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 .
Detailed Action
Applicant’s election with traverse of Group IV (claim 19) but with traverse on all groups of I-IV is acknowledged. The traverse is on the grounds that the restriction requirement is unappropriated since all groups share the same technical features. The examiner upon close review of the groups realizes that only claim 1 (of group I) is being generic to claim 19 thus completely overlaps with group IV invention. While other cited groups do not share at least one technical feature such as (reinforced optical cable connector) with these groups. Thus the examiner currently incorporates examination of groups I and IV together and groups II-II are withdrawn. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Information Disclosure Statement
The prior art documents submitted by Applicant(s) in the information Disclosure Statement(s) have all been considered and made of record (note the attached copy of form(s) PTO-1449).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the drawings figures 1-9 have multiple labels must pointedly show each label with its corresponding features to identify the claimed invention feature(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The applicant is kindly advised to delete numerical characters in the claim as labels for features of the claimed for clarity and OCR purpose.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2 and 5 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 2 is indefinite for reciting “the clamping portion” as it lacks adequate antecedent basis.
Claim 5 is indefinite for reinstating an offset for engaging the optical adapter as it is not clear where the “offset” is and to which feature of the claimed invention it belongs to, thus making the scope of the claim indefinite/vague.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
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 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.
Claims 1 and 5-6 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Coenegracht (US 11226456 B2).and further in view of “Lu” et al., WO 2009/076364 having publication US 20090148104 A1. .
Regarding claim 1, Coenegracht teaches an optical cable connector ferrule 100 for connecting a reinforced optical cable connector 90 to an optical adapter 504 for optical coupling (shown in figs. 14a,b-16; also all 1-16), the “ferrule” (150 containing the optical fiber cable as “ferrule” noting that ferrule in the art is a generic term as a housing and/or sleeve to protect the optical fiber/fiber-cable ) characterized in that it comprises: a cavity to house an optical cable connector 102 connected to an optical cable 90/92; and a fastening portion comprising slots (i.e., items 180, 168) for fastening and aligning with the optical adapter 504.
However, Coenegracht does not explicitly teach that the above cable connector is a cable connector plug. Nonetheless, the cable connector of Coenegracht has snap mechanism (see at least summary) for the connector coupling and that in the background of the invention such conventional snap mechanism for the connector is stated to be described in WO 2009/07636 to Reagan/Lu in which such snaping is a connector plugging. Thus it is obvious/well-known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention made that snap mechanism of a cable connector is cable connector plug for coupling a ferrule/adapter system to optical fiber cable.
5. (Currently Amended) Optical cable connector ferrule according to claim 1, characterized in that it comprises an offset for engaging the optical adapter (see at least fig. 14 with multiple “offsets” for engaging the optical adapter 504.
6. (Currently Amended) Optical cable connector ferrule according to claim 1 characterized in that the attachment portion comprises projections adjacent to the slots (see at least fig. 14 with multiple threads as projections adjacent to the slots between the threads).
.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3-4 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.
Claim 19 is allowed.
Citation of Relevant Prior Art
Prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. In accordance with MPEP 707.05 the following references are pertinent in rejection of this application since they provide substantially the same information disclosure as this patent does. These references are:
US 20120237173 A1
US 20080121047 A1
WO 2017046190 A2
US 20180329158 A1
US 6856747 B2
US 20190079260 A1
US 11226456 B2
US 20190265418 A1
US 11262520 B2
US 20170003458 A1
US 20170003457 A1
US 20190383432 A1
US 20190227244 A1
US 6526210 B1
WO 9964917 A2
US 20090148104 A1
US 20020197018 A1
US 20020081076 A1
US 20030002808 A1
US 20090148104 A1
US 20180217339 A1
US 20140082913 A1
US 20240103230 A1
US 20090060421 A1
US 20180224610 A1
US 10585257 B1
US 20180217338 A1
US 20210364721 A1
US 20160274311 A1
US 20210373254 A1
US 20210011235 A1
US 20050041928 A1
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Thomas A Hollweg whose telephone number is (571)270-1739. The examiner can normally be reached on 9-19.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Thomas Hollweg can be reached on571-270-1739. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KAVEH C KIANNI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874