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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 26, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed February 26, 2026 has been fully considered and entered.
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 § 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 1-3 and 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishimura et al. (US 2009/0257718 A1; hereafter Nishimura) in view of Rosenast (US 2003/0156807 A1); Takeuchi et al. (US 9,664,851 B2; hereafter Takeuchi); Varner et al. (US 2003/0231847 A1; hereafter Varner); Carpenter et al. (US 2005/0063645 A1; hereafter Carpenter); and Yu et al. (CN 209821426 U; hereafter Yu).
Regarding claims 1, 2, 6-7, and 9; Nishimura discloses a high fiber count, ferrule-terminated optical fiber cable assembly (see Figures 1-7), comprising:
a ferrule body (ferrule 12) having a front end face (end face 4), a rear end face (the rear end face of ferrule 12 opposes end face 4), and an aperture (the aperture includes an opening at the rear end face, internal cavity 2e, and holes/apertures 6a at the front end face 4, through which optical fibers 1 extend) extending between the front end face and the rear end face (see Figures 1-5);
a first two-dimensional array of optical fibers (optical fibers 1; see Figures 1B, 4, and 7) having a substantially constant first fiber pitch extending through the aperture of the ferrule body and terminated at the front end face (see Figures 1-4), each optical fiber (1; see Figures 1B and 7) of the first two-dimensional array comprising a core (core 8a), a cladding layer (cladding 8b), and a hard coating layer (coating 9a, 9) having a Young's modulus greater than 100 MPa (see paragraphs 107 and 112), wherein each optical fiber (1) of the first two-dimensional array individually and separately has a first region with a first outer diameter in a range of 100 microns to 150 microns (110 micrometers to 125 micrometers; see paragraphs 112 and 115) and a second region (coating 21; see Figure 4) with a second outer thickness, the second outer thickness different than the first outer diameter;
wherein, within the aperture of the ferrule body (12), at least a portion of the first region of each optical fiber (1) in the first two-dimensional array is arranged within a distance of each adjacent optical fiber (1) in the first two-dimensional array (see Figures 1A and 4);
wherein the ferrule body (12) comprises an outer shape selected from square, rectangular, round, and hexagonal;
further comprising adhesive material (18; see Figure 5 of Nishimura) arranged in interstitial spaces between optical fibers (1) of the first two-dimensional array within the aperture of the ferrule body (12);
wherein the ferrule body has a length in a range of from 3 mm to 15 mm (see paragraphs 22 and 23).
Nishimura discloses that the unstripped portions of the fibers are contained within a common outer coating (21a) and thus does not teach that the unstripped portions of fibers are contained individually and separately within an outer polymeric coating layer.
There exists only two possibilities for the optical fibers having an outer coating in the unstrippped region, either that the fibers are within a common outer coating forming a ribbon of fibers for easier handling or that the fibers are provided with separate outer coatings to form a loose bundle of fibers suitable for individual routing, wherein both scenarios are known to a person of ordinary skill in the art and would not appear to produce any novel or unexpected advantages. For example, Takeuchi discloses a cable assembly having a ferrule body (110) and a plurality of fibers (101, 102) each including a stripped region housed within the ferrule body (110) and a separated unstripped region (105, 106) with a polymeric coating (107). Rosenast discloses a cable assembly including a ferrule (24) containing a plurality of fibers (36) each having a stripped region within the ferrule and an unstripped region with separate polymeric coatings (37).
Given the finite options (only two), i.e. the fibers in the unstripped region either having a common outer coating or separate coatings, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to choose either option with, including choosing fibers that are each individual and separate with separate coatings in an unstripped region thereof to allow for independent routing as desired, since both scenarios were known 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).
Nishimura discloses that the outer coating or sheath (21) is provided to protect the fibers, but does not specify the thickness of the outer coating (21; see Figure 4) in the second region, and therefore not teach that the second outer diameter is in a range of 120 microns to 250 microns.
