optical fiber (Fibers with bend will inherently have some degree of loss or attenuation), the method comprising: sliding a first piece (Figure 6: 220) of a fiber optic cable bending device across a second piece (Figure 6: 300) of the fiber optic cable bending device and against a tensioning mechanism (Figure 4: 400) to expose a groove between the pieces and having a predetermined bend radius (Figure 4: the groove 210 has a bending radius define by the curve shape of the groove and the tension member 400) to generate a first level of attenuation of the optical fiber (the level of attenuation is due to bending radius of the 1st groove as shown Figures 4 and 6); inserting and bending the optical fiber into the groove (Figure 4: 500 into 210); and releasing the first piece (Figure 6: illustrates the first piece being inserted; Figure 4 shows the first piece is fully inserted or “release” into 300) such that the tensioning mechanism (Figure 4: 400) applies a pressure to maintain the bend of the optical fiber within the groove (Figure 4: spring 400, groove 210, and fiber 500 bending orientation are maintain when fully assembled).
Kachmar does not teach inserting and bending optical fiber into a second groove formed within the first piece of the fiber optic cable bending device and with a same enclosure as the groove (Figure 1: two grooves are formed within the same enclosure), the second groove having a second predetermined bend radius different from the first predetermined bend radius to generate a second level of attenuation on the optical fiber.
Guan does teach inserting and bending an optical fiber into a second groove (Figure 1: grooves 100) formed within the first piece of the fiber optic cable bending device and with a same enclosure as the groove (Figure 1: two grooves are formed within the same enclosure), the second groove having a second predetermined bend radius different from the first predetermined bend radius to generate a second level of attenuation on the optical fiber (Figure 1: outer groove 100 has a different bending radius than the inner groove thus producing different attenuation profiles due to their respective bending radius). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device to contain a 2nd groove around circular arc body in order to house multiple inputs and outputs. This means groove 210 and 230 will have multiple channels similar to 100 on the left opening and right openings. Further the second piece 300 maybe modified to have a second channel to match a 2 grooves setup within the channels 210 and 230. The fibers are place in stack configuration on the arc body thus having different radius of curvature which correlates to different bending loss. The modification of having many arc grooves allows each fiber to have its individual channels and thus prevent tangling of the fiber cable.
As for Claim 16, Kachmar teaches the method of claim 15, the tensioning mechanism comprising a spring (Figure 4: 400 and Page 8, lines 20-30).
In regards to Claim 17, Kachmar teaches the method of Claim 15.
Kachmar does not teach the bend of the optical fiber causing an optical attenuation between 0.5 dB and 1 dB.
The attenuation profile of the fiber is a byproduct of the bend on the fiber within the groove. It would have been an obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the curvature dimension of the grooves in order to ensure proper coupling efficiency is met, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size (in this case the curvature radius of the bend in groove 210 on the left and right side) of the component. A change of size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
As for Claim 18, Kachmar teaches the method of claim 15, the optical fiber comprising at least one of a bend-insensitive fiber or a non-bend-insensitive fiber (since the claimed limitations cover all types fibers both bend insensitive and non-bend insensitive fiber, the fiber 500 of Figure 4 will meet at least one of those types of fiber).
As for Claim 19, Kachmar / Guan teaches the method of claim 15, wherein the combination as result of having a second groove as indicated in claim 15, allow the second piece to applying a manual pressure to maintain of the optical fiber within the second groove via the second piece 300 since the modification calls for the grooves of 210 to contain two input openings, the opening of 230 to also contain two openings and the second piece 300 to contain dual channels to match the two grooves on 210 and 230 respectively.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 8 and 15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any of the combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
The claims 1, 8 and 15 are now rejected in view of newly cited prior art to Guan which teaches two grooves having different bending radius profiles.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US Patent to Udelhofen 4,665,590US teaches a two-piece device used to apply tension to a corded structure via insertion of the 2nd piece into the first piece.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOANG Q TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5049. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 am - 5:30pm Monday - Friday.
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 5712722397. 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.
/HOANG Q TRAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2874
/UYEN CHAU N LE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights