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 and Status of Application
This notice is in response to the amendments filed 28 January 2026. Claims 1-4, 6-13, and 15-22 are pending in the instant application where claims 1, 6-7, 9-10, 13, 17, and 21 have been amended, claim 22 is newly added, and claims 5 and 14 have been cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 28 January 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments (remarks pages 2 and 3) with regards to the claims have been considered but are not persuasive, as they are directed to newly added limitations to the claims, namely “wherein the body portion is configured to allow illumination light, received from a perimeter zone of a lens of the optical fiber inspection device…”. This and other newly added limitations are addressed in the rejection below.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to for the following reason(s): lines 14-15 of the claim as it appears recites “toward an angled end face of an optical fiber of the optical fiber inspection device to exit through the illumination light the illumination light”. The underlined text appears to be a typo included by mistake as it does not make grammatical sense with the rest of the limitation.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites the limitation “optical element” which uses the generic placeholder “element” that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Accordingly, the limitation “optical element” is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) as corresponding to “a reflective element (e.g. a reflector, mirror,), a refractive element (e.g. a prism), and/or another type of non-diffractive element” (applicant’s specification [0015]) and equivalents thereof.
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 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.
Claims 1, 3-4, and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2022/0035104 A1 by Jean Filion et al. (herein after “Filion”) in view of US 2016/0170151 A1 by Robert Baribault (herein after “Baribault”) and further in view of US 2014/0354977 A1 by Ge Zhou et al. (herein after “Zhou”).
Regarding claim 1, Filion discloses a tip for an optical fiber inspection device (Filion [0059] and figs 2-9 discloses an adapter tip 200 [tip for an optical fiber inspection device]), comprising:
a body portion that includes a first end with a first opening, a second end with a second opening, and a chamber that extends within the body portion from the first opening of the first end to the second opening of the second end of the body (Filion fig. 3 and [0062] shows the adapter tip 200 with an opening at the proximal end 208 to engage with a connector adapter 100 and a distal end 212 with connection mechanism 210, where [0064] the connection mechanism 210 is a screw threaded mechanism [and therefore detachable] connection; [0062] discloses a housing 204 which defines a light relaying channel 216 [chamber]; fig. 15 shows the tip 200 relaying light from a microscope 904 to an optical fiber end face 104, and therefore must have openings at the proximal and distal ends, otherwise light could not be transmitted through; as an additional note, fig 8 shows the adapter 200 with the proximal end 208, and fig 7 shows the optical fiber end face 104 and associated housing 102 inserted into the proximal end 208, and therefore there must be an opening at the proximal end to receive the housing 102; either the proximal end 208 or distal end 212 qualify as being the first or second ends, but for the record the proximal end 208 is considered the “second end” (closest to the optical fiber end face) and the distal end 212 considered the “first end” (furthest from the optical fiber end face)), and
an optical element disposed on a surface of the chamber of the body portion (Filion [0065] and fig. 7 show a Rhomboid prism 228 in contact with the walls of the chamber [i.e. disposed on a surface of the chamber]),
wherein the body portion is configured to allow illumination light to enter the chamber through the first opening and impinge on the optical element,
wherein the optical element is configured to redirect the illumination light to exit through the second opening toward an angled end face of an optical fiber of the optical fiber inspection device (Filion fig. 15 and [0085] shows an inspection microscope which employs the adapter tip 200, where an illumination source illuminates the optical fiber end face 104; the light from 906 passes through the adapter tip 200 in its entirety [allow illumination light to enter the chamber through first opening] to illuminate the optical fiber end face 104; fig. 9 shows the rhomboid 228 [optical element] redirecting the light to the optical fiber end face 104 [illumination light impinge on optical element], necessarily through the second end of the body portion [optical element to redirect illumination light to exit through second opening]; [0058] discloses that the optical fiber is an angled-polished optical-fiber end face [i.e. angled end face of an optical fiber], and is also seen as angled in fig. 1),
wherein the body portion is further configured to allow reflection light reflected by the angled end face to propagate through the chamber toward a central zone of a lens of the optical fiber inspection device, wherein the central zone of the lens is within a perimeter of the lens (Filion [0065] discloses that the object beam 126, ultimately generated by the illumination source 906 of fig. 15, is reflected from the optical fiber end face 104; [0085] discloses that the reflected light from the end face is collected by objective 226 [lens] and directed to image sensor 908; due to the geometry of the adapter tip, the body portion must allow light to propagate back through the claimed first and second portions after reflected on the optical fiber tip – ultimately this light is propagated to the end face imaging assembly 904 of fig. 15 [i.e. the optical fiber inspection device]; fig. 9 discloses objective 226 where light rays are propagating towards a central zone of the objective, where the central zone is within a perimeter zone of the lens, the perimeter zone being the boundary of defined by the physical perimeter of the lens)
wherein the optical element is oriented at an angle relative to an optical axis of the optical fiber (Filion fig. 7 discloses the rhomboid 228 [optical element]; the rhomboid is essentially a parallelogram as appears in figs. 7 and 8, where the long sides of the parallelogram are oriented along an axis which is oriented at an angle relative to the axis of the optical fiber – the axis of the optical fiber is drawn as an extension of 800 through the rhomboid 228 and forms an angle with the long sides of the parallelogram)
Filion is silent to wherein the body portion is configured to allow illumination light, received from a perimeter zone of a lens of the optical fiber inspection device, to enter the chamber through the first opening and impinge on the optical element.
