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 .
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 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.
DETAILED ACTION
This is an AIA application filed January 25, 2024.
The earliest effective filing date of this AIA application is seen as June 22, 2023, the date of the earliest priority application (United States provisional patent application serial numbers 63/509,621 and 63/522,556) for any claims which are fully supported under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) by the provisional applications.
The effective filing date of this AIA application is seen as January 25, 2024, the actual filing date, for any claims that are not fully supported by the foregoing provisional or non-provisional application(s).
The present application is also related to:
United States patent application serial number 18/422,444 filed January 25, 2024 for OPTICAL FIBER CONNECTION FASTENER and published December 26, 2024 as US 20240427104 A1 of Davidson et al. (Davidson II).; and
United States patent application serial number 18/422,472 filed January 25, 2024 for an OPTICAL FIBER CASSETTE and published December 26, 2024 U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 20240427102 A1 of Davidson et al. (Davidson III).
The claims filed March 28, 2024 by preliminary amendment are entered, currently outstanding, and subject to examination.
This action is in response to the filing of May 8, 2025.
The current status and history of the claims is summarized below:
Last Amendment/Response
Previously
Amended:
none
N/A
Cancelled:
none
N/A
Withdrawn:
none
N/A
Added:
none
N/A
No changes were made to the claims.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and outstanding.
No claims have been amended, cancelled, withdrawn, or added.
Claims 1-20 are currently outstanding and subject to examination.
This is a non-final action and is the first action on the merits.
Allowable subject matter is not indicated below.
Often, in the substance of the action below, formal matters are addressed first, claim rejections second, and any response to arguments third.
Claim Objections
The following claims are objected to because of the indicated informality/ies:
Claim(s)
Informality/ies
10
"the storage area" lacks antecedent basis
14 & 15
"the cover" lacks antecedent basis
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b/¶ 2)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(B) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1 and 19 (and by dependency, remaining claims 2-18 and 20) rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 19 both recite an “external cable” and it is not seen as definite whether or not the “external cable” is part of the claims. Certain dependent claims also recite it and in positive terms.
Special Definitions for Claim Language - MPEP § 2111.01(IV)
No special definitions as defined by MPEP § 2111.01(IV) are seen as present in the specification regarding the language used in the claims. Consequently, the words and phrases of the claims are given their plain meaning. MPEP §§ 2173.01, 2173.05(a), and 2111.01.
If special definitions are present, Applicant should bring those to the attention of the examiner and the prosecution history with its next response in a manner both specific and particular. In doing so, there will be no mistake, confusion, and/or ambiguity as to what constitutes the special definition(s). Per above, such special definitions must conform to the requirements of MPEP § 2111.01(IV).
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 of this title, 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20150355428 of Leeman et al. (Leeman, cited by Applicant).
With respect to claim 1, Leeman discloses an optical fiber cassette (the figures generally, but especially Figs. 62-69, particularly Fig. 68; ¶ 126 et seq., fiber distribution terminal 700′), the cassette (700’) defining a mutually orthogonal length, width, and height, the cassette (700’) comprising:
a main body (front cover 742) comprising
a pair of sidewalls extending along the length and an end wall extending along the width between the pair of sidewalls (per the lower element in Fig. 68),
the sidewalls and the end wall each extending along the height (Fig. 68),
wherein an adapter wall (Fig. 66 at 718’, generally) is positioned between the sidewalls and positioned along the length distal to the end wall (Fig. 66 at 718’, generally, and as shown/indicated in Fig. 68),
wherein a partition wall (intermediate tray 744) extends between the sidewalls, the end wall, and the adapter wall (per Fig. 68),
wherein the partition wall (744) is positioned along the height between a top lip and a bottom lip of the sidewalls,
wherein a first volume (top/upper side) is formed at a first side of the partition wall (744) between the sidewalls, the end wall, and the adapter wall (718’), and
wherein a second volume (bottom/lower side) is formed at a second side of the partition wall (744) between the sidewalls, the end wall, and the adapter wall (718’),
wherein a fiber storage area (Fig. 68, generally between base 740 and front cover 742 and including tray 744) is positioned at the first volume (top/upper side) and the second volume (bottom/lower side), and
wherein a cable opening is formed at or between the end wall and at least one sidewall (Fig. 67 at 720′, generally),
the cable opening (720’, generally, and as show in Figs. 67 and 68) configured to receive an external cable (not shown, but with connection to the input connection 720’) into the first volume (top/upper side; the cable opening is seen as so configured, particularly at the top of Fig. 68), and
wherein a passthrough opening (plural openings are seen at 744 in Fig. 68, particularly the cylindrical structures and the split lobe structures at the right end of 744) is formed through the partition wall (744) to allow for fiber egress from the first volume (top/upper side) to the second volume (bottom/lower side).
Leeman as set forth above does not disclose:
wherein a splice holder is positioned at the first volume or the second volume.
Leeman Fig. 50, ¶ 118 et seq. shows a splice holder at the front/right of the splice tray with integrated cable termination 626
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide splice holding via a splice holder along the lines of Leeman Fig. 50 in a system according to Leeman as set forth above in order to provide fiber splitting via splicing. This provides one rationale to combine the references.
Another completely independent and separately sufficient rationale arises as follows. In making the combination (above), the combining of prior art elements (listed above) according to known methods (per the references) to yield predictable results (an optical fiber distribution and storage device) would occur as each element merely performs the same function in combination as it does separately. MPEP § 2141(III). This additional rationale is a sufficient, a complete, and an explicitly-recognized rationale to combine the references and conclude that the claim is obvious both under the controlling KSR Supreme Court case and MPEP § 2141(III)(A). Current Office policy regarding the determination of obviousness is set forth in the Federal Register notice at 89 Fed. Reg. 14449 (Feb. 27, 2024).
Further, the combination would then provide:
wherein a splice holder is positioned at the first volume or the second volume,
With respect to claim 2, Leeman as set forth above discloses the optical fiber cassette (700’) of claim 1, including one wherein
the adapter wall (718’) comprises a plurality of adapters (output connectors 715 per Fig. 60; 718’ Fig. 66) extending into the second volume (bottom/lower side; per Fig. 68).
With respect to claim 3, Leeman as set forth above discloses the optical fiber cassette (700’) of claim 1, including one wherein
an adapter base wall (Fig. 66, portion of top panel with numbers above adapters at 718’) extends along the width between the sidewalls and partially along the length (per the figures; Fig. 66),
the adapter base wall (number panel) positioned along the length at or proximate to the adapter wall (718’).
With respect to claim 4, Leeman as set forth above discloses the optical fiber cassette (700’) of claim 3, including one wherein
a cable entry passage is formed at the adapter base wall (number panel) (the adapters themselves provide passage for cable entry, particularly for the ends of cables that connect to the adapters),
the cable entry passage extending along the length (which they do),
the cable entry passage configured to allow the external cable into the first volume (top/upper side; the passage is seen as so configured as entry into the interior of the Leeman splitter would allow for entry into either the first or second volume).
With respect to claim 5, Leeman as set forth above discloses the optical fiber cassette (700’) of claim 1, the main body (742) but not one comprising
a fastener mount location extending along a direction of extension of the external cable through the cable opening.
Leeman, Fig. 50 shows:
a fastener mount location (a cable termination bracket 628) extending along a direction of extension of the external cable (a riser cable 638 or a feeder cable 634) through the cable opening (at either end of the rear of splice tray with integrated cable termination 626).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a fastener mount location along the lines of Leeman Fig. 50 in a system according to Leeman as set forth above in order to provide cable connection and fiber splitting/split apart. This provides one rationale to combine the references.
Another completely independent and separately sufficient rationale arises as follows. In making the combination (above), the combining of prior art elements (listed above) according to known methods (per the references) to yield predictable results (an optical fiber distribution and storage device) would occur as each element merely performs the same function in combination as it does separately. MPEP § 2141(III). This additional rationale is a sufficient, a complete, and an explicitly-recognized rationale to combine the references and conclude that the claim is obvious both under the controlling KSR Supreme Court case and MPEP § 2141(III)(A). Current Office policy regarding the determination of obviousness is set forth in the Federal Register notice at 89 Fed. Reg. 14449 (Feb. 27, 2024).
Further, the combination would then provide:
a fastener mount location extending along a direction of extension of the external cable through the cable opening.
With respect to claim 6, Leeman as set forth above discloses the optical fiber cassette (700’) of claim 5, including one wherein
the fastener mount location forms a groove configured to receive the external cable (634/638).
The feeder/riser cable 634/638 is in a channelled groove.
With respect to claim 7, Leeman as set forth above discloses the optical fiber cassette (700’) of claim 5, including one wherein
the fastener mount (628) location is configured to receive a collar extended around the external cable (634/638).
In Fig. 50, zip ties are seen which collar the cable and are received by the cable termination bracket 628.
With respect to claim 8, Leeman as set forth above discloses the optical fiber cassette (700’) of claim 5, including one wherein
the fastener mount location (628) is configured to receive a fastener (zip ties shown in Fig. 50) extended around the external cable (634/638).
With respect to claim 9, Leeman as set forth above discloses the optical fiber cassette (700’) of claim 1, including one wherein
a tie point (¶ 120, strength member termination device 632) is formed alongside the cable opening (628, generally),
the tie point configured to affix a strength member of the external cable (634/638) to the main body (742).
The strength member termination device 632 is seen as terminating strength members by affixation thereto.
With respect to claim 10, Leeman as set forth above discloses the optical fiber cassette (700’) of claim 1, including one wherein
the storage area (Fig. 68) comprises a plurality of tabs (shown as part of tray 744) extending at least partially parallel to the partition wall (744).
The lateral extension of the tabs shown with tray 744 are seen as being generally parallel to the base thereof. See Fig. 50 and the elements, including parallel tabs.
With respect to claim 11, Leeman as set forth above discloses the optical fiber cassette (700’) of claim 1, including one wherein
the storage area (744 top) comprises an internal wall (generally to the rear/left of the more forward oval elements) extending along the height (per Fig. 68) from the partition wall (744),
wherein a tab (shown as generally between and to the left of the oval element) extends from the internal wall at least partially parallel (per Fig. 68) to the partition wall (744).
With respect to claim 12, Leeman as set forth above discloses the optical fiber cassette (700’) of claim 1, including one wherein
the passthrough opening (plural openings are seen at 744 in Fig. 68, particularly the cylindrical structures and the split lobe structures at the right end of 744) is positioned alongside the end wall or the sidewall.
One is generally seen at the left/front of tray 744 having a circular top.
With respect to claim 13, Leeman as set forth above discloses the optical fiber cassette (700’) of claim 1, including one comprising:
a removeable cover (base 740) forming a base wall (over the adapter area 718’) and a top wall over the main body (742; per Figs. 66-69).
With respect to claim 14, Leeman as set forth above discloses the optical fiber cassette (700’) of claim 13, the cover but not one comprising
a latch configured to selectively attach and release at a latch interface at the sidewall.
Leeman ¶ 96 discloses:
For example, the connection interface 75 may couple to a mounting interface 126 (e.g., latches, snaps, dove tail, etc.) on the tray 120 (see FIG. 5).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use latches to selectably and removably connect different splitter elements along the lines of Leeman ¶ 96 in a system according to Leeman as set forth above in order to provide easy and reliable access and securement. This provides one rationale to combine the references.
Another completely independent and separately sufficient rationale arises as follows. In making the combination (above), the combining of prior art elements (listed above) according to known methods (per the references) to yield predictable results (an optical fiber distribution and storage device) would occur as each element merely performs the same function in combination as it does separately. MPEP § 2141(III). This additional rationale is a sufficient, a complete, and an explicitly-recognized rationale to combine the references and conclude that the claim is obvious both under the controlling KSR Supreme Court case and MPEP § 2141(III)(A). Current Office policy regarding the determination of obviousness is set forth in the Federal Register notice at 89 Fed. Reg. 14449 (Feb. 27, 2024).
Further, the combination would then provide:
a latch configured to selectively attach and release at a latch interface at the sidewall.
With respect to claim 15, Leeman as set forth above discloses the optical fiber cassette (700’) of claim 13, the cover including one comprising
a face extending along the length and width (Fig. 68 top),
wherein a cover sidewall and a cover end wall extends from the face along the height (the perimeter elements shown at the top of Fig. 68).
With respect to claim 16, Leeman as set forth above discloses the optical fiber cassette (700’) of claim 1, the sidewalls but not one comprising
a latch attachment at an outside face of the sidewalls.
Leeman ¶ 96 discloses:
For example, the connection interface 75 may couple to a mounting interface 126 (e.g., latches, snaps, dove tail, etc.) on the tray 120 (see FIG. 5).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use latches to selectably and removably connect different splitter elements along the lines of Leeman ¶ 96 in a system according to Leeman as set forth above in order to provide easy and reliable access and securement. This provides one rationale to combine the references.
Another completely independent and separately sufficient rationale arises as follows. In making the combination (above), the combining of prior art elements (listed above) according to known methods (per the references) to yield predictable results (an optical fiber distribution and storage device) would occur as each element merely performs the same function in combination as it does separately. MPEP § 2141(III). This additional rationale is a sufficient, a complete, and an explicitly-recognized rationale to combine the references and conclude that the claim is obvious both under the controlling KSR Supreme Court case and MPEP § 2141(III)(A). Current Office policy regarding the determination of obviousness is set forth in the Federal Register notice at 89 Fed. Reg. 14449 (Feb. 27, 2024).
Further, the combination would then provide:
a latch attachment at an outside face of the sidewalls.
With respect to claim 17, Leeman as set forth above discloses the optical fiber cassette (700’) of claim 1, the partition wall (744) including one comprising
a transition wall (midway between the left back and right front of tray 744) extending along the height (per Fig. 68),
the transition wall positioned along the length between the adapter wall (718’) and the storage area (per Fig. 68, the mid-space wall of tray 744 extends horizontally in both directions and situated behind the adapter area of 718’ generally).
With respect to claim 18, Leeman as set forth above discloses the optical fiber cassette (700’) of claim 1, including one wherein
the main body (742) is a unitary, monolithic component.
Front cover 742 is seen as being in one piece.
With respect to claim 19, Leeman as set forth above discloses an optical fiber cassette (700’), the cassette (700’) defining a mutually orthogonal length, width, and height, the cassette (700’) comprising:
a main body (742) comprising a pair of sidewalls extending along the length and an end wall extending along the width between the pair of sidewalls, the sidewalls and the end wall each extending along the height (per Figs. 62-69),
wherein an adapter wall (718’) is positioned between the sidewalls and positioned along the length distal to the end wall,
wherein a partition wall (744) extends between the sidewalls, the end wall, and the adapter wall (718’),
wherein the partition wall (744) is positioned along the height between a top lip and a bottom lip of the sidewalls,
wherein a first volume (top/upper side) is formed at a first side of the partition wall (744) between the sidewalls, the end wall, and the adapter wall (718’), and
wherein a second volume (bottom/lower side) is formed at a second side of the partition wall (744) between the sidewalls, the end wall, and the adapter wall (718’),
wherein a fiber storage area is positioned at the first volume (top/upper side) and the second volume (bottom/lower side), and
wherein an adapter base wall (Fig. 66, portion of top panel with numbers above adapters at 718’) extends along the width between the sidewalls and partially along the length,
the adapter base wall (number panel) positioned along the length at or proximate to the adapter wall (718’), and
wherein a cable entry passage (the adapters themselves provide passage for cable entry, particularly for the ends of cables that connect to the adapters) is formed at the adapter base wall (number panel),
the cable entry passage extending along the length (which they do),
the cable entry passage configured to allow the external cable into the first volume (top/upper side; the passage is seen as so configured as entry into the interior of the Leeman splitter would allow for entry into either the first or second volume), and
wherein a passthrough opening (plural openings are seen at 744 in Fig. 68, particularly the cylindrical structures and the split lobe structures at the right end of 744) is formed through the partition wall (744) to allow for fiber egress from the first volume (top/upper side) to the second volume (bottom/lower side).
Leeman as set forth above does not disclose:
wherein a splice holder is positioned at the first volume (top/upper side) or the second volume (bottom/lower side),
With respect to claim 20, Leeman as set forth above discloses the optical fiber cassette (700’) of claim 19, including one wherein
a cable opening is formed at or between the end wall and at least one sidewall (Fig. 67 at 720′, generally),
the cable opening (720’, generally, and as show in Figs. 67 and 68) configured to receive an external cable (not shown, but with connection to the input connection 720’) into the first volume (top/upper side; the cable opening is seen as so configured, particularly at the top of Fig. 68).
Conclusion
Applicant’s publication US 20240427103 A1 published December 26, 2024 is cited.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited references have elements related to Applicant’s disclosure and/or claims or are otherwise associated with the other cited references, particularly with respect to trays and containers for optical fiber and other cables.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW JORDAN whose telephone number is (571) 270-1571. The examiner can normally be reached most days 1000-1800 PACIFIC TIME ZONE (messages are returned).
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. While examiner does not examine over the phone (see 37 C.F.R. § 1.2), examiner is glad to clarify or discuss issues so long as it forwards prosecution.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Thomas (Tom) 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.
/Andrew Jordan/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
V: (571) 270-1571 (Pacific time)
F: (571) 270-2571
March 28, 2026