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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s Amendment filed December 16, 2025 has been fully considered and entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 18, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant states that for at least the reasons presented in the interview and without acquiescing in the Examiner's rejection, the cited sections of the applied references, whether taken alone or in any reasonable combination, do not disclose at least "a monolithic core having a rotationally varying refractive index profile about a longitudinal axis of the optical fiber," as recited in claim 17, as amended. Therefore, independent claim 17 and the claims that depend thereon, are patentable over the cited sections of the applied references.
The examiner disagrees. Yuan et al. discloses a monolithic core (see Figures 2 and 5) having a rotationally varying refractive index profile. The core has a refractive index that varies linearly in a direction transverse to the propagation axis of the optical fiber as illustrated in Figures 2 and 5, forming in a rotationally varying refractive index profile.
Inventorship
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 17, 20, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yuan et al. (CN 103969739 B; hereafter Yuan).
Regarding claims 17, 20, and 22; Yuan discloses an optical fiber (see Figures 1, 2, 5, and 7), comprising:
a monolithic core (2; see Figures 2 and 5, the core is monolithic and has a refractive index that varies linearly along a width of the core) having a rotationally varying refractive index profile about a longitudinal axis of the core (see Figures 1, 2, 5, and 7, wherein the refractive index of the core is different for different rotational positions of the core); and
a cladding (1) surrounding the monolithic core (2);
wherein the rotationally varying refractive index profile (see Figure 1, 2, 5, and 7) includes a cross-section with a slanted refractive index profile (see Figure 2(c), having a maximum value (n2) at a first circumferential or azimuthal position of the monolithic core (2), that monotonically decreases to a minimum value (n1) at a second circumferential or azimuthal position of the monolithic core (2; see the written description: “Referring to FIG. 1 FIG. 4, the first embodiment of the present invention with a section of optical fibre scroll, the cladding 1 refractive index distribution is constant FORMULA, and refractive index of fiber core 2 in the transverse direction are linearly distributed (as shown in FIG. 2, the minimum value is n1 and the maximum is n2) in the longitudinal direction is constant pitch spiral curve distribution 3”, and “Referring to FIG. 7, The second embodiment of the invention similar to the first embodiment, but the scroll optical fibre core refractive index of 2 in the transverse direction is still linear distribution, but the change in pitch in the longitudinal direction of the spiral curve distribution 14, in the preparation process, can be controlled by controlling torsion force torsion speed of 12 for implementing such a refractive index distribution.”);
wherein the rotationally varying refractive index profile (see Figures 1, 2, 5, and 7) is a spiral refractive index profile (3, 14) having one or more maxima that rotationally vary along a length of the monolithic core (2; see Figures 2, 5, and 7).
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.
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan et al. (CN 103969739 B; hereafter Yuan) in view of Parker et al. (US 2008/0101754 A1).
Regarding claims 18 and 19; Yuan discloses the optical fiber of claim 17 as applied above, wherein the monolithic core (see Figure 1, 2, 5, and 7) has a circular shape and an azimuthally varying refractive index with one or more refractive index minima and one or more refractive index maxima around a circumference of the monolithic core (see Figures 1, 2, 5, and 7). Yan does not disclose that the refractive index profile is a result of a varying dopant concentration, wherein a cross-section of the monolithic core has a non-uniform doping concentration that causes the monolithic core to have the rotationally varying refractive index profile.
The examiner takes Official notice that it’s known in the art to vary refractive index by varying dopant concentrations. Parker further teaches that different refractive indices of core and cladding materials are known to be achieved through the different concentrations of dopants (see paragraph 4).
Thus, before the effective filing date of the present invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to vary dopant concentrations within the core of Yuan to form the refractive index profile disclosed by Yuan with a method of providing desired refractive index profiles that is commonly used in the art, thereby providing a monolithic core with a circular shape and an azimuthally varying dopant concentration (corresponding to the varying refractive index) with refractive index one or more refractive index minima and one or more refractive index maxima around a circumference of the monolithic core, wherein a cross-section of the monolithic core has a non-uniform doping concentration that causes the monolithic core to have the rotationally varying refractive index profile.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan et al. (CN 103969739 B; hereafter Yuan).
Regarding claim 21; Yuan teaches that a change is pitch is achievable for the spiral refractive index (14; see figure 7) by controlling a torsion force and/or torsion speed, wherein a change in pitch results in refractive index maxima and minima in desired locations along a circumferential length of the resulting fiber. Thus, before the effective filing date of the present invention a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to form the optical fiber with refractive index maxima and minima at desired locations of the rotationally varying refractive index profile, including forming two or more azimuthal minima and maxima at opposing circumferential or azimuthal positions of the monolithic core.
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 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