Optical fibers are known to comprise outer coatings having an outer diameter in a range of 120 microns to 250 microns. Varner teaches that a fiber comprising a core and cladding may include a hard polymer coating of 125 micron outer diameter, and an outer strippable coating having a diameter of 250 microns (see paragraph 85). Carpenter teaches that coating optical fibers may have a standard outer diameter of 125 microns and 250 microns (see paragraph 29). 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 outer coating to have a diameter within a standard range of outer diameters for the purpose of ensuring that the fiber ends are compatible with standard connectors and routing guides, including an outer diameter in a range of 120 microns to 250 microns to protect the optical fibers therein and maintain a desired structure integrity of the resulting cable, since it’s elementary in the art to provide a sheath around a coated fiber, and one of ordinary skill could have done so with no novel or unexpected results.
Nishimura does not disclose that the distance of each adjacent optical fiber is within two microns. The ferrule (12) of Nishimura includes individual apertures 6a for the fibers.
Rosenast teaches that a fiber array may be formed without individual apertures for each fiber by placing the fibers in a aperture of a body (24) such that the fibers contact for the purpose of forming a compact arrangement of fibers (see Figures 1-3 of Rosenast. Takeuchi et al. also teaches that the fibers (101, 102) may be placed within a common aperture of a body (110) and arranged to contact adjacent fibers for the purpose of providing a compact arrangement (see Figures 3A and 3B). Yu teaches that a ferrule (10) may alternatively include an opening (11) in which optical fibers (20) of a two-dimensional fiber array contact adjacent fibers for the purpose of providing a compact arrangement.
Before the effective filing date of the present invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to adjust the distance of each adjacent optical fiber to be within any range to obtain desired optical output results, including within 2 microns, by providing an open space in alternative to the apertures of Nishimura such that the fibers in the array contact adjacent fibers for the purpose of providing a more compact fiber array arrangement, since this was a known alternative prior art arrangement and one of ordinary skill could have combined the elements by known 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 2; The applied prior art teaches and/or suggests the optical fiber cable assembly as applied above to claim 1, wherein at least some optical fibers in the first two-dimensional array are arranged in contact with one or more adjacent optical fibers of the first two-dimensional array within the aperture of the ferrule body (see Figures 5 and 6 of Yu, which teach that the fibers 20 may contact adjacent fibers in a single opening 11 provided within a ferrule 10; see the rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 3; The applied prior art teaches and/or suggests the optical fiber cable assembly as applied above to claim 1, wherein:
each optical fiber (1; see Figures 1-5 of Nishimura) of the first two-dimensional array comprises the first region and the second region (see the rejection of claim 1 above), the first region being a stripped region (coating 21/21a is removed to form the stripped region of fibers 1; see Figures 4 and 5) and an unstripped region (the unstripped region includes coating 21/21a), wherein in the unstripped region each optical fiber (1; see Figures 1B, 4 and 5) comprises the core (8a), the cladding layer (8b), the hard coating layer (9), and at least one outer polymeric coating (21a) disposed around the hard coating layer (9), and wherein in the stripped region each optical fiber (1) is devoid of an outer polymeric coating (21a) disposed around the hard coating layer (9), the stripped region including an end stripped region and a medial stripped region (see Figure 5);
the end stripped region of each optical fiber (1) of the first two-dimensional array extends within the aperture of the ferrule body (12; see Figure 5 of Nishimura);
the first two-dimensional array comprises a second fiber pitch corresponding to the unstripped region of each optical fiber (1) of the first two-dimensional array, the second fiber pitch being greater than the first fiber pitch (see Figure 5 of Nishimura; additionally the examiner notes that for adjacent optical fibers touching each outer in a single opening as suggested by the teachings of Yu et al., the fiber pitch is smaller); and
for each optical fiber (1) of the first two-dimensional array, a pitch transition area including the medial stripped region is arranged between the unstripped region and the end stripped region (see Figure 5 of Nishimura).
Regarding claim 8; The applied prior art teaches and/or suggests the optical fiber cable assembly as applied above to claim 1, wherein the hard coating layer has a thickness, but do not teach that the thickness is in a range of from 1 μm to 15 μm. Before the effective filing date of the present invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to provide a coating with any desired thickness, including a thickness ranging from 1 μm to 15 μm for the purpose of providing a thin coating that is sufficient to protect the integrity of the optical fiber core and cladding within the coating and thin enough to allow for a desired reduced diameter of the optical fibers to increase the number of optical fibers that may be provided in a two-dimensional array within the same ferrule, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233), since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component and it has been held that a change in size is generally recognized in as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955)) and that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device (In re Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984)).
Regarding claim 10; The applied prior art teaches and/or suggests the optical fiber cable assembly as applied above to claim 1, wherein the first two-dimensional array comprises a number of fibers, but does not specifically teach that the number is at least 72 optical fibers. Nishimura teaches that the number of fibers are not limited and may vary without limitation (see paragraph 75). Before the effective filing date of the present invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to provide a greater number of fibers by providing fibers of smaller diameter (see paragraph 114 of Nishimura) that allow for more fibers within the same ferrule because of the reduced diameter, since this is the purpose of the invention of Nishimura.
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishimura et al. (US 2009/0257718 A1; hereafter Nishimura) in view of Rosenast (US 2003/0156807 A1); Takeuchi et al. (US 9,664,851 B2; hereafter Takeuchi); Varner et al. (US 2003/0231847 A1; hereafter Varner); Carpenter et al. (US 2005/0063645 A1; hereafter Carpenter); and Yu et al. (CN 209821426 U; hereafter Yu), and in further view of Nishimura et al. (JP 2009-230105; hereafter Nishimura-2) and Takahashi et al. (JP 2010-224195 A; hereafter Takahashi).
Regarding claim 4; The applied prior art teaches and/or suggests the optical fiber cable assembly of claim 1, as applied above.
Nishimura claims priority to Nishimura-2, which teaches that the problem being solved is to increase the number of optical fibers that can be spliced without changing the external size of an optical ferrule (see the abstract; Figure 4 of Nisnimura-2 corresponds to Figure 5 of Nishimura). Yu teaches that Figures 5 and 6 are splice ends (see the brief descriptions of Figures 5 and 6).
Takahashi teaches that a ferrule (40; see Figures 1-4) having a first array of fibers (43) with a fusion end portion (43C) may be fusion spliced to a second array of fibers (2), wherein the second array of fibers (2) each include splice ends (2d) having a coating removed therefrom.
Thus, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, for the cable assembly to further comprise a second two-dimensional array of optical fibers to be spliced to the splice ends of the first two-dimensional array of optical fibers, comprising:
a second two-dimensional array of optical fibers (a second array of fibers as taught by Takahashi; the examiner notes that optical fibers are known to include core, cladding, and coating layers), each optical fiber of the second two-dimensional array comprising the first region and the second region (see the rejection of claim 1), the first region being a stripped region (without sheath/coating 21/21a) and the second region being an unstripped region (the region having sheath/coating 21/21a; the optical fibers are stripped of coating layers at the end of the fiber being spliced, as taught by Takahashi; see Figures 1-8 of Takahashi), wherein in the stripped region each optical fiber comprises a core and a cladding layer, and in the unstripped region each optical fiber comprises the core, the cladding layer, and at least one outer polymeric coating layer disposed around the cladding layer; and
a fusion splice region (Takahashi disclosed fusion splice region 3) between the first two-dimensional array of optical fibers (43C) and the stripped region of the second two-dimensional array of optical fibers (2d), wherein each optical fiber of the first two-dimensional array of optical fibers is fusion spliced to a corresponding fiber of the second two-dimensional array of optical fibers;
wherein the first two-dimensional array of optical fibers has a fiber pitch that transitions from a larger fiber pitch proximate to the fusion splice region to a smaller fiber pitch proximate to the ferrule (this is inherent when splicing a second array of fibers to the first array of fibers in the ferrule taught or suggested by Nishimura and Yu, as suggested by the teachings of Nishimura, Nishimura-2, Yu and Takahashi).
Regarding claim 5; Takahashi further teaches a thermoplastic material (22) encapsulating the fusion splice region (3) for the purpose of reinforcing and protecting the splice region. Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, would have found it obvious to further provide a thermoplastic material encapsulating the fusion splice region between a second array of fiber and the first array of fibers taught by Nishimura for the purpose of reinforcing and protecting the spliced region.
Claims 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishimura et al. (US 2009/0257718 A1; hereafter Nishimura) in view of Rosenast (US 2003/0156807 A1) and Takeuchi et al. (US 9,664,851 B2; hereafter Takeuchi).
Regarding claim 11-13, 15-17, and 19; Nishimura discloses a high fiber count, ferrule-terminated optical fiber cable assembly (see Figures 1-5), comprising:
a ferrule body (ferrule 12) having a front end face (end face 4), a rear end face (the rear end face of ferrule 12 opposes end face 4), and an aperture (the aperture includes an opening at the rear end face, internal cavity 2e, and holes/apertures 6a at the front end face 4, through which optical fibers 1 extend) extending between the front end face and the rear end face (see Figures 1-5); and
a plurality of optical fibers (1) each having a stripped region (coating 21/21a is removed to form the stripped region of fibers 1; see Figures 4 and 5) and an unstripped region (the unstripped region includes coating 21a), wherein in the stripped region each optical fiber individually and separately comprises a core (8a), a cladding layer (8b), and a hard coating layer (9) having a Young's modulus greater than 100 MPa (see paragraph 107), and in the unstripped region each optical fiber individually and separately comprises the core (8), the cladding layer (8a), and the hard coating layer (9), within one common outer polymeric coating layer (21a) disposed around the hard coating layer (9), the stripped region including an end stripped region and a medial stripped region (see Figure 5);
the plurality of optical fibers (1) in the end stripped region forms a first two-dimensional array having a first fiber pitch extending through the aperture and being terminated at the front end face (see Figure 5), and the plurality of optical fibers (1) in the unstripped region forms a second two-dimensional array having a second fiber pitch that is larger than the first fiber pitch (see Figure 5);
wherein:
the ferrule body (12) has a first maximum lateral dimension taken parallel to the front end face;
the second two-dimensional array (unstripped portion including coating 21a) has a second maximum lateral dimension; and
the second maximum lateral dimension is no more than two times greater than the first maximum lateral dimension (see Figures 4 and 5);
wherein the second maximum lateral dimension is no greater than the first maximum lateral dimension (see Figures 4 and 5);
wherein for each optical fiber (1) of the first two-dimensional array, a pitch transition area including the medial stripped region is arranged between the unstripped region and the end stripped region (see Figure 5 of Nishimura);
wherein the ferrule body (12) comprises an outer shape selected from square, rectangular, round, and hexagonal;
further comprising adhesive material (18; see Figure 5 of Nishimura) arranged in interstitial spaces between optical fibers (1) of the first two-dimensional array within the aperture of the ferrule body (12);
wherein the ferrule body has a length in a range of from 3 mm to 15 mm (see paragraphs 22 and 23).
Nishimura discloses that the unstripped portions of the fibers are contained within a common coating (21a) and thus does not teach that the unstripped portions of fibers are contained individually and separately within an outer polymeric coating layer.
There exists only two possibilities for the optical fibers having an outer coating in the unstrippped region, either that the fibers are within a common outer coating forming a ribbon of fibers for easier handling or that the fibers are provided with separate outer coatings to form a loose bundle of fibers suitable for individual routing, wherein both scenarios are known to a person of ordinary skill in the art and would not appear to produce any novel or unexpected advantages. For example, Takeuchi discloses a cable assembly having a ferrule body (110) and a plurality of fibers (101, 102) each including a stripped region housed within the ferrule body (110) and a separated unstripped region (105, 106) with a polymeric coating (107). Rosenast discloses a cable assembly including a ferrule (24) containing a plurality of fibers (36) each having a stripped region within the ferrule and an unstripped region with separate polymeric coatings (37).
Given the finite options (only two), i.e. the fibers in the unstripped region either having a common outer coating or separate coatings, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to choose either option with, including choosing fibers that are each individual and separate with separate coatings in an unstripped region thereof to allow for independent routing as desired, since both scenarios were known 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 14; Nishimura does not disclose that at least some of the optical fibers in the first two-dimensional array are arranged in contact with adjacent optical fibers of the first two-dimensional array within the aperture of the ferrule body.
The ferrule (12) of Nishimura includes individual apertures 6a for each fiber.
Rosenast teaches that a fiber array may be formed without individual apertures for each fiber by placing the fibers in a aperture of a body (24) such that the fibers contact for the purpose of forming a compact arrangement of fibers (see Figures 1-3 of Rosenast. Takeuchi et al. also teaches that the fibers (101, 102) may be placed within a common aperture of a body (110) and arranged to contact adjacent fibers for the purpose of providing a compact arrangement (see Figures 3A and 3B). Thus, before the effective filing date of the present invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to provide at least some of the optical fibers in the first two-dimensional array are arranged in contact with adjacent optical fibers of the first two-dimensional array within the aperture of the ferrule body for the purpose of forming a more compact arrangement.
Regarding claim 18; Nishimura discloses the optical fiber cable assembly of claim 11, wherein the hard coating layer has a thickness, but do not teach that the thickness is in a range of from 1 μm to 15 μm. Before the effective filing date of the present invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to provide a coating with any desired thickness, including a thickness ranging from 1 μm to 15 μm for the purpose of providing a thin coating that is sufficient to protect the integrity of the optical fiber core and cladding within the coating and thin enough to allow for a desired reduced diameter of the optical fibers to increase the number of optical fibers that may be provided in a two-dimensional array within the same ferrule, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233), since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component and it has been held that a change in size is generally recognized in as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955)) and that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device (In re Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984)).
Regarding claim 20; Nishimura discloses the optical fiber cable assembly of claim s1, wherein the first two-dimensional array comprises a number of fibers, but does not specifically teach that the number is at least 72 optical fibers. Nishimura teaches that the number of fibers are not limited and may vary without limitation (see paragraph 75). Before the effective filing date of the present invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to provide a greater number of fibers by providing fibers of smaller diameter (see paragraph 114 of Nishimura) that allow for more fibers within the same ferrule because of the reduced diameter, since this is the purpose of the invention of Nishimura.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 26 and 27 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record, which is the most relevant prior art known, does not disclose or render obvious:
the optical fiber cable assembly defined by claim 4, comprising
a protective material encapsulating the fusion splice region of an aggregate of the optical fibers between the ferrule body and the unstripped region of the aggregate of the optical fibers;
wherein the hard coating layer comprises at least one of UV-cured acrylates or organic UV-curing acrylate resins, the hard coating layer having a thickness between 0.1 μm and 10 μm, the hard coating layer having a shore D hardness value greater than 60, a pencil hardness value greater than 3H, and an elastic modulus of at least 100 MPa;
in combination with all of the limitations of base claim 1 and all of the limitations of intervening claim 4; or
the optical fiber cable assembly defined by claim 27, comprising:
a second two-dimensional array of optical fibers, each optical fiber of the second two-dimensional array comprising the first region and the second region, the first region being a stripped region and the second region being an unstripped region, wherein in the stripped region each optical fiber comprises a core and a cladding layer, and in the unstripped region each optical fiber comprises the core, the cladding layer, and at least one outer polymeric coating layer disposed around the cladding layer;
a fusion splice region between the first two-dimensional array of optical fibers and the stripped region of the second two-dimensional array of optical fibers, wherein each optical fiber of the first two-dimensional array of optical fibers is fusion spliced to a corresponding fiber of the second two-dimensional array of optical fibers; and
a protective material encapsulating the fusion splice region of an aggregate of the optical fibers between the ferrule body and the unstripped region of the aggregate of the optical fibers;
wherein the first two-dimensional array of optical fibers has a fiber pitch that transitions from a larger fiber pitch proximate to the fusion splice region to a smaller fiber pitch proximate to the ferrule;
wherein the hard coating layer comprises at least one of UV-cured acrylates or organic UV-curing acrylate resins, the hard coating layer having a thickness between 0.1 μm and 10 μm, the hard coating layer having a shore D hardness value greater than 60, a pencil hardness value greater than 3H, and an elastic modulus of at least 100 MPa;
in combination with all of the limitations of base claim 11.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the pending claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
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