DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to applicant’s amendment filed on October 17, 2025. Claims 12 and 14-24.
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 12 and 14-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schroll et al. (US 6,968,103 B1, herein “Schroll”) in view of Zheng et al. (US 2020/0041719 A1, herein “Smithson”).
Regarding claim 12, Schroll discloses a method of processing an optical fiber for coupling an external optical signal, wherein the optical fiber (20 in Fig. 6A-6C) comprises a longitudinal axis (z direction), an optical core (30) and an optical cladding (26),
the method comprising:
processing the optical cladding via a laser beam (28 in Fig. 6A) at a coupling point of the optical fiber along the longitudinal axis between a start region and an end region (see beginning and ending point of planar surface 32),
wherein,
during the processing, an effective axis of the laser beam for processing of the optical cladding is arranged skew with respect to the longitudinal axis of the optical fiber (curved substrate 24 and the skewed effective axis is shown in Fig. 6C) so as to generate an optical fiber having a coupling point for coupling-in the external optical signal, and
during the processing, the effective axis of the laser beam is guided along a movement axis which is parallel to or substantially parallel to the longitudinal axis of the optical fiber so as to process the coupling point of the optical cladding along the longitudinal axis. The examiner notes, the curved substrate 24 allows the laser beam to be skewed to the fiber longitudinal axis (at the two ends of the fiber that curve) and be “substantially parallel” to the axis at the processing site.
However, Schroll does not explicitly teach continuously uniformly rotating the optical fiber with respect to an effected axis of the laser beam about the longitudinal axis of the optical fiber during the processing so that different circumferential regions of the coupling point the optical fiber are processed.
Zheng discloses a CO2 laser (102) for ablating the cladding of fiber (10) forming discreet craters (30) spaced apart from each other in an array which extends along the longitudinal axis (20) of the optical fiber (10) and about a circumference of the optical fiber (10). The fiber is shown to continuously uniformly rotating the optical fiber with respective the effected axis of the laser beam from laser (102) about the longitudinal axis of the optical fiber during the processing at different circumferential regions (Fig. 6 and Para [0038]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the laser system of Zheng for processing the optical fiber by ablating the cladding of the fiber such that light coupling an external optical signal at different circumferential regions of the coupling point of the fiber of Schroll. One would be motivate to employ the CO2 laser of Zheng for its discrete and accurate ablation uniformly formed around the fiber as shown in Fig. 8.
Claims 14 and 20, Schroll in view of Zheng (herein “Schroll / Zheng”) disclose the substrate (24) is curved such that as the CO2 laser beam traverses over the processing region of the fiber the distance of the laser beam would varies, such that the center of the fiber would have the shortest distance from the laser beam and the two curved ends of the fiber would have the longer distance from the laser beam (Schroll: Figs. 6A-6C and Col. 4, lines 1-16).
Claim 15, Schroll discloses the invention of claim 12, but Schroll does not explicitly disclose changing a distance of the effective axis of the laser beam to the longitudinal axis of the optical fiber at least one of at the start region and at the end region of the coupling point so as to produce at least one of a uniform geometric transition and a uniform optical transition of the coupling point to the optical fiber.
The combined teaching of Schroll in view of Zheng would necessitate the modification of changing the distance of the effective axis of the laser beam to the longitudinal axis of the optical fiber via the drive mechanism. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the laser beam distance to remove the predetermined shape of the cladding for the coupling design, 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 (C.C.P.A. 1955).
Claim 16, Schroll / Zheng teach the invention of claim 15, except for wherein the distance of the effective axis at least one of at the start region and at the end region of the coupling point is changed so as to form at least one of a connection surface and an insertion surface at an angle of 0.01˚ to 90˚ with respect to the longitudinal axis. The combined teaching of Schroll / Zheng would necessitate the modification of changing the distance of the effective axis at least one of a start region and at the end region of the coupling point is changed via the drive mechanism adjusting the fiber position on the z- axis (Zheng [0043]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the laser beam distance to remove the predetermined shape of the cladding for the coupling design, 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 (C.C.P.A. 1955).
Claim 17, Schroll / Zheng teach the invention of claim 15, except for the distance of the effective axis at least one of at the start region and at the end region of the coupling point is changed so as to form at least one of the connection surface and the insertion surface at the optical cladding at an angle with respect to the longitudinal axis (Zheng: Para [0026]). The combined teaching of Schroll / Zheng would necessitate the modification of changing the distance of the effective axis at least one of a start region and at the end region of the coupling point is changed via the drive mechanism adjusting the fiber position in z- axis (Zheng: Para [0043]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the laser beam distance to remove the predetermined shape of the cladding for the coupling design, 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 (C.C.P.A. 1955).
Claim 18, Schroll / Zheng teach the invention of claim 12, except for the effective axis of the laser beam and the longitudinal axis of the optical fiber are arranged at an angle of 45˚ to 135˚ or at right angles to each other. The combined teaching of Schroll / Zheng would necessitate the modification of changing the distance of the effective axis at least one of a start region and at the end region of the coupling point is changed via the drive mechanism adjusting the fiber position z- axis (Para [0043]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the laser beam distance to remove the predetermined shape of the cladding for the coupling design, 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 (C.C.P.A. 1955).
Claim 19, Schroll / Zheng teach the invention of claim 12, except for the effective axis of the laser beam and the longitudinal axis of the optical fiber are arranged at an angle of 85˚ to 95˚ to each other (Zheng: Para [0026]). The combined teaching of Schroll / Zheng would necessitate the modification of changing the distance of the effective axis at least one of a start region and at the end region of the coupling point is changed via the drive mechanism adjusting the fiber position in the z-axis (Zheng: Para [0043]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the laser beam distance to remove the predetermined shape of the cladding for the coupling design, 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.
Claim 21, Schroll / Zheng disclose indirectly that varying a power of the laser beam so as to vary a processing power at the optical cladding. Schroll teaches an alternative to ablating one fiber at a time, a more powerful laser with a beam width that spans all the fibers, by use of a cylindrical lens, could be used to ablate multiple fibers simultaneously (Col. 7, lines 34-49).
Claims 22-23, Schroll / Zheng teach a coupling arrangement comprising a feed fiber (34); an optical fiber (20) and a coupling point (at 38) for transmitting an optical signal from the feed fiber into the optical fiber, wherein the feed fiber introduces the optical signal into the optical fiber at the coupling point and is connected to the optical fiber, and the optical fiber is processed as recited in claim 21. A light source or “an external optical signal” is connected to the fiber to facilitate adjustment of the coupler prior to final assembly (Schroll: Col. 6, lines 4-11).
Claim 24, Schroll / Zheng disclose a manufacturing arrangement for manufacturing the coupling point for coupling an external optical signal into an optical fiber, the manufacturing arrangement comprising:
a fiber receptacle (block 30) comprising a fiber receiving axis, and
a laser receptacle (laser 28) comprising a laser receiving axis,
wherein,
the optical fiber comprises,
a longitudinal axis (z-axis),
an optical core (30), and
an optical cladding (26), and
for coupling an external optical signal (Col. 6, lines 4-11),
the optical cladding is processed at the coupling point (Figs. 6A-6C) of the optical fiber along the longitudinal axis between the start region and the end region via a laser beam (28), and
the fiber receiving axis of the fiber receptacle (30) and the laser receiving axis (28) of the laser receptacle are arranged skewed to each other (curved substrate 24).
However, Schroll does not disclose the optical fiber is subjectable to a continuously uniformly rotated about the fiber receiving axis.
Zheng discloses a CO2 laser (102) for ablating the cladding of fiber (10) forming discreet craters (30) spaced apart from each other in an array which extends along the longitudinal axis (20) of the optical fiber (10) and about a circumference of the optical fiber (10). The fiber is shown to continuously uniformly rotating the optical fiber with respective the effected axis of the laser beam from laser (102) about the longitudinal axis of the optical fiber during the processing at different circumferential regions (Fig. 6 and Para [0038]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the laser system of Zheng for processing the optical fiber by ablating the cladding of the fiber such that light coupling an external optical signal at different circumferential regions of the coupling point of the fiber of Schroll. One would be motivate to employ the CO2 laser of Zheng for its discrete and accurate ablation uniformly formed around the fiber as shown in Fig. 8.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 12 and 14-24 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 Erin D Chiem whose telephone number is (571)272-3102. The examiner can normally be reached 10 am - 6 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, Thomas A. Hollweg can be reached at (571) 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 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.
/ERIN D CHIEM/Examiner, Art Unit 2874
/THOMAS A HOLLWEG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874