However, Baribault does address this limitation. Filion and Baribault are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they relate to optical fiber end face inspection.
Baribault discloses “wherein the body portion is configured to allow illumination light, received from a perimeter zone of a lens of the optical fiber inspection device, to enter the chamber through the first opening and impinge on the optical element” (Baribault [0055] discloses an optical fiber inspection system 46 comprising an objective lens 28; light from light source 102 is seen to pass through a perimeter zone of the lens [i.e. a zone of the lens that is not the central axis] as it travels through the optical fiber inspection system; as the light in the system is capable of passing through a perimeter zone of the objective lens, MPEP §2114 II. discloses that apparatus claims cover “what a device is and not what a device does” and that the “manner in which the device is operated does not limit apparatus claims”; in this case, receiving illumination light from a perimeter zone of the lens is a recitation of what the device does, rather than what it is, as Baribault is shown to have the objective lens, a light source and an optical fiber; therefore, the limitation does not differentiate the claim over the prior art).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Filion to incorporate wherein the body portion is configured to allow illumination light, received from a perimeter zone of a lens of the optical fiber inspection device to enter the chamber through the first opening and impinge on the optical element as suggested by Baribault for the advantage of enabling compensation of possible aberrations of light caused by the imaging beam (Baribault [0055]).
Filion when modified by Baribault is silent to wherein the optical element is at least partially above or below from the angled end face.
However, Zhou does address this limitation. Filion, Baribault, and Zhou are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they relate to optical fiber end face inspection.
Zhou discloses “wherein the optical element is at least partially above or below from the angled end face” (Zhou [0036] and fig. 5A show an angled end face 711 of a fiber optic connector 70; a relay lens 630 is shown at an angle above the angled end face, where “above” is in the direction of the angle α shown in the figure; the relay lens 630 of Zhou is analogous to the rhomboid optical element within Filion, and is therefore partially above or below from the angled end face).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Filion in view of Baribault to incorporate wherein the optical element is at least partially above or below from the angled end face as suggested by Zhou for the advantage of enabling the optical arrangement shown in fig. 5A to be configured/connected to a wider variety of connector types (Zhou [0021]), increasing the versatility of the arrangement.
Regarding claim 3, Filion when modified by Baribault and Zhou discloses the tip of claim 1, and Filion further teaches the tip wherein the tip is an independent component configured to attach to an end of the optical fiber inspection device, wherein the first end of the body portion contacts the end of the optical fiber inspection device when the tip is attached to the end of the optical fiber inspection device (Filion fig. 3 and [0064] show the adapter tip 200 without being connected to the inspection microscope 201 [optical fiber inspection device; the end face imaging assembly 904 from claim 1 is a part of the inspection microscope 201 as a whole]; the adapter tip 200 is attached to the microscope 201 by a screw-threaded mechanism on the adapter tip and the connection assembly 210; fig. 2 shows the adapter tip 200 attached to the microscope [i.e. is in contact with the optical fiber inspection device]).
Regarding claim 4, Filion when modified by Baribault and Zhou discloses the tip of claim 1, and Filion further teaches the tip wherein the tip is an integrated component of the optical fiber inspection device (Filion [0064]; though the adapter tip 200 is attached to the inspection microscope 201 by threads – once the pieces are successfully threaded and secure, the adapter tip 200 has become an integrated component of the inspection microscope [i.e. the tip is an integrated component of the optical fiber inspection device]; examiner notes that no definition for “integrated component” is provided in the specification, and therefore the adapter tip 200 being an integrated component of the inspection microscope is consistent with the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim).
Regarding claim 7, Filion when modified by Baribault and Zhou discloses the tip of claim 1, and Filion further teaches the tip wherein the optical fiber is included in an optical cable, and the angled end face of the optical fiber is positioned at an end of the optical cable that is recessed within at least one of an optical connector and bulkhead adapter (Filion [0057] and fig. 1 show a cross section of an optical fiber end face 104 housed within a connector adapter 100 [bulkhead adapter]; fig. 1 shows a mating sleeve 120 [optical connector], such that the optical cable is recessed both within the adapter 100 [bulkhead adapter], and mating sleeve 120 [optical connector]; the end face 104 is seen in the figure as being angled; the optical fiber end face 104 is housed within an optical fiber connector 102 [optical cable, where the fiber itself is seen as the thin line originating from the end face 104 and is coaxial with the optical fiber connector 102 [i.e. optical fiber is included in an optical cable]; [0058] discloses that the end face 104 (itself recessed within the connector 102) is “deeply recessed” within the connector adapter 100 [recessed within the bulkhead adapter and the mating sleeve 120]; the same cross-sectional view is seen in fig. 7 with the incorporation of the Rhomboid with consistent labeling and features within),
wherein the tip is configured to interface with at least one of the optical connector or the bulkhead adapter to allow the second opening of the second end of the body portion of the tip to be proximate to the angled end face of the optical fiber (Filion fig. 8 shows the adapter tip 200 with the proximal end 208 capable of receiving the connector adapter 100 [i.e. interfacing with the optical connector/bulkhead adapter]; fig. 7 shows the connector adapter 100 inserted into the proximal end 208 of the adapter tip 200, such that the second opening is proximate to the end face 104 of the optical fiber).
Regarding claim 8, Filion when modified by Baribault and Zhou discloses the tip of claim 1, and Filion further teaches the tip wherein the optical element is configured to have at least one of a reflective characteristic or a refractive characteristic (Filion fig. 9 shows the object beam 126 traveling through the Rhomboid, where reflection is taking place at certain faces of the Rhomboid (also shown in figs 16A-16C), i.e. the optical element has a reflective characteristic).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Filion in view of Baribault, in view of Zhou, and further in view of “3D Differential Phase-Contrast Microscopy with Computational Illumination using an LED Array” by Lei Tian et al. (“Tian”) (doi.org/10.1364/OL.39.001326).
Regarding claim 2, Filion when modified by Baribault and Zhou discloses the tip of claim 1. Filion when modified by Baribault and Zhou is silent to the tip of claim 1, wherein the tip is configured to allow the optical fiber inspection device to image the angled face of the optical fiber using bright field illumination.
However, Tian does address this limitation. Filion, Baribault, Zhou, and Tian are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they are in the same field of devices using light microscopy for inspection purposes.
Tian discloses the tip of claim 1, “wherein the tip is configured to allow the optical fiber inspection device to image the angled face of the optical fiber using bright field illumination” (Tian page 1326 col 2 paragraph 2 ll. 8-12 discloses the use of brightfield LEDs to generate illumination light for the microscope; Filion discloses that the illumination source is comprised of a light emitting diode (LED) and so the brightfield LEDs of Tian may be incorporated as the light source of Filion).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Filion in view of Baribault and Zhou to incorporate wherein the tip is configured to allow the optical fiber inspection device to image the angled face of the optical fiber using bright field illumination as suggested by Tian for the advantage of simplifying the hardware requirements (i.e. no need for specialized objectives or polarization optics) of the microscope and therefore reducing the cost of imaging (Tian col 1 paragraph 2 ll. 3-11).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Filion in view of Baribault, in view of Zhou, and further in view of US 2017/0003195 A1 by Denis Lafrance et al. (“Lafrance”).
Regarding claim 6, Filion when modified by Baribault and Zhou discloses the tip of claim 1. Filion when modified by Zhou is silent to the tip of claim 1, wherein the tip further includes an adjustment component that is configured to adjust an orientation angle of the optical element with respect to a reference axis that extends from the first opening of the first end to the second opening of the second end.
However, Lafrance does address this limitation. Filion, Baribault, Zhou, and Lafrance are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they are in the same field of optical fiber inspection microscopes with a tip adapter to connect the optical fiber and the microscope.
Lafrance discloses the tip of claim 1, “wherein the tip further includes an adjustment component that is configured to adjust an orientation angle of the optical element with respect to a reference axis that extends from the first opening of the first end to the second opening of the second end” (Lafrance fig. 6 and [0081] discloses a lens 28 [optical element] mounted on a lens support 30 [adjustment component], where the lens support 30 is movable; the lens 28 is tilted by pivoting the lens support, and the lens is tiltable with respect to a rotation axis 36 [reference axis – see figs. 3 and 4 for rotation axis label] that extends from a microscope probe 22 and mating interface 26; 22 and 26 are each at an end of a probe tip 24 which includes first and second openings; the angle of orientation of the optical element changes in reference to the rotation axis, since the lens support rotates about an orthogonal axis to the rotation axis 36).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Filion in view of Baribault and Zhou to incorporate wherein the tip further includes an adjustment component that is configured to adjust an orientation angle of the optical element with respect to a reference axis that extends from the first opening of the first end to the second opening of the second end as suggested by Lafrance for the advantage of efficiently shifting the imaging axis of the microscope probe across the fiber connector (MFC) to image the entirety of the optical fiber end face (Lafrance [0081]).
Claims 9, 11-13, and 15-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Filion, in view of Baribault, in view of US 2022/0066103 A1 by Yusuke Oyama, and further in view of Zhou.
Regarding claim 9, Filion discloses a tip for an optical fiber inspection device (Filion [0059] and figs 2-9 discloses an adapter tip 200 [tip for an optical fiber inspection device]), comprising:
a body portion that includes a first opening, a second opening, and a chamber that extends within the body portion from the first opening to the second opening (Filion fig. 3 and [0062] shows the adapter tip 200 with an opening at the proximal end 208 to engage with a connector adapter 100 and a distal end 212 with connection mechanism 210, where [0064] the connection mechanism 210 is a screw threaded mechanism [and therefore detachable] connection; [0062] discloses a housing 204 which defines a light relaying channel 216 [chamber]; fig. 15 shows the tip 200 relaying light from a microscope 904 to an optical fiber end face 104, and therefore must have openings at the proximal and distal ends, otherwise light could not be transmitted through; as an additional note, fig 8 shows the adapter 200 with the proximal end 208, and fig 7 shows the optical fiber end face 104 and associated housing 102 inserted into the proximal end 208, and therefore there must be an opening at the proximal end to receive the housing 102; the proximal end 208 with associated opening is considered the “second opening”, and the distal end 212 with associated opening is considered the “first opening”), wherein:
the body portion is configured to allow illumination light to enter through the first opening of the body portion and to propagate to, and impinge on, a portion,
the portion is configured to redirect the illumination light to allow the illumination light to propagate to, and exit through, the second opening of the body portion and thereby propagate to an angled end face of an optical fiber (Filion fig. 15 and [0085] shows an inspection microscope which employs the adapter tip 200, where an illumination source illuminates the optical fiber end face 104; the light from 906 passes through the adapter 200 in its entirety to illuminate the optical fiber end face 104; fig. 9 shows the rhomboid 228 redirecting the light to the optical fiber end face 104, necessarily through the second opening of the body portion [here, the rhomboid 228 is considered “a portion”, and the light having impinged upon the rhomboid, i.e. impinged upon a portion]; [0058] discloses that the optical fiber is an angled-polished optical-fiber end face [i.e. angled end face of an optical fiber], and is also seen as angled in fig. 1), wherein the portion is oriented at an angle relative to an optical axis of the optical fiber (Filion fig. 7 discloses the rhomboid 228 [“a portion” as indicated above]; the rhomboid is essentially a parallelogram as appears in figs. 7 and 8, where the long sides of the parallelogram are oriented along an axis which is oriented at an angle relative to the axis of the optical fiber – the axis of the optical fiber is drawn as an extension of 800 through the rhomboid 228 and forms an angle with the long sides of the parallelogram),
the body portion is configured to allow reflection light, reflected by the angled end face of the optical fiber, to enter through the second opening of the body portion and to propagate through, and exit from, the chamber of the body portion and thereby propagate to the optical fiber inspection device (Filion [0065] discloses that the object beam 126, ultimately generated by the illumination source 906 of fig. 15, is reflected from the optical fiber end face; [0085] discloses that the reflected light from the end face is collected by objective 226 and directed to image sensor 908; due to the geometry of the adapter tip, the body portion must allow light to propagate back through the claimed first and second portions after reflected on the optical fiber tip – ultimately this light is propagated to the end face imaging assembly 904 of fig. 15 [i.e. the optical fiber inspection device]) toward a central zone of a lens of the optical fiber inspection device, wherein the central zone of the lens is within a perimeter of the lens (Filion [0065] discloses that the object beam 126, ultimately generated by the illumination source 906 of fig. 15, is reflected from the optical fiber end face 104; [0085] discloses that the reflected light from the end face is collected by objective 226 [lens] and directed to image sensor 908; due to the geometry of the adapter tip, the body portion must allow light to propagate back through the claimed first and second portions after reflected on the optical fiber tip – ultimately this light is propagated to the end face imaging assembly 904 of fig. 15 [i.e. the optical fiber inspection device]; fig. 9 discloses objective 226 where light rays are propagating towards a central zone of the objective, where the central zone is within a perimeter zone of the lens, the perimeter zone being the boundary of defined by the physical perimeter of the lens).
Filion is silent to wherein the body portion is configured to allow illumination light from a perimeter zone of a lens of the optical fiber inspection device to enter through the first opening of the body portion and to propagate to, and impinge on, a portion.
However, Baribault does address this limitation. Filion and Baribault are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they relate to optical fiber end face inspection.
Baribault discloses “wherein the body portion is configured to allow illumination light from a perimeter zone of a lens of the optical fiber inspection device to enter through the first opening of the body portion and to propagate to, and impinge on, a portion” (Baribault [0055] discloses an optical fiber inspection system 46 comprising an objective lens 28; light from light source 102 is seen to pass through a perimeter zone of the lens [i.e. a zone of the lens that is not the central axis] as it travels through the optical fiber inspection system; as the light in the system is capable of passing through a perimeter zone of the objective lens, MPEP §2114 II. discloses that apparatus claims cover “what a device is and not what a device does” and that the “manner in which the device is operated does not limit apparatus claims”; in this case, receiving illumination light from a perimeter zone of the lens is a recitation of what the device does, rather than what it is, as Baribault is shown to have the objective lens, a light source and an optical fiber; therefore, the limitation does not differentiate the claim over the prior art).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Filion to incorporate wherein the body portion is configured to allow illumination light from a perimeter zone of a lens of the optical fiber inspection device to enter through the first opening of the body portion and to propagate to, and impinge on, a portion as suggested by Baribault for the advantage of enabling compensation of possible aberrations of light caused by the imaging beam (Baribault [0055]).
Filion when modified by Baribault is silent to illumination light entering and impinging on a portion of a surface of the chamber, the portion of the surface of the chamber configured to redirect the illumination light, and wherein the portion of the surface of the chamber is oriented at an angle relative to an optical axis of the optical fiber.
However, Oyama does address this limitation. Filion, Baribault, and Oyama are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they are related to the coupling of optical fibers via holding members and/or housing components.
Oyama discloses “illumination light entering and impinging on a portion of a surface of the chamber (Oyama [0130] and fig. 1 discloses an optical connector 1 which functions as an optical path converting unit 5; reflection plane 10 [a portion] changes the direction of illumination light 4; [0141]-[0142] discloses that the reflection plane may be a reflection mirror on a surface of the optical path converting unit [i.e. a portion of a surface of the chamber], or a prism; in a case where the reflection plane 10 is comprised of a prism, this is analogous to the rhomboid 228 of Filion, and therefore the redirection of illumination light of Filion may be done by a portion of the surface of the chamber, as in Oyama), “the portion of the surface of the chamber configured to redirect the illumination light” (Oyama fig. 1 shows the redirection of illumination light), “and wherein the portion of the surface of the chamber is oriented at an angle relative to an optical axis of the optical fiber” (Oyama fig. 1 shows the reflection plane 10 at an angle with the optical fiber 16, the fiber described in [0159]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Filion in view of Baribault to incorporate illumination light entering and impinging on a portion of a surface of the chamber, the portion of the surface of the chamber configured to redirect the illumination light, and wherein the portion of the surface of the chamber is oriented at an angle relative to an optical axis of the optical fiber as suggested by Oyama for the advantage of mitigating the effect of impact or foreign materials within the coupling system (Oyama [0079]) enabling a reliable and accurate inspection of the status of an optical fiber, and also enabling the redirection component being formed within the housing providing a more structurally sound system less sensitive to physical disturbances.
Filion when modified by Baribault and Oyama is silent to wherein the portion of the surface of the chamber is at least partially or below from the angled end face.
However, Zhou does address this limitation. Filion, Baribault, Oyama, and Zhou are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they are related to the coupling of optical fibers via holding members and/or housing components.
Zhou discloses “wherein the portion of the surface of the chamber is at least partially or below from the angled end face” (Zhou [0036] and fig. 5A show an angled end face 711 of a fiber optic connector 70; a relay lens 630 is shown at an angle above the angled end face, where “above” is in the direction of the angle α shown in the figure; the relay lens 630 of Zhou is analogous to the rhomboid optical element within Filion and reflective prism of Oyama, and is therefore partially above or below from the angled end face).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Filion in view of Baribault and Oyama to incorporate wherein the portion of the surface of the chamber is at least partially above or below from the angled end face as suggested by Zhou for the advantage of enabling the optical arrangement shown in fig. 5A to be configured/connected to a wider variety of connector types (Zhou [0021]), increasing the versatility of the arrangement.
Regarding claim 11, Filion when modified by Baribault, Oyama, and Zhou discloses the tip of claim 9, and Filion further teaches the tip wherein the tip is an independent component configured to attach to an end of the optical fiber inspection device (Filion fig. 3 and [0064] show the adapter tip 200 without being connected to the inspection microscope 201 [optical fiber inspection device; the end face imaging assembly 904 from claim 1 is a part of the inspection microscope 201 as a whole]; the adapter tip 200 is attached to the microscope 201 by a screw-threaded mechanism on the adapter tip and the connection assembly 210).
Regarding claim 12, Filion when modified by Baribault, Oyama, and Zhou discloses the tip of claim 9, and Filion further teaches the tip wherein the tip is an integrated component of the optical fiber inspection device (Filion [0064]; though the adapter tip 200 is attached to the inspection microscope 201 by threads – once the pieces are successfully threaded and secure, the adapter tip 200 has become an integrated component of the inspection microscope [i.e. the tip is an integrated component of the optical fiber inspection device]; examiner notes that no definition for “integrated component” is provided in the specification, and therefore the adapter tip 200 being an integrated component of the inspection microscope is consistent with the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim).
Regarding claim 13, Filion when modified by Baribault, Oyama, and Zhou discloses the tip of claim 9, and Filion further teaches the tip wherein the body portion is configured to allow the reflection light to exit the body portion through the first opening of the body portion toward the central zone of the lens (Filion fig. 15 and [0085] discloses an objective lens 226 [lens] collects light returned from the end face [light reflected from the end face and therefore exiting the first end of the body portion]; fig. 9 discloses objective 226 where light rays are propagating towards a central zone of the objective, where the central zone is within a perimeter zone of the lens, the perimeter zone being the boundary of defined by the physical perimeter of the lens).
Regarding claim 15, Filion when modified by Baribault, Oyama, and Zhou discloses the tip of claim 9, and Filion further teaches the tip wherein the optical fiber is included in an optical cable, and the angled end face of the optical fiber is positioned at an end of the optical cable that is recessed within at least one of an optical connector or a bulkhead adapter (Filion [0057] and fig. 1 show a cross section of an optical fiber end face 104 housed within a connector adapter 100 [optical connector or bulkhead adapter] and the end face 104 is seen in the figure as being angled; the optical fiber end face 104 is housed within an optical fiber connector 102 [optical cable], where the fiber itself is seen as the thin line originating from the end face 104 and is coaxial with the optical fiber connector 102 [i.e. optical fiber is included in an optical cable]; [0058] discloses that the end face 104 (itself recessed within the connector 102) is “deeply recessed” within the connector adapter 100 [recessed within an optical connector or bulkhead adapter]; the same cross-sectional view is seen in fig. 7 with the incorporation of the Rhomboid with consistent labeling and features within),
wherein the tip is configured to interface with at least one of the optical connector or the bulkhead adapter (Filion fig. 8 shows the adapter tip 200 with the proximal end 208 capable of receiving the connector adapter 100 [i.e. interfacing with the optical connector/bulkhead adapter]).
Regarding claim 16, Filion when modified by Baribault, Oyama, and Zhou discloses the tip of claim 9, and Filion further teaches the tip wherein the portion of the surface is configured to have at least one of a reflective characteristic or a refractive characteristic (Filion fig. 9 shows the object beam 126 traveling through the Rhomboid [considered a portion of the surface of the chamber, as discussed in claim 9], where reflection is taking place at certain faces of the Rhomboid (also shown in figs 16A-16C), i.e. the portion of the surface has a reflective characteristic).
Regarding claim 17, Filion discloses an optical assembly (Filion [0059] and figs 2-9 discloses an adapter tip 200, considered an optical assembly), comprising:
a body portion that includes a first opening, a second opening, and a chamber that extends within the body portion from the first opening to the second opening (Filion fig. 3 and [0062] shows the adapter tip 200 with an opening at the proximal end 208 to engage with a connector adapter 100 and a distal end 212 with connection mechanism 210, where [0064] the connection mechanism 210 is a screw threaded mechanism [and therefore detachable] connection; [0062] discloses a housing 204 which defines a light relaying channel 216 [chamber]; fig. 15 shows the tip 200 relaying light from a microscope 904 to an optical fiber end face 104, and therefore must have openings at the proximal and distal ends, otherwise light could not be transmitted through; as an additional note, fig 8 shows the adapter 200 with the proximal end 208, and fig 7 shows the optical fiber end face 104 and associated housing 102 inserted into the proximal end 208, and therefore there must be an opening at the proximal end to receive the housing 102; the proximal end 208 with associated opening is considered the “second opening”, and the distal end 212 with associated opening is considered the “first opening”) wherein:
the body portion is configured to allow illumination light to enter through the first opening of the body portion and to propagate to, and impinge on, a portion,
the portion is configured to redirect the illumination light to allow the illumination light to propagate to, and exit through, the second opening of the body portion and thereby propagate to an angled end face of an optical fiber (Filion fig. 15 and [0085] shows an inspection microscope which employs the adapter tip 200, where an illumination source illuminates the optical fiber end face 104; the light from 906 passes through the adapter 200 in its entirety to illuminate the optical fiber end face 104; fig. 9 shows the rhomboid 228 redirecting the light to the optical fiber end face 104, necessarily through the second opening of the body portion [here, the rhomboid 228 is considered “a portion”, and the light having impinged upon the rhomboid, i.e. impinged upon a portion]; [0058] discloses that the optical fiber is an angled-polished optical-fiber end face [i.e. angled end face of an optical fiber], and is also seen as angled in fig. 1), wherein the portion is oriented at an angle relative to an optical axis of the optical fiber (Filion fig. 7 discloses the rhomboid 228 [“a portion” as indicated above]; the rhomboid is essentially a parallelogram as appears in figs. 7 and 8, where the long sides of the parallelogram are oriented along an axis which is oriented at an angle relative to the axis of the optical fiber – the axis of the optical fiber is drawn as an extension of 800 through the rhomboid 228 and forms an angle with the long sides of the parallelogram),
the body portion is configured to allow reflection light, reflected by the angled end face of the optical fiber, to enter through the second opening of the body portion and to propagate through, and exit from, the chamber of the body portion (Filion [0065] discloses that the object beam 126, ultimately generated by the illumination source 906 of fig. 15, is reflected from the optical fiber end face; [0085] discloses that the reflected light from the end face is collected by objective 226 and directed to image sensor 908; due to the geometry of the adapter tip, the body portion must allow light to propagate back through the claimed first and second portions after reflected on the optical fiber tip) toward a central zone of a lens of the optical fiber inspection device, wherein the central zone of the lens is within a perimeter of the lens (Filion [0065] discloses that the object beam 126, ultimately generated by the illumination source 906 of fig. 15, is reflected from the optical fiber end face 104; [0085] discloses that the reflected light from the end face is collected by objective 226 [lens] and directed to image sensor 908; due to the geometry of the adapter tip, the body portion must allow light to propagate back through the claimed first and second portions after reflected on the optical fiber tip – ultimately this light is propagated to the end face imaging assembly 904 of fig. 15 [i.e. the optical fiber inspection device]; fig. 9 discloses objective 226 where light rays are propagating towards a central zone of the objective, where the central zone is within a perimeter zone of the lens, the perimeter zone being the boundary of defined by the physical perimeter of the lens).
Filion is silent to wherein the body portion is configured to allow illumination light from a perimeter zone of a lens of the optical fiber inspection device to enter through the first opening of the body portion and to propagate to, and impinge on, a portion.
However, Baribault does address this limitation. Filion and Baribault are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they relate to optical fiber end face inspection.
