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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in India on 12/30/22. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the foreign application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the first enclosure portion". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4-8, 10-16 and 18-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schurmans et al (US 11,061,196 B2) in view of Van Baelen et al (US 2023/0093250 A1).
Schurmans teaches:
1. A fiber distribution enclosure (200, Figs. 8-14) comprising:
a base portion (210) having a back wall portion (218) and a side wall portion (201-204) structurally configured to define an interior (211);
a cover portion (206) configured to be pivotally coupled with the base portion (210) so as to pivot about a first axis (top in Fig. 11, see top hinge);
a mounting portion (232) configured to be fixedly coupled with the back wall (218) of the base portion (210) in the interior (211) of the base portion (210) (see Fig. 13);
an enclosure portion (250) configured to be coupled with the mounting portion (232) in the interior (211) of the base portion (210);
wherein the enclosure portion (250) includes a first enclosure portion (236 with the rest of the periphery of the body of 250) configured to be coupled with a second enclosure portion (251);
wherein the first enclosure portion (236 with the rest of the periphery of the body of 250) includes a wall portion (body of the periphery) that is structurally configured to define an interior (everything below the cover) of the enclosure portion (250), and the second enclosure portion (251) is structurally configured to block access to the interior of the enclosure portion (C4 L28-36);
wherein the enclosure portion (250) is structurally configured to enclose a fiber distribution portion (231, 240) in the interior of the enclosure portion (250);
wherein the enclosure portion (250) includes a locking portion (236, 254, 255) that is structurally configured to lock the second enclosure portion (251) with the first enclosure portion (236 with the rest of the periphery of the body of 250) so as to prevent an unauthorized person from accessing the fiber distribution portion (231, 240) (C7 L51 – C8 L4; C4 L28-36);
wherein the wall portion (periphery of 250) of the first enclosure portion (236 with the rest of the periphery of the body of 250) includes an adapter portion (233) that is structurally configured to couple a fiber optic cable from outside (at 235) of the enclosure portion (250) with a fiber optic cable of the fiber distribution portion (231, 240) so as to permit a person to couple a fiber optic cable to the fiber distribution portion (231, 240) without accessing the fiber distribution portion (C4 L58 – C5 L7);
wherein the base portion (210) includes a port portion (205) that is structurally configured to permit a fiber optic cable to pass there through for coupling with the adapter portion (233) (C4 L22-45);
wherein the cover portion (206) is structurally configured to be moved between a closed position (Fig. 8), which prevents access to the enclosure portion, and an open position (Fig. 10), which permits access to the enclosure portion (250).
7. A fiber distribution enclosure (200, Figs. 8-14) comprising:
a base portion (210);
a cover portion (206) structurally configured to be coupled with the base portion (210);
an enclosure portion (250) structurally configured to be coupled with the base portion (210) at an interior (211) of the base portion (210);
wherein the enclosure portion (250) includes a first enclosure portion (236 with the rest of the periphery of the body of 250) structurally configured to be coupled with a second enclosure portion (251) so as to prevent an unauthorized person from accessing a fiber distribution portion (231, 240) in the interior of the enclosure portion (C4 L28-36);
wherein the enclosure portion (250) includes an adapter portion (233) that is structurally configured to couple a fiber optic cable from outside of the enclosure portion with a fiber optic cable of the fiber distribution portion (231, 240) so as to permit a person to couple a fiber optic cable to the fiber distribution portion without accessing the fiber distribution portion (C4 L58 – C5 L7).
13/21. The enclosure of claim 7/15, wherein the base portion (210) includes a port portion (205) that is structurally configured to permit a fiber optic cable to pass there through for coupling with the adapter portion (233) (C3 L25-35; C7 L15-24).
15. A fiber distribution enclosure (200, Figs. 8-14) comprising:
a base portion (210);
a cover portion (206) structurally configured to be coupled with the base portion (210);
an enclosure portion (250) structurally configured to be coupled with the base portion (210) at an interior (211) of the base portion (210);
wherein the enclosure portion (250) includes an adapter portion (233) that is structurally configured to couple a fiber optic cable from outside of the enclosure portion with a fiber optic cable of a fiber distribution portion (231, 240) in the enclosure portion (250) so as to permit a person to couple a fiber optic cable to the fiber distribution portion without accessing the fiber distribution portion (231, 240) (C4 L58 – C5 L7).
23. The enclosure of claim 15, wherein the enclosure portion (250) is structurally configured to prevent an unauthorized person from accessing a fiber distribution portion (231, 240) in an interior of the enclosure portion (250) (C4 L28-36).
Schurmans does not teach expressly:
the enclosure configured to be pivotally coupled with the mounting portion; or
the first enclosure portion configured to be pivotally coupled with the second enclosure portion about a second axis perpendicular to the first axis; or
wherein the first enclosure portion is structurally configured to be moved relative to the base portion between a lowered position and a raised position; or
wherein the first enclosure portion includes an engagement portion structurally configured to engage a receiving portion of the mounting portion such that the engagement portion and the receiving portion are structurally configured to maintain the first enclosure portion in the raised position so as to provide enhanced access to the adapter portion of the enclosure portion when the cover portion is in the open position.
Schurmans does show the first enclosure portion (251) being oriented about a second axis (see arrows in Fig. 11) that directs movement of the first enclosure portion (251) to be moved perpendicular to the first axis (about the top hinge at 202 in Fig. 11).
Concerning the pivot limitations: It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to try a pivot coupling between the cover and base (first and second enclosure portions), since it has been held that “it is obvious to try - choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success” is a rationale for arriving at a conclusion of obviousness. In re KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. Hinged couplings between covers and bases are well known in the fiber distribution enclosure art, Schurmans teaches one for the main cover and base for example. One of ordinary skill in the art would expect the cover for the enclosure portion to succeed as a hinged portion since the overall cover will now get in the way of such a cover because the main cover can be completely removed.
Van Baelen teaches:
an enclosure (1000, Figs. 20-22) configured to be pivotally coupled with a mounting portion (910); and
wherein a first enclosure portion (base of 1000) is structurally configured to be moved relative to a base portion (base of 900) between a lowered position (Fig. 20) and a raised position (Fig. 21); and
wherein the first enclosure portion (base of 1000) includes an engagement portion structurally (910) configured to engage a receiving portion of the mounting portion (part of 910) such that the engagement portion and the receiving portion (part of 910) are structurally configured to maintain the first enclosure portion (1000) in the raised position (Fig. 21) so as to provide enhanced access to the adapter portion of the enclosure portion when a cover portion is in the open position (P0103).
Van Baelen further teaches:
2/8/16. The enclosure of claim 1/7/15, wherein the engagement structure (910) comprises a biasing portion extending from the first enclosure portion (the linkage portion the connects the linkage to the base, see Fig. 21), and the receiving portion (linkage itself) is structurally configured to receive the biasing portion (see Fig. 21).
4/10/18. The enclosure of claim 1/7/15, wherein the mounting portion (910) comprises two arms (four total) and each arm includes a notch (see Fig. 21, the hole in each arm), and the enclosure portion (1000) comprises two pins (the pins holding the enclosure to the arms) extending in an opposite direction from two opposite side walls of the enclosure (1000) (see Fig. 21); and
wherein the arms (part of 910, four total) are spaced apart from one another by a distance that is large enough to permit the enclosure portion (1000) to be received therebetween (see Fig. 21) and small enough such that the notches are structurally configured to receive the pins so as to permit the enclosure portion to pivot relative to the mounting portion (see Fig. 21, P0103).
Schurmans and Van Baelen are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, fiber distribution enclosures.
At the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the enclosure taught by Schurmans to use the enclosure that raises and lowers as taught by Van Baelen.
The motivation for doing so would have been to increase access to the enclosure and the support the enclosure when moved (Van Baelen, P0103).
Regarding claims 5, 12 and 20:
Van Baelen teaches a different embodiment (Fig. 14) wherein notches (608) are configured to require that a pin (708) of a pivotable enclosure (700) be moved in two directions in order to remove the pin from the notch so as to prevent inadvertent removal of the pin from the notch (P0091).
At the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the notch of the main embodiment of Van Baelen (1000) to include a notch and pin system as taught in the embodiment of Fig. 13.
The motivation for doing so would have been to ensure the pin and notch do not disconnect too easily or on accident.
Regarding claims 6, 14 and 22:
Schurmans teaches optical fiber adapters (235), parking portion (245) and ports (205) for input and outputting multifiber cables (see 249, Fig. 14). Schurmans further teaches splitters being typical devices in such enclosures (C1 L15-28).
Van Baelen teaches an adapter portion (102) with single fiber adapters (108) and multifiber adapters (102) (P0080).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify Schurmans to include a single and multifiber adapters as taught by Van Baelen. The motivation being to make the device compatible to more types of cables and connectors.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify Schurmans to include a splitter in the fiber distribution portion, since it has been held that “it is obvious to try - choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success” is a rationale for arriving at a conclusion of obviousness. In re KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. As discussed, Schurmans teaches splitters are known devices for such enclosure so a person of ordinary skill in the art would expect using a splitter in the fiber distribution portion to succeed.
Finally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify Schurmans to include a drop cable, since it has been held that “it is obvious to try - choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success” is a rationale for arriving at a conclusion of obviousness. In re KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. Schurmans already teaches cables that are input and outputted from the device, a drop cable portion is just a name given to a cable exiting the device that a user labels “drop”. One of ordinary skill the art would expect a cable exiting the device of Schurmans to succeed as a drop cable portion since no special cable or fiber is needed to be a drop cable.
Schurmans further teaches:
11/19. The enclosure of claim 10/18, wherein the mounting portion (232) is structurally configured to be coupled with a wall of the base portion (210) (see Fig. 13 showing the screws that mount all the mounting portions 232, 241 for example).
Claims 3, 9 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schurmans and Van Baelen as applied to claims 1, 2, 7, 8, 15 and 16 above, and further in view of Conner et al (US 8,879,882 B2).
Schurmans and Van Baelen teach the enclosure previously discussed.
Schurmans and Van Baelen do not teach expressly wherein the biasing portion comprises a spring-biased plunger mounted in a side wall of the first enclosure portion, and the receiving portion comprises a hole or notch in the mounting portion.
Conner teaches a biasing portion (36, 102, 110) comprises a spring-biased plunger (110) mounted in a side wall of an enclosure portion (102), and a receiving portion comprises a hole or notch in the mounting portion (36) (C10 L54-59; C11 L14-34).
Schurmans, Van Baelen and Conner are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, fiber distribution enclosures.
At the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the biasing portion of Schurmans and Van Baelen to include a spring-based plunger and hole/notch structure as taught by Conner.
The motivation for doing so would have been to allow for easy complete separation of the enclosure by using biasing structure with a spring-based plunger that can be disconnected by the corresponding receiving structure.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following references teach enclosures within fiber distribution enclosures: US 9223106, US 2016/0091682, US 9366838, US 9442266, US 9882362, US 11656421, US 12050354, US 12298581, US 12422639, US 12468106.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN A LEPISTO whose telephone number is (571)272-1946. The examiner can normally be reached on 8AM-5PM EST M-F.
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.
/RYAN A LEPISTO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874