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 7/30/2025 has been fully considered and entered.
The previous objections to the claims have been withdrawn in view of Applicant’s Amendment.
The previous rejections to the claims under U.S.C. 112(b) have been withdrawn in view of Applicant’s Amendment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-6 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mukasa et al. in US 20120141078 A1 (hereinafter "Mukasa").
Regarding claims 1 and 5-6, Mukasa discloses an optical fiber (10), including a method of designing and manufacturing said optical fiber (by providing optimum ranges and examples, Mukasa implies methods of designing and manufacturing; note also Para. 15), comprising:
a core portion (111);
a side core layer (112) that surrounds an outer periphery of the core portion (see Fig. 1); and
a cladding portion (12) that surrounds an outer periphery of the side core layer (112; see Fig. 1), wherein
the optical fiber is a single mode optical fiber having a W-type refractive index profile (see Para. 15 and 44),
Δ1>ΔClad>Δ2 and 0>Δ2 hold (see Fig. 2), where Δ1 (Δ1) is an average maximum relative refractive-index difference of the core portion (111) with respect to an average refractive index of the cladding portion (12; note Para. 37 where cladding 12 is identified as pure silica), Δ2 is a relative refractive-index difference of an average refractive index of the side core layer (112) with respect to the average refractive index of the cladding portion (pure silica cladding 12), and ΔClad (ΔClad equals 0; see Fig. 2 and note Para. 37) is a relative refractive-index difference of the average refractive index of the cladding portion (12) with respect to pure silica glass (12; note Para. 37 where cladding 12 is identified as pure silica),
an effective core area at a wavelength of 1550 nm (see Para. 44) is equal to or larger than 100 μm2 and equal to or less than 160 μm2 (see #91 of Fig. 6),
(Δ1-Δ2) is equal to or larger than 0.36% and equal to or less than 0.54% (for #91 of Fig. 6, Δ1-Δ2 is 0.3%-(-0.1%)= -0.4%, wherein a discrete value within the claimed range necessarily anticipates the claimed range),
Δ2 is equal to or larger than -0.23% and equal to or less than -0.08% (for #91 of Fig. 6, Δ2 is -0.1%, wherein a discrete value within the claimed range necessarily anticipates the claimed range),
b/a is equal to or larger than 2.5 and equal to or less than 3.9 (for #91 of Fig. 6, b/a=Ra2= 3, wherein a discrete value within the claimed range necessarily anticipates the claimed range) when a core diameter of the core portion (111) is 2a (see Fig. 2) and an outer diameter of the side core layer (112) is 2b (see Fig. 2),
2a is equal to or larger than 12.0μm and equal to or less than 13.6μm (for #91 of Fig. 6, 2a is 12.0 μm , wherein a discrete value within the claimed range necessarily anticipates the claimed range), and
the (Δ1-Δ2) is a value in which a cutoff wavelength is within 10 nm from a lowest value of the cutoff wavelength (the cut-off wavelength is 1500nm as in Para. 15; 1500nm is interpreted as the lowest value of the cut-off wavelength and thus is 0nm from itself and meets the claim limitation).
Regarding claim 2, Mukasa discloses that the (Δ1-Δ2) satisfies
-0.0946(b/a)3 + 0.9962(b/a)2 - 3.5477(b/a) + 4.6605 ≥ (Δ1-Δ2) ≥
-0.0840(b/a)3 + 0.8739(b/a)2 - 3.0106(b/a) + 3.7956.
Specifically, Mukasa discloses #91 of Fig. 6 wherein:
Δ2 is -0.1%
Δ1-Δ2 is 0.30% - (-0.1%) = 0.4%
b/a = Ra2 = 3
Thus:
-0.0946(b/a=3)3 + 0.9962(b/a=3)2 - 3.5477(b/a=3) + 4.6605 = 0.429
-0.0840(b/a=3)3 + 0.8739(b/a=3)2 - 3.0106(b/a=3) + 3.7956 = 0.3609
And since Δ1-Δ2 which is 0.4% and falls between 0.3609% and 0.429%, we have a sample with discrete values falling within the ranges designated by limitations of claims 1 and 2. See MPEP 2131.03 (I). "[W]hen, as by a recitation of ranges or otherwise, a claim covers several compositions, the claim is ‘anticipated’ if one of them is in the prior art." Titanium Metals Corp. v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citing in re Petering, 301 F.2d 676, 682, 133 USPQ 275, 280 (CCPA 1962)).
Regarding claim 3, Mukasa discloses that the (Δ1-Δ2) is equal to or larger than 0.37% and equal to or less than 0.44% (for #91 of Figure 6, Δ1-Δ2=0.3%-(-0.1%)=0.4%, wherein a discrete value within the claimed range necessarily anticipates the claimed range).
Regarding claim 4, Mukasa discloses that the b/a is equal to or larger than 2.8 and equal to or less than 3.8 (for #91 of Fig. 6, b/a=Ra2=3 , wherein a discrete value within the claimed range necessarily anticipates the claimed range).
Conclusion
This prior art, made of record, but not relied upon, is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure since the following references have similar structure and/or use similar structure and/or similar optical elements to what is disclosed and/or claimed in the instant application:
US 20090252470 A1 discloses a similar optical fiber.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARBY M THOMASON whose telephone number is (703)756-5817. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 8am-5pm.
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 on (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.
/DARBY M. THOMASON/Examiner, Art Unit 2874
/UYEN CHAU N LE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874