Baribault discloses “wherein the body portion is configured to allow illumination light from a perimeter zone of a lens of the optical fiber inspection device to enter through the first opening of the body portion and to propagate to, and impinge on, a portion” (Baribault [0055] discloses an optical fiber inspection system 46 comprising an objective lens 28; light from light source 102 is seen to pass through a perimeter zone of the lens [i.e. a zone of the lens that is not the central axis] as it travels through the optical fiber inspection system; as the light in the system is capable of passing through a perimeter zone of the objective lens, MPEP §2114 II. discloses that apparatus claims cover “what a device is and not what a device does” and that the “manner in which the device is operated does not limit apparatus claims”; in this case, receiving illumination light from a perimeter zone of the lens is a recitation of what the device does, rather than what it is, as Baribault is shown to have the objective lens, a light source and an optical fiber; therefore, the limitation does not differentiate the claim over the prior art).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Filion to incorporate wherein the body portion is configured to allow illumination light from a perimeter zone of a lens of the optical fiber inspection device to enter through the first opening of the body portion and to propagate to, and impinge on, a portion as suggested by Baribault for the advantage of enabling compensation of possible aberrations of light caused by the imaging beam (Baribault [0055]).
Filion when modified by Baribault is silent to illumination light entering and impinging on a portion of a surface of the chamber, the portion of the surface of the chamber configured to redirect the illumination light, and wherein the portion of the surface of the chamber is oriented at an angle relative to an optical axis of the optical fiber.
However, Oyama does address this limitation. Filion, Baribault, and Oyama are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they are related to the coupling of optical fibers via holding members and/or housing components.
Oyama discloses “illumination light entering and impinging on a portion of a surface of the chamber (Oyama [0130] and fig. 1 discloses an optical connector 1 which functions as an optical path converting unit 5; reflection plane 10 [a portion] changes the direction of illumination light 4; [0141]-[0142] discloses that the reflection plane may be a reflection mirror on a surface of the optical path converting unit [i.e. a portion of a surface of the chamber], or a prism; in a case where the reflection plane 10 is comprised of a prism, this is analogous to the rhomboid 228 of Filion, and therefore the redirection of illumination light of Filion may be done by a portion of the surface of the chamber, as in Oyama), “the portion of the surface of the chamber configured to redirect the illumination light” (Oyama fig. 1 shows the redirection of illumination light), “and wherein the portion of the surface of the chamber is oriented at an angle relative to an optical axis of the optical fiber” (Oyama fig. 1 shows the reflection plane 10 at an angle with the optical fiber 16, the fiber described in [0159]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Filion in view of Baribault to incorporate illumination light entering and impinging on a portion of a surface of the chamber, the portion of the surface of the chamber configured to redirect the illumination light, and wherein the portion of the surface of the chamber is oriented at an angle relative to an optical axis of the optical fiber as suggested by Oyama for the advantage of mitigating the effect of impact or foreign materials within the coupling system (Oyama [0079]) enabling a reliable and accurate inspection of the status of an optical fiber, and also enabling the redirection component being formed within the housing providing a more structurally sound system less sensitive to physical disturbances.
Filion when modified by Baribault and Oyama is silent to wherein the portion of the surface of the chamber is at least partially or below from the angled end face.
However, Zhou does address this limitation. Filion, Baribault, Oyama, and Zhou are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they are related to the coupling of optical fibers via holding members and/or housing components.
Zhou discloses “wherein the portion of the surface of the chamber is at least partially or below from the angled end face” (Zhou [0036] and fig. 5A show an angled end face 711 of a fiber optic connector 70; a relay lens 630 is shown at an angle above the angled end face, where “above” is in the direction of the angle α shown in the figure; the relay lens 630 of Zhou is analogous to the rhomboid optical element within Filion and reflective prism of Oyama, and is therefore partially above or below from the angled end face).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Filion in view of Baribault and Oyama to incorporate wherein the portion of the surface of the chamber is at least partially above or below from the angled end face as suggested by Zhou for the advantage of enabling the optical arrangement shown in fig. 5A to be configured/connected to a wider variety of connector types (Zhou [0021]), increasing the versatility of the arrangement.
Regarding claim 18, Filion when modified by Baribault, Oyama, and Zhou discloses the optical assembly of claim 17, and Filion further teaches the assembly wherein the optical assembly is an independent component configured to attach to an optical fiber inspection device (Filion fig. 3 and [0064] show the adapter tip 200 without being connected to the inspection microscope 201 [optical fiber inspection device; the end face imaging assembly 904 from claim 1 is a part of the inspection microscope 201 as a whole]; the adapter tip 200 is attached to the microscope 201 by a screw-threaded mechanism on the adapter tip and the connection assembly 210).
Regarding claim 19, Filion when modified by Baribault, Oyama, and Zhou discloses the optical assembly of claim 17, and Filion further teaches the assembly wherein the optical assembly is an integrated component of an optical fiber inspection device (Filion [0064]; though the adapter tip 200 is attached to the inspection microscope 201 by threads – once the pieces are successfully threaded and secure, the adapter tip 200 has become an integrated component of the inspection microscope [i.e. the tip is an integrated component of the optical fiber inspection device]; examiner notes that no definition for “integrated component” is provided in the specification, and therefore the adapter tip 200 being an integrated component of the inspection microscope is consistent with the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim).
Regarding claim 20, Filion when modified by Baribault, Oyama, and Zhou discloses the optical assembly of claim 17, and Filion further teaches wherein a portion of the surface is configured to have at least one of a reflective characteristic or a refractive characteristic (Filion fig. 9 shows the object beam 126 traveling through the Rhomboid [considered a portion of the surface of the chamber in claim 9], where reflection is taking place at certain faces of the Rhomboid (also shown in figs 16A-16C), i.e. the portion of the surface has a reflective characteristic).
Regarding claim 21, Filion when modified by Baribault, Oyama, and Zhou discloses the tip of claim 1, and Filion further teaches the tip wherein the optical element is oriented at a second angle relative to an optical axis of a lens of the optical fiber inspection device (Filion [0065] and figs 7 and 8 disclose a second relay lens 224 [lens of the optical fiber inspection device]; the rhomboid 228 is oriented at an angle relative to the optical axis of the optical fiber, and is oriented at a second angle with respect to the relay lens 224, where the relay lens 224 is below the optical axis of the optical fiber (see also fig. 9)).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Filion in view of Baribault, in view of Oyama, in view of Zhou, and further in view of Tian.
Regarding claim 10, Filion when modified by Baribault, Oyama, and Zhou discloses the tip of claim 9. Filion when modified by Oyama and Zhou is silent to the tip of claim 9, wherein the tip is configured to allow the optical fiber inspection device to image the angled face of the optical fiber using bright field illumination via the perimeter zone and the central zone of the lens.
However, Tian does address this limitation. Filion, Baribault, Oyama, Zhou, and Tian are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they are in the same field of devices using light microscopy for inspection purposes.
Tian discloses the tip of claim 9, “wherein the tip is configured to allow the optical fiber inspection device to image the angled face of the optical fiber using bright field illumination via the perimeter zone and the central zone of the lens” (Tian page 1326 col 2 paragraph 2 ll. 8-12 discloses the use of brightfield LEDs to generate illumination light for the microscope; Filion discloses that the illumination source is comprised of a light emitting diode (LED) and so the brightfield LEDs of Tian may be incorporated as the light source of Filion; the light passing through the lens will be via the perimeter zone and the central zone of the lens, as established in claim 9 above).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Filion in view of Baribault, Oyama and Zhou to incorporate wherein the tip is configured to allow the optical fiber inspection device to image the angled face of the optical fiber using bright field illumination via the perimeter zone and the central zone of the lens as suggested by Tian for the advantage of simplifying the hardware requirements (i.e. no need for specialized objectives or polarization optics) of the microscope and therefore reducing the cost of imaging (Tian col 1 paragraph 2 ll. 3-11).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Filion in view of Baribault, in view of Oyama, in view of Zhou, and further in view of US 2024/0255713 A1 by Olivier Cote et al. (herein after “Cote”),
Regarding claim 22, Filion in view of Baribault, Oyama, and Zhou discloses the tip of claim 9. Filion in view of Baribault, Oyama, and Zhou is silent to the tip of claim 9, further comprising: an adjustment component configured to adjust an orientation angle of the portion of the surface of the chamber with respect to a reference axis that extends from the first opening of the first end to the second opening of the second end.
However, Cote does address this limitation. Filion, Baribault, Oyama, Zhou, and Cote are considered to be analogous to the present invention because they are related to the coupling of optical fibers via holding members and/or housing components.
Cote discloses the tip of claim 9, “further comprising: an adjustment component configured to adjust an orientation angle of the portion of the surface of the chamber with respect to a reference axis that extends from the first opening of the first end to the second opening of the second end” (Cote discloses an optical fiber inspection microscope device, wherein the imaging assembly of the microscope discloses an actuator 41 [adjustment component] used to actuate various optical components within the device; the claimed “adjustment component configured to adjust an orientation angle…” recites an intended use of the device, where MPEP §2114 I; given Cote’s disclosure of the structure that inherently possesses the functionally defined limitations of the claimed apparatus [i.e. an actuator 41 for optical component adjustment], the claimed “configured to adjust an orientation angle of the portion of the surface of the chamber with respect to a reference axis” does not differentiate the claim from Cote; Cote also discloses that additional lenses and optical elements can be either fixed relative to the microscope system or movable, as required by optical design).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Filion in view of Baribault, Oyama, and Zhou to incorporate an adjustment component configured to adjust an orientation angle of the portion of the surface of the chamber with respect to a reference axis that extends from the first opening of the first end to the second opening of the second end as suggested by Cote for the advantage of aiding in the adjustment of the focus of the microscope’s objective lens system, as required during inspection (Cote [0060]).
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 JOSHUA M CARLSON whose telephone number is (571)270-0065. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8:00AM - 5:00PM.
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, Tarifur R Chowdhury can be reached at (571) 272-2287. 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.
/JOSHUA M CARLSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2877 /Michael P LaPage/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights