DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection(s) in the prior office action have been fully considered and are persuasive in view of the added claim limitation. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made with the same reference for the reason below.
It is noted that Applicant has made no structural claims to define the “structurally configured” portions. As currently claimed, any piece that can be removed would anticipate this functional language. Therefore, in Penumatcha, when components are disassembled, this would provide access. Because access is provided, end portions such as either the coupling nut (14) or the connector (12) anticipate the limitations requiring the access portion
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) 1-4, 6-10, 12-17 and 19-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Penumatcha et al (cited in prior office action).
Penumatcha discloses in figures 1-3 and 6-7, a connector comprising:
A body portion (13);
A coupling portion (12) that is structurally configured to be connected to and removed from the body portion (13);
An access portion (14) that is structurally configured to secure the coupling portion to the body portion (figure 9 depicts how these pieces are separate with figures 10-12 depicting the components come together);
A retaining portion (the threads 44 secure the coupling portion to the body portion via nut 14);
Wherein the coupling portion is structurally configured to be connected to a node (a “node” is not structurally defined in the claims. Therefore, the end connection point of the prior art constitutes a node termination);
Wherein the coupling portion comprises a passageway that is structurally configured to receive a fiber optic cable (a fiber cable could be passed through the prior art assembly);
Wherein the body portion comprises a chamber inside the body portion and is structurally configured to connect to the passageway in the coupling portion (interior volume via dotted axis line in figures 6-9);
Wherein the body portion comprises a passageway that is connected to the chamber (the entire inner portion is a passageway);
Wherein a longitudinal axis of the passageway extends through the access portion (the entire inner portion is a passageway that extends longitudinally through the two ends);
Wherein the passageway in the body portion, chamber and the passageway in the coupling portion form an angled path (figure 7B) for feeding a cable through and into the node; and
Wherein the access portion is structurally configured to be removed from the body portion to allow access to the chamber and the angled path (the assembly of the prior art can be removed and disassembled which would provide access to all internal areas).
As to claim 2, threaded portions would be inherent with fastener screws. The claim does not specify that the access portion itself is entirely threaded.
As to claim 3, the claimed portions are on opposing sides in the prior art (see figures 3-4).
As to claim 4, multiple portions of the coupling portion have circumferential grooves (unlabeled in figures).
As to claim 6, there are 90-degree configurations (figure 9).
As to claim 7, the body is engaged with threaded nuts.
As to claim 8, when assembled, the retaining portions are structurally configured to secure both the access and body portions.
Claims 9-10 and 12-15 relate to the above with the independent claim different in that it discloses an angled path within an access chamber (such angled paths are shown in figures 8-10).
Claims 16-17 and 19-21 relate to the above with structure defining four portions that are structurally configured to connect with one another. The prior art certainly has at least four components that are configured to connect with one another. These claims lack any specifics with regard to the structure of each portion. Claim 20 adds slight detail in that a third portion is a “cap”, however, the shell of the prior art is configured as a cap to seal an opposing shell.
As to claims 22-24, when assembled, the internal passageways are permanently fixed relative to one another and the angle. Examiner assumes Applicant is intending to claim the feature of the singular molded body bock portion (200; applicant figure 4), however, these claims only require an internal portion that does not change. The prior art’s body portion and associated passageways are fixed once assembled.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 6,602,085 to Young et al.
Young discloses in figures 9-13, a connector comprising:
A body portion (100);
A coupling portion (102) that is structurally configured to be connected to and removed from the body portion (100);
An access portion (114) that is structurally configured to secure the coupling portion to the body portion (figure 9 depicts how these pieces are separate with figures 10-12 depicting the components come together);
A retaining portion (the threads 82 secure the coupling portion to the body portion);
Wherein the coupling portion is structurally configured to be connected to a node (via 52);
Wherein the coupling portion comprises a passageway that is structurally configured to receive a fiber optic cable (a fiber cable could be passed through the prior art assembly);
Wherein the body portion comprises a chamber inside the body portion and is structurally configured to connect to the passageway in the coupling portion (interior volume via dotted axis line in figure 9);
Wherein the body portion comprises a passageway that is connected to the chamber (the entire inner portion is a passageway);
Wherein a longitudinal axis of the passageway extends through the access portion (the entire inner portion is a passageway that extends longitudinally through the two ends);
Wherein the passageway in the body portion, chamber and the passageway in the coupling portion form an angled path (figure 13) for feeding a cable through and into the node; and
Wherein the access portion is structurally configured to be removed from the body portion to allow access to the chamber and the angled path (the assembly of the prior art can be removed and disassembled which would provide access to all internal areas).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2006/0207783 (access box).
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 Eric K Wong whose telephone number is (571)272-2363. The examiner can normally be reached M-Tu, Th-F 8A-6P.
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 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.
ERIC K. WONG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2874
/Eric Wong/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874