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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of invention I, claims 1-13 and 21-25, in the reply filed on 11/04/25 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The prior art documents submitted by applicant in the Information Disclosure Statement filed on 05/24/23, have all been considered and made of record (note the attached copy of form PTO/SB/08a).
Specification
4. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) 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.
8. Claims 1-2 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Parikh et al. (US-2009/0185782-A1) in view of Marmon et al. (US-20120230645-A1).
With respect to claim 1, Parikh et al. (figures 2-3, 4A and 7E) disclose a basket (50) for a fiber management assembly of a telecommunications closure, the basket (50) extending from a bottom to a top along a first axis (see the annotation in figure 2 below), from a first side to a second side along a second axis (see the annotation in figure 2 below), and from a front to a back along a third axis (see the annotation in figure 2 below), the basket comprising: a basket volume configured to store loops of optical fibers (the optical ribbon fibers from distribution cables can be stored in the first slack storage layer 60 under the first tabs 51. Optical ribbon fiber loops or fibers in the transition tubing can be managed and tied to the basket ([0038])); and a basket mounting portion (mounting bracket portion 42) configured to mount the basket to a tower (22) configured to pivotally support fiber management trays (90a, 90b), the basket mounting portion including a pair of resilient latch arms (42) having catches (see the annotation in figure 4A below).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow] Second axis First axis Third axis
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
356
250
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]Catches resilient latch arms
PNG
media_image2.png
362
550
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Parikh et al. do not explicitly disclose resilient latch arms having a keying tab defining a keying notch.
However, Marmon et al. (figure 6) teach an optical device including resilient latch arms having a keying tab (122) defining a keying notch (see the annotation in figure 6 below). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Parikh et al. to include the above features (accordance with the teaching of Marmon) for the purpose of inhibiting vibration or rattling of the tab member ([0045]).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow] A keying tab A keying notch
PNG
media_image3.png
642
550
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Marmon et al. (figure 6)
With respect to claim 2, Parikh et al. (figures 2-3, 4A and 7E) substantially disclose all the limitations of claimed invention except the keying tab and the keying notch are positioned between the pair of resilient latch arms.
However, Marmon et al. (figure 6) teach an optical device including the keying tab (122) and the keying notch are positioned between the pair of resilient latch arms (118) (see figure 6). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Parikh et al. to include the above features (accordance with the teaching of Marmon) for the purpose of inhibiting vibration or rattling of the tab member ([0045]).
With respect to claim 9, Parikh et al. (figures 2-3, 4A and 7E) substantially disclose all the limitations of claimed invention except for the tower.
However, Marmon et al. (figure 7) teach an optical device including the tower (80, figure 7). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Parikh et al. to include the above feature (accordance with the teaching of Marmon) for the purpose of routing and organizing the fiber optic ribbons ([0035]).
With respect to claim 10, Parikh et al. (figures 2-3, 4A and 7E) substantially disclose all the limitations of claimed invention except the basket is constructed entirely of plastic.
However, the basket being constructed entirely of plastic is considered to be obvious to provide high performance of optical signal transmission. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Parikh et al. to include the above feature for the purpose of providing high performance of optical signal transmission. It is also noted that it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Allowable Subject Matter
9. Claims 3-8 and 24-25 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 prior art of record fails to disclose the basket, wherein the basket mounting portion includes ribs configured to frictionally engage the tower, the ribs being positioned at front and back sides of the basket mounting portion as recited in claim 3; wherein the basket mounting portion includes a pair of opposing stabilizing tabs, wherein the pair of resilient latch arms are configured to engage the tower to inhibit upward movement of the basket relative to the tower; and wherein the pair of opposing stabilizing tabs are configured to engage the tower to inhibit movement parallel to the second axis of the basket relative to the tower as recited in claim 6; wherein the basket mounting portion includes stabilizing walls configured to engage outer surfaces of an arm of the tower to inhibit movement parallel to the second axis of the basket relative to the tower as recited in claim 8; wherein the pair of resilient latch arms are configured to flex away from each other and towards each other to latch to the tower as recited in claim 24 and wherein the pair of resilient latch arms are configured to flex parallel to each other to latch to the tower as recited in claim 25.
Claims 4-5 depend from claim 3.
Claim 7 depend from claim 6.
10. Claims 11-13 and 21-23 are allowed.
The prior art of record fails to disclose or reasonably suggest all the limitations of claim 11. Specifically, the prior art fails to disclose a fiber management assembly of a telecommunications closure as set forth in claim 11.
Claims 12-13 depend from claim 11.
The prior art of record fails to disclose or reasonably suggest all the limitations of claim 21. Specifically, the prior art fails to disclose a fiber management system of a telecommunications closure as set forth in claim 21.
Claims 22-23 depend from claim 21.
Conclusion
11. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Beymer (US 20250028134 A1) and Claessens et al. (US 20210382258 A1) disclose a fiber optic closure. Aznag et al. (US 20180039037 A1) disclose telecommunications enclosures.
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jennifer Doan whose telephone number is (571) 272-2346. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday from 7:00am to 3:30pm.
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 Hollweg can be reached on 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 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.
/JENNIFER DOAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874