DETAILED ACTION
1. The amendment received on April 1, 2026 has been entered into the record.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
3. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “114” of FIG. 1 has been used to designate both ‘FIRST OBJ. ASSEMBLY” and a dotted line between 108 and 124. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
4. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
5. Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
As for claim 7, ‘is to cause the first objective assembly and the second objective assembly to rotate about an axis’ appears to be a statement of intended use.
The examiner notes that ‘it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex Parte Masham, 2 USPQ F.2d 1647 (1987).’
As for claim 17, ‘is further to: based on a determination that the fiber-optic cable has failed the inspection, stop inspection of the fiber-optic cable and output a notification that the fiber-optic cable has failed the inspection’ appears to be a statement of intended use.
The examiner notes that ‘it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex Parte Masham, 2 USPQ F.2d 1647 (1987).’
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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.
7. Claims 1, 3, 6, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP-4707620-B2-previously cited-using machine translation-hereafter ‘620.
As for claim 1, ‘620 in an optical connector end face inspection device discloses/suggests the following: an apparatus for inspecting a device under test (DUT) (FIGS. 2 and 3 and 12), the apparatus comprising: a chassis (FIG. 2and FIG. 3: DUT being 34 noting interface being 33 with chassis as frame comprising 22a, 22b, 23, 41, 42, 44 along with stage assembly: paragraph 0021; FIG. 12: treating rectangular block that 2 is attached to as necessarily being a frame comprising a DUT interface, noting support/interface for 2 in FIGS. 10 and 11); an optical system (FIG. 2: 48, 49, 47, 52, 51; FIG. 12: 16, 13, 12, 14, noting 17 demonstrates that an illumination source resides within 13, 12, 14) comprising: a camera assembly (FIG. 3: 51; FIG. 12: 14); a first objective assembly having a first magnification level; a second objective assembly having a second magnification level (FIG. 3: 48 demonstrates at least three objectives with three different magnifications; FIG. 12: 16 demonstrates at least three objectives with three different magnifications ); a DUT interface including an opening in the chassis through which an end of a DUT inserted into the opening of the DUT interface is selectively visible to one of the first objective assembly and the second objective assembly (as stated above regarding the chassis: FIG. 2 and FIG. 3: DUT being 34 noting interface being 33 with chassis as frame comprising 22a, 22b, 23, 41, 42, 44 along with stage assembly: paragraph 0021; FIG. 12: treating rectangular block that 2 is attached to as necessarily being a frame comprising a DUT interface, noting support/interface for 2 in FIGS. 10 and 11), wherein at least one of the DUT interface and the optical system is movable with respect to the other one of the DUT interface and the optical system (FIGS. 2-3: noting stage assembly: paragraph 0021 and FIG. 3: 49; FIG. 12: 13 makes 16 movable relative to 2); and an objective switcher (FIG. 3: 49 and FIG. 12: 13).
As for ‘to switch between a first light path from the first objective assembly to the camera assembly and a second light path from the second objective assembly to the camera assembly,’ ‘it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex Parte Masham, 2 USPQ F.2d 1647 (1987).’
As for claim 3, ‘620 discloses/suggests everything as above (see claim 1). In addition, ‘620 discloses/suggests an illumination source (FIG. 3: 52; FIG. 12: as stated above ‘noting 17 demonstrates that an illumination source resides within 13, 12, 14’); again, the objective switcher is disclosed (FIG. 3: 49 and FIG. 12: 13).
As for ‘to direct light rays toward the first objective assembly and the second objective assembly’ and ‘is to selectively direct the light rays to the first objective assembly or the second objective assembly,’ ‘it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex Parte Masham, 2 USPQ F.2d 1647 (1987).’
As for claims 6 and 7, ‘620 in an optical connector end face inspection device discloses/suggests the following: an apparatus for inspecting a device under test (DUT) (FIGS. 2 and 3 and 12), the apparatus comprising: a chassis (FIG. 2and FIG. 3: DUT being 34 noting interface being 33 with chassis as frame comprising 22a, 22b, 23, 41, 42, 44 along with stage assembly: paragraph 0021; FIG. 12: treating rectangular block that 2 is attached to as necessarily being a frame comprising a DUT interface, noting support/interface for 2 in FIGS. 10 and 11) an optical system (FIG. 2: 48, 49, 47, 52, 51; FIG. 12: 16, 13, 12, 14, noting 17 demonstrates that an illumination source resides within 13, 12, 14) comprising: a camera assembly (FIG. 3: 51; FIG. 12: 14); a first objective assembly having a first magnification level; a second objective assembly having a second magnification level (FIG. 3: 48 demonstrates at least three objectives with three different magnifications; FIG. 12: 16 demonstrates at least three objectives with three different magnifications ); a DUT interface including an opening in the chassis through which an end of a DUT inserted into the opening of the DUT interface is selectively visible to one of the first objective assembly and the second objective assembly (as stated above regarding the chassis: FIG. 2 and FIG. 3: DUT being 34 noting interface being 33 with chassis as frame comprising 22a, 22b, 23, 41, 42, 44 along with stage assembly: paragraph 0021; FIG. 12: treating rectangular block that 2 is attached to as necessarily being a frame comprising a DUT interface, noting support/interface for 2 in FIGS. 10 and 11), wherein at least one of the DUT interface and the optical system is movable with respect to the other one of the DUT interface and the optical system (FIGS. 2-3: noting stage assembly: paragraph 0021 and FIG. 3: 49; FIG. 12: 13 makes 16 movable relative to 2); and at least one of a panning actuator to selectively pan at least one of the optical system and the DUT interface between a first position in which the first objective assembly is adjacent to the DUT interface and a second position in which the second objective assembly is adjacent to the DUT interface; or a scanning actuator to selectively scan at least one of the optical system and the DUT interface vertically with respect to the other one of the optical system and the DUT interface (scanning actuator: noting FIG. 2: 33 and 34: stage assembly necessarily makes inspecting every optical connector end face of the cassette possible thereby scanning the cassette: paragraphs 0020-0021).
As for ‘to selectively pan at least one of the optical system and the DUT interface between a first position in which the first objective assembly is adjacent to the DUT interface and a second position in which the second objective assembly is adjacent to the DUT interface (claim 6),’ ‘to selectively scan at least one of the optical system and the DUT interface vertically with respect to the other one of the optical system and the DUT interface (claim 6),’ and ‘is to cause the first objective assembly and the second objective assembly to rotate about an axis (claim 7),’ ‘it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex Parte Masham, 2 USPQ F.2d 1647 (1987).’
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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.
9. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP-4707620-B2-previously cited-using machine translation-hereafter ‘620 in view of Bin et al. (KR 20060106256 A)-using machine translation.
As for claim 4, ‘620 discloses/suggests everything as above (see claim 1). As for the objective switcher comprises a mirror and wherein the optical system further comprises: an objective switcher actuator, ‘620 is silent. ‘620 teaches the objective switcher being a revolver (FIG. 3: 49 and FIG. 12: 13). Nevertheless, Bin in an apparatus for obtaining image appears to demonstrate that a mirror with an objective switcher actuator are equivalent to a revolver for switching between objectives for imaging (FIGS. 3A-3B: 302 with double ended arrow demonstrating actuation vs FIG. 2: 201 and 103). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute ‘620 revolver with a mirror with an objective switcher actuator such as taught in Bin to achieve the predictable result of switching between two objectives when imaging with different magnifications.
Allowable Subject Matter
10. Claims 5, 8, and 9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 10-16 are allowed.
Claim 17 would be allowable if the rejection under 35 USC 112(d) is overcome.
Response to Arguments
11. The examiner apologizes for any inconvenience but upon further search and consideration new rejections of claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 17 have been made.
As for applicant’s remarks filed on April 1, 2026 regarding the drawing objections (see page 13 of applicant’s remarks), there does not appear to be any replacement sheets filed with the response of April 1, 2026.
Applicant’s remarks regarding claim interpretation under 35 USC 112(f) (see Remarks pages 13-15) have been found persuasive.
Conclusion
12. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: please refer to the attached PTO-892. The examiner notes that Koudelka et al. (US 2008/0074676) teaches a chassis with DUT interface having a turret device for magnification selection (FIG. 3 with 148 and paragraph 0039).
Fax/Telephone Numbers
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Gordon J. Stock, Jr. whose telephone number is (571) 272-2431.
The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 10:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m.
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, Kara Geisel, can be reached at 571-272-2416. 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.
/GORDON J STOCK JR